Warnaar Hoornbeeck seems to have spent a lot of time in litigation. Listed below are the many times he appears in the record books. These court records not only give a brief view of the life of Warnaar, but also tell much about the structure of the society at the time. For more about Warnaar’s life, see The Hornbacks.
- Tuesday, January 23, 1663: Gommert Roulussen, plaintiff vs Warrenaer Hoorenbeek, defendant; plaintiff demands payment of 17 schepels of wheat and also three schepels of wheat for interest. Defendant admits debit. Order: defendant to pay within six weeks.
- September 18, 1663: Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs Warnaar Hoorenbeeck, defendent, for violation of the ordinance of August 4, against leaving the stockade. Default (he did not appear).
- October 9, 1663: Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Warnaar Hoorenbeeck, same case, second default.
- October 30, 1663: Roelof Swartwout, Schout, plaintiff, vs. Warnaar Hoorenbeeck, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant a fine of 25 guilders for violating the ordinance of Aug 4th in that he harvested without permission and a convoy. Defendant refers himself to his mistress [employer] (Gertruyd Andiresen) because she represented him at the said session of Oct 23. Plaintiff is ordered to summon her in this matter before the court.
- February 24, 1665: Walran DuMont, plaintiff vs. Warnaar Hoorenbeeck, defendant. Plaintiff demands from defendant 19 schepels of wheat as per note for delivered goods. Defendant admits debt, but says that he himself cannot collect it from another. The honorable court orders defendant to satisfy plaintiff's aforementioned claim. [It was this same spring that the local citizens had rebelled against the English soldiers' abuse. They had been compelled to board the soldiers in their homes and were tired of being "pushed around" by them. On May 26, 1665, some of the residents went to the guardhouse with guns. There was some drunkenness and shoving involved and the end result was a court case in which Warnaar was called to testify.]
- Monday, June 1, 1665: Jan Hendericksen, alias Jan Buyr was asked whether his watch fell on last Tuesday evening and replied, "yes, because Warnaer Hoorenbeeck on the previous night took his watch" and that on said evening he mounted guard for Warnaar.
- October 13, 1665: Henderick Palingh, plaintiff vs. Warnaar Hoorenbeeck, defendant. Absent - default.
- November 24, 1665: Andries Pietersen Noorman, plaintiff vs Warnaar Hoorenbeeck, defendent. Absent - default.
- January 19, 1666: Joris Hael, plaintiff vs. Warnaer Hoorenbeeck, defendant. Absent - default.
- January 26, 1666: Joris Poorter, plaintiff vs Warnaar Hoorenbeeck, defendant. Plaintiff demands of defendant 13 guilders in sewan. Defendant admits debt. The honorable court orders defendant to satisfy plaintiff's demand. [Sewan was "light money" or wampum which was strings of clam shells made by the Indians and used when "hard money" was unavailable.]
- October 16, 1666: Gerrat Fooken, plaintiff vs. Pieter Hillabrants, Warnaar Hoorenbeeck and Jan Hendricks, defendants. Plaintiff demands of defendants an amount of 26 schepels of wheat, on account of the sale of the crops in the new village in the year 1664, according to a signed contract. The defendants answer that plaintiff sold them grain, and coming on the great piece on the field, defendants did not find grain worth the cutting, and further say that defendants can be free with the wyncoop which they offer to prove. The honorable court orders defendants to provide proof at the next court session. [This case was apparently settled out of court as it does not appear in court next session, involving Warnaar.]
- October 16, 1666: Warnaar Hoorenbeeck, plaintiff vs. Aert Martensen Doorn, defendant. Plaintiff demands of defendant a sum of 108 sch. of wheat, being a portion of earned wages and a portion for advanced money. Further demands a suit of clothes owed for more than three years. Defendant answers that he claims against the above demand one year's board, being 1-1/2 sch. of wheat weekly. The honorable court orders parties to themselves select two good men for the purpose of settling their various accounts.
- November 23, 1666: Warnaar Hoorenbeeck, plaintiff vs. Jan Jansen van Ooosterhout, defendant. Plaintiff demands 13 sch. of wheat, balance for a wagon. Defendant admits the debt and agrees to pay the 13 sch. of wheat in eight or ten days. The honorable court orders defendant to satisfy plaintiff's demand.
- November 22, N.S. 1666: appeared before me Mattheus Capito, secretary of the village of Wildwyck, and the below-named witnesses: Mr. Reynier Van der Coelan, of the ordered of the aforesaid Warnaer Hoorenbeeck, two new wagons, which the contractor agrees to deliver to the principal at this place in the month of May of the following year of 1667. The principal promises to order for the two new wagons the iron-work and to pay for the labor on said wagons the amount of 180 guilders in sewan or value of the same on delivery. With which contract the aforesaid appearers are satisfied, promising to sincerely comply with the same, pledging their respective persons and estates as per law. On which account the witnesses invited and requested for the purpose, have subscribed to the present with their own hand at Wildwyck on the day and in the near named before. Signed: Reynier Van doer Coeele. The Mark "X" of Warnaer Hoorenbeeck, Roelof Swartwout, Alaerdt Heymansz Roosa. In my presence, signed: Mattheus Capito, Secretary.
- January 8/18, 1667: Warnaer Hooorenbeeck, plaintiff vs. Pieter Hillebrants defendant. Absent - default.
- January 15/25, 1667: Warnaer Hoorenbeeck, plaintiff vs. Pieter Hillebrants defendant., Plaintiff demands of the defendant 7-1/2 sch. of wheat for wages both owing since the year 1663 and requests payment. Defendant answers there was only 6-1/2 sch. of grain loaned to him with one sch. for wages, together 7-1/2 sch. Plaintiff is satisfied with defendants answere. The honorable court orders defendant to pay plaintiff 7-1/2 sch. of wheat.
- January 15/25, 1667: Thomas Harmensen, plaintiff vs. Warnaer Hoorenbeeck, defendant. Plaintiff demands of defendant 31 guilders light money with costs. Defendant answers not to owe any more than 13 guilders. Plaintiff answers that he attached on Arent Jansen, wheelwright his claim of 3 sch. of wheat for which attachment defendant has become security. Defendant answers that he became security for as far as he should have received the three sch. of wheat of Aert Martensen Doorn on account of Arent Jansen. The honorable court orders defendant as per admission to satisfy plaintiff for the 13 guilders with costs and that the defendant, as per his own confession, shall be obliged to receive the three sch. of wheat of Aert Martensen Doorn and after having received them, to pay the same to plaintiff.
- Jan 29/Feb 8, 1667: Warnaer Hoorenbeeck, plaintiff vs. Ariaen Gerretsen, defendant. Absent. Warnaer Hoorenbeeck demands payment by defendant of the amount of 116 guilders on account of an assignment of Aert Martensen Doorn from the grain bought at the vendue of Aert Martensen Doorn. The vendue master is instructed to assist plaintiff in judicially enforcing the payment thereof by defendent.
- February 7, 1667/8: Warnaer Horenbeeck, plaintiff vs. Reynier Van Coelen, defendant. Plaintiff demands of defendant 122 guilders for wages. Defendant admits the debt only believes it to be five or six guilders less. The honorable court orders defendant to immediately pay plaintiff what he shall be found to owe after balancing accounts...complains to the honorable court that defendant Van Coelen has publicly on the street called him a thief and a rascal and agrees to prove same. Defendant Van Coelen answers that plaintiff has said that he charges two for one (viz. two pints of wine for one). Agrees to prove the same and also offers to prove the contrary from the charge. Parties ordered to prove their accusations and assertions at the next session under penalty.
- February 4/14, 1667/8: Reynier Van Coelen, plaintiff vs. Warnaer Horenbeeck, defendant. Plaintiff says that defendant slandered him by saying that he charges two for one. Requests satisfaction and persists by the same, and brings Jo. Hend. to the meeting who says, having been in the company and having seen that Van der Coelen ordered to draw wine, and to fetch the same in and charged one can. The defendant still complains that Van Coelen on the public street called him a rascal and a thief., Van Coelen says having done so because he slandered him, saying he charges two for one. The honorable court ordered Warnaer Horenbeeck to produce proof at the next session.
- February 11/21, 1667/8: Freryck Peters, Warnaer Horenbeeck, Thomas Quick and Matth. Blanchan requests the honorable court to have judicially enforced their obtained judgments against Reynier van Coelen. The officer is ordered to proceed with the execution.
- May 1/11, 1667: A stallion, for which Warnaer Hoorenbeeck bids 155 guilders, which is increased by the auctioneer with 100 guilders and was bid down to 20 guilders; and Warnaer Hoorenbeeck became the purchaser for 175 guilders. Henderick Jochemsz and Jan Hendericksz became sureties for Warnaer at this purchase.
- November 1, 1667: George Hall, plaintiff vs. Warner Horenbeeck, defendant. Plaintiff demands of defendant 13 guilders 4 st. Defendant admits the debt, says he will pay next week. Defendant is ordered to satisfy plaintiffs demand.
- November 1, 1667: Freryck Peters, plaintiff vs. Warner Horenbeeck, defendant. Plaintiff demands of defendant a balance of 104 sch. of oats and costs. Defendant admits the debt. The honorable court orders defendant to satisfy plaintiff.
- November 8, 1667: George Hall requests that the judgment pronounced in his favor on Nov 1 against Warnaar Hoorenbeeck, Albert Gerrits, Mattys Coeuracts, and Cornelis Hogeboom shall be judicially enforced. The officer is ordered to attend to the same and to proceed with the execution. Secretary Court Minutes: "On this Jan 3, 1671/2 Roelof Swartwoudt informs the honorable court that he, Warnaer Hoorenbeecq, Johannes de Hoogeus and Daniel Purine, while returning from Marbleton, between Hurley and Marbletown, found a fire on a wood path and near it four savages, busy cooking something, and, judging from their languages they were southern savages, which they themselves acknowledged. They asked Swartwoudt and the whole company from whence they came, and Johannes de Hoogeus answers "from Waerwaersink" and the aforesaid savages said they also intended to go to Waewaersink and after much talk they said to the savages "We shall follow you," and for the purpose of making the savages follow them they took one of their rifles. And they, seeing that the savages did not follow them, returned right away to the spot and found the savages gone, and they could see by the burning of the fire that the savages had departed shortly after them and maintain that the savages are planning mischief, and therefore informed the honorable court. Captain Chambers proposes the necessity of keeping a watch. The honorable court orders a watch of four men till further orders because the messenger remains away beyond the time Captain Chambers proposes the necessity of having the village closed as per the decree."
Sources: The McDonald Family History and from a Hornback web site. This web site gives the following sources: Warnaar Hornbeck Descendants; Hornbeck Hunting and Descendants of Warnaar Hornbeck Born c 1645; Baptismal and Marriage Records of the Old Dutch Church of Kingston, Ulster County, New York, transcribed an edited by Rowell Randall Hoe pub 1891; New York Calendarof Wills compiled and edited by Berthold Fernow, p 188, Will of tobias Hoornbeck of Rochester, NY dated 5 June 1767, probated 10 April 1771; Calendar of NJ Wills, Administrations, etc. Vol III, p 164-164, published as Documents Relating to Colonial Hist of the State of NJ, 1st Ser., Vol. XXXII; and other documents.
[This page researched and written by Susan Overturf Ingraham, a descendant of the Hornbacks through Martha Hornback who married William Power McDonald.]