Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File S 46358, John Gauley, Continental (Canadian)
Page 1

(3---1776)
   SERVICE              
Continental (Canadian)
Gauley, John
NUMBER
S46358
and
{ B.L.Wt 14.100. Private
{Reazuir Regl. issued on
{May 13, 1803, delivered
{to Toppan Webster.
{see papers within
Page 2

Issued Wt No. 14 in favor
of John Gauley
Bounty Land Record
book shows that
Warrant No 14. issued 
in favor of John Gauley,
Pvt Hazens Regt.
100 acres
delivered May 13, 1803
to Toppan Webster

[SIDE NOTATION]
Power of Attorney ~
from Mr. Thos Schieffelin
to Mr. Peter Mills ~
Page 3

 Year of our lord one thousand eight hundred and one 
and in the presence of the subscribing Witness, 
Thomas Schieffelin
Sealed and delivered in the presence of
Elizabeth Fraser
Phebe Rea
By this public instrument be it known to all whom the same doth or may concern, that I Jonathan Abraham Gray, Notary Public, in and for the Province of Lowe, Canada, residing in the City of Montreal, by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the said Providence, duly commissioned and sworn, and in and by the said Letters Patent invoked with full Power and Authority to attest Deeds, Wills, Agreements and other instruments in writing, Do hereby certify that Mr. Thomas Schieffelin, Merchant of this City, the signor of the within written Instrument, Personally appeared before me at my Office in the said City of Montreal, and Signed Sealed and delivered the same, as from his free Act and Deed, for the use and purposes therein contained and Whereof an attestation being required, I have granted this under my Notarial firm and seal, Done at Montreal in the Province of Lower Canada aforesaid, This Twenty Seventh Day of November, in the year of our Lord, in all lawful ways and means in my  Name, for the Recovery thereof; and when the receipt of any such Debts, Fees, or Sums, Rents, or Lands, Deeds of Lands, Property or Warrants aforesaid, acquisitions or other sufficient Surcharges, for me and in my Name to make, Seal, and deliver; and generally, all and every other Act and Acts, Thing and Things, Device and Devices in the Law whatsoever mindful and necessary to be done in and about the premises, for me and in my Name to do execute and conform, as largely and ample, to all intents and purposes, as I myself might or could do if I were personally present, or as the Matter required more special authority than is herein given; and attention in One or More under him for the purpose aforesaid, to make and constitute and again at pleasure to revoke; ratifying, allowing, and holding for firm and effectual, all and whatsoever said attorney shall lawfully do in and about Premises, by virtue hereof, in writing whereof I ever hereunto set my Hand and Seal in the  City of Montreal aforesaid, This Twenty Seventh Day of November in the
Page 4

Know all men by these Presents that I, Thomas Schieffelin, of the city and district of Montreal and providence of Lower Canada Merchant, have constituted, made and appointed by these presents to constitute, make and appoint by Virtue of sundry powers of attorney granted to me by divine powers in this province, Mr. Peter Mills of the city of New York in this United States of America Merch. my true and lawful attorney, for me and in my name and stead, and to my [illegible], to ask, demand, sue for, levy, recover and receive all sum and sums of money, debts, rents, goods, wares dues, accounts,  lands, deeds of lands, patents, warrants and other demands whatsoever, which are or shall be due, owing, payable and belonging to me or those I represent, or obtained from me or them in any manner of ways or means whatsoever, by any human or persons in any manner of ways in the United States of America.
Giving and granting unto my said attorney, by his presents my full and whole power, strength and authority, in and about the Premises, to have, use and

One Thousand Eight thousand and one

T. A. Schieffelin, not. pub.
Page 5

13 March 1830

Revolutionary Claims 

Under the act, entitled "An act for the relief of certain surviving Officers and Soldiers of the Army of the Revolution," approved 15th May, 1828.

Before me Calvin K Averill a Justice of the peace for the County of Clinton in the State of New York, personally appeared this day, John Gauley, of Rouses Point in the County of Clinton in the State of New York, who exhibited to me a certificate issued by the Secretary of the Treasury, numbered 745 and dated the [illegible] day of August 1829, setting forth that he is entitled to pay under the above-mentioned act, as a surviving Private of Infantry Col. Hazens Regt in the New York line of the Army of the Revolution; and the said John Gauley then there made oath that he is the person named in the said certificate, and, in testimony thereof signed his name to this affidavit. Witness my hand, this Fourth day of March in the year 1830.

Sworn and subscribed before me this fourth day of March 1830                                  
CK Averill J. Peace   
                                                        
his mark John Gauley

Note. The most convenient Branch Bank of the U. S. is at New York
The most convenient post office is at Rouses Point Clinton Coy. NY

I, ___ Clerk of the Court of the County of ____ in the State of ___ do hereby Certify, that ___ before whom the foregoing affidavit was sworn, was, at the time, a ____ for the said County, and duly empowered to administer oaths.
In Testimony whereof, I hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court, this ___ day of _____ in the year one thousand eight hundred and thirty
Page 6

In the purpose of obtaining the benefits of an act entitled "an act for the relief of certain surviving officers and soldiers of the army of the Revolution" approved on the 10th of May 1828, I John Gauley of Rouses Point in the State of New York and do hereby declare that as stated in the Continental line of the Army of the Revolution for and during the war and continued in its service until its termination at which period I was a private in Captain Oliver's Company in Col. Hazen's Regiment of the New York Line, And I also declare that I afterwards received certificates for the rewards of Eighty dollars to which I was entitled under an act of Congress proposed the 10th day of May 1778, And I further declare that I was not on the [crossed out: pension list of the] 15th of May 1828 on the Pensions List of the United States, affixing my hand this First Day of September one thousand and Eight hundred and Twenty Eight
The words in the third line above "pension list of the" erased before signing.

C,K. Averills                John Gauley

Before Mr. Calvin K. Averills, a Justice of the Peace in the County of Clinton in the State of New York formally appeared this day, John B Vinet and Louise Marney of the said County, who did severally make oath that Johan Gauley by whom the foregoing declaration was subscribed is generally reputed and believed to have been a soldier in the Army of the Revolution in America or therein stated, Notarize my hand this first day of  September in the year of our Lord one thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty Eight.

                  C.K. Averlls, J. Peace

I John Walworth Clerk of the Court of the County of Clinton in the State of New York do hereby certify that Calvin K. Averill before whom the foregoing affidavits were sworn was at the time a Justice of the Peace + duly empowered to administer oaths.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hands + affixed the seal of the said Court this Eleventh day of September A.D. 1828
John Walworth
Page 7

To All Persons To Whom These Presents
shall come or may concern greeting -
Know ye That We Peter Cayeaux, John Gauley, and Paul Hubert all of us of the Parish of Chambly and Province of Lower Canada Yeomen, For Devine good Causes and Considerations us herunto Moving, Have Made, Ordained, Authorized, Constituted and appointed and by these Presents Do Make, Ordain Authorize, Constitute and appoint Mr. Thomas Schieffelin of the City and District of Montreal and Province aforesaid Merchant our True and Lawful attorney, Representative and Agent Irrevocably, for the Special purposes herein after Mentioned Which is to Say, To Petition the Congress of the United States of America in our Names and on our behalf, For Compensation for the Losses, Damages, Services, Sufferings and Sacrifices Made by us individually in Consignment of our attachment to the Cause of the United States of America, during the years One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy Five, Seventy Six and so on to the year in which the Peace took Place between Great Britain and the United States, and for all other Demands, Due, Owing, Payable, and belonging to us or Detained from us by any manner of ways or Means whatsoever by the Said United States of America, To Ask, Demand recover and receive of and from the War office of the United States of America or of and from any other office Duly appointed for the purpose in any particular State, and of and From all and every Person or Persons, whom it Doth may or shall concern in any part of the United States aforesaid, all and Singular the Lands, Pay, Arrange of Pay, Clothing Rations, Rewards, Bounties, Gratuities and other Demands Due, Owing, Payable and belonging to us, or obtained from us by any Manner of Ways or Means whatsoever, by the said United States of America or of and from any other officer duly appointed for the purpose in any particular State, and of and from all and every person or persons, whom it may or shall concern in any part of the United States aforesaid, all and singular the land pay, arrearages of pay, clothing, rations, rewards, bounties, gratuities and other demands due, owing payable and belonging to us, or detained from us by any manner of ways or means whatsoever
Page 8

and upon Receipt thereof to execute and deliver, sufficient and requests Receipts, Releases, and acquittances for the Same, and also to Sell, Assign and Transfer all Certificates and registered or other Stocks, Now or hereafter standing in any of our Names, in the Bodies of the Treasury of the United States, or of any particular State, for or in Consequence of Our Losses, Damages, Sufferings, and Sacrifices as aforesaid, or for and on account of our Services as Soldiers in the Service of the United States during the Late War with Great Britain, and further to obtain from the War office of the United States, or of and from any particular State or of and from any office in said State Duly appointed for the Purpose and of and from all and every Person or Persons whom it Doth, may or shall Concern in any of the aforesaid United States of America The Warrants and Patents for the Lands Granted By the United States and the State of New York for services during the Late war with Great Britain - And We do hereby invest our Said attorney with absolute and unlimited Power on the Promise to have use and take all Lawful ways and means for the Purposes aforesaid With Power of attorney or attornies under him for the purpose aforesaid to make and substitute, and to do all Lawful acts requisite for affecting the Premises as fully and Effectually to all interests and purposes as we might or Could do were we Personally foremost, hereby allowing and Confirming all that our said attorney, or his substitute may or shall do therein by virtue of these Present In Witness whereof, we have hereunto Set our Hands and ______________ Montreal in the ______________________ of Lower Canada on the Sixth Day of March in the year of our Lord One Thousand Eight Hundred. 

(Signed)
Peter x Cayeaux (the word "his" above the x)
Mark (under the x)
John  x Gauley (the word "his" above the x)
Mark (under the x)
Paul x Hubert (the work "his" above the x)
Mark (under the x)
In Test. Veritates
J.A. Gray, not. pub.
Witness - Firs. Brig. Dubois, 1800
Page 9

Leave these papers wi
their proper order 
They are the reports relative to the 
pensioners of the Canadian Regi.
Page 10

State of New York}
County of Clinton}

I, Benjamin Mooers of Plattsburgh in the county aforesaid do hereby certify that I am a Lieutenant of General Hazens Regiment in the Army of the Revolution and according to the best of my recollection about the year 1780 a part * of the Troops Commanded by Col Livingston was attached or transferred into Gen. Hazens Regiment given under my hand this 9th day of Oct. 1828

Benjamin Mooers

* "Part" - [illegible] resolution of the 3rd Oct. 1786, which transferred all "foreigners". Gen. J.H.
Page 11

Burlington 31 Mar. 1831.
DB. McNeil, Esq.
   Sir,
          Mr. Lewis Provandie has not received the allowance due him from Government and as he alleges it is wrongfully detained from him. He says that Mr. Averill of Champlain has been his agent, and that he has regularly delivered him the requisite papers to enable him to obtain his allowance semi annually. that it is said his money has not been received and that therefore it is not paid over to him - In his behalf I have written to the Secretary of the Treasury for information relative to the promise, and he had referred me to you - Will you be pleased to give me some account of the matter, if within your power, and oblige Mr. Provandie, who, if his statement be true, is not faulty dealt by - 
 Respectfully Yr.of.Ser

Signed   A. Thompson
Page 12

(B)
Rouses Point April 11. 1831
Sir,
     your letter of the 1st is received; it was Mr. Lewis Provandie's papers that you gave me when at Plattsburgh for his pention pay-I have advanced him, and had his order for it on Averill to the 3 March 1830, and for his pay from that previous to 3 Sept; he gave his order on Averill for in favor of his son, to whom I paid the money, took his receipt and Averill order on you for the papers -
     Mr. Provandie has been waiting for the opening of navigation before he comes to draw his pay from Sept. last to March, when I suppose it would be proper to hand him the pention forms you gave me. He will probably soon make his appearance.
   Respectfully,
      Yr. of. Ser
   D.B. Mc.Neil, Esq.   (Signed)         A. Webb.
Page 13

Burlington 6 April 1831,
David B McNeil  Esquire,
                                            Sir,
     I return you enclosed  Mr. Webb's letter to you on the subject of Lewis Provudie's pension - I regret the inconvenience I have put you to in this affair, and the more so, as it seems I have been made a dupe of, for what purpose, dont know I have been put upon this inquiry by one, who, it appears, knows all about it. it was engaged in with a view to cover what way honestly, on my part, supposed to be wrong, either accidental or otherwise. I have been following this shadow all winter, writing letters to Washington and else where, and it is making a use of me, which I do not by any means relish.
     I am, Sir, with permission
                    Your friend
(Signed)                          A. Thompson
Page 14

(D)

State of New York
Clinton County Js:

I,  John B. L Skinner being duly sworn doth depose and say that on or about the fourth day of March last as this deponent was passing the Collectors office in the Village of Plattsburgh, he was called to by Alexander Marquis and desired to step into the office, that he went in and there saw two Canadians whom he was told were United States Pensioners and that their names were Michael Dufau & Baptist Martin - that Col. McNeil in the presence of this deponent delivered to them two letters each, which on being opened were found each to contain a draft from Richard Smith Cashier of the MSB Bank at Washington for $40.-  The said Pensioners (through their Interpreter Mr. Marquis) then desired Col McNeil to negociate the drafts for them or to give them money for the same, and were particularly desirous to get specie on Montreal Bills, alleging that United States bills were not current in that part of Canada where they resided - 
That the drafts were endorsed by the said Dufau & Martin (one of which was [illegible] by this deponent) and were sent out to be exchanged for Specie or Montreal Bills -  That afterwards the said Dufau & Martin together with Ferman Loselton called on this deponent at his office in company with Mr Marquis, and desired him to make the necessary papers to enable them to draw their pensions which were due on the 3rd March - That they and each of them then & there informed this deponent through their Interpreter that Col McNeil had paid them the whole amount of their drafts and exempted themselves fully satisfied and under many obligations to him for the
Page 15

trouble he had taken to procure them good money - That no charge whatever was made by Col McNeil for negociating those drafts or for procuring the money on them to the knowledge or belief of this deponent and he thinks he would have heard of it had it been so -
And this deponent further said that several days after Dufau Marin & Loselton had been paid John Gouley came to this place to receive his money and make his declaration that as the said Gouley was very old and infirm this deponent was sent for the call on him at the Hotel where he stopped - that he this deponent did call on him and Col. McNiel did in the presence of this deponent deliver be the said Gouley two letters which were opened by this deponent at the request of the said Gouley and they were found to contain each a draft for $40. which were indorsed in the presence of this deponent - who then at the request of the said Gouley got them exchanged for Canada Bills and paid the amount to him the said Gouley in the presence of Col McNiel

Sworn & Subscribed this (cut off) day of April} 1831 before me

J Synde first Judge of Clinton Coun. Pleas

Sr. J.B. Skinner
Page 16

(E)

I Benji Mooers of Plattsburgh Clinton County & State of New York do certify Fermon Lopelton alias Lorillen called on me about the first of March last for the purpose of procuring his Pension money which he had been informed and forwarded by the directory of the Treasury to the Collection of the Champlain district sent for Mr. McNeil & he came to my house and delivered to the F. Lopelton alias Lorillan letters containing his drafts the said Lorillan said he should like the species for them and the P. McNeil took the drafts and went out into the village & exchanged them for species and for the amount to the said Lopelton in my presence without any change for his trouble - April 26th. 1831

(signed)

Benji Mooers
Page 17

State of New York
Clinton County  B  Alexander Marquis being duly sworn doth depose and say that on or about the fourth day of March 1831 Baptist Martin & Michael Dufau called on this deponent at his house in Plattsburgh to get him to go with them to David B. McNeil Esq and act as Interpreter in transacting their pension business with the said McNeil - That the said McNeil gave letters to Dufau & Martin which contained drafts for the amount of their pensions and when they were opened they both said that they wanted specie on Montreal Bills for their drafts alleging that American Bank Bills were not current in that part of Canada where they resided - And this deponent further states and swears that the said McNeil went out into the village and after considerable difficulty as the said McNeil said and as this deponent verily believes returned with Canada money & specie and in his the said deponents {illegible] paid the said Dufau & Martin the full amount of their drafts - And this deponent further said that the said Dufau & Martin through him as their Interpreter solicits the said McNeil to act as their agent & transact their business in future, which the said McNeil totally refused to do alleging as a reason that he had as much other business as he could attend to - And this deponent further said that the said Martin & Dufau offered to pay the said McNeil for the trouble he had been at, and the pains he had taken to accommodate them in giving them money that they were acquainted with and which was subject to no discount in Canada, but the said McNeil
Page 18

positively refused to take any thing for his trouble - and this deponent further said that the said Dufau & Martin stayed at the house of this deponent in Plattsburgh and that they there manifested the most entire satisfaction of the kind treatment they had received at the hands of Col McNeil

Sworn & Subscribed this 26th day of April} 1831. (cut off) me & I certify that (cut off) deponent is a man of truth & veracity }

(signed)
Alexander Marquis
J B L Skinner
Justice Peace

We the undersigned do certify that we are acquainted with Alexander Marquis and that his truth and veracity are undoubted, and that he is entitled to full credit   Dated April 26th 1831

R. Wilson Clerk of Court to
Thomas Green
William Law
Page 19

(G)        Plattsburgh April 30th 1831

To the Hon. S.D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury

Sir

D.B. McNeil, Esq., Collector of the Customs of Champlain District, has laid before us an anonymous letter, directed to the Secretary of the Treasury. dated Pittsburgh, March 25, 1831, signed "Justice".
I have examined the letter in question and am of the opinion that if Oliver from the office of Bela Edgerton & C.K. Averill, of Rouses Point, from the known hostility of these men to the Collector, of this district and from their count of Character and standing in society, we have no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that they are capable of addressing a man in disguise against whom they entertain a deadly hostility and without the least shadow of truth and allow us to add how we know from personal observation as well as by our knowledge of Col. McNeil's character and high standing in community that he had most scrupulously guarded the rights & interests of the pensioners and has taken great pride and trouble in seeing them protected from all impositions we have known to be.

With great respect,
[illegible] of service
John W. Bailey
Ezra Thurber
Page 20


(Black stamp upper left side what appears to be an envelope)

WHITEHALL
APR 12 NY             FREE


(In script)

Hon. Saml. D. Ingham
Secretary of U.S. Treasury
Washington
Page 21

Plattsburgh March 25, 1831

Sir,

I beg you will pardon me for interrupting you with this communication, but justice to the "Old Soldiers" requires a few words in their behalf - A short time ago I happened to witness an interview between the Collector David B McNeil of this place and some Canadian Pensioners under the late law of 1828 - It appeared that the Collector had received their draft, and paid them off in uncurrent money at a cost to them of two 1/2 percent discount to get it into good money.  The most striking circumstance that attracted my attention is that said Collector told them that the Secretary of the Treasury had instructed him to tell them all they could not draw any more money unless they come to him.  That they must not let the merchants and lawyers have anything to do with their pensions for they would cheat them.  I took the liberty of talking with these men afterwards & they were dissatisfied in as much as they had been accustomed to receive their drafts & instead of paying discount, they got a premium of two per cent. The merchant would willingly give that for the sake of remitting - Some other circumstances might be mentioned but I have said enough to put you on your guard against like impositions.

Justice

S.D. Ingham Secretary
Page 22

  

(Stamp)

FREE

PLATTSBURGH N.Y.
AUG 13

(In script)

Hon. Louis Mc Lane
Secretary of the Treasury
Washington City.
D.C.
Page 23

Recvd 18 Augt 1832

Collectors Office Dist. of 4887
Champlain August 13th 1832

Sir,

Yours of the 6th instant reached me by the last mail.

I rec'd a letter from this date Secretary of the Treasury under date of the 29th Jany 1831 requesting me to obtain affidavits relative to certain claims under the act entitled "an act for the relief of certain surviving officers + soldiers of the Army of the Revolution, with a view (as he said) to ascertain whether there was sufficient evidence of fraud against any one to support a criminal prosecution. I rec'd an other letter from this date Secretary of the Treasury under date of the 18th April 1831 in the latter part of which he alludes to the affidavits in question again, + states that his object is to ascertain, whether under Averill or any other person than the claimants had been fraudently concerned
Page 24

on the 28th of May 1831 I wrote the late Secretary that owing to sickness in my family at the time the Pensioners called, + some indispensable engagements, it was out of my power at that time to take their affidavits, touching the manner in which Averill last transacted their business. In June following several of the Canadian Refugees, who were returned on the Pension list, came to Plattsburgh to receive their half yearly pay from Col. Skinner their agent.  I then made it convenient to call on them, + I found as they
came fairly upon the Pension list, that
they could state no fact implicating any one
in an attempt to defraud the Government.
Most of the Canadian Refugees who came from Canada to this place to draw their pensions, belonged to Col. Hazens Regt. of which Major General Mooers was Adjutant, + were not only recollected by him, but their names appeared upon the Roll of the said Regt then + now in the possession of General Mooers. There were a number of Canadians whose names were improperly put upon the Pension list that they could state no fact implicating any one in an attempt to defraud the Government.  Most of the Canadian Refugees who came from Canada to this place to draw their Pensions, belonged to Col Hazen's Regt. of which Major General Mooers was a Lieutenant, and was not only upon the roll of the said Regt. then and now in the possession of General Mooers.  There was a number of Canadians whose names were improperly put upon the Pension list
Page 25

as appeared by the testimony of General Mooers + the old Regimental roll in his possession + several applicants for Pensions whose claims were reported against by General Mooers and myself on account of the marked variances between the testimony many gave before us, +that contained in their original Declarations sworn to before a magistrate.  If there was any fraud intended by Mr. Averill, or any other person, than the claimants, the affidavits of the Canadians whose claims were rejected might throw some light on the subject, but they reside in various parts of lower Canada, +it would be attended with considerable trouble + expense to find them.
I am very respectfully
Your Ob. Servt.
D.B.McNeil

Hon. L McLane
Secretary of the Treasury
Page 26



Plattshurgh
May 2

Free

Hon. Samuel D. Ingham Esqr.
Secretary of the Treasury
Washington City
D.C.
Page 27

S. D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury
Washington City
D.C.
Page 28

Recd 5 July 1831

                                3931
Plattsburgh June 28th 1831

Sir,

Mr. N. Webb a respectable merchant at Champlain Clinton County informed me that he forwarded to the Treasury Department some two months since the necessary papers to draw the Pensions of Louis Provandie & Nicholas Constantine, which were due to them on the 4th of March last.  Drafts for this may have not been forwarded - Mr. Webb is a man of responsibility and strict integrity & the Department can repose the most implicit confidence in his checking justly with all such Pensioners as which proper to confide their business to his charge.

I am very respectfully your ob. servt.
D. B. McNeil

Hon. S. D. Ingham
Secy of the Treasury
Page 29

Re:cd 18 April 1831   2691 Copy
                               Plattsburgh March 25 1831

Sir,

I beg you will pardon me for interrupting you with this communication, but justice to the "old Soldiers" requires a few words in their behalf.  A short time ago I happened to witness an interview the Collector David B. Niel of this place, and some Canadian pensioners under the late law of 1828.  It appeared that the Collector had received their drafts, and paid them off in uncurrant money at a sop to them of two 1/2 percent discount to get it into good money.  The most striking circumstance that attracted my attention was that said Collector told them that the Secretary of the Treasury had instructed him to tell them all they could not draw any more money unless they came to him - That they must not let the merchants and lawyers have anything to do with their pensions for the would cheat them - I took the liberty of talking with these men afterwards and they were dissatisfied in as much as they had been accustomed to receive their drafts and instead of paying discount, they got a premium of two per cent.  The merchants would willingly give that for the sake of remitting.  Some other circumstances might be mentioned but I have said enough to put you on your gard against like imposition.  

                                      Justice
S. D. Ingham Secretary
Page 30

Recd 7 May 1831

3844

B

Collection Office Dist. of
Champlain April 28 1832

I recvd yours of the 18th and this morning coming an anonymous letter and a copy of a letter from C. K. Averill to you.  This letter containing the Drafts forwarded by you to me for the Pensioners attached to in the anonymous letter were all delivered by me or in my presence to the persons to whom they were directed, except the letter to Louis Provandie.  Mr. Webb a Merchant at Rouses Point called at my office and told me that Provandie resided in Montreal, that he was well acquainted with him, and if I thought proper to entrust him with his papers that he would personally deliver them to him, with this understanding I gave him the letter containing the Drafts for Provandie's pay.  I took for granted, that Mr. Webb had  done or had agreed until I had recvd a letter from A. Thompson, Esq. Cashier of the Bank of Washington on the subject of Provandie pay under date of the 31st March last a copy of which I had endorsed marked A in the report of Mr. Thompson's letter.  I wrote Mr. Webb to know what disposition he had made of Provandie's letters containing the Drafts and shortly after recvd from him a letter of which the enclosed is a copy, and is marked B.  I then wrote Mr. Thompson and enclosed him with his letter to me, and on the 6th of April and recvd a letter from him a copy of which I send enclosed marked C.  From the standing of Mr. Webb I had my reason to suppose that
Page 31

he would act in good faith + deliver the letters containing the Drafts to Provandie.  I have since been informed, that Averill under his old power of attorney negotiated the Drafts, + that Webb had drawn Provandies money. If this is so the acknowledgement of the report of the Warrants will be on file in the office of the United States Treasurer.  The enclosed affidavit of Col Skinner marked D will show the manner in which Depo. Martin + Gauley were dealt with by me. The certificate of Gen'l Mooers marked E will show how Loselton was dealt with Chatheton called at my office + took his drafts without asking me to get them cashed. I delivered Constantine his letters containing his drafts, + he requested me in the presence of J.W. Bailey, Esq, of Rouses Point to open them. I did so + handed him the drafts which I took from the letters, + he gave them to Mr. Bailey for safe keeping.  The affidavit of Alexander Marquis the interpreter for two of the pensioners marked F will satisfy the Secretary of the Treasury that I did not tell the pensioners, that they could not draw any more money until they come to me. When the pensioners through their interpreters urged me to transact their business for them in future I told them expressly that I could not have the trouble of it, + that they must find some other person to make these papers and + do their business for them.  The interpreter for the pensioners is a resident of this village, and was well acquainted with the high character + standing
Page 32

of Col. Skinner for integrity, & he recommended him to the Pensioners as a suitable person to transact this business. I told the Pensioners that they could not make a better situation, provided Col. Skinner would charge them a moderate compensation for his trouble, & that they ought not to pay him more than one dollar each semi annually- Col. Skinner agreed to do their business annually for two dollars each, which I considered reasonable enough. I was subjected to considerable trouble & inconvenience in procuring specie and Canada paper for each of the Pensioners as asked me to cash their drafts-all that I did for them I did gratuitously, & was not benefited by it directly or indirectly a single farthing. The Pensioners in question were all residents of Canada, and would not take any money, but specie & Canada bills, there is no discount in Canada on their own paper, it is precisely as good as specie I had on hand & offered to pay them U.S. bank bills for their drafts & they would not touch them. 

I will now notice Mr. Averills' letter to you of the 6th in a copy of which you forwarded to me. You stated in your printed letters to the Pensioner under state of the 30th Jany last that "In consequence of the impositions that have been practiced upon the Officers & Soldiers of the Revolution this Department finds it necessary to decline all communications with the Agents, unless when they are persons whose character & standing are known to the Department. " [illegible] made this date
and the above extract from one of your letters & caused the interpreter to explain it to Pensioners
Page 33

+ then directed him to say to them that from now sending their pay to me instead of Averill
I have no doubt he was a person that you would decline all correspondence with an agent for pensioners + that they had better employ some person to do their business, who could promise accommodations, that would be satisfactory to the Treasury Department.  Shortly previous to the pensioners calling on me with their frustration, Mr. Webb the person to whom I delivered Provandie's papers called at my office and exhibited an order from Averill and an old Power of Attorney executed by the Pensioners to Averill, upon which he demanded the letters containing the pay of the Pensioners forwarded by you to me.  I wrote you upon our further conversation, that I temporarily refused to intervene, which I had with Mr. Webb.  I read that part of your letter before [illegible] [illegible] Pensioner Agents and told him that I presumed that Averill was one of the members, that was not [illegible] known at the Department.  In your letter to me of the 9th of March last you approved of my not delivering the letters evidencing the drafts for the Pensioners upon Averills' order.  Edgerton and Averill have not (as I now warrant) spoken to me on the subject of the Pensioners for more than four months past.

I have submitted the anonymous letter to several gentlemen of the first [illegible] [illegible] in this Country who have [illegible] known Egerton and Averill, and they all [illegible] in the opinion, that the letter in question was made at his office.
Page 34

If I have been guilty of doing injustice to the Old Soldiers and have betrayed the trust afforded in me by the Secretary of the Treasury, why should I be attacked by anonymous writers?  If I have been guilty of a dereliction of duty, it is susceptible of proof I can't investigate or challenge the insidious authors of the anonymous letter to throw off all disguise and come out like honest men under their own proper signatures.  This they chose not to do for then known that this communication is the work of imagination and shows fabrication from top to bottom.  The anonymous letter was by and all point in my mind the joint production of Edgerton and Averill of Rouses Point, although it purports to have been etched at Plattsburgh and was mailed at Whitehall (several days after date), more than 100 miles from Rouses Point.  I hold in utter contempt all of the efforts of Edgerton and Averill covertly or openly to injure me, but this fact is not to be disguised, that they have first and last subjected me to a great deal of trouble and considerable expense in answering the wicked and groundless charges they have from time to time inferred against me at the Treasury Department.  Owning to sickness in my family at this time, the Pensioners called for their drafts and some official engagement, it was out of my power at that time to take their affidavits, touching the means in which Mr. Averill had heretofore harmed their benefits.  You will recollect that the Pensioners to whom you send draft was the most of them organized by General Mooers or persons who served in the Revolutionary War and to thhe
Page 35

to the case thereof, and consequently commission the provisions of the Act of 1828.  They may however disclose facts in relation to some other cases that will be important.  They will be here again in June as I am informed by Col Skinner, their Agent, at which time I will attend in person and examine them and take their statements upon oath, through highly respectable gentlemen residents of Rouses Point on examining the anonymous letter, and drafted a letter to the Secretary of the Treasury which I sent enclosed marked G.  I have been somewhat particular in showing how I draft with the Pensioners to whom you endorsed drafts under cover to me, satisfy you of the falsity of the charges contained in the anonymous letter.  I lay it down as a well-established fact, that no one but villains fight under false colours.  The most that Edgerton and Averill could expect by their anonymous communications was to prejudice the Secretary of the Treasury against me.  They reportedly asked that I should have no power until I would consent to remove Gen. Thurber, who is one of the last officers in my District.

I am respectfully 
your able servant

D.B. McNeill, Collector

Hon. S.D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury
Page 36



                          Free

Hon. Samuel D. Ingham
Secretary of U. S. Treasury
Washington
D.C.
Page 37


Rouse's Point April 6,, 1831

Sir,

I feel it incumbent on me to let you know that in relation to certain pension claims referred by you to Benji Mooers & David B. McNeil of Plattsburgh,  Mr. McNeil has & is circulating injurious reports intended to reflect upon my character & integrity. the agent or attorney for those persons, and as his ground for in doing shields himself under your letters & restrictions to him - For certain reasons which I do not wish now to mention, I am much at a loss how to receive thy compliment - what motives you could have in giving breath to a slander against a humble an individual as myself, unmerited as this seems to be. must, be known to yourself and to [illegible] whom you have chosen to publish (cut off/blurred) the words - But Sir, I cannot believe you have given instructions to him, in this matter, and I believe they are to serve a wicked purpose of the author to debase the (blurred)  another who he possibly may think will one day or other stand in his way.  The truth of this however is what I wish to know, and from the common courtesies or civilities that exist among honorable men I feel assured that you will [illegible] me with your denial or avowal of the instructions as above mentioned.

I am Respectfully yours
C. K. Averill 

Hon. Samuel D. Ingham
Page 38

The Hon, 
S D Ingham
Secy of the Treasury
Washington
Page 39

                             Plattsburgh March 5th 1831

Sir - 

Herewith I send to the Treasury Department the declarations of Michael Dufau, Baptist Martin and Firman Lorion alias Laselton for the purpose of drawing their pay as pensioners under the act of Congress of 1828.
These certificates I am aware are not in conformaty with the regulations of the department (the reason of which is assigned in them) but hope they will be sufficient to show that the claimants were in full life on the third of March; which I presume is the most important fact to be established (word cut off/blurred) to department, the fact of their being on the Pension Roll being known there - I have however taken the precaution to have the persons identified by Genl Mooers who was (possibly Adjudicator) of the Regiment in which they served -
I also send the declaration of Joseph Labe for the purpose of having his name inscribed on the Pension Roll - I am not advised what regulation has been established at the department in relation to back pay to persons who apply at this time, but suppose they are entitled to two years back pay at least, and do not know why they may not draw for two years previous  to the passage of the law as was the case with those who made application immediately after the law was promulgated - Mr. Labe will feel very greatful if he is permitted to draw pay from 1826 but will be perfectly satisfied with the decision of the department in his case, whatever it may be -
Page 40

The pensioners within named have thought proper to appoint me their agent for the purpose of communicating with the department on the subject of their pensions.
The letter of appointment together with one which Col McNeil has very obligingly written on the subject is herewith sent.
Mr. Labe who is a considerable distance from his home will remain in this place until he hears the decision of the department in his case

I have the honor to be 
Very Respectfully Your
Obt Servt
Sr J. B. L. Skinner
Page 41

The Hon. S. D. Ingham.
Secretary of the Treasury.
Washington City, 
D.C.
Page 42

Plattsburgh March 4th 1831

Sir
I have this day seen a letter directed to the Secretary of the Treasury having same date within this, signed by Mr. Defo & three other pensioners, in which they expect or wish to have Col. St John B.L. Skinner recognized at the Treasury Department as their Agent. Col. Skinner is a man of the first respectability in this section of the state, & will guard the interests of the Pensioners as far as he has any concern in their affairs, as strictly as he would his own - I can confidently recommend Col. Skinner to the Secretary of the Treasury as a man of respectability & a perfectly safe man for the Department to recognize as Agent for the pensioners, who have
Page 43

appointed him. The letter which you enclosed to me containing Drafts for the payment of the claim of certain Pensioners have all been delivered, except the one to J. Gauley.  

I am very respectfully
Your ob. Servt.
D.B. McNeil


The Hon S.D. Ingham
Secy of the Treasury
Page 44

The Hon
S D Ingham
Secty of the Treasury
Washington
Page 45

Recd. 14 March 1831                   2528

Hon.  S.D. Ingham,
Secretary of the Treasury.

                 We the undersigned Revolutionary Pensioners under the act entitled "an act for the relief of certain Surviving officers and Soldiers of the Revolution approved 15th May 1828 would respectfully Suggest, that in consequence of our being unable to read or to write, and being liable to imposition in the receipt of the Government bounty we have determined to appoint a general agent before whom to make our Semi annual declarations, and through whom all communications from the Treasury Department to us on the subject of our pensions may be made;
                  We have therefore nominated and appointed and by these presents do appoint St John B. L. Skinner Esquire of Plattsburgh, in whom we have the fullest confidence, our general agent to make all our communications to the Department on the Subject of our pensions, and through whom we respectfully request all communications on the Subject to us may be made.  We also request that pay certificates may be issued to us and forwarded to Mr. Skinner -

Witness our hands at Plattsburgh this 4th day of March 1831 
Signed in presence of 
Benji Mooers

Michael x Dufau (the word "his" above the x and the word "mark" below the x)

Baptist x Martin  (the word "his" above the x and the word "mark" below the x)

Furman x Lorion alias Loselton  (the word "his" above the x and the word "mark" below the x)

Joseph x Labe  (the word "his" above the x and the word "mark" below the x)
Page 46

'9 March
2472
Plattsburgh February 28th, 1831
Sir,
        Mr. Averill's letter to you of the 27th of December last a copy of which you forwarded to us was received several days since, & would have been promptly answered, but for the great pressure of business on the hands of the Collector, & sickness in his Family. Mr. Averill in the introductory part of his letter commences by expressing his regret, that he did not make a report immediately after our first sitting & adds that he gave us expressly to understand, that they would not appear before us again, or offer any
further evidence. Our report shows the fact that several of the cases submitted to
Page 47

to us by the Secretary of the Treasury were not
acted upon at our first meeting at Rouses
Point. Consequently Mr. Averill could not
have supposed that we would make
our report until an examination into
all of the claims submitted to us had
been gone through with Mr. Averill did
not intimate to us at the close of our first
meeting, at Rouses Point, that he should
not appear before us again in behalf
of the claimants, but on the contrary
asked us to leave the day for the next
meeting open a short time, & alledged
as a reason for making the request, that
several of the claimants had not arrived
from Canada. We thought under the
Page 48

the circumstances his request a reasonable
one, & we accordingly added to it, & did
not meet again until the 12th of Oct(ober) last
owing. We left Rouses Point on the
evening of the 8th of September last, &
heard no more from Mr. Averill from
that time until we received a letter from
him under date of the 22nd of Sept 1830 a
copy of which we send enclosed. On the
subject of the separate charges performed by
Mr. Averill against B(enjamin) Mooers, we of course
as Co. Commissioners have nothing to say.
We will therefore pass over them, & take up
the charges which he has performed against
us in our joint character as Commissioners.
Page 49

For the sake of brevity we will refer to those
charges as he numbered them in his communication
to the Department without
copying them at length in our answer.
The first charge is every syllable of it false.
The second charge is equally false, not a
single affidavit of any description was
taken before us on Commissioners during
the investigation of the claims submitted
to us by the Secretary of the Treasury. Mr. Mooers
made oath, that the evidence given by him
on the examination of the claims in question
was true, & Mr Averill was told expressly
by D. B. McNeil at the first meeting of
the Commissions, that Mr. Mooers would
be informed as a witness on the part of the
Page 50

the government, & we verily believe that the giving 
of that notice was the principal reason why
Mr. Averill (several days after our meeting, 
at Rouses Point) came to the conclusion
that he would not appear before us at
our second meeting. In his letter to us of
the 22d of September, he charges B. Mooers 
with having made a complaint to the
Department against the Pensioners, which
caused the suspension of their pay.
The Secretary of the Treasury upon the receipt of
a copy of that letter, promptly wrote Mr
Averill, & as we supposed put that charge
at rest. The Secretary of the Treasury will [illegible]
by examining Averill’s letters to us of the
22nd of September & the 13th of October, that the only
Page 51

reason he urges for not appearing before us
again is the charge he made against Mr.
Mooers, which was refuted from the proper
quarter as above stated. That the Claimants
had ample opportunity to make a defence
will appear by Mr. Averill’s letter to us of the
13th of October last a copy of which we
also enclose. The same day or the next day
after we received Mr Averill’s letter of the 22d of
September last, we now speak from recollection
for we did not purchase a copy of
of the notice, we sat down & gave him
written notice, that we should meet
at J. McGees in Plattsburgh on the 12th
of October last, & continue in defiance
from day to day until the examination
Page 52

into the claims of the Pensioners submitted
to us were gone through with. Again
finding on the 12th of October that Mr.
Averill did not appear we sent a trusty
man to Rouses Point to know whether
he had it. the written notice above attached
of our meeting at Plattsburgh to 
which notice was sent by mail
and the man returned the next day & said that
Mr Averill acknowledged the receipt of
our motion, & also stated that he had made
up his mind not to appear before us
again. Under this statement of facts with
what semblance of justice or propriety can
Mr. Averill charge us with not giving the claimants an opportunity
of a defence. The third charge is equally
Page 53

false as the first & second. - We did
suggest to the Counsel for the claimants the
propriety of calling the Pensioners & their witnesses
before us as they should be wanted, instead
of having them appear in mass, & we have
to regret, that we did not adopt & inform
that mode of handwriting the examination.
Nothing could be more remote from us than
the idea of excluding spectators, & making the
examination private as stated to the public,
not a word escaped us from which such an
inference could be drawn. The whole
examination was conducted in a public
manner & the claimants had two lawyers
(viz) Averill & Edgerton during our first
sitting at Rouses Point. We conducted the
Page 54

examination with a scrupulous regard to the
rights of all concerned, & unless uprighteous
of purpose & a proper respect for ourselves can
be distorted by our accuser into improper
conduct, we have nothing to apprehend
from his wished & false misrepresentations.
To the fourth charge we have to say that
we made use of no improper means to
ensnare & entrap the claimants and their
witnesses. The examination on our part
was conducted upon liberal & fair principles,
& if the testimony of the Claimants & their
Witnesses was [illegible] the fault lays at
their own doors & not at ours. The 5th
charge brings to view the extraordinary
fact, that we paid Alexander Ferriole, a
Page 55

witness on the part of the Government for
his attendance before us. We also paid the
expenses of Judge Sax & S. Ferrislegs, witnesses that
we sent for as the part of the Government
(but did not have occasion to impress as witnesses)
& had they exacted anything more from us
we should have paid them at the same
rate as we did Ferriole. Ferriole’s expenses
for himself & Norse could not have been
less than one dollar per day, that would
earn him three dollars for 5 days attendance,
or sixty cents per day. We had no means
of compelling the attendance of witnesses &
when we wrote or sent for witnesses they
were told that the Commissioners would
allow them a reasonable compensation for their
Page 56

attendance. On the first day of our meeting
Mr. Averill remarked that he should
impeach the testimony of Ferriole, if we
offered him as a witness on the part of
the Government. We had no occasion to
impress Ferriole as a witness the first day.
It was suggested to us, that Judge Sax and S.
Ferris Esq. two reputable men, & were
neighbours of Ferriole, would if called upon
sustain his character - We therefore dispatched
a messenger for Sax & Ferris early on the
morning of the second day of our meeting
& when the messenger returned with them
Mr. Averill understanding what they
came for, said he would defer impeaching
Ferriole’s character until our next meeting
Page 57

at Plattsburgh where he said he could do it more
effectually, than he could at that time.
The fact of Ferriole having been convicted of
an infamous offense, would have been conclusive against him as a witness, had he
been not pardoned by the Governor, which
rendered him to competence as a witness by
the Laws of this State. Suppose Mr. Averill
had appeared before us at Plattsburgh and
impeached the character of Ferriole for
truth and veracity, it would not have availed
him anything, unless he could have also im-
peached the testimony of B. Mooers, one of
the Commissioners, who in the evidence
given by him corroborated the testimony
of Ferriole in almost every particular, that
Page 58

was at all material. Robarge’s testimony also
supported the testimony of Ferriole in several of
the cases submitted to us. One of the
Commissioners D.B. McNeil never saw Ferriole
nor heard of him until he was called before
us as a witness. It is certain therefore, that
one of the Commissioners at least did
not know, that Ferriole’s character for truth
& veracity was bad.
To the 6th charge we
have to remark that the testimony was taken
down truly & impartially, & no objection
was made to it by Averill at the time.
Averill examined for the claimants & Giles
Edgerton took down the evidence for him.
To the 7th charge we have to observe, that we
Page 59

have no recollection of Mr. Averill's making
the last objection against our removing the
investigation to Plattsburgh, & if he had
it certainly would have made no difference
with us, for we very much doubt
whether the Secretary of the Treasury expected
us to leave our business & go abroad to investigate
the claims submitted to us. Rouses Point
is 24 miles from Plattsburgh. We have briefly
answered the charges, which Mr. Averill pressed
against us jointly. Averill can utter & publish
slanderous & libelous matter against his neighbours
with impunity, for he is as destitute of property
as he is of reputation-
We are very Respectfully, Sir,
your obedient servants
Benjamin Mooers
D. B. McNeil

Hon. S.D. Ingham Secretary of the Treasury
Page 60

                           Rouses Point Sept 22 d 1830

Gentlemen 

              I have ascertained to my satisfaction that the complaint against the pensioners in this section to the Secretary of the U S Treasury Department proceeded from one of the board appointed by the secretary to investigate their claims via Genl Mooers.  Therefore you will readily perceive the manifest in propriety in their being tried by this accuser.  Had I have known this previous to your entering upon the duties assigned to you, that objection would have been made and their rights would not have been submitted to your deliberations.  I give you this notice in order that you may take such a course as you see proper in relation to those you have passed upon and allowed.
                     I am Respectfully Yours
                       C K Averill Counsel for the 
                                          Claimants
Genl Benji Mooers}
S B McNeil Esq}         Commissioners appointed to investigate certain Revolutionary claims.

                              Rouse's Point Oct 13 1830 
Gent -  I received your letter stating that you should hold an examination in relation to certain persons having claims on the U S for pensions on the 12" inst & have also been verbally informed that you would hold open until tomorrow  For the reasons stated in my former communication and other reasons Since see nothing to alter my determination particularly as you do not deny in your letter the allegations stated.
                          I am very Respectfully Yours
            C K Averill Atty for certain pensioners
Gen B Mooers
David B McNiel Esq Commissioner
N B  The claims that have been (word cut off) upon are submitted without further (word cut off)
Page 61

Received 9 March 1831		2473
Plattsburgh February 28th 1831
Sir,

I perceive that C. K. Amerill &
Giles Edgerton seem determined to trouble the
Secretary of the Treasury from time to time
with false & malicious representations against
me. The secret of the implacable hostility
of these unprofessional men towards me, arises
simply from the fact of having nominated
General Thurber of Rouses Point for Deputy
Collector at that plan, instead of some miserable
creature of theirs – I had been many years acquainted
with General Thurber, & had utter confidence
in his integrity, in addition to which his
application for the appointment in question
was supported by A. C. Flagg Esq. Secretary of
State. The Hon. Richard Kase late member of
Congress from this District, & by most of the backing
Page 62

friends of the Administration in the District of
Champlain. You may not assume, Sir,
that these men [E & A (Edgerton & Averill)] are perfectly harmless where they are known. The Hon A. C. Flagg of
Albany, lived many years a neighbour
to Averill & knows him well. I therefore take
the liberty to refer you to him for information
as to the character & standing
of the man. I had occasion in a former
communication to the Treasury Department
to speak of Giles Edgerton, & at
that time [referred] the Secretary of the Treasury to the
Hon. S. Wright Junior for the truth of my
assertions respecting his character. Misters Wright
& Flagg have since told me that the Hon.
M. Van Buren knows the fact that Edgerton
is a fallen & degraded man. If paper
evidence, Sir, promised by Averill & Edgerton


The following was submitted by the previous Citizen Archivist:
Continental   Gauley, John  S46358
aud
B.L.W 14.100 Private
Keazeir Regh. issued on 
May 13, 1803.  delivered
to Toppan Webster.
See papers within
Page 63

was to be taken as conclusive against the accused, there is not a citizen of the United States, but that they could sacrifice at their pleasure. 

Averill's attack upon Major General Mooers is one of the most flagrant and unwarrantable things that ever came under my observation. General Mooers is a man who served in the Revolutionary War with reputation, and for the distinguished and patriotic part he took in the late War upon this Frontier as Major General of militia, the State of New York noted him their thanks and a sword. He has filled various high civil stations with credit to himself and benefit to his Country. And this is the first time I have heard his integrity called in question. That a man of his reputation and at his time of life should depart from correct principles (without
Page 64

the least [Illegible])is not a supportable case.  A Mr. Wable called on me with an old Power of Atty.{illegible} by M Defo & others  to C,K, Averill, & demanded the papers containing the Draft for the [illegible] of the said Dufo & others, which you recently forwarded to me.  I
have {illegible} refused to deliver them upon the old Power of Atty. or upon Mr Averills order.  I recently visited Rouses Point & 
{illegible} that all of the Pensions to whom you sent Drafts {illegible}  in Canada.  I got Mr
{ }ailey, who was acquainted with their various 
places of residences in Canada to write to them & direct them to call on me for their papers.  Chatherton & Constantine have called & taken their papers.  {illegible} as near as I could ascertain is at his residence below {illegible}.
Yours respectfully
(signature of D.W. McNeil)

Hon S. D. Ingham
Secy. of the {illegible]
Page 65

Free

The [illegible] Saml. D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury of U.S.
Washington City D.C.

Plattsburgh
Feby 28
Page 66

Recvd 8 March 1830            2476

Plattsburgh February 25, 1831

To the Honorable Saml D
Ingham Secretary of the
Treasury

Sir

Within letter of ____________ date to Col. McNeil and myself, enclosing a copy of a communication from C.K. Averill to you under date 29 Jan 1831 was duly received.

The great respect I entertain for your character the limited  acquaintences which it is probable you have of [illegible] and characters at this distance from the seat of Government, and the possibility that {illegible} might be misconstrued
induces me to reply to a {illegible} of falsehoods emanating from a {illegible} that would otherwise have precluded my noticing them.
Averill can have no other ground of {illegible possibly "hostility"} to me other than my unwillingness to further unfounded claims upon government [illegible] allowance of which would [illegible] in much to his promising {illegible] and my previous knowledge of characters and events connected with Genl. Hazen's Regiment--whereby I was [illegible] not only to recognise some of my old commanders and promote their claims but in some instances to defeat in positions and attempts at [illegible] & fraud upon the government.
Averill [illegible] "that I was a land speculator that the former pension laws--{illegible} against my interest by drawing from Canada {illegible] to claim from me their lands & that I am [illegible, smudged] agents to buy up claims who committed [illegible] fraud upon the innocent Canadians--and which he's furnished a [illegible, illegible] of litigation more or less every year for thirty years [illegible] as is found by the reports of--cases in the Supreme Court &
Page 67

Chancery of this state and the [illegible/smudge--possibly "admonishing"] of Chancellor [illegible]:......................
To which I reply that but a small portion of the lands I formerly owned are now in my possession that I have never [illegible] a foot of land by [illegible] claims set up by the [illegible]  [illegible name] **Transcriber note--maybe this isn't a name, but the word "Passengers"**
That my agents who purchased for me all served in Genl. Hazen's Regiment and were personally acquainted with most or all of those who were entitled to the bounties of government-- some of whom Averill has [illegible] as evidence.
No fraud to my knowledge was ever committed by my agents, nor has any ever been shewn or even alleged to my [illegible] with any just cause.
That in the [illegible] of thirty years than any have been some half dozen suits against me--that in every one of these as far as I can recollect my [illegible] have been [illegible, illegible] sustained.
His [illegible] of Chancellor Kent refused to [illegible] to audit between me and the administration of Genl. Hazen respecting matters of account wherein no questions of fraud upon the [illegible as their [illegible] in any  [illegible]
In that matter the Hon;. Martin Van Buren was my Council to whom I by [illegible] to for you for further information expecting it.
Averill further says " That several of the persons whose claims are at stake in the investigation here--[illegible] pending against me or persons claiming [illegible] me for the recovery of their [illegible]."
The only foundation for this [illegible[  is that a suit is pending against a person [illegible] Title under me in the names of John Groby in when [illegible] have already [illegible] & when claims have been allowed, where [illegible] rights therefore have not been prejudiced by any act of mine.
Averill also [illegible] "That the names of persons belonging to Hazen's Regiment likely made out by [illegible] for the use of the Treasury department was made with a direct review to my own interest and [illegible, smudge, illegible] persons known
Page 68

to have served in that Regiment and that it contains also names that never [illegible]"
What this [illegible]  [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] after having do [illegible] as for and my motives and conduct should attempt to destroy the Credit of a Roll has never [illegible] that afforded proof pointedly approved in his nefarious plans is no evidence extraordinary -
Given my motive an [illegible] above the  [illegible] [illegible] of a man so depraved as Averill.
The Roll furnished you is an exact copy without addition or elimination of our names which have been my com[illegible] nearly fifty years - the original you will  [illegible] issued by a previous letter was offered - and a copy made it [illegible] [illegible] and forwarded by me family from a wish to serve my country  [illegible] [illegible] joint claims of those Entitled to its Bounties _ [illegible][illegible] not in distant with the [illegible] of my life upon which I can look back so far as my country is concerned with satisfaction and [illegible]
 I shall [illegible] it a favor if this department will furnish me a copy of any subsequent communication [illegible] of a personal nature -
The [illegible] as [illegible] whose conduct has been the [illegible] of an a [illegible] by a private communication to you
I  [illegible] [illegible] with great [illegible] your [illegible]
Benja Mooers
Page 69

(Upper left corner)

C

(Title in Bold typeface)

Revolutionary Claims.

Under the act, entitled "An act for the relief of certain surviving Officers and Soldiers of the Army of the Revolution," approved 15th May, 1828.

                            TREASURY DEPARTMENT,
                             (Hand-written)
                             17 Jany 1831.

Sir:

                 A certain Calvin K Averill Esq & Bela Edgerton of Rouses Point, Clinton Co. N.Y. have been committing and attempting to commit frauds on the Treasury by transmitting and causing to be presenting false claims under the aforementioned act.
                  Various claims were received, (the words "from, Averill & Edgerton and no" have a line through them) some even admitted and some were not, without any suspicion attaching itself to either Averill or Edgerton until the 6th March 1830, when a letter from W Averill, dated Rouses Point 26 Feb. 1830. containing the affidavits of Joseph Labe and Joseph Labo to prove that they were different persons and both entitled to the benefits
Page 70

of the aforementioned act, was received.  This excited suspicion because a claim of (the words "Joseph Labo" are crossed out) had been allowed as long ago as the 28 Feb. 1829 to a person who in the body of the application was styled Joseph Labo and when he made his marks Joseph Labe. It appearing that Joseph Labe was mentioned on the records at Washington as entitled and W Joseph Watson the attorney for the applicant having assured the department that he had ascertained from New York that the person who made his mark as Labe and was called in the body of the application Labo was the same person to whom land had been granted as Labe (the words "the claim was admitted" are crossed out) The claim was consequently admitted under the belief that Joseph Labo who did not write his name was the person returned on the records as Labe.  When W Averills letter of the 26 Feb 1830 was received it was ascertained that this claim had been allowed under an erronious improfession and consequently all the claims received from Averill and Edgerton were suspended
Page 71

until some further information ("was" is crossed out) could be obtained upon the subject.  On the 4 June 1830 when W Averill called at the Treasury to make some enquiries upon the subject of those suspended claims he was requested to state some particulars which he did in his letter ("of the" is crossed out) of the same day.  ("On that day the 4 June 1830 confin" is crossed out) on the receipt of which the 4 June 1830 confidential letters were written to Genl Benjamin Mooers and D. B. McNeil Esq. collector of the customs at Plattsburgh making enquiry about the applicants as it was presumed from this having been a long time resident of the same neighborhood with the applicants and the first having been adjutant of the Regiment in which most of them were presented to have served that they could furnish all the information required.  In consequence of the answers received to these letters on the 24 & 26 June & 8th July 1830 & on the 30th July appointed Genl. Mooers and S. B. McNeil Esq. commissioners to examine the claims and notified W Averill of that fact.  On the 7th Oct last a letter was received from the commissioner enclosing
Page 72

a copy of one they had received from Mr. Averill by which it appears that Averill declines to appear any more before them.  In answer to this W A. was informed ("the the" is crossed out) that the investigation did not originate in any complaint or representation made by either of the commissioners.  And I will state to you that it occurring to me that this would be the surest and best way to get at all the facts I appointed them. On the 8th Dec I received the enclosed report from the commissioners which will show where fraud has been committed and where it has been attempted.
     Justice requires that the purpetrators other frauds should be brought to punishment I therefore transmit to you the original report of the commissioners.  with this letter of the 24 Sept and the letter of the 14 & 25 June from S. B. McNeil Esq and the 15th June from Genl Mooers which are all that has been received from them upon the subject.
The foregoing was payment to ,the Secretary of the Treasury as a letter to the District Atty but was never sent.
                           Frances A. Dickins.
                            29 March 1836
Page 73

(Addressed Envelope)

Rouses Point Ny.  Dec 27.


free


Hon Samuel D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury
Washington, 
D.C



(Upside down)

From C. K. Averill, to
Secretary of the 
Treasury, dated
Rouse's Point, Dec. 27.
1830
Page 74

Rec'd 3 Jany 1830

Rouse's Point Dec 27 1830

Sir

In behalf of the individuals whom claims were submitted to Benjamin Mooers and David B. McNiel of Plattsburgh for investigation, I am requested to ascertain with a little delay as possible whether the claims have been allowed or disallowed. It is to be regretted that their pay has been so long withheld and they put to so much expense, without to them any apparent good reason therefor; and that the commissioner to whom their claims were deferred did not make their report immediately after their first setting: for they were given a reply to understand that they would not appear again or offer any further evidence.

It is due to these men and their rights for me to state some of the reasons which led them to take this firm stand.  At the commencement it was understood and known here that some of the commissioners had made or was instrumental in making a complaint with as much against their men and that it was his intent to supply this just claims in some if not the most of them.  It is well known in this section of the country that the former law granting pensions drew out many of the refugees in Canada who served in the American Revolution; and in many cases it proved detrimental to General Mooers interest, as it has done since the law of 28.  The Refugees after the Revolution mostly returned to Canada, without receiving their patents for lands, which the State of New York afterwards granted them and General Mooers was a land speculator in those days and employed [illegible] men to go in search of and purchase in their land claims and in that way derived title to a very great proportion of the land which now comprises the County of Clinton.  And it is also well known here that the agents employed in this business committed many frauds on the ignorant Canadians which has furnished a fruitful source of litigation more or less every year for more than thirty years past.  The report of cases in our Supreme Court and Courts of Chancery in this state furnish ample proof often above forty and in ours of John C. [cut off] reports Chancellor Kent in everything and [illegible] language
Page 75

approves the conduct of Genl. Mooers in the subject above stated.

It is with reference to these sort of interests that I complain + indulge in the remarks I herein just made, strengthened with additional facts which come home to the persons whose rights have been or are liable to be in [illegible] or the interest of Genl Mooers shall direct. And then additional facts are simply that several of the persons whose claims are at stake in the investigation above referred been into pending against General Mooers or persons claiming under him for the recovery of their lands - Another thing perhaps worthy of consideration is that the names of persons belonging to Mooers Regt. lately made out by Genl. Mooers for the use of the Treasury department made with a direct view to his own intent + omits many persons known to have served in that Regt. + that it contains names also that never served-

The extraordinary conduct of the Commissioners at the opening and during their first sitting was generally compliant.

1st.  For confederating in secret with the persons interested in suits, above mentioned and advising with them as to the best course to be pursued in the investigation to defeat the rights of the claimants.

2d.  For securing ex parte affidavits against the rights of the Claimants without informing them thereof + giving them an opportunity of a defense.

3d. For attempting to carry into execution a plan matured in secret confederacy which was to exclude the claimants the benefit of a public examination as expected + declared by the Commissioner + shut them out from benefit of counsel and which plan they adhered to until as counsel for the claimants I declared the determination of the claimants to withdraw from any further proceedings before them.

4th. For endeavoring to menace and outrage the claimants and their witnesses purposely to get them to swear to things they did not know by putting leading and indirect questions.

5th. For paying Alexander Ferriole wages for attending the examination + calling on him to testify + requiring him after we objected + they knew that he had been convicted of an infamous crime + by the laws of State was thereby rendered incompetent + that they knew Ferrioles general character for truth + veracity was bad.

6th. For not taking down the testimony truly + impartially.
Page 76

7th: For abruptly removing the investigation to Plattsburgh & thus putting it out of the ability of the claimants to prosecute their claims, they being unable to bear the expense of maintaining their witness so far from thier homes.

There are other prominent reasons why the claimants did not further prosecute this claim before the Commissioners.

The only witness appeared against the claimants at Rouses Point was Ferriole & the Commissioners adjourned so abruptly as opportunity was not given to prove his general bad character, but on his direct & cross examination he so discredited his own
evidence, if there had been time allowed, it would have been perhaps unnecessary to have offered a single witness to his character- He even offered to the claimants before the examination commenced to swear in their claims if they would pay him for it - He volunteered on the Examination to swear
in the claim of his uncle Provandie, and although urged by the Commissioner to call on him, he declined his services - And the Commissioner repeatedly urged the claimants to [introduce him] as a witness, but they declined calling him - This James Ferriole is one of the worthless character that [illegible] by Genl Mooers in looking up the law claims of the [illegible] & it is his intent to sustain his character-he even has applied to the [illegible] to have his evidence restored .his intent 
was so effected by his conviction -

The limits of this sheet will not allow me to go into the details of all the proceedings, but whenever it shall be proven whose claims are rejected if any, I propose to furnish the department, if it is requested, with the true evidence taken down at the time, to be verified by the same interpreters & other persons. spectators attending said investigation.

I am very Respectfully
Yours
C. K. Averill

Hon Samuel D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury 

P.S.
I hold powers of atty from the claimants
to draw their pay whenever their claims are settled the papers for their last six months pay are in my
Page 77

                        Rouses Point Dec, 24th 1831

Sir

           On behalf of the individuals whose claims were submitted to Benjamin Mooers, and David B. McNiel of Plattsburgh for investigation I am requested to ascertain with as little delay as possible whether the claims have been allowed or disallowed.  It is to be regretted that their pay has been so long withheld and they put to so much expense, without to them any apparent good reason therefor;  and that the commissioners to whom their claims were referred did not make their report immediately after their first setting; nor they were given expressly to understand that they would not appear again or offer any further evidence -
       It is due to those men, and their rights for me to state some of the reasons which led them to take this firm stand.  At the commencement it was understood and known here that one of the commissioners had made or was instrumental in making the complaint which are made against these men, and that it was his interest to suppress their just claims ("that it was"  through "just claims" is underlined), in some if not the most of them.
      It is not known in this section of the country that the former laws granting pensions drew out many of the refugees in Canada who served in the American Revolution; and in many cases it proved detrimental to Genl. Mooers interest; as it has done since the Law of 28.  The refugees after the Revolution mostly returned to Canada, without receiving their patents for lunch, which the state of New York afterwards granted them.  Genl. Mooers was a land speculator of those days of employed worthless men to go in search of and purchase in their land claims and in that way derived little to a very great perportion of the land which now composes the county of Clinton.  And it is also well known here that the agent employed in this business committed many frauds on the ignorant Canadies which has furnished a fuitful source of litigation more or less every year for more than thirty years past.  The report of cases in one supreme court and court
Page 78

of chancery, in this state furnish ample proof of the above facts and in one of John Chase Reports Chancellor Kent in everything and emphatical language, reproves the conduct, of Genl Mooers in the subject above stated.  It is with reference to this sort of interest that I complain and indulge in the remarks, I have just  made strengthened with addition at facts which came home to the persons whose rights have been or are liable to be sacrificed according to the interest of Genl Mooers shall direct, and then additional facts are simply that several of the persons, whose claims are at stake in the investigation above referred to have suits pending against Genl Mooers of persons claiming under him for the recovery of their Lands.  Another thing perhaps worthy of consideration is that the names of Persons belonging to Hazens Regt lately made out by Genl Mooers for the use of the Treasury department was made with a direct view to his own interest and omits many persons known to have served in that Regt. and that it contains names also that never served -
   The extraordinary conduct of the commissioner at the opening & during the first setting is also grounds of complaint - 1st In confederating, in secret with the persons interested in suits, above mentioned, and advising, with them as to the best course to be pursued in the investigation to defeat the rights of the claimants -
2nd For receiving ex parte affidavits against the rights of the claimants without informing them thereof and giving them an opportunity of a defence -
3rd  For attempting to carry into execution a plan matured in Secret confederacy, which was to exclude the claimants the benefit of a public examination, as expressed and declared by the commissioners
Page 79

to shut them out from benefit of council and which plan the adhered to until . as council for the claimants.  I declared the determination of the claimants to withdraw from any further proceedings before them,
4th  For endeavouring to ensnare and entrap the claimants and their witness purposly to get them to swear to things they did not know, by putting leading and indirect questions. -
5th   For paying Alexander Ferriole wages for attending the examination and calling on him to testify and swearing him after he was objected and the knew that he had been convicted of an infamous crime, and by the Laws of said State was hereby rendered incompetent and that they knew Ferrioles general character for truth and veracity, was bad
6th  For not taking down the testimony duly and impartially  
7th  For abruptly removing, the investigation to Plattsburgh and thus putting it out of the ability, of the claimants to prosecute their claim they being unable to bear the expense of maintaining, witness so far from their homes. -
    These are the prominent reasons why said claimants did not further prosecute their claims before said commissioners. -
   The only witness offered against the claimants at Rouses Point was Ferriole and the commissioners adjourned abruptly, and opportunity was not given to prove his general bad character but on his direct and cross examination he discredited his own evidence, if there had been time allowed, it would have been perhaps unescessary to have offered a single witness to his character.  He even  offered to the claimants before the examination commenced to swear in their claims of the would pay him for it - He volunteered on the examination to swear in the claim of his uncle Prevander, and altho urged by the commissioner to call on him
Page 80

he declined his services, and the commissioners repeatedly urged the claimants to empower as a witness, but the declined calling him
    This same Ferriole is one of the worthless characters employed by Genl Moores in looking up the land claims of the Refugees and it is his interest to sustain his character he even applied to the Governer to have his evidence restored, his interest was so effected & has condition
   The limits of this sheet will not allow me go into, the details of all the proceedings. but whenever it shall be known whose claims are rejected if any I propose, to furnish the department if it is requested with the true evidence taken down at the time to be verified by the same interpreters of the persons spectator attending said investigation -

                                 I am very Respectfully
                                           Yours
                                       C. K. Averill
Hon, Samuel D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury

NB  I have powers of atty, from the claimants to draw their pay whenever their claims are settled the paper for their last six months pay are with me -
Page 81




                                       Free

To the Hon S. D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury
Washington City.

(Stamped)
Plattsburgh NY
Dec 20
Page 82

Received 27 December 1830
2309
Collectors Office District
of Champlain December 18th 1830

Dear Sir,
Yours of the 6th Instant
was received yesterday. The report attested to
in your letter was mailed (as near as
I can attest) on the first Instant. General
Mooers was ready at all times to join
with us in making the Report, but
any official duties put it out of my
power to give that prompt attention
to this subject in question, which is so
much to be desired in all matters of
business.
I am very respectfully
Your obedient servant
(Signed) D.B. McNeil

Hon. S.D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury
Page 83

Report of D.B. McNeil
Benjamin Mooers,
Commissioner

Canada R___ Refugees
Letter & reports of a general
Character for al
Page 84

Rec 8 Dec 1830.

                  Plattsburgh Nov 20th 1830.
A
        Sir,

                 On the receipt of your letters of the 30th of July last, requesting us to examine the claims of sundry of persons under the act entitled.. an act for the relief of certain surviving officers and Soldiers of the army of the Revolution,, approved 15th of May 1828;  we addressed a letter to Calvin K Averill Esqr. Agent for the persons interested advising him of the duty assigned to us by the Treasury Department and fixed on the 7th day of September last to enter upon the examination.  A number of pensioners & applicants for Pensions under the before mentioned act approved before us at the time & place specified in our letter to W. Averill.  The claimants with the exception of one person being Canadians, we appointed John W Collum & William Phillips Interpreters and had them duly sworn - On motion of
Page 85

2

     C. K. Averill Agent of attorney for John Gouley we proceeded to examine into the validity of his claim under the before mentioned act.

No 1.

                          John Gauley being duly sworn stated, that he was a private soldier in Capt. Olivers Company in Col Moses Hazens Reg.t, that he was 90 years of age the 11th day of Jan.y last & rc.d his Discharge at the close of the war in 1783 -

                         Alexander Ferriol & Amable Boileau being duly sworn, stated that they belonged in the same Reg.t with Gauley & served with him till the close of the War in 1783 -

                       Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners who served as Adjutant in Col. Hazens Reg.t stated, that John Gauley entered the service as a volunteer & served in the said Regt for several years, & remained in it till the close of the Revolutionary War, & that the said John Gauley, who appeared before us he believes to be the same person, who served in Col Hazens Reg.t as stated by Ferriol & Boileau.  We have no doubt, that
Page 86

Gauley justly earns within the provisions of the act of the 15th May 1828.

No 2.                        Nicholas Constantine, next appeared before us & produced a regular Discharge dated June 1783, signed by General Washington, Moses Hazen Col. of the Right & Benjamin Mooers Adjutant - That Constantine was the same person named in the said Discharge, & who served in Col Hazens Regt. till the close of the War, was proved by Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners & by Bileau & Ferriol

No 3.                        Michael Dufau, next appeared before us, & produced a regular Discharge - The evidence in this case was precisely the same as, that in the case of Nicholas Constantine, marked upon the margin No 2.

No 4.                        Joseph Labe age 79, next appeared & after being duly sworn, denied that he inlisted in (ineligible) year Burgoyne was taken & served in Capt. Gosselins Company in Col. Hazens Regt. till the close of the War.
Page 87

(?)  a regular Discharge, but lost it many years since, has drawn no pension from the United States Government.  Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners, Alexander Ferriol recognized the said Joseph Labe to be the same person who served in Col. Hazens Regt. in the Revolutionary War, & the closr thereof.

No. 5.                          Herman Loselton alias Lorrilton ( 83 years of age) appeared, & after being sworn, said that he belonged to Capt. Gosselins Company in Col. Hazens Regt. , & served in the said Regt. till the close of the Revolutionary War in 1783.  The truth of Loselton alias Loriltons statement, was proved by Alexander Ferriol, who served in the same Regt. with him, also by Benjamin Mooers Adjutant of the said Regt. Lorelton stated that he had a Discharge, but that the same was lost. 

No 6.                             Baptiste Martin, appeared & after being duly sworn, stated that he was 73 years of age, & served as a soldier in the Revolutionary War in Capt. Gosselins Company in Col Hazens Regt., & was discharged near West Point at the
Page 88

close of the War in 1783, but had lost or mislaid his Discharge - Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners & Alexander Ferriol stated, that they know the said Baptiste Martin in the Revolutionary War, & that he is the same person who belonged to Col. Hazens Regt., & that he remained in it till the close of the War in 1783.

No 7.                             Nathaniel Chatterton, appeared & being duly sworn, stated, that he was a private in Capt. Thomas,s Company in Col. Lambs Regt., enlisted at Poughkeepsie in the latter part of the year 1782 or the beginning of the year 1783, & served till the close of the War, had a regular Discharge which he sold with his land. Joshua Odell was then called as a witness & being duly sworn stated, that he had known Nath. Chatterton about fifty years, never saw him in the Army of the Revolution, but lived in the same neighborhood when Chatterton lived when at home, he was absent & appointed to be in the army - Witness saw him at home near the close of the War with a Soldiers uniform on, always understood that he belonged to the American Revolutionary Army
Page 89

& had no doubt be did.  Witness was 71 years of age, says Chattertons character for truth & veracity is good.

                 William (last name crossed out with correction above) Scriver was the next Witness called & sworn, who stated that he had been acquainted with Nathaniel Chatterton from his youth, witness was 65 years of age, said that during the Revolutionary War he lived in the same neighborhood when Chatterton resided when at home, that he was in the American Army & when home on a furlough to visit his friends near the close of the War in 1783 - Odell & (last name crossed out with correction above) Scriver the two last witnesses had the appearance of respectable & intelligent (the words "& respectable" crossed out) men.  We are satisfied, that Chatterton is justly entitled to a Pension under the act of the 15th May 1828.

No 8.                         Lewis Provendie, appeared & being duly sworn, stated that he enlisted in the year 1778 in Capt. Eustons Company in Col Cranes Regt. of Artillery, & served till the close of the War, rcd.  a regular Discharge but lost it.  Prudent Lagunesse was sworn as a witness who
Page 90

who stated that he was Baker in the Army of the Revolution & was acquainted with Lewis Provendie at West Point in1783, that he (Provendie) belonged to Col. Cranes Regt. of Artillery- Witness remained at West Point till the close of the War & for two years after, did not know Provendie till he saw him at West Point, saw him again in Montreal in 1787, was confident, that the Provendie then before us was the same person that he knew at West Point, & who was in the Army of the Revolution in May 1783.
                            Alexander Ferriol was then sworn, who stated that he was acquainted with Lewis Provendie first at Schenectady Barracks, then at the Cantonment near New Windsor, that the said Lewis Provendie was a Soldier in Capt. Vose's Company in Col. Cranes Regt. of Artillery, & that he served to the close of the War, & had a regular Discharge which he the Witness had seen.  We are of opinion that Provendie is entitled to a Pension.

                          Pierre Pyon ensn - at the request of C. K. Averill Atty. for Pyon we intend upon our minutes, that the reputed
Page 91

services of Pyon were proved by Lewis Murney & John B Venett, also that Lettus Patent from the State of New York to Pyon for lands, were produced & laid before us. Pierre Pyon then appeared & was sworn, & stated that he was 78 years of age & served in the Revolutionary War in Capt. Lubonte,s Company Col Livingstons Regt., was in no battles, but was engaged at Kings Ferry in carrying our Troops & Provisions for the Army, the year in which he rendered this service not recollected - He also stated, that he was engaged at Stilwater in making roads & Bridges for the Army till near the close of the War, was under the command of Col. Renney at Stilwater for a short time.  He further stated that he served in Capt. Lubonte,s Company, Col. Livingstons Regt. till the close of the War, said he did not receive a written Discharge, & was certain that he served in Col. Livingstons Regt. till the close of the War.
         
                                 Baptiste Malbeuf was then sworn, who stated that he was in the same Company & Regt. with Pierre Pyon.
Page 92

that they entered the (words crossed out) Revolutionary Army together, could not say at what time but it was when the American Army retracted from Canada, they came out with that Army & stayed at Crowne Point 5 or 6 weeks, & went from there to Albany by way of Fort George, they remained at Albany 18 months, from there they went to Kings Ferry & were engaged in Transporting Troops & Provisions across the river, went from thence to Stilwater when they were engaged three or four months in making roads & Bridges for the Army - Witness was certain that they served in Capt. Labonte,s Company & Col Livingstons Regt. till the close of the War in 1783.
                                 Peter Robarge was called as a witness, (the words "who stated" are crossed out) who stated that he was a Soldier in Col. Livingstons Regt. & remained in the service till the close of the War, said he knew Pierre Pyon, & that he went to work for the Farmers in Saratoga after the reduction of Col. Livingstons Regt. which was about 1781, that he never saw nor heard of his being in the Army after that time.
Page 93

Alexander Ferriol sworn, said he knew Pierre Pyon well, saw him frequently during the War of the Revolution, but did not know of his serving in the Army - Witness also stated, that after the disbandment or reduction of Col. Livingstons Regt. which was about the year 1780, some of that Regt. joined the Regt. under the command of Col. Hazen.
                         Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners produced a Regimental Orderly Book, which he has had in his possession since the Revolutionary War, containing an order of the Commander in Chief dated at West Point Nov 4th 1780, from which we make the following extract "The Commander in Chief has the "happiness to inform the Army, that the Hon "the Congress have been prudent by their acts of "the 3d & 21st of October to pay the following "Resolutions - That such of the 16 additional "Regiments as have not been annexed to the "time of some (the words "of the" are crossed out) particular State, & all of "the seperate light Corps of the Army, both of Hand "& foot ( Col. Hazens Regt., Col. Armands & Major Lees Corps
" ex...? & also the German Battalion he reduced on the first
Page 94

"day of January next."  Benjamin Mooers states, that he understood Col. Livingstons Regt. was one of the number reduced under the above recited order of the Commander in Chief. He further states, that after the reduction or disbandment of Col. Livingstons Regt. as aforesaid, some of the said Regt. joined Col. Hazens Regt.  He further said that neither of the aforesaid Regt. belonged to the lives of any State.
             
  Remarks upon the case of P. Pyon.


Firstly - The Secretary of the Treasury will perceive by turning to the 14th Section of an act of the Legislature of the State of New York enbilled, an act for granting certain lands promised to by given as bounty lands by laws of this State & for other purposes therein mentioned, passed 11th. May 1784, that is not necessary, that a person should have served in the Army of the Revolution to entitle him to bounty land under the 14th Section of the act above referred to.  We therefore consider that a grant of land by this State under the before mentioned act to a Canadian Refugee is not of itself unsupported by other facts sufficient evidence, that such Refugee enlisted in the Army of the Revolution for & during the War & continued in service until its termination
Page 95

Secondly - Pyon states in his Declaration (a Copy of which you sent us) that he was a private in Captain Labonte,s Company in Col. Livingstons Regt., & in the oath to that Declaration he states that he served until the close of the War in Livingstons Regt.  It was proved by Benjamin Mooers  Robarge & Ferriol that Col. Livingstons Regt. was disbanded nearly two years & a half before the close of the War. 

Thirdly - Pyon also stated in the oath to his declaration, that at the close of the War in 1783 he was Discharged by General Washington, that his Discharge was lost, that the particular manner in which it was lost he was not able to state - In his examination before us he stated that he did not receive a written or printed Discharge at the close of the War.

                                    Fourthly - Robarge states that after Col. Livingstons Regt. was disbanded Pyon went to work with the Farmers in Saratoga, that he never saw him in the Army after - Ferriol who knew Pyon during the War of the Revolution, but not as a Soldier.
Page 96

From the character of the evidence in Pyons case we should not feel justified in expressing an opinion favourable to his claim.

No 10.                       Baptiste Malbeuf case.  The first evidence offered in support of his claim was a Patent for land granted to him by the State of New York - After which Malbeuf was sworn, & stated that he did not know how old he was when he entered the army of the Revolution, is now 75 years of age - The evidence of his statement is precisely the same as the evidence he gave in Pierre Pyons case, with this exception, he states that he never enlisted, but went with the Army from Sorrel & remained with it to the close of the War.  Pierre Pyon was then called as a witness for Malbeuf, after being sworn stated, that he knew Malbeuf, they belonged to the same Company & Regt., even engaged together at Kings Ferry in carrying troops over the River & Provisions for the Army, worked together at Saratoga in making roads & Bridges for the army till near the close of the War, that Malbeuf served till the close of the War & was discharged at Albany.
Page 97

Basil Nadau next sworn & stated that he knew Malbeuf in the Revolutionary War saw him once at Providence Rhodsiland, once at Albany & once at Quebeck during the War.  Had not seen Malbeuf since the close of the war until Tuesday the 31st day of August 1830, ensured him to be the same person, that he knew in the Revolutionary from his voice - all the acquaintances he had with Malbeuf was one Winter at Quebec, & the times he saw him at Albany & Providence - Witness 78 years of age -

                                           Joseph Labo was then sworn, who stated that he was in Col. Livingstons Regt. - Capt. Lubontes Company was well acquainted with Malbeuf, he belonged to the same Company with Witness -  Witness stated that he & Malbeuf both served in Col. Livingstons Regt. till the close of the War, of this he was certain - Witness said he rcd. a Pension bill last fall under the act of the 15th. May 1828.

                                      Pierre Robarge was sworn, who stated that he came out from Canada with Col. Livingstons Regt. and remained in it until it was reduced, knew Baptiste Malbeuf, he came out with them
Page 98

as far as Albany, did not join the Regt. when they arrived there, but went to Stilwater and worked for Esq.. Palmer a Farmer of that Town.

                    Remarks -
Basil Nadau is entered upon the Regimental Roll of Col. Hazens Regt. as a deserter, as appears by the original Roll now in the possession of Benjamin Mooers Adjutant of the said Regt. -  We shall have occasion to speak of Pierre Pyon & Joseph Labo in our concluding remarks -

                        Peter Renways case - Renway was sworn,, & stated that he was 77 years old, that he entered the army in 1776 & followed the American Army on their retreat from Canada belonged at that time to Capt. Derushas Company, afterwards enlisted in the city of New York in August or September 1777 in Capt. Oliver,s Company in Col. Hazens Regt.,  & served last in Capt. Goslins Company til the close of the War had a written Discharge was in the Battle of Brunswick & White plains,
Page 99

in Col. Hazens Regt. & no other Battle during the War, said Col. Hazens Regt. was reduced at Fort Stanwix in 1782 or 3 by a Company of Col. Cranes Regt. of Artillery, that he went to Fort Stanwix with Cao, Goselin, & that he went from Fort Stanswix to a small Fort in the war of West Point when he rcd. his Discharge, that he lost his Discharge within six months after running the same, his Discharge was lost by wading through a River & got chafed & worn out in his pocket.

                                  Joseph Lobe was then called as a witness, & stated that Renway belonged to the same Company with him, first knew Renway in Albany & was acquainted with him two or three years in the neighborhood of Albany, has not seen Renway since the War till the year 1830.  Witness said he had resided thirty leagues below Quebeck and since the War until he was sent for in February last by Baptiste Martin to come out to the States for his Pension. Had no doubt from the appearance of Renway, that he was the same man he knew in the army.

                                   Firman Loselton alias Lorrillon was called as a Witness & sworn - Said he belonged to Capt. Clement Goselins Company in
Page 100

Col. Hazens Regt. has seen Peter Renway pass the road, says that Renway told him he belonged to the same Company with Witness - Witness says that he never saw Renway in Capt. Goselins Company 

                            Alexander Ferriol was next sworn, & said that he was a Fifer in Capt. Oliver,s Company Col. Hazens Regt., entered the army in 1776, & served in Col. Hazens Regt. until the close of the War in a regular Discharge, & has drawn a Pension since 1818 - Witness said he knew no such man in Col. Hazens Regt. as Pierre Renway.

                             Benjamin Mooers our of the examiners Lt. in Capt. Oliver,s Company, & Adjutant of Col. Hazens Regt., said he had no recollection of Peter Renway, & has no such name upon his Regimental Roll of Col. Hazens Regt., or Copy of which he went by forwarded to the Treasury Department - He further stated that Col. Hazens Regt. was not at Fort Stanwix in the year 1782 or 1783, or at any other time during the War from the year 1778 (at which time he joined the said Regt.) to the case thereof.
Page 101

              Remarks upon Peter Renways case

First.   Renway stated in the oath (illegible) his declaration, which oath was administered on the 16th day of February 1829, that he was 73 years of age, & that he enlisted in Capt. Oliver,s Company in 1776 - He also stated in his declaration that he enlisted for & during the War & continued in it, service until its termination, at which period he was a private in Capt. Oliver,s Company in Col. Hazens Regt.

                             In his examination an oath before us, he stated that he was 77 years of age, & that he enlisted in the City of New York in Capt. Oliver,s Company in August or September 1777, but served last in Capt. Goselins Company - The many men in possession of & (illegible) the City of New York in 1777.

Secondly - Renway stated in his oath of the 16th of Feb.y 1829 before C. K. Averill Esqr. (which oath is attached to his declaration) that he was in the Battles of Brunswick, Saratoga & White Plains & other skirmishes - In his oath, which is also attached
Page 102

Thirdly - Renway stated in his oath of the 16th of Feb.y 1829, taht he was honorably discharged at the close of the War, & that he lost his discharge in 1786 from his pocket & had never seen it since. -
                                                       In his examination before us he said, that he rcd. a regular Discharge & lost it within six months after receiving it, that in wading through a River his Discharge got wet & that it was chafed & worn out in his pocket.

Fourthly - Joseph Labe, affidavit to prove that Renway served in the Revolutionary War purports to have been taken before C. K. Averill Esqr. in the County of Clinton State of New York on the 16th day of Feb.y 1829, & is annexed to Renways declaration

                                       Joesph Labe,s testimony before us (in the case of Peter Renway) shows conclusively
Page 103

that on the 16th day of Feb.y 1829 he was 30 (??) Quebeck, & had been for more than 45 years till in Feb.y 1830 he came to Rouses Point, which was his first appearance in the United States since the close of the Revolutionary War. 

Fifthly - Nicholas Constantine stated in his oath taken before C. K. Averill Esqr. on the 16th of July 1829 (-which oath is attached to Renways declaration) that Renway enlisted into Capt. Oliver,s Company in the City of Albany in 1776 & served in said Company through the War & the close thereof.  Constantine further stated in his affidavit taken before the same magistrate on the 31st day of March 1829 (which is also attached to Renways declaration) that he first saw Peter Renway at Albany in 1776, that he was then a soldier in Capt. Oliver,s Company, that he (Constantine) was in the Battle of New York & (the word "Brunswick is crossed out) Brandywine, & at the taking of Cornwallis, & that he was knowing to Renway, being engaged in the same Battles

                                     Renway in his examination before us, stated that he followed the retreating
Page 104

army from Canada in 1776, & belonged at that time to Capt. D?, Company, that he enlisted in the City of New York in 1777 in Capt. Oliver,s Company in Col. Hazens Regt. Renway further stated , that he was in the battles of Brunswick & White Plains in Col. Hazens Regt., & in no other battle during the War

Sixthly - Renway claimed to belong to the same Company with Loselton alias Lorrillon, & called him as a witness to prove his Revolutionary services, but Lorrillon knew no such man in his Company as Renway - Benjamin Mooers & Alexander Ferriol knew no (the word "such" is crossed out) man of this name of Peter Renway in the service during the Revolutionary War.

                       Joseph Labo,s case - C. K. L. Averill att.y for Labo requested us to enter upon our minutes, that John B Venitt & Louis Mauney (illegible) men the witnesses by whom the reputed services of Labo were proved in his original application for a Pension.  Labo was then sworn, said he was 81 years of age, that he entered the Armenian Army as a volunteer in Capt. Labontes
Page 105

Company Col. Renyeas Regt., afterwards enlisted at Stilwater, was present at the surrender of Burgoyne, does not know the year the War ended, but was in Capt. Lubontes Company & Col, Livingstons Regt. at the close of the War, of this he was certain.  He also stated, that he served in the Army of the Revolution about eight years, & did not receive a Discharge, had drawn a Pension under the Act of the 15th May 1828 until last Fall. 

                         Prudent Lajuness was then called as a witness for Labo - after being. sworn, said he never saw Labo in the service but heard his name mentioned as being in the Army at West Point & Albany in the years 1779-80. 81 & 82, does not recollect the Regt. Labo was said to have belonged to - Witness said he was a Baker for the army, & whom the Soldiers came for their bread to the Government Bake Shop he saw the name of Labo on the list, does not recollect the Christian name.

                           Pierre Pyon sworn, said that he & Joseph Labo both belonged to Capt. Lubonte,s Company in Col. Livingstons Regt.
Page 106

& that whey both served in the said Company & Regt. until the close of the War, that they mounted guard in said Regt. at Albany.

                            Baptiste Malbeuf was then sworn, who stated, that he knew Joseph Labo that they served in the same Company & Regt., & that they remained in Col. Livingstons Regt. till the close of the War - Witness said, that the said Joseph Labo was the same person (the word "which" is crossed out) he knew in the army of the Revolution.

                            Fermon Loselton alias Lorrillon, was next called as a witness on the part of Joseph Labo, & after having sworn, stated that he did know of Joseph Labo,s serving in the Army of the Revolution

                            Alexander Ferriol was then called on the part of the Government & sworn - He stated, that he entered the army of the Revolution in 1776, belonged to Oliver,s Company Col. Moses Hazens Regt. & served in the said Company & Regt. until the close of the War - Knew Capt. Goselin, who joined Hazens Regt. at White Plains
Page 107

in 177x & knew him from that time to the close of War, & since until the time of his oath - Witness says that he did not know Joseph Labo in the service, saw him at Schenectady Barracks in the years 1778-79-80 - Witness said all of the Canadian Refugees, who came out with the American Army from Canada, whether they were or were not attached to the Army, drew Provisions from the Commissary, did not know of Joseph Labo,s doing, duty in Col. Hazens Regt.  Thinks he should have known it if he had, was acquainted with Louis Marney & John B. Venitt divided, their character for both good for aught he knew - Witness thinks some part of Livingtons Regt. their reduction joined Col. Hazens Regt.

                          Pierre Robarge was called as a witness on the part of the Government and sworn - Witness said he knew Joseph Labo well, that he belonged to Capt. Lubontes Company in Canada & enlisted with Livingstons Regt. to Albany & that Labo did not (illegible) after working Albany, but left the Regt. and went to work with the Farmers in Saratoga County.
Page 108

Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners and Adjutant of Col. Hazens Regt. stated that he joined the said Regt. about June 1778, & that he had no knowledge of the said Joseph Labo,s doing duty in, or belonging to the said Regt. at any time during the war, nor did he believe that he ever served in the said Regt, as his name does not appear upon the Roll of the said Regt. now in the possession of the said Benjamin Mooers, a copy of which has been forwarded to the Treasury Department by the said Benjamin Mooers.  B. Mooers further stated, that he believed that Capt. Goselin joined Col Hazens Regt. soon after her joined it.

                             The Att.y for Joseph Labo offered in evidence in support of the claim of Labo a certified copy of a general Power of Att.y executed by the said Joseph Labo & others to Benjamin Mooers, giving him authority to collect their pay grants of lands for which said Power of Attn.y was dated Sept. 12th, 1790.  The attn.y for Labo agreed to furnish
Page 109

us with a Copy of the said Power of Att.y & we agreed upon our part, if he did so, to annex it to our Report to the Treasury Department.  The Copy has not been furnished by the Att.y of Labo.


    Remarks upon the case of Joseph Labo.

 Firstly - Labo stated in his declaration of the 20th June 1828, that he enlisted in the Continental line of the Army of the Revolution for & during the War & continued in its service until its termination, at which period he was a private in Capt. Lubonte,s Company in Col. Livingstons Regt. Labo stated in his oath of the 16th of May 1829 (which oath is attached to his declaration) that he served the greatest part of the time during the War in Col. Livingstons Regt., & about the last six years of his service in Col. Hazens Regt. until the War ended, & he was (?) discharged.

                          Joseph Labo in his examination before us stated, that he entered the American Army as a volunteer in Capt. Lubontes
Page 110

Company in Col. Renyeas Regt., afterwards enlisted at Stilwater, was at the surrender of Burgoyne, but was in Capt. Lubontes Company in Col. Livingstons Regt. at the close of the War, of this he was certain.  The said Joseph Labo also stated in his examination before us, that he did not receive a discharge at the close of War. 

Secondly - The declaration aforesaid in the case of Labo is signed Joseph Labe, the name of Joseph Labo appears only in the body of the declaration - Immediately under the declaration signed Joseph Labe are the oaths of Venitt & Marney in these words " Before me Calvin K Averill a Justice of the Peace in the County of Clinton in the State of New York personally appeared this day John B Venitt & Louis Murney of the said County who did securely make oath, that Joseph Labe by whom the foregoing declaration is subscribed is generally reputed & believed to have been a Soldier in the Army of the Revolution , in manner or therein stated, & they on personally knowing to his serving as whom stated"  You will percieve by looking at the
Page 111

examination of Joseph Labe (in Peter Renways case), that he left the United States immediately after the close of the Revolutionary War, & has resided ever since 30 leagues below Quebeck, until Feb.y, 1830 at which time he was sent for by Baptiste Martin to come out to Rouse,s Point for his Pension.  We would him beg have to call the attention of the Secretary of the Treasury to Mr. Averills letter to the Department under date of June the 4th. 1830, from which letter we give the following extract " Joseph Labe "& Peter Renway are residents of Rouse,s Point  "I have known them for two years past, & "never heard any thing, against their characters "for truth & veracity, they an in offensive men "& I believe honest".  We repeat that Joseph Labe had not been in the United States since the close of the Revolutionary War, until last February - That Mr. Averill knew, that there was a Joseph Labo & a Joseph Labe is proved by his letter to the Department under date of the 26th. Feb.y 1830, (which said letter is attached to the declaration of Labe) but that he knew prior to about that time, whether Joseph Labe was dead or alive is not quite so certain - It appears to be well established then, that Mr. Averills acquaintances with
Page 112

Joseph Labe instead of being two years, was only from February 1830 to the fourth of June following.  It then was no mistake in copying the declaration & furnished us by the Department in the case of Labo, then the Pension, which he has drawn from the United States, was clearly a fraud upon the Government, for the declaration is signed Joseph Labe, (Joseph Labe is underlined)  & in all of the evidence of Revolutionary services annexed to the said declaration Joseph Labe & not Joseph Labo is spoken of as the person known to the Witnesses - Joseph Labo has drawn a Pension until last Fall.  Joseph Labe applied for a Pension last Winter, & his claim has not been allowed.  It is proved by Genl. Mooers & Ferriol, that Labe was a regular Soldier in the Revolutionary War & served to the close of the same, & was regularly discharged as appears by the Regimental Roll of Col. Hazens Regt. now in the possession of the said Mooers.  It will be perceived on examination, that the testimony in the case of Labo is contradictory, & in many instances totally unconvinceable.
Page 113

We recd. evidence in the twelve preceeding cases at our first meeting at Rous,s Point on the 7th & 8th. Days of September last - On the morning of the 8th of September we adjourned from Rous,s Point to Plattsburgh without naming in days for the adjourned meeting - after waiting more than two weeks we notified C. K. Averill Esqr. , that we should meet at the House of John McGee in Plattsburgh on the 12th of October last, & continue in session until we had gone through with all the Pension claims submitted to us by the Secretary of the Treasury - We did not take the precaution to ask Mr. Averill to acknowledge the receipt of our notice naming time & place for the adjourned meeting.  On the 12th of Octr. we went to the place appointed for the examination & none of the Pensioners or applicants for Pension appeared in person or by their Attty.  We then sent a man to Rous,s Point to ascertain from W. Averill, who then he had rcd. notice of the time & place appointed by us for the second meeting, & instructed the man to say to Averill, that we would hold open all of
Page 114

the next day to give him an opportunity to appear, & if there was any mistake in his receiving notice of the adjourned meeting, that we would adjourn again to a day, that should be convenient for him - We rcd. an answer from Mr. Averill under date of the 13th of October 1830 a copy of which is annexed to our report.

                              D. B. McNeil one of the the examiners gave notice to C. K. Averill at our first meeting, that Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners would be improved as a witness on the part of the Government before the examination was finally closed.

                              Pierre Robarge & Benjamin Mooers men not improved as witnesses at our first meeting on the 7th & 8th of Septr. last at Rous,s Point.  Their testimony was taken in all the cases where their names appear as witnesses on the 12th. 13th. & 14th. days of October last.  Alexander Ferriol attended as a witness on the part of the Government at Rous,s Point & at Plattsburgh, & was improved as a witness at both places.  After having ascertained, that Mr. Averill had rcd. notice
Page 115

of the time & place appointed by us for the second meeting, & that he declined appearing in behalf of the persons interested in the examination, we provided on, & dated the exam (illegible) on the 14th of Octr. last.  The testimony in the cases, which follow from No. 13 to No 17 inclusive was taken at Plattsburgh on the 17th 13th & 14th Days of Octr. last. 

No 13.                    Jean Baptiste Rocieau, Case.

Rocieau stated in his declaration, that he enlisted in Capt. Livingston Company in Col. Livingstons Regt. & afterwards in Col M. Hazens Regt. in Capt. Robisheaux,s Company of the New York line. 
                                     Pierre Robarge was then called & sworn, who stated, that he was a Soldier in Col. Livingstons Regt. & served therein until its reduction, & that he knew no such man as Jean Baptiste Rocieau in said Regt.

                            Alexander Ferriol was then called and sworn, who stated that he served in Col. Hazens Regt. until the close of the War, & had no knowledge of such a man
Page 116

as Jean Baptiste Rocieau, serving in the said Regt.

                   Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners, who served as adjutant of Col. Hazens Regt. from 1778 until the close of the Revolutionary War, had no knowledge of Jean B Rocieau, serving in the said Regt.

                        Peter Lubonte,s case.
Lubonte stated in his declaration of the 18th of August 1828, that he enlisted in Capt. Livingstons Com.y in Col. Livingstons Regt. of the New York win, & served until the close of the War.  He also stated in his affidavit of the 31st of Nov. 1829 (& which said affidavit is annexed to his declaration) that he served in Genl. Hazens Regt. towards the close of the War, & that he rcd. his discharge from Col. Hazens. In the testimony of Nicholas Constantine & Joseph Labe attached to the aforesaid declaration of Peter Lubonte dated 16th July 1829, it is stated that Peter Lubonte was a private in Capt. Livingstons Company in Col. Livingstons Regt. in the Army of the Revolution & was working
Page 117

to the last of the deponents recollection & belief enlisted for & during the War, & that the said Lubonte was afterwards transferred into Genl. Hazens Regt. of the New York bin, & that Lubonte continued to serve in Genl. Hazens Regt. until the close of the War -

                                     Pierre Robarge was called & sworn, who said, that he knew Peter Lubonte well, he belonged to Capt. Lubontes Company in Canada, & returned with Col. Livingstons Regt. to Albany, but that Lubonte left the Regt. at, that place & went to work in Saratoga County, & did not bear arms, or join the Regt. afterwards.  Witness said he belonged to Col. Livingstons Regt. & remained in it until its reduction.

                              Alexander Ferriol sworn, said, that he was acquainted with Peter Lubonte, that the said Lubonte came out from Canada with the retreating Army in 1776, has no knowledge of his serving in the Army after the retreat from Canada, saw him frequently during the War at Schenectady
Page 118

but did not at any time during the War see him in the service - Witness joined the Army in 1776 & served in Col. Hazens Regt. until the close of the War.

                            Benjamin Mooers adjutant in Col. Hazens Regt. said he had no knowledge of Peter Lubontes serving in said Regt. & that he did not believe he did as his name ws not to be found upon the Regimental Roll of Col. Hazens Regt.

Remarks upon the case of Peter Lubonte.

In the oath administered before C. K. Averill on the 16th day of Feb.y 1829 Josheph Labe is made to swear, that Peter Lubonte was in the service, & in an other affidavit sworn to before the same magistrate on the 1st of Sept. 1829 Joseph Labe is again made to swear that he was a Soldier in the same Regt. with Peter Lubonte.

It will be borne in mind that Joseph Labe was not in the United States at the time the above mentioned oaths purport to have been administered by C. K. Averill Esq.
Page 119

& had not been (as appears by his testimony in
the case of Peter Renway marked in the margin
No. 11) for more than 45 years. Joseph Labe’s
first appearance in the United States since 1783
was in February 1830-

Pierre Robarge was sworn &
stated that he knew Peter Labonte, that Labonte
came out from Canada with & belonged
to Col. Livingston’s regiment, but that he left the
said Regiment on its arrival at Albany, & went
to work with its Farmer in Saratoga County,
& served no longer in the army to his, the
witness’s knowledge.
Alexander Ferriola was
sworn & said he belonged to Col. N’s regiment till
the close of the War, & that he had no knowledge
of Peter Labonte’s serving in the said Regiment
at any time during the War.
Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners corroborated the
testimony of Ferriola so far as stated to
Labonte’s not having served in Col. N’s Regiment

No 15
John Baptiste Labonte’s case
Labonte stated as appears by the copy of his
Page 120

declaration, that he enlisted in the continental bin of the Army of the Revolution in Capt. Lubontes Company in Col. Livingstons Regt.  By the Certificate of Justice Averill annexed to the aforesaid declaration it would appear that on the 16th day of February 1829 Nicholas Constantine & Joseph Labe appeared before him & sworn, that Lubonte was transferred from Livingstons Regt. to Col. Hazens and continued in the said last mentioned Regt. to the close of the War.

                                   Pierre Robarge was called & sworn, who stated, that he was a Soldier in Col. Livingstons Regt., & knew John Baptiste Lubonte on the retreat from Canada of the said Regt. that after their arrival at Albany, the said John Baptiste Lubonte quit Livingstons Regt. & went with Joseph Labo to work with the Farmers in Saratoga County -

                                  Alexander Ferriol sworn -Said he belonged to Col. Hazens Regt. & knew John Baptiste Lubonte on the retreat of the American Army from Canada in 1776, has no knowledge of his serving in the Army after
Page 121

the retreat, saw him frequently during the War, but never saw him in the service after the retreat, was confident, that Lubonte did not serve in Col. Hazens Regt. at any period during the War -

                         Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners, has no knowledge of John Baptist Lubonte, knew no man of that name in Col. Hazens Regt. at the close of the War or at any other time -

                           Remarks.

The Secretary of the Treasury will observe, that the name of Joseph Labe is pressed into the service again (one year before he left his residence 30 leagues below Quebek, to establish the claim of J. B. Lubonte to a Pension.

                                       It was proved by Pierre Robarge of Col. Livingstons Regt. that Lubonte left the said Regt. after its arrival at Albany from Canada, & went to work in Saratoga County.

                           Alexander Ferriol knew John Baptiste Lubonte on the retreat of the
Page 122

Army from Canada, thinks he quit the service on the arrival of the intruding Army at Albany, is confident that he did not serve in Col. Hazens Regt. at any period of the Revolutionary War.

                                   Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners knew no such man as John Baptiste Lubonte in Col. Hazens Regt. of which he the said Benjamin Mooers was Adjutant at the close of the War.

No. 16              Samuel Chartiers case.

Chartier stated in his declaration, that he returned as a volunteer in the Continental line of the Army of the Revolution for & during the War & continued in the service until its termination, at which period he was a in Capt. Augustin Lesseaux,s Com.y in Col. Livingstons Regt.; & that in the year 1779 he was transferred into Col. Hazens Regt., & that while in said Regt. he was a private in Capt. Lawrence Oliver,s company -

                                   Alexander Ferriol sworn
Page 123

said he knew Chartier on the retreat of the American Army from Canada in 1776, Chartier was at the time a small Boy.  Witness never saw him in Capt. Oliver,s Company during the War - Witness was a Fifer in Capt. Oliver,s Company & served in said Company until the close of the War.

                                          Pierre Robarge sworn - said he knew Chartier, & that he was attached to Livingstons Regt until its reduction

                                    Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners, a Lieutenant in Capt. Oliver,s Com.y & Adjutant of Col Hazens Regt., stated that Saml. Chartier did not belong to Capt Oliver,s Company, nor Col. Hazens Regt. to the best of his recollection from 1778 to the close of the War.

The case of Chartier we submit without making a single remark.

           Joseph Brissets case -

Brisset stated in his declaration that he was a Soldier in Capt. Maurice Desacrois,s Com.y in Col Livingstons Regt. & served in the said Company & Regt. until the close of the War.
Page 124

It is stated in the Testimony of Peter Renway & Nicholas Constantine attached to the declaration of the said Brisset, that he was transferred from Col. Livingstons Regt. in 1779 to Col. Hazens Regt., & that he was in the service until the close of the War.

                               Pierre Robarge sworn - Said he knew Joseph Brisset in Col. Livingstons Regt. during the War of the Revolution, that Brisset was at that time a very old man, & left the Regt. at Rhode - Island, & went into the Hospital at Boston on ( ? ) -

                                 Alexander Ferriol sworn -  Said he knew no such man as Joseph Brisset in Col. Hazens Regt. during the Revolutionary War - Witness served in Col. Hazens Regt. until the close of the War. 

Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners, said he knew no such man in Col. Hazens Regt. as Joseph Brisset, at any time during the Revolutionary War.
Page 125

We remark in conclusion, that the Claimants for Pensions under the act of the 15th May 1828, who appeared before us were ( ? ) foreigners, & had been so short a time in the United States, that we were unable to obtain the least information as to their character & standing.  It was not only desirable, but highly necessary to a proper & satisfactory examination of their claims, that we should ascertain whether they were men of truth & veracity, in as much as they were generally witnesses in support of each others claims.  There was such a striking variance in many of the cases submitted to us, between the original declarations of the claimants & the testimony they gave before us, that we supposed C. K. Averill Counsel for the claimants would see the necessity of offering evidence as to the character of the Claimants, & also as to the character of their witnesses - We were strengthened in this belief by looking a the first paragraph in C. K. Averills letter to the Secretary of the Treasury under date of the 4th of June 1830 -
Page 126

No evidence was offered by the Counsel for the claimants to show, that they or their witnesses were entitled to credit, except in the case of N. Chatterton one of the claimants, & of Louis Marney & John B. Venett divided, the two last mentioned persons having been in proved as witnesses in their lifetime by several of the claimants at the time their Pension papers were prepared.
                   The testimony of Pierre Pyon, Baptiste Malbeuf, Joseph Labo and Peter Renway was of an unsatisfactory character & should if rcd. at all he ruined with caution & considerable allowance - If these men could (?) it in 1828 & 9 what Companies & Regiments they belonged to in 1783, & other occurrences, that took place in the War of the Revolution with sufficient persuasion and certainty to swear to them it would b a natural & reasonable conclusion (if they swear to the truth then) that their testimony taken in relation to the same facts & occurrences in 1830 would correspond with the testimony given by them in 1828 & 1829.  A few of the many contradictions in the Testimony
Page 127

of the above named persons we have pointed out in our Report.

                                 Nicholas Constantine,s evidence attached to Renways declaration is contradicted by Lorrillons, Ferriol & Benj.m Mooers, & his testimony attached to the declarations of Joseph Labo, Peter Lubonte, P. Rocieau & John B. Lubonte is contradicted by Benjamin Mooers & Alexander Ferriol.  Constantine is an aged & imbecile man, & we do not consider him entitled to credit.

                        The Secretary will observe by examining the declaration, & the evidence sworn (?) them in the cases of John B. Lubonte, Peter Renway & Peter Lubonte, that a palpable fraud was (?) upon the Government in making use of the name of Joseph Labe to prove their Revolutionary services; it being well established, that Joseph Labe was not in the United States at the time or knows that his evidence in support of their Claims purports to have been taken before C. K. Averill at Rouses Point.
Page 128

Alexander Ferriol a witness called on the part of the Government was objected to by the Counsel for the Claimants on the ground, that he had served years since been convicted of Larceny, but it appearing, that he had been restored to competency as a Witness by a pardon from the Governor of this State, the objection was overruled.

            Ferriol is an intelligent man. & appears to have an extraordinary good memory.  Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners has been acquainted with Ferriol nearly fifty years, & has confidence in his statements touching the events of the Revolutionary War.

                                    But the Secretary of the Treasury will observe, that the testimony of Ferriol is partly generally supported (when it is material) by the testimony of Benjamin Mooers -

                                  Pierre Robarge an other Witness called by us, was amongst the first settlers of this County, his character for truth & veracity is good -
Page 129

All of the persons whose names appear in our Report as witnesses were duly sworn prior to the taking of their testimony, except Benjamin Mooers one of the examiners.  His affidavit appears below. 

                             State of New York}
                              Clinton County}  LS:

                    Benjamin Mooers of Plattsburgh being duly sworn doth depose & say, that the evidence given by him in all of the preceding cases contained in this Report (in which his name appears as a witness) is the truth according to the best of his knowledge & belief -

                                   (signed) Benj Mooers

Sworn & Subscribed the first 
day of December 1830 Before me
(signed) S J B Skinner  Justice Peace

Our Report would have been made long since, but for reasons beyond our controul.  It is now Respectfully submitted -
                             (signed) Benj Mooers
                                           D, B, McNeil.
Page 130

Gent

                  I read your letter stating that you should hold an examination in relation to certain persons having claims on the U S for pensions, on the 12th (?), I have also been verbally informed that you would hold open until tomorrow For the reasons stated in my former communication & other reasons since  I see nothing to alter my determination particularly as you do not deny in your letter the allegations stated

                          I am respectfully your LC
                               C. K. Averill Atty.
                             for certain pensioners.

Genl B Mooers &
David B. McNeil Esq,
Commissioners LC

N. B  The claims that have been passed or acted upon are submitted without further evidence
Page 131

Rcd. 8 Dec 1830.     Copy       2260
                Plattsburgh, November 20, 1830    1.

Sir,

                       On the receipt of your letters of the 30th. of July last, requesting us to examine the claims of sundry persons under the act, entitled "An act for the relief of certain surviving officers and Soldiers of the army of the revolution", approved, 15. of May, 1828, we addressed a letter to Calvin K. Averill, Esq;  agent for the persons interested, advising him of the duty assigned to us by the Treasury Department, and fisced on the 7th. day of September last, to enter upon the examination.  A number of pensioners and applicants for pensions under the beforementioned act, appeared before us at the time and place specified in our letter to W. Averill.  The claimants, with the exception of one person, being Canadians;  We appointed John M. Collum and William Phillips interpreters, and had them duly sworn.  On motion of C. K. Averill, agent and attorney for John Gauley, we proceeded to examine into the validity of his claim under the beforementioned act.
                    John Gauley being duly sworn, stated, that he was a private soldier in Capt. Oliver's Company in Col. Moses Hazen's regiment;  that he was 90 years of age the 11th day of January last, and received his discharge at the close of the war in 1783.

                      Alexander Ferriol and Amable Boileau, being duly
Page 132

duly sworn, stated, that they belonged in the same regiment with Gauley, and served with him till the close of the war in 1783.

           Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, who served as adjutant in Col. Hazen's regiment, stated John Gauley entered the service as a volunteer, and served in the said regiment for several years, and remained in it till the close of the revolutionary war;  and that he said John Gauley who appeared before us, he believes to be the same person. who served in Col. Hazen's regiment, as stated by Ferriol and Boileau.  We have no doubt that Gauley justly comes within the provisions of the act of the 15. May, 1828.

No. 2.}               Nicholas Constantine next appeared before us, and produced a regular discharge, dated June 1783, signed by General Washington, Moses Hazen, Col. of the regiment, and Benjamin Mooers, adjutant.  That Constantine was the same person named in the said discharge, and who served in Col. Hazen's regiment till the close of the war, was proved by Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, and by Boileau and Ferriol. 

No. 3.}                      Michael Dufau next appeared before us, and produced a regular discharge. The evidence in this case, was precisely the same as that in the case of Nicholas Constantine, marked upon the margin, No. 2,

No. 4.}                        Joseph Labe, age 79, next appeared and
Page 133

and after being duly sworn, said that he enlisted in Albany, the yar Burgoyne was taken, and served in Capt. Gosselin's company in Col. Hazen's regiment, till the close of the war - received a regular discharge; but lost it many years since;  has drawn no pension from the United States government.  Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiner, and Alexander Ferriol, recognized the said Joseph Labe to be the same person who served in Col, Hazen's regiment in the revolutionary war, and to the close therof.

No. 5.}              Fermon Losetton, alias Losilton (83 years of age) appeared, and after being sworn, said that he belonged to Capt. Gosselin's company, in Col. Hazen's regiment, and served in the said regiment, till the close of the revolutionary war in 1783.  The truth of Losetton, alias Losilton, statement, was proved by Alexander Ferriol, who served in the same regiment with him, also, by Benjamin Mooers, adjutant of the said regiment.  Losetton stated, that he received a discharge, but that the same was lost.

No. 6.}                   Baptiste Martin appeared, and after being duly sworn, stated that he was 73 years of age, and served as a soldier in the revolutionary war in Capt. Gosselin's company in Col. Hazen's regiment, and was discharged near West Point. at the close of the war in 1783; but lost or mislaid his discharge.  Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, and Alexander Ferriol stated, that they knew the said Baptiste Martin in the revolutionary war;  and that he is the same person who belonged to Col. Hazen's regiment;  and that he remained in it ill the close of the war in 1783.
Page 134

No. 7.}                 Nathaniel Chatterton appeared, and being duly sworn, stated, that he was a private in Capt. Thomas's Company, in Col. Lamb's regiment;  enlisted at Poughkeepsie in the latter part of the year 1782, or the beginning of the year 1783, and served till the close of the war;  had a regular discharge, which he sold with his land.  Joshua Odell was then called as a witness, and being duly sworn, stated, that he had known Nath. Chatterton about fifty years - never saw him in the army of the revolution;  but lived in the same neighborhood where Chatterton lived when at home;  he was absent, and reputed to be in the army. - Witness saw him at home near the close of the war, with a soldiers uniform on;  always understood, that he belonged to the American Revolutionary army and he had no doubt he did. - Witness was 71 years of age, says, Chatterton's character for truth and veracity, is good.   
                            William Scriver, was the next witness called and and sworn, who stated that he had been acquainted with Nathaniel Chatterton from his youth - witness was 65 years of age;  said, that during the revolutionary war, he lived in the same neighborhood where Chatterton resided, when at home; that he was in the American Army, and came home on a furlough to visit his friends, near the close of the war in 1783.  Odell and Scriver, the two last witnesses, had the appearance of respectable and intelligent men.  We are satisfied that Chatterton is justly entitled to apension under the act of the 15th. May, 1828.       
No. 8.}                Lewis Provendie. appeared, and being duly sworn,
Page 135

                                                             (5.)
stated that he enlisted in the year 1778, in Capt. Eustis's company, in Col. Crane's regiment of artillery, and served till the close of the war; received a regular discharge, but lost it.  Prudent La Junesse was sworn as a witness, who stated, that he was a baker in the army of the revolution, and was acquainted with Lewis Provendie at West Point in 1783; that he (Provendie) belonged to Col. Crane's regiment of artillery.  Witness remained at West Point till the close of the war, and for two years after;  did not know Provendie, till he saw him at West Point;  saw him again in Montreal in 1787;  was confident that the Provendie then before us, was the same person that he knew at West Point, and who was in the army of the revolution in May 1783. 
               Alexander Ferriol was then sworn, who stated, that he was acquainted with Lewis Provendie, first at Schenectady Barracks;  then at Cantonment near New-Windsor;  that he said Lewis Provendie was a Soldier in Capt. Vases's's Company in Col. Crane's regiment of artillery;  and that he served to the close of the war, and had a regular discharge which he, the witness, had seen.  We are of opinion, that Provendie is entitled to a pension.  
          Pierre Pyon case.  At the request of C. K. Averill, attorney for Pyon, we entered upon our minutes, that the reputed services of Pyon were proved by Lewis Maurey, and John B. Venett,  deceased;  also,
Page 136

also, that letters patent from the state of New-York to Pyon, for lands, were produced and laid before us.
        Pierre Pyon then appeared, and was sworn, an stated, that he was 78 years of age, and served in the revolutionary war in Capt. Labonte's company, Col. Livingstons regiment;  was in no battles;  but was engaged at King's Ferry in carrying our troop and provisions for the army;  the year in which he rendered this service, not recollected.  He also stated, that he was engaged at Stilwater in making roads and bridges for the army, till near the close of the war;  was under the command of Col. Renney at Stilwater, for a short time.  He further stated, that he served in Capt. Labonte's company, Col. Livingston's regiment, till the close of the war;  said, he did not receive a written discharge; and was certain that he served in Col. Livingston's regiment 'till the close of the war. 
                                Baptiste Mulbeuf, was then sworn, who stated that he was in the same Company and regiment with Pierre Pyon;  that they entered the revolutionary army together;  could not say at what time;  but it was, when the American army retreated from Canada:  they came out with that army and stopped at Crown Point 5 or 6 weeks, and went from thence to Albany, byway of Fort George:  they remained at Albany 18 months; from thence they went to King's Ferry, and were engaged in transporting troops and provisions across the river;  went from thence to Stilwater, where they were engaged three or four months in making roads and bridges for the army.
Page 137

Witness was certain that they served in Capt. Labonte's company, and Col. Livingston's regiment 'till the close of the war in 1783.
                       Peter Robarge was called as a witness, who stated, that he was a soldier in Col. Livingston's regiment, and remained in the service 'till the close of the war;  said, he knew Pierre Pyon, and that he went to work for the farmers in Saratoga after the reduction of Col. Livingston's regiment, which was about 1781;  that he never saw nor heard of his being in the army after that time. 
                    Alexander Ferriol sworn, said he knew Pierre Pyon well, saw him frequently during the war of the revolution, but did not know of his serving in the army;  Witness also stated, that after the disbandment or reduction of Col. Livingston's regiment, which was about the year 1780, some of that regiment joined the regiment under the command of Col. Hazen.
                     Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, produced a regimental orderly book, which he has had in his possession since the revolutionary war, containing an order of the Commander in Chief, dated at West-Point. November 4th. 1780, from which we make the following extract, "The Commander inn Chief has the happiness to inform the army,  "that the hon: the Congress have been pleased by their acts "of the 3.d and 21st. of October, to pass the following resolutions, "That such of the 16 additional regiments as have not been "annexed to the line of some particular State, and all of the "Separate light corps of the army both of horse and foot (Col. Hazen's also,
Page 138

"Hazen's regiment, Col. Armand's and Major Lee's Corps excepted) "and also the German battalion, be reduced on the first day "of January next."  Benjamin Mooers states, that he understood Col. Livingston's regiment was one of the number reduced under the above recited order of the Commander in Chief.  He further states, that after the reduction or disbandment of Col. Livingston's regiment, as aforesaid, some of the said regiment joined Col. Hazen's regiment.  He further said, that neither of the aforesaid regiments belonged to the line of any state. 
        Remarks upon the case of P. Pyon.
Firstly.   The Secretary of the Treasury will perceive by turning to the 14th. Section of an act of the Legislature of the State of New-York, entitled "An act for granting certain lands promised to be given as bounty lands, by laws of this state, and for other purposes therein mentioned", passed 11th. May, 1784, - that it is not necessary, that a person should have served in the army of the revolution to entitle him to bounty land under the 14th. Section of the act above referred to.  We therefore consider that ageant of land by this state under the before mentioned act to a Canadian Refugee, is not, of itself, unsupported by other facts, sufficient evidence, that such refugee enlisted in the army of the revolution for and during the war, & continued in service until its termination.  
Secondly.     Pyon States in his declaration (a copy of which you sent us) that he was a private in Capt.
Page 139

Labonte's Company in Col. Livingston's regiment, "and in the oath to that declaration, he states that he served until the close of the war in Livingston's regiment. It was proved by Benjamin Mooers, Robarge, and Ferriol, that Col. Livingston's regiment was disbanded nearly two years and a half before the close of the war.  
    Thirdly...  Pyon also stated in the oath to his declaration, that at the close of the war in 1783, he was discharged by general Washington;  that his discharge was lost;  that the particular manner in which it was lost, he was not able to state.  In his examination before us, he stated , that he did not receive a written or printed discharge at the close of the war. 
   Fourthly
Roberge states, that after Col, Livingston's regiment was disbanded, Pyon went to work with the farmers in Saratoga;  that he never saw him in the army after.  Ferriol also knew Pyon during the war of the revolution, but not as a soldier.
      From the character of the evidence in Pyon's case, we should not feel justified in expressing our opinion favorable to his claim.
No. 10}       Baptiste Malbeuf case. -
                 The first evidence offered - in support of his
Page 140

claim was a patent for land granted to him by the state of New York.  After which Malbeuf was sworn and stated, that he did not know how old he was when he entered the army of the revolution - was now 75 years of age.  The residue of his statements, precisely the same as the evidence he gave in Pierre Pyon's case, with this exception, he stated that he never enlisted, but went with the army from Sorrel, and remained with it to the close of the war.  Pierre Pyon was then called as a witness for Malbeuf, and after being sworn, stated that he knew Malbeuf;  they belonged to the same Company and regiment;  were engaged together at King's Ferry in carrying troops over the river, and provisions for the army, worked together at Saratoga in making roads and bridges for the army 'till near the close of the war;  that Malbeuf served 'till the close of the war, and was discharged at Albany.
          Basil Madau. -  next sworn, and stated, that he knew Malbeuf in the revolutionary war, saw him once at Providence, Rhode-Island, once at Albany, and once at Quebec, during the war -  had not seen Malbeuf since the close of the war, until Tuesday, the 31st. day of August, 1830 - knowed him tobe the same person that he knew in the revolutionary from his voice,  All the acquaintance he had with Malbeuf, was one winter at Quebec, and the
Page 141

the times he saw him at Albany and Providence;-  Witness 78 years of age.
         Joseph Labo was then sworn, who stated that he was in Col. Livingston's regiment, Capt. Labonte's company - was well acquainted with Malbeuf:  he belonged to the same company with Witness - Witness stated, that he and Malbeuf both served in Col. Livingston's regiment, 'till the close of the war;  of this he was certain;  Witness said, he received a pension till last fall under the act of the 15. May, 1828.
                Pierre Robarge was then sworn, who stated, that he came out from Canada with Col. Livingston's regiment, and remained in it, until it was reduced - knew Baptiste Malbeuf;  he came out with them as far as Albany;  did not join the regiment when they arrived there;  but went to Stilwater, and worked for Esq: Palmer, a farmer of that town.  
                                Remarks.
Basil Madau is entered upon the regimental roll of Col. Hazen's regiment as a deserter, as appears by the original roll now in the possession of Benjamin Mooers, adjutant of the said regiment.  We shall have occasion to speak of Pierre Pyon and Joseph Labo in our -
Page 142

concluding remarks.
               Peter Renway's case:    Renway was sworn, and stated, that he was 77 years old;  that he entered the army in 1776, and followed the American army on their retreat from Canada - belonged at that time to Capt. Derusha's company:  afterwards enlisted in the city of New York, in August or September 1777, in Capt. Olivi's company, in Col. Hazen's regiment, and served last in Capt. Goslin's company. to the close of the war;  had a written discharge - was in the battle of Brunswick and White Plains in Col. Hazen's regiment, and in no other battle during the war;  said Col. Hazen's reg. was relieved at Fort Stanwix in 1782 or 3, by a company of Col. Crane's regiment of artillery:  that he went to Fort Stanwix with Capt. Goselin, & that he went from Fort Stanwix to a small fort in the rear of West Point, where he received his discharge;  that he lost his discharge within six months after receiving the same;  his discharge was wet by wading through a river and got chafed and worn out in his pocket.
          Joseph Labe was then called as a witness, and stated that Renway belonged to the same company with him:  first knew Renway in Albany, and was acquainted with him two or three years in the neighborhood of Albany;  had not seen Renway since the war till the year 1830.  Witness said he had resided thirty leagues below Quebec ever since the war, until he was sent for in February last by Baptiste Martin, to come out to the States for his pension:  Had no doubt from the appearance of Renway,
Page 143

                                                         13.
Renway, that he was the same man he knew in the army.
    Ferman Losetton, alias Louilton - was called as witness and sworn;  said he belonged to capt. Clement Goselin's company in Col. Hazen's regiment;  has see Peter Renway pass the road;  says that Renway told him he belonged to the same company with Witness -  Witness said that he never saw Renway in Capt. Goselins's company.
        Alexander Ferriol was next sworn, and said, that he was a fifer in Capt. Olive's Company, Col. Hazen's regiment; entered the army in 1776, and served in Col. Hazen's regiment until the close of the war;  received a regular discharge, and has drawn a pension since 1818.  Witness said he knew no such man in Col. Hazen's regiment as Pierre Renway.
       Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, lieut. in Capt. Olive's company, and adjutant of Col. Hazen's regiment, said he had no recollection of Peter Renway, and has no such name upon his regimental roll of Col. Hazen's reg. & a copy of which he recently forwarded to the Treasury department.  He further stated, that Col. Hazen's regiment was not at Fort Stanwix in the year 1782 or 1783, or at any other time during the war, from the year 1778 (at which time he joined the said regiment) to the close thereof.
Page 144

          Remarks upon Peter Renway's case.
First.   Renway stated in the oath accompanying his declaration, which oath was administered on the 16th. day of February, 1829, that he was 73 years of age, and that he enlisted in Capt. Olive's company in 1776.  He also stated in his declaration that he enlisted for and during the war, and continued in its service until its termination, at which period he was a private in Capt. Olivie's company in Col. Hazen's regimt.
      In his examination, on oath, before us, he stated that he was 77 years of age, and that he enlisted in the city of New-York in Capt. Olivies's company, in August or Sept. 1777;  but served last in Capt. Goselin's company.  The enemy were in possession of, and occupied the city of New-York, in 1777.
Secondly - Renway stated in his oath of the 16th. of February, 1829, before C. K. Averill, Esq; (which oath is attached to his declaration) that he was in the battles of Brunswick, Saratoga, and White Plains, and other skirmishes.  In his oath, which is also attached to his declaration of the 31st. day of March. 1829, he stated that he was in the battles of White Plains, New-York, and at the surrender of Cornwallis, and in the battle of Brandywine.  In his examination before us, he said he was in the battles of Brunswick and White Plans, and in no other battle during the war. 
    Thirdly.  Renway stated in his oath of the 16. of February, 1829, that he was honorably discharged at the close of the war, and that 
                                                                   he
Page 145

he lost his discharge from his pocket, and had never seen it since.  
        In his examination before us, he said that he received a regular discharge, and lost it within six months after receiving it;  that in wading through a river, his discharge got wet, and that it was chafed, and worn out in his pocket.
         Fourthly -  Joseph Labe's affidavit to prove that Renway served in the revolutionary war, purports to have been taken before C. K. Averill, Esq;  in the county of Clinton state of New-York, on the 16th. day of February. 1829, and is annexed to Renway's declaration. 
      Joseph Labe's testimony before us (in the case of Peter Renway) shows conclusively, that on the 16th. day of February. 1829. he was 30 leagues below Quebec, and had been for more than 45 years, 'till in February. 1830, he came to Rouss's point, which was his first appearance in the United States since the close of the Revolutionary war. 
   Fiftly.  Nicholas Constantine stated in his oath taken before C. K. Averill, Esq;  on the 16th. of July, 1829 (which oath is attached to Renway's declaration) that Renway enlisted into Capt. Olive's company, in the city of Albany in 1776, and served in said company through the war, and to the close thereof.  Constantine further stated in his affidavit taken before the same magistrate, on the 31st. day of March. 1829 (which is also attached to Renway's declaration) that he first saw Peter Renway at Albany in 1776; that he was then a Soldier in Capt. Olivies company; that he (Constantine) was in the battles of New-York and Brandywine, and at the taking of Cornwallis;  and that he was knowing to Renway's being engaged in the same battles.
Page 146

Renway, in his examination before us, stated that he followed the retreating army from Canada in 1776, and belonged at that time to Capt. Derusha's company;  that he enlisted in the city of New-York in 1777, in Capt. Olivies company in Col. Hazen's regiment.  Renway further stated, that he was in the battles of Brunswick and White Plains in Col. Hazen's regiment, and in no other battle during the war.
    Sixthly.  Renway claimed to belong to the same company with Losetton, - alias Louilton, - and called him as a witness to prove his revolutionary services; but Losetton - knew no such man in his company as Renway.  Benjamin Mooers and Alexander Ferriol, knew no man of the name of Peter Renway in the service, during the revolutionary war. 
No. 12.}           Joseph Labo's case.
               C. K. Averill, attorney for Labo, requested us to enter upon our minutes, that John Benett - and Louis Mauny, - deceased, were the witnesses by whom the reputed services of Labo were proved in his original application for a pension.  Labo was then sworn, said he was 81 years of age;  that he entered the American army as a volunteer in Capt. Labonte's company, Col. Renyeas regiment;  afterwards enlisted at Stilwater; was present at the surrender of Burgoyne;  does not know the year the war ended; but was in Capt Labonte's company and Col. Livingston's regiment  at the close of the war;  of this he was certain.  He also stated, that he served in the army of the revolution about eight years, and did not receive a discharge; had drawn a pension under the act of the 15th.
Page 147

                                                                     17. 

15th. May 1828, until last fall.
              Prudent La Juness was then called as a witness for Labo, and after being sworn, said he never saw Labo in the service, but heard his name mentioned as being in the army at West Point and Albany, in the years 1779 - 80 - 81 and 82;  does not recollect the regiment Labo was said to have belonged to.  Witness said he was a baker for the army;  and when the soldiers came for their bread to the Government Bake Shop, he saw the name of Labo on the list - does not recollect the Christian name.
          Pierre Pyon sworn, said that he and Joseph Labo both belonged to Capt. Labonte's company in Col. Livingston's regt. and that they both served in the said company and regiment until the close of the war:  that they mounted guard in said regiment at Albany.
      Baptiste Malbeuf was then sworn, who stated, that he knew Joseph Labo;  that they served in the same company and regiment;  and that they remained in Col. Livingston's regt. till the close of the war.  Witness said, that he said Joseph Labo was the same person he knew in the army of the revolution.
     Fermon Losilton, alias Louitton - was next called as a witness in the part of Joseph Labo, and after being sworn, stated that he did know of Joseph Labo's serving in the army of the revolution.
      Alexander Ferriol was then called on the part of the government
Page 148

government and sworn.  He stated that he entered the army of the revolution in 1776, belonged to Olivie's Company, Col. Moses Hazen's regiment, and served in the said company and regimt. until the close of the war:  knew Capt. Goslin who joined Hazen's regiment at White Plains in 1778, and knew him from that time to the close of the war, and since, until the time of his death.  Witness says, that he did not know Joseph Labo in the service; saw him at Schenectady Barracks in the years 1778, 79, 80:  Witness said, all of the Canadian refugees who came out with the American army from Canada whether they were or were not attached to the army, drew provisions from the commissary:  did not know of Joseph Labo's doing duty in Col. Hazen's regiment:  thinks he should have known it, if he had:  was acquainted with Louis Marney, - and John B. Venitt - deceased; their character for truth good for aught he knew.  Witness thinks some part of Livingston's regiment, after their reduction, joined Col. Hazen's regiment.  (Note: There is a line crossed out at this point)
       Pierre Robarge was called as a witness on the part of the government, and sworn.  Witness said , he knew Joseph Labo well:  that he belonged to Capt. Labonte's company in Canada, and retreated with Livingston's regiment to Albany, and that Labo did not bear arms after reaching Albany, but left the regiment, and went to work with the farmers in Saratoga County.
      Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, and adjutant of Col. Hazen's regiment, stated that he joined the said regimt. about June 1778;  and that he had no knowledge of the said Joseph
Page 149

Joseph Labo's doing duty in, or belonging to the said regiment, at any time during the war;  nor did he believe that he ever served in the said regiment, as his name does not appear on the roll of the said regiment now in the possession of the said Benjamin Mooers, a copy of which has been forwarded to the Treasury department by the said Benjamin Mooers.  B. Mooers further stated, that he believed that Capt. Goselin joined Col. Hazen's regiment soon after he joined it.
       The attorney for Joseph Labo offered in evidence in support of the claim of Labo, a certified copy of a general power of attorney executed by the said Joseph Labo, and others, to Benjamin Mooers, giving him authority to collect their pay grants of lands, He, which said power of attorney was dated Sept. 12, 1790.  The attorney for Labo agreed to furnish us with a copy of the said power of attorney; and we agreed upon our part, if he did so, to annex it to our report to the Treasury department.  The copy has not been furnished by the attorney of Labo.
           Remarks upon the case of Joseph Labo.
Firstly.   Labo stated in his declaration of the 20th. June, 1828, that he enlisted in the Continental line of the army of the revolution for and during the war, and continued in its service until its termination, at which period he was a private in Capt. Labonte's company in Col. Livingston's regimt.  Labo stated in his oath of the 16th. of May, 1829 (which oath is attached to his declaration) that he served the greatest part of the times during the war in Col. Livingston's regiment, and about the
Page 150

about the last six years of his service, in Col. Hazen's regt. until the war ended and he was regularly discharged.
      Joseph Labo, in his examination before us, stated, that he entered the American army as a volunteer in Capt. Labonte's company in Col. Renyeas' regiment; - afterwards enlisted at Stilwater - was at the surrender of Burgoyne; but was in Capt. Labonte's company in Col. Livington's regiment at the close of the war;  of that he was certain.  The said joseph Labo also stated in his examination before us, that he did not receive a discharge at the close of war.  
Secondly.   The declaration aforesaid, in the case of Labo, is signed Joseph Labe, the name of Joseph Labo appears only in the body of the declaration.  Immediately under the declaration signed Joseph Labe on the oaths of Vinett and Marney - in these words, before me, Calvin K. Averill a justice of the peace in the county of Clinton, in the state of New-York, personally appeared this day John B. Vinett and Louis -   Mr. Marney of the said county, who did severally make oath, that Joseph Labe, by whom the foregoing declaration is subscribed, is generally reputed and believed to have been a soldier in the army of the revolution, in manner as therein stated, & they are personally knowing to his serving as above stated.  You will perceive, by looking at the examination of Joseph Labe (in Peter Renway's case) that he left the United States immediately after the close of the revolutionary war, and has resided ever since 30 leagues below Quebec until February 1830, at which time he was sent for
Page 151

                                                            21.

for by Baptiste Martin to come out to Rouses' point, for his pension. We would here beg leave to call the attention of the Secretary of the Treasury to W. Averill's - letter to the department, under date of June the 4th, 1830;  from which letter, we "give the following extract."  Joseph Labe and Peter Renway "are residents of Rouse's point.  I have known them for two "years past, and never heard anything against their characters "for truth and veracity:  they are inoffensive men, and I "believe, honest."  We regret that Joseph Labe had not been in the United States since the close of the Revolutionary war, until last February.  That W. Averill knew that there was a Joseph Labo, and a Joseph Labe, is proved by his letter to the department under date of the 26th. February. 1830, (which said letter is attached to the declaration of Labe)  but that he knew prior to about that time, whether Joseph Labe was dead or alive is not quite so certain.  That W. Averill's acquaintance with Joseph Labe, instead of being two years, was only from February 1830. to the fourth of June following.  If there was no mistake in copying the declaration furnished us by the department, in the case of Labo, then the pension which he has drawn from the United States, was clearly a fraud upon the government, for the declaration is signed Joseph Labe, and in all of the evidence of revolutionary services annexed to the said declaration, Joseph Labe, and not Joseph Labo, is spoken of as the person known to the witnesses.  Joseph Labo has drawn a pension until last fall. Joseph Labe
Page 152

Labe has applied for a pension last winter, and his claim has not been allowed.  It is proved by gen. Mooers: and Ferriol, that Labe was a regular soldier in the revolutionary war, and served to the close of the same, and was regularly discharged, as appears by the regimental roll of Col. Hazen's regiment, now in the possession of the said Mooers.  It will be perceived on examination, that the testimony in the case of Labo, is contradictory, and in many instances, totally irreconcileable.  We received evidence in the twelve preceding cases, at our first meeting at Rouse's point, on the 7th and 8th. days of September last.  On the evening of the 8th. of September, we adjourned from Rouses's point to Plattsburgh, without naming a day for the adjourned meeting.   After waiting more than two weeks we notified C. K. Averill, Esq:  that we should meet at the house of John M.Gee, in Plattsburgh, on the 12th. of October last, and continue in session until we had gone through with all the pension claims submitted to us by the Secretary of the Treasury.  We did not take the precaution to ask W. Averill to acknowledge the receipt of our notice naming time and place for the adjourned meeting.  On the 12th. of October, we went to the place appointed for the examination, and none of the pensioners or applicants for pension, appeared in person, or by their attorney.  We then sent a man to Rouses' point, to ascertain from W. Averill, whether he had received notice of the time and place appointed by us for the second meeting, and instructed the man to say to Averill, that we would hold open all of the next day, to give him and opportunity
Page 153

opportunity to appear, and if there was any mistake in his receiving notice of the adjourned meeting, that we would adjourn again to a day that should be convenient for him.  We received an answer from W. Averill, under date of the 13th. of October, 1830, a copy of which is annexed to our report.
       D. B. Mc. Niel, one of the examiners, gave notice to C. K, Averill, at our first meeting, that Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, would be empowered & as a witness on the part of the government before the examination was finally closed. 
        Pierre Robarge and Benjamin Mooers were not empowered - as witnesses at our first meeting, on the 7th. and 8th. of September last at Rouses' point.  Their testimony was taken in all the cases where their names appear as witnesses on the 12th. 13th, and 14th. days of October last.  Alexander Ferriol attended as a witness on the part of the government, at Rouses' point and at Plattsburgh, and was empowered as a witness at both places.  After having ascertained that W. Averill had received notice of the time and place appointed by us for the second meeting, and that he declined appearing in behalf of the persons interested in the examination, we proceeded on, and closed the examination on the 14th. of October last.  The testimony in the cases which follow from No. 13 to No. 17, inclusive, was taken at Plattsburgh on the 12th. 13th. and 14th. days of October last.
No. 13.     Jean Baptiste Rocieau Case.
Rocieau stated in his declaration, that he enlisted in Capt. Livingston Company in Col. Livingston's regiment, and afterwards
Page 154

afterwards in Col. M. Hazen's regiment, in Capt. Robisheaux's company, of the New York line.
Pierre Robarge was then called and sworn, who stated that he was a soldier in Col. Livingston's regimt. and served therein until its reduction; and that he know now such man as Jean Baptiste Rocieau, in said regiment.
Alexander Ferriol was then called and sworn, who stated that he served in Col. Hazen's regimt. until the close of the war, and had no knowledge of such a man as Jean Baptiste Rocieau serving in the said regiment.
Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, who served as Adjutant of Col. Hazen's regiment from 1778, until the close of the revolutionary war, had no knowledge of Jean B. Rocieau's serving in the said regiment.
No.14, Peter Labonte's case.
Labonte stated in his declaration of the 18th of August, 1828, that he enlisted in Capt. Livingston's Company in Col. Livingston's regiment of the New York line, and served until the close of the war. He also stated in his affidavit of the 31st of November, 1829, (and which said affidavit is annexed to his declaration) that he served in general Hazen's regiment towards the close of the war, and that he received his discharge from Col. Hazen. In the testimony of Nicholas Constantine and Joseph Labe, attached to the aforesaid declaration of Peter Labonte, dated 16th Feby. 1829, it is stated that Peter Labonte was a private in Capt. Livingston's company, in Col. Livingston's regiment in the army of the revolution, and was, according to the best of the deponents' recollection and belief, enlisted for 
and
Page 155

25.
and during the war; and that the said Labonte was afterwards transferred into general Hazen's Regiment of the New York line; and that Labonte continued to serve in general Hazen's regiment until the close of the war.
Pierre Robarge was called and sworn, who said that he knew Peter Labonte well; he belonged to Capt. Labonte's company in Canada, and retreated with Col. Livingston's regt. to Albany; but that Labonte left the regiment at that place, and went to work in Saratoga County, and did not bear arms, or join the regiment afterwards. Witness said he belonged to Col. Livingston's regiment, and remained in it until its reduction.
Alexander Ferriol sworn, said, that he was acquainted with Peter Labonte; that the said Labonte came out from Canada with the retreating army in 1776; has no knowledge of his serving in the army after the retreat from Canada; saw him frequently during the war at Schenectady; but did not at any time during the war, see him in the service. Witness joined the army in 1776, and served in Col. Hazen's regiment until the close of the war.
Benjamin Booers, Adjutant in Col. Hazen's regiment, said he had no knowledge of Peter Labonte's serving in said regiment, and that he did not believe he did, as his name was not to be found upon the regimental roll of Col. Hazen's regiment.
Remarks upon the case of Peter Labonte.
In the oath administered before C. K. Averill, on the 16th day of February
Page 156

February, 1829, Joseph Labe is made to swear that Peter [illegible] Labonte was in the service, [illegible]. and in another affidavit sworn to before the same magistrate, on the 1st of September, 1829, Joseph Labe is again made to swear that he was a soldier in the same regiment with Peter Labonte, [illegible].
It will be borne in mind that Joseph Labe was not in the United States at the time the above mentioned oaths purport to have been administered by C. K. Averill, Esqr. had not been (as appears by his testimony in the case of Peter Renway marked in the margin No.11.) for more than 45 years. Joseph Labe's first appearance in the United States since 1783, was in February, 1830.
Pierre Robarge was sworn and stated, that he knew Peter Labonte; that Labonte came out from Canada with, and belonged to Col. Livingston's regiment; but that he left the said regiment on its arrival at Albany, and went to work with the farmers in Saratoga County, and served no longer in the army, to his, the witnesses knowledge
Alexander Ferriol was sworn, said he belonged to Col. Hazen's regiment till the close of the war; and that he had no knowledge of Peter Labonte's serving in the said regiment at anytime during the war.
Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, corroborated the testimony of Ferriol, so far as related to Labonte's not having served in Col. Hazen's regiment.
No. 15 John Baptiste Labonte's case.
Labonte stated, as appears by the copy of his declaration
that
Page 157

that he enlisted in the continental line of the army of the revolution in Capt. Labonte's company in Col. Livingston's regiment.
By the certificate of justice Averill annexed to the aforesaid declaration, it would appear that on the 16th day of February, 1829, Nicholas Constantine, and Joseph Labe appeared before him, and swore that Labonte was transferred from Livingston's regiment to Col. Hazen's, and continued in the said last mentioned regiment, to the close of the war.
Pierre Robarge was called and sworn, who stated, that he was a soldier in Col. Livingston's regiment, and knew John Baptiste Labonte, on the retreat from Canada, of the said regiment that after their arrival at Albany the said John Baptiste Labonte quit Livingston's regiment, and went with Joseph Labe to work with the farmers in Saratoga County.
Alexander Ferriol sworn, said, he belonged to Col. Hazen's regiment, and knew John Baptiste Labonte on the retreat of the American army from Canada in 1776; has no knowledge of his serving in the army after the retreat, saw him frequently during the war, but never saw him in the service after the retreat; was confident that Labonte did not serve in Col. Hazen's regiment at any period during the war.
Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, has no knowledge of John Baptiste Labonte; kne no man of that name in Col. Hazen's regiment at the close of the war, or at any other time.
Page 158

Remarks.
     The Secretary of the Treasury will deserve that the name of Joseph Labe is mafsed into the service again (one year before he left his residence 30 leagues below Quebec) to establish the claim of J. B. Labonte to a pension.
     It was proved by Pierre Robarga of col. Livingston's reg. that Labonte left the said regiment after its arrival at Albany from Canada, and went to work in Saratoga County. 
     Alexander Feniol knew John Baptiste Labonte on the retreat of the army from Canada; thinks he quit the service on the arrival of the retreating army at Albany, is confident that he did not serve in col. Hazen's regiment at any period of the revolutionary war.
     Benjamin Moore, one of the aminers, knew no such man as John Baptiste Labonte in Col. Hazen's regiment of which he, the said Benjamin Moore was adjutant at the close of the war
No. 16.          Samuel Chartier's case.
      Chartier stated in his declaration, that he entered as a volunteer in the Continental line during the war, and continued in the service until its termination, at which period he was a private in Capt. Augustine Sefeaux's Company in Col. Livingston's regiment; and that in the year 1779, he was transferred into Col. Hazen's regiment, and that while in said regiment, he was a private in Capt. Laurence Olivie's Company.
       Alexander Ferriol sworn,
Page 159

29.
from Canada, in 1776. Chartier was at that time a small boy, Witnofs never saw him in the Capt. Olivie's Company during the war. Witnofs was a fifer in Capt. Olivie's Company, and served in said Company, until the close of the war.
     Pierre Robarge sworn - said he knew chartier: that he was attached to Livingston's regiment until its reduction.
     Benjamin Moores, one of the examiners, a lieutenant in Capt. Olivie's Company, and adjutant of Col. Hazen's regiment, Hated, that Samuel Chartier did not belong to Capt. olivie's company, nor Col. Hazen's regiment to the best of his recollection, from 1778, to the close of the war.
     the case of Bhartier we submit without making a single remark.
No. 17.
     Joseph Brisset's case.
     Brisset stated in his declaration, that he was a soldier in Capt. Mauriel Disazvois's Comp. in Col. Livingston's regiment, and served in the said Company and regiment until the close of the war.
   It is stated in the testimony of Peter Renway and Nicholas Constantine, attached to the declaration of the said Brisset, that he was transferred from Col. Livingston's regiment in 1779, to Col. Hazen's regiment, and that he was in the service until the close of the war.
     Pierre Robange sworn, said he knew Joseph Brisset in Col. Livingston's regiment during the war of the revolution; that Brisset was at that time a very old man, and left the regiment at Rhode- Island, and went into the hospital at Boston an invalid.
     Alexander Ferriol sworn - said, he knew no such man as
Page 160

as Joseph Brisset in Col. Hazen's regiment, during the revolutionary war.  Witness served in Col. Hazen's regiment, until the close of the war.
       Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, said he knew no such man in Col. Hazen's regt. as Joseph Brisset, at any time during the revolutionary war.
     We remark, in conclusion, that the claimants for pensions under the act of the 15th. May. 1828, who appeared before us, were principally foreigners, and had been so short a time in the United States, that we were unable to obtain the least information as to their character and standing.  It was not only desirable, but highly necessary to a proper and satisfactory examination of their claims, that we should ascertain whether they were men of truth and veracity, inasmuch as they were generally witnesses in support of each other's claims.  There was such a striking variance in many of the cases submitted to us, between the original declaration of the claimants, and the testimony they gave before us, that we supposed C. K. Averill, counsel for the claimants would see the necessity of offering evidence as to the character of the claimants. and also, as the character of their witnesses. We were strengthened in this belief, by looking at the first paragraph in C. K. Averill's letter to the Secretary of the Treasury, under date of the 4th. of June 1830.  No evidence was offered by the counsel for the claimants to show that they, or their witnesses were entitled to credit, except in the case of N. Chatterton, one of the claimants, and of Louis Marney, - and John B. Vinett, deceased:  the two last mentioned persons having been empowered as witnesses in their life time by several of the claimants at the time their pension papers were prepared.
Page 161

  The testimony of Pierrre Pyon, Batpiste Malbeuf, Joseph Labo and Peter Renway was of an unsatisfactory character, and should, if received at all, be received with caution and considerable allowance.  If these men could recollect in 1828 & 9, what companies and regiments they belonged to in 1783, and other occurrences that look place in the war of the revolution with sufficient precision and certainty to swear to them, it would be a natural and reasonable conclusion (if they swore to the truth then) that their testimony, taken in relation to the same facts and occurrences in 1830, would correspond with the testimony given by then in 1828 and 1829.  A few of the many contradictions in the testimony of the above named persons, we have pointed out in our report. 
       Nicholas Constantine's evidence attached to Renway's declaration, is contradicted by Lossilton, - Ferriol, and Benj. Mooers, and his testimony attached to the declaration of Joseph Labo, Peter Labonte, P. Rocieau, and John B. Labonte, is contradicted by Benjamin Mooers and Alexander Ferriol.  Constantine is an aged and imbecile man, and we do not consider him entitled to credit.  
     The Secretary will observe, by examining the declaration and the evidence accompanying them in the cases of John B. Labonte, Peter Renway, and Peter Labonte, that a palpable fraud was practised upon the government in making use of the name of Joseph Labe, to prove their revolutionary services, it being well established, that Joseph Labe was not in the United States at the time or times that his evidence in support of their claims
Page 162

purports to have been taken before C. K. Averill at Rouse's point.
      Alexander Ferriol, a witness called on the part of the government, was objected to by the Counsel for the claimants, on the ground, that he had several years since, been convicted of larceny;  but it appearing that he had been restored to competency as a witness by a pardon from the governor of this state, the objection was over ruled.
      Ferriol is an intelligent man, and appears to have an extraordinary good memory.  Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners, has been acquainted with Ferriol nearly fifty years, and has confidence in this statements touching the events of the revolutionary war. 
      But the Secretary of the Treasury will observe, that the testimony of Ferriol, is pretty generally supported (when it is mentioned) by the testimony of Benjamin Mooers.
     Pierre Robarge, another witness called by us, was amongst the first settlers of this county his character for truth and veracity, is good.
      All of the persons whose names appear in our report as witnesses, were duly sworn prior to the taking of their testimony, except Benjamin Mooers, one of the examiners.  His affidavit appears below.  

                                         State of New-York}
                                           Clinton county.}
        Benjamin Mooers, of Plattsburg, being duly sworn doth depose and say, that the evidence given by him in all of the preceding cases contained in this report (in which his name appears
Page 163

                                                                     33.
appears as a witness, is the truth, according to the best of his knowledge and belief.
                                             Benjn. Mooers.
Sworn and subscribed the first 
day of December, 1830, Before me 
S. J. B.. L. Skinner, Justice Peace.

Our report would have been made long since, but for reasons beyond our controul.  It is now respectfully submitted.
Benjn. Mooers.
D. B. Mc. Neil.

       (Copy.)
                      Rouse's point, October 30th, 183
 
Gent.

          I received your letter stating that you should hold an examination in relation to certain persons having claims in the United States for pensions on the 12th. instant.  I have also been verbally informed, that you would hold open until tomorrow.  For the reasons stated in my former communication, and other reasons since, I see nothing to alter my determination, particularly as you do not deny in your letter the allegations stated.
                                      I am, respectfully,
                                          Yours, &
                                 C. K. Averill, Atty for 
                                  certain pensioner.

Genl. B. Mooers, & 
David B. Mc. Niel, Esq;
Commissioners, &
N.B.  The claims that have been passed or acted upon, are submitted without further evidence.
Page 164

(Top left corner of envelope)
Benj.n Mooers. &
D. B. Me. Niel,
dated Sept. 24, 1830. &
enclosure from C. K. Averill.

(Middle of envelope)

Free
The Hon S. D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury.
Plattsburgh
Sept. 30  Washington City.


(At the bottom - upside down)

October 7. 1830
and answered
Page 165

Red 7 Oct 1830.
Plattsburgh Septr. 24th. 1830.

Dear Sir, 

       Your letters of the 30th. July last together with the copies of sundry Revolutionary claims reached us on the tenth day of July - We immediately informed C. K. Averill Esqr. the agent for the pensioners & applicants for pensions named in your letter, that we would attend to the duties of our appointment at Rous's Point on the 7th. day of September instant, & requested him to give notice to all concerned to appear before us on that day.  We attended at the time & place appointed, & after swearing two interpreters provided to examine the claims of all those, who appeared and declared themselves prepared for the investigation - The persons intrusted did not all appear, & their atty said he was not ready to proved in several of the cased, we therefore adjourned after two days Session without fixing on a day certain for the next meeting, but left it with the agent for the
Page 166

Pensioners to consult his own conscience &
the consciences of the Pensioners as to the day
on which we should meet again, & write
us- It was however expressly understood
between Mr. Averill the attorney for the Pensioners & ourselves that
the next meeting should take place at
Plattsburgh within a few days, & when
it became a question to what day we should
adjourn, we left it optional with him
because we were disposed to give him
ample time to procure his witnesses, &
prepare for the further investigation of
the claims in question. We yesterday
received a letter from Averill of which the
enclosed is a copy- on the receipt of this
letter we wrote Mr. Averill & informed
him, that we should proceed with
the investigation of the claims in question
on the 12th day of October next & continue
in session from day to day till the
investigation was brought to a close.
We also informed Mr. Averill if he
had any good objection to [illegible] against
the propriety of either of the Commissioners
acting in the matters submitted to them
by the Hon The Secretary of the Treasury
that his objections should be noted
Page 167

& [illegible] in our Report to the Treasury
Department – Mr. Averill at an early stage
of our proceedings manifested quite a refractory
disposition, but he soon learnt that we
were not to be [distracted] from a faithful
& impartial discharge of the duties assigned
to us. If Mr. Averill appears on the 12th
of October, we hope to [illegible] the examination
in two days. Immediately after the examination
is closed we will make & forward our report.

Yours respectfully,
D.B. McNeil
Benjamin Mooers

The Hon. S. D. Ingham
Page 168

Rouses Point Sept 22 1930

Gentlemen
I have ascertained to my satisfaction that the complaint against the pensions in this section to the Secretary of the U S Treasury department proceeded from one of the board appointed by the Secretary to investigate their claims [illegible] Genl. Mooers. Therefore you will readily perceive the manifest impropriety in their being tried by their accuser. Had I have known this previous to your ordering upon the duties assigned to you the obligation would have been made and their rights would not have been submitted to your deliberations. I give you this notice in order that you may take such a course as you see proper in relation to those you have [illegible] upon and allowed

I am respectfully Yours
C.K. Averill Counsel
for the Claimants
Genl. Benj. Mooers
D.B. McNeil Esq.
Commissioners appointed to investigate
certain Revolutionary Claims
Page 169

Copy
Rec'd 7 October, 1830
Plattsburgh, Sept. 24, 1830
Dear Sir
Your letters of the 30th July last, together with the copies of sundry revolutionary claims, reached us on the 10th day of July. We immediately informed C. K. Averill, Esq. the agent for the pensioners and applicants for pensions named in your letter, that we would attend to the duties of our appointment at Rouse's point, on the 7th day of September instant, and requested him to give notice to all concerned, to appear before us on that day. We attended at the time and place appointed and after swearing two interpreters, proceeded to examine the claims of all those who appeared and declared themselves prepared for the investigation. The persons interested did not all appear, and their attorney said he was not ready to proceed in several of the cases, we therefore adjourned after two days session, without fixing on a day certain for the next meeting, but left it with the agent for the pensioners to consult his own convenience, and the convenience of the pensioners, as to the day on which we should meet again and write us. It was, however, expressly understood between Mr. Averill, the attorney for the pensioners, and ourselves, that the next meeting should take place at Plattsburgh, within a few days, and when it became a question as to what day we should adjourn, we left it optional with him, because we were disposed to give him ample time to procure his witnesses, and prepare for the further investigation of the claims in question. We yesterday received a letter from Averill, of which the enclosed is a copy. On the receipt of this letter, we wrote Mr. Averill, and informed him that we should proceed with the investigation of the claims in question, on the 12th day of October next, and continue in session from day to day, 'till the investigation was brought to a close. We also informed Mr. Averill that if he had any good objection to urge against the propriety of either of the commissioners acting in the matters submitted to them by the hon. the Secretary of the Treasury, that his objections should be noted and embraced in our report to the Treasury department.
Page 170

Averill, at an early stage of our proceedings, manifested quite a refractory disposition, but he soon learnt, that we were not to be diverted from a faithful and impartial discharge of the duties assigned to us. If Mr. Averill appears on the 12th of October, we hope to close the examination in two days. Immediately after the examination is closed, we will make and forward our report. 

Yours respectfully
D. B. McNiel
[illegible]
The Hon. P. D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury
Copy of the letter from Mr. Averill, referred to in the foregoing communication.

Rouse's Point, Sept. 22d 1830

I have ascertained to my satisfaction, that the complaint against the pensioners in this section, to the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury Department, proceeded from one of the Board appointed by the Secretary to investigate their claims, viz. General Mooers: therefore, you will readily perceive the manifest impropriety in their being tried by their accusers. Had I have known this previous to your entering upon the duties assigned to you, that objection would have been made, and their rights would not have been submitted to your deliberations. I give you this notice, in order that you may take such a course as you see proper in relation to those you have passed upon, and allowed. 

General Benjamin Mooers,
D. B. McNeil, Esq.

I am, respectfully yours, C.K. Averill, Counsel for the Claimants

Commissioners appointed to investigate certain Revolutionary claims.
Page 171

From
D.B. McNeil, Collector,
Plattsburgh, Lake Champlain
dated June 25, 1830

To
Hon. S.D. Ingham
South of the Treasury
Washington City.

Plattsburgh June 29
Page 172

Received 8 July 1830
1992
D
Collectors Office District of Champlain
Plattsburgh June 25th 1830
Dear Sir,
I visited Rouses Point an Friday last – 
on my arrival there I addressed letters to some
of the earliest settlers of that place, making such
inquiries as you suggested in your letter of
the 4th of June instant [illegible] to certain Canadian
claimants under the Pension Law of the 15th
of May 1828. I concluded that this would
be as satisfactory a method of coming at the
information required as I could at present adopt.
I send enclosed the answers of the Gentlemen
to whom I addressed letters on the subject, &
can assure you that they are men of integrity
& that the most implicit confidence can
be placed in their statements. I had confidential
communications with several other reputable Gentlemen
on the subject in question, & they
all agreed in saying that C.K. Averill had
agents in Canada to hunt up & bring out
Canadians, who were reputed Soldiers in the
Army of the Revolution – all with whom I
concurred on the subject agreed in saying that
they are of opinion, that there was something
[many] in the [business], but none was able
to point out any particular case in which
fraud had been [perpetrated] by Averill on the
Government.
Page 173

It was generally considered by the people in the neighborhood of Rouse's Point that a continued residence in the United States was necessary to obtain a pension under any of the existing laws.  But it would appear by the pension Law of the 15th of May 1828 that privates residing in Canada who served in the Army of the Revolution are entitled to relief under the said law not withstanding they are non residents and have maintained so from the time of their discharge up to the time of their application to be put on the pension list.  All of the persons named in your letter of the 4th except Baileau were nonresidents up to August 1828.  This fact coupled with the extraordinary pains taken by Averill and the high rewards paid by him to his agents for procuring Canadians to come out to the States and proffer their claims to the Government, first excited a suspicious in the minds of some of our most respectable citizens, that all was not right. my own opinion from all I can learn is that many of the claims presented by Averill under the pension law of 1828 are of doubtful character for the following reasons.
1st Forty some years have elapsed since the Canadian refugees were discharged and the oldest residents in this county have no knowledge
Page 174

of but one man named in your list up to
August 1828.- 2nd. The notorious ignorance of
the lower class of Canadians warrants the
conclusion that with the use of money
& by the management of artful men great
imposition & extensive fraud may be
practiced upon the Government by false

[illegible].3rd. The [illegible] manner in which it
is said that Averill [illegible] the [illegible] papers
for the claimants leads one to suspect, that if the
evidence procured him was closely scrutinized
that it would turn out to be of unsatisfactory
character.

All letters addressed to me inform
the Treasury Department as “Collector Champlain”
without the addition of Plattsburgh papers
& go to the Town of Champlain 21 miles
north of Port of entry in this District.
Your letter of the 14th of June Instant on the
subject of the monthly return of [illegible] reached
me to day from Champlain.

I am very Respectfully your
obedient Servant
D.B. McNeil
Collector
Hon S.D. Ingham
Secretary of the Treasury
Page 175

Received 8 July 1830
1999
Rouses Point June 19th 1830
Dear Sir

Yours in the date of the 17th Instant was
duly received, relating to the residence of persons
therein named - who appear to be receiving pensions from the
the United States.
In reply I would state that I have
resided in the Town of Champlain and at the
place called Rouses Point about thirty five years,
and that I know of but one person named in your
list from the Hon. Secretary of the Treasury that
has resided in this Town or county for any length
of time - viz Amable Baileau or Bilow – who was
a resident when I came to this Town – I know that
several persons named in said list have come from Canada
within one or two years to this place for the purpose
of making Their claims upon the United States government
for revolutionary services under the act of the 15th of
May 1828. I know that it is a matter of public notoriety
in this neighbourhood that C.K. Averill has
employed men to [hunt for] reputed Soldiers of the
Revolution in the province of Canada & have them
sent out to this place to make out the papers – 
necessary to bring them under the provisions of the
before mentioned act. Solomon M. Rouse, residing in
St. Johns Lower Canada & Charles Whitye of this place.
Page 176

have both been employed in That business Through
Canada, as I am well informed, and have been as
far as [Quebec] [illegible] those Claimants and brought
them to C.K. Averill’s office when the papers considered
necessary to entitle them to the benefits of said act were made
out. I have heard both of these persons Rouse & Whitye
express a dissatisfaction with C.K Averill for
not paying them the amount they were to receive
by an understanding for bringing Those men
to him from Canada for the purpose of procuring
their pensions.
I would refer you Sir to some few men of
the first respectability in this place who are
well acquainted with the transactions to which your
letter alludes – who will speak more fully than
I feel disposed to do in consequence of the unfriendly
feelings existing between Mr. Averill & myself
references to Messrs. Silus Hubble, Thomas Hibbard,
John W. Bailey, Benjamin Graves, & Dr. Benjamin
Mooers – will be able to give you further
information on the subject.

I am very Respectfully your
Obedient Servant
(Signed) Ezra Thurber

(Signed) Col D.B. McNeil
Collector of the Customs
Page 177

1997
Rec'd 8. July, 1830,
Collector's office District of Champlain,
Plattsburgh June 25, 1830.
Dear Sir,
In visited Rouse's point. on Friday last.
On my arrival there I addressed letters to some of the earliest Settlers of that place, making such enquiries as you suggested in your letter of the 4th of June instant,  relative to certain Canadian Claimants under the pension law of the 15th of May, 1828. I concluded that this would be as satisfactory a method of coming
at the information required as I could at present adopt. I send
enclosed the answers of the gentlemen to whom I addressed
letters on the subject, and can assure you that they are men of 
integrity, and that the most implicit confidence can be placed
in their slatements. I had confidential communications with several other respectable gentlemen on the subject in question and they all agreed in saying that CK Averill had agents in Canada to  hunt up and bring out Canadians who were reputed soldiers in the army of the revolution.  all with whom I communed on the subject agreed in saying that they were of opinion that there was something wrong in the business, but none were able to point out any particular case in which fraud had been practiced by Averill on the government.  It was generally considered by the people in the neighbourhood of Rouse's point that a continued residence in the United States was necessary to obtain a pension under any of the existing laws; but it would appear
Page 178

appear by the pension law of the 15th of May 1828, that privates residing in Canada, who served in the army of the 
revolution, are entitled to relief under the said law, not
withstanding they are non residents and have remained so
from the time of their discharge up to the time of their application
to be put on the pension list. All of the persons named in your
letter of the 4th except Baileau, were non-residents up to August
1828. This fact coupled with the extraordinary pains taken by Averill, and the high rewards paid by him to his agents for procuring Canadians to come out to the  States, and proffer their claims
to the government, find excited a suspicion in the minds of some of our  most respectable citizens, that all was not right. My own
opinion from all I can learn, is, that many of the claims presented
by Averill , under the pension law of 1828 , are of doubtful character for the following reasons,
1st.  Forty seven years have elapsed since the Canadian refugees were discharged, and the oldest residents in this County
have no knowledge of but one man named in your list up to August 1828.
2nd The notorious ignorance, of the lower class of Canadians warrants the conclusion that with the use of money, and by the management of artful men, great imposition and extensive
frauds may be practiced upon the government by false swearing.
3d the secret manner in which Averill prepares the necessary
papers for the claimants, leads me to suspect  that if the evidence procured
Page 179

prepared by him was closely scrutinized that it would turn out to be of an unsatisfactory character.
All letters addressed to me from the Treasury Department as Collector, Champlain, without the addition of Plattsburgh, [illegible] me, and go to the town of Champlain, 21 miles north of the port of entry win this district. Your letter of the 14th of June instant, on the subject of the monthly return of bonds. [illegible] reach me today from Champlain.

I am very respectfully, your obedient servant, D. B. McNiel, Collector

Honorable S.D. Ingram,
Secretary of the Treasury.