# Max Havelaar, Chapter 19

Max Havelaar · Multatuli · The Novel

Source: https://1732studios.com/books/havelaar/hoofdstuk-19. Data: https://1732studios.com/books/havelaar/hoofdstuk-19.json. Audio: https://audio.1732studios.com/havelaar/<line id>.m4a.


Ik ben zelden prettiger uit geweest, en myn vrouw vond het ook.  
I have seldom had a more pleasant outing, and my wife thought so too.
> Comparative adverb + perfect of 'uit zijn': Prettiger ('more pleasantly') is the comparative; uit geweest is the perfect of uit zijn ('to be out/on an outing'), formed with zijn. Here the subject 'Ik' fills the first position and 'ben' stands in V2; 'zelden' is an adverb in the middle field, not fronted. Because the subject is first there is no inversion; had 'zelden' been fronted, inversion would be required.

NEGENTIENDE HOOFDSTUK  
NINETEENTH CHAPTER

In 't partikulier briefje dat de heer Slymering aan Havelaar zond, deelde hy dezen mede dat hy in weerwil zyner "drukke bezigheden" den volgenden dag te Rangkas-Betoeng zou komen om te overleggen wat er moest gedaan worden.  
In the private little note that Mr. Slymering sent to Havelaar, he informed him that, in spite of his "pressing engagements," he would come to Rangkas-Betoeng the following day to confer about what was to be done.
> Separable mededelen + dative dezen: Mededelen ('to inform') splits, stranding mede at the end. Dezen is the old dative demonstrative 'to this one' (= Havelaar), an inflected demonstrative form of deze.
> Genitive after in weerwil: zyner: In weerwil ('in spite of') governs a genitive; zyner is the old genitive possessive 'of his', agreeing with bezigheden. This in weerwil + genitive is markedly formal/archaic.

Havelaar, die maar al te goed wist wat zulke overlegging te beteekenen had--zyn voorganger had zoo dikwyls "geaboucheerd" met den resident van Bantam!--schreef den volgenden brief, dien hy den resident te-gemoet zond opdat deze dien zou gelezen hebben voor hy op de Lebaksche hoofdplaats aankwam.  
Havelaar, who knew only too well what such a conference was meant to signify — his predecessor had so often "talked things over" with the resident of Bantam! — wrote the following letter, which he sent ahead to the resident so that the man would have read it before he arrived at the chief town of Lebak.
> Accusative relative dien + separable tegemoetzenden: Dien is the accusative relative agreeing with brief; tegemoetzenden ('to send to meet') splits, te-gemoet stranded before zond. The clause is verb-final after the relative.
> opdat + conditional-perfect, verb-final: Opdat ('so that') is a purpose subordinator that here governs zou gelezen hebben ('would have read') at the clause end. Deze ('this one') = the Resident; dien = the letter (accusative).

Kommentaar op dit stuk is overbodig.  
Commentary on this document is superfluous.
> stuk = 'document' here: Stuk literally 'piece' here means an official 'document/paper'. The dry one-line frame ('commentary is superfluous') hands the floor to Havelaar's letter to damn the system in its own words.

"N° 91.  
"No. 91.

Geheim.  
Secret.

Spoed.  
Urgent.

Rangkas-Betoeng, 25 Februari 1856, desavends te 11 ure.  
Rangkas-Betoeng, 25 February 1856, in the evening at 11 o'clock.
> Frozen genitive: desavends; old dative ure: Desavends ('in the evening') is a frozen adverbial genitive (des + avond + -s). Te 11 ure keeps the old dative ending on ure ('o'clock'). Both are case relics in dating formulas.

Gisteren middag te 12 ure had ik de eer tot u aftezenden myn spoedmissive N° 88, houdende in substantie:  
Yesterday at midday at 12 o'clock I had the honour of dispatching to you my urgent missive No. 88, containing in substance:
> de eer hebben + joined aftezenden: De eer hebben te ('to have the honour to') is the courtly bureaucratic formula; aftezenden is the fused af te zenden ('to dispatch'). Fronted Gisteren middag inverts to had ik.
> Present participle houdende: Houdende ('containing') is the present participle of houden, modifying the missive — 'containing in substance'. The -end(e) participle is a hallmark of this clipped official register.

dat ik na lang onderzoek, en na vergeefs getracht te hebben den betrokkene door zachtheid terugtebrengen van zyn verkeerdheid, my krachtens myn ambtseed verplicht gevoelde den Regent van Lebak te BESCHULDIGEN van misbruik van gezag, en dat ik, hem VERDACHT hield van knevelary.  
that after long investigation, and after having tried in vain to bring the man concerned back from his wrongdoing through gentleness, I felt myself bound by my oath of office to ACCUSE the Regent of Lebak of abuse of authority, and that I held him SUSPECTED of extortion.
> na + perfect te-infinitive, joined terugtebrengen: Na getracht te hebben ('after having tried') is the perfect te-infinitive of na-purpose; terugtebrengen is fused terug te brengen ('to bring back'). Den betrokkene is the substantivized participle 'the person concerned', in old accusative den.
> Reflexive zich verplicht voelen: Zich verplicht voelen ('to feel oneself obliged') is reflexive (here the object is the earlier me/myself implied). Krachtens ('by virtue of') + ambtseed ('oath of office') is the bureaucratic idiom; gevoelde is the older form of voelde.

Ik was zoo vry in dien brief u voortestellen dat Inlandsch Hoofd naar Serang opteroepen, ten-einde na zyn vertrek en na neutralisatie van den bedervenden invloed zyner uitgestrekte familie een onderzoek te doen instellen naar de gegrondheid myner beschuldiging en van myn vermoeden.  
I took the liberty in that letter of proposing to you that the Native Chief be summoned to Serang, so that, after his departure and after the neutralizing of the corrupting influence of his far-flung family, an investigation might be set on foot into the well-foundedness of my accusation and of my suspicion.
> ten einde ... te (formal purpose): Ten-einde + te-infinitive ('in order to') is the heavy, formal twin of om ... te. Een onderzoek doen instellen ('to have an investigation set on foot') stacks doen + bare infinitive instellen, a causative.
> Genitive possessive: myner: Myner is the old genitive of mijn ('of my accusation'), governing the noun after it without van. Such inflected possessives (myner, zyner, hunner) mark the elevated register of the document.

Lang, of juister gezegd veel, had ik nagedacht voor ik daartoe besloot.  
Long, or to put it more exactly, much, had I reflected before I resolved on this.
> Fronted adverb + voor as 'before': Fronting Lang ('long') inverts to had ik. Voor here is the conjunction 'before', sending besloot to the clause end; daartoe ('to that') is the pronominal adverb pointing back to the decision.

Het was u door myn zorg bekend dat ik getracht heb door vermaningen en bedreigingen den ouden Regent voor ongeluk en schande te bewarenen myzelf voor de diepe grieve, daarvan--zy 't dan ook alleen de onmiddelyk voorafgaande oorzaak te zyn.  
It was known to you, through my care, that I had tried by admonitions and threats to preserve the old Regent from misfortune and disgrace — and to spare myself the deep grief of being, were it even only, the immediate antecedent cause of that.
> Dative-like u + impersonal het: Het was u bekend ('it was known to you') uses dummy het as subject and u as the indirect object. U is the formal/polite 'you' Havelaar uses to his superior throughout.
> Inflected -en + bewaren voor: Den ouden carries the old masculine accusative -(e)n on both article and adjective, agreeing with Regent. Bewaren voor ('to preserve from') is the fixed preposition pairing.

Doch ik zag aan den anderen kant de sedert jaren uitgezogene, diep gedrukte bevolking, ik dacht aan de noodzakelykheid van een voorbeeld--want vele andere vexatien zal ik u te rapporteeren hebben, als niet ten-minste deze zaak door terugwerking daaraan een eind maakt--en, ik herhaal het, na ryp beraad heb ik gedaan wat ik voor plicht hield.  
Yet on the other hand I saw the population, sucked dry for years, deeply oppressed; I thought of the necessity of an example — for I shall have many other vexations to report to you, unless at least this case, by its repercussion, puts an end to them — and, I repeat it, after mature deliberation I did what I held to be my duty.
> Participles as attributive adjectives: Uitgezogene ('sucked dry') and gedrukte ('oppressed') are past participles used attributively, each taking -e before the de-word bevolking. Stacking them piles the indictment.
> Relative wat + iets voor ... houden: Wat ('what') is the headless relative; iets voor plicht houden means 'to consider something a duty'. The clause is verb-final with hield at the end.

Op dit oogenblik ontvang ik uwe vriendelyke en geachte partikuliere letteren, houdende mededeeling dat gy morgen hier zult komen, en tevens een wenk dat ik deze zaak liever vooraf partikulier had moeten behandelen.  
At this very moment I receive your kind and esteemed private lines, conveying the news that you will come here tomorrow, and at the same time a hint that I ought rather to have handled this matter privately beforehand.
> Inflected possessive uwe + adjective -e: Uwe is the old inflected form of uw ('your'); both it and the adjectives take -e agreeing with the plural letteren ('lines/letter'). This heavy agreement marks the formal style.
> Participle houdende + future zult komen: Houdende ('conveying') is again the present participle. Inside the dat-clause, the future zult komen (zullen + infinitive) lands at the end; gy is the formal/literary 'you'.

Morgen dus zal ik de eer hebben u te zien, en het is juist hierom dat ik vryheid neem u dezen te-gemoet te zenden, om vóór die ontmoeting het volgende te konstateeren.  
Tomorrow, then, I shall have the honour of seeing you, and it is precisely for this reason that I take the liberty of sending you this letter to meet you, so that, before that meeting, I may establish the following.
> Cleft with pronominal adverb hierom: Hierom ('for this reason') is the pronominal adverb (hier + om); the cleft het is ... dat ('it is precisely for this that') gives emphasis. Vryheid nemen te ('to take the liberty to') governs the following te-infinitive.

Alles wat ik omtrent de handelingen van den Regent onderzocht, was diep geheim. Alleen hyzelf en de Patteh wisten het, want ik had hem loyaal gewaarschuwd.  
Everything I investigated concerning the dealings of the Regent was deeply secret. He alone and the Patteh knew of it, for I had warned him in good faith.
> Headless relative wat as subject phrase: Alles wat ik ... onderzocht ('everything I investigated') is a relative clause on indefinite alles, with onderzocht at the end. The whole phrase is the subject of was diep geheim.

Zelfs de kontroleur weet nu nog maar ten-deele den uitslag van myn onderzoekingen.  
Even the controller still knows the result of my inquiries only in part.

Deze geheimhouding had een tweeledig doel.  
This secrecy had a twofold purpose.

Eerst, toen ik nog hoopte den Regent van zyn weg terugtebrengen, was het om, àls ik slaagde, hem niet te kompromitteeren.  
First, when I still hoped to bring the Regent back from his course, it was so that, if I succeeded, I should not compromise him.
> Conditional als-clause + te-infinitive of purpose: The als-clause àls ik slaagde ('if I succeeded') is verb-final; the surrounding purpose is carried by the te-infinitive hem niet te kompromitteeren. The grave on àls marks emphatic stress.

De Patteh heeft my namens hem--het was op den 12den dezer--expresselyk voor die diskretie bedankt. Doch later toen ik begon te wanhopen aan den goeden uitslag myner pogingen, of beter, toen de maat myner verontwaardiging door een pas gehoord voorval overliep toen langer zwygen medeplichtigheid worden zou, toen moest die geheimhouding strekken ten-mynen-behoeve, want ook omtrent myzelf en de mynen heb ik plichten te vervullen.  
The Patteh, on his behalf — it was on the 12th of this month — expressly thanked me for that discretion. But later, when I began to despair of any good outcome to my efforts, or rather, when the measure of my indignation overflowed at a fresh incident just then come to my ears, when to keep silent any longer would have become complicity, then that secrecy had to serve to my own benefit, for I have duties to discharge toward myself and mine as well.
> Genitive dezer + ordinal den: Op den 12den ('on the 12th') keeps the old dative den and the inflected ordinal; dezer ('of this [month]') is the genitive of deze. A compact pile-up of case relics typical of dating in official prose.
> toen + worden-future passive sense: Toen ('when', narrative past) sends its verbs to the end. Zwygen ('keeping silent', a nominalized infinitive) is the subject; worden zou ('would become') is conditional. The repeated toen ... toen is rhetorical anaphora.

Immers na 't schryven der missive van gister, zou ik onwaardig zyn het Gouvernement te dienen, indien het daarin voorkomende, ydel, ongegrond, uit de lucht gegrepen was.  
For, after writing yesterday's missive, I should be unworthy to serve the Government if what it contained were idle, groundless, plucked out of thin air.
> indien (formal 'if') + participle as noun: Indien is the formal/literary 'if', sending was to the clause end. Het daarin voorkomende ('what appears in it') is a substantivized present participle with daarin, the pronominal adverb 'in it'.

En zoude of zal het my mogelyk wezen te bewyzen dat ik gedaan heb: "wat een goed Adsistent-resident behoort te doen" te bewyzen dat ik niet beneden de betrekking sta die my gegeven is, te bewyzen dat ik niet loszinnig en lichtvaardig zeventien moeielyke dienstjaren op 't spel zet, en wat meer zegt, het belang van vrouw en kind ... zal 't my mogelyk zyn dat alles te bewyzen, wanneer niet een diep geheim myn nasporingen verbergt, en den schuldige belet zich, zooals men 't noemt, te dekken?  
And will it, or shall it, be possible for me to prove that I have done "what a good Assistant Resident ought to do" — to prove that I do not fall short of the post that has been given me, to prove that I am not frivolously and rashly staking seventeen difficult years of service, and, what matters more, the welfare of wife and child ... shall it be possible for me to prove all that, if a deep secret does not conceal my searchings and prevent the guilty man from, as the saying goes, covering himself?
> Archaic zoude beside zal: Zoude is the older full form of zou (conditional 'would'), set beside the future zal. Pairing them ('would it, or shall it, be possible') heightens the rhetorical urgency; wezen is the archaic infinitive of zijn.
> Anaphoric te-infinitives + passive relative: The hammering repetition te bewyzen ('to prove') strings parallel te-infinitives. Within them, die my gegeven is ('that has been given me') is a zijn-state-passive relative clause.

By de minste verdenking zendt de Regent een expresse naar zyn neef die op-weg is, en die belang heeft by zyn maintien. Hy vraagt, ten-koste van wat ook, geld, deelt het met kwistige hand uit aan ieder dien hy in den laatsten tyd heeft te-kort gedaan, en 't gevolg zou wezen--ik hoop, niet te moeten zeggen: zal wezen--dat ik een lichtvaardig oordeel heb geveld, en kortaf: een onbruikbaar ambtenaar ben, om niet erger te zeggen.  
At the slightest suspicion the Regent sends an express to his nephew, who is on the road, and who has an interest in his maintenance. He asks, at any cost, for money, hands it out with a lavish hand to everyone he has lately shortchanged, and the consequence would be — I hope I shall not have to say: will be — that I shall have passed a rash judgment, and, in short, am an unfit official, to say nothing worse.
> Accusative relative dien + idiom tekortdoen: Dien is the accusative relative 'whom', object of the verb-final clause. Iemand tekortdoen ('to shortchange/wrong someone') is the separable idiom, here in the perfect heeft te-kort gedaan.
> Conditional zou vs future zal: Havelaar contrasts the hedged conditional zou wezen ('would be') with the blunt future zal wezen ('will be') in a self-correcting aside — the same zullen verb, past vs present, marking unreal vs predicted.

Om my tegen deze eventualiteit te verzekeren, dient dit schryven.  
To secure myself against this eventuality, this letter serves this purpose.

Ik heb de meeste hoogachting voor u, maar ik ken den geest dien men "de geest der Oost-Indische ambtenaren" zou kunnen noemen en ik bezit dien geest niet!  
I have the greatest respect for you, but I know the spirit that one might call "the spirit of the East Indian officials," and I do not possess that spirit!
> Accusative den + dien + stacked modals: Den geest (accusative object) is picked up by the accusative relative dien; zou kunnen noemen stacks the conditional zou with the modal kunnen and bare infinitive noemen at the end.

Uw wenk dat de zaak vooraf beter partikulier ware behandeld geworden, doet me vreezen voor een abouchement. Wat ik in myn brief van gisteren gezegd heb, is waar.  
Your hint that the affair would have been better handled privately beforehand makes me fear a parley. What I said in my letter of yesterday is true.
> Archaic ware + passive perfect (geworden): Ware is the past subjunctive of zijn ('would have been'); behandeld geworden is the perfect of the worden-passive, where geworden is its participle. A doubly archaic construction.

Doch misschien zou het onwaar schynen, wanneer de zaak werd behandeld op een wyze als zou kunnen strekken tot openbaarmaking van myne beschuldiging en van myn vermoeden, voor de Regent van hier verwyderd is.  
But perhaps it would appear untrue, were the affair handled in a way that might tend to make my accusation and my suspicion public before the Regent has been removed from here.
> wanneer + worden-passive past: Wanneer ('if/when', formal) sends the verbs to the end; werd behandeld is the past process passive ('were/was handled'). The conditional flavour comes from the surrounding zou ... schynen.

Ik mag u niet ontveinzen dat zelfs uw onverwachte komst, in verband met de gister door my naar Serang gezonden expresse, my doet vreezen dat de schuldige die vroeger niet wilde toegeven aan myn vermaningen, nu vóór den tyd zal wakker worden en trachten, zoo mogelyk, zich tant soit peu te diskulpeeren.  
I may not conceal from you that even your unexpected arrival, in connection with the express sent by me to Serang yesterday, makes me fear that the guilty man, who earlier would not yield to my admonitions, will now wake up before the time and try, if he can, to exculpate himself tant soit peu.
> Pre-nominal participle phrase: Gezonden ('sent') heads a participle phrase squeezed before its noun expresse: 'the express sent by me to Serang yesterday'. Dutch can pack a whole reduced relative clause in front of the noun.
> Reflexive te-infinitive zich diskulpeeren: Zich diskulpeeren ('to exculpate oneself') is reflexive, here as a te-infinitive after trachten ('to try'). The French tag tant soit peu ('ever so little') flavours the genteel register.

Ik heb de eer my thans nog letterlyk te gedragen aan myne missive van gister, doch neem de vryheid daarby optemerken dat die missive óók het voorstel inhield: om vóór het onderzoek den Regent te verwyderen, en zyn afhangelingen voorloopig, onschadelyk te maken. Ik vermeen niet verder verantwoordelyk te zyn voor wat ik avanceerde, dan voor-zoover gy mocht gelieven intestemmen met myn voorstel betreffende de wyze van onderzoek, dat is: onpartydig, openlyk, en vooral vry.  
I have the honour to abide for the present, to the letter, by my missive of yesterday, yet I take the liberty of noting alongside it that that missive also contained the proposal: to remove the Regent before the investigation, and to render his dependents provisionally harmless. I do not consider myself further answerable for what I advanced, than insofar as you may be pleased to concur in my proposal regarding the manner of the investigation, that is: impartial, open, and above all free.
> voor-zoover + modal mocht + joined intestemmen: Voor-zoover ('insofar as') subordinates, sending verbs to the end. Mocht ('might') is the modal; intestemmen is the fused in te stemmen ('to concur'). Gelieven ('to be pleased to') is a courtly formula.

Die vryheid bestaat niet voor de Regent verwyderd is, en naar myn bescheiden meening ligt hierin niets gevaarlyks. Hem kan immers gezegd worden dat ik hem beschuldig en verdenk, dat ik gevaar loop, en niet hy, wanneer hy onschuldig is.  
That freedom does not exist until the Regent has been removed, and to my humble mind there is nothing dangerous in this. He can surely be told that I accuse and suspect him, that it is I who run the risk, and not he, if he is innocent.
> Impersonal worden-passive, dative Hem: Gezegd worden ('be told') is the process passive; Hem ('to him') is the dative experiencer fronted for emphasis, forcing inversion kan ... gezegd worden. Immers ('after all') is a confirming particle.

Want ikzelf ben van oordeel dat ik uit de dienst behoor ontslagen te worden, als er blyken zal dat ik lichtvaardig, of zelfs maar voorbarig heb gehandeld.  
For I myself am of the opinion that I ought to be dismissed from the service, should it appear that I have acted rashly, or even merely prematurely.
> behoren + passive te-infinitive: Behoren te ('ought to') governs the passive te-infinitive ontslagen te worden ('to be dismissed'). The als-clause (here met 'als er blyken zal') is the verb-final condition.

Voorbarig! Na jaren, jaren, misbruik!  
Prematurely! After years and years of abuse!

Voorbarig! Als een eerlyk man slapen kon, en leven en genieten, zoo lang zy voor wier welzyn hy geroepen is te waken, zy die in den hoogsten zin zyn naasten zyn, worden gekneveld en uitgezogen!  
Prematurely! As if an honest man could sleep, and live and enjoy, so long as those for whose welfare he is called to watch — those who, in the highest sense, are his neighbours — are being extorted and sucked dry!
> worden-passive: gekneveld en uitgezogen: Worden gekneveld en uitgezogen ('are being extorted and sucked dry') is the process passive with two participles — the action ongoing, not a finished state. The relative zy die ... is verb-final.
> Rhetorical als ('as if') + modal: Here Als reads 'as if' in an indignant rhetorical question; the modal kon sends slapen to the end. The exclamatory Voorbarig! framing gives it heat.

Het is waar, ik ben hier kort, doch ik hoop dat de vraag eenmaal wezen zal: wat men gedaan heeft, of men het goed gedaan heeft, niet of men het in te korten tyd heeft gedaan.  
It is true that I have been here but a short time, yet I hope the question will one day be: what has been done, and whether it has been done well, not whether it was done in too short a time.
> Future zal + embedded indirect questions: Wezen zal ('will be') is the future. The colon introduces stacked indirect questions (wat men gedaan heeft, of men het goed gedaan heeft), each verb-final with the perfect at the end.

Voor my is elke tyd te lang die gekenmerkt wordt door afpersing en onderdrukking, en zwaar weegt my de sekonde die door myn nalatigheid, door myn plichtverzuim, door myn "geest van schipperen" in ellende zou doorgebracht zyn.  
To me, every span of time is too long that is marked by extortion and oppression, and heavily would weigh on me the second that, through my negligence, through my dereliction of duty, through my "spirit of compromise," had been passed in misery.
> Fronted adverb + conditional passive: Fronting zwaar ('heavily') inverts to weegt my. The relative die ... zou doorgebracht zyn ('that would have been spent') is a conditional perfect passive, verb cluster at the end.

Ik heb berouw over de dagen die ik heb laten verloopen voor ik u officieel rapporteerde, en ik vraag verschooning voor dat verzuim.  
I repent of the days I let slip by before I reported to you officially, and I beg pardon for that omission.
> Causative laten + bare infinitive verloopen: Laten verloopen ('to let slip by') is the causative laten + bare infinitive. The relative die opens a verb-final clause; berouw hebben over ('to repent of') is the fixed idiom.

Ik neem de vryheid u te verzoeken my in de gelegenheid te stellen myn schryven van gisteren te rechtvaardigen, en my te vrywaren voor de mislukking myner pogingen om de afdeeling Lebak te bevryden van de wormen die sedert menschen-geheugenis knagen aan haar welvaart.  
I take the liberty of asking you to give me the opportunity to justify my letter of yesterday, and to guard me against the failure of my efforts to deliver the district of Lebak from the worms that, within living memory, have been gnawing at its prosperity.
> Chained te-infinitives: Three te-infinitives nest: u te verzoeken ('to ask you'), my in de gelegenheid te stellen ('to put me in a position'), and te rechtvaardigen ('to justify'). This embedding is the engine of the letter's formal periodic style.
> verschooning = 'pardon': Verschooning (modern verschoning) here means 'pardon/forgiveness' for the omission — an older, formal sense, not the everyday meaning 'change of clothes/clean linen'.

Het is daarom dat ik op-nieuw zoo vry ben, u te verzoeken myne handelingen ten deze--trouwens alleen bestaande in onderzoek, rapport en voorstel--wel te willen goedkeuren, den Regent van Lebak, zonder voorafgaande direkte of indirekte waarschuwing van hier te verwyderen, en voorts te doen instellen een onderzoek naar hetgeen ik meedeelde in myn schryven van gisteren N° 88.  
It is for this reason that I once more take the liberty of asking you to be pleased to approve my actions in this matter — which, after all, consist only in investigation, report, and proposal — to remove the Regent of Lebak from here without any prior direct or indirect warning, and then to have an investigation set on foot into what I reported in my letter of yesterday, No. 88.
> Relative die + present-tense indictment: Die opens a verb-final relative clause (knagen at the end); knagen aan ('to gnaw at') keeps the present tense for ongoing harm. Haar ('its') refers to the de-word afdeeling Lebak.

De Adsistent-resident van Lebak,  
The Assistant Resident of Lebak,

MAX HAVELAAR"  
MAX HAVELAAR"

Deze bede om de schuldigen niet in bescherming te nemen, ontving de Resident onderwege.  
This plea not to take the guilty under his protection reached the Resident on the road.
> Fronted object + inversion: The long object phrase Deze bede ... in bescherming te nemen ('this plea not to protect the guilty') is fronted, so the verb ontving precedes its subject de Resident. Onderwege ('on the road') is the archaic form of onderweg.

Een uur na zyn komst te Rangkas-Betoeng legde hy een kort bezoek by den Regent af, en vroeg hem by die gelegenheid: wat hy kon inbrengen tegen den Adsistent-resident? en: of hy, Adhipatti, geld noodig had?  
An hour after his arrival at Rangkas-Betoeng he paid a brief visit to the Regent, and asked him on that occasion: what he could bring forward against the Assistant Resident? and: whether he, the Adhipatti, needed money?
> Separable afleggen: Een bezoek afleggen ('to pay a visit') is a separable verb; af strands at the end while legde stands second after the fronted time phrase. Een uur na zyn komst fronted forces the inversion.

Op de eerste vraag antwoordde de Regent: "niets, dat kan ik bezweren!" Op de tweede antwoordde hy toestemmend, waarop de resident hem een paar bankbriefjes gaf, die hy--voor de gelegenheid meegebracht!--uit zyn vestzak haalde.  
To the first question the Regent answered: "nothing, that I can swear to!" To the second he answered in the affirmative, whereupon the resident gave him a couple of banknotes, which he — brought along for the occasion! — drew from his waistcoat pocket.
> Relative die + separable idiom, period detail: Die (relative, object) opens a verb-final clause closing with haalde. The dash-bracketed aside voor de gelegenheid meegebracht ('brought along for the occasion!') is Multatuli's narratorial sneer at the premeditated bribe.

Men begrypt dat dit geheel buiten Havelaar omging, en straks zullen wy te weten komen hoe die schandelyke handelwyze hem bekend werd.  
It will be understood that this passed entirely without Havelaar's knowledge, and presently we shall learn how that shameful proceeding came to his ears.
> Separable omgaan buiten: Buiten ... omgaan ('to go on without someone's knowledge') is a separable idiom; in the dat-clause om-ging lands at the end. Men begrypt ('it is understood') uses impersonal men.
> worden-passive in an indirect question: Bekend werd ('became known') is the process passive in the past; hoe opens the embedded question, pushing werd to the end. Straks here means 'presently/soon', not 'just now'.

Toen de resident Slymering by Havelaar afstapte, was hy bleeker dan gewoonlyk, en zyn woorden stonden verder van elkander dan ooit.  
When the resident Slymering alighted at Havelaar's, he was paler than usual, and his words stood further apart from one another than ever.
> toen-clause + comparative with dan: The toen-clause ('when ... alighted') is verb-final (afstapte at the end), so the main clause inverts to was hy. Bleeker dan ('paler than') is the comparative with dan for 'than'.

Het was dan ook geen geringe zaak voor iemand die zóó uitmuntte in "schipperen" en jaarlyksche rustverslagen, zoo op-eenmaal brieven te ontvangen waarin geen spoor was, noch van 't gebruikelyk officieel optimismus, noch van kunstige omwending der zaak, noch van vrees voor ontevredenheid van de Regeering over 't "bemoeielyken" met ongunstige berichten.  
For indeed it was no small matter for a man who so excelled in "compromise" and tranquil annual reports, to receive all at once letters in which there was no trace either of the customary official optimism, or of any artful glossing-over of the affair, or of any fear of the Government's displeasure at being "troubled" with unfavourable news.
> geen + extraposed te-infinitive subject: Geen geringe zaak ('no small matter') negates the indefinite predicate noun; the real subject is the extraposed te-infinitive zoo op-eenmaal brieven te ontvangen ('to receive such letters all at once').

De resident van Bantam was geschrokken, en als men my de onedelheid van 't beeld wil vergeven om-den-wille van de juistheid, heb ik lust hem te vergelyken by een straatjongen die zich beklaagt over verkrachting van voorouderlyke gewoonten, omdat een excentriek kameraadje hem zonder voorafgaande scheldwoorden geslagen heeft.  
The resident of Bantam was startled, and — if I may be forgiven the indelicacy of the image for the sake of its aptness — I am inclined to liken him to a street urchin who complains of a violation of ancestral custom because some eccentric little comrade has struck him without first delivering the customary insults.
> Frozen dative -den: The phrase 'om-den-wille van' ('for the sake of') preserves the old masculine dative ending -den on 'wil', a fossilised case form normal in 1860 prose. Modern Dutch writes 'omwille van' with no inflection.
> Reflexive zich beklagen: 'Zich beklagen over' ('to complain about') is a third-person reflexive verb: 'zich' refers back to the subject 'een straatjongen'. The reflexive 'zich' is obligatory and cannot be dropped.
> Period spelling: -lyk and y: 1860 spells the suffix -lijk as -lyk, using 'y' for the 'ij' digraph throughout (myn, vergelyken). Read 'voorouderlyke' as modern 'voorouderlijke' ('ancestral').

Hy begon met den kontroleur te vragen waarom deze niet beproefd had Havelaar van zyn aanklacht terugtehouden?  
He began by asking the controller why the latter had not tried to dissuade Havelaar from his accusation.
> te + infinitive after 'beginnen met': 'Beginnen met … te' frames the opening action: the main verb 'vragen' arrives as 'te vragen' at the clause end. The dative-marked 'den kontroleur' shows the old masculine accusative/dative -den.
> Subordinate clause: verb to the end: The indirect question opened by 'waarom' is a subordinate clause, so the finite verb 'had' moves to the end, after its participle 'beproefd'. 'Terugtehouden' is the separable verb 'terughouden' written as one word with embedded 'te' — period orthography.
> Demonstrative 'deze' = 'the latter': Here 'deze' ('this one') stands in for the just-mentioned controller, the standard Dutch way to say 'the latter'. It is the near demonstrative for de-words.

De arme Verbrugge, wien de geheele aanklacht onbekend was, betuigde dit, maar vond geen geloof.  
Poor Verbrugge, to whom the whole accusation was unknown, attested as much, but was not believed.
> Dative relative pronoun 'wien': 'Wien' is the dative form of the relative pronoun 'wie' ('to whom'): the accusation was unknown 'to him'. Modern Dutch would more often write 'aan wie'; the inflected 'wien' belongs to the formal/older register.
> geen with an indefinite noun: Negation here uses 'geen', not 'niet', because it negates an indefinite noun ('geloof', belief/credence). The idiom 'geen geloof vinden' means 'to find no credence, not to be believed'.

De heer Slymering kon maar niet begrypen dat iemand, geheel alleen, op eigen verantwoordelykheid en zonder langgerekte overwegingen of "ruggespraken" had kunnen overgaan tot zóó ongehoorde plichtsvervulling.  
Mr. Slymering simply could not grasp that anyone, entirely alone, on his own responsibility and without protracted deliberations or "consultations," could have proceeded to so unheard-of a discharge of duty.
> Modal + bare infinitives at the clause end: The chain 'had kunnen overgaan' stacks a perfect ('had'), a modal ('kunnen', here as infinitive not participle — the 'Infinitivus pro Participio'), and the separable verb 'overgaan'. The modal forces bare infinitives, all piling up at the end.
> 'dat' opens a verb-final clause: The subordinating conjunction 'dat' ('that') sends all its verbs to the end of the clause, producing the long final cluster 'had kunnen overgaan'. The adverb 'maar niet' intensifies the negation: 'simply could not'.

Daar evenwel Verbrugge--volkomen naar waarheid--zyn onbekendheid met de door Havelaar geschreven brieven staande hield, moest de resident na veel uitroepingen van ongeloovige verbazing eindelyk wel toegeven, en hy ging--ik weet niet waarom?--tot het voorlezen van die brieven over.  
Since, however, Verbrugge — in perfect truth — maintained his ignorance of the letters Havelaar had written, the resident, after many exclamations of incredulous astonishment, had at last to give way, and he proceeded — I do not know why? — to the reading-aloud of those letters.
> Participle as a pre-noun adjective: Dutch can pack a whole relative clause in front of the noun: 'de door Havelaar geschreven brieven' = 'the letters written by Havelaar'. The past participle 'geschreven' functions as an attributive adjective.
> Fronted clause triggers inversion: 'Daar' here means 'since/because' and opens a subordinate clause; when the main clause follows, the finite verb 'moest' comes before its subject 'de resident' (verb-second inversion). The separable 'toegeven' lands at the end.
> Separable verb 'overgaan tot': The prefix of 'overgaan' ('to proceed to') splits off and lands at the very end as 'over', framing the whole object phrase between verb and prefix. The nominalised infinitive 'het voorlezen' means 'the reading-aloud'.

Wat Verbrugge by 't aanhooren daarvan leed, is moeielyk te beschryven.  
What Verbrugge suffered as he listened to it is hard to describe.
> te-infinitive of possibility: 'Te beschrijven' after 'zijn' carries a passive/possibility sense: 'is hard to describe' = 'can hardly be described'. This 'zijn + te + infinitive' pattern is a common alternative to a full passive.
> Pronominal adverb 'daarvan': 'Daarvan' fuses 'van' + 'dat' into 'thereof/of it' — Dutch replaces 'van dat' with the single pronominal adverb 'daarvan' when the reference is a thing. 'By 't aanhooren' nominalises the verb: 'on hearing'.

Hy was een eerlyk man, en zou zeker niet gelogen hebben als Havelaar zich op hem had beroepen om de waarheid van den inhoud der brieven te staven.  
He was an honest man, and would certainly not have lied had Havelaar appealed to him to confirm the truth of the contents of the letters.
> Conditional with 'zou' + counterfactual: 'Zou … gelogen hebben' is the conditional perfect ('would not have lied'), paired with an unreal 'if'-clause whose pluperfect 'had beroepen' sits at the end. Together they form a past counterfactual.
> Reflexive 'zich beroepen op': 'Zich beroepen op' ('to appeal to / call upon') is a fixed reflexive verb; 'zich' is the third-person reflexive referring to Havelaar. In the if-clause the verbs cluster at the end as 'had beroepen'.
> Genitive plural 'der': 'De waarheid … der brieven' uses the old genitive plural 'der' ('of the letters') instead of modern 'van de brieven'. This inflected genitive is everyday in 1860 written Dutch.

Maar ook zonder deze eerlykheid, hy had in veel schriftelyke rapporten niet altyd kùnnen vermyden de waarheid te zeggen, ook waar die soms gevaarlyk was.  
But even apart from this honesty, he had not always been able, in many written reports, to avoid telling the truth, even where it was sometimes dangerous.
> Stacked verbs: perfect + modal + te-infinitive: 'Had kunnen vermijden' chains a perfect auxiliary with the modal 'kunnen' (bare infinitive), and 'vermijden' then governs 'te zeggen'. The grave accent on 'kùnnen' marks emphatic stress.
> 'die' as a relative for a de-word: 'Die' refers back to 'de waarheid' (a de-word) and means 'which/where it'. Relative 'die' is used for common-gender (de) nouns, 'dat' for neuter (het) nouns.

Hoe zou 't zyn, als Havelaar daarvan gebruik maakte?  
How would it be, if Havelaar made use of that?
> Conditional 'zou' for a hypothetical: 'Hoe zou 't zyn' ('how would it be') uses 'zou' to float a hypothetical, completed by the 'als'-clause. The dummy subject ''t' (het) is impersonal — it points at no specific thing.
> Pronominal adverb + idiom: 'Gebruik maken van' ('to make use of') is a fixed expression; with a thing as object it becomes 'daarvan … gebruik maken'. 'Daarvan' is 'van' + 'dat' fused into one pronominal adverb.

Na 't voorlezen van de brieven betuigde de resident dat het hem aangenaam wezen zou indien Havelaar die stukken terugnam, om ze te kunnen beschouwen als niet geschreven, hetgeen deze met beleefde vastheid weigerde.  
After the reading-aloud of the letters, the resident declared that it would be agreeable to him if Havelaar withdrew those documents, so that they might be regarded as unwritten — which the latter refused with polite firmness.
> Conditional 'zou' + 'indien': 'Wezen zou' is the conditional 'would be' (with archaic 'wezen' for 'zijn'); the condition is introduced by the formal conjunction 'indien' ('if'), which like 'als' sends its verb 'terugnam' to the end.
> Purpose clause 'om … te': 'Om … te beschouwen' expresses purpose ('so as to regard them'); 'om' opens the clause and 'te' + infinitive closes it, with the modal 'kunnen' nested inside. 'Niet geschreven' is a participle used adjectivally: 'unwritten'.
> Sentence relative 'hetgeen': 'Hetgeen' ('which') is a formal/archaic relative referring back to the whole preceding idea, not a single noun. 'Deze' again means 'the latter' (Havelaar), the near demonstrative standing for the most recent person.

Na vergeefs te hebben getracht hem hiertoe te bewegen, zei de resident dat hem niets overbleef dan een onderzoek intestellen naar de gegrondheid van de gedane klachten, en dat hy dus Havelaar verzoeken moest de getuigen te doen oproepen die zyn beschuldigingen konden staven.  
After trying in vain to move him to this, the resident said that nothing was left him but to set on foot an investigation into the well-foundedness of the complaints that had been made, and that he must therefore ask Havelaar to have the witnesses summoned who could confirm his accusations.
> Perfect te-infinitive after 'na': 'Na te hebben getracht' = 'after having tried' — a perfect infinitive construction (te + hebben + participle) used after 'na'. 'Hiertoe' is a pronominal adverb ('to this'), and 'bewegen' governs its own 'te'.
> Negative word 'niets': 'Niets' ('nothing') is a single negative carrying the whole clause's negation — Dutch allows only one negative, so no 'niet' accompanies it. 'Dan' here means 'but/except': 'nothing was left him but …'.
> Causative 'doen' + infinitive: 'Te doen oproepen' = 'to have summoned': 'doen' is a causative auxiliary (like 'laten') meaning to cause something to be done. It takes a bare infinitive 'oproepen', the whole governed by 'te'.

Arme lieden die u gewond hadt aan de doornstruiken in den ravyn, hoe angstig zouden uw harten geklopt hebben als ge dezen eisch hadt kunnen hooren!  
Poor folk who had wounded yourselves on the thorn-bushes down in the ravine, how anxiously would your hearts have beaten had you been able to hear this demand!
> Archaic 2nd-person 'gy/hadt': The apostrophe addresses the poor folk as 'gy' (period 'gij', 'you'), whose verb takes the old ending -t: 'hadt' ('had'). 'U' here is the reflexive object of 'zich wonden' — 'wounded yourselves'.
> Past conditional + counterfactual 'als': 'Zouden … geklopt hebben' is the conditional perfect ('would have beaten'); the 'als'-clause with pluperfect 'hadt kunnen hooren' supplies the unreal condition. 'Ge' is the unstressed form of 'gij'.

Arme Verbrugge! Gy, eerste getuige, hoofdgetuige, getuige ex officio, getuige uit kracht van ambt en eed!  
Poor Verbrugge! You, first witness, chief witness, witness ex officio, witness by force of office and oath!
> Vocative 'gy': 'Gy' (period 'gij') is the literary/solemn 'you' of 1860, here in a heightened apostrophe to Verbrugge. In modern Dutch this is 'jij/u'; 'gij' survives mainly in Flemish and older or biblical registers.

Getuige, die reeds getuigd hàdt op schrift!  
Witness who had already borne witness in writing!
> Relative 'die' + archaic 'hadt': 'Die' relativises 'getuige' (a de-word), and the verb 'hàdt' carries the old 2nd-person -t ending used with 'gij'; the grave accent marks emphasis. 'Op schrift' is the fixed phrase 'in writing'.

Op schrift dat dáár lag, op de tafel, onder Havelaars hand ...  
In writing that lay right there, on the table, under Havelaar's hand ...
> Relative 'dat' for a het-word: 'Dat' relativises 'schrift' (a het-word), so the neuter relative pronoun 'dat' is used (de-words would take 'die'). 'Lag' is the strong simple past of 'liggen' ('lay').

Havelaar antwoordde: "Resident, ik ben adsistent-resident van Lebak, ik heb beloofd de bevolking te beschermen tegen afpersing en geweldenary, ik klaag den Regent aan, en zyn schoonzoon van Parang-Koedjang, ik zal de gegrondheid myner aanklacht bewyzen zoodra me daartoe de gelegenheid wordt gegeven die ik voorstelde in myn brieven, ik ben schuldig aan laster, als myn aanklacht valsch is!"  
Havelaar answered: "Resident, I am Assistant Resident of Lebak, I have promised to protect the population against extortion and tyranny, I accuse the Regent, and his son-in-law of Parang-Koedjang, I shall prove the well-foundedness of my accusation as soon as I am given the opportunity for it that I proposed in my letters, I am guilty of slander, if my accusation is false!"
> Present perfect + te-infinitive: 'Heb beloofd' is the present perfect (hebben + participle), and 'beloven' governs a 'te'-infinitive complement 'te beschermen'. The infinitive phrase trails after the participle in this main-clause order.
> worden-passive: 'Wordt gegeven' is the process passive: 'worden' + past participle, meaning 'is given' (the giving is in progress). 'Daartoe' is a pronominal adverb ('for that'), and 'zoodra' ('as soon as') sends the verb to the end.
> Genitive possessive 'myner': 'De gegrondheid myner aanklacht' uses the inflected feminine genitive of the possessive: 'myner' = 'of my' ('the well-foundedness of my accusation'). Modern Dutch would write 'van mijn aanklacht'.

Hoe ruim Verbrugge ademde!  
How freely Verbrugge breathed!

En hoe vreemd de resident Havelaars woorden vond!  
And how strange the resident found Havelaar's words!
> 's-genitive on a name: 'Havelaars woorden' ('Havelaar's words') forms the genitive by adding -s directly to the name, as with English. With ordinary nouns 1860 prefers 'der/des' or 'van'.

Het onderhoud duurde lang.  
The interview lasted long.
> Simple past of a weak verb: 'Duurde' is the imperfect of weak 'duren' ('to last'): stem + -de. The simple past is the workhorse narrative tense of Dutch prose. 'Het onderhoud' (the interview) is a neuter het-word.

Met beleefdheid--want beleefd en welopgevoed wàs de heer Slymering--trachtte hy Havelaar te bewegen van zoo verkeerde grondbeginselen aftezien. Maar met even groote beleefdheid bleef deze onverzettelyk.  
With courtesy — for courteous and well-bred Mr. Slymering certainly was — he tried to move Havelaar to give up such mistaken first principles. But with equal courtesy the latter remained immovable.
> 'want' coordinates without inversion: 'Want' ('for') is a coordinating conjunction, so it does not send the verb to the end; yet here a fronted predicate ('beleefd en welopgevoed') triggers inversion, putting 'wàs' before its subject. The accent marks emphatic 'was'.
> Separable 'afzien' with embedded 'te': 'Aftezien' is the separable verb 'afzien (van)' ('to give up') written with 'te' wedged between prefix and stem — period orthography for modern 'af te zien'. 'Trachten' and 'bewegen' each govern a te-infinitive, chaining the clause.

Het slot was dat de resident moest toegeven, en als bedreiging zei, wat voor Havelaar een zegepraal was: dat hy zich dan genoodzaakt vond de bedoelde brieven te brengen onder de aandacht van de Regeering.  
The upshot was that the resident had to give way, and by way of a threat said what was, for Havelaar, a triumph: that he then found himself obliged to bring the letters in question to the notice of the Government.
> Reflexive 'zich genoodzaakt vinden': 'Zich genoodzaakt vinden' ('to find oneself obliged') uses third-person reflexive 'zich'. The 'dat'-clause is verb-final, so the verb 'vond' sits after its complements.
> Participle 'bedoelde' as adjective: 'De bedoelde brieven' = 'the letters in question'; 'bedoelde' is a past participle used attributively, taking the adjective -e ending. 'Te brengen onder de aandacht van' is the idiom 'to bring to the notice of'.

De zitting werd opgeheven.  
The session was adjourned.
> Past passive with 'werd': 'Werd opgeheven' is the simple-past process passive: imperfect of 'worden' + participle of separable 'opheffen' ('to adjourn'). 'De zitting' (the session) is the grammatical subject undergoing the action.

De resident bezocht den Adhipatti--we zagen reeds wat hy daar te verrichten had!--en gebruikte daarna 't middagmaal aan den schralen disch der Havelaars. Terstond daarop keerde hy terug naar Serang, met grooten spoed: Omdat.  
The resident visited the Adhipatti — we have already seen what he had to transact there! — and afterward took the midday meal at the meagre board of the Havelaars. Immediately thereupon he set off back to Serang, in great haste: Because.
> 'te verrichten had' = had to do: 'Te verrichten had' expresses obligation: 'hebben … te' + infinitive means 'to have to do'. The whole indirect question 'wat … had' is verb-final, so 'had' closes it.
> Genitive plural of a family name: 'De schralen disch der Havelaars' uses genitive 'der' before a pluralised surname: 'the meagre board of the Havelaars'. 'Schralen' carries the old strong masculine -en ending after the definite article.

Hy. Het.  
He. It.

Zoo.  
So.

By-zonder.  
Particularly.

Druk. Had.  
Pressing. Had.

Den volgenden dag ontving Havelaar een brief van den resident van Bantam, welks inhoud blykt uit het antwoord dat ik hier afschryf: "N° 93.  
The following day Havelaar received a letter from the resident of Bantam, the contents of which appear from the reply that I here transcribe: "No. 93.
> Formal genitive relative 'welks': 'Welks' is the genitive of the formal relative 'welk' — 'whose/of which' (the contents of which). This heavy, chancery-style relative belongs to the period's official prose, fitting a bureaucratic letter.
> Separable 'afschrijven', present tense: 'Afschryf' is the present-tense, separated form of 'afschrijven' ('to transcribe/copy out'); in this relative clause the prefix stays attached because the verb is clause-final. The 'dat'-clause is verb-final.

Geheim. Rangkas-Betoeng, 28 Februari 1856.  
Secret. Rangkas-Betoeng, 28 February 1856.

Ik heb de eer gehad te ontvangen uwe spoedmissive van 26 dezer LaO, geheim, houdende hoofdzakelyk mededeeling:  
I have had the honour of receiving your urgent missive of the 26th of this month, La O, secret, conveying in substance the following:
> Perfect of a verb governing te-infinitive: 'Heb de eer gehad' is the present perfect of 'de eer hebben' ('to have the honour'), which governs 'te ontvangen'. 'Uwe' is the old inflected possessive 'your' (formal), modern 'uw'.
> Present participle 'houdende': 'Houdende' is a present participle (-end + -e) used adverbially: 'containing/conveying'. The -end(e) form names an action in progress and is typical of formal, frozen chancery phrasing like 'houdende mededeeling'.
> spoedmissive (urgent dispatch): A compound of 'spoed' (haste) + 'missive' (an official letter): an 'urgent missive'. Dutch freely glues nouns into single compounds; the head is the rightmost element.

dat gy gronden hadt, niet te treden in de voorstellen, gedaan by myne ambtsbrieven van 24 en 25 dezer, Nrs 88 en 91;  
that you had grounds for not entering into the proposals made in my official letters of the 24th and 25th of this month, Nos. 88 and 91;
> Reported clause: 'dat' + verb-final 'hadt': 'Dat' opens an indirect-statement clause, so the finite verb 'hadt' (archaic -t with 'gy') goes to the end. 'Te treden in' is a formal idiom, 'to enter into / take up'.
> Participle 'gedaan' + dative 'myne': 'Gedaan' is the past participle of 'doen' used as a postposed adjective ('made'). 'By myne ambtsbrieven' shows the old inflected possessive 'myne' before a plural; 'ambtsbrieven' is a compound (ambt + brieven, 'official letters').

dat gy vooraf vertrouwelyke mededeeling hadt gewenscht;  
that you had wished for a confidential communication beforehand;
> Pluperfect in a 'dat'-clause: 'Hadt gewenscht' is the pluperfect ('had wished'): imperfect 'hadt' + participle 'gewenscht'. In the 'dat'-clause both verbs cluster at the end, finite verb first. 'Gy/hadt' is the archaic 2nd person.

dat gy niet goedkeurt myne verrichtingen in die beide brieven omschreven;  
that you do not approve my proceedings described in those two letters;
> 'niet' negating a verb: Here 'niet' (not 'geen') negates the verb 'goedkeurt' ('approve'), because what is negated is the action, not an indefinite noun. 'Goedkeuren' is separable, but stays joined as 'goedkeurt' since it is the clause-final finite verb.
> Postposed participle 'omschreven': 'Omschreven' ('described') is a past participle qualifying 'verrichtingen' from behind: 'my proceedings described in those two letters'. Such trailing participle phrases are common in formal Dutch.

en ten-slotte van eenige bevelen.  
and finally, some orders.

Ik heb thans de eer, gelyk trouwens reeds in de konferentie van eergister mondeling geschiedde, nogmaals en ten-overvloede te verzekeren:  
I now have the honour, just as I did orally in the conference of the day before yesterday, once again and to abundance to assure you:
> Archaic 'geschiedde' (it happened): 'Geschiedde' is the simple past of the literary verb 'geschieden' ('to happen, come to pass'), now archaic and solemn. 'Gelyk' ('just as') is itself a formal conjunction sending its verb to the end.
> ten-overvloede (to abundance): A fixed adverbial phrase, 'ten overvloede' means 'superfluously, for good measure, once again to be sure'. The 'ten' is a frozen contraction of 'te' + the old dative article 'den'.

dat ik volkomen eerbiedig de wettigheid van uw gezag, waar het geldt de keuze, al of niet te treden in myn voorstellen;  
that I fully respect the lawfulness of your authority where it concerns the choice of whether or not to enter into my proposals;
> Verb-final in the 'dat'-clause: Read carefully: in the 'dat'-clause the verb is 'eerbiedig' ('I respect', from 'eerbiedigen'), placed before its long object — but the clause's other verbs would close at the end. 'Volkomen' is the adverb 'fully'.
> te-infinitive after 'de keuze': The noun 'de keuze' governs an infinitive complement with 'te': 'the choice … whether or not to enter into'. 'Al of niet' is the set phrase 'whether or not'.

dat de ontvangen bevelen met stiptheid en des-noods met zelfverloochening, zullen worden nagekomen, als waart gy tegenwoordig, by al wat ik doe en zeg, of juister: by al wat ik niet doe en niet zeg.  
that the orders received will be carried out with strictness and, if need be, with self-renunciation, as though you were present at all I do and say, or more exactly: at all I do not do and do not say.
> Future passive: 'zullen' + 'worden' + participle: 'Zullen worden nagekomen' stacks the future auxiliary 'zullen', the passive auxiliary 'worden', and the participle of separable 'nakomen' ('to carry out') — 'will be carried out'. Three verbs cluster clause-finally.
> Subjunctive 'waart' in 'as if': 'Als waart gy tegenwoordig' = 'as though you were present': 'waart' is the old 2nd-person past subjunctive of 'zijn' with 'gy', and the 'als' triggers inversion (verb before subject). A markedly literary turn.

Ik weet dat gy op myn loyaliteit ten deze vertrouwt.  
I know that you rely on my loyalty in this matter.
> Fixed preposition 'op' with 'vertrouwen': 'Vertrouwen op' ('to rely on') takes the preposition 'op', not the English 'on' applied to 'loyaliteit'. The 'dat'-clause sends 'vertrouwt' to the end. 'Ten deze' is formal for 'in this matter'.

Doch ik neem de vryheid ten plechtigste te protesteeren tegen den minsten zweem van afkeuring omtrent éénige handeling, éénig woord, éénige zinsnede, door my in deze zaak verricht, gesproken of geschreven.  
Yet I take the liberty of protesting most solemnly against the least shadow of disapproval regarding any single act, any single word, any single phrase performed, spoken, or written by me in this affair.
> Archaic 'doch' + te-infinitive: 'Doch' is the literary/archaic 'but, yet' (modern 'maar/echter'). 'De vryheid nemen … te protesteeren' is the idiom 'to take the liberty of protesting', with the noun governing a 'te'-infinitive.
> Passive agent 'door my' + participles: The agent 'door my' ('by me') with the participles 'verricht, gesproken, geschreven' forms a reduced passive qualifying the nouns: 'performed, spoken, or written by me'. 'Door' marks the agent in a passive.

Ik heb de overtuiging myn plicht te hebben gedaan, in doel en in wyze van uitvoering, geheel myn plicht, niets dan myn plicht zonder de minste afwyking.  
I have the conviction of having done my duty, in aim and in manner of execution, my whole duty, nothing but my duty, without the slightest deviation.
> Perfect te-infinitive after a noun: 'Te hebben gedaan' ('to have done') is a perfect infinitive (te + hebben + participle), governed by the noun 'de overtuiging' ('the conviction'). It compresses 'the conviction that I have done my duty'.
> Negative 'niets' + superlative 'de minste': 'Niets dan' = 'nothing but'; 'niets' is the clause's sole negative (no double negation). 'De minste' ('the slightest') is the superlative of 'gering/min', formed with -ste and the article.

Lang, had ik nagedacht voor ik handelde--dat is: voor ik onderzocht, rapporteerde en voorstelde--en als ik in iets het minste zou gefaald hebben ... uit overyling faalde ik niet.  
Long had I reflected before I acted — that is: before I investigated, reported, and proposed — and if I had failed in anything in the least ... it was not out of overhaste that I failed.
> Fronted adverb triggers inversion: Beginning with 'Lang' ('long') forces verb-second inversion: the finite verb 'had' precedes its subject 'ik'. 'Nagedacht' is the participle of separable 'nadenken' ('to reflect').
> Conditional perfect in an 'als'-clause: 'Zou gefaald hebben' is the conditional perfect ('would have failed'), here inside an 'als'-clause that pushes the verb cluster to the end. It frames an unreal past: 'if I had failed in the least'.

In gelyke omstandigheden zou ik op-nieuw--iets sneller echter --geheel, letterlyk geheel hetzelfde doen en nalaten.  
In like circumstances I would, once more — somewhat more quickly, however — do and leave undone the very same things, wholly, literally the same.
> Conditional 'zou' + bare infinitives: 'Zou … doen en nalaten' is the present conditional ('would do and leave undone'), with two infinitives governed by 'zou' at the clause end. 'Nalaten' is the separable verb 'to refrain from / leave undone'.
> Comparative 'sneller': 'Sneller' is the comparative of 'snel' ('faster'), formed by adding -er; 'iets sneller' = 'somewhat faster'. 'Echter' ('however') is a sentence adverb wedged in mid-clause.

Al ware het zelfs dat een hooger macht dan de uwe iets afkeurde in wat ik deed--behoudens misschien het eigenaardige van myn styl die een deel uitmaakt van myzelf, een gebrek waarover ik zoomin verantwoordelyk ben als een stamelaar voor het zyne--al ware het dat ... doch neen, dit kàn niet zyn, maar al ware het zoo: ik heb myn plicht gedaan!  
Even were it so that a higher power than yours disapproved of something in what I did — save perhaps the peculiarity of my style, which is a part of myself, a defect for which I am no more answerable than a stammerer for his own — even were it that ... but no, this cannot be, yet even were it so: I have done my duty!
> Concessive 'al ware het' (even were it): 'Al ware het dat …' = 'even were it that …', a literary concessive using 'ware', the past subjunctive of 'zijn'. 'Al' here means 'even though/even if' and the subjunctive marks the hypothesis as unreal.
> Pronominal-adverb relative 'waarover': 'Waarover' fuses the relative 'wat/dat' with 'over' into 'over which/about which', referring to 'een gebrek' (a defect). When a relative refers to a thing and needs a preposition, Dutch uses 'waar-' + preposition.
> Comparative + possessive 'de uwe': 'Hooger … dan de uwe' = 'higher … than yours': the comparative 'hooger' with 'dan' for 'than', and the independent possessive 'de uwe' ('yours', formal). 'De uwe' nominalises 'uw'.

Wel doet het my--zonder bevreemding evenwel--leed, dat gy hierover anders oordeelt--en wat myn persoon aangaat, zou ik terstond berusten in wat my een miskenning toeschynt--doch er is een principe in 't spel, en ik heb gewetensredenen die eischen dat uitgemaakt worde welke meening juist is, die van U of de myne. Anders dienen dan ik te Lebak diende, kan ik niet.  
It does indeed grieve me — without surprising me, however — that you judge otherwise on this; and as far as my own person is concerned, I would at once acquiesce in what seems to me a failure to be recognized — but there is a principle at stake, and I have reasons of conscience that demand it be settled which opinion is the right one, yours or mine. To serve otherwise than I served at Lebak, I cannot.
> Impersonal 'het' + 'leed doen': 'Het doet my leed' ('it grieves me') uses a dummy 'het' subject with the idiom 'leed doen'. The real content sits in the 'dat'-clause that follows, whose verb 'oordeelt' moves to the end.
> Subjunctive passive 'worde': 'Dat uitgemaakt worde' uses the present subjunctive 'worde' (not 'wordt') in a formal, almost legal demand: 'that it be settled'. This subjunctive of 'worden' is archaic and survives only in solemn or fixed phrasing.
> Fronted infinitive phrase + inversion: The whole infinitive phrase 'Anders dienen dan ik te Lebak diende' is fronted, so the main verb 'kan' precedes the subject 'ik' (verb-second). 'Diende' is the weak past of 'dienen' ('to serve').

Wenscht dus het Gouvernement anders te worden gediend, dan moet ik als eerlyk man eerbiedig verzoeken my te ontslaan.  
Should the Government, then, wish to be served otherwise, I must, as an honest man, respectfully ask to be relieved of my post.
> Verb-first conditional + 'dan'-resumption: A conditional can be marked by putting the verb first with no 'als': 'Wenscht … het Gouvernement' = 'Should the Government wish'. The main clause then opens with 'dan' and inverts: 'dan moet ik'. 'Te worden gediend' is a passive infinitive.
> te-infinitive after 'verzoeken': 'Verzoeken … te ontslaan' = 'ask … to relieve/dismiss'; 'verzoeken' governs the 'te'-infinitive 'te ontslaan'. 'My te ontslaan' literally 'to relieve me (of my post)'.

Dan moet ik op zes-en-dertigjarigen leeftyd trachten op-nieuw een loopbaan aantevangen. Dan moet ik, na zeventien jaren, na zeventien zware moeielyke dienstjaren, na myn beste levenskrachten te hebben ten-offer gebracht aan wat ik voor plicht hield, op-nieuw aan de Maatschappy vragen of ze my brood wil geven voor vrouw en kind, brood in ruil voor myn denkbeelden, brood wellicht in ruil voor arbeid met kruiwagen of spade, als de kracht van myn arm meer waard wordt gekeurd dan de kracht myner ziel.  
Then, at thirty-six years of age, I must try to begin a career anew. Then, after seventeen years, after seventeen heavy, difficult years of service, after having sacrificed my best vital powers to what I held to be my duty, I must once more ask Society whether it will give me bread for wife and child, bread in exchange for my ideas, bread perhaps in exchange for labour with wheelbarrow or spade, should the strength of my arm be judged worth more than the strength of my soul.
> Separable 'aanvangen' with embedded 'te': 'Aantevangen' is the separable verb 'aanvangen' ('to begin') with 'te' wedged in — period spelling for modern 'aan te vangen'. 'Trachten' governs this te-infinitive: 'try to begin'.
> Perfect te-infinitive after 'na': 'Na … te hebben … gebracht' = 'after having brought/offered up', a perfect infinitive used after 'na'. 'Ten-offer brengen' ('to sacrifice') is an idiom; 'ten' is a frozen 'te + den'.
> Passive 'wordt gekeurd' + comparative: 'Wordt gekeurd' is a worden-passive ('is judged'), and 'meer waard … dan' is the comparative 'worth more than'. 'Myner ziel' is again the inflected feminine genitive ('of my soul').

Maar ik kan en wil niet gelooven dat uwe meening door zyne Excellentie den Gouverneur-generaal gedeeld wordt, en ik ben dus verplicht, vóór ik overga tot het bitter uiterste dat ik neerschreef in de vorige alinea, u eerbiedig te verzoeken aan het Gouvernement voortestellen:  
But I cannot and will not believe that your opinion is shared by His Excellency the Governor-General, and I am therefore obliged, before I proceed to the bitter extremity I set down in the preceding paragraph, respectfully to ask you to propose to the Government:
> worden-passive with agent 'door': 'Gedeeld wordt' is the process passive ('is shared'), with the agent introduced by 'door' ('by His Excellency'). In the 'dat'-clause the verb 'wordt' moves to the very end.
> Separable 'overgaan'; 'neerschreef': 'Overga' is the present of separable 'overgaan tot' ('to proceed to'), here joined because clause-final after 'vóór'. 'Neerschreef' is the strong simple past of separable 'neerschrijven' ('to write down/set down').

den resident van Bantam aanteschryven, alsnog goedtekeuren de handelingen van den adsistent-resident van Lebak, betrekking hebbende op diens missieves van 24 en 25 dezer, Nis 88 en 91.  
to write to the resident of Bantam to approve after all the actions of the Assistant Resident of Lebak, bearing on his missives of the 24th and 25th of this month, Nos. 88 and 91.
> Separable verbs with embedded 'te': Both 'aanteschryven' (aanschrijven, 'to write to / instruct') and 'goedtekeuren' (goedkeuren, 'to approve') are separable verbs written with 'te' inside, the 1860 way of writing 'aan te schrijven', 'goed te keuren'.
> Present participle + 'diens': 'Betrekking hebbende op' is a present-participle phrase ('bearing on'). 'Diens' is the genitive of the demonstrative 'die' ('his/the latter's'), a formal way to say 'of the said one' without ambiguity.

Of wel:  
Or else:

genoemden adsistent-resident te roepen ter verantwoording op de door den resident van Bantam te formuleeren punten van afkeuring.  
to call the said Assistant Resident to account on the points of disapproval to be formulated by the resident of Bantam.
> Inflected participle 'genoemden': 'Genoemden' ('the said/aforementioned') is a past participle used adjectivally, carrying the old masculine accusative -en ending before a de-word. 'Ter verantwoording roepen' is the idiom 'to call to account'.
> Future-passive participle phrase: 'De door den resident te formuleeren punten' = 'the points to be formulated by the resident': a 'te'-infinitive used attributively with passive/future sense, plus the agent 'door den resident'.

Ik heb de eer u ten-slotte de dankbare verzekering te geven, dat wanneer iets me kon terugbrengen van myn lang doordachte, en bedaard maar vurig aangekleefde principes ten dezen ... waarlyk, het zou geweest zyn de heusche innemende wyze waarop gy in de konferentie van eergister die principes hebt bestreden. De Adsistent-resident van Lebak,  
I have the honour, finally, to give you the grateful assurance that, if anything could turn me back from my long-pondered principles in this matter — held calmly but ardently — then truly it would have been the gracious, winning manner in which you contested those principles in the conference of the day before yesterday. The Assistant Resident of Lebak,
> Conditional perfect 'zou geweest zyn': 'Het zou geweest zyn' is the conditional perfect of 'zijn' ('it would have been'), answering the unreal condition opened by 'wanneer' ('if'). 'Terugbrengen van' is the separable verb 'to turn (someone) back from'.
> Relative 'waarop' (the manner in which): 'De wyze waarop' = 'the manner in which': 'waarop' is the pronominal-adverb relative ('op welke'). The attributive adjectives 'heusche' and 'innemende' take the -e ending before the de-word 'wyze'.

MAX HAVELAAR."  
MAX HAVELAAR."

* * * * * Zonder uitspraak te doen omtrent de gegrondheid van het vermoeden der Weduwe Slotering, betreffende de oorzaak die haar kinderen tot weezen maakte, en alleen aannemende wat bewysbaar is, dat er in Lebak nauw verband was tusschen plichtsbetrachting en gif--al bestond dan ook dit verband slechts in meening--zal toch ieder inzien dat Max en Tine kommervolle dagen hadden doortebrengen na 't bezoek van den resident.  
* * * * * Without pronouncing on the well-foundedness of the Widow Slotering's suspicion as to the cause that had orphaned her children, and admitting only what is provable — that in Lebak there was a close connection between the discharge of duty and poison, even though that connection existed only in surmise — everyone will nonetheless see that Max and Tine had grievous days to live through after the resident's visit.
> 'zonder … te' + infinitive: 'Zonder … te doen' = 'without doing'; the preposition 'zonder' governs a 'te'-infinitive. 'Uitspraak doen' is the idiom 'to pronounce judgement / give a verdict'.
> Genitive 'der': 'Het vermoeden der Weduwe Slotering' uses the inflected feminine genitive 'der' ('of the Widow Slotering'), in place of modern 'van de Weduwe'. Standard 1860 written usage.
> Relative 'die' for a de-word: 'Die' relativises 'de oorzaak' (a de-word): 'the cause that …'. 'Tot weezen maken' ('to make into orphans') uses 'tot' for resultant state; 'weezen' is the period spelling of 'wezen' (orphans).

Ik geloof niet noodig te hebben den angst te schetsen van een moeder die by 't reiken van spys aan haar kind, zich gedurig de vraag moet voorleggen of ze misschien haar lieveling vermoordt?  
I do not think it necessary to sketch the dread of a mother who, in handing food to her child, must again and again put to herself the question whether she is perhaps murdering her darling.
> Nested te-infinitives: Two 'te'-infinitives nest here: 'noodig te hebben' ('to need') governs 'te schetsen' ('to sketch'). 'Den angst' shows the old masculine accusative -den on the article.
> Reflexive 'zich voorleggen': 'Zich de vraag voorleggen' ('to put the question to oneself') is reflexive, with third-person 'zich' for the mother. 'Voorleggen' is separable; in this relative clause it stays clause-final.

En wèl was het een "afgebeden kind" de kleine Max, die zeven jaar was uitgebleven na 't huwelyk, als wist de schalk dat het geen voordeel was ter-wereld te komen als zoon van zulke ouders!  
And little Max truly was a "prayed-for child," who had stayed away for seven years after the marriage, as though the rogue knew it was no advantage to come into the world as the son of such parents!
> Perfect with 'zijn': 'was uitgebleven': 'Was uitgebleven' is the pluperfect of separable 'uitblijven' ('to stay away'), which forms its perfect with 'zijn' (a verb of change/motion), not 'hebben'. 'Die' relativises 'kind' here loosely as 'who'.
> Counterfactual 'als' + inversion: 'Als wist de schalk' = 'as though the rogue knew': 'als' ('as if') here triggers verb-first inversion ('wist' before 'de schalk'), an elliptical literary 'as if'. 'Schalk' is an old word for a rogue/imp.
> te-infinitive after 'voordeel': 'Geen voordeel … te komen' has the noun 'voordeel' governing a 'te'-infinitive: 'no advantage to come into the world'. 'Ter wereld komen' is the idiom 'to be born'; 'ter' is a frozen 'te + der'.

Negen-en-twintig lange dagen had Havelaar te wachten voor de Gouverneur-generaal hem meedeelde ... doch we zyn nog zoover niet.  
Twenty-nine long days Havelaar had to wait before the Governor-General informed him ... but we are not yet so far.
> Fronted object + inversion; 'had te wachten': The time-object 'Negen-en-twintig lange dagen' is fronted, so the verb 'had' precedes the subject 'Havelaar' (verb-second). 'Had te wachten' ('had to wait') uses 'hebben … te' for obligation.
> Period spelling 'zyn'; negation 'niet': 'Zyn' is the 1860 spelling of 'zijn' (here 'we are'). 'Nog … niet' = 'not yet', with 'niet' negating the predicate 'zoover' ('so far'): 'we are not yet so far'.

Kort na de vergeefsche pogingen om Havelaar te bewegen tot de intrekking zyner brieven, of tot het verraden van de arme lieden die op zyn grootmoedigheid vertrouwd hadden, trad eens Verbrugge by hem binnen.  
Shortly after the vain attempts to move Havelaar to withdraw his letters, or to betray the poor folk who had trusted in his magnanimity, Verbrugge once stepped in to him.
> Purpose 'om … te' + nominalised verb: 'Om … te bewegen tot' frames purpose: 'to move Havelaar to …'. The objects are a noun ('de intrekking') and a nominalised infinitive ('het verraden van', 'the betraying of'), both with 'tot'.
> Separable 'binnentreden'; inversion: Fronting the adverb of time forces inversion: 'trad … Verbrugge'. The separable prefix of 'binnentreden' ('to step in') splits to the end as 'binnen'. 'Trad' is the strong past of 'treden'.
> Pluperfect + fixed preposition 'op': 'Hadden vertrouwd' is the pluperfect ('had trusted'); 'vertrouwen op' takes the preposition 'op'. 'Die' relativises 'de arme lieden' (a de-word plural).

De brave man was doodsbleek, en had moeite te spreken.  
The good man was deathly pale, and could hardly speak.
> 'moeite hebben te' + infinitive: 'Moeite hebben te spreken' = 'to have difficulty speaking'; the noun 'moeite' governs a 'te'-infinitive. 'Doodsbleek' is a compound, 'death-pale'.

--Ik ben by den Regent geweest, zeide hy ... dàt is infaam ... maar verraad me niet.  
"I have been to the Regent," he said ... "that is infamous ... but do not betray me."
> Perfect of motion with 'zijn': 'Ben … geweest' is the present perfect of 'zijn' used for 'have been (to)': verbs of being/going take 'zijn', not 'hebben'. 'By den Regent' = 'at/to the Regent's', with old dative 'den'.
> Imperative + 'niet': 'Verraad me niet' is a negative imperative ('do not betray me'): bare stem 'verraad' for the command, with 'niet' after the object pronoun. 'Infaam' means 'infamous, vile'.

--Wat?  
"What?"

Wàt moet ik niet verraden?  
What must I not betray?

--Geeft ge my uw woord geen gebruik te maken van wat ik u zeggen zal?  
"Will you give me your word to make no use of what I am going to tell you?"
> Archaic 'ge' + 'geen' negation: 'Geeft ge' inverts the verb before the unstressed archaic pronoun 'ge' ('you') in a question. 'Geen gebruik maken van' negates the indefinite 'gebruik' with 'geen', not 'niet'. 'Zeggen zal' is future word order in the relative clause.
> Future 'zullen' in a relative clause: 'Zeggen zal' is the future ('will tell'): 'zullen' + infinitive, here verb-final inside the 'wat'-clause so 'zal' lands at the end after its infinitive 'zeggen'.

--Weer halfheid, zei Havelaar. Doch ... goed!  
"Half-measures again," said Havelaar. "But ... very well!"
> halfheid (half-measure): 'Halfheid' is an abstract noun from 'half' + -heid: 'half-heartedness, doing things by halves'. Havelaar's curt 'Weer halfheid' scorns Verbrugge's timid bargaining over his word.

Ik geef myn woord.  
I give my word.

En toen verhaalde Verbrugge, wat den lezer reeds bekend is, dat de resident aan den Adhipatti had gevraagd of hy iets wist intebrengen tegen den adsistent-resident, en hem tevens geheel onverwachts geld had aangeboden en gegeven.  
And then Verbrugge related what is already known to the reader: that the resident had asked the Adhipatti whether he knew of anything to bring forward against the Assistant Resident, and had at the same time, quite unexpectedly, offered and given him money.
> Dative 'den lezer' with 'bekend zijn': 'Den lezer bekend' = 'known to the reader': 'bekend zijn' takes a dative ('to whom'), here marked by the old accusative/dative 'den'. The whole 'wat'-clause is verb-final.
> Indirect question 'of' + separable 'inbrengen': 'Of' ('whether') opens an indirect yes/no question, sending its verbs to the end. 'Intebrengen' is separable 'inbrengen' ('to bring forward / object') with 'te' wedged in — period spelling for 'in te brengen'.
> Pluperfect with stacked participles: 'Had … aangeboden en gegeven' is the pluperfect ('had offered and given'): one auxiliary 'had' serving two participles, one from separable 'aanbieden'. The participles cluster at the clause end.

Verbrugge wist het van den regent zelf, die hem vroeg welke redenen den resident hiertoe konden geleid hebben?  
Verbrugge knew it from the regent himself, who asked him what reasons could have led the resident to this.
> Interrogative 'welke' + verb-final cluster: 'Welke redenen' ('what reasons') opens an indirect question, so the verb cluster 'konden geleid hebben' ('could have led') gathers at the end. 'Den resident' shows the old accusative -den; 'hiertoe' is 'to this'.

Havelaar was verontwaardigd, maar ... hy had zyn woord gegeven.  
Havelaar was indignant, but ... he had given his word.

Den volgenden dag kwam Verbrugge terug, en zei dat Duclari hem onder 't oog had gebracht hoe onedel het was, Havelaar, die met zulke tegenstanders te stryden had, zoo geheel alleen te laten, waarop Verbrugge dezen kwam ontheffen van zyn gegeven woord.  
The following day Verbrugge came back, and said that Duclari had brought home to him how ignoble it was to leave Havelaar — who had such adversaries to contend with — so entirely alone, whereupon Verbrugge came to release him from the word he had given.
> Impersonal 'het was' + te-infinitive: 'Hoe onedel het was … te laten' = 'how ignoble it was to leave': a dummy 'het' subject anticipates the real subject, the 'te'-infinitive 'te laten'. The whole sits in a 'hoe'-clause, verb-final.
> Relative 'waarop' + 'dezen' (the latter): 'Waarop' ('whereupon') is a pronominal-adverb relative linking the clauses. 'Dezen' is the inflected demonstrative for 'the latter' (Havelaar), in the old masculine accusative -en. 'Komen … ontheffen' = 'came to release'.

--Goed! riep Havelaar, schryf het op!  
"Good!" cried Havelaar, "write it down!"
> Imperative of a separable verb: 'Schryf … op' is the imperative of separable 'opschrijven' ('to write down'): bare stem 'schryf' commands, and the prefix 'op' splits to the end after the object 'het'.

Verbrugge schreef het op.  
Verbrugge wrote it down.

Ook die verklaring ligt voor my.  
That declaration too lies before me.
> Demonstrative 'die' as determiner: 'Die verklaring' = 'that declaration', with 'die' as the far demonstrative determiner for a de-word. 'Ligt voor my' ('lies before me') frames the narrator's claim to be working from real documents.

De lezer heeft immers reeds lang ingezien waarom ik zoo gemakkelyk afstand kon doen van alle aanspraken op juridieke echtheid der geschiedenis van Saïdjah?  
Surely the reader has long since seen why I could so easily renounce all claim to the juridical authenticity of the history of Saïdjah?
> Perfect 'heeft ingezien' + indirect question: 'Heeft ingezien' is the present perfect of separable 'inzien' ('to perceive'). The 'waarom'-clause is verb-final: 'afstand doen van' ('to renounce') keeps its noun 'afstand' and the modal 'kon' to the end.
> Genitive 'der': 'Juridieke echtheid der geschiedenis' uses inflected genitive 'der' ('of the history'). The phrase frames the famous embedded tale of Saïdjah and Adinda as a literary, not legal, document.

Het was zeer treffend optemerken hoe de beschroomde Verbrugge--vóór de verwyten van Duclari--op Havelaars woord durfde bouwen in een zaak die zoo noopte tot woordbreuk!  
It was most striking to observe how the timid Verbrugge — faced with Duclari's reproaches — dared to rely on Havelaar's word in a matter that so tempted one to break it!
> Impersonal 'het was' + separable te-infinitive: 'Het was treffend optemerken' = 'it was striking to observe': dummy 'het' anticipates the 'te'-infinitive. 'Optemerken' is separable 'opmerken' with embedded 'te' (period 'op te merken').
> 'durven' + bare infinitive: 'Durfde bouwen' ('dared to rely') has the verb 'durven' (here taking a bare infinitive, no 'te') sending 'bouwen' to the end. 'Bouwen op' ('to build/rely on') is a fixed preposition idiom.
> Relative 'die' + 'nopen tot': 'Die' relativises 'een zaak' (a de-word). 'Nopen tot' ('to impel/tempt to') is a formal verb with fixed 'tot'; 'woordbreuk' is a compound, 'word-breaking, breach of one's word'.

En nog iets.  
And one more thing.

Er zyn sedert de gebeurtenissen die ik verhaal, jaren verloopen.  
Years have passed since the events I am recounting.
> Existential 'er' + perfect 'zyn verloopen': 'Er zyn … jaren verloopen' = 'years have passed': 'er' is the existential placeholder, and 'zyn verloopen' is the perfect of 'verlopen' (a change-of-state verb taking 'zijn'). 'Sedert' = 'since'.

Havelaar heeft in dien tyd veel geleden, hy heeft zyn gezin zien lyden--de geschriften die voor my liggen, getuigen daarvan!--en 't schynt dat hy gewacht heeft ... ik geef de volgende aanteekening van zyn hand:  
In that time Havelaar suffered much; he saw his family suffer — the papers lying before me bear witness to it! — and it seems he has waited ... I give the following note in his own hand:
> Perception verb 'zien' + bare infinitive: 'Heeft … zien lyden' = 'has seen suffer': the perception verb 'zien' takes a bare infinitive 'lyden' (no 'te'), and in the perfect appears as an infinitive itself ('zien', not 'gezien') — the 'IPP' rule.
> Relative 'die' + pronominal 'daarvan': 'Die voor my liggen' relativises 'de geschriften' (de-word plural). 'Getuigen daarvan' ('bear witness to it') uses 'daarvan' ('daar' + 'van') for the thing witnessed.

"Ik heb in de nieuwsbladen gelezen dat de heer Slymering benoemd is tot ridder van den Nederlandschen Leeuw.  
"I have read in the newspapers that Mr. Slymering has been made a knight of the Order of the Netherlands Lion.
> zijn-passive 'benoemd is': 'Benoemd is' is the state/perfect passive with 'zijn' ('has been appointed'): the result, not the process, is in view. 'Benoemen tot' ('to appoint as') takes 'tot'. The 'dat'-clause sends 'is' to the end.

Hy schynt thans resident van Djokjakarta te wezen.  
He now appears to be Resident of Djokjakarta.
> 'schijnen' + te-infinitive 'te wezen': 'Schynt … te wezen' = 'appears to be': 'schijnen' governs a 'te'-infinitive, here archaic 'wezen' for 'zijn'. 'Thans' is a formal/older word for 'now'.

Ik zou dus nu op de Lebaksche zaken kunnen terugkomen zonder gevaar voor Verbrugge."  
I could therefore now return to the affairs of Lebak without danger to Verbrugge."
> Conditional 'zou' + modal 'kunnen': 'Zou … kunnen terugkomen' ('could now return') combines the conditional 'zou' with the modal 'kunnen', both governing the separable infinitive 'terugkomen' at the end. 'Lebaksche' is an inflected place-adjective with -sche (period -se).

TWINTIGSTE HOOFDSTUK  
CHAPTER TWENTY
---

Source text: public domain (Multatuli / Eduard Douwes Dekker, d. 1887; Dutch 1860, Project Gutenberg #11024). English translation: original, © 1732 Studios (2026); rendered freshly from the public-domain Dutch, not derived from any prior English translation. Sentence-aligned by 1732 Studios.