JOHN MARSTON

From British Mercenary to Colonial Constable

Born in England¹ around 1622², John Marston (the future accidental founder of the Masten name) sailed for America in the early 1640's. He got there by signing up with the Dutch West India Company. At the time, life in the Netherlands was great, so actual Dutch citizens weren't exactly lining up to get eaten by bears or shot with arrows in an unknown wilderness. England, however, was miserable, broke, and sliding into a brutal civil war. The Dutch capitalized on this by hiring entire regiments of desperate English mercenaries to do their dirty work, specifically protecting the settlement from the natives. In exchange for risking his life guarding settlers in New Amsterdam, John got free food, guaranteed wages, and a horrific transatlantic boat ride.

The gamble paid off. On October 19, 1645, Governor Willem Kieft handed John a nice chunk of land in Flushing, Long Island³. John successfully transitioned from "hired muscle" to "upstanding pillar of the community," eventually becoming the Constable of Flushing in 1658⁴.

On October 27, 1650, John married Dievertje “Deborah” Jans at the Reformed Dutch Church in modern-day Lower Manhattan⁵. Dievertje was a native of North Holland born abroad in about 1632.

John and Dievertjie had five children: John, Cornelius, Elizabeth, Tryntje (a cute Dutch way of saying Katherine), and Ezekiel. But as the kids grew up, they geographically grew apart:

Team Marston: The eldest son, John, and two surviving siblings stayed in NYC area and kept the “r” in their English last name. One sibling, Ezekiel, passed away at age 9, with his “r” intact.
Team Masten: Cornelius packed his bags for Ulster County, settled in Kingston, and officially became a Masten—directly establishing the lineage of Herman Wolf’s 5th great-grandfather.

The story takes a dark turn in early 1671, when both John and Dievertje died in close succession. The tragedy left behind four children between ages 13 and 18. Their family friend, John Hinchman, was named as a guardian immediately prior to John’s death, and stepped in to take the traumatized kids into his own home. By April, the courts officially ordered Hinchman to take over the Marston estate before it could be "impaired" or looted.

True to his stubborn British roots, John Marston flatly rejected the aggressively fair Dutch custom of dividing an estate equally among all his children. Instead, he hoarded the entire family homestead and slapped it exclusively onto his two teenaged sons, John Jr. and Cornelius, to be unlocked when they hit the age of 21. As for his daughters, Elizabeth and Katherine? Their grand inheritance consisted entirely of a single gold ring and a silver thimble⁶. Don’t spend it all in one place, ladies.

¹ Some online genealogy sleuths claim he was from Yorkshire or Norfolk. There have no proof and you should not believe everything you see on the internet anyhow, particularly if no receipts are attached.

² Best guess of birthyear based on first appearance in records in 1643 and marriage. No birth records found.

³ Patent of Flushing (Flushing Charter), October 10, 1645, New York Historical Manuscripts: Dutch, vol. 4, New York State Archives, Albany, NY.

⁴ Henry D. Waller, History of the Town of Flushing, Long Island, New York (Flushing, NY: J. H. Ridenour, 1899), p 55.

⁵ Records of the Reformed Dutch Church in New Amsterdam and New York: Marriages from 11 December, 1639, to 26 August, 1801, compiled by Samuel S. Purple (1890) https://archive.org/details/recordsofreforme01coll/page/n61/mode/1up

⁶ Dievertjie likely died first, since her name is completely missing from John's will. Let’s be honest: if she had still been breathing, she likely would have not allowed John to completely stiff her daughters with only a thimble and ring.

Earliest documented appearance in America

When did John arrive in America? This document, written in Dutch in late 1643, shows John (aka Jan) Marston acts as a bondsman for Robert Eden. The text explicitly mentions his involvement with "the English troops" serving the Dutch. This lends credence to him being a soldier hired under the service of Dutch Director General Willem Kieft and establishes him living in the area as early as 1643.

The portion that mentions him is translated: "Brient Nelli and Jan Masten have given security as bondsmen for Robert Eden, stating that his upcoming monthly wages—accruing from his service with the English troops—shall henceforth be collected and deposited in the Fort. It shall remain there to serve as a guarantee and protection against his landlord's claim regarding his housing expenses, and to satisfy the judicial officials or any other interested parties."

Where was he living at the time? The 1645 Patent meant he likely did not own land prior to that. The very court record in the image hints at his living arrangement because he was helping a another English soldier secure money for his landlord to pay for housing expenses. During this period, mercenary soldiers, laborers, and transient Englishmen did not yet own land. As an English soldier in the Dutch service, Marston’s "residence" during these years would have been a military garrison, barracks, or camp.

What was he up to before he started farming? From 1643 - 1645 the settlers who the Dutch West India Company sent over to establish a colony were fighting local Native American tribes (referred to Kieft's War). Kieft hired English soldiers and mercenary forces—notably under English commanders, to fight for the Dutch. John would have been deployed from Manhattan to various active skirmish sites across western Long Island and modern-day Westchester, meaning he was living the life of an active-duty soldier.

In fact, he is listed as "Jan Maste, Soldaet"(Soldier)” in February of 1644, when he appeared at the Reformed Dutch Church in New Amsterdam to act as a baptismal godfather for Jan Pieterzen, the son of a fellow soldier. New Amsterdam Reformed Dutch Church (now known as the Collegiate Church of New York City) was formed in 1628 making it the oldest continuous evangelical church in North America.

New York State Archives. New York (Colony). Council. Dutch colonial council minutes, 1638-1665. Series A1809-78. Volume 4, page 181

Nathaniel Marston (not an relative)

Born in South Lubec, Maine, in 1827, author Nathaniel Washington Marston dedicated much of his adult life to the meticulous documentation of family lineages. This culminated in his defining work, The Marston Genealogy: In Two Parts, which was published in 1888. The book remains a primary reference for historians and descendants of the New England Marston family, documenting the lineage of early immigrants who arrived in Massachusetts and New Hampshire in the 1630s

The existence of Nathaniel in New York at that time is not in question, but he is not an ancestor of Herman Wolf, because the info in this genealogy regarding John Marston of Flushing is INCORRECT.

Y-DNA results show that the New England line of the Marstons is unrelated to the line we are following.

Old "family records" from 1888 produced an error that was propogated about John Marston

"The Marston Genealogy : In Two Parts" is flat out wrong about John Marston and his (imaginary) son Nathaniel. In the 1880s, there was no internet, microfiche, or centralized archive system. Nathan lived in Maine and could not easily travel to New York City to read all of the handwritten, unindexed and untranslated Dutch language books of the Reformed Dutch Church or court records.

Nathan Washington Marston got some bad info when he stated that John Marston married a woman named Ann Ley or Legg, which we know is not correct. His first and only wife was Dievertje Jans. We have receipts!
Given how we have proved he was a young adult by 1643 and a soldier in 1644, his birth year would have been in the early 1620's, not 1630 and 1635 as the article states.
Marrying a Dutch woman, Cornelis Masten (son of John) adopted the Dutch tradition of naming children, which involves naming the first male after the paternal grandfather and the first female after the paternal grandmother. This totally fits: John and Dieviertje were the first two children of Cornelis and his wife Elizabeth.
The Marston Y-DNA project proves several UNRELATED lines of Mastens exist, and records show this Nathaniel Marston is not associated with the “New York” line of the Marstons (Mastens) that we’re following.

The article, part of which is shown here, was written by the editor of New York Genealogical and Biological Record, who set out to correct the errors - and he does not mince words about what Nathaniel Washington Marston wrote:

"not substantiated by any public record therein"
"he compiler failed to investigate the facts relative to John Marston"
"the assumption that the copyist made an error in transcription and substituted (inadvertently) the name Cornelius for that of Nathaniel is without foundation for belief"
"not an iota of evidence to show the parentage of this Nathaniel Marston"

Here is the link to John Reynolds Totten's dopeslap of Nathaniel Washington Marston's work - https://www.newyorkfamilyhistory.org/online-records/nygb-record/566-301/93

Fun fact: the Church where John and Dievertje married still is in existence (the building is not). See the history of the church here: https://www.collegiatechurch.org/

New York Genealogical and Biographical Society. The New York Genealogical and Biographical Record 60, no. 3 (July 1929).

Marriage of John Masten and Dievertje Jans 10/27/1650

The Groom: Listed in the Dutch records as Jan Masten (an English immigrant, noted as "Uyt Engelandt" meaning "from England").

The Bride: Listed as Dievertje Jans (noted as "Uyt Noordt Holland" meaning "from North Holland").

The Status: They were registered as a j.m. (jong man / young unmarried man) and j.d. (jonge dochter / young unmarried woman), meaning neither had been married before.

Records of the Reformed Dutch Church in New Amsterdam and New York : marriages from 11 December 1639 to 26 August 1801.

Significance of the Flushing Remonstrance

A Precursor to the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution

The document entitled “The Flushing Remonstrance” is VERY significant – it served as an ideological precursor to the religious liberties later enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

Both the Dutch and English hated Governor Peter Stuyvesant - lambasting him largely because of his intense prejudice toward their neighbors: Quakers, Lutherans, Jews and pretty much anyone else who tried to settle in the area¹. In an extreme move, Stuyvesant sought to criminalize all non-Dutch Reformed religious gatherings, even chaining a Quaker preacher named Robert Hodgson to a wheelbarrow and beating him nearly to death².

John Marston was English and certainly not a Quaker (as evidenced by the fact that he was a Constable). But, his neighbor and fellow patentee, John Bowne, was arrested for holding Quaker meetings in his home, which prompted Stuyvesant to toss him into a dungeon and banish him back to Europe. Bowne went directly to Dutch West India Company in Amsterdam, passionately arguing that Stuyvesant was violating the religious freedoms guaranteed in Flushing's original 1645 patent – AND WON - returning home in 1664³.

¹Shorto, Russell. “New Amsterdam Figured Out Religious Tolerance 361 Years Ago.” The New York Times, 27 June 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/06/27/opinion/travel-ban-supreme-court-new-amsterdam.html.

² "Flushing Remonstrance." Historical Society of the New York Courts, history.nycourts.gov/about_period/flushing-remonstrance/. Accessed 27 June 2026.

³ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bowne. Accessed 27 June 2026.

A note on the dates for John's will and death

John wrote the will in 1671; you will see this notated in 1670/71 though. According to the Old Style Julian calendar, 1671 didn't begin until March 25. The court granted administration of his estate on April 6, 1671. Because April comes after March 25, the calendar year had officially rolled over to 1671 under both systems.

Because John appears to have written the will right before he died, it suggests Dievertje died shortly before him. Back in those days, when a man's wife died leaving him with youngsters, he would do two things right away: look for a replacement wife, and draft a will appointing a guardian in case he died before finding someone to help raise his children. Had Dievertje died months or years prior to John, he likely would not have waited until he was on death's door to create a will to name a guardian.

Did John Marston have slaves?

Evidence suggests he did NOT have slaves at the time of his death because they were not in his will, but that fact can’t be proven because a formalized census recording slave ownership did not exist in that area during his lifetime.

The Dutch West India Co, sponsor of John's passage, did bring 11 slaves to the area in 1626. They and their wives were freed in 1644, but their children were not.

Slavery wasn’t really widespread until the British took over in 1664. Sadly, we know the practice remained in the area until 1841, so it is definitely possible that John's descendants were slave owners. Based on a 1698 Flushing Census (almost 3 decades after John’s death) and tax records from that era, historians think two-fifths of all households on Long Island had at least one enslaved person.

References:

Hofstra University Library Special Collections Department. "Slavery on Long Island." Hofstra University Library. Accessed June 27, 2026. hofstra.edu.

Diouf, Sylviane A. "New York City's Slave Market." The New York Public Library (blog). June 29, 2015. https://www.nypl.org/blog/2015/06/29/slave-market

Book of Ruth and Chuck

JOHN MARSTON

From British Mercenary to Colonial Constable

Earliest documented appearance in America

Nathaniel Marston (not an relative)

Old "family records" from 1888 produced an error that was propogated about John Marston

John Marston and the 1645 Flushing Land Patent: Residents strongly promote religious liberty and tolerance in the new land

Marriage of John Masten and Dievertje Jans 10/27/1650

Significance of the Flushing Remonstrance

A Precursor to the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution

John's Homestead (approximation, original plot boundries lost in a fire). This is based on where the kids legal guardian, John Hinchman, lived. He likely would have held between 20 - 40 acres, not necessarily continuous, with access to the Flushing Creek and with a long, ribbon-like shape eastward.

John the Constable

John's Will

A note on the dates for John's will and death

Did John Marston have slaves?

JOHN MARSTON

From British Mercenary to Colonial Constable

Earliest documented appearance in America

Nathaniel Marston (not an relative)

Old "family records" from 1888 produced an error that was propogated about John Marston

John Marston and the 1645 Flushing Land Patent: Residents strongly promote religious liberty and tolerance in the new land

Marriage of John Masten and Dievertje Jans 10/27/1650

Significance of the Flushing Remonstrance

A Precursor to the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution

John's Homestead (approximation, original plot boundries lost in a fire). This is based on where the kids legal guardian, John Hinchman, lived. He likely would have held between 20 - 40 acres, not necessarily continuous, with access to the Flushing Creek and with a long, ribbon-like shape eastward.

John the Constable

John's Will

A note on the dates for John's will and death

Did John Marston have slaves?

This website uses cookies.