Anthonie Dubbelman and Marijn de Jong, theft of spiering.

In late Juli or the beginning of August 1870, two hungry men walked along the harbour side when they saw some baskets with smelt (in Dutch Spierings, a salmon like fish that smells a little like cucumber and can be flowered an baked in whole).

The first was named Anthonie Dubbelman and was 33 years old born in Moerdijk, the other was Marijn de Jong was 36 years old and born in Hoeven. Both probably worked at the harbour as carrier. They lived in "Moerdijk onder de Klundert".

The two didn't earn a lot of money and lived in fairly bad conditions it seemed. So they asked the man who was delivering the baskets with smelt if they could get one basket. No said the man, go to Bart van Veen and ask him. I'm delivering for him. He owns the baskets now.

vs_spiering.jpgAnthonie and Marijn didn't ask Bart van Veen for one basket, but just took one. When the helper of the fisher Bart van Veen, Gerrit de Rooy saw the two taking a basket he asked if they had permission. Anthonie and Marijn claimed that they had permission of Bart van Veen to take one basket. This was all witnessed by another fisherman called Albert van der Zalen who also could overhear the conversation..

When the fisher heard from his helper that one basket was taken by two men that claimed they had permission from him to do so, he went to the police. The police took the depositions of four witnesses. Bart van Veen and his helper Gerrit Leenderts de Rooy, Albert van der Zalen who heard the conversation between the men and Gerrit,  and Anthonie Ruinschatel who delivered the baskets with smelt to Bart van Veen.

The 15'th of August the case came to trial. The persecutor claimed that Anthonie and Marijn committed a minor theft. And said that there were circumstances that pleated for the defendants. He claimed a sentence of one month of imprisonment and paying of all legal expenses.The judge came to his verdict the 9'th September 1870. He sentenced Anthonie and Marijn to 14 day's in jail and payment of all legal expenses. He motivated the sentence by the fact that the taken property was not costly (not more than 1 guilder) and he also considered the circumstances that lead to the theft.