Briefwisseling Menno ter Braak - Frank van der Hoeven
Frank van der Hoeven
Menno ter Braak (Den Haag)
Chicago, 16 september 1937
Gentlemen: - By a rare chance, issues of your papers of Mei-31 and Aug-1937 landed in my hands. What interested me the most, was the controversy in regard to Multatuli-Van der Hoeven letters.
After reading the debate bewteen Mr. Tromp Meesters and Dr. Ter Braak I wish to clear up certain points and also would like to get some further information.
In the first place Mr. Meesters can not understand why the Hero of the late Jan Van der Hoeven, did not press the claim against [Edw.?] This is very simple. At the time my father died in [1850?], I was only 10 years old while my brothers Maarten and Jan were still younger. Within a few years both Maarten and myself left Holland for America while Jan went to the East-Indies.
At that time we were not aware, that such letters were in existence. As a matter of fact, I knew that [Edw?] owed my father 500 gulden or even a little letter.
But as I stated, that I did not have proof, and as [Edw?] has not yet returned to Holland, before we left [we were?] not in a position to press our claims.
Widow Van der Hoeven-Meyer did not do so. I [did?] not state also a clerk in my father's store who lived behind the ‘groote Kerk’ was aware of this debt.
Now in regard to Mr. Meesters [?] een zekere heer van der Hoeven bungs out that he either deleberate did so or he was not fully acquainted with the facts as he did not know my father's name.
I prefer to accept the latter explanation, as I am sure Mr. Meesters did not intend to [s..?] the name of one departed who was merely an innocent bystander in this family drama.
What however interets myself and brother Maarten who this Mr. J.H. Van der Hoeven is and how he came into possesion of letters belonging to the Estate of father. According to the family-tree, there is no J.H. Van der Hoeven in the family, unless it possibly is a son of our stepbrother van der Hoeven-Meyer.
As such he would not to be entitled to the possesion of this correspondence, as long as the children of Jan Van der Hoeven still were alive.
I'll enclose herewith family-tree, so this matter can be cleared up without difficulty. Would appreciate if you would send me all the issues of your paper governing this controversy.
Can I look forward to a reply from your
Frank J. van der Hoeven
3538 W 61 th street
Oldest son of the
[?] van der Hoeven
[?] Hoogstraat or Witte de Witstraat
|My grandfather||Jan van der Hoeven||Francis J. van der Hoeven|
|Maarten van der Hoeven|
|Jan C. van der Hoeven|
|Fred van der Hoeven-Meyers|
|Frans van der Hoeven||Piet van der Hoeven|
|Maarten van der Hoeven|
|Leen van der Hoeven||Wim van der Hoeven|
|Wilhelmina van der Hoeven|
|Pamelus van der Hoeven||no issue|
|Pietje van der Hoeven getrouwd met [Kimmel?] Korendijk|
|Johanna van der Hoeven- died without issue|
So you can readily see there is no J.H. van der Hoeven in the family.
It is too bad that Dr. Leen van der Hoeven [kade?] 16 The Hague overleden is. He could have told you all you may wish to know, about this controversy, as he was thoroughly familiar with it. The other broters of my father are also dead. However Mevr. De Wed. Dr Leen van der Hoeven woont ergend in Den Haag en hij mag er ook veel van weten.
I have written most in English, as after 50 years so in U.S.A. the Dutch language comes somewhat difficult for me.
Origineel: Den Haag, Letterkundig Museum (Ter Braak map, Multatuli, v.Lier). Brief.