Schout-Fiscael of New Netherland, 1633-1636
Vice Director of New Netherland, 1647-1651
Lubbert Van Dincklagen, widely regarded as an honorable man, had been awarded the degree of Doctor of Laws by the University of Leiden. He was commissioned by the Dutch West India Company in 1633 as the Shout-fiscael of New Netherland. In 1636, Van Dincklagen criticized Director Wouter Van Twiller’s management of the colony and Van Twiller arraigned the Schout-fiscael for contumacy, retained his salary, which was then three years in arrears, and ordered him to return to Holland to justify his conduct to the Company. Once in Holland, Van Dincklagen, supported by David Pietersz de Vries, raised concerns about the mismanagement of New Netherland, and the Dutch parliament recalled Director Van Twiller to the Hague to answer the charges made against him.
In 1647, the Hon. Lubbert Van Dincklagen returned to New Netherland as Vice-Director of New Netherland and First Councillor of New Amsterdam in the administration of Director-General Pieter Stuyvesant. Stuyvesant appointed him Presiding Judge of the New Netherland Court although the Director-General reserved the right to preside on important cases.
In August 1647, Stuyvesant authorized the election of eighteen men, from whom he chose the Board of Nine Men. The Council at that time consisted of Vice-Director Dincklagen, Johannes La Montagne, the Schout-fiscael Hendrick Van Dijck, the unpopular Secretary Cornelis Van Tienhoven and George Baxter, the secretary for English affairs. Adriaen van der Donck became president of the Nine Men and began to document problems with the administration of the colony. Stuyvesant seized this journal, jailed Van der Donck, and convened the Council to sit as a court for the trial of his impeachment. Of the Council, Van Dincklagen alone had the courage to object to Stuyvesant’s suppression of the right of petition.
Although the Nine Men submitted the Grand Remonstrance of New Netherland to the authorities in Holland in 1649, little changed in the administration of the colony. In 1651, realizing the futility in fighting Stuyvesent’s repressive administration, Vice Director Van Dincklagen and the Schout-fiscael, Van Dijck drew up a document that unsparingly condemned the acts of the Director-General. This outraged Stuyvesant, and he appeared in the Council Chamber on February 28, 1651 with a sergeant and a file of soldiers and demanded Van Dincklagen’s resignation. When Van Dincklagen resisted, asserting that his commission, like that of the Director-General, was granted by the Dutch parliament and thus could be revoked only by that body, Stuyvesant ordered him removed by force from the chamber and imprisoned him in the guardhouse. Several days later, Van Dincklagen escaped from custody and took refuge in Cornelis Melyn’s patroonship on Staten Island. When news of Van Dincklagen’s removal reached Holland, Stuyvesent was ordered to reinstate him, but by that time Van Dincklagen had moved to Staten Island and had become agent for the merchant Van der Capella.
Lubbert Kus Van Dincklagen relocated to New Haven with Cornelis and Jacob Melyn, became a citizen there in April, 1657 and died in early 1658.
Edmund Bailey O’Callaghan. The Register of New Netherland 1626 to 1674 (1865)
Old New York: A Journal Relating to the History and Antiquities of New York City (1890)