Here is the continuation of an article in THE SPARKS QUARTERLY,December 2000, Whole No. 192, continuing here at the bottom of p.5450:
Governor Andross, whose principal duty was to govern the colony of NewYork, then also governed the three Delaware counties, which meant thathis Delaware subjects rarely had personal contact with him. In July1679, four of the New Castle magistrates, including William Sample,agreed to be available on occasion to travel to New York to representNew Castle County before the Governor. It is interesting to note thatwhen the New Castle Court met on July 6, 1681, it adjourned withoutacting because Justice Otto was ill and "Justice Will: Sempill isabsent at New York." Sample served as a member of the New Castle Courtfor the remainder of his life.
References From the New Castle Court Records
Pertaining to Josine Sample
In attempting to gather information regarding Josine Sample in orderto tell something of her life, we are
fortunate that she was mentioned a number of times in the extant Courtrecords of New Castle. It is also helpful that she was the only personwith the forename Josine in these records. Her name is also spelledJosyn, Joslyn, and, on one ocasion, Usyn.
This writer is quite certain that her maiden name was Boyer. She wasmarried, first, to a man named John Marshall by whom she had a numberof children; he had died prior to 1675. Josine was married, second, toWilliam Sample; they were the parents of one child, Margaret Sample.With William Sample's death in 1681, Josine again became a widow.Sometime prior to 1686 she was married, third, to William Hamilton.She died prior to March 1696. The Court records revealing her marriageand other events in her life are discussed below.
Josine was doubtless of Dutch origin; she was probably born prior to1650. Our most important clue that her maiden name was Boyer (orBoeyar or Boeyer) is contained in a curious entry in the minutes ofthe New Castle Court of Novem ber 5, 1678:
Josyn Boeyer, the wyfe of Mr William Semple, for hur unhandsome & illbehavior being heretofore
bound over to the Court, The Court, (in hopes of hur better behavior)did Continue the prsentment till
next Court day.
William Sample, who had been appointed a magistrate in this Court onlyfive months earlier, must have found himself in an awkward situationwith this Court's notice of his wife's "unhandsome & ill behavior." Wewill return to this incident later in this article. Our interest atthis point, however, is that in this record his wife is identified by,we believe, her maiden name, "Josyn Boeyer." This is given furthercredence by a Court record dated March 15, 1679/80. As seen in this,in 1675 a man named Justa Andries (also written as Andersen) hadpurchased a tract of land lying on Christina Creeke in New CastleCounty, the record of which could not be found because of the neglectof the town's clerk at that time, a man named William Tom. (There arefrequent statements in these Court records complaining about Tom'sneglect of his duties.) In order to prove that he had purchased thetract (400 acres) of land, Andries prevailed upon the justices of theCourt to obtain confirmation from those who had sold him the 400acres, they being Robert Scot, Josyn Marshall, widow of John Marshall,John Cosins, and John Boeyer. Apparently this tract had been inheritedby these four individuals. Of these four, John Boeyer and JosynMarshall attested in person to the 1775 sale. It is the belief of thiswriter that John Boeyer and Josyn Marshall
were brother and sister, and that Robert Scot and John Cosins werehusbands of Josine's sisters. Four of the magistrates, includingWilliam Sample (Will: Sempill), signed this document.
We underwritten, the Justices of This Towne of New Castle Doe herebyCertifie That upon tfle
Request of Justa Andries we have made Examinacon and doe fiend thatthere was heretofore in the
year 1675 sould and made over by Rob: Scot, Josyn the widow of JohnMarshall deceased, John
Cosins, and John Boeyer unto him the said Justa Andries a seartainePattent for fouer hundred acres of land Lying and being inCristina Creeke aforesaid betweene the Land of Jan Staalcop & the mill Creeke as by the said Pattent baring date the first of october1669 may more att Large appeare by the neglect of the formerClercq Mr William Tom (as is supposed) nothing Can bee found uponRecord thereof however Living wittnesses To witt John Boeyer andJosyn marshall and others do attest that there was such aTransport Past In the Court of new Castle In witness Whereof wee haveherunto sett or hands at New-Castle this 15 day of March 1679/80.
(was signed)
John Moll
Pieter Alrichs
J: d'Haes
Will: Sempill
The charge by the New Castle Court against Josine Sample for her"unhandsome & ill behavior" noted earlier, appears to be explained ina Court record of November 3, 1680. This reads:
Josyn the wyfe of William Sempill in open Court did Terme & callRynier vander Coelen a man wth twoo fathers, a murtherer, a Roug and adogh. Mr Will: Sempill desiers that the Case may be referred till nextCourt to the end he may bee the better provyded, wch the Cort Grantand doe order that the plt & deft [i.e., Rynier Vander Coelen andJosine Sample] bee both & each of them bound in a bond of £40 fortheir good behavior till then, hee wch first breakes the peace andafronts the other shall bee Imediately Imprizoned & pay the sd 40pounds.
The next meeting of the Court was on December 9, 1680, but there wasno mention in its proceedings of Josine' s "unhandsome & illbehavior." It was during Court session, however, that:
Jan Boeyer was this day sworne Constable of this Towne of New Castlein the roome of Jan Biscus
[John Bisk] for one year or till another bee sworne in his Roome.
Jan Boeyer [John Boyer] was, we feel certain, a brother of JosineSample. When the Court met on May 3, 1681, John Boeyar (as his namewas spelled on this occasion) brought "an action of Slaunder" againstHendrik Vanden Burgh, in which Josine was mentioned.
Susanna the wyfe of Geo: Moore sworee in Cort sayeth that, sheewashing att the house of Jan
Hermsen did heare Hendrik Vanden Burgh say that the wastecoate wchJohn Boeyar had was Lyke
to the wastecoate hee had Lost, and the deponant replyed that shee hadseen such a wastecoate
wch Aeltie [wife of John Boyer] brought from William Sempills wyfe &therefore did not thinke itt to
bee the same & further sayeth nott: Peter Claesen sworne Sayeth thathe heard Hendrik vanden
Burgh say that hee supposed the Blancquet which Brantie [?] had boughtof John Boeyar was his &
att an other tyme hee heard Hendrik vanden Burg's wyfe say that ittwas a sad thing that a man must
see hur owne things Every day worne & wth that the deponant saweAeflie Boeyars pas by but
whether shee was meant the deponant nowes nott: Edmund CantwellSwore sayeth that being in
the office of Mr Herman, Hendrik Vanden Burg Came in there and thedeponant asked what was the
matter wth him he replyed that John Boeyar had in the Street threatnedto stryke him, wth the
Constables stike and that John Boeyar had bad him to goe to mistrsDarby; an ugly theefe as hee is
sayed the sd hendrik whereupon the deponant sayed you must not saysoe. Yes replyed the sd
hendrik. I: can proove itt and further sayeth nott.
The cort thought itt fitt to referre this action untill next Court day& the deft hendrik vanden Burgh then
to appeare, or Else Judgemt to pass wth out delay.
The case of John Boyar against Hendrick Vanden Burg, labeled in theCourt proceedings of July 6, 1681, "In an action of Slaunder," wasdecided as follows:
The deft being 3 tymes called did not appeare nor none for him. Thisaction haveing Long Continued
in Cort Contrary to the order of the Laest Cort, The Court doetherefore order him to pay the sume of
50 gilders as a fyne for the Slaunder sence hee did not proove[disprove] it; and that the deft pay the
Costs of suit.
Recallng that it had been Rynier Vander Coelen who had complainedabout Josine Sample insulting him in Court, and that it had beenHendrik Vanden Burg who was fined for his slander against John Boyer,the
following entry in the minutes of New Castle Court for December 6,1681, is interesting:
Justice Alrichs, Justice Will: Sempill & Justice Dehaes are ofopinion, that drink shall be sould by the
halfe aneker but not by the small measure & the halfe anckers Carriedout of the Towne as before.
It is this Corts opinion & order that all those as have sould drinketo the Indians Contrary to a former
order of this Cort bearing date the 2d day of August 1680, and theTolleration of the Governor shall
be fyned according thereto.
The Constable John Boeyar prsents Hendrik Vanden Burgh and ReynierVander Coelen for selling
of drink to the Indians by the small measure [i.e., by the glass].
John Boyar sworne in Court Sayeth that hee has seen Hendrik VandenBurgh take drinke by the
bottell to the Indians, and that hee sawe twoo Indian woomen drinkesmall chyter att Reynier Vander
Coelens. This Case referred till next Court.
Unfortunately, the extant record of New Castle's Court proceedingsends at this point. From 1681 until 1699, the only record that we haveof the Court's actions pertains to land and probate matters. It isamong these records, however, that were published by the ColonialSociety of Pennsylvania in 1934, we learn of the death of WilliamSample ("William Sempill") in December 1682 and have the text of hiswill dated December 11,1682. A transcription of William Sample's willwas given earlier in this article, with the added information that,although he had clearly designated James Walliam and Samuel Land ashis executors, his widow, Josine, convinced the Court that she shouldbe the executrix, with Walliam and Land to serve as "overseers &assistants to the widdow." For a woman to prevail in this manner atthat time was most unusual.
[Here appears a map, a copy of which is placed in the scrapbook forWilliam Sample.]
This page contains a map of New Castle County, Delaware as it lookedin the 17th Century.
Events Leading to and Following the Death of William Sample
We shall probably never know how it was that William Sample had become"Sick and weake in Boddy" as he described himself in his will datedDecember 11, 1682. Was it disease, of which there was always plenty inthe 17th Century, or was it an accident that brought on his quickdemise? He had been present when the Court of New Castle met onNovember 2, 1782, at which none other the "The Right Honorble:Proprietry: William Penn" had been present with five Council members,including Captain William Markam, the new Deputy Governor of the"Lower Counties." On November 9, 1682, when Capt. Markam called aspecial meeting of the New Castle Court to announce that, henceforth,every Saturday would be set as the town's "Market Day," William Samplewas present. The Court did not meet again until the following firstday of January at which the first order of business was the appearanceof John Bisk and Jonas Arskin who did "Solomly declare in Cort: thatthey were personally Prsent and did heare and See William SempillDeclare, Signe and Seale this his Laest will and Testament." Therefollowed the transcription of the will.
With the annexation of the "lower Counties" to Pennsylvania, the Dutchand Swedish inhabitants could become English citizens through petitionto their county courts. There can be no doubt that William Sample hadbeen an English citizen by birth, whereas Josine was of Dutch origin.As Sample's wife, however, Josine shared her husband's English status,but as his widow, she was no longer considered an English citizen. Soit was that, on February 21, 1862/3, two months following herhusband's death, Josine was one of 71 inhabitants of New Castle Countywho signed a petition expressing their "desire to bee Naturalized."Her name appeared thereon as "Josyn Sempill." Only one other femalewas included, a widow named Mary Blocq (Block).
As noted earlier, on April 19, 1681, William Sample had obtained,through a petition to the Court of St. Johns County (the name of whichbecame Kent County the next year), a tract of 600 acres. As wasEnglish custom, the first owner of land could choose a name for it;the name chosen by Sample was "The Vinyard." There was no specificreference in his will to this 600-acre tract in Kent County; it wassimply included among his "worldly goods" that "I give, devyse andbequeath unto my dearly beloved wyfe Josyn Semple and my Littledaughter Margaret wth [the] Rest of my wyfes Children..." A KentCounty tax list of 1684 includes "The Vinyard" (600 acres), under thename of "Widdow Sample."
As we have noted earlier, the one property owned by William Samplethat he did not include with the rest to be divided among his heirs,was a tract of land in New Castle County, on a branch of ChristinaCreek, that he left specifically to his daughter, Margaret: "to myLittle daughter Margaret all my Estate in Christina Creek or upon abranch of the said Creeke..." He also directed that his widow, Josine,place livestock on this land for the future benefit of Margaret. Thisland was undeveloped at the time he made his will.
As shown on the map of New Castle County on the previous page,Christina Creek flows some four or five miles northeast of the town ofNew Castle. The manner in which William Sample's land there had comeinto his possession is not revealed in the New Castle Court records.From later tax records, however, we know that it comprised 400 acres.
The manner in which William Sample came into possession of a town lotshortly be fore his death may illustrate the advantage he enjoyed as ajustice of the New Castle Court. The Court minutes of September 6,1681, contain the following:
Upon the motion of Justice Will: Sempill ordered that if the Cooper,Hans Coderus, doth not settle
his Lott Granted him by this Court Lying next to Engelbert Lott,within one yeare after the date of the
grant, then hee to forfeit the same and Mr Sempil to have preferrenceto take itt up before any
others.
It had been during a meeting of the Court on April 6, 1680, that thejustices had granted to Hans Coderus one lot of land "within thisTowne of New Castle Provided hee himself settles the same & followsthe Coopers trade for Incourradgemt [encouragement] & the Conveniencyof the Inhabitants."
It was not until the Court met on May 2, 1682, however, thatconfirmation was made, among several other grants of land, that Sampleacquired ownership of this lot: "Granted to... William Sempill theLott which was formerly Granted to Hans Corderus & not improved."
Tax lists were compiled following William Penn's appointment asGovernor of the "Lower Counties" in
accordance with his careful record keeping. These reveal that WilliamSample's widow now owned both the land on Christina Creek, in trustfor her daughter, Margaret, but town lots in addition to the oneformerly granted to Hans Coderus. From William Sample's will, we knowthat Josine had children by her first husband, John Marshall, (called"the rest of my wyves Children"), and that Josine had held propertythat had been left to her and/or her children by her earlier husband.With her marriage to Sample, however, that property, under Englishlaw, would have come under his control. After his death in 1682,however, it would have reverted to Josine and to her children byMarshall. A tax list for the town of New Castle in 1683 shows her, as"Josyn Sempel," taxed for two town lots in the amount of two shillingsand two pence. As a woman, she was not taxed as a "tithable," however. Taxed and living near her in the town of New Castle in 1683, werethe following individuals whose names also appear in other recordspertaining to William and Josine Sample: James Walliam, John Bixcus(Bisk), Emelius d. Ring, and John Henrickson.
In a New Castle County tax list of 1684/5, "Joslyn Semple" was shownwith 400 acres of land and one town lot; her total tax on thisproperty was 5 shillings and 5 pence that year. This town lot wasdoubtless the one once owned by Coderus. The name of John Biscusfollows that of "Joslyn" in this list; he held three town lots. JamesWalliam is next (one town lot). John Boyer is also included with onetown lot and Mathyas De Ring with three.
In his will, William Sample had referred on four occasions to hiswife's children, besides his and Josine's one child, their daughter,"little Margaret." Since he made no mention of any children of hisown, we may assume that if he had been married prior to his union withJosine, there had been no issue.
From available records, we can identify only one of Josine's childrenby her first marriage to John Marshall; this was Cataline, wife ofJonas Wright. It was at about the time that Josine was married to herthird husband, William Hamilton, former close associate of WilliamSample, that her children petitioned the New Castle Court for theirinheritance to be protected. It was Jonas Wright, son-in-law of Josine(though he called himself a son), who presented the petition on behalfof "himself and the rest of the orphans." By definition at the time,an orphan was one whose father was deceased, and it was not unusualfor a son-in-law to identify himself as a son of his wife's mother.The following New Castle Court action was dated January 17, 1688/9:
Upon the Peticon of Jonas Wright the Son of Josyne Hamilton in behalfof himself and the rest of the
orphans. The [Court] haveing considered the matter of the Peticon doeappoint James Walliam &
Edward Blake who are desired to be Supervers of the estate & usuage ofthe sd orphans, and John
Biscus, John Hendickson & Emelius De Ring are appointed Administratorsin the behalf of the
orphans.
The sd John Discus, JnO Hendrickson & Emelius De Ring Joyntly &Severally doe Recognize
themselves & heirs &ct in the Sum of one thousand pounds to the Courtof Orphans for the time
being of the County of newcstle to render a true accopt [and] makegood pay of all the estate of the
orphans to them committed: when thereunto lawfully required.
James Walliam, one of the two men appointed by the Court to supervise"the estate," had been one of the executors named by William Sample inhis will. The name Bisk was sometimes written "Biscus" as in the aboveCourt document, and the John Biscus named here as one of theadministrators to act on behalf of the "orphans" was the John Biskmentioned in the deed of March 31, 1696, transcribed earlier in thisarticle. It is also interesting to note that in the February 21,1682/3 petition to the New Castle Court for citizenship that included"Josyn Sempill," there were also the names of Emilius D'Ringh and JanHendriksen.