Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File R. 4428, John Hagey, Continental (French)
Page 1

(3—1776)
Service 
Continental (French)
Hagey, John
or Hagar
or Hagie, Catharine
or Hague
NUMBER 
R. 4428
Page 2

11856 
John Hagee
Tennessee
Rejected service in the French army not provided for by Act of Jany 7, 1832.  See letter from 
Hon J Bell 27th 1833
Page 3

Brief in the case of [John] Hagee County of Davidson in the State of Tennessee (Act 7th June, 1832)

1. Was the declaration made before a Court or a Judge? Court

2. If before a Judge, does in appear that the applicant is disabled by bodily infirmity?

3. How old is he? 82

4. State his service, as directed in the form annexed.

Period: In 1776
Duration of Service: he says he served in the French light horse during the whole war.
Rank: Private
Names of General and Field Officers under whom he served: Gen La Fayette, Capt Escaline, Col Polorotski

5. In what battles was he engaged? White Plains

6. Where did he reside when he entered the service? Came to the US with La Fayette

7. Is his statement supported by living witnesses, by documentary proof, by traditionary evidence, by incidental evidence, or by the rolls? Traditionary

8. Are the papers defective as to form or authentication? And if so, in what respect? No Clergyman

I Certify that the foregoing statement and the answers agree with the evidence in the case above mentioned.
Chs W Forrest
Examining Clerk.
Page 4

Petition of Catharine Widow 
John Hagie
Aged 105 ^ praying a pension for services by her husband in the Revolution =
as volunteer with Genl LaFayette
301 411 Bounty
9 Land Rejected
Nickolson
Committee on Pensions
[Black stamp seal: Illegible]
36 Cong.
1 Sess . [Handwritten black ink check mark]
Petition
of Catharine Hagie
widow of 
John Hagie a volunteer under Genl LaFayette in the Revy War, Praying a petition. 
[double line]
1860 Jany 10, Referred to the Com. on Pensions
May 8, Adverse report
Page 5

To the Honorable Senate House of Representatives in Congress Assembled

Your petitioner Catherine Hagie aged 105 years a resident of Nashville Tennessee widow of John, who was a solider of the Revolution & who shortly after the passage of the Revolutionary Pension law 7th June 1832 applied for his pension and was denied.

Now respectfully sets forth that she has applied as a widow aforesaid for a pension under the Act 7th Juny 1838 also for Bounty and Act 3rd March 1855, & May 1856. Both have been denied, after appeal to the Honorable Secretary of the Interior and being duly convinced that she is entitled now appeals to your Honorable bodies for the allowance of land and pension. She refers to the paper hereunto marked A B C D E & F. In the next place reference is made to the original paper on file in the pension office especially to the Commissioner letter of the 27th September 1859 to the land in said office.  Also Bill of the House of Representatives No 473
Page 6

founded in Report No 640 of the 1st session of the 26th Congress. 2.

Your petitioner further respectfully represents that all through her husband held rank as did his General Lafayette, the patriotism of the latter was no more patent than that of the former, the solder offered his life (had no fortune) as a sacrifice in the cause of this Nation of freedom; he was saved, he chose this Country as his home, his general returned to his Kings allegiance and its profits revisiting this country after the lapse of a number of years is receive with open arms by millions of grateful persons [underlined] forming a free [double underline] and independent & happy nation. One, he materially assisted to its freedom, is princely honored and princely rewarded pecuniarily; the solider patriot is left to die in want and bury him "inth his old clothes around him"_x

They carved not a line and his poverty raised not a stone. But the nation's gratitude [underlined] left him [underlined] alone with his [underlined] glory [underlined] even when General Lafayette at the very moment he was receiving the highest honors & homages of the people forget not but says to this poor solider on first seeing him
Page 7

(Hagie had walked 200 miles to meet him.)  John is that you? Then turns to the populace and surrounding soldiers of the Revolution; his hand on his shoulder and sayst them "this soldier served through the Revolution with me, he was one of my men, This fact is proven by the highest testimony that the State of Tennessee can afford, still is he denied!!

Further your petitioner would say although her husband applied 27 years ago for his pension & the fact of his having rendered the service  had never been disputed! the age and period has arrived & the impeachment of the words of LaFayette is recorded "if indeed he rendered any service" Although as before stated, he was recognized by the highest authority, and one who your petitioner would hardly believe could have erred in this case, as it is well known he had similarly recognized many patriotic soldiers of the [underlined] Revolution as well as officers during this sojourn in this Country, this instance of the peculiarity is not [illegible], it was almost universal with him, more so probably  than any commander the world has ever known.
Page 8

It may not be out of place to remark that had the Executive reached Lafayette's words during his life his autograph confirmed him of them could have been readily obtained.  Aye, with what lively feelings of happiness would this patriot have signed such proofs as would inscribe upon the escutcheon of the United States, in letters of brilliants the proofs of the = "Gratitude of this Republic" and refute the old adage of the Ingratitude of Republics, as also preserved his word as his bond.
Your Petitioner places her case in your hands & as in duty bound will ever pray.
Catherine Hagie widow of John 
by her attorney F E Hassler
Washington City  
15 December 1859
Page 9

 Office
August 29th 1859.
Sir, 
I have examined and rejected the bounty land claim of Mrs. Catherine Hagee as the widow of John.
The claims of John and Catherine Hagee to a pension have been respectfully rejected for the reason that the service under the Duke De Sansonne having been in a Corps belonging to the French Army was not provided for by the Act of 7 June 1832.
If the service of John Hagee is not pensionable, his widow is not entitled to land bounty under the existing laws relating hereto.
Yours Respectfully 
Geo C Whiting
Commissioner.
F. E. Hassler, Esqr.
Present.
Page 10

B   6
Washington City DC
Geo.
Sept. 5th 1859
Hon Geo C Whiting
Commissioner of Pensions
Present
Sir

In reply to yours of the 29th
August rejecting the claim of
Catherine Hagie widow of John for
Bounty Land for his services in the
Revolution, in which, whilst you admit the service you deny land.
I will for argument sake admit
your proposition; that is, if entitled
to land she is to pension but I do not
clearly understand whether
it was intended (you having admitted service) for me to appeal
or to simply call your attention
to some points that (I thought might
have a hearing on the subject,
I therefore pursue the latter course.
I claim that all the troops coming
from France were in service, in pay
& paid for by the United States it
appears by the treaty of " Alliance
eventual and defensive of the 11th Febry
1778 - see secret Journals of Congress vol 2d
viz Art. 1. Guarantees to France the
assistance of the United States should
war happen between France & England ie-
a payment for her troops paid
from her treasury by aid in troops or assistance furnished & paid for by
Page 11

 
the United States Treasury, and thereby
reimbursed France at the cost of the
United States.
Can it be pretended that the
U.S. did not compensate & pay these
troops in as much as France received
a national benefit and paid the individual services from her benefitted
treasury the U.S. guaranteeing money
from her treasury to procure for
France like aid. France being thereby
as fully reimbursed for her expenses
in the American War as were the 
separate colonies reimbursed, they being
in themselves in fact allied [underlined] solely
for mutual protection & benefit [underlined].
On examining the Journals of
the Continental Congress, it is evident that the compact of the Colonies was not different, as
against England and the common enemy than that of the colonies with
France; That France spent in the
way of a loan, money for carrying
on the war, the same as the colonies,
the colonies refunded pro-rata to
themselves & to France the loan.
Could it be said that the soldiers
who were clothed and fed by
money from France were not
in the Revolution because French
money sustained & placed them
for the time in the ranks under
command of the chosen officers
Page 12

of the allied Colonies & France.
Did not each State or Colony
appoint its own officers?  Were
they not paid by those States?
commanded by a Commander
in chief chosen by consent of
these allied Colonies & France.-
Could it be claimed that a
South Carolina officer or Soldier
did not serve in the Revolution because
he was commanded by a Captain or
General officer of the State of Virginia
in service or in a battle?
Each Colony furnished her quota of
aid and received joint Alliance
protection [underlined]-- what difference with
France? True France only joined
the alliance furnished her quota
but did not enter the confederation after the War, still wherein
her position differs from any of
the allied colonial Governments
at the period the service now claimed
for was performed. I cannot perceive at White Plains, at Yorktown. the French were under command of an American officer obedience to the order of attack imperative? General
Lafayette as an American officer
(see Journals Continental Congress
2nd Vol 31. July 1777 page 211. Commissioned & ca_
2nd Vol Page 357" Given command
of a division of the American Army
Page 13

9
Decre 1777,
4th Vol, p 186, Lafayette, "Reasons
for absence from his command in
the American army satisfactory
to Congress April 10th. 1783)
commanded the attack
and I think the law clearly
Covers the claim, which I hope
will be allowed
Yours Respectfully
F E Hassler
Page 14

10
Washington City DC
October 3rd 1859
Hon Jacob Thompson
Secretary of the Interior
Present

Sir.
I appeal from the decision
of the Commissioner
of Pensions
rejecting the claim for Bounty Land
March 1853 per of
Catherine Hagie widow of John
for his services in the war of the
Revolution and consider his
letter of 27th Sept 1839 as an
acknowledgement of the perfectness of the proof of service, identity & Marriage, otherwise any objections would have been specified
had they existed. I now take the
language of the Commissioners letter
"but that France looked to the United
"States to pay the expenses specifically
"of her troops is not the case". xxxx
"from an alliance of that character
"it is evident that French troops
"were serving as effectually their own
" Country as they were us." Was
that not precisely the case with the
Colonial Government. Each for
itself & own benefit risking the
final result (see art, 8 Confederation
1778) of which the guarantee to
France was one, as provided for by
the 8th Art, Confederation 1778 in these
Page 15

"and all other expenses that shall
"be incurred for the common defence
"or general welfare."
---
Could it be supposed that
Lafayette would have recognized
Hagie as one who served through
the greater portion of the Revolution
with him, if he were a French
soldier never under his command.
Being Lafayette's soldier (he being
an American officer) constituted
Hagie an American soldier; it is
not to be presumed that at one &
the same time Hagie was an
American & French soldier unless
a prior French were American
soldiers.
The service is admitted
under Lafayette he & his troops if
not Continental line, State troops
militia were volunteers as were
Marions: Armand's; Vontteers;
Lee Legion, & Horse: Pulaskis Legion
Volunteers & militia & ca = Lafayette
corps was established before the
arrival of what are called by contra [illegible] French troops or Army.-
Hagie came to this Country joined
the troops under
Lafayette and
served therein: Is regarded by
Lafayette as one of his soldiers,
He was in Battle at Yorktown
under Lafayette, the Bounty Land
laws make no distinction as to
them further than that must have
Page 16

12
been in the Revolution, I can see
no difference between a State of
Virginia volunteer, or Lees Legion
serving serving [sic] under Governer
Nelson & Washington at Yorktown
and this man to he fought side by
side under Lafayette.
If this class
by contradistinction called French
had been taken prisoners by the
English would they not have been
fit objects of Exchange or would
they have become British subjects
by right of conquest?  see 2d Vol
Journals Continental Congress.
30 Decre 1777, p. 360, same Vol
page 624, says, "Prisoners taken by
"the French to be provided
"for in like manner as hath been usual
"for the prisoners of these States"
The States recognized them as their
prisoners until France had through
the consent of the States disposed of them otherwise, see Journals 4 Vol
p./188 "Naval" xx disposal of land,
prisoners, "That the prisoners the
"navy of France had taken and
"were carried to the French Isles be
" bought to the Colonies for Exchange"
Vol 4 p 28.
The Commissioner
seek to demonstrate that what
he calls French Allies or auxiliaries
were not in the service of the Colonies.
and it is supposed of the points
urged, promotion is one,
Page 17

13
were promotions in Volunteers "
Corps. Militia or State troops or
the Legions governed by & following
the same course as Continentals? No, it went by the laws of the
Colony as shown by att: 2 & 7
of the Confederation (see Vol 1 Secret
Journals of Congress, to be Colonial
or States Rights,
In our
Mexican War did a Volunteer
officer command the Regular Army?
were not the promotions within
their own bodies and not into the
regular army? The laws of Courts
martials were then & are still subjects of specifically & individual
State Rights or State Military regulations
In fine were not all troops
call them by whatsoever name
it seems meet, fighting the Battles
of the Revolution and governed
solely in military matters by
General Washington whose commands were imperative, as he
had power to act in accordance
with or contrary to the opinion of
his officers in Councils. Officers
of Virginia volunteers should have
been court martialed by their own
officers & laws. What if Frenchmen
were by their laws? Is their
States different,= In regard to that
portion of the Commissioners letter
in which he says, "the words
Page 18

14
"Revolutionary War cannot be
"Construed seperate [separate] and distinct
"by themselves and to embrace every
"person whose service inured to the
"benefit of the Government"
What does the 8th sect; of the act. say
also the 4th Sec of the amendatory
act of 14 May 1856 - x shall be construed as embracing xxxxx
"and other persons engaged as
"aforesaid." in the Navy in Battle
in the Revolutionary War. By which
it is evident that every one engaged
in any manner in any battle
became entitled to every one engaged in Battle must have been
commanded by an officer and
risked his life in fighting as well as
In running away
live to fight another day.
I do not enter upon the
pension in this appeal but as the
Commissioner introduces the subject
will collaterally remark that the
law governing pensions have
never excluded other than foreign
Officers. The law of 1818 says
nothing on the subject except
non residents [underlined] act 1828 likewise;
the act of 1832 makes no such
exception, except no troops or
non residents;  and as an exception
can only operate were but for the
exception that which is excepted
Page 19

13.
would have been included in  
prior enactment, it is clear troops"
or volunteers were not excepted
although by contradistinction called
French. Foreign officers to nomine
only. The reason of this we had
before 1800 a threatened war with
France another again in 1832--
while this law was under consideration. (see Journal Art Senate 1st Sess [Session] 23d 
Congress fo 8) yes when
Lafayette then in high military
power in France would have
had to fight against us, (see Ere Doc
1st Sess. 23rd Con: No 495, Reports of
Committee end we 4. same.-- Wm
Cutters Life of General Lafayette
fo 400, Derby & Jackson N.Y. 1858,
J. Q. Adams oration House of Representatives 
31 Decr 1834, a possibility of this (as well as all news of international law, would clearly
dictate that pensioning foreign
Officers should be avoided, neither
could an invidious distinction be
made from any other officers
I hand the Commissioners letter &
should be pleased to receive it again.
Regretting the necessity for this
[illegible] appeal I am
Yours Respectfully
F E Hassler
Atty for Mrs Hagie
Page 20

War Dept
Pension Office
Nov 22, 1837

Gentlemen,

The affidavits in the case of John Hagey have been examined and filed with his declaration in the office.  The service under the Duke de Lauranne having been in a Corps belonging to the French Army is not provided for by the Act of 7th June 1832. The decision of the Department rejecting the claim is therefore adhered to.
Messrs. Holman & Hollingworth
Nashville
Tennessee.
Page 21

[Illegible] Hatch
[Illegible] Journals
[Illegible] Washington
[Illegible]
Waterbury
July 1781
French Army
and at White Plains
by 1781.
Catherine Hagie
Rev.
[illegible]
[illegible]
[illegible]
Page 22

would have been included in B
prior enactment, it is clear troops
or volunteer were not excepted
although by contradistinction called
French.
Foreign officers to nomine 
only. The reason of this we had
before 1800 a threatened War with
France another again in 1832
while this law was under considera-
 
17
[Second page laying across bottom of page - text is running from bottom to top of page]
Lafayette Commissioned = 31 July 1777
Po 2 11 2d vve
Lafayette Comd
of pension of Army
po 357 2d
G Ealue MM.
Oct 28 1778 3 vo
pay x2 wks
Decu 2/1779
Farther pay - u cr
fo 407. =
Page 23

Pension Office
August 6, 1859

Sir,

In respect to the claim of the widow of John Hagee for pension, I have to state that the application of her husband himself was rejected by this office in 1837, for the reasons assigned in a letter addressed to Messrs Holman and Hollingsworth, under date of November 27 of that year, a copy of which is enclosed herewith.  Congress along can afford relief in cases of this description.

Very Respectfully,
Geo C Whiting
Commissioner

F.E. Hassler. Esq.
Present
Mr. Hassler
M Anderson
Papers required
Augt. 9/59
Hooe
Page 24

Department of the Interior
November 2nd 1839

Sir,
I have carefully considered the claim of
Catharine Hagie, widow of John Hagie, for bounty land under act of March 3rd 1833, [unknown], and also for pension under Acts of June 7th 1832, and July 7th 1838, upon which an appeal has been taken from your decision.

The soldier in the application he made in 1832,
declares that he came over to this country with La Fayette, as a volunteer to assist the Americans in the Revolutionary war, and that he served as a private in the regiment of Light Horse under Col. Polorofski and Capt. Escaline, to the end of the war. His claim under the act of June 7th 1832, was rejected, and since his death the widow has renewed it, and asserted in her own behalf her title to bounty land and pension.

To justify the allowance of either of the claims
for pension it is necessary that the soldier should have served in the Continental line or State troops, volunteer or militia, and to obtain bounty land under the act of 1833, that he should have been regularly mustered or
paid by the United States.
Page 25

His own statement shows that he could have come under neither of these conditions, for he served (if, indeed, he rendered any service) in the French Troops, and was paid by the King of France.

I am of the opinion, therefore, that these claims are bad and accordingly affirm your rejection of them.

The papers which accompanied your report are herewith returned to your office.

I am, very respectfully, your obe't serv't.
J. Thompson
Secretary

Hon. George C. Whiting
Comm. of Pensions
Page 26

Pension Office
Novr 7th 1839
Sir,
The Secretary of the Interior has
affirmed the decision of this office in the case
of Catharine Hagee, an applicant for County
land and pension for the alleged revolutionary services of John Hagee.
I enclose herewith a copy of his decision
Very respectfully,
John Robb
for Commissioner
F. E. Hassler, Esq.
Present
Page 27

F  
Washington City DC
Nov 9 1859
Hon Jacob S. Thompson
Secretary of the Interior
Sir,
On the 3rd Oct. I had
the War of addressing
you a letter of appeal from decision
of the Commissioner of Pensions
denying the claim of Catherine
widow of John Hagie for Bounty
Land under act 3d March 1855 [illegible]
This day I received thro the
Commissioner of Pensions
copy of a letter purporting
to be a reply to an appeal
or report made by him to your
Honor to affirm his decision
expressing your Judgement " &
"that these claims are bad, and
"accordingly affirm your rejection of them,"
My appeal in the Hagie case seems not to have been considered, but the Commissioners, appeal or that upon my appeal instructions were given the Commissioner "that these claims were bad "
There is no evidence that I ever appealed
in the case. The decision is
made as regards a class in
which the case I appealed upon
is not included. =
Page 28

For in the letter to the Commissioner
it is said " The soldier in the application he "made in 1832 declares he came over to this "Country with LaFayette as a volunteer to "assist " the Americans in the Revolutionary
" War" & that he served & ca
and in the next paragraph it is
said " To Justify the allowance
"of either of the claims for pensions, it is "necessary that the soldier
"should have served in the Continental line or "State troops Volunteers
"or militia"
As regards the
facts of the case Hagie swears
he followed the banner of LaFayette and Lafayette recognized him and Lafayette was an American officer
Hagie's statement shows
precisely what Lafayette history does, that he came as a volunteer
and was not sent by his French
King. I should not again have
troubled you, but that should
the claimant deem it proper (it is
my duty), to go to Congress with
this claim the Committee might
say - Why have you not appealed
the Secretary of the Interior
(a courtesy I well know is due your
Honer) before applying
to Congress
although my opinion may differ
as to the ability of any single member of a Comm[illegible]
Page 29

[mem]ber of a committee of the whole
committee being as capable of
doing justice as the Executive
having possession of all the M.S.S.
from which proofs are gathered,
& not in possession of the Commitee
or of any private individual
being government & not individual
property. As regards the
Bounty Land claim the fact of
of being in Battle in the Revolution is all sufficient under the
law, it does even suggest pay  
By the King of France or the
United States
Yours truly
F E Hassler
Page 30

John Hagie
11856
Pension Claim
Page 31

Declaration, in order to obtain the benefit of the Act of Congress passed June 7th 1832.
State of Tennessee
Davidson County ⎬Ss.
On this 1st day of August 1832 personally appeared in open court before the county court of Davidson now sitting John Hagie a resident
of Nashville in the County of Davidson & State of Tennessee aged 82 years
&
who being first duly sworn according to law doth on his oath make the
following declaration in order to obtain the benefit of the Act of Congress
passed June 7th 1832
He states that he entered the service of the United States under the
following named officers & served as herein stated. That he is a French
man by birth, that he came over with La Fayette as a volunteer to assist the Americans in the recovery of their freedom, that his Captains name was Escaline that he commenced his services so soon as he landed in the United States, that he landed at New Port in the State of
Rhode Island, that his general under La Fayette was the Duc De Lausanne that his colonel was Polorotski a Pole that he served in the
French Light horse during the whole war under the aforesaid officers. that he marched & countermarched previous to the battle of
the White Plains through the State of New York in a hard service that
he was at the battle of the White Plains, that he recollects there
were many persons wounded & killed in that battle & that LaFayette himself was among the wounded, that he was at the siege
of York when the Lord Corvallis delivered up his sword to General Washington that he marched there by forced marches to coop up
Cornwallis & prevent him from receiving reinforcements. That
after the taking of York he was marched back to Philadelphia &
he received his discharge at New Castle in New Jersey. That he follow
the banner of La Fayette and was in the service with him due
in his stay in America, that he professed staying in America to
going back to his native country & became an American citizen. He
states that he would produce his discharge on the present occasion
but that whilst he was living in Knoxville in East Tennessee that
his house was burnt down & that he lost all his papers & this amongst
the rest. That he has now no documentary evidence which can be
produced on this subject. That being a foreigner he had but slight
opportunity of getting acquainted with American officer of other
Page 32

regiments. That he does not now inconsequence of age and infirmity  recollect may things that were formerly fresh in his memory. He knows of no person now whose testimony he can procure who can testify to his service. He herby relinquishes  every claim whatever to a pension or annuity except the present  & declares that his name is not on the  pension roll of the agency of any State. Sworn to & subscribe the day & year aforesaid  ( his mark X ) John Hagie Test Henry Ewing  ( signed ) Clerk of Davidson County Court    We the undersigned  residing in the town county  & State aforesaid hereby certify that we are well acquainted with John Hagie who has subscribed & sworn to the above declaration . that we believe him to be 82 years of age or thereabouts that he is reputed & believed in the neighborhood where he resides and in Knoxville where he hereto fore resided  to have been a soldier of the revolution and we concur in that opinion & that  we believe said John Hagie to be an honest and upright man & that his statements can be relied on . James Gwin ( signed ) , R. Armstrong ( signed ) , Shadrack  Nye ( signed ) , Joseph Litton ( signed ) , ( illegible name )  , R. Weakley  ( signed ) , Will Lytte ( signed ) , Wm Armstrong ( signed )  Thos. P Minor ( signed ) ,  Joseph Anderson ( signed ) W. R. W. Nill ( signed ) , F. Porterfield ( signed ) , Tho. J Read ( signed ),  W Nichol ( signed )
Page 33

State of Tennessee ⎬ 
Davidson County
Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County & State aforesaid July Term 1832
said court do hereby certify that they caused the within named John
Hagie to come before them & that he made affidavit to the facts
stated in the above declaration, that the persons who have signed the
within certificate of recommendation are men of unexceptionable
character & that their statements are entitled to the utmost confidence
And said court do hereby declare their opinion after the
investigation of the matter & after putting the interrogatories prescribed
by the War Department that the above named applicant was a revolutionary soldier & served as he states
Will Williams
J Wharton
E P Connell
[Written in left margin, direction written requires 1/4 left turn of paper]
Justices of the court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for Davidson County Tennessee

State of Tennessee Davidson County Ss.
 
I Henry Ewing Clerk of the court of pleas and quarter Sessions for said county do hereby certify that the
foregoing contains the original proceedings of the said court in the matter of the
application
John Hagie for a pension.
In Testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and
caused the seal of said court to be also hereunto affixed at
Office in Nashville on this second day of August A.D. 1832
Henry Ewing
Page 34

Mrs. Claud Simpson
Box 85
Dermott, Arkansas
JOHN HAGEY
R. 4428
BA-J/MLB
Dear Madam:
Reference is made to your letter in which you request the
military record of John Hagey who came to this country with
La Fayette acting as body guard, served in the Revolutionary War,
was wounded at Yorktown and married in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
You are furnished herein the record of John Hagey as found
in the papers on file in pension claim, R. 4428, based upon his
service in the Revolutionary War; his name also appears in the
claim as Hagee, Hagie, Hagar, Hagy and Hague, but the family
signed Hagey.
John Hagey was a "Frenchman by birth" but was "born in Germany;"
the date of his birth and names of parents are not stated.
He applied for pension August 1, 1832, at which time he was
eighty-two years of age and a resident of Nashville, Davidson
County, Tennessee, and stated that he came to this country in
1777 with La Fayette, as a volunteer, enlisted in the French Army,
served as private in Captain Escaline's or Eskelige's company,
Colonel Polorotski's regiment of French light-horse, was at the
siege of Yorktown and surrender of Cornwallis and served to the
close of the war.
His claim was not allowed as the act of Congress under which
he applied did not provide for services of soldiers in the French
Army.
John Hagey married about the close of the Revolutionary War,
Catharine or Catherine (maiden name not given), in Harrisburg,
Dauphin County, Pennsylvania.
During General La Fayette's visit to this country in 1824,
John Hagey, who was then residing in Alabama, came to Nashville,
Tennessee, to see him and was recognized and greeted very
cordially by La Fayette.
Page 35

John Hagey died July 13 or 14, 1841, in Nashville, Tennessee. 

In 1859 the following children of John Hagey and his wife, Catharine or Catherine, were referred to and their ages and places of residence then as given below: 

Mary, aged about 72 years; married Steven H. Cheek
Cathrine, " " 70 " " Joseph Becker
Elizabeth, " " 68 " " Nicolass Bishop
Susan, " " 66 " " Hiram W. Martin
John, " " 58 " living in Nashville, Tennessee
Sary, " " 56 " " James Nealy
Margarett, " " 54 " " Odle B. Thrift
Nancy, " " 52 " " John E. Wilson
George W., " " 50" In 1841 residing in Nashville, Tenn.
Mariah, " 48 " " ____ Jenkins

Reference was also made to children who had died, but their names and the number of children dead not stated. 

Very truly yours

A. D. Hiller
Assistant to Administrator
Page 36

Application
Catharine Hagar
or Nagney
[illegible] John
who during his
life applied for
a Rev. Pension
was not allowed
from Tennessee
from
J. B. Pittman
Nashville
F. E. Hassler
attrny
Present
Page 37

State of Tennessee
County of Davidson⎬
On this 8th day
of July in the year 1859
in the year 1859 personally
came before the undersigned the
Judge of the Court of Davidson County
Jas Whitworth which court is a Court of
record having a seal. John
Hagey - a resident of Nashville
who being duly sworn according to
law,
states that he is 58 years
old, that he is the son of John
Hagey or Hagar as he is sometimes
called and Catharine Hagey
his wife & this deponents mother:
that deponents mother is now
living at the age of one hundred and
five years but that she is wholly
incapable of doing or 
understanding anything, & he therefore now
makes this affidavit in her
behalf for the purpose of 
obtaining from the government of the
United States, the pension which
she may be entitled to, under 
the laws of the U.S. as the widow
of John Hager or Hagar or Hague
who was a Revolutionary soldier and
served as he has always been informed
Page 38

by his father. I has heard him speak of, what the paid service was performed by his father under General Lafayette, as one of his Guard as he has always understood  from him together with the following circumstances is. When General Lafayette visited Nashville, his father came from Alabama to see him and on his [illegible] home [illegible] Lafayitt [illegible] him and and embraced him and was of [illegible] joyous to see this for [illegible] as he told him that his father + mother were married on the day of Revolutionary War in the year about this [illegible] of the Revolutionary War in the town of Harrisburg County of Dauphin State of [illegible] by

that they reared a family of children named based as follows. Mary who married Steven H. Cheek about 72 years. Cathrine married Joseph Becker about 70 years. Elizabeth married Nicolas Bishop about 68 years. Susan married Hiram W. Martin 66 years. John Hagey about 58 years. Sary married James Nealy about 56 years. Margarett married Odle B. Thrift about 54 years. Nancy married John E. Wilson about 52 years. George W. Hagey about 50 years. Mariah married [illegible] 48 years. those are all of the children except those that live without [illegible]
Page 39

He states that he has frequently heard his father and his mother shared that there house was burned in three miles of Noxville Tennessee and all there papers and other things burned up but he was two young to remember it himself that he refers to the annexed affidavit of Michael E. Degrove of Nashville and William H. Horn of Nashville as regards the reputation of the marriage living together of his father and mother as man and wife. To the date of death of his father, which took place on the 14th day of July in the year 1841 in the town of Nashville and State of Tennessee County of Davidson and that he remembers to have heard his father speak of the following men and officers with who and where he serving. Gen Washington Lafayett and Gen Bushhambean a french man he done not no that he spells the last name corect at White Plains and York town and a number of other places with other officers but done not remember other names and further saith naught     John Hgey
Sworn to in open court July 5 1859
James Whituorth county judge
Page 40

Charter of Tennessee
County of Davason
On this 8th day of July in 1859. Personally came before the undersigned Michael E Degrove of Nashville aged 65 years and Williamson H Horn of Nashville, aged 60 years who are known to me take credible and disinterested [...] after being duly proven accessing [...] state, that the Micheal E Degrove was in command of the Artillery company at the reception of Lafayette in 1825 and left his company and went to [...] on which Lafayette was placed and [...] and John Hagey was assisted upon the stand and Lafayette embraced  him and they both shed tears and from what I could gather was that the old man, John Hagey had come to the country with him and served with him in the war of the Revolution. Deponent further atates that he was acquainted with John Hagey and Catherine Hagey and that they lived together as man and wife and have a large family of children with most of all of whom he is acquainted and with John Hagey who make the declaration for his mother Catherine Hagey he has been acquainted for 30 years and state he is a reputable man and that he would give him full faith and credit on other or otherwise Williamson H Horn that was a member of the Layayette guard on the occasion above referred to of Lafayette recetion at Nashville and witnessed the meeting between Lafayette and John Hagey and that after they had embraced were bothe in tears that Lafayette turned around to the company on the stance and said he recognized one his old slaves of the previous revolutionary war they were both much affected.
Continued
Page 41

The letters
executions he
this place.
Milled
Some
Deponent further states that from 1825 up to the
time of his death on the 13th of July 1841 he was well
acquainted with John Hager & his wife Catherine
Hager and that they lived to gather as man and
wife and that Catherine Hager is still living
as the widow of John Hager and has never been
married since his death as above, said to be 105
years old deponent refers to life of Lafayette by
William Cutler page 366 as a true and
further description of the above meeting and
to the annexed & is containing an account of
his death taken from the Christian Advocate
a religious paper published in Nashville in
the year 1841 Deponent further states that he has
been acquainted with John Hager the declarant
for his mother Catherine Hager and State
that he is a reputable man and that he would
give him full faith and credit on oath or
otherwise, and further these deponent sayeth
not
M E Grove
in to and subjected
me in open Cort
1859
James Whitworth
County Judge
W. Horn
Page 42

July 8 1859
Sworn to and subscribed before me in open Court
James Whitworth 
County Judge
AN OLD SOLDIER FALLEN.
Mr. John Hagey, aged, we understand, ninety three years, died in this City on Thursday night the [illegible] Mr. Hagey was a native of Germany and came to America in company
with La Fayette [Lafayette], and fought in the
Revolutionary War in aid of our country's independence. He was one of La Fayette's life guards.--
When this distinguished chieftain visited America and passed through Nashville in 1824, Mr. Hagey who then resided in Huntsville, Alabama came on foot more than a hundred miles to meet once mode [more] his old general. We are told by those who were present at their meeting, that it was a moment of thrilling interest, Mr. Hagey threw himself suddenly and unexpected before La Fayette; the General immediately recognized him, and with a familiar tone exclaimed, "Why John is this you!" and in a moment they were closely
embraced in each other's arms.
Mr. Hagey was for more than fifty years a devoted Christian, and faithful member of the Methodist Episcopal Church. 
He died triumphantly. His funeral took place at the McKendree church on Wednesday 4 o'clock P. M., and was attended by an immense concourse of about five thousand people. He was buried with Military honors. -- Nashville Christian Advocate
Page 43

State of Tennessee 
Davidson County
I, J R Cheatham Clerk of the County Court do
hereby certify that James Whitworth whose
name is signed to the foregoing declarations & depositions is Judge of the County of said Circuit duly elected & commissioned and that the signatures purporting to be his are genuine
In testimony whereof I hereunto set my hand & affixed the seal of said Court at office in
Nashville this 8th day of July 1859
J R Cheatham Clerk
Page 44

BRIEF objections in the admission of apension Claims,  or which those answered in the negative, in red ink, will apply to t he claim of  J mc Hagee which require further proof or explanation,

I.  Does the declaration show where the applicant resides?
YES
II.  Did the declarant make the declaration in the county where he resides?  YES
III.   If the applicant did not make the declaration in the county where he resides, is there any reason for his not doing so ?
IV.  Has the declarant mentioned the periods of the war when he served?  YES
V.  Has he mentioned with precision the length of his service, and  the different grades in which he served, in language so definite as to enable the department to determine to what amount of pension he is entitled?    NO
VI. Has he given the names of the officers under whom he served, in conformity with the regulations?   YES
VII.  Has he made a relinquishment of every claim to any other pension than the one under Act of June 7, 1832? YES
VIII.  Has the Court given their opinion?  YES
IX.  Has the clerk given his certificate?  YES
X..Is the Clerks seal affixed?  And if so, has it a device or inscription by which it can be distinguished from any other seal?  YES
Page 45

2
XI. Has the applicant obtained the evidence of a clergyman and another respectable citizen as to their belief respecting his age and the general belief in his neighborhood relative to his revolutionary
service? No
XII. If the clergyman's affidavit has not been produced, is there any reason assigned for not obtaining it?  No
XIII. If the applicant has no documentary evidence, and has not obtained the testimony of at least one
living witness, has he stated in his declaration that such proof cannot be had? Yes
XIV.  If the applicant's name is not found on the rolls of military service, has he produced a witness
or witnesses as to his service?
If he has produced direct proof as to service, has the magistrate who administered the oath,
certified to the credibility of the witness or witnesses?  Has the proper officer certified to the official character and signature of the magistrate as the regulations direct?
Has the proper officer certified to the official character and signature of the magistrate as the
regulations direct? [no response to xiv]
XV. Does it appear from any of the papers that the witness was in such a situation, or of such an age,
as to have a personal knowledge of the applicant's service?[no response]
XVI. Are the papers authenticated as the regulations direct? Yes
XVII. Are the seven interrogatories prescribed by the War Department answered satisfactorily? And,
if not, which of them is not so answered? 7

EXPLANATORY NOTES.
QUERE V. In a case where the applicant cannot, by reason of the loss of memory, state precisely how
long he served, he should amend his declaration by making an affidavit in the following words:
"Personally appeared before me, the undersigned, a Justice of the Peace, &c. A. B. who, being
duly sworn, deposeth and saith, that, by reason of old age, and the consequent loss of memory, he
cannot swear positively as to the precise length of his service, but according to the best of his recollection he served not less than the periods mentioned below, and in the following grades;
 For  ----- year ------months, and ------ days,
- I served as a----- ; and for such service I claim a pension.
---
Page 46

John Hagee
Tennefsee
Rejected Service in
the French army
not provided for
by act of June 7th
1832

[After much crossed off text
it says, "cannot find"]

To is Hon.
H Sibley Jan 11. 1838

[More crossed off text}

Act 7 June 1832

[More crossed off text]

Let Hon J. R. Thompsen
Chrm Com Pensions U.S.S.
enclosing papers Jany 12. 1860
Page 47

36 Cong. 1 Sess.
Report
adbuse
by Mr Thomson from the Com. on Pensions on the petition of Catharine Hagie
1860 May 8 Submitted
Page 48

36TH CONGRESS, 1st Session.
SENATE. REP COM. No. 219.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
MAY 8, 1860. -- Ordered to be printed.
Mr. THOMSON, submitted the following
REPORT.
The Committee on Pensions, to whom was referred the petition of Catharine Hagie, widow of John Hagie, for a pension for the revolutionary services of her husband, having had the same under consideration, beg leave to report:
That it appears, in the year 1832, the husband of the petitioner applied for a pension under the general law of that year, but that his claim was rejected, for reason that he came over to this country with the French army, and that his service was entirely in that army, and under French officers, and not in either the " Continental line, State troops, volunteers, or militia," as was required by the act of June,
1832, in order that the applicant should receive the benefits of the above - mentioned act.
It also appears by his own declaration that he came to this country with General LaFayette; was attached as a Frenchman to his troop of
French light horse, and that all of his service was performed in that troop, and under foreign officers, holding their commissions from Louis XVI, King of France, and consequently were paid by that government
It has been the uniform practice of this government to deny claims of this character, as such soldiers (foreign officers were  xpressly excluded from the benefits of the act of 7th June, 1832) were not embodied in the American army, but were allies, and served in conformity to the treaty of alliance entered into on the 6th February, 1778, and ratified on the 5th May following.
Your committee report that, as the husband was not entitled under the act of 7th June, 1832, the widow has no claim under the act of
7th July, 1838, which is based upon the former act, therefore recommend that the prayer of the petitioner be denied.
Page 49

J. E. Wassler
Aug 6
Page 50

Pension Office, August 6. 1839

Sir,
In respect to the claim of the widow of John Hagee for pension, I have to state that the application of her husband himself was rejected by this office in 1837 for the reasons assigned in a letter addressed to Misses. Holman + Hollingsworth under oath of November 22, that year, a copy of which is herewith. Congress alone can afford relief in cases of this description

F. E. Hassler Esqr
Washington,
D.C
Page 51

Dermott Arkansas
March 12, 1934

Veterans Administration
Washington, D. C.

Dear Sir,

Please send me the military record of John Hagey (only one) who came over to this country acting as the body guard to Marguis de Lafayette 1778 was wounded at York town. In 1825 when Lafayette revisited this country
Page 52

he met and recognized his old companion in arms at Nashville Tenn, embracing him with a brother's love
Capt John Hagey married in Harrisburg Pa
Any information that you can send me will be greatly appreciated. I do not know just where he died or the date. I am anxious to have his military record for the U. S. D. A. R.
Respectfully,
Mrs. Elisa B. Simpson
Dermott, Arkansas
Box 85.

Round stamp mark:
RECEIVED
MAR 14 1934
[illegible] DIV.
READER 14
VETS. ADM.
Page 53

WAR DEPARTMENT
THE ADJUTANT GENERALS' OFFICE
WASHINGTON
March 1, 1934.

IN REPLY
REFER TO ORD-fjm

Round stamp mark:
RECEIVED
MAR [illegible] 1934
[illegible] DIV.
READER 14
VETS. ADM.

Respectfully returned to

Mrs. Claud Simpson,
Box 85,
Dermott, Arkansas.

The name John Hagey has not been found on the records on file in this office of soldiers in the Revolutionary War.

The collection of Revolutionary War records in this office is far from complete, and it is suggested as a possibility that the desired information may be obtained from the Veterans Administration, Washington, D. C.

James F. McKinley
Major General,
The Adjutant General.
By fjm
Page 54

1934, Apr 5. Hist to Mr. Claud Simpson

(3-223.) Revy R

No. 4428
___, Ex'r REJECTED

OLD WAR INVALID.

John Hagey of Ten~ + his
Widow Catharine Private
in the French Army

Service: ____
Enlisted: ____, 18__.
Discharged: ____, 18__.

Printed List of 1852 of Rejected 
Suspended claims show cansl
of Rejection as follows:
"Belonged to the
Army of France"

Application filed: ____, 18__.
Alleges: ____
Re-enlisted: ____
Attorney: ____
P.O. ____
Page 55

Washington City DC
23d March 1860

Hon. J S Thompson U S Senate

Sir.
Since filing the petition of Catharine widow of John Hagy for a Revolutionary pension now pending before the Committee on Pensions, I have casually met with the accompanying extract from the American Quarterly Review December 1829 page 490, by which it appears that John Hagy was recognized as a soldier of the Revolution, by Gnl La Fayette seven or eight-years, before the passage of the act of 1832. = I had hoped to have been able to present the Committee the work of A. Lavafseur [Lavasseur] but I am unable to find it in any library here as yet. May I ask, in view of the applicants age (103 yrs) that you Honorable Committee will at an early day take her meritorious case into consideration - Yrs Resply
F. E. Hassler
Page 56

Hon J. R. Thompson
Jany 12
Page 57

Enc:

Pension Office
Jany: 12" 1860.

Sir.
I have the honor to return herewith the papers which accompanied your letter of the 11" Instant, now in Compliance with your request. Enclose the papers filed in this Office relative to the Claims of John + Catharine Hagee for pension + bounty land together with copy of my letter of 27" of September 1859. to F. E. Hafsler [Hassler], Esqr in reference thereto.
I have +c [&c.]:

Hon. J. R. Thompson
Chr. Com. on Pensions
U. S. S.
Page 58

F. E. Hassler
Sept. 27
Page 59

Pension Office
September. 21" 1859

Sir:
I have reexamined and rejected the bounty land claim of Catherine Hagee filed under the Act of 3d. March.1855, as the widow of John.
The husband of the claimant applied for a pension under the Act of 7" June. 1832. His claim was rejected for the reason that he did not serve in the Continental line State troops Volunteers or militia. It appears by his declaration that he came to this country with General La Fayette, attached himself as a Frenchman to La Fayette's troppe of French Sight Horse that all of his service was performed in this troupe, which was Commanded by La Fayette, the Duc De Lansanne, Col. Polonotski + Capt. Escaline, all foreign officers + in Command of foreign troops, that at the close of the War he preferred to remain in American + consequently become an American Citizen.  I find by an reexamination of similar cases on file in this Office, that it has been the uniform practice of the Government to disallow [illegible] of this
Page 60

2
Character. La Fayettes Corps as Soldiers of the French Army were not attached to and embodied in the Service of the Colonial Army but were allies + served in Conformity to the Stipulations of the Treaty of Alliance of 6" Feb: 1778.
It is not denied that La Fayette was authorized to receive the Rank + commission of a Major General, that his appointment to the Command of a Division of the Continental line was Authorized, but this would not change his military station or the relation of the allied troops under his command.
In the argument the hole that France was paid + reimbursed for the service of her troops, as well as other assistance under us during the Revolutionary struggles + consequently, that the allied troops were in effect in the Colonial Service. By a reference to the 9" Article of the Treaty of Alliance you will observe it is exprefsly [expressly] provided that "there shall be no after claim of compensation on one side or the other, whatever may be the event of the war." It is Evident from thw wording of this Article of the Treaty that France
Page 61

3
paid her troops + bore the Expenses of the Army whilst they were Engaged in this Country. It is also historically true, I think, that France [illegible illegible] not while the treaty was in full force and effect claim compensation for the Services of her troops + has afserted [asserted] no such claim since the treaty was abrogated. The Supplies furnished the United Colonies in the Shape of money and munitions of war, were for the general use of the Government to enable it to prosecute the war of Independence with vigor + to a favorable conclusion.
That a loan contracted under such circumstances was duly Satified no one pretends to deny, but that France looked to the U. S. to pay the expenses [illegible] of her troops whilst Engaged in the War is not the case. The benefits to be derived from the treaty of alliance were intended to be mutual + to a certain extent reciprocal. France was Engaged in a controversy with England + for her aid to us we agreed to give her support material and moral in her present + prospective struggle, + to secure her in the Enjoyment of her pofsefsions [possessions] in America. From an alliance of this Character
Page 62

4
it is Evident that the French troops were serving as effectually their own Country as they were us. that at no time were they in the Continental line, State troops, Volunteers or Militia + that they were not paid by the Colonial Government.
Foreigners, except foreign Officers, have not been denied pensions provided they served in the Contl. line +c" [&c] but under the construction given to the Act of 7" June. 1832. by Judge Taney as early as Oct: 27" 1832, it was held that the service of persons who were not resident American Citizens must be in the Contl. line, State troops +c:. John Hagie, did not so serve.
I have deemed it proper to refer to the claim of Hagie to a pension, as it is evident from Argument tends to the allowance of his widows claim to a pension as well as land bounty and that you serve some distinction between the words of the pension Acts + those of the Act of 3", March. 1855. granting land to Officers + Soldiers of the Rev. war + to their windows and minor Children.
By the 1st diction of the Act of 3". March,
Page 63

185 a gratuity is provided for these soldiers who were regularly mustered into the service of the United States, were paid by the U.S. for their services. John Hagie was not so mustered or so paid. He may reply that his section of the act refers to service in wars since 1790 which is admitted so far as it relates to the periods during which the service was performed but the fact that Congress has required person who have served since 1790 to be regularly mustered into the service shows conclusively that Congress regards such regular mustering as a necessary condition to entitle a party to it's benefits. Section 8 of said act extends it's benefits to officers and soldiers of the Revolutionary war" and to their widows and minor children,.What are the benefits conferred? A gratuity in land. To whom? To persons who were regularly mustered into the service of the U.S. and whose services were paid by the U.S. The words "Revolutionary war' cannot be construed separate and distinct by themselves and to embrace every person whose service insured to the benefit of the Government and he was not regularly mustered into the service.
Page 64

6
of the United States did not belong  to the Continental line, State troops ,volunteers or militia of the Colonial Army.  John Hagee would not be entitled to claim, if living, or his two sons cannot be the recipient  of benefits which he could not recieve if living, her prayer must be denied.
Page 65

For Ina Bell 
for Rep Feb. 1833
John Hagee
Page 66

War Department
Pension Office    27 Feb. 1833

Sir,
 The case of John Hagee has been examined and in consequences of having been made no provisions for the French Army by the Act of 7th June 1832, his claim is rejected. The papers are retained in the files of this office. 

               Very respectfully 
Hon. John Bell  to of Rep.
Page 67

State of Tennessee
  I Robert B Turner clerk of the Circuit Court for the County of Wilson in said state do certify that Samuel Anderson whose name is subscribed to the foregoing certificate is and of the judges of the Circuit courts for the state of a foresaid and  presiding judge of said Circuit court duly missioned and qualified 
In testimony where of I hereto subscribe my name and office the seal of said court at Nashville the 25th day of October A.D. 1837 and the 2nd year of our independence R. B. Turner.
Page 68

State of Tennessee
Rutherford County
Circuit Court 
October term 1837
Personally appeared Daniel McCoy a citizen  of the county and state a foresaid in open court before the Hon. Samuel Anderson presiding judge on the 24th day of October 1837 and made oath in due form of law, that his is personally acquainted with John Hagey, now a citizen of Nashville in Davidson county Tennessee that he first became acquainted with said John Hagey as well as he can recollect A.D. at the White Plains near Kings Bridge in the state of New York, that said Hagey was at that time and place a regular soldier in the army of the Revolution and was un the command of General Lafayette in the French troops, but his company and regimental officers he does not remember, Applicant was at that time a private soldier in the army of the Revolution and was un the command of the same general and he remembers seeing said Hagey at the battle at the White plains which was fought with the American troops and the British troops uner the command of General Clinton. Applicant further states that said Hagey was a private soldier and at that time above mentioned belonged to the Light house applicant afterwards saw said Hagey as a private soldier in the army of the Revolution at KIng's Bridge and at New York and in 1780 he remembers seeing said Hagey on his march to Little York and he
Page 69

saw him at Little York in 1781 and knows he was present in the American army at the surrender of Cornwallis.Affiant is confident he saw said Hagey at many other places,which his memory does not now serve him to specify as a private soldier during the Revolutionary war between the years 1778 and 1781 and he know he was in the service of the United State and a private soldier from the time he first saw him in 1778 up to the surrender of Cornwallis in 1781. Afficant understood from said Hagey at the time that he had enlisted during the war and he has no doubt but that he was a soldier of the Revolutionary war in the service of the United States from the period of his enlistment until the close of the war. Affiant as already stated was himself a private soldier in the service of the United States in the Revolutionary war, and is now a pensioner of the United States un the act of Congress passed the 7th of June 1832      Daniel Mc Coy
described and sworn to before me this 24th 1837 in open court Anderson judge [illegible]
Page 70

State of Tennessee
Circuit Court
Rutherford County October Term 1837
Personally appeared in open Court on this 24th day of October 1837, Peter Jennings, a free colored man and a citizen of the County & State aforesaid, before me the Hon. Samuel Anderson presiding Judge and made oath in due form of law that he was a soldier of the Revolutionary war, in the service of the
United States, and that he is a Pensioner of the
United States under the Act of Congress of the
7th of June 1832. Affiant also makes oath that he is personally acquainted with John Hagey, a citizen of Nashville in Davidson County Tennessee, as has been acquainted with him for the last twelve or thirteen years; that he has frequently conversed with the said John Hager about the occurrences of the Revolutionary war and especially about the operations of the Revolutionary troops under the command of General Lafayette in New York, who operated in concert with the detachment of troops to which affiant belonged, and also, about the battle at the White Plains in New York, in which battle affiant was, and affiant states that from said conversations and the facts there
mentioned by said Hagey, he entertains no doubt but that said Hagey was a soldier of the Revolution in the service of the United States.
Affiant also states that he was at Nashville Tennessee in 1824, when
Page 71

General Lafayette visited that place, and saw said Hager in conversation with General Lafayette, and well remembers that General Lafayette recognized him as one of his soldiers of the Revolutionary war.
Peter Jennings
Subscribed & sworn to before me in open court this 29th Oct 1837
S Anderson Judge
State of Tennessee
Davidson County
I Robt B. Turner Clerk of the Circuit Court for the County of Davidson, in said State do certify that Samuel Anderson, whose name is subscribed to the foregoing certificate
of me, is one of the Judges of the Circuit Courts for the state aforesaid, and presiding Judge of said Circuit Court, duly commissioned and qualified. In testimony where I hereto subscribe my name and affix the seal of said County at Nashville, the 25th day of October, A.D. 1837, and the 62d year of American
Independence.
R. B. Turner
Page 72

Nashville, 25th. Octr. 1837.
Mr. J. L. Edwards
Dr. Sir,
Enclosed you will find the certificate of David McCoy and P. Jennings, showing that John Hagey was in the revolutionary service. Mr. Hagey sent his declaration to the department some time ago, but owing to some defect in his testimony, a pension was not allowed him. We hope the testimony furnished will supply the defect and that he ^will have a pension allowed. There is no doubt but that he was in the service.
Please write to me on the subject.
Your respectful
Obt. Servt
Holman & Hollingsworth
Page 73

Missr. Holman & Hollingsworth
Nov 22 1837
Ten
Page 74

War Dept Pension Office
Nov 22 1837

Gentlemen
  The affidavits in the case of John Hagey have been examined and filed with his declaration in the office. The service under the Duke de Lausanne having been in a corps belonging to the French Army is not provided for by the Act of June 1832. The decision of the Capt rejecting the claim is therefore adhered to.

Mfsrs [Misters] Holman + Hollingsworth
Nashville TN
Page 75

House Reps
Dec. 21st 1837

Sir
I request that you will send me the application for a pension (and the papers accompanying it) of John Hagey, a soldier of the revolution who served in the French army. They are on file in your office, having been forwarded from Nashville. If you cannot comply with my request in sending the originals, I hope you will oblige me by furnishing me with a certified copies. My object is to apply for relief to Congrefs. 
I am respectfully
your obt. sevt.
Jn O Bell

J. L. Edward Esqr.
Com. Pension
Page 76

Hn. Jn O Bell
Dec 28. 1837
OC
Page 77

War Dept
Pension Office,
Dec 28. 1837.

Sir,
I have the honor to enclose herewith certified copies of the papers in the case of John Hagie

Hrn. Jn O Bell
H. R.
Page 78

Ezra Holstead
Oct 29. 1839
O.C.
Page 79

396

War Dept
Pension Office
Oct. 29. 1839

Sir,
In reply to your letter of the 13th inst. respecting the case of John Hagey, I have to inform you that his claim was rejected on the 22 November 1837, for reasons given in a letter of that date addrefsed to Mifrs [Misters] Holman + Hollingsworth, a copy of which I herewith enclose.

Ezra Holstead, Es
Chesnut Grove
Tenn
Page 80

Chesnut Grove Ten. Oct 13th 1839

J. L. Edwards Esqr

Dear Sir
I am requested by Mr John Hagy of Nashville to enquire of you whether or not, an application for a pension by him (under the act of June 7th 1832) has ever been received in your office - Mr Hagy said that he sent the Declaration, accompanied with the certificates of two witnefses proving his services in the Revolution, about three years since, and has never received no communication from your department in reply to his claim - Please Sir have the goodnefs [goodness] to state if his application has been received, if so, what objections there is to the same - Mr Hagy came to the United States with General Lafayette I think in 1777 landed at Charleston R. I. and served under Lafayette until the close of the Revolution, and has been in the United States ever since - He was born in Germany His Captain was by the name of Eykelige or something similar to it - He says he has been rejected once in consequence of his being a foreigner - Please inform me if his
Page 81

name is on the rolls, and if his being a foreigner will deprive him of the benefit of the act of June 7th 1832 - Mr Hagy is a man whose character for morality and veracity is undoubted, which will appear more satisfactory by referring to the Hon. Felix Grundy who is well acquainted with him - On this subject please direct me a few lines to Chesnut Grove Post Office Davidson County Ten. and you will much oblige.
Your Obedient Servt
Ezra Holstead
Page 82

Nashville April 26th 1841
Dr Sir, Old Mr Hagey is now with me + requests that I shall write to you for him concerning the procurement of a pension for him. He said you promised him to attend to it. I have before me two letters, the copies of which may save you + your clerks some trouble.
"(Copy) War Department, Pension Office Gentlemen, November 22., 1837
The affidavits in the case of John Hagey have been examined + filed with his declaration in this office. The service under the Duke De Lausanne, having been in a corps belonging to the French Army, is not provided for by the act of 7th June 1832. The decision of the Department respecting the claim is therefore, adhered to.
I am very respectfully
Your Obt Servt
(Signed J L Edwards
Mefsrs Holman + Hollingsworth, Nashville Ten."
The other letter is as follows.
"H. of Rep. 4th June 1840.
Dear Sir, I recd. your letter on yesterday. The claim of John Hagie has been referred
Page 83

to the Committee on Revolutionary claims upon which they have not as yet reported. - It was handed for examination to McRayner of N. C. who has been, like myself sick very much but promises me to report on it in a day or two. I have no doubt favorably. Your friend
C. Johnson
His Excellency Jas K Polk, Nashville."
It would be a source of gratification to his numerous friends, if the good old man, now more than 90 years old, could procure a pension.
Permit me to congratulate you on your appointment with which all the Whigs of my acquaintance, with whom I have conversed upon the subject are well pleased.
Your very good friend
Smith Criddle.
Nashville 26th April 1841
Dear Sir I am a son of the old man and have him to support by my daily labour if you can do anything for him and wife I pray do so and if you think it not worth while to try I pray let him know as he still expects it. Yors G. Hagey
Page 84

S. Criddle
May 6. 1841
O.C.
Page 85

78

Pen. Office
May 6. 1841
Sir,
In reply to your letter of the 26th ult. to the Secretary of War which has been referred to this office, in the case of John Hagey, I have to inform you that his case is not provided for by the pension laws. His service was in the French Army and the only relief which he can obtain will be from Congrefs, before which body his case has been laid.

Smith Criddle Esq
Nashville,
Ten:

O. C
enter on index
Page 86

Nashville May 14th 1841

Dear Sir I have never attempted to addrefs a man of your tallents before and if I prove to be an Awkward hand you must pardon me I shall endeavor to make my epistle as short as I can to explain what I want. I am a son of John Hagey and a house carpenter by trade and have my father and mother to support by my daily labour I find I have hard work to do it but ever willing to do so. I expect you are well acquainted with his case as he saw you in Nashvill where he resides. his case is this he was a soldier of the revolution and has never got any pention he has petitioned time after time and he has had promis upon promises he will get the pention the reasons I write now is he says you said he must remind you of it when you arrived at Washington He has great confidence in you as a man in you station and tells me you will do something for him. This much would be doing him me and his friends a great favour indeed to get a few lines from you hands naming what you think can be done for him I would that he could -
Page 87

- know what to expect whether he could hope for any thing or not if you can let him know do so as it would take you but few minutes and would afford him so much satisfaction I will not say any thing more as you know more about it than I can tell. his papers and documents are in Washington you could see them. writ to him if you please if I have ered [erred] in this forgive.
There is no news worth your attention - On tomorrow will be quit a sollim day with all our stores and shops will be closed and a general fasting with all it causses solemity now we shall have preaching at all the churches in the Citty.
P.S. write to the Old man soon
Yours most respectfully
George W. Hagey
For his Father John Hagey
Page 88

Geo. W. Hagey
Nashville
Ten
May 26th 1841
O.C
Page 89

315

Pen. Office
May 26th 1841

Sir.
In reply to your letter of the 14th inst. in the case of your father John Hagey, I have to inform you that he is not entitled to the benefits of any of the pension laws. His service was in the French Army. It would appear that his case has been laid before Congrefs, from which body alone relief can be obtained.

Mr George W. Hagey
Nashville.
Ten:

OC
enter on index
Page 90

Washington City 23 Nov 1845
To
J L Edwards Esqr
Sir
I beg to call your attention to the papers on file in your office being the application of John Hagy a Revolutionary soldier for a Pension  I have not seen the papers myself, but was requested upon my arrival here to look into the matter, and to endeavor to obtain for the Heirs of Hagy, he being now dead the benefit of the Laws in such case and provided - In a memordum [memorandum] furnished here I find the claim has not heretofore been allowed upon the ground that Hagy was a foreigner, and therefore his claim could not be admitted- Is there not a mistake - It is true he was a foreigner but it is equally true that he was a Revolutionary soldier, and that he continued to reside in these United States from the time of his arrival untill his death - I knew him personally myself for a number of years, as an upright, honest old man esteemed by all who knew him; and in his case I witnessed a remarkable instance of memory by Gen Lafayette who met this old man in Nashville when there in the spring of 1825 - this old man presented himslf to Genl lafayette in a large crowd of persons, and was not only recognized but his name was called by the Genl. - I feel personally much interested for the
Page 91

Heirs of the old man - I think he is clearly within the provisions of the Law, and am sustained in this opinion by that of the present Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, who when Attorney General gave a written opinion covering this case it is dated 27 Oct. 1832 and may be found in Document No 118. on page 46 - I think of that year - I submit then this case to you with a hope that your will give to it your early attention
And am
Very Respectfully
Yr Frd & Mo Obt Svt
Th. Claiborne
Page 92

Hon. T. Claiborne
24 Nov. 1845
Page 93

Pension Office
November 24, 1845
Sir,
At your request I have again examined the case of John Hagie.  My letter of the 22d November 1837 to Messrs. Holman and Hollingsworth, a copy of which is herewith enclosed, will shew that the claim was rejected, not because the claimant was a foreigner, but because he was in the French Army.  None of the pension laws embrace the cases of those who belonged to Foreign Regiments or corps.  The opinion of the Attorney General, to which you refer, does not authorize any interpretation of the act of June 7, 1832, at variance with the decision in this case.  I regret that it is not in our power to grant a pension.
I have the honor-
Hon. Thomas Claiborne
of Tennessee,
now present
Footnote:
No. 11856
Act 7 June '32
Tenn. case
Page 94

Washington August 8th 1846 

Sir

I enclose you herewith a letter from Jubal Richardson;
please note the contents & give me an answer in regard to the matter of it at your convenience addressed to me at Nashville Tennessee- I send you also a letter of Carson Dobbins in regard to the pension claim of Mrs Mary Latimore, enclosing a letter from you to him, will ^you be so kind as to attend to its behests in my room as I shall probably leave this for Nashville before you can send me the paper. your attention to this will much oblige

Respectfully
EH Ewing
Page 95

Hon E.H. Ewing
Augt 13 ‘46
Page 96

Pen off 
Aug 13th, 46 
Sir
In the case of John Hagie I have the honor to 
inform you that your correspondent is wholly mistaken in the point in issue which has 
never been a subject of reference to the 
Atto Genl.  The act of 7 June ‘32 provides for those who served in the American - Not French army as has been repeatedly stated to various agents of this Claimant 
Hon E. H. Ewing 
Nashville, 
Ten.