Augustine Herrman, Beginner of the Virginia Tobacco Trade, Merchant of New Amsterdam and First Lord of Bohemia Manor in Maryland/Chapter 2

by Leon Heck

Chapter II

A NEW AMSTERDAM MERCHANT AND LANDOWNER

We are not sure of the exact year Augustine Herrman came to the New World; nor are we certain of the precise part of America he first visited. This much seems certain, however. He saw a strange weed called tobacco growing in the rich soil of the southern lowlands and was aware that it was cultivated, cured and sent back to the European cities where people bought and smoked it. Inasmuch as he later referred to himself as the beginner of the Virginia tobacco trade we might assume that he stopped on one of these early voyages at the port of Jamestown where he took some time to study about the cultivation and shipment of tobacco. By beginning the Virginia tobacco trade it is possible that what Herrman meant by the statement was that he took some of the tobacco with him back to Amsterdam where he sold it. Certainly he was not an independent merchant at this time.

In 1633 he was with Arendt Corssen on the present site of Philadelphia when the land in that vicinity was bought from the Indians. There is some little evidence to believe that he came over in that year with Wouter Van Twiller, as an officer of the Dutch West India Company. At any rate Van Twiller, before assuming the governorship of New Amsterdam, had been a clerk in the home office of the Dutch West India Company and undoubtedly he knew of Herrman.^[1]

In 1633 Arendt Corssen was a commissary of Fort Nassau (on the east side of the Delaware River) under Van Twiller.^[2] He was ordered by the Dutch governor to buy a large tract of land on the Schuylkill River on which a fort called Beversrede was later built; so named because of the multitude of beavers which abounded there. “Those From the South (called Munquasson) and the wild blacks, are brought down in large quantities; so that the river, for its fitness, handsome situation, as well in regard of trade as of culture will always be held by the company and ministers in high esteem.”^[3] The conveyance of the land was made by means of the following document:

 

“We the subscribers, Amattehooren, Alebackinne, Sinquees, etc. .chiefs over portions of the land lying about and on the Schuylkill, called Armenveruies, declare, that after proper and deliberate consideration, we have sold to Arent Corssen, the Schuylkill and adjoining lands, for certain cargoes, for which we are not paid in full, but for which were fully satisfied at present.”

 

This document is signed by Amattehooren, Sinquees, Alebackinne, Michecksonwabbe, Quironqueckock, Kancke and Walpackvouch with their curious appropriate marks.^[4]

The above instrument was witnessed by, “Augustin Heermans, Govert Loockermans, Juriaen Plancke, Cornelis Jansen Coele and Sander Leendertsen.”

The years from 1634 to 1644 are blank in relation to Herrman’s life so far as documentary evidence is concerned. It is probable, however, that he remained in the service of the Dutch West India Company, making frequent trips to Amsterdam and the West Indies.^[5] Commenting upon this period of Herrman’s life, Čapek says:

 

“Prior to settling in the Dutch metropolis, he probably resided in Virginia. It is of interest that traces of Czech immigration in the first half of the 17th, century lead to this very section of that state. There is evidence that he did work as a public surveyor at Accomac, Va. (The Eastern Shore of Virginia, Proc. of the Council of Maryland, 1661–1675, Vol. III, pp. 463–64). The services of a surveyor in a new country must have been greatly in demand. In his spare time he traded with Indians and planted tobacco. ‘I am the founder of the Virginia tobacco trade', he wrote to Governor Stuyvesant. The exact date of his removal to New Amsterdam is not known.”^[6]

 

In June 1644 Herrman was associated with Laurents Cornelissen as an agent in New Amsterdam for Peter Gabry and Sons, the prominent merchant traders of Amsterdam,^[7] but he probably was connected with the Gabry firm the year before and possibly as early as 1640.^[8] By this time his commercial propensities were fully awakened and he sought many means to promote trade between the New World and Amsterdam. In 1644 he made successful experiments in the cultivation of indigo on his farm (bouwery) near the site of the Astor Library.^[9] He tried the culture of indigo merely from an experimental standpoint, and as it was not a source of much revenue he discontinued its growth after a few years.

By 1644 the New Amsterdam branch of the Gabry firm had grown to be fairly large; certainly the most important in the western continent. The extent of their business in America may be seen from a receipt for 2622 guilders, 9 stivers given to Governor Kieft by Herrman and Cornelissen.^[10] Peter Gabry died about the year 1645 and was succeeded by his sons, John and Charles. Quarrels arose between the sons and Herrman left the Gabry firm about this time; and in his own name began an extensive trade with Amsterdam, London and Jamestown, Virginia. In 1652 Charles Gabry brought suit against Herrman in New Amsterdam for alleged debts,^[11] but in 1661 the local court decided in favor of the defendant.^[12]

On the official seal of New Amsterdam appeared the figure of a beaver. No better emblem could have been chosen; it best represented the very reason for the establishment of the Dutch colony. First a trading post and later a shipping center, New Amsterdam depended from the very first and for a time thereafter for her prosperity and in fact her very existence upon the beaver. As early as 1634 it seems that Herrman was shipping furs to Europe and receiving skins principally from Fort Nassau and Fort Orange and likely from a few points south of the Delaware River, especially from Patuxen, Maryland.^[13]

In addition to furs, Herrman dealt in cattle and horses which he sent to Virginia.^[14] To that colony he also sent lumber.^[15] He had salt shipped to New Amsterdam from Curaçao which he distributed between New Netherland, the southern colonies and Europe.^[16] From Amsterdam he imported pottery, glassware and tavern supplies.^[17] He also imported wines from France and Spain and much of this commodity he sent to Virginia in exchange for tobacco.

Herrman’s scheme for commercial supremacy was far-reaching. He dealt in African slaves and sent numbers of them to Maryland and Virginia in exchange for tobacco.^[18] Slavery was found not to be a suitable institution in New Netherland, where few slaves were kept. The Dutch burgers were content to cultivate their own small plots of land without extra help. Moreover, the climate did not seem to agree with the health of the slaves as we find that some of whom Herrman had brought in died suddenly.^[19]

But the phase of Herrman’s mercantile career with which we are now concerned is the trade in tobacco between New and old Amsterdam. Tobacco had been grown on a small scale by the Indians and by the Virginians from the earliest years of that colony. It was, however, for the most part cultivated for only local use; for but little found its way to the old world except that which was occasionally taken by a returning emigrant. But the Virginians, learning how readily the use of the weed was becoming among the people of not only England and Holland but in all European countries, began the cultivation of tobacco on a somewhat larger scale. In 1619 the first slaves were brought to America through the port of Jamestown in Dutch ships; thereby laying the groundwork for the extensive cultivation of tobacco decade or two hence. Up until 1625 the greater part of the Virginia tobacco had been sent to London. But more and more Amsterdam was becoming the chief commercial mart of Europe and the number of the Dutch ships was exceeded only by those of Great Britain. On the other hand the low rates charged by the Dutch for transportation of the tobacco abroad stood in favor of marketing the produce in Amsterdam.

At first, however, Herrman did not confine his traffic in tobacco exclusively with Virginia. About the year 1629 the culture of tobacco was introduced into New Netherland by Thomas Hall, the first Virginian to settle in the Dutch colony. Herrman, eager to produce the commodity in such near proximity, encouraged the burgers to cultivate the plant; he himself growing it on his own bouwery. By 1640 he was shipping large quantities from both Virginia and New Netherland.^[20] But the severity of the climate of the northern colony was found to be such that the quality of the tobacco grown there was found inferior to the Virginia product; and European merchants more and more demanded that grown in the southern colony. After 1640 the cultivation of the plant gradually declined in New Netherland and was confined essentially to Virginia and the newly opened Maryland plantations.

About the year 1650 he began to systematize his tobacco trade; and for a few years, it seems, he was able to establish a monopoly in the staple. In this enterprise were associated Dr. George Hack of the Eastern Shore of Virginia (Northampton County) and his wife Anna. It is not known the exact year the Hacks came to America but there is some undocumented evidence that they were first in New Amsterdam before settling in Northampton County, Virginia near the town of Eastville, the county seat.^[21] Whether Dr. Hack, a graduate of the Medical Department of the University of Cologne, practiced his profession in the Dutch village is uncertain, but he was living in Virginia by 1651, at which time he, with others, signed the so-called Engagement of Northampton whereby they promised to “bee true and faithful to the commonwealth of England as it is nowe constituted without Kinge or House of Lords.“^[22]

While practicing medicine on the Eastern Shore of Virginia, George Hack also engaged in the cultivation of tobacco; and it would seem that Anna Hack under her own name did business with Herrman in the tobacco traffic. It appears that it was nothing unusual for the wives of the early colonial planters to engage in business activities under their own names.^[23] In return for tobacco Herrman sent to Virginia various commodities which on one occasion consisted of boards, a horse and a negro.^[24] Only the slave arrived for in a law suit brought by Paulus Leendertsen, Van der Griest and Albert Anthony, assignees of Augustine Herrman in 1652, Anna Hack denies receiving anything but the negro.^[25] As a consequence a quantity of her tobacco stored in New Amsterdam was seized and held for security. It appears that during the time Mrs. Hack was living in New Amsterdam and she insisted that the tobacco was her own private property sent to her by her husband from Virginia. The court ordered Herrman’s assignees to prove that Mrs. Hack was indebted to his estate and whether the tobacco was sent in payment of such indebtedness; otherwise the court decreed that the attachment of the tobacco was null and void.^[26] Nothing further about the case appears in the council records and it is likely that the case was dismissed without further inquiry. Moreover, Herrman was soon thereafter released from his creditors and the case was probably settled amicably.

Very friendly relations always seem to have existed between Herrman and the Hacks. Their lives and fortunes were united for a quarter century or more. The Verletts first settled in the Dutch Colony on the west bank of the Connecticut River, Good Hope, later Hartford; and if Anna was indeed the daughter of Casper Verlett she may have arrived in America around the year 1633; and it is possible that she was born at Good Hope. The Verletts subsequently became large land owners not only in Connecticut but also in New Netherland. Nicholas Verlett was among the early lawyers of New Amsterdam.

Joost Van Beeck was an agent in New Amsterdam for Herrman and engaged in the marketing of tobacco in his own name. On one occasion Herrman delivered four hogsheads of tobacco that had been inspected and passed. Later Van Beeck inspected the tobacco and found that the greater part of it was spoiled and not marketable, and proceeded to bring suit against Herrman. As we study the early history of the Dutch in New Amsterdam we find them to have been a rather quarrelsome folk and their daily transactions seem to have been filled with a continuous round of law suits. On this occasion Van Beeck lost the suit, the court claiming that he himself was present when the tobacco was inspected and if it was in bad condition he should not have received it.^[27] The Dutch at this period were careful that all the tobacco that left the port was inspected properly, and the court judging that the inspector had been careless in his duties gave Van Beeck leave to sue him.

The culmination of Herrman’s tobacco trade came about the year 1655. The price of Virginia and Maryland tobacco was low that year on account of the extensive culture of the plant for that year.^[28] On the other hand the price had not yet declined in the European markets. Herrman bought heavily and made a large profit. He was still able to transport the produce directly to Holland regardless of the fact that Cromwell had been at war with the Dutch since 1651 and was trying with unceasing vigor to stop the passage of tobacco to the port of Amsterdam. Though the Maryland and Virginia planters promised to obey the Navigation Act of the English Parliament, they did all they could to circumvent the law. The planters were jubilant when the news arrived that the Stuarts had been restored to the throne in England, believing that Charles II would immediately repeal the obnoxious Navigation Act of 1651. But their joy and enthusiasm was considerably dampened when news arrived that the king had not only refused to repeal the detested law of Cromwell but that he had passed by Parliament the Second Navigation Act which was even more rigorous and destructive to American commerce. By this act the ports of Jamestown and St. Marys were closed to all but English vessels. A storm of indignation arose in Virginia and Maryland; the price of tobacco was so low now that the planters could not afford to pay the exorbitant rates demanded by the English skippers. Thus the two great agricultural British colonies were at the mercy of tobacco, for it was their only source of income. Tobacco was indeed “King”, and at that time it turned out to be something of a tyrant.

Yet the ingenious Herrman was equal to the occasion. Already in possession of a fair sized fleet of ships, he was able to break the blockade at Jamestown and St. Mary’s and carry away all the tobacco he wanted to New Amsterdam or to Holland. When this plan became too dangerous the resourceful Herrman adopted other measures.

The Hacks had left Northampton County in 1659 and had gone to the extreme northeast corner of Maryland in what is now Cecil County where they bought extensive tracts of land.^[29] Their plantations were located on the upper headwaters of Chesapeake Bay some twenty miles from the Delaware River, one of the largest called Hackston on the Sassafracx River. What tobacco Herrman could not get through the blockade at St. Mary’s he had transported to Hackston by wagon road, thence to a port on the Delaware River and then to New Amsterdam by boat and wagon road. Although this must have been a troublesome and roundabout method, still the extra expense was not so great but what Herrman could give the southern planters cheaper rates to Amsterdam than were otherwise offered by the English traders. Herrman was able thereby to smuggle tobacco from the English colonies to New Amsterdam as long as he remained in the mercantile business.^[30] Finally in 1664, New Amsterdam, apparently not much to Herrman’s discomfort, passed from the hands of the Dutch to the British. Herrman became a loyal British subject; in fact he had become a subject of the British crown as early as 1660; and after the transfer of New Netherland to England he probably did some little export business directly from the ports of Jamestown and St. Mary’s.

In addition to being one of the foremost merchants of New Amsterdam, he was one of the largest landowners in New Netherland. It was in his capacity of a landowner, particularly his ownership of Bohemia Manor, that he is chiefly remembered; thereby obscuring for posterity his more spectacular career as a Dutch merchant and trader. But before Herrman acquired title to the vast tract of land in upper Maryland he owned considerable property on Manhattan Island and the vicinity. Although it is high probable that Herrman owned land in New Netherland prior to 1647, the patent dated May 15 of that year is the earliest extant. It bears reference to a lot bought by “Augustyn Herman” near Fort Amsterdam, adjoining the lands belonging to the “company”, that is, the Dutch West India Company.^[31] During the next few years, his time being occupied with his various mercantile pursuits, he did not invest much in land. But in 1651 he began to buy heavily. March 31, 1651^[32] he bought from Symon Joosten a lot on the east side of the Kolck, Manhattan Island. This land had been owned by two negroes, Paulo de Angela and Clara Crioole and their deed is one of the earliest extant in which a negro is shown to have owned land in America.^[33] On July 17, 1651 Herrman sold his house to Cornelis Van Werckhoven, curator of the estate of Peter Gabry.^[34] In December 1651 he purchased a vast tract which included all the land from “the mouth of the Raritan Creek westerly up unto a creek Mankackkewachky, which runs northwest unto the country, and then from the Raritan Creek aforesaid northerly up along the river behind States Isle (Staten Island), unto the creek, namely from Raritan Point, called Ourpage, unto Pechciesse, the aforesaid creek, and so to the said creek Pechciesse up to the very head of it and from thence directly westerly thorowe the land untill it meets with the aforesaid creek and meadow Ground called Mankackkewackky aforesaid.”^[35] A few days later he purchased thirty thousand acres of land where the township of South Amboy (New Jersey) is situated and another large tract from Newark to Elizabethtown.^[36] The next year, 1652, he bought large tracts north of the Haarlem River and with Adriaen Van der Donck he owned the greater part of what is now the city of Yonkers.

It could hardly be supposed that during these two years Herrman bought all this land for himself. At this period he was in business to make money and whether it was made on land or sea it mattered little. If we look at Herrman as the first operator of real estate on a large scale in New York, we find that he had about the same visions for the development of the city as were entertained by the Astors one hundred fifty years later. Much of the land that he bought he soon afterwards sold. Other land he bought on something like a brokerage system. The “Raritan Great Meadow” he bought directly from Cornelis Van Werckhoven, an influential member of the provisional government of New Amsterdam.^[37] As early as 1639 it seems that he owned some land on Manhattan Island. When he saw that the tiny Dutch village was growing rapidly he bought houses and lots in the close proximity of the settlement. It appears that these houses and fields he rented.^[38] Other lots he sold by a method that seems to closely resemble our modern installment or contract method of financing real estate, as there are instances where the buyer did not receive the deed to the lot.^[39] On one occasion a curious case was tried before the council in which one Severyn Laurens brought suit against Herrman to compel him to receive wampum in payment of the rent of a farm he had leased. The council decided that Laurens must pay his rent in grain as wampum was not “merchantable pay.”^[40] Just as tobacco was used as a form of money in Virginia and Maryland, so, no doubt, grain was so used in the early Dutch days.^[41]

Herrman owned a large farm or bouwery on the site of the present Bowery. On this farm, Herrman had an orchard in which he took a good deal of pride. As late as the end of the eighteenth century the term, “Herman’s orchard” was used to designate the district although, of course, the orchard had long ago disappeared. Adjoining the Herrman farm was the bouwery of the Director General, Peter Stuyvesant. Beyond a doubt they were quarrelsome neighbors, though it seems that they were able to get along socially better than politically, as we shall presently see; for in the next chapter we shall have occasion to discuss the historic controversy between the two. In passing we might observe at this point that much of the documentary evidence goes to show that while Herrman and Stuyvesant appeared to the world at large as implacable enemies, they secretly entertained a mutual respect and liking for each other in their private lives. They were among the first to erect “country estates” on the site of the present Bowery and they were influential in bringing other rich and influential citizens out from the narrow confines of New Amsterdam proper. By 1660 there were a number of good houses on the site and during this period of New York’s history the Bowery was the exclusive district for the elite of the little Dutch city.^[42]

In New Amsterdam itself, the best street appears to have been Pearl or Perel on account of its commanding a fine view of the East River. At the corner of Pine and Pearl Streets stood the Dutch West India Ware House. Adjoining this building was Herrman’s “town house”, a substantial mansion built in Dutch style of brick and stone.^[43] It is thought that either the foundation of this house or of the warehouse next to it still serves for the foundation of subsequent buildings and that this wall alone is all that remains to be seen to the present day of the colonial Dutch architecture of New York City.

Herrman had another house in New Amsterdam which he thought suitable for himself and his family. It was not as fine a mansion as the one on Pearl Street nor did it command as fine a view of the river. This house was known as Smits Valley (along the East River from Wall to Fulton Streets). A New York Directory for 1665 gives this as the residence of the Herrmans. For that year he was assessed one guilder for the house.^[44]

The brick mansion on Pearl Street Hermann likely reserved for those rarer occasions when he had important guests to entertain. As one of the chief burgers of the village he no doubt often entertained notable visitors from Holland. In this house Dr. George Hack and his wife lived while in New Amsterdam and here Herrman entertained other members of the Maryland and Virginia gentry who came to see him on business. The Englishmen of the southern colonies, probably because of trade reasons, seemed to get along very well with the Dutch during this period; however, the Dutch did not get on so well with the settlers in New England. Up until 1660, at least, the most friendly relations seem to have been maintained between the southern planters and the Dutch burgers of New Amsterdam; for, as we have observed, the two nationalities were bound together by trade and economic ties. This amicable feeling was much strengthened by the Navigation Act of 1651 which tended to draw the Dutch traders and the southern planters closer together than before; and as long as Cromwell ruled in England, the Marylanders and the Virginians looked toward the Dutch to the north as their natural allies. New Amsterdam was at this time the largest town on the Atlantic coast and perhaps many visitors came there, as they still continue to do, if for no other reason than curiosity.

After Herrman took up his residence in Maryland at Bohemia Manor, he did not wholly withdraw from New York life. For a number of years he kept at least one house there. The last time his name appears in the annals of New York is in 1673, “House of Augustyn Heermans under the fort and bulwarks of the City of New Orange to be torn down.”^[45]

The last link between Herrman and New Amsterdam was now severed. The romantic Bohemian left his quarrelsome Dutch friends forever, and the last remaining possession of his once extensive New Netherland domain passed from his hands. Maryland henceforth was to be his home, where he was acquiring vast tracts of land in that colony.

As a great merchant and landowner engaged in business with a people inclined toward incessant argument and court litigation, Herrman necessarily found himself involved in a number of lawsuits. Nicholas Verlett, his brother-in-law, acted for a while as Herrman’s attorney, but apparently not to the complete satisfaction of either party. In 1644 Herrman was dealing in European wines. He had supplied Philip Geraedy and Isaac Abrahamsen, landlords of the “Wooden Horse”, presumably a Dutch tavern. Geraedy and Abrahamsen claimed that they never received the wine, whereupon Herrman brought suit against them. He acts as his own lawyer and produces one Peter Hartgens and Abraham Jacobsen who testify that they had been told by the defendants themselves that they had received Herrman’s wine. On the strength of this assertion and other evidence the case was finally settled in Herrman’s favor. On another occasion Herrman was not so successful in massing his evidence and presenting his arguments. This was when he had brought suit against Adam Roelantsen for the passage money and the board for himself and his son on one of Herrman’s ships, “The St. Jacobs”. The defendant was able in this instance to prove that the skipper of the vessel, Haye Jansen, gave him his passage on the condition that he work as a seaman during the voyage, and allowed his son his passage for saying prayers, presumably, of course, for the entire crew. This argument Herrman was unable to answer and the case was dismissed.^[46] Herrman, for that matter, was quite well versed in the law himself, and not infrequently acted as counsel for not only himself but for business associates. He could at times be quite eloquent when occasion demanded and in truth he can be said to have been one of the first of New York’s attorneys.^[47] Oftentimes members of his own family consulted him in matters of the law, seemingly putting more dependence in his judgment than that of their brother, Nicholas.^[48]

So versatile were Herrman’s intellectual accomplishments that he even set up a rude kind of bank at his house on Pearl Street, a scheme that proved successful for the financial arrangements of the little town; and in a sense we might even regard him as the prototype of that great profession that later made the lower end of Manhattan Island so renowned.^[49]

Although the most amicable relations existed between the southern planters and the Dutch traders and merchants, the feeling between the English skippers and the Dutch were by no means so friendly. Perhaps it was quite natural that they should not be, particularly when we recall that the English traders could not offer as cheap rates for carriage as the Dutch; seeing, too, that their kinsmen, the southern tobacco planters, themselves were trying all kinds of methods—lawful or illegal—to get their produce shipped abroad in Dutch bottoms. Certainly the English skippers had deep cause to regard the Dutch traders with enmity. Although England and Holland were at war at various times during the seventeenth century, a real enmity between the people of the two nations had never been actually created; for certainly the English and the Dutch were bound together by many ties, economic, political and religious, ever to become real enemies. The pusillanimity of James I and the obstinate and undiplomatic mind of Charles I had given back to Spain the supremacy of the high seas which the English had won so spectacularly during the reign of Elizabeth. Although Spain and England were temporarily at peace, and the British at war with Holland, all statesmen, knowing the history of the three peoples, knew that such a condition of war and peace was highly artificial; and that sooner or later the old hereditary friendship and enmity would reassert itself. Peace, too, had been temporarily established between Spain and the Netherlands, but this, discerning statesmen knew too, was not a state of affairs likely to be of long duration. Spanish and Dutch ships seldom met on the high seas without glances of the old hatred flaring up in the hearts of the captains.

No one in America at this time understood the conditions in Europe better than did Augustine Herrman. He arranged his future program in conformity with his convictions, which ultimately proved to be correct. As his commerce with Europe increased, he found himself constantly in need of ships. England and Spain had set the precedent of privateering among the maritime nations of the world, and Herrman turned to this expediency to increase the size of his fleet. He found little difficulty in Holland of procuring letters patent to seize English and Spanish vessels, but Herrman determined to make use of his authority on ships belonging to Spain, regardless of the fact that his country was temporarily at peace with that nation. In 1646 articles of copartnership were signed between Herrman and Captain Blavelt of the privateer “La Garce”.^[50] With Jan Jansen Damen, Jacob Van Couwenhoven and others, he operated the privateer “Harpy”.^[51] On a number of occasions, “La Garce” made depredations upon Spanish shipping and when called to account for his action, the skipper of the vessel claimed that he was not aware of the fact that Holland and Spain were at peace.^[52] Formerly one of Herrman’s frigates had captured a Spanish vessel, “Tobasko”, but the prize was denied him by the Director General of New Netherland on the grounds that the ship had been taken long after the publication of the treaty of peace between the two countries.^[53] There is no record of Herrman’s privateers making depredations on English vessels even during the period of the years of actual hostilities between Holland and England, 1651–1664. There is reason to believe, on the other hand, that he gave express orders to the captains of his privateers not to molest English shipping, because he certainly could have captured vessels of that nation between the years 1651 to 1664 and yet been wholly within the law. Moreover, at this time he particularly courted popularity with the southern planters and during this period made trips to Virginia and Maryland. It may have been that on one of the occasions that he was making a visit with his kinspeople, the Hacks, on their estate in Northampton County, Virginia, that he met some of the leading families of the county, such as the Scarboroughs, Custises and Spencers, all of whom took leading parts in the governmental affairs of the colony. Charmed with the delightful social life of the southern colonies, particularly with the atmosphere of ease and elegance that probably reminded him of his early boyhood days in his native city, Prague, he determined to make preparations to leave New Amsterdam and settle among the English.

We must now turn our attention to that unfortunate period in the career of Augustine Herrman’s mercantile life, namely his quarrel with Peter Stuyvesant, although we shall leave the political aspect of the controversy for a later chapter. For the beginning of the feud was essentially of a political nature, though it is not improbable that the headstrong old governor resented seeing Herrman, who was not really a Dutchman, prosper so amazingly and amass so much wealth. Herrman, as we have previously pointed out, bought vast tracts of land in the latter half of the year 1651, but much of this was apparently purchased for his friend Govert Loockermans, a wealthy New Amsterdam merchant and trader whom Stuyvesant had succeeded in ruining financially. Herrman tried to bear the entire burden of the debt and a year later found himself a ruined man. Added to these misfortunes, Herrman lost heavily in tobacco in 1652, compelled to sell below cost price. Herrman turned to Stuyvesant for aid but the vindictive old Dutchman not only refused to aid him but determined to make his plight all the more desperate. Herrman bore his misfortunes with coolness and manly fortitude. “In fine matters are so situated, that God’s help will only avail, there is no trust to be placed in man.” So he wrote to Anna Hack in Virginia. Mrs. Hack, upon hearing of the misfortunes of her brother-in-law, made preparations to go to New Amsterdam at once. The fortunes of the two families seemed so interwoven that a change in the financial affairs of one would naturally affect that of the other. Mrs. Hack appears to have had a successful business year in 1651 regardless of the First Navigation Act, possibly because Dr. Hack had courted favor with Cromwell by signing the Engagement of Northampton; and she was now in a position to be of help to Herrman. While Anna Hack was making preparations to make the trip to New Amsterdam, Herrman had made an assignment, putting his affairs in the hands of Paulus Leendersten and Albert Anthony.^[54] When Anna Hack arrived in New Amsterdam, Stuyvesant made a serious effort to ruin her financially—the governor apparently being on a veritable rampage at the time, determining to wreck the fortunes of every one who crossed his path. But Mrs. Hack was a Dutch woman, apparently with much of the fiery temper of the governor himself. When she saw the conditions of things and what she had to face she determined to spend the winter of 1651–1652 in New Netherland regardless of the rigorous climate. Her brother-in-law’s enemies instituted one law suit after another against her, but she was able to win every one.^[55] By the spring of 1652 conditions had become greatly changed. Just exactly what occurred that winter in the house on Pearl Street, likely we shall never know all the details. But it seems that Herrman and Anna Hack met their creditors and changed them from bitter enemies into fast friends. Perhaps Stuyvesant, harsh and rough, tempestuous and vindictive, as he undoubtedly was, finally succumbed to the graces of the Virginia lady, proving then as it does so often now that one can accomplish more by gentle rather than by rough ways. At any rate the Stuyvesants, Herrmans and Hacks remained staunch friends and allies.^[56] In May 1652 Stuyvesant stipulated that Herrman’s creditors abide by the valuation to be fixed by Pieter Wolphertsen, Van Couwenhoven, Schepen and Frederick Flipsen on his property in New Amsterdam.^[57] Herrman’s assignees had been discharged two months before.^[58] At the end of May, 1652 Herrman was granted “Liberty and freedom” by the council and excused for having broken the company’s seal, “Having settled with his creditors”.^[59] During her visit to New Amsterdam Anna Hack strengthened her business relations with Herrman and in the course of the next few years it seems that both parties benefitted financially by the arrangement; for, as we have seen, Herrman made large sums of money in 1655, while the same year and subsequently the Hacks acquired large tracts of land in Maryland, at the same time adding to their Virginia estates.^[60]

 

1. Lamb, M. J. History of New York, 1877, Vol. I.
2. O’Callighan, E. B. Documents relating to the Colonial History of New York, Vol. I. p. 142.
3. Hazard, Samuel, Annals of Pennsylvania, 1850, p. 35.
4. Ibid.
5. Is it probable that Herrman came as a boy of twelve years of age with some older man in 1633; possibly with Govert Loockermans, later his friend and advisor? The fact that but slight mention can be found in the colonial records from 1634 to 1644 might substantiate that supposition.
6. Čapek, Thomas. Augustine Herrman, p. 12. Mr. Čapek may be quite right in his belief that Herrman spent some time on the Eastern Shore of Virginia prior to 1644. His brother-in-law, Dr. George Hack and with whom he was later associated in business was living on the Eastern Shore by 1651. However, J. C. Wise in his exhaustive researches of this part of Virginia does not mention Herrman.
7. New York Geneal, and Biog. Record. Vol. 9. p. 58.
8. Wilson, J. G.N. J. Hist. Soc. Proc. Vol. LI.
9. Van der Donck, Adriaen. Desc, of New Netherlands.
10. Dutch Mss. (ed, by E. B. O’Callighan), Pt. I. p. 28.
11. O’Callighan. N. Y. Col. Mss. Vol. I, pp. 469, 470.
12. Dutch Mss. p. 229.
13. Dutch Mss. p. 107 & Maryland Arch. (Proc, of Council), Vol. 5, pp. 165, 200. If Herrman was so engaged by 1634 it seems impossible that he was born in 1621.
14. Dutch Mss. p. 129.
15. Ibid.
16. Ibid. p. 331.
17. Records of New Amsterdam, Vol. III, p. 358–59.
18. Ibid. p. 379.
19. Records of New Amsterdam, Vol. II, p. 119.
20. As early as 1658 Herrman was known in both America and Europe as the “beginner of the Virginia tobacco trade” (Dutch Mss. Pt. 1 Calendar of Hist. Mss, p. 204). There are vague indications that he began the trade in 1629 though it is probable that at that early date, when he was an agent for the Dutch West India Company, he shipped very small quantities from Virginia of tobacco locally grown by Thomas Hall and others on Manhattan Island. In 1626 tobacco exports from Virginia amounted to only 500,000 pounds. By 1629 tobacco exports totaled nearly 1,500,000 pounds. (MacInnes, C. M. Early English Tobacco Trade, 1926, p. 134.) See also Woodrow Wilson’s Hist, of American People, Vol. II. p. 17.
21. There has been some question as to the exact relationship between Augustine Herrman and Anna Hack. Some of the documentary evidence would lead one to believe that she was a full sister of Herrman. If we accept the account given by Čapek (page 8) and to which he seemed partially inclined to believe, Augustine Herrman, the son of Abraham, had three sisters, all of whom were apparently older than himself. Anna may have been one of them. If on the other hand we accept the Rattermann account of Herrman’s parentage and the date of his birth being around 1605, we find that the father died about the year 1618. (See also J. G. Wilson, Hist. Soc. Proc., Vol. XI. Pt. 2, p. 21.) If such were indeed the case, we might suppose that Herrman’s mother fled from Prague to Holland where she married a second time. If Anna Hack were the issue of the second marriage this would make her a half-sister of Herrman.
    However, it would appear that Anna Hack was only a sister-in-law, if the following genealogical table is correct. (Court Minutes of New Amsterdam, in Records of New Amsterdam, edited by E. B. O’Callaghan, N. Y., 1897, Vol. I. p. 326, footnote.)
    Casper Verleth or Verlett (Varleth), born in Utrecht; married Judith . . . . . . . . . . . .; later, 1666, wife of Nicholas Bayard.

    Their Children

    1. Nicholas married:
    (ii)(i) . . . . . . . . . . . .
    (ii) Oct. 1656 Anna Stuyvesant, sister of Peter Stuyvesant (and widow of Samuel Bayard).
    2. Janneke, married Augustyn Heermans, Dec. 1650.
    3. Anna, married George Hawke (Hack) of Virginia.
    4. Maria, married:
    (iii)(i) Johannes Van Beeck.
    (iii)(ii) Paulus Schrick in 1658.
    (iii) Willem Teller in 1664.
    5. Catherine, married Francis de Bruyn in 1657.
    6. Sarah.

22. Virginia Historical Register, Vol. I (1848). p. 163.
23. New York Geneal. and Biog. Record, Vol. IX. p. 54.
24. Deutsch-Amerikanisches Magazin, Band I. p. 202.
25. Dutch Mss. p. 129.
26. Ibid.
27. Records of New Amsterdam, Vol. II. p. 119.
28. Bruce, Philip A. Economic History of Virginia during the seventeenth century, 1896, Vol. II. p. 303. See Bruce also for account of fluctuation of prices of tobacco during these years.
29. Between the years 1659 and 1684 the Hacks acquired a total of 2270 acres of land in Upper Baltimore Co., Md., besides a tract called “Anna Catherine Neck”. Hackston consisted of 800 acres granted June 21, 1662. Other grants were Wormust consisting of 450 acres; Resurvey of 470 acres and Hack’s Addition, 150 acres, besides small tracts. Much of this land, however, was granted to Peter, the second son of George and Anna Hack, several years after Herrman had retired from active business. (Maryland Land Records, Annapolis.) The Hacks appear to have first gone to Maryland in 1658 (Md. Land Records, Liber 4, folio 17).
30. Records of New Amsterdam, Vol. VI. p. 120.
31. Dutch Mss. Land Papers, p. 375.
32. Ibid. p. 51.
33. Dutch Mss. Land Paper, p. 51.
34. Ibid. p. 54. Probably one of several houses owned by Herrman.
35. Whitehead, East Jersey under the Propriety Govn. p. 19.
36. Wilson, J. G. New Jersey Hist. Soc. Proc., Vol. XI. Pt. 2, p. 26.
37. Broadhead, J. R. Hist. of New York, 1853, Vol. I. p. 537.
38. Records of New Amsterdam, Vol. II. p. 384.
39. Ibid. Vol. pp. 160, 167, 183.
40. Dutch Mss. Council Minutes. p. 239.
41. For a comprehensive study of the use of tobacco as a form of currency consult Bruce’s detailed work, Economic history of Virginia in the seventeenth century.
42. Dutch Mss. Vol. I. p. 210.
43. Close to Herrman’s house on Pearl Street stood the “Stadthuys” (Town Hall) bu out 1655. It was when built regarded as one of the architectural wonders of America. (Shepherd, W. R. New Amsterdam, 1917, p. 18.)
44. Wilson, J. G. Hist. of New York, Vol. I. p. 338.
45. Records of New Amsterdam, Vol. VII. p. 131. For an interesting account of the construction of Herrman’s warehouse and his other New Amsterdam property see J. H. Innes, New Amsterdam and its people, 1902, pp. 33, 35, 54.
46. Dutch Mss. p. 105.
47. 47 Ibid. pp. 35, 37.
48. Ibid. p. 38.
49. New Jersey Hist. Soc. Proc., Vol. XI. p. 26.
50. Dutch Mss.
51. Ibid. p. 47.
52. New Jersey Hist. Soc. Proc., Vol. XI.
53. Dutch Mss. p. 226.
54. New York Geneal. and Biog. Record, Vol. IX. p. 58.
55. Dutch Mss. p. 129. The above episode tells much of the ability and business sagacity of Anna Hack who appears to have taken much more interest in the tobacco trade than her husband Dr. Hack, who according to Wise was actively engaged in the practice of medicine in Virginia.
56. In October 1656 Anna, sister of Peter Stuyvesant and widow of Samuel Bayard, married Nicholas Verlett, brother of Anna Hack. (Court Minutes of New Amsterdam, ed. by E. B. O’Callighan, N. Y. 1897, Vol. I. p. 326 footnote.) Throughout this history the above genealogy of the relationship between Herrman and Anna Hack is accepted as the accurate version. However, the above episode points strongly in the direction that Anna Hack may have been either a full sister or a half-sister of Herrman. But inasmuch as the financial affairs of the Hacks were closely interlocked with those of Herrman it was certainly not unnatural for a sister-in-law of Herrman to rush to New Amsterdam to try to help him from the hands of his vindictive creditors.
57. Dutch Mss. p. 129.
58. N. Y. Geneal. and Biog. Rec., Vol. IX. p. 58.
59. Ibid.
60. Dr. George Hack died about the year 1665, but Anna continued to buy land and to deal in tobacco. She lived until around 1700 and at the time of her death was among the largest landowners of the women of her time. For account of Hack estates see Maryland Land Record Index, Annapolis.