Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File R. 8,833, for Epaphras Ripley, Vermont
Page 1

Service | | Number 
Conn. | Ripley, Epaphras | R. 8.833
Vt. | | .
Page 2

33023
Epaphras, Ripley
Act 7 June '32
No 1
Page 3

Declaration of Ephaphram [Epaphras] Ripley for a pension in order to obtain the benefit of the act of the 7 of June 1832. State of Vermont Windham
Sept 27th 1832 -
The.probate court begun and holden in and for the district of Westminster Epaphras Ripley resident of Rockingham in sd County aged seventy one years who being first duly sworn according to law doth on his oath make the following declaration in order to obtain the benefit of the act of Congress passed June the 7th 1832 that he enlisted in the Service of the United State in the Revolutionary War with Grate Briton [Great Britain] in the month of June  or July enlisted in the town of Windham in the state of Conn [Connecticut] in the Company commanded by Capt Jose [illegible] West and Reg. Command by Col. Mott in the [com?] line for six months and after his time was out in the month of January or February enlisted for three years in the [Regiment?] commanded by Col. Warner and company by Cape Bronson he enlisted at fort independence and was in the Battle at Hubardton Vt and at the taking of Bougiane and went to the South and the explanation of his enlistment was discharged in the state of N. Y. does not  recollect it is not in his power to [?] prove his services only by the papers that accompany this declaration he hereby relinquishes every claim whatever to a pension or an annuity [?] the present and he declares that his name is not on the pension roll of any agency in any state.  Sworn & Subscribed the day & year [enforced?]
Epaphras Ripley 
Peter M Taft - Judge
And the [?] court do hereby declare their opinion after the investigation of the matter [?] after finding the [Interrogations?] [?] by the war department that the above named applicant was a revolutionary soldier in service as he states.
Peter M Taft - Judge
Page 4

I Azer Reeps Clerk and [?] of Probate Court aforesaid do hereby certify that the foregoing contains the original proceeding of the [?] in the matter of [?] of Epaphras Ripley for a pension under guardian this and that Richard Cobb of said Rockingham is his legal guardian 
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and see R of office this 28th day of [?] AD 18?? 
 
33023
Epaphras Ripley 33023 
Vt [Vermont]
Act 7 June '32
No 1
Page 5

Tabitha Ripley
1839 [underlined]

No. 16 [underlined]
E. Ripley
Page 6

Declaration in order to obtain for Epaphras Ripley of Rockingham in the District of Westminster and state of Vermont a person who on account o mental infirmity is incapable of testifying in in court the benefit of the act of congress passed June 7, 1832 state of Vermont
District of Westminster on this 28th day of November AD 1839 personally appeared in open court before the Probate [illegible] for the district of Westminster in the state aforesaid now, Tabitha Ripley of Rockingham aforesaid who being first duly sworn according to the law doth on her oath make the following declaration in order to obtain for the aforesaid Epaphras Ripley the benefit of the provisions made by the act of Congress [passed?] June 7, 1832 that she is the daughter of the said Epaphras Ripley that he the said Epaphras resided Rockingham aforesaid and that his mental infirmity is such and has been for several years past as to destroy his faculties and to render him incapable of verifying[?] under oath that the said Epaphras is as she always considered and believe about eighty one years of age and that she has understood from the said Epaphras Ripley that he was in the service of the United States in the Revolutionary war about three years but does not know under what officer
Page 7

he served - she believes that he performed the
service as before mentioned, he cannot specify any
particular service rendered by him
and she declares that his name as she believe is
not on the pension roll of any agency
Sworn to and subscribed the day and year
aforesaid
Before me
Tabitha Ripley
Ellery Attbe Probate Judge
and the said Court do hereby declare their opinion
that the above named Epaphras Ripley was a revolutionary
soldier and served as stated by the above
named Tabitha Ripley Ellery 
Attbe Probate Judge
I Charles Phelps Clerk & Register of the Probate
Court for the District of Westminster aforesaid do certify
that the foregoing contains the original proceedings
of the said Court in the matter of the application
of Tabitha Ripley for a pension for Epaphras Ripley.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand
and the seal of said cause this 29th day of January AD 1840
and further that the above signatures purporting to be
the signature of Ellery Attbe Judge of Probate on his
genuine signature
Attest C. Phelps Probate Register
Page 8

Power of Attorney
16 April 1853
Epaphras Ripley, dec.
John W. Shipman, Adm. 
to
Edmund F. Brown
No. 17
Edm. F. Brown
of Wash. 
ATTN.
New York City
18 Apl. 1853
Page 9

POWER OF ATTORNEY: - Revolutionary Pension Claim.
Know all Men by these Presents, and that I, John W. Shipman of Perkinsville, Windsor County, Vermont, do hereby constitute and appoint Edward H. Brown, of Washington City to be my true and lawful Agent and Attorney, to prosecute the Claim of Epaphras Ripley, deceased for any amount of Revolutionary Pension, [crossed out; or Increase in Pension] that may be due; and I hereby authorize my said Agent to examine all the papers an documents of every description, in relation to said claim, that may be on file in the Departments at Washington City, or elsewhere; to file any additional evidence or arguments that can be obtained; and to receive the Certificate which may be issued for said Claim, which Certificate I wish may payable to me, an Administrator of said Ripley; to appoint one or more substitutes under him for the purposes herein expressed; and to do all things that I might or could do were personally present. Hereby ratifying and confirming all that my said Attorney and Agent lawfully do in premises.
WITNESS my hand and Seal this 16th day April A.D., 1853.
John W. Shipman
Signed and Sealed in the presence of }
[illegible] Harris
J. H. Williams

STATE OF Vermont
COUNTY OF Windham } ss:
On this Sixteenth day of April A.D. 1853, before me, a Notary Public [crossed out; Justice of the Peace] in and for the County aforesaid personally appeared John W. Shipman and acknowledged the foregoing Power of Attorney to be his act and deed, for the purposes therein mentioned.
In testimony whereof, I hereunto set my hand and seal, the day and year aforesaid

J PEACE [SEAL] {crossed out]
J.H. Williams
Notary Public
Page 10

No. 1 [crossed out]
Certificate of Death & Heirship

Epaphras Ripley, decd [deceased]
9 children
John W. Shipman, Administrator
Claim for pension
Act 7, June 1832.
No 13.

Edm F Brown of Wasn. [Washington] Attorney
New York City, 18, Apl 1853. }
Page 11

EXPLANATION. -- The following Form can be used by Prothonotaries, Surrogates, Registers of Probate, and other Officers, for certificates in the cases of deceased Applicants for Revolutionary Pension; and for deceased Pensioners, where Arrears or Increase may be claimed. In either case, the precise date of death must be plainly stated, with the names of all the children who were alive when the party died; and if any have since died, it must be stated, with the names of the children they left. Where there are but few children, and they all live near each other, there need not be an Administrator. 
If for a deceased Pensioner, the Grade, Rate, and law under which pensioned should be stated; and in Widows' cases the name and Grade of the Husband should also be stated. 

Certificate of Death and heirship. 

STATE OF Vermont COUNTY of Windham } ss: It is hereby certified, that satisfactory evidence has been exhibited before me, Benjamin W. Dean Probate Register of the District of Westminster in [crossed out; and for] the County aforesaid, that Epaphras Ripley late of Rockingham in said County, who was was an [Insane] Applicant for a Revolutionary Pension died in said County, on the eleventh day of February in the year one thousand eight hundred and fifty three leaving surviving him the following named children only, viz: Tabitha Ripley, Charles Ripley, Shubel Ripley, Clarissa Ripley, Rodentha Ingalls, Azuba Hatch, Randilla Ripley, Octava [Octavia] Shipman and Nancy Stickney, and that he left no widow, his wife having died about eleven years ^ago and he never married another and that the above named Tabitha, Charles, Shubel, Clarissa, Rodentha Azusa Randilla Octava [Octavia] and Nancy

are the only children of the said Epaphras Ripley who are now living. I further certify, that John W Shipman of Weathersfield Vermont has been duly appointed and qualified as Administrator of the estate of the said Epaphras Ripley deceased. 

In Testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and affixed my Seal of Office, this Sixteenth day of April one thousand eight hundred and fifty three
Benjamin W. Dean 
Probate Register
Page 12

Charles Ripley
Affidavit in
the case of 
Epaphras Ripley
Page 13

I Charles Ripley of Ripton in the County of Addison in the State of Vermont aged sixty eight years do depose and say that I am the Son of Epharas [misspelled; Epaphras] Ripley of Rockingham in the County of Windham in the State of Vermont 
My Father was out in the Revolutionary War as I have often heard him say
I have not lived at home with my Father since I was fifteen years old during my boyhood and before I left house I have frequently heard my Father say in conversation with people who used to call on him that he was out in the Revolutionary War and that he was in the Vermont troops or militia and served under Col [Colonel] Warner and in Captain Hutchins company 
I have also heard him state that he was at Fort Independence and at the taking of Burgoynes Army these Statements were made to people who were making inquiries about the Revolutionary War and before I was fifteen years old my Father lived in Windham Connecticut & Grand Father [grandfather] Ripley also lived in the same town he enlisted in the Revolutionary War and also enlisted two of his sons my father was one of them they were under age at the time of their enlistment Grand Father Ripley was taken a prisoner and put in the Jail and was there killed by the Jailor My father has been Insane for some over twenty years and has been supported by the
Page 14

Town of Rockingham for a long time My Father has lived in Rockingham a great [illegible] of year he was married in [illegible; crossed out]
Charles Ripley [signed]

State of Vermont
Addison County ss} 
At Ripton June 26th 1851 Personally appeared before me Charles Ripley and made oath that the above affadavit [affidavit] by him signed is true the alterations [illegible] made before signing and I herby certify that said Ripley is a man of truth and veracity and can be replied upon as such
Curtis P. Ripley
Justice of the Peace
Page 15

Certificates of Judge & Register of Probate, with 6 Affidavits;
Proving the Marriage & deaths of Epaphras Ripley & wife, & names of all their children, 9 living & 1 dead.
No 15

E.F. Brown of Washn [Washington]
Atty [Attorney]
New York
15. Sep [September]. 53}
Page 16

State of Vermont
Windham County s.s.}

I Abishai Stoddard Judge of Probate in and for the District of Westminster in the County of Windham aforesaid do hereby certify that from the affidavits of Luther Webb, Alexander S. Campbell, Ebenzer Locke, Napoleon B. Roundy, Manasseh Divoll, Joel M. Brown, herewith sent, and from my own knowledge & the history of this County and its inhabitants I am well satisfied that the late Epaphras Ripley of the Town of Rockingham in said District who was an applicant for a Revolutionary Pension died in said Town on the eleventh day of February A.D. 1853 and left no widow, but that the following married nine children survived and still survive him vis Tabitha Ripley, Shubel Ripley, Rodentha Ingalls, Randilla Ripley, Charles Ripley, Clarissa Ripley, Azuba Hatch, Octavia Shipman and Nancy Stickney that the said Epaphras Ripley and Anna Webb are known to have lived together in this county many years as husband and wife, and all the above named nine persons are reputed to be their children and it is universally believed that the said Epaphras Ripley and Anna Webb were lawfully married in or about the year seventeen hundred and eighty two [1782], as their older daughter is believed to be now in her seventy first year; and that the said Anna wife of said Epaphras Ripley died in the month of February A.D. eighteen hundred and forty [1840] and said Epaphras Ripley never married
Page 17

again. I further certify that John W Shipman of Windsor County has been duly appointed and qualified as Administrator [Acting administrator thereof, and that he is now^] of the Estate of the said Epaphras Ripley deceased
On testimony whereof I hereunto set my hand this fifth day of September A.D. 1853.
The [illegible] acting administrator thereof [illegible] before signing 
Abishai Stoddard


State of Vermont
District of Westminster S.S.}
I Benjamin W. Dean Register of the Probate Court for said District of Westminster certify that Abisahi Stoddard the signer of the foregoing instrument was at the time of execution of said instrument and now is duly appointed and qualified as Judge of the Private Court for said District of Westminster
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the seal of said Court at Rockingham in said District this fifth day of September A.D. eighteen hundred and fifty three [1853]
Benj. [Benjamin] W. Dean Register
Page 18

I Alexander S Campbell of Rockingham in the County of Windham and State of Vermont testify say that I am at this time Town Clerk of the Town of Rockingham aforesaid and have held that office one year and I further certify that I have this day examined the record in said Town Clerks Office from the year Seventeen hundred and sixty one [1761] to this [illegible] and that said records do not as I can discover contain any evidence of the marriage of Epaphas [Epaphras] Ripley to Anna Webb, and that the records of births on said records are as follows
“The following are the births of the children of Epaphras & Anna Ripley of Rockingham in the County of Windham & State of Vermont viz
Tabitha born May 11 1782 
Charles Do November 26 1783 
Shubel Do April 13th 1786 
Nancy Do January 22d 1788 
Clarissa November 11 1790 
Rodentha Do November 20 1791 [illegible]October 10 1793 
Randolphe Do November 23 1795 
Randilla Do October 25th 1799 
Octavia Do September 1802 
Recorded by me Jonathan Burt Clerk April 20 1803" 
that I can discover no other records of birth
Page 19

of children of the said Epaphras & Anna. The said records do not appear to be so regular and full as to raise presumption against their marriage before the year 1794 or at any other time that is to say the the records of marriages - and that very few records of marriages before the year 1794 are to be found on the book in said office 
Alexander S Campbell 
Town Clerk of Rockingham

State of Vermont Windham County ss }
Sworn to before me this 3d day of September 1853 

Windham County ss at Rockington this 3d day of September AD 1853 personally appeared A.S. Campbell made oath that the foregoing certificate by him subscribed is true 
Before me [illegible] Brulyman
Notary Public 

No seal of court attached. No clerk certificate } Judge satisfied
Page 20

I Luther Webb of Rockingham in the County of Windham and the State of Vermont of lawful age do depose testify and say that Epaphras Ripley now deceased, and who died on the 11th day of February A.D. 1853 at Rockingham aforesaid Married my Sister Anna Webb in the year 1781 as two [to] which year I am not certain or the month but this much I am shure [sure] I was present at the wedding and carried the parties to the wedding, Judge Benjamin Bunt of Westminster Vermont, which Town joins the Town of Rockingham on the South married them in due form of law My sister Wife of Epaphras Ripley died Eleven years ago last February in the Town of Goshen in this State and then now survives of the children of the said Epaphras & Anna Ripley, Tabitha, Charles, Shubel, Nancy, Clarissa, Rodentha, Azubah, Randilla, & Octavia and further this deponent smith not. I am not certain as to the exact time of the said Anna Ripley formerly Anna Webb death but think it was at the time above stated
No Clk [clerk] Certificate - Judge satisfied [penciled in]
Luther Webb [signed]

State of Vermont Windham County ss Rockingham September 3d 1835 Then personally appeared Luther Webb above named who is a credible person and made oaths that the foregoing affidavit by him described is true
Before Me Alexander S Campbell Justice Peace

No seal of court attached [penciled in]
Page 21

I Napoleon B. Roundy of Weathersfield in the County of Windsor, and State of Vermont aged fifty two years, do depose and say that I resided in the town of Rockingham in the county of Windsor, Vermont, from my infancy to the year 1840. In the winter of 1812-13 I went to live with Levi Hoyt of said Rockingham who was then a deputy Sheriff, and lived with him a little more than two years. Epaphras Ripley then resided near said Hoyt. I was frequently at said Ripley’s house he had a large family of children, some 7 then were there with him, and some were gone away. Mrs Ripley wife of the said Epaphras, was then living with him, they were a poor, but reputable family.Mr & Mrs Ripleys daughter Rodentha was then a woman grown and lived at home. She afterwards married a Mr. Ingalls, and the other daughter Randilla was then at home with her family. She now is living on the family of Bishop [Cha? illegible] at Claremont N. H. Another daughter, Octavia, who also at home, she is now the wife of John W. Shipman, and resides with her husband at Perkinsville, Vermont, near where I reside. They had a son at time married, [illegible] since deceased. They had a daughter, Tabitha whom I have seen, but she was then gone from home I then understood that there were a Charles and a Shubel belonging to the family, and that they there resided near Middlebury Vermont,  I feel quite confident thy visited at their fathers while I lived with said Hoyt, and I think I saw them
I recollect hearing the name of Nancy as
Page 22

one of the family, but I do not recollect that I ever saw her.
The name of Clarissa, as one of the family is familiar to me, and I think I have seen her, but not positive I say that of Azubah as of Clarissa. The said Epaphras Ripley worked for said Hoyt at the time I lived [illegible] chopping wood and making his garden for him and I have always been acquainted with him from that time up to the time of his death, which place, I think, last winter.
Napoleon B Roundy [signed]

State of Vermont Windsor County ss } At Weathersfield in said County this first day of September A.D. 1853, Napoleon B. Roundly personally appeared and made oath that the foregoing affidavit by him subscribed is true
Before me, William M. Pingry Master in Chancery

No Clerks Certificate, nor seal. [penciled in]
Page 23

I Ebenezer Locke of Rockingham in the County of Windham and State of Vermont of lawful age depose and say that I was well acquainted with Epaphras Ripley and his family. Mr Ripley lived for many yeas a near neighbour [neighbor] with his wife Anna Ripley they lived together as Man & Wife and had several children among whom I remember Tabitha, Charles, Shubel, Nancy, Clarisa [Clarissa], Rodentha and Azubah; I knew the family for several years. That they were duly and legally married was reported to be true and I have no reason to doubt the same as they were reported as Husband & Wife and had children as above named; I knew the family for more than fifty years and in fact have always been acquainted with them, from my earliest days, I am now ninety years of age and do now enjoy my mental facilities in full, Mr Epaphras Ripley died in this Town last winter and was buried at Rockingham
Ebenezer Locke [signed]

State of Vermont Windham County ss. Rockingham Sept. 2d 1853
Personally appeared on this 2d day of September A.D. 1853 Ebenezer Locke who is a credible person and made oath to the truth of the foregoing affidavit by him signed. Before Me Sam S. Billings } Notary Public

No clerks certificate, nor seal [penciled in]
Page 24

I Manasseh Divoll of lawful age depose testify and say that I have been well acquainted for more than forty years with the family ^of Epaphras Ripley now deceased.
Mr Ripley & wife lived together in this town for several years as husband and wife and had children among who I remember Tabitha, Charles, Shubel, Adolphus, Rodentha, Randilla, & Octavia. I do not know whether they were legally married or not as I was not present at their marriage but am well satisfied that they were duly and legally married from the fact that they lived together as husband & wife and was reported as husband 7 wife while they so lived together. Mr Ridley died and was buried in this Tpwn some time in the month of February last. I am now in my sixty six year of my age and now reside in Rockingham Vermont and have resided there for the last forty some yeas, and further I say not.
Manasseh Divoll [signed]

State of Vermont Windham County ss Rockingham Sept 2d 1853
Personally appeared Manasseh Divoll who is a credible person and made oath to the truth of the foregoing affidavit by him signed.
Before Me, Sam S. Billings } Notary Public’

No clerk certificate nor seal. [penciled in]
Page 25

I, Joel M. Brown of lawful age do depose and say that I am Sexton of the Town of Rockingham and as Such was called upon to officiate as Sexton to bury Epaphras Ripley an old man who died in this Town on the 11th day of February A.D. 1853 I was well acquainted with the Said Epaphras Ripley, for many years. Mr  Ripley had a family of Children by his Wife who died several years since, but how many Children he had I know not But he was reputed as a Married Man

Joel M. Brown

State of Vermont
Windham County [unclear] Rockingham Sept 2d 1853

Personally appeared on this 2d day of September A.D. 1853. Joel M. Brown who is a Credible person and made oath to the truth of the foregoing affidavit, by him Signed. Before me Saml L. Billings  
Notary Public

No clerk Certificate nor seal. But the Judge Seems satisfied of the above Notary
Page 26

Epaphras Ripley Vt act'32

In the certificate of the Sec. of Vt. Epaphras Ripley is returned as a pvt & cook in Capt Hutchins co, Col Herrick's Regt Vt troops for nearly two years of service.

It appears said Ripley was laboring under a sort of insanity, in the words of Bishop Chase of N.H. when he made application under act of 32 [crossed out & unreadable] and has been insane ever since.

Charles Ripley, a son who is certifyed by the J.P. to be a man of truth and veracity.

John W. Shipman, who is certified to in like manner

and Luther Webb, who is also certified to in the strongest terms as one whose statements are entitle[unclear] to the fullest confidence. all state that 20 and 30 years ago they have heard him speak of Col. Herrick, and two Charles Ripley and John W. Shipman swear positively that they heard him before he was insane state that he belonged to Capt. Hutchins co. Col. Herrick's Regt Vt troops 

These statements[crossed out] affidavits considered.
Page 27

in connection with the peculiarity of the name, its uncommoness (for it can hardly be supposed that there was another soldier in the Vt troops of the name of Epaphras Ripley) would seem to be sufficient to establish his identity, 

Luther Webb above referred to [unclear & crossed out] says I understood from him that he enlisted several times in the Vermont troops. I understood this fact from him before he became insane I should think between 20 and thirty years ago
Page 28

In Sep 1832. Epaphras Ripley asserted that he enlisted in June or July, town of Windham, Ct. in the Regt commanded by Col Mott [unclear] line, for 6, six months. After his term of enlistment was out, 36 he enlisted for three years in The Regt commanded by Col Warner, Capt Bronson's Co, enlisted Fort Independence, was at the battle at Hubbarston, & at the taking of Burgoyne _

In 1809 his daughter Tabitha Ripley renews application and declares that her father's Mental infirmety is so great that he could not attend to the business,

Aug 3 1839 Vt. Sec furnishes a certificate shewing that a man of his name served und Cap Wm Hutchins, Col Herricks Regt. at various periods from 1780 to 1782, as much as 10 ms & 11 ds 1838 cert included 

In 1851 the Vt Sec furnishes same certificate with additional service in Cap Allens Co fer 125 ds no year given,

Nov 1851 Bishop C Chase certifies that he had been convinced that Ripley was a soldier, that when he made his dclaration in '32 he was laboring under mental aberation, that he had seen a tattered paper which he took to be some kind of mental discharge
Page 29

In Sep 57 several afficants, among them his son & son in law, testify to having heard him frequently declare for service under Hutchins, in Herricks Rgt -

——
Mch 1852, Ct comptroller says his name is not found on any rolls of Warner or Mott, in his possession.

——
Mc sec certifies that he has no evidence of his name

——
Ap 53 Jm W Shipman swears he has often heard him say before he became insane, he had served under Hutchins in Herricks Regt. [unclear]

——
saw exchanges for service

——
Acknowledgment of Bishop Chase that he made the certificate when referred to
——
Page 30

Epaphras Ripley - Vt.

Epaohras Ripley (27th Sept 1832 aged 71 yrs) declares he enlisted in service in June of July in Windham Conn.
Capt .Regt Col Mott 6 mos - & at this time was out, in Jany or Feby enlisted for 3 years in Col Warners Regt. Capt Bronson at Fort Independence & was in Battle at Hubardstown Vermont & at the taking of Burgoyne & went South & at expiration of enlistment was discharged in State N.Y.

Secretary State Vermont (3d Aug 1839), certifies name of Epaphras Ripley is on Roll Capt. Wm Hutchin's Col. Herrick Regt. in service Vermont from 11th Oct 1780 8 days. Also on a paper purporting to be a payroll of Capt Wm Hutchin's Co provincial Troops, from May 1st ending 30th Nov 1778 - 7 mos. Also on a pay roll of Capt. W Hutchins Independence Co: (stationed at Castleton & Pittsford fort. as Corpl 93 days-

Secretary State Vermont (10th Nov 1851), certifies name Epaphras in Roll Capt. Parmelee Allens Co, Col Herrick Regt rangers - 125 days private - 1777 Dec 3d Also on Roll Capt Wm Hutchins independence Co Troops Vt (at Castleton and Pittsford Forts 11th May 1782 - Epa
Page 31

Page 2

Epaphras Ripley Corpl 93 days. Also in Capt. Wm Hutchins Co. Col Saml Fletcher's in Vt name of Epaphras Ripley 74 days ending Novr 19th 1781. same  Co.[Crossed out] dept Col. Herrick, Regt Militia reserve of Vt. (E.R.) allowance of 8 days _ same Capt. Co. of Provincial troops 7 mos. 1778 as private.

Chas Ripley (26 June 1851), is son of Epaphras of Vt. Co. of Windham _ Heard his father say he was and in Vt. troops. or militia & served under Col. Warner & in Capt Hutchins Co _ also that he was at Fort independence _ Epaphras formerly lived in Windham Connt. Grandfather also served & was taken prisoner _ and killed. Epaphras has been insane over 20 years

Jno W. Shipman (2d Sept 1851) married Epaphras' daughter _ frequently heard E. speak of having been in Vt. enlisted under Col Herrick & in Capt Hutchins Co _first enlisted from Windham Connt. & afterwards in Vt Troops. this is from family history

Andw Bradford (21st Sept 1832), enlisted in 1777, for 3 yrs, in spring of 1777 became acquainted Epaphras as private in Capt Bronsons, Col Warner's Regt independent Rangers _ first saw him at Fort Independence & Hubbardstown battle & at the taking of Burgoyne & discharged in State N.Y. think at West Point _ his time being out before Deponents[unclear]
Page 32

page 3

Luther Webb (16 July 1851), is well acqtd with Epaphras, he is deptd brother in law. Ripley enlisted from Windham Connt. enlisted by his father _  after that he came to Bennington Vt. & served several months _ Frequently heard Epaphras speak of Col Herrick & Col Warner. Understood from him he enlisted several times in Vt. troops. After the war he wore his military clothes _ a short blue coat with white facings. No other mand named Epaphras Ripley to depts. knowledge ever lived in sd. town. _ Heard him speak of Col Ethan Allen: was with him when he took Toconderoga

Rich M. Ely (21st July 1851), knew Andw Bradford who told him he (Andw) was a revolutionary soldier.
Page 33

In the Matter of Epaphras Ripley Vt.

At first, this case seemed involved in much doubt and uncertainty, there being so many facts apparently irreconcilable. The old man declares for Conn. Service, and the Heirs attempt to prove Vt. Service. _ He states his Officers and our witness (Bradford) confirms his whole statement. Yet there is a great amount of testimony offered to prove that the old man said he served in Vt.

Upon examination it appears that the the officers stated in the declaration, did serve in Vermont, and therefore the old gentleman could say with truth he served in Vermont. This reconciles all these various statements Col. Harmer & Capt Bronson, were at Fort Independence (where Ripley says he enlisted) at Hubbardston, and at the taking of Genl. Burgoyne. —— Therefore these witnesses may all have sworn to the truth & yet the claimant been a different Ripley to the one certified to by the Secretary of Vermont. The old man says he was at these places under
Page 34

Harmer & Bronson —— The certificate of the Secretary says there was a Ripley at the same place, under Col. Herrick and Capt. Parmalee Allen. _ The former is supported by the old man's oath & by the oath of Bradford (who is proven a credible & worthy witness) —— They both swear that Epaphras Ripley was at Hubbardston & the taking of Burgoyne, under Col. Harmer & Capt Bronson —— The claimants representation is now trying to prove that he was at these places under Herrick & Allen. —— All four of these officers were at the same time in the service —— and the question is which shall statement shall be taken for the truth. Mr Ripley may have spoken of Col. Herrick as testified to by several witnesses —— for his daughter says he was in the habit of speaking of all the officers he saw or knew. This is offsetted however by the fact that he also spoke of Marner. (see Webbs testimony) —— His son Charles says he heard his father tell of having served in the Vermont Troops under Col. Harmer. —— Harmer & Herrick were both at Hubbardston & the taking of Burgoyne, but Ripley could not
Page 35

have served with convenience under both of them at the same time. Under which one did he serve? The answer to this question settles this case. _ If he served under Maran —— as he himself swears & as Bradford swears —— the he is not the man whose Services are certified to by the Secretary of Vermont If he served under Herrick, then he and his witness have both sworn falsely and he is the man certified to as above. —— 

I think the statements are all reconcilable. —— The old man's first service was in Con. He then enlisted under Waran & Bronson & was at Barrington —— and the places in Vermont ——  performed service in Vermont of which he spoke —— knew Herrick & Hutchings who were in the service with him at the same time —— was at Hubbardston & the taking of Burgoyne —— and if he had not lost his mind would in all probability proven this service. —— This also redeems the first agent from the charge of stupidity, —— and explains why he did
Page 36

not claim for "the Vermont service". —— It was embraced in the service under Warner & Bronson. ——

It is very clear to my mind that Ripley who served under Col. Herrick was not the Ripley who served under Col. Warner as they were both in service at the same time —— 

Claim should be rejected 

Evans

{sideways bottom left corner] E. Ripley
Page 37

[This letter is very dim and difficult to transcribe.]

[illegible] N.Y. April 2 1853

Sir
Please [illegible] me [illegible] the name of Epaphras Ripley of Rockingham [illegible words]  places [illegible] the pension rolls as a Revolutionary soldier [illegible words] was [illegible words] Back pay will [illegible words] 
during [illegible] life.
[illegible words]
George Ripley

Commissioner
of Pensions
Washington City
Page 38

For Mr. Waldo.

Act 7. June 1832.

Epaphras Ripley,

Vermont.

Final Protest
of
E.F. Brown
Atty.
Present.
Nov. 2. 1854.
Page 39

Washington City, 2d. Nov. 1854.

Hon. L.P. Waldo,
Commissioner of Pensions.

Sir,

In reply to your letter of 28th. ult. rejecting the additional evidence in the case of Epaphras Ripley, I beg leave to file this, my respectful, but solemn protest against the decision, not with any view or expectation of pursuing it further, but to shew my best efforts in its behalf, and to record the fact that I still believe the claim to be just.

Allow me further to say that independent of the affidavit of Andrew Bradford (which is evidently an error so far as he was concerned) we think the claim was proven by Luther Webb, John Shipman, & Bishop Chase, three disinterested persons, besides those interested. Further: In April 1853, Mr. Waldo verbally admitted to me that he had no doubt Ripley served somewhere, and Mr. Niles said there was "much merit" in the case, and Mr. Geddes now " would rather believe Ripley served in some Company of which there were no Rolls to be found than in Herrick's Regt. or Warner's." —— 

A gentleman from Vermont now in the State Dept. in this City, (Judge Chipman) knows Charles Ripley & says he is as respectable as any man in Washington, there is "no cheat about him," and that he and Bishop
Page 40

Chase are to be implicitly relied on.

J..W. Shipman, the Administrator, is only interested so far that his Wife is entitled to one ninth part of the proceeds; his character is clearly proven to be good, and he has given a full history of the case, proved the identity, saw the discharge, & gives other particulars: —— yet all this testimony must lie till the Day of Judgement before its truth will be admitted.

As an individual, I quietly submit to "the powers that be"; but as the Attorney I feel it my duty once more to insist that the different accounts are reconcileable, and the Pension Office might, if it saw proper, convince the Secretary that the claim ought to be allowed.

I have the honor to remain, 
Very Respectfully,
Your Obd. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown

Atty
Page 41

Additional Evidences.
Epaphras Ripley
Vermont.
Act 1832.

E.F. Brown
Atty.
Present
23. Oct. 54.

[Seal]
Perkinsville VT
Oct 19

[Sideways across entire page]
6
Paid
Edward F. Brown Esqr
Washington City, D. C.
(Box 278)
Page 42

Perkinsville oct.18.1854

E. F. Brown Esq _
Washington City

Dear Sir

Enclosed I send you some important additional Evidence and Explanations which I think will go far To clear up the difficulties that have appeared to present themselves To the Department on The Claim of Epaphras Ripley deceased.

The officer desire that you will present These papers To The Commissioner of pensions and urge him To give Them a carefull consideration. We understand That Mr Waldo is disposed at all times to Listen to facts, and give due weight to all important Evidence, and we hope These papers will clear up the difficulties which before appeared to demand This Claim

Respectfully Yours
John W. Shipman
Adm.- of E Ripley dieC
Page 43

Washington City, Octr. 23. 1854.

Hon. L. P. Waldo,
Commissioner of Pensions, 

Sir:

Having been requested to present the enclosed additional evidence, I have the honer to as that you will give it your personal consideration; and also that you will allow me to withdraw my former letters in the case, and offer the following explanations.

Since the rejection of this claim, it has been discovered that one of the witnesses, Andrew Bradford, served but 15  months, and therefore made a mistake in his affidavit given in this case, in which he said he enlisted for 3 years. Bradford's character is proven to be good, he was a Pensioner under Act of 1818, and his Widow under Acts of 1838 and 1843 was allowed but $50 per year, being for 15 mo. service. He says Ripley was discharged before he was, which probably refers to the Discharge on 3. Dec. '77 recorded at Montpelier. When he gave this affidavit in 1832, he was a good member of the Baptist Church, was quite old, and the error in the length of his service was doubtless made without any intention of swearing falsely; and as the Militia and Regulars were much together in 1777 at Saratoga, Bennington, and other places, it was easy for him to mistake the precise Company of which Ripley was a member fifty years previously. Please examine his papers and Affidavit. 

A letter from your Office, dated 15. June 1835, to A.S. Campbell Esq. ( a copy of which is herewith sent) states that Ripley's name does not appear on the Rolls of Col. Warner, and "it is quite certain that he never served as stated", which fact, in connection with his insanity leaves no doubt but that he, likewise made mistakes, altho' the proof of his good character shows no intention of false swearing.
Page 44

It was also very easy for Luther Webb to have been led into the same errors as the Regiment, from their conversations. He is very old and consciencious, is a gentleman highly esteemed in his County, and told me 18 months ago he could not swear to particulars, but he knew Ripley served, for he saw him with Soldiers clothes on, & besides hearing him often tell of his services.

Bishop Chase saw one of his Discharges, and other old papers, and is confident he served between one and two years.

His name not being on Col. Warner's, nor any other Rolls, except those at Montpelier, it is respectfully submitted whether this new evidence, these explanations, and a reference to Bradford's and Ripley's papers will not identify this claimant as the Epaphras Ripley who served 16 months, 5 days as Private, and 3 months 3 days as Corporal, as recorded at Montpelier.

As it is "human to err," I am free to confess that my correspondence in this case has sometimes been under an excitement cause by a conviction of the justice of the claim, which convictions were strengthened by personal conversations with the family and others in Vermont. Hence my desire to withdraw my letters, in the hope that this apology will be received, and all unpleasantness be forgotten.

I have withdrawn from the Pension Business, except the completion of this case, and will be obliged, by your early and favorable decision.

If you have any further doubts respecting it, and will grant me an interview, I can probably make other
Page 45

other explanations that will assist the case. 

I have the honor to be, 
Very Respectfully,
Sir, Your Obt. Servt.
Edm, F. Brown
Attorney for Admn. of 
Epaphras Ripley dieC

Please address me thus: ——
E. F. Brown,
Box 278,
Washington City.
Page 46

Official.

Hon. L.P. Waldo
Commissioner of Pensions,
Washington City,
D.C.

For the Commissioner specially.

{Sideways]
Oct 12, 1853
Letter in case of Ripley
From E. F. Brown
18 Nassau St.,
City of 
New York
Page 47

No. 18 Nassau St. New York City,
October 11.1853.

Hon. L.P. Waldo,
Commr. of Pensions.

Sir:

Mr. Chief Clerk Whiting informed me when he passed through here a few weeks since that you expected the business of your Office would be up to date, by the first of the present month; and as the new business in which I am now engaging will require all my time and means; it will be a great favor if you will take up the papers I sent you on 15th. ult., being all that your Office has required in the case of Epaphras Ripley.

Please forward me the Pension Certificate during this week, and confer a favor on

Very Respectfully, 
Your Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington.
Page 48

New York City, 15. Sept. 1853.

Hon. L. P. Waldo,
Commr. of Pensions.

Sir:

The papers required by your letter to me of 11th. August ultimo, I have the honor to enclose herewith; viz: ——

Certificate of Secretary of Vermont, shewing that he has made another search, (according to your suggestion,) and that his Rolls do not shew the Towns or Counties where the soldiers resided; that there is but one Epaphras Ripley on his Rolls; and that one two occasions the said Ripley was allowed for sixty miles travel. 

Also, certificates of Judge and Register of Probate, with six Affidavits, proving the Marriage and deaths of Epaphras Ripley and his Wife, & names of children.

Allow me further to refer you to your printed Pension Roll, for Vermont, page 76, and the 7th. name from the top is Andrew Bradford, of the New Hampshire Line, who saw our Mr. Ripley at Hubbardston, at the taking of Burgoyne, and at other places.

I am happy Sir, that this fact, with 60 miles travel named in the new Certificate of the Secretary, furnishes the "further link as to identity", which you require; and trust that the papers are now so complete that you will take pleasure in forwarding me the Pension Certificate without further delay.

With great Respect,
I have the honor to be,
Sir, Your Mo. Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington
Page 49

Mr Brown's impertinent letter.
Page 50

New York, 18. Aug. 1853.

Hon. L. P. Waldo,
Commr. of Pensions.

Sir:

Your Clerk has uttered an absolute falsehood and gross misrepresentations, and if his position had been reversed, and he acting as Attorney for Claimant instead of for the Government, he would be liable to arrest and trial for attempt at fraud. 

The proof is in your Office, and as an American Citizen and the Attorney of respectable and honest clients, I most respectfully call upon you for an investigation, as it is proper the facts should be first submitted to you so that he may make reparation and obviate the necessity of complaints to the President and Secretary.

The falsehood is this: he says —— 
"Andrew Bradford is the only Witness who testifies to the service in Vermont, but his name is not found on our Pension Roll, and there is nothing beyond his own assertion to show that he was in a position to know."

The proof of the falsity of the assertions is found in several rooms in your Office and elsewhere, viz: —— in the printed Pension Roll (commonly called "Preston's Resolutions",) at page 76 of Vermont, 7th name from the top. This Document was reported to the Senate in 1835, a copy of which is now in my possession, and by it I find that Andrew Bradford was inscribed upon the Pension Roll 34 years ago, so that when he gave his testimony in 1832 he had then been a Pensioner for 13 years; that he served in the New Hampshire
Page 51

Line; and that his residence was in Windsor Co. Vermont, adjoining the county where this claimant resided.

Without answering my arguments, or examining the testimony (unless he examined with his eyes and understanding closed) he boldly makes the wholesale assertion that the man is not identified, and no evidence "discovered" justifying the admission of the claim.

The main facts stated in Bradford's Affidavit are proven by the concurrent testimony, by the History of Claimants family, and by the History of Burgoyne's Campaign; and the former objections to the claim have been answered. Yet this new Clerk has found a new way to reject claims; for no old Clerk would have though of requiring the date of Marriage where no Widow was concerned and where the claimant outlived his Wife by ten years.

Further: —— the Certificates of Death and Heirship are such as have been admitted by your Office in numerous cases, were presented by me in person in April last and were not objected to by Mr. Triplett or yourself, both of whom assured me of a personal examination of all the papers.

In all my correspondence of ten years with your Office, the letter referred to is the most extraordinary, unfair, and far fetched, and the Clerk need not think that my clients will tamely submit to his ignorance, and be thus unceremoniously, unjustly, and falsely set down as instigators if fraud.

No, Sir, they feel their claim is just, and has been clearly proven, and look to you for the justice which your Clerk denied.
Page 52

The Clerk referred to is unknown to me, but you can readily identify him as the one who prepared the letter bearing your signature, dated 11th. inst. and addressed to me, relative to the case of Epaphras Ripley. You, doubtless, signed it without knowing or considering its contents.

Please attend to this immediately, and send me the Pension Certificate.

Very Respectfully,
Your Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown
Page 53

Private.
Hon. L. P. Waldo,
Commissioner of Pensions.
Page 54

[symbol of hand with index finger pointing to the right]
Very Special .= 

New York, 12. Aug. 1853.

Hon. L. P. Waldo, 
Commr. of Pensions.}

Sir:

As I am about to abandon the Pension Business, you will confer a great favor, & an act of Justice to all parties, by calling up the last papers in the last case I have at your Office, and sending me the Pension Certificate, as it is now clearly proven: viz: —— the case of Epaphras Ripley, of Vermont, Act 7. June 1832.

Your immediate compliance will lay me under lasting obligations. 

Very Respy. Yr. Obt. St.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington, 
Now at New York City.

[symbol of hand with index finger pointing to the right] 
See Additional & conclusive Proof and argument, received at your Office 5. May. 1853, and evidence corroborating the same, received at your Office on 25th. May & 15th. July 1853.
E. F. B.
Page 55

New York, 9. Aug. 1853

Hon. Samuel Cole,
Chief Clerk, Pension Office,
Washington City : ——

Dear Sir,

From the opinion you expressed in our personal interview at the Irving House in this city on the 7th. ult. relative to the progress of examinations at your office, it is probable you are now up to 5th. May; and my necessity compels me to ask the favor of you and the Commissioner to take up the last & only case ※ I have then or ever expect to have; & let my 1 1/2 years' labor on it have a little remuneration. ——

Everything is now proven, by papers which were rec at your office on 5th. & 25th. May, & 15th. July, of the present year, and one hour's examination will convince you that the Certificate ought to issue at once. ——
 Do let me have it without delay, Do!! I am about starting the other business, but the completion of this is necessary to enable me to do so.

Very Respy. Yr. Obt. St.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washn.

※ Claim of Epaphras Ripley.
Vermont _ Act 1832.
Page 56

[symbol of hand with index finger pointing to the right] Official or Private —— either.

New York City, 25. July 1853.

Hon. S. P. Waldo,
Commr. of Pensions.

Sir:

To enable me to arrange my movements in other matters, please inform me by return mail, when your Examiners will take up Additional Evidence, Revolutionary, received at your Office 5. May 1853. ——

In the file received on that day, is some new light in the case of Epaphras Ripley, and to prove it clearly other papers were sent by me on 24th. May & 14. July, received by you 25. May & 15 July, which belong to 5. May. If not already done, please instruct your Clerk to place them all together under date of 5. May, & when they are all examined, I know you will allow the claim.

If I can receive the Certificate by Friday morning the 29th. inst. it will be a very great favor!

Most Respectfully,
Your Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington.
An old Jackson Democrat.
Page 57

New York, 18. July 1853.

S. Cole Esq.
Ch. Clerk. Pension Office.

Dr. Sir:

Please inform me by return mail, what date you are now examining of Revolutionary cases, & oblige
Your, Very Truly,
Edm. F. Brown,
of Washington.

P. S. Please read the enclosed at your leisure, and keep it if you choose, as a copy of it has gone to the files Officially, to be placed with papers filed 5. May last.


Has Addison yet succeeded in getting an examination of the case about which I spoke to you here? viz:

Savannah Smith, Widow of Richard,
Wagon Conductor 
—— Act, 1832 & 1838

E. F. B.
Page 58

Extra Copy of my Printed Argument sent 14. July 1853 to the Pension Office.

E. F. B.
Page 59

New York, July 14, 1853.
Hon. L. P. Waldo,
Commissioner of Pensions,
Washington City.
Sir:—— You will probably recollect that on the 26th of April last, I had an interview with you at your office relative to the claim of Epaphras Ripley, of Vermont, (now deceased,) for Revolutionary Pension, under the Act of June 7, 1832; that when you informed me you could not allow it on the evidence there filed, I said "My dear Sir, the man must have served somewhere, for such respectable testimony cannot be false;" that you replied, "I think it likely he did; but where, and how long!" and that in reply to my assertion that he served over nineteen months in Vermont, as shown by the certificate of the Comptroller which I filed more than a year ago, you intimated that the parties never knew that such service was on record until recently, (say two years ago,) and as they never thought of claiming for it until then;  that you believed the soldier recorded at Montpelier, was another man of that name; and that this was an unjust claim.

This was an unexpected objection, which I could not answer until I wrote the family; because having never thought of such a charge, I had not questioned them on that point when I visited ten days previously.

Mr. Shipman , the administrator, was astonished at the charge, and immediately wrote me that he knew twenty-one years ago that Mr. Ripley's service was recorded at Montpelier, and in 1832, when the original application was commenced, he desired  Mr. Barton, the agent whom he employed, to claim for said Vermont service, but was overruled by said agent, who insisted on claiming for Connecticut Service, by which he thought he could obtain a full pension; that said agent died shortly afterwards; and that then or soon after, the town of Rockingham appointed a guardian for said Ripley, and the said Shipman took no further action in the pension claim until the summer of 1831, when some of the family sent Mr. Tilden, to him desiring that another effort be made.

Your last objection being thus answered and reasonably explained, I sent the said letter to your office on the 4th of May last, supposing that as his affidavits and other statements are on your files, and his veracity clearly established by certificates of the Magistrates and of Bishop Chase, you would see the case in a different light, and admit the claim. But, on reflection, I concluded, that to remove every objection, I would write Mr. Shipman to send me such evidence as he could obtain, to prove that in 1832 he wished to claim for Vermont service. He then sent me the affidavits of his wife, aged 51, and of his father, aged 82 years, both of whom will recollect the facts, and give such plain honest statements as must convince you of their truth, especially as their veracity is so well vouched. These affidavits I sent your office on 24th of May last. Lest you should object to his letter, which I sent you on 4th May last, because it is not sworn to, I advised him to make oath to the facts which he then stated, and has just sent me his reply, in which he reiterates those statements, with other facts, and has made oath to them before a Justice whose name is attached to the last papers I sent you. This letter and affidavit I enclose herewith, together with a letter from Judge Tafft to Mr. Shipman, and also a certificate of seven respectable citizens of Rockingham, attested by Bishop Chase, showing that from their knowledge or the family of Ripleys, the claimant must have moved there about 1777, married there in 1782, (as his eldest daughter is now seventy years old,) and must have served in Vermont between 1777 and 1782, as the rolls at Montpelier show.

These papers, with the others which I have filed, being duly attested and authenticated, and the good and credible standing of the witnesses clearly established, allow me to offer you some remarks on evidence, in the course of which I shall use some of the language of a certain Attorney, addressed to your predecessor in another case, but equally applicable to this.

It was doubtless the intention of Congress is the enactment of pension laws, that the common law and equity rules, as to the sufficiency of evidence should prevail in their execution. The converse of this proposition, will not, I feel sure, be maintained by any intelligent and candid mind. It is quite too evident to admit of a doubt, that if Congress had intended that a higher standard of evidence should be required in the adjudication of this class of claims, that would be sufficient to satisfy the minds of an intelligent court or jury, they would have said so. If there is any tribunal in this country, either legislative, executive, governmental, departmental, or judicial, that is not, or which should not be bound by the common law and equity rules of evidence as established and uniformly adhered to, in every judicial tribunal, in every government, making the least pretensions to freedom, from the days of Justinian to the present time, I have yet to know it.

I say, if there is any tribunal or authority in this land of boasted liberal laws, unknown, superior to, and disregardful of the common law of England, as applicable to the particular case in question, I should like to know it, and it is time the public should know it.

Chief Justice Story says there is no such tribunal or authority.

It is a matter of judicial history that our ancestors brought with them from mother country the common law of England, or at least so much of it as was adapted to their new condition, and that the same has been has been recognized and adopted by the general, and all the State and territorial governments, with certain modifications. But whatever modifications may have been found necessary by our new state of things, and new forms of government, that branch of England's boasted system of jurisprudence, relating to evidence, especially the sufficiency of evidence, has been adopted, unaltered and unmodified, in all its length and breadth, by the general an every State government, and considered of absolute and binding authority in every judicial tribunal in this broad republic. That degree of evidence which was sufficient to carry conviction to the mind of a Littleton, a Coke, a Hale, a Baron, and a Mansfield, has ever been sufficient to satisfy the mind of a Marshall, a Kent, a Story, and a Taney, —— and will it not suffice for your mind? I trow it  will ! And if so, the result of the present case can no longer be doubtful!

Appropos: Mr. Story, is one of his admirabe works, after remarking generally, that the courts of the United States and of
Page 60


2
the several States, as well as the legislatures and the Congress of the United States, are bound by the common law rules of evidence, proceeds to say totidem verbis: "The general rule of law and evidence applicable to common trials, are interposed to prevent the party against the exercise of wanton and arbitrary power."

When Congress devolved upon secretary, the duty of executing the pension laws, under such rules and regulations as he might prescribe, they did not expect him to adopt an arbitrary system of rules and regulations in regard to the character and degree of evidence unknown, and unpracticed in judicia tribunals, and calculated to defeat the objects and end those laws. 

They expected his rules and regulations to be merely ancillary and subordinate to the design of the laws, and be confined to the forms of application, modes of authenticating papers &c. I say it was not the intention of Congress to confer upon the secretary a power of authority to demolish every vestige of law evidence, and erect upon its ruins, a utopian superstructure, or standard of evidence, far above the reach and comprehension of ordinary minds and capacities, like the laws of a certain ancient lawgiver, and tyrant, who caused his laws to be written obscurely, and placed so high up in the air, that but few could reach, or understand them, and then punished his subjects for their violation.

Distant claimants upon reading the pension laws, very naturally conclude, that you will be satisfied with the same amount and degree of evidence that would be sufficient to establish similar claims in a court of law or equity, and go to work , and make out their claims accordingly, and when presented, they are told by you, that this will not do,—— that a much greater amount of evidence is requisite, and such an amount and degree of evidence, as render the law in many equally meritorious and just cases, a nullity, a species of tantalization, and mockery. Thus injustice and injury is often done to honest claimants.

In Bacon's Abridgement, volume 2, page 597: "It is holden by my Lord Chief Justice Holt, that at common law it was not necessary in any case, that a proof of any matter of fact, should be made by more than one witness, and that the single testimony of one credible witness was sufficient to prove any fact." And it is the constant practice of the courts of equity in England, and in this country, to ground their decrees upon the testimony of a single witnesses. The ecclesiastical courts of England were also compelled to observe these rules. Vide, the authority above referred to. Archibald's Criminal Evidence, page 156-157. It is held , that in cases of treason and perjury, the testimony of two witnesses is necessary, or one witness with corroborating circumstances: "In all other cases one witness is sufficient."

See, also, 2d Hawke, 6, 46, 2; Fost, 233 where the same principles are maintained. Philips on Evidence, vol.3 page 565, "one credible witness is sufficient even to convict of a crime, and a useless repetition of witnesses is discountenanced by law. The judge might by the civil law, in his discretion, stop the multiplication of witnesses to the same matter, and this is not an unusual exercise of discretion in our courts." See, also, Wood's Civil Law, 317. "Greenleaf on Evidence," vol.1, page 324, also says "that whatever was evidence at common law, is still good evidence under the express constitutional and statutory provisions of the American government." You thus perceive, Sir, that upon these principles, if Mr. Ripley had been upon his trial for treason or perjury, with the wight of evidence before you, he would have been convicted, and, in England, drawn and quartered, and his head severed from his body, and placed at the disposal of the sovereign.

Again, Starkie, on Evidence, vol. 1. page 552; "the testimony of a single witness, where there is no ground for suspecting either his ability or his integrity, is sufficient legal ground for belief; that it is strong enough to produce actual belief, every man's experience will vouch." Now, Sir, we have seen the integrity of these witnesses to be above suspicion; and as to their ability —— they have detailed with sufficient particularity the facts and circumstances, which enable them to know the truths to which they testified. Their ability to know the truths to which they have testified is as unquestionable as their integrity, and you cannot question the one witness without, at the same time, questioning the other. Bouvier says, vol. 2, page 659, " when we are called upon to rely on the testimony of another in order to form a judgement as to certain facts, we must be certain, 1st, that he knows the facts in question, and that he is not mistaken; and, 2ndly, that his is disposed to tell the truth, and has no desire to impose on those who are to form a judgement on his testimony. The confidence, therefore, which we give to the witness must be considered, in the first place, by his capacity or his organization, and, in the next, by the interest or motive which he has to tell or not to tell the truth. When the facts to which the witness agrees with the circumstances which are know to exist, he becomes much more credible thon when there is a contradiction in this respect. It is true, "that, until impeached, one witness is as good as another, and that the one witness is sufficient to establish a fact."

Now, Sir, with these principles in view, let us with candor and frankness examine and consider the
HISTORY OF THE CLAIM.	

The papers now sent, with those sent you on the 4th and 24th May last, when considered with those before placed upon your files, will justify me in the assertion that the following are the facts:

In the fall of 1832, Epaphras Ripley being then insane, his son in law, John W. Shipman, employed a man named Barton, to obtain a pension for said Ripley, and went with Barton and Ripley to the Court, to make out papers. Ripley has some papers, and among them a discharge for militia service in Vermont, which discharge was often seen by Shipman and by Bishop Chase; but as Ripley often talked of being at the taking of Burgoyne, and knew Col. Warner, he and Barton got a notion that he served in the Continental Line under Warner, and Barton made the claim accordingly, although Shipman desired him to claim for his Militia Service in Vermont, and knew his name was on the rolls at Montpelier.

Soon after that, his insanity became of such a nature that his town authorities appointed a guardian over him, and Mr. Shipman though proper to take no further trouble about it. About that time Mr. Barton died. The Pension Office, not finding the name of Ripley in Col. Warner's rolls, rejected the claim, and so it was dropped.

On the 2nd of November, 1851, while at Albany, N.Y., a stranger named Alpheus Tilden called upon me, urged me to prosecute the claim for him, and as he exhibited such papers as induced me to believe it was a righteous claim, I consented. On the 28th of that month, I sent your office, proof of the highest respectability, to shew that said Ripley was insane at the time of the application and continued so; that having lived in the same town for seventy years, his family and friends had always heard him say, he served first in Connecticut and then in Vermont, under Captain Hutchins and Col. Herrick; and a certificate of the Comptroller of Vermont that the name of Epaphras Ripley appears on his Revolutionary Roll for the following service, viz:

From Aug. 1, 1777, to Dec 3, 1777, in Capt. Parmalee Allen's Company, Col. Herrick's Regiment -  days.
From May 1, 1778, to Nov. 30, 1778, in Capt. Hutchins' Company of Provincial   Troops, - - - - - 7 months.
From Oct. 11, 1780, in Capt. Hutchins' Company, of Col. Herricks Regiment, - - - - - - - - 8 days.
From Sept. 5, 1781, to Nov. 19, 1781, in Captain Hutchins' Company, of Lieut. Col. Saml. Fletcher's Battalian, 74 days.
From Nov. 20, 1781, to May 1, 1782, in Capt. Hutchins' Independent Company of Troops, 93 days Corporal, 68 days Private, ----------------------- 161 days.

Total, 16 months 5 days, as Private,
3do. 3 do. as Corporal.
—— ——
Amounting to 19 months 8 days service.
Page 61

 3

The Certificate of the Rev. Dr. Chase, Bishop of New Hampshire, which accompanies those papers, convinced me that the file was a good one, but it appears your office thought it was only an expression of his opinion that Ripley was a Revolutionary soldier; when he says expressley, that he saw his discharge and other papers, in 1832, and became satisfied he was entitled to a pension, but his insanity prevented him from pursuing the right course; he would have his own way and failed.

But the greatest objection you make to the claim is the affidavit of Andrew Bradford, the only witness who saw him in service, who swore, in 1832, that "In the spring of 1777 he became acquainted with Epaphras Ripley, a private soldier who belonged to Capt. Bronson's Company of Col. Warren's Independent Regiment of Rangers, that he saw him first at Fort Independence, at Hubbardston Battle, at the taking of Burgoyne, and at other places as the army moved during his enlistment —— that he was discharged in New-York, he thinks at West Point, before he was, his time being out."

Now although Andrew Bradford was old and might not have known or remembered the precise Company to which Ripley belonged, yet from facts stated in the history of Burgoyne's Campaign, it is more than probable that Ripley was then in Warner's Regiment, and might not have been enrolled, for at pages 25 and 26, that History says, "When the troops arrived at Hubbarston in Vermont. they were halted for nearly two hours, and the rear-guard was increased by many who did not at first belong to it, but were picked up on the road, having been unable to keep up with the Regiments. The rear-guard was here put under the command of Col. Seth Warner, with orders to follow the army then proceed to Castleton, about six miles farther —— Col. Warner, with the rear-guard and stragglers, remaining at Hubbarston." This was July 6th, 1777.

The same book, (herewith sent to you.) at page 34, says "Col. Warner had been detached with his Regiment into the State of Vermont, with orders to assemble the militia of the country." &c.

At page 92, it says that on the 16th of August, 1777, in speaking of attacking Burgoyne, that "Col. Nichols was detached with two hundred men to the rear of his left, and Col. Herrick with three hundred to the rear of his right."

It is evident there was much confusion in the army at that time, and as we have record of his service from 1st August to 3d December 1777, in Col. Herrick's Regiment, and several tours afterwards under Capt. Hutchins,he must have been with Herrick at the above battle, and also at the "taking of Burgoyne" in October following, and it is most probable he was one of the "stragglers" with Warner at Hubbardston, and might have been temporarily under Capt. Bronson, when Bradford first saw him;  so that Bradford's evidence is more than half confirmed by History, and by the fact of Ripley talking all his life of serving under Hutchins and Herrick, and seeing Burgoyne; as proven by five members of his family, besides other respectable persons, among whom are Luther Webb and John Shipman, who knew him nearly seventy years.

The objection of your office, that it was another man of that name, is now completely answered, especially as it is not pretended nor believed that any other Epaphras Ripley ever was pensioned, ever applied , or ever was known to have lived. The unfortunate man now under sentence of death in your City for the murder of his wife, was convicted on circumstantial evidence, and no doubt justly, BUT the evidence was not as strong as we have now presented to establish this claim; and when you shall have considered the o'd and new evidence, with the facts and arguments herein set forth, you will see Sir, that the claim of Epaphras Ripley cannot be rejected without a disregard of every feeling of gratitude, every principle of law, equity, reason and justice —— every rational presumption, and all the known principles of human nature and action. It will also brand the several witnesses with the crime of perjury, as far as your action can fix such a stigma; a result too monstrous and painful to be contemplated, or to be expected from an impartial mind, conscious of its own rectitude and therefore not ready to suspect others of crime before High Heaven.

As the proof of his death, heirship,administration, and power of attorney to me, are on your files, I shall expect to receive your certificate stating that Epaphras Ripley of Vermont, is placed upon the Pension List for services in the Revolutionary War 3 months and 3 days as corporal, and 16 months and 5 days as private, from the 4th March 1831, to the 11th February 1853, when he died; and that the same is payable at Montpelier, Vermont, to John W. Shipman, administrator, for the benefit of his nine children named in the certificate of heirship.
Page 62

Printed Argument, with Additional Evidence, to be filed & examined with the papers received at Pension Office 5. May 1853, in the claim of Epaphras Ripley, of Vermont, Act 7. June 1832.

[hand with index finger pointing to the right] Also, please get the papers recd. on 25th May & with these place with those of 5th. May.

Edward F. Brown,
of Washington
Attorney

New York, 14. July 1853.}
Page 63

New=York, July 14, 1853.

HON. L. P. WALDO,
COMMISSIONER OF PENSIONS,
Washington City.

SIR: - You will probably recollect that on the 26th of April last, I had an interview with you at your office, relative to the claim of EPAPHRAS RIPLEY, of Vermont, (now deceased,) for Revolutionary Pension, under the Act of June 7, 1832; that when you informed me you could not allow it on the evidence there filed, I said, "My dear Sir, the man must have served somewhere, for such respectable testimony cannot be false;" that you replied, "I think it likely he did; but where, and how long?" and that in reply to my assertion that he served over nineteen months in Vermont, as shown by the certificate of the Comptroller which I filed more than a year ago, you intimated that the parties never knew that such service was on record until recently, (say two years ago,) and as they never thought of claiming for it until then; that you believed the soldier recorded at Montpelier, was another man of that name; and that this was an unjust claim.

This was an unexpected objection, which I could not answer until I wrote the family; because having never thought of such a charge, I had not questioned them on that point when I visited them ten days previously.

Mr. Shipman, the administrator, was astonished at the charge, and immediately wrote me that he knew twenty-one years ago that Mr. Ripley's service was recorded at Montpelier, and in 1832, when the original application was commenced, he desired Mr. Barton, the agent whom he employed, to claim for said Vermont service, but was overruled by said agent, who insisted on claiming for Connecticut Service, by which he thought he could obtain a full pension; that said agent died shortly afterwards; and that then or soon after, the town of Rockingham appointed a guardian for said Ripley, and the said Shipman took no further action in the pension claim until the summer of 1851, when some of the family sent Mr. Tilden, to him desiring that another effort be made.

Your last objection being thus answered and reasonably explained, I sent the said letter to your office on the 4th of May last, supposing that as his affidavits and other statements are on your files, and his veracity clearly established by certificates of the Magistrates and of Bishop Chase, you would see the case in a different light, and admit the claim. But, on reflection, I concluded, that to remove every objection, I would write Mr. Shipman to send me such evidence as he could obtain, to prove that in 1832 he wished to claim for the Vermont service. He then sent me the affidavits of his wife, aged 51, and of his father, aged 82 both of whom well recollect the facts, and give such plain honest statements as must convince you of their truth, especially as their veracity is so well vouched. These affidavits I sent to your office on 24th of May last. Lest you should object to his letter, which I sent you on 4th May last, because it is now sworn to, I advised him to make oath to the facts which he then stated, and he has just sent me his reply, in which he reiterates those statements, with other facts, and has made oath to them before a Justice whose name is attached to the last papers I sent you. This letter and affidavit, I enclose herewith, together with a letter from Judge Taff to Mr. Shipman, and also a certificate of seven respectable citizens of Rockingham, attested by Bishop Chase, showing that from their knowledge of the family of Ripleys, the claimant must have moved there about 1777, married there in 1782, (as his eldest daughter is now seventy years old,) and must have served in Vermont between 1777 and 1782, as the rolls at Montpelier show.

These papers, with the others which I have filed, being duly attested and authenticated, and the good and credible standing of the witnesses clearly established, allow me to offer you some remarks on evidence, in the course of which I shall use some of the language of a certain Attorney, addressed to your predecessor in another case, but equally applicable to this.

It was doubtless the intention of Congress in the enactment of pension laws, that the common law and equity rules, as to the sufficiency of evidence should prevail in their execution. The converse of this proposition, will not, I feel sure, be maintained by any intelligent and candid mind. It is quite too evident to admit of a doubt, that if Congress had intended that a higher standard of evidence should be required in the adjudication of this class of claims, than would be sufficient to satisfy the minds of an intelligent court and jury, they would have said so. If there is any tribunal in this country, either legislative, executive, governmental, departmental, or judicial, that is not, or which should not be bound by the common law and equity rules of evidence as established, and uniformly adhered to, in every judicial tribunal, in every government, making the last pretensions to freedom, from the days of Justinian to the present time, I have yet to know it.

I say, if there is any tribunal or authority in this land of boasted liberal laws, unknown, superior to, and disregardful of the common law of England, as applicable to the particular case in question, I should like to know it, and it is time the public should know it.

Chief Justice Story says, there is no such tribunal or authority.

It is a matter of judicial history that our ancestors brought with them from the mother country the common law of England, or at least so much of it as was adapted to their new condition, and that the same has been recognized and adopted by the general, and all the State and territorial governments, with certain modifications. But whatever modifications may have been found necessary by our new state of things, and new forms of government, that branch of England,s boasted system of jurisprudence, relating to evidence, especially the sufficiency of evidence, has been adopted, unaltered and unmodified, in all its length and breadth, by the general and every State government, and considered of absolute and binding authority in every judicial tribunal in this broad republic. That degree of evidence which was sufficient to carry conviction to the mind of a Littleton, a Coke, a Hale, a Bacon, and a Mansfield, has ever been sufficient to satisfy the mind of a Marshall, a Kent, a Story, and a Taney, -- and will it not suffice for you mind? I trow it will! And if so, the result of the present case can no longer be doubtful!

Appropos: Mr. Story, in one of his admirable works, after remarking generally, that the courts of the United States and of
Page 64

2

the several States, as well as the State legislatures and the Congree of the United States, are bound by the common law rules of evidence, proceeds to say, totidem verbis: "The general rules of law and evidence applicable to common trials, are interposed to prevent the party against the exercise of wanton and arbitrary power."

When Congress devolved upon the secretary, the duty of executing the pension laws, under such rules and regulations as he might prescribe, they did not expect him to adopt an arbitrary system of rules and regulations in regard to the character and degree of evidence unknown, and unpracticed in judicial tribunals, and calculated to defeat the objects and ends of those laws.

They expected his rules and regulations to be merely ancillary and subordinate to the design of the laws, and be confined to the forms of application, modes of authenticating papers, &c. I say it was not the intention of Congress to confer upon the secretary a power of authority to demolish every vestige of the law of evidence, and erect upon its ruins, a utopian superstructure, or standard of evidence, far above the reach and the comprehension of ordinary minds and capacities, like the laws of a certain ancient lawgiver, and tyrant, who caused his laws to be written obscurely, and placed so high up in the air, that but few could reach, or understand them, and then punished his subjects for their violation.

Distant claimants upon reading the pension laws, very naturally conclude, that you will be satisfied with the same amount and degree of evidence that would be sufficient to establish similar claims in a court of law or equity, and go to work, and make out their claims accordingly, and when presented, they are told by you, that this will not do, -- that a much greater amount of evidence is requisite, and such an amount and degree of evidence, as render the law in many equally meritorious and just cases, a nullity, a species of tantalization, and mockery. Thus injustice and injury is often done to honest claimants.

In Bacon's Abridgement, volume 2, page 597: "It is holden by my Lord Chief Justice Holt, that at common law it was not necessary in any case, that a proof of any matter of fact, should be made by more than one witness, and that the single testimony of one credible witness was sufficient to prove any fact." And it is the constant practice of the courts of equity in England, and in this country, to ground their decrees upon the testimony of a single witness. The ecclesiastical courts of England were also compelled to observe these rules. Vide, the authority above referred to. Archibald's Criminal Evidence, page 156-157. It is held, that in cases of treason and perjury, the testimony of two witnesses is necessary, or one witness with corroborating circumstances: "In all other cases one witness is sufficient."

See, also, 2d Hawk, 6, 46, 2; Fost, 233, where the same principles are maintained. Philips on Evidence, vol. 3 page 565, "one credible witness is sufficient even to convict of a crime, and a useless repetition of witnesses is discountenanced by law. The Judge might by the civil law, in his discretion, stop the multiplication of witnesses to the same matter, and this is not an unusual exercise of discretion in our own courts." See, also, Wood's Civil Law, 317. "Greenleaf on Evidence," vol. 1, page 324, also says, "that whatever was evidence at common law, is still good evidence under the express constitutional and statutory provisions of the American government." You thus perceive, Sir, that upon these principles, if Mr. Ripley had been upon his trial for treason or perjury, with the weight of evidence bore you, he would have been convicted, and, in England, drawn and quartered, and his head severed from his body, and placed at the disposal of the sovereign.

Again, Starkie, on Evidence, vol. 1, page 552: "the testimony of a single witness, where there is no ground for suspecting either his ability or his integrity, is a sufficient legal ground for belief; that it is strong enough to produce actual belief, every man's experience will vouch." Now, Sir, we have seen the integrity of these witnesses to be above suspicion; and as to their ability -- they have detailed with sufficient particularity the facts and circumstances, which enable them to know the truths to which they testified. Their ability to know the truths to which they have testified is as unquestionable as their integrity, and you cannot question the one without, at the same time, questioning the other. Bonvier says, vol. 2, page 659, "when we are called upon to rely on the testimony of another in order to form a judgment as to certain facts, we must be certain, 1st, that he knows the facts in question, and that he is not mistaken; and, 2dly, that he is disposed to tell the truth, and has no desire to impose on those who are to form a judgment on his testimony. The confidence, therefore, which we give to the witness must be considered, in the first place, by his capacity or his organization, and, in the next, by the interest or motive which he has to tell or not to tell the truth. When the facts to which the witness testifies agree with the circumstances which are known to exist, he comes much more credible than when there is a contradiction in this respect. It is true, "he says, "that, until impeached, one witness is as good as another, and that one witness is sufficient to establish a fact."

Now, Sir, with these principles in view, let us with condor and frankness examine and consider the

HISTORY OF THE CLAIM.

The papers now sent, with those sent you on the 4th and 24th May last, when considered with those before placed upon your files, will justify me in the assertion that the following are the facts:

In the fall of 1832, Epaphras Ripley being then insane, his son in law, John W. Shipman, employed a man names Barton, to obtain a pension for said Ripley, and went with Barton and Ripley to the Court, to make out papers. Ripley had some papers, and among them a discharge for militia service in Vermont, which discharge was often seen by Shipman and by Bishop Chase; but as Ripley often talked of being at the taking of Burgoyne, and knew Col. Warner, he and Barton got a notion that he served in the Continental Line under Warner, and Barton made the claim accordingly, although Shipman desired him to claim for his Militia Service in Vermont, and knew his name was on the rolls at Montpelier.

Soon after that, his insanity became of such a nature that his town authorities appointed a guardian over him, and Mr. Shipman thought proper to take no further trouble about it. About that time Mr. Barton died. The Pension Office, not finding the name of Ripley in Col. Warner's rolls, rejected the claim, and so it was dropped.

On the 2d of November, 1851, while at Albany, N. Y., a stranger named Alpheus Tilden called upon me, urged me to prosecute the claim for him, and as he exhibited such papers as induced me to believe it was a righteous claim, I consented. On the 28th of that month, I sent to your office, proof of the highest respectability, to shew that said Ripley was insane at the time of the application and continued so; that having lived in the same town for seventy years, his family and friends had always heard him say, he served first in Connecticut and then in Vermont, under Captain Hutchins and Col. Herrick; and a certificate of the Comptroller of Vermont that the name of Epaphras Ripley appears on his Revolutionary Roll for the following service, viz:

From Aug. 1, 1777, to Dec. 3, 1777, in Capt. Parmalee Allen's Company, Col. Herrick's Regiment - 125 days.

From May 1, 1778, to Nov. 30, 1778, in Capt. Hutchins' Company of Provincial Troops, - 7 months.

From Oct. 11, 1780, in Capt. Hutchins' Company, of Col. Herrick's Regiment, - 8 days.

From Sept. 5, 1781, to Nov. 19, 1781, in Capt. Hutchins' Company, of Lieut. Col. Saml. Fletcher's Battallian,  - 74 days.

From Nov. 20, 1781, to May 1, 1782, in Capt. Hutchins' Independent Company of Troops, 93 days Corporal, 68 days private, - 161 days.

Total, 16 months 5 days, as Private,
3 do.[months] 3 do. [days] as Corporal.
Amounting to 19 months 8 days service.
Page 65

 3

The Certificate of the Rev. Dr. Chase, Bishop of New Hampshire, which accompanies those papers, convinced me that the claim was a good one, but it appears your office thought it was only an expression of his opinion that Ripley was a Revolutionary soldier; when he says expressley, that he saw his discharge and other papers, in 1832, and became satisfied he was entitled to a pension, but his insanity prevented him from pursuing the right course; he would have his own way and failed.

But the greatest objection you make to the claim is the affidavit of Andrew Bradford, the only witness who saw him in service, who swore, in 1832, that "In the spring of 1777 he became acquainted with Epaphras Ripley, a private soldier who belonged to Capt. Bronson's Company of Col. Warren's Independent Regiment of Rangers, that he saw him first at Fort Independence, at Hubbardston Battle, at the taking of Burgoyne, and at other places as the army moved during his enlistment —— that he was discharged in New-York, he thinks at West Point, before he was, his time being out."

Now although Andrew Bradford was old and might not have known or remembered the precise Company to which Ripley belonged, yet from facts stated in the history of Burgoyne's Campaign, it is more than probable that Ripley was then in Warner's Regiment, and might not have been enrolled, for at pages 25 and 26, that History says, "When the troops arrived at Hubbarston in Vermont. they were halted for nearly two hours, and the rear-guard was increased by many who did not at first belong to it, but were picked up on the road, having been unable to keep up with the Regiments. The rear-guard was here put under the command of Col. Seth Warner, with orders to follow the army." "The army then proceed to Castleton, about six miles farther —— Col. Warner, with the rear-guard and stragglers, remaining at Hubbarston." This was July 6th, 1777.

The same book, (herewith sent to you.) at page 34, says "Col. Warner had been detached with his Regiment into the State of Vermont, with orders to assemble the militia of the country." &c.

At page 92, it says that on the 16th of August, 1777, in speaking of attacking Burgoyne, that "Col. Nichols was detached with two hundred men to the rear of his left, and Col. Herrick with three hundred to the rear of his right."

It is evident there was much confusion in the army at that time, and as we have record of his service from 1st August to 3d December 1777, in Col. Herrick's Regiment, and several tours afterwards under Capt. Hutchins, he must have been with Herrick at the above battle, and also at the "taking of Burgoyne" in October following, and it is most probable he was one of the "stragglers" with Warner at Hubbardston, and might have been temporarily under Capt. Bronson, when Bradford first saw him;  so that Bradford's evidence is more than half confirmed by History, and by the fact of Ripley talking all his life of serving under Hutchins and Herrick, and seeing Burgoyne; as proven by five members of his family, besides other respectable persons, among whom are Luther Webb and John Shipman, who knew him nearly seventy years.

The objection of your office, that it was another man of that name, is now completely answered, especially as it is not pretended nor believed that any other Epaphras Ripley ever was pensioned, ever applied , or ever was known to have lived. The unfortunate man now under sentence of death in your City for the murder of his wife, was convicted on circumstantial evidence, and no doubt justly, BUT the evidence was not as strong as we have now presented to establish this claim; and when you shall have considered the o'd and new evidence, with the facts and arguments herein set forth, you will see Sir, that the claim of Epaphras Ripley cannot be rejected without a disregard of every feeling of gratitude, every principle of law, equity, reason and justice —— every rational presumption, and all the known principles of human nature and action. It will also brand the several witnesses with the crime of perjury, as far as your action can fix such a stigma; a result too monstrous and painful to be contemplated, or to be expected from an impartial mind, conscious of its own rectitude and therefore not ready to suspect others of crime before High Heaven.

As the proof of his death, heirship, administration, and power of attorney to me, are on your files, I shall expect to receive your certificate stating that Epaphras Ripley of Vermont, is placed upon the Pension List for services in the Revolutionary War 3 months and 3 days as corporal, and 16 months and 5 days as private, from the 4th March 1831, to the 11th February 1853, when he died; and that the same is payable at Montpelier, Vermont, to John W. Shipman, administrator, for the benefit of his nine children named in the certificate of heirship.


I have the honor to be, very respectfully,
Your obedient Servant, 
Edmund F. Brown,

Attorney for Claimants.

To prevent my letters falling into the hands of one if the forty E. Browns, or one of the six hundred and thirty other Browns in this city, I desire my correspondence to address me thus:

Edmund F. Brown,
of Washington,
Now at New-York City.
Page 66

Affidavit of John W. Shipman, of the Family History of Epaphras Ripley, showing clearly that his home was in Vermont some years before 1782, and his last service in the Revolution must have been in Vermont Companies.

Also  other particulars, which are so honestly told that they bear truth on the face of them.

Also Certificate of Esq. Roundy.

E. F. Brown,
Att.y

New York, 14. July 1853}
Page 67

Perkinsville Vt. 25th June 1850[unclear]

E F Brown Esq
N york City

Sir

I have received your letter of the 31st ult stating that you have sent to the pension office the Affidavit of my Father and my Wife and desiring me to collect some further information relative to The Early history of my late Father in Law, Epaphras Ripley Deceased.

as I am but little more than fifty five and he was more than forty years older, of course I cannot give any but such family history as I have been able to learn from different members of his family, and from his old neighbors. his Eldest Daughter Tabitha now living in Rockingham is 70 years old, which would have made his Marriage about the time of his last service in Capt. Hutchins Independent Company as he used to call it. which the record says Ended 1st May 1782. we know from statements always made by himself and The Family of Webb. in which he Married that of much as five years before he was Married, he removed from Windham Connecticut. To Rockingham Vermont which was we believe in the Early part of the year 1777[unclear]. and with the exception of his tours of service resided in that Town untill his Death, I should have made this statement long since but did not suppose it necessary and presume you did not think of asking such question untill The Commissioner of Pensions doubted whether Mr Ripley was the same Man who is recorded at Montpelier, and said we did not Think of claiming for his Vermont service untill we found his name There recently, we Think it very strange that he is so unbelieving as to suppose we would all swear falsely in a matter that will give to The Children so small an amount and especially that his Son and Uncle Luther Webb should in 1851 while the old Gentleman was still living and they could have had no interest in it should have sworn so positively that he always said his last service was in Vermont under Capt. Hutchins,
Page 68

Old Mr Webbs character is and always was of the very highest standing for veracity. as we have proven in the papers which you have filed. and by Certificate of Seven other as good Men as can be produced in any Community. Men who have always known Mr. Webb and Mr Ripley long before his insanity commenced.

Now the difficulty appears to me to be with them that the Declaration made by Mr Ripley in 1822 claimed for Connecticut service only, and more than he performed in that state. and said nothing about his Vermont Service.

I told Mr Barton in 1832 that Father Ripley never pretended to have a regular discharge from The Connecticut service. and that he said he had always fullfilled all his engagements in the Vermont service. Barton said he could prove him long enough in the Connecticut service to entitle him to full pay. if he should fail he could then put in his claim for Vermont service and get it allowed any time. I should think The Department would see that as he is proven to have been insane, that statement cannot be relied on especially as They say his name is not on The Rolls of Col. Warners Regiment in  The Department, as you have affidavits of My Father and several of Mr Ripleys Children that he served in Vermont, and as I know that this discharge which I saw him have was for Vermont service. and D. Chase Certifies To the same. and I also know that if my advice has been followed in 1832 his said service in Vermont would have been claimed for Them. but his agent Mr Barton managed it his own way. and soon after died. I hope you will insist when the last papers sent shall be examined that they must not blame Father Ripley for the bad management of his first agent as the ignorance of his administrator,
Page 69

The new Commissioner being a Connecticut Man should consider that we Green Mountain Yankees when we have a good Character as is proven of all those who have given evidence in this case are not such as I am informed are often found in large Cities who could be hired to swear to any thing. all those who have been sworn or given certificates in this case are persons who would not swear falsely for his service what the pension will amount to and we then characters are proven. when I wrote you some weeks since I thought Judge Taft would recollect the parts I then stated, which took place at his office and i wrote him to ascertain. but I have his Letter which I enclose, stating that as he had about two hundred pension cases before him about that time he does not recollect particulars. I know they are true as I stated, The Judge refers me to his Register. I was well acquainted with Esqr Keyes prior to 1832 he was not at The Office nor did I ever [unclear] a word with him on the subject. nor was the Judge consulted as to the discharge. but I am sure it was handed to him first and by Mr Ripley himself, and then passed round. The conversation I know was Between Barton and Myself, Is it possible that The Commissioner Thinks we have been putting up Men of Straw for the purpose of obtaining a few dollars from Government if so prevail on him if possible to invite The Hon William Henry BellowsFalls as To Rockingham Testimony. who will willingly satisfy him on that part. as you may wish to send this to the department I shall verify it before Esqr Roundy,  I hope you will get it acted on again soon, as the family an all anxious for its allowances as much for this honor as for the small amount that cash may receive after paying Expenses

Respectfully yours  John W. Shipman
Page 70

State of Vermont
Windsor County

I N.B. Roundy Justice of the Peace in and for the county aforesaid do hereby certify that John W Shipman this day appeared before me and made oath according to Law that the statements contained in the foregoing letter written and signed by him are true to the best of his Knowledge and belief and that the said Shipman is a man of respectable standing in our comunity and and his statements are entitled to credit

Napoleon B Roundy Justice of the Peace

N.B. —— Mr. Roundy's Station as Justice of the Peace, is avouched in another Affidavit taken before him, (in this case) Sent by me to the Pension Office on 24. My 1853

E.F. Brown
Atty.——
Page 71

New York, 24. May 1853.

Hon. L. P. Waldo,
Commr. of Pensions.

Sir:

Four weeks ago this day I had a conversation with you, and you declined allowing the claim of Epaphras Ripley, of Vermont, Act 1832, on the ground that you thought he was not sufficiently identified as being the one whose name is borne on the Rolls at Montpelier.

I have now the honor to send you herewith, proof that I was then right; and presuming you will admit the principle that it ought to be first in order to correct errors, whether private or official, I trust you will be pleased to take up and admit this claim at once. 

The enclosed Affidavits of John Shipman Esq. aged 82, and of Mrs. Octava Shipman, with Certificate and letter of Napoleon B. Roundy Esq. Justice of the Peace; and the letter of John W. Shipman Esq.; (all of whom are credible beyond doubt,) prove facts not before brought out, because not before thought of until I informed Mr. S. that you supposed they never thought of claiming for Vermont Service till one or two years ago.

They prove the following; viz: ——

1st.—— That in 1832; when the first Declaration was made, Mr. Shipman desired Ripley to claim for his Vermont Service, had a Discharge and knew there was record of it, but was over-ruled by his Agent, Barton, who soon after died.

2nd.—— That Shipman abandoned it many years because the Town appointed a Guardian; and that Tilden furnished no new information.

3rd.—— That Ripley served but a short time in Connecticut, as his Uncle prevailed on his Officers to release him so he might move to Vermont, and that such was his Military spirit that he afterwards served many tours under Capt. Hutchins, as proven by the Rolls.

4th.—— That before he was Insane, or thought of Pension, these witnesses
Page 72

witnesses heard him repeatedly say he served under Capt. Hutchins and Col. Herrick, in Vermont.

Your Office will surely admit that Mr. Ripley (being then Insane) was not to blame for the avarice of his Agent in 1832, who had an idea that he could get a full pension by placing him three years in Warner's Regiment, and therefore refused to claim for his Militia or Volunteer Service.

If you will examine the enclosed papers carefully, you will perceive there is certainly the appearance of honesty and reasonableness in all the statements, especially as the other papers on file shew that he must have moved into Vermont as early as 1777; and as you admitted in our interview on 26th. ult. that he must have served somewhere; and as this is too small to be a "Galphin" or a "Gardner" claim, it cannot be any but a just one.

Trusting that all will now be satisfactory, and that a Pension Certificate will be sent me without delay,

I have the honor to remain,
Very Respectfully,
Sir, Your Mo. Obt. Servt.
Edw. F. Brown
of Washn
Atty.
Page 73

[This letter is dim and difficult to transcribe.]

[illegible] May 1?, 1853

John W. Shipman Esq.

Dear Sir I received [illegible words] and in reply would say that I have had very little recollection 
[illegible words] place at the time you remember about [illegible words] in his declaration before me for a  pension.  There were many persons in the year 1832 that made oath to their declaration before me something like [illegible] hundred [illegible words] an omission [?]  [illegible] number [illegible words] one, who during the [illegible] of it had a [illegible] appointed [illegible words] or whether  it was the Town of Rockingham that [illegible] the support [illegible] or whether his agents name was [illegible] I could not say. as to the discharge, that you say Ripley produced, and the conversation you mention held between Benton & Shipley, I have not the least recollection of under I think my [illegible] at that time could not have been called to it [illegible] my attention had been called to it or I had been consulted on the [illegible] I think I would recollect it.  My Register Mr. Asa Keyes may have had this conversation I have seen the discharge allowed to and would have been much more likely have been consulted on the subject
Page 74

[This letter is dim and difficult to transcribe.]

and he was a [illegible] and was agent or attorney for many applicants for pensions at that ^time^ and [illegible] due more declarations for pensions, than any other [illegible] in the County of Windham I would therefore advise you to write him on the subject he is now practicing law in the town of Brattleboro Windham Co. Vermont
Yours with esteem
Peter R. Taft
Page 75

New York City, 4th. May 1853.

Hon. L.P. Waldo,
Commr. of Pensions,

Sir:

With thanks for your gentlemanly kindness while I was at your Office last week urging the allowance of the claim of Epaphras Ripley, of Vermont, Act 1832; I beg leave to ask five minutes of your time to read the enclosed letter which I have just received from Mr. Shipman, his Son-In-Law, and which explains away your objections, and establishes the following facts, viz :—— 

1st. —— That Shipman knew of the record of the Vermont Service twenty. one years ago, and would have claimed for it then, but was over-ruled by his Agent, who soon after died.

2nd. —— That Shipman abandoned it for many years, because the Town appointed a Guardian.

3rd. —— That Ripley Served but a short time in Connecticut, as his Uncle got the Officers to let him off without discharge, which accounts for not finding him on Warner's Rolls. The Roll which had his name for a short time might have been lost.

4th. —— That the names of Col. Herrick & Capt. Hutchins were familiar to Shipman more than 30 years ago, as the Officers under whom Ripley served the last and greater portion of his time :——

Now, Sir, you are Lawyer enough to know that a client must use or not use such papers as his Attorney may determine; the statement shews honesty on the face of it, and the whole sum and substance of it is, as now shewn, that the avarice and bad management of his first Agent prevented him from obtaining in 1832 what was his just due, and what we now claim; viz : a Pension for his Vermont Service.

I believe Sir, if you were the Attorney, instead of the Commissioner, you would coincide with me in the belief that the explanations now sent, are
Page 76

Sufficient to admit the claim.

Entertaining these views, I shall of course look for the Pension Certificate the latter part of this week.

Your immediate attention will confer a favor  on

Very Respectfully,
Sir, Your Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington,
Atty.
Page 77

E R Brown Esqr
New York City

Perkinsville 2d May 1853

Dear Sir

yours of the 28th came to hand Saturday Evening sorry to hear The fates are against us, Now for The Commissioner's unbelief as to the Man, Rolls or I knew 21 years ago that the Old Mans name was on The Rolls at Montpelier and I will tell you how; at the very Time that he made oath to the Declaration mentioned 1832 before Judge Taft of the District of Westminster I was present with the agent Rufus Barton of Ludlow Vt. Mr Ripley produced a Military Discharge for Services in this state I suggested that he had better make use of it. Barton said no, I can get him on for his first Enlistment in Conn. and full pay. whereas his service in this state will not Entitle him to full pay, said he had seen The Rolls at Montpelier. Ripleys Name was there and if he failed in his first application he should fall back upon his Vt Service which he could get allowed at any time,  this conversation was in Judge Tafts office and I have no doubt he would remember it if he could be found, he is somewhere at The West, I have learned nothing new from Mr Tilden. in regard To The Pension, some weeks after we were at the Probate office Judge Taft wrote Barton to say that the Town of Rockingham had placed a Guardian over Mr Ripley of which he gave me notice (over
Page 78

some 3 or 4 weekes after this Mr Barton died The old man having a Guardian I paid no more attention to it untill Tilden came To Me for the Job, at which time I think Tilden did not know as Ripleys name was on The Rolls at Montpelier, I had not a doubt he would have got the claim allowed and think now he would if he had been Honest. (Tilden got on my track at Rockingham on other Business)

I have been thinking of the old Men in Rockingham. I believe they are all gone Except the Webbs certainly in that part of the Town, I know Mr Ripley had no regular discharge from his Conn Service his Uncle Webb went to the officers of his Regiment and got him off some how, after which he was in the Vt service as the records shaw. and as Esqr Luther Webb Testifies. Mr Shubel Ripley told me when at Middlebury last month that a Mr Weed (who is in agency business) told him there was abundant Evidence to prove his claim. I have wrote Mr R to find out if he could in what it consisted, do not know where Mr Weed. Lives previous[unclear] I shall hear from you before I do from him, 

Shall not undertake to prove that I knew nothing of The Rolls at Montpelier untill the application was Made ,Reasons, conversation with Barton at Probate office before stated. The officers names named in My Affidavit were familiar More than thirty years ago. I am going to write to Townshend Judge Tafts last residence in Vermont to try and find out when he
Page 79

now is and if you think his recollection of The Discharge as any thing Else he may remember will be any service in the case I feel sure he will do it if we can track him as he is a good man, 

I yet beleive we shall have Justice done us although it may be delayed till The Eleventh hour

Let me hear from you

and believe me yours Truly
John W. Shipman

E.F. Brown Esqr
of Washington

[symbol of hand with index finger pointing to the right]  Note. 

John W. Shipman Esq. the writer of the foregoing letter, is the Son_in_law, and Administrator of the late Epaphras Ripley, about whose claim for Revolutionary Pension, he writes. His standing for veracity is duly proven in the papers on file, by Bishop Chase and others; and as his last Affidavit states that over thirty years ago, and before Ripley's insanity, he often heard Ripley say he served under Capt. Hutchins & Col. Herrick, it is presumed these additional explanatory statements will be received as if sworn to.

If so, it will be admitted that our Ripley must be the man recorded at Montpelier; and consequently the claim will be allowed.

E.F. Brown, 
Attorney

New York, 
4. May 1853.}
Page 80

Copy of letter from John W. Shipman to E. F. Brown, 2 May 1853.

Original sent to the Pension Office on 4th. May 1853.

E.F.B.


A plain, honest, and reasonable story, which shows that by a blunder of the first Agent in 1832, justice has been delayed.

E.F.B.
Page 81

(Copy)

Perkinsville 2nd May 1853.

E.F. Brown Esqre.
New York City.

Dear Sir:

Yours of the 28th. came to hand Saturday evening. Sorry to hear the fates are against us. Now for the Commissioner's unbelief as to the Man, Rolls, &c [etc]. I knew 21 years ago that the old man's name was on the Rolls at Montpelier, and I will tell you how; at the very time that he made oath to the Declaration mentioned 1832 before Judge Taft of the District of Westminster, I was present with the Agent Rufus Barton of Ludlow Vt. Mr. Ripley produced a Military discharge for services in this State: I suggested that he had better make use of it. Barton said "No, I can get him on for his first enlistment in Conn. and full pay, whereas his service in this State will not entitle him to full pay." Said he had seen the Rolls at Montpelier, Ripley's name was there, and if he failed in his first application he should fall back upon his Vt. service, which he could get allowed at any time. This Conversation was in Judge Taft's office and I have no doubt he would remember it if he could be found. He is somewhere at the west. I have learned nothing new from Mr. Tilden in regard to the Pension Some weeks after we were at the Probate office Judge Taft wrote Barton to say that the Town of Rockingham had placed a
Page 82

Guardian over mr. Ripley of which he gave me notice. Some 3 or 4 weeks after this Mr. Barton died. The Old man having a Guardian I paid no more attention to it, until Tilden came to me for the job at which time I think Tilden did not know as Ripleys name was on the Rolls of Montpelier.

I had not a doubt he would have got the claim allowed, and think now he would if he had been honest. (Tilden got on my track at Rockingham on other Business)

I have been thinking of the old men in Rockingham. I believe they are all gone except the Webbs, certainly in that part of the town.

I know Mr. Ripley had no regular discharge from his Conn. service. His uncle ※Webb went to the officers of his regiment and got him off somehow; after which he was in the Vt. service as the records show and as Esqr. Luther Webb testifies. Mr. Shubel Ripley told me when at Middlebury last month that a Mr. Weed (who is Agency Business) told him there was abundant evidence to prove his claim. I have wrote Mr. R. to find out if he could in what consisted. Do not know where Mr. Weed lives. Presume I shall hear from you before I do from him.

Shall not undertake to prove that I knew nothing of the Rolls at Montpelier until the application was made. Reasons conversation with Barton at Probate office before stated. The Office names, named

[Sideways in lower left corner] ※ Probably meaning his Wife's Uncle Webb, as his Wife was Sister of Luther Webb, now living, whose two Affidavits are now on file, and who knew Ripley nearly all his life, and is certain he served last in Vermont. 

E.F.B.
Page 83

in any Affidavit were familiar more that thirty years ago. I am going to write to Townshend Judge Taft's last residence in Vermont to try and find out where he now is, and if you think his recollections of the discharge or anything else he may remember will be any service in the case  I feel sure he will do it if we can reach him as he is a good man. 

I yet believe we shall have justice done us although it may be delayed until the eleventh hour.

Let me hear from you and believe me
Yours truly
(signed) John W. Shipman

E.F. Brown Esqr.
Washington

Note.—— John W. Shipman Esq., the writer of the foregoing letter, is the Son_in_law and Administrator of the late Epaphras Ripley, about whose claim for Revolutionary Pension he writes. His standing for veracity is duly proven in the papers on file, by Bishop Chase and others;—— and as his last Affidavit states that over 30 years ago, and before Ripley's insanity, he often heard Ripley say he served under Capt. Hutchins & Col. Herrick, it is presumed these additional explanatory Statements will be received as if sworn to.

If so, it will be admitted that our Ripley must be the man recorded at Montpelier, and consequently the claim will be allowed.

E.F. Brown,
Attorney

New York May 4. 1853.

Original sent to Pension Office, this 4th. May ' 53.
Page 84

E.F. Brown's letter to Commissioner 

[sideways] Claim of Epaphras Ripley
Vermont, Act 1832}
Page 85

To the Hon. L.P. Waldo,
Commissioner of Pensions.

Sir:

In the case which I desired you to have acted on last Wednesday, I could not then give you my strongest reason, because of those present.—— Believing you felt a delicacy in making any case special, I applied to the Secretary to grant his permission, and this morning his Chief Clerk informs me that he prefers leaving it to your discretion if you see cause to take it up.

I have now the honor to state a private reason which is more pressing than any other person can have. It is this —— to save me and my family from ruin!

It was formerly the practice of the Office to make such cases special, and I trust you will now. 

I am dependent on my Commissions in this case to save my family from being turned in the street and in a land of strangers, at the end of next week.

Col. Niles can decide the case in half an hour, as he knows all the points. 

Be pleased to grant permission, and confer a favor on

Very Respy. Yr. Obt. St.
Edm. F. Brown
Att.y
22. Apl. 1853

Claim of Epaphras Ripley,
Vermont, Act 1832}
Page 86

E.F. Brown's letter of appeal
Page 87

New York City, 18th April 1853.

Hon. R. McClelland, 
Secretary of the Interior.

Sir:

On the 12th. February last, I addressed to your Predecessor an Appeal from the decision of the Commissioner of Pension in the case of Epaphras Ripley, an Insane applicant for Revolutionary Pension, and on the 17th. of the same month he wrote me that my letter had been sent to the Commissioner for a Report.

Learning soon after, that Ripley had died, I wrote one of his family for some additional papers, and at the same time sent to the Pension Office a request that their Report be suspended a few days to enable me to file such additional papers as could be obtained.

I have now the honor to present herewith, proof which will obviate the objection to the papers on file in the handwriting of Tilden, and will, doubtless, satisfy the Pension Office of the justice of the claim, without troubling you with an examination of the case.

The papers now sent, are :——

No. 1. —— Certificate of Ripley's death, names of his Children, and Administrator.

No. 2. —— Power of Attorney from John W. Shipman, Administrator, to Edmund F. Brown, Attorney.

No. 3. —— Affidavit of John W. Shipman, proving that Ripley served under Col. Herrick and Capt. Hutchins in Vermont, was at the Surrender of Genl. Burgoyne,  & other particulars.

No. 4. —— The Affidavit of Luther Webb, and Certificate of Hon. Wm. Henry, late Member of Congress, clearly shewing that Ripley served under Col. Herrick in Vermont

No. 5. —— The Affidavits of Shubel Ripley, Clarissa Ripley,  and Rodentha Ingals, Daughters of Epaphras, confirming the fact of his serving under Col. Herrick. 

No. 6. , and last, but not least.—— A letter from Rt. Rev. Bishop Chase, re-iterating his Certificate, and shewing by the clearest circumstantial evidence, that the claimant must have been the man whose name is on the Rolls at Montpelier;
Page 88

and vouching for the truth of the statements of Shipman and Webb.

The genuineness of the letter will not be doubted, as it has his Seal upon the back of it, and his handwriting will compare with his Certificate on file.

In addition to the evidence above named, I would suggest to the Clerk who examined the claim, that Andrew Bradford's statements can now be reconciled, and they are in part, and probably all true.

By reference to the "Extracts from the History of Burgoyne's Campaign," herewith sent, (marked A,) it will be seen that Cols. Warner and Herrick were both at the Burgoyne Battles in August & October 1777, and that in the Spring of that year Warner was sent into Vermont to collect Militia, and it is highly probable that Militia was in the Hubbardton Battle in July among Warner's 1000 men, and that Ripley was on some Roll which was lost. It is well known that those Battles were very
severe, and it would not be surprizing if amid their "noise and confusion" Mr. Bradford should have been mistaken as to the precise Company to which Ripley belonged; but he says it was in the Spring of 1777, and we have clearly proven by the other evidence that his statement of having seen him at the taking of Burgoyne, was true, as he belonged to Herrick's Regiment from Aug. 1. to Dec. 3. 1777, which includes both of Burgoyne's Battles of August and October.

Further :—— As it appears from the Comptroller's Certificate that Hutchins' Company, of Fletcher's Battallian was disbanded on 19. Nov. 1781, and that on the next day Hutchins raised an Independent Company of Troops in which Claimant served 161 days, at the end of which (1. May 1782,) the War was virtually ended, and the Discharge then received was probably the one which J. W.
Page 89

Shipman has often seen :—— and as the Certificate of the Comptroller and the statements of the Witnesses all shew that he was in the habit of serving short Tours, it is but fair to believe that he was in all the service asserted.

The Claimant was in his 96th. year when he died, in February last, and it is not improbable that he was in service with Ethan Allen as early as 1775, as stated by Luther Webb.

The Administrator desires me to obtain as liberal a pension as practicable, as there are nine children to share it, and they are all in need. 

I therefore submit this new proof to the liberal consideration of the Department, in the confident expectation that I shall receive a Pension Certificate without delay.

With great Respect,
I have to honor to be,
Sir, Your Mo. Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington,
Atty.
Page 90

(Copy.)

Touching the case of Epaphras Ripley, I hereby certify as follows:

Being Rector of Immanuel Church in the Town of Rockingham, Vt., where he resides, from the year 1819 to 1844, I knew him well, and often heard him speak of being out as a Soldier in the Revolutionary War. Sometime after the passing of the Act of Congress in favor of Revolutionary Soldiers —— say in the year 1833 or 1834, he came to my house with his head full of a plan which he had formed for obtaining a Pension and asked for my assistance in prosecuting his claim. He laid before me several papers, whose contents I do not now particularly recollect —— except that I have an impression that one of them was a tattered paper purporting to be a military discharge. On examination I became satisfied that his claim was a good one, and needed only to be presented by an intelligent Agent. Being that time, as he has been ever since under a sort of insanity, he had fixed his mind on an absurd plan of proceedure, and would  not allow his papers to be used in any other way. I tried to make him see that he must conform to the course prescribed by the Government. He insisted that his own was better. Of course nothing was done.

That Epaphras Ripley was in the service between one and two years, and left it not without honorable discharge —— and that he is entitled to a pension as a Revolutionary Soldier I fully believe. Carlton Chase

(signed) Carlton Chase,
Bishop of the Diocese
of New Hampshire.

Claremont, N.H.
July 17. 1851.
Acknowledged Nov. 8. 1851.
Page 91

Abstract of Epaphras Ripley's, Vermont Service, as shewn by the Comptroller's Certificate, 10. Nov. 1851.

From Aug. 1. 1777 to Dec. 3. 1777 —— 125 days, Capt. Parmalee Allen's Co.—— Col. Herrick's Regt, ——

From May 1. 1778 to Nov. 30. 1778 —— 7 months, Capt. Hutchins' Co. Provincial Troops

From Oct. 11. 1780, —— 8 days Private —— 8 days, Capt. Hutchins' Co. Col. Herrick's Regt.

{From Sept. 5. 1781 to Nov. 19. 1781 —— 74 days, Capt. Hutchins' Co. Lt. Col. Fletcher's Battn.

{From Nov. 20. 1781, to 1. May 1782 —— 161 days, 93 days Corporal, 68 days Private 
Capt. Hutchins Independent Co. of Troops.

{These two making nearly 8 months continuous service. 

Total —— 16 months, 5 days, Private
3 " 3 " Corporal.
19 " 8 "
Page 92

No. 6

Rt. Rev. Bishop Chase.

Positive circumstantial proof that Epaphras Ripley served in Vermont, [?Seal?here] and is on the Rolls at Montpelier.

13. April 1853

[upside-down] 
[Postmark] Claremont  Apr 13

Edmund F. Brown Esrq.
114 South 9th Street.
Williamsburgh, 
(Long Island)
N. York.

[right side up]
E. F. Brown
of Washn.
Atty.

New York,
18Apr. '53}
Page 93

Claremont, N.H. April 18. 1853

To Edmund F. Brown Esqr.

Dear Sir,

Your letter of the 8th inst. touching the case of Epaphras Ripley came to hand yesterday.

I have been wondering a long time what had become of the question of that old man's pension —— and had rather concluded, that the whole thing had fallen with Tilden.

That Ripley did service as a soldier and was in several battles in the revolutionary war I have no manner of doubt. Nor do I doubt that he was justly entitled to a pension under the act of Congress. And yet I do not know that I can at this distance of time from receiving the information make any such certification as will satisfy a tribunal, which insists such strict rules of evidence. It is to be regretted that such questions cannot be tried by a local Commissioner, which might be influenced in a reasonable manner by the circumstances of the case, and might, under a safe discretion, take a benign view of claims, with regard to which it is so natural that evidence should be lost or recollections diffidently assorted.

In the year 1819 I became Rector of Immanuel Church in Rockingham, Vt. About that period, somewhat later, commenced my acquaintance with Epaphras Ripley —— whom I reckoned as a Communicant in my Church. His wife was sister to two of the most respectable men in the parish —— viz. Calvin and Luther Webb; from the latter of whom Tilden obtained a Certificate.
Page 94

Ripley and to be fond of telling about the "revolution war," as he called it, and of fighting his battles over again. I am not, however, able to state particulars —— except that I am pretty sure he told of being in the battle of Bennington or that of Saratoga, having much to say of the taking of Burgoyne. My impression for the most part is a general one, which stays in my mind as the result of common conversation and report.

As to the names of officers, under whom he served I have no recollections.

I recognize the enclosed as a copy of a certificate given by me to Tilden, and return it to you with my renewed signature.

A daughter of E. Ripley, now a woman of 50 years' age, is and has been for 16 or 17 years in my family. She only recollects in general her father's stories of revolutionary campaigns.

That there was any other Epaphras Ripley in that war from Vermont —— or the New Hampshire grants —— is very improbable. That this is the one, whose name is found at Montpelier, I think admits not of reasonable doubt. Still if there exists positive evidence to the contrary, that evidence must prevail.

Charles Ripley (son) I am not acquainted with. Luther Webb and J.W. Shipman I know well, and should repose perfect confidence in any thing stated by them. The Rev. Dr. Class was my successor at Rockingham, after the Rev. Mr. Putnam who died.

I know nothing about the necessity the department may be under to apply rules of evidence strictly.
Page 95

That this Ripley "went a soldiering" in the revolutionary war between one and two years I have not least doubt —— and it is impressed on my mind, that if the papers exhibited to me by him/referred to in my certificate/ could be produced, the case would be clear to all. But those papers, I presume, have long since been destroyed, or irrevocably lost. 

I am, Sir,
Your very obedient servant,
Carlton Chase

Note. 
The foregoing is in reply to my request that he would state  all he could recollect relative to any particulars which Ripley was in the habit of mentioning relative to his service, and is as explicit as could be expected, when it is remembered that it is thirty years since the statements were made, and the Bishop had no particular reason to change his memory with them.

E.F. Brown.
Page 96

Copies of letters from Pension Office, and Extracts of letter from Bishop Chase, with marginal notes, by

E.F. Brown.
Oct. 1853.

No 19.
Page 97

Extracts of Letter from Revd. Dr. Chase, Bishop of New Hampshire, to E.F. Brown, dated

"Claremont, N. H. April 12.1853"

{See Certificate of Bishop Chase, on file}

"That Ripley did service as a soldier, and was in several Battles in the Revolutionary War, I have no manner of doubt. Nor do I doubt that he was justly entitled to a Pension under the Act of Congress. And yet I do not know that I can, at this distance of time from receiving the information, make any such certifications as will satisfy a Tribunal which insists on strict rules of Evidence. It is to be regretted that such questions cannot be tried by a local commission ※  which might be influenced in a reasonable manner by the circumstances of the case and might under a safe discretion take a benign view of claims with regard to which it is so natural that evidence should be lost or recollections diffidently asserted."

※  The Pension Office ought to be such a "local commission."

"In the year 1819, I became Rector of Immanuel Church in Rockingham, Vt. —— About that period, somewhat later, ※ commenced my acquaintance with Epaphras Ripley, whom I reckoned as a Communicant in my Church. 

※ Before Ripley was Insane

"His wife was a sister to two of the most respectable
Page 98

"men in the Parish, viz: Calvin and Luther Webb; from the latter of whom Tilden obtained a Certificate."

"Ripley used to be fond of telling about the "Revolution War," as he called it, and of fighting his Battles over again. I am not, however, able to state particulars, except that I am pretty sure he told of being in the Battle of Bennington, or that of Saratoga, having much to say of the taking of Burgoyne."——

"That there was any other Epaphras Ripley in that War from Vermont, or the New Hampshire Troops, is very improbable ※ . That this is the one whose name is found, at Montpelier, I think admits not of reasonable doubt."

※ for no one has ever heard of another 

x"Luther Webb and J.W. Shipman I know well, and should repose perfect confidence in any thing stated by them."

x Important Witnesses.——

"I know nothing about the necessity the Department may be under to apply rules of evidence + strictly."

+none.

"That this Ripley "went a Soldiering" in the Revolutionary war between one and two years, I have not the least doubt, and it is impressed on my mind that if the papers exhibited to me by him (referred to in my certificate) could be produced, the case would be clear to all. But those papers I presume have long since been destroyed."

(signed) Carlton Chase,
Bishop &c.

[Original on file in Pension Office.]
Page 99

(Copy)

Pension Office, 
February 14. 1852.

Sir:

The evidence of the appointment of a Committee or Guardian for Epaphras Ripley an insane applicant for a pension under Act of 7. June 1832, from Vermont, has not been received at this Office.

Very Resp. &c.
(Signed) J. Wilson,
for Comr. Pensions.

Edmd. F. Brown Esq.
Present.

[On Left Side]
Proof of service having been filed 28. Nov. 1851, this was, of course, supposed to be all that was required.
Page 100

(Copy.)

Pension Office,
April 3rd. 1852.

Sir:

Your communication of the 27th. ultima. relative to the case of Epaphras Ripley, enclosing  x additional evidence, is received, and will be fully considered as soon as it can be reached in its paper order.

x Certificate of Guardianship.

Very respectfully,
Your obedient servant,
(signed) I. E. Heath,
Commissioner of Pensions.

E.F. Brown Esq.
New York.

(The above was a printed letter with blanks for such words as were to be written.)
Page 101

(Copy.) 

Pension Office,
May 13th. 1852.

Sir,

At your very urgent request, I have taken up, out of its turn, the case of Epaphras Ripley, of Vt. under Act of 1832. I find that  ※  several letters were written in this case during the last year, to various individuals, to wit: one to J. Meacham 24th. Jany. 1851—— one to J. Peaze Sept. 30. and one to S. Ripley of 26th. Novr., all saying that the claim has been rejected for want of evidence of service.

※ All these were before I filed proof of service, which was 28. Nov. 51, and it ought to have been found before 13. May

Mr. Ripley was informed in addition that if any farther steps were proposed to be taken in the prosecution of it —— as his father was insane —— a committee or Guardian should be appointed to act for him —— This has been done, and it is all that has been done. There has been no farther proof of service adduced. You seem to base your expectation of its allowance, on x my letter of 14th. Feb. last. You say, as that letter states nothing further than to inform you no evidence of the appointment of a Guardian had been received, you infer that I had, of course, admitted the claim. That letter was only in answer to the simple inquiry, whether that evidence of Guardianship had been received, and made no comments or admissions as to the merits of the claim. If you desire the claim to be allowed, you must furnish evidence of the service.

x certainly .——

(Signed) F.F.C. Triplett, for Comr.——

E.F. Brown Esq.
New York.}
Page 102

(Copy.)

Pension Office,
November 29th. 1852.

Sir:

With the x statements of my letter of the 13th. May last, as to the condition of the claim of Epaphras Ripley, before you, I have been greatly surprised to learn from your numerous letters, that you were under the impression that our x objections to its admission had been removed, and that you had, for sometime past, been in the constant expectation of receiving a Certificate:—— for, with the exception of the Certificate of Bishop Chase, which merely establishes the fact that Ripley was by him regarded  ※ as a Revolutionary Soldier, and as embraced by the law of June 7. 1832, not a particle of additional testimony of any character, has been received since the date of the letter above referred to. Indeed since that date the entire parole testimony which had been intended to sustain the claim, has been discredited by the fact, that Alpheus Tilden in whose handwriting it is, is now a fugitive from justice, having been indicted in the District Court of Vermont (but forfeited his bond) for having prepared and x uttered false papers in another pension case, and thereby defrauded the Government. Tilden is also charged with an attempt to commit a fraud in the case of Ripley. The conduct of Agents, however, should not be permitted to prejudice a claim

[All the following are in the left hand margin]

x Erroneous

x Because I supposed you had examined the proof, which ought to have been Satisfactory.

[※ ] A very unfair estimate to place on the Bishop's assertion that he saw his Discharge.

x This has been satisfactorily explained.
Page 103

which is really a good one, and this Office therefore willing to reconsider that of Ripley, which x may be well founded x. It may be well to state, however, that it is believed that any attempt to connect him with the service credited to a Soldier of his name on the books of the Office of the Secretary of Vermont, would fail; for the reason, that, notwithstanding the peculiarity of the baptismal name, that soldier was another and different person. He claimed no such service Service, nor does his Witness, Andrew Bradford, the only one who claims to have had personal knowledge of his services as a soldier refer to it. The service claimed in Ripley's declaration was alleged to have been rendered in Warner's Regiment, and from the fact that the enlistment took place in Connecticut, it was inferred that it was rendered under the authority of that State, nor is there any evidence whatever of his service among the Records at Hartford. Warner's Regiment belonged to the Line of New Hampshire, and many persons residing in Vermont enlisted in it. It is possible that some evidence of the service may be found at Concord. If found there, the claim could be satisfactorily adjusted; otherwise, it is utterly impracticable, from the present testimony, to do so. When you furnish proof of service, you should also exhibit authority to act as the Attorney of Ripley's Guardian,

[All below are in the left hand margin]

x In Admission, which is true.

No.

He is the same. He was insane, and his Agent over-ruled him

His friends had him released from that service and he moved to Vermont.

Not found there.

Power of Attorney filed.
Page 104

There is x no cause of complaint on the action of this Office in Ripley's case. Twelve letters have been written to you and other Agents in reference to it, and every disposition manifested to investigate it thoroughly and to award the Pension, if found to be due. 

I am, &c.
(signed) I. E. Heath,
Commisioner.

E.F. Brown Esq.
New York.


[All below is in left margin]

x Much cause because it was treated unfairly from the first, either through ignorance or design.
Page 105

(Copy.) 

Pension Office,
February 4/53

Sir,

I have most x carefully re-examined all the papers in the case of Epaphras Ripley of Vermont.

In my letter bearing dated 29th. Novr. 1852, (to which you are referred) are stated the objections to his claim. I regret to inform you that I am now, after a most rigid and thorough [strikethrough]examination[/strikethrough] investigation of all the evidence, irresistibly led to the same conclusion.

I  am, &c.
(signed) I.E. Heath,
Commr.

E.F. Brown Esq.
New York City.

[All below are in left margin]
x Doubtful.

Very poor objections. No allowance for Insanity; and all doubts on your own side.
Page 106

This has not been, and cannot be answered.——
E.F.B.

New York, July 14, 1853.

Hon. L.P. Waldo,

Commissioner of Pensions,

Washington City.

Sir:—— You will probably recollect that on the 26th of April last, I had an interview with you at your office,  relative to the claim of EPAPHRAS RIPLEY, of Vermont, (now deceased,) for Revolutionary Pension, under the Act of June 7, 1832; that when you informed me you could not allow it on the evidence there tiled, I said, "My dear Sir, the man must have served somewhere, for such respectable testimony cannot be false;" that you replied "I think it likely he did; but where, and how long?" and that in reply to my assertion that he served over nineteen months in Vermont, as shown by the certificate of the Comptroller which I filed more than a year ago, you intimated that the parties never knew that such service was on record until recently, (say two years ago) and as they never thought of claiming for it until then; that you believed the soldier recorded at Montpelier, was another man of that name; and that this was an unjust claim.
This was an unexpected objection, which I could not answer until I wrote the family; because having never thought of such a charge, I had not questioned them on that point when I visited them ten days previously.

Mr. Shipman, the administrator, was astonished at the charge, and immediately wrote me that he knew twenty-one years ago that Mr. Ripley's service was recorded at Montpelier, and in 1832, when the original application was commenced, he desired Mr. Barton, the agent whom he employed, to claim for said Vermont service, but was overruled by  said agent, who insisted on claiming for Connecticut Service, by which he thought he could obtain a full pension; that said agent died shortly afterward; and that then soon after, the town of Rockingham appointed a guardian for said Ripley, and the said Shipman took no further action in the pension claim until the summer of 1831, when some of the family sent Mr. Tilden, to him desiring that another effort be made. 

Your last objection being thus answered and reasonably explained, I sent the said letter to your office on the 4th of May last, supposing that as his affidavits and other statements are on your files, and his veracity clearly established by certificates of the Magistrates and of Bishop Chase, you would see the case in a different light, and admit the claim. But, on reflection, I concluded, that to remove every objection, I would write Mr. Shipman to send me such evidence as he could obtain, to prove that in 1832 he wished to claim for the Vermont Service. He then sent me the affidavits of his wife, aged 51, and of his father, aged 82 years, both of whom well recollect the facts, and give such plain honest statements as must convince you of their truth, especially as their veracity is so well vouched. These affidavits I sent your office on 24th of May last. Lest you should object to his letter, which I sent to you on 4th May last, because it is not sworn to, I advised him to make oath to the facts which he then stated, and he has just sent me his reply , in which he reiterates those statements, with other facts, and has made oath to them before a Justice whose name is attached to the last papers I sent you. This letter and affidavit, I enclose herewith, together with a letter from Judge Tafft to Mr. Shipman, and also a certificate of seven respectable citizens of Rockingham, attested by Bishop Chase, showing that from their knowledge of the family of Ripleys, the claimant must have moved there about 1777, married there in 1782, (as his eldest daughter is now seventy years old,) the claimant must have served in Vermont between 1777 and 1782, as the rolls at Montpelier show.

These papers, with the others which I have filed, being duly attested and authenticated, and the good credible standing of the witnesses clearly established, allow me to offer you some remarks on evidence, in the course of which
Page 107

the several States, as well as the State legislatures and the Congress of the United States, are bound by the common law rules of evidence, proceeds to say, totidem verbis; "The general rule of law and evidence applicable to common trials, are interposed to prevent the party against the exercise of wanton. and arbitrary power."

When Congress devolved upon the secretary, the duty of exceuting the pension laws, under such rules and regulations as he might prescribe, they did not expect him to adopt an arbitrary system of rules and regulations in regard to the character and degree of evidence unknown, and unpracticed in judicial tribunals, and calculated to defeat the objects and ends of those laws.

They expected his rules and regulations to be merely ancillary and subordinate to the design of the laws, and be confined to the forms of application, modes of authenticating papers, &c. I say it was not the intention of Congress to confer upon the secretary a power of authority to demolish every vestige of the law of evidence, and erect upon its ruins, a utopian superstructure, or standard of evidence, far above the reach and the comprehension of ordinary minds and capacities, like the laws of a certain ancient lawgiver, and tyrant, who caused his laws to be written obscurely, and placed so high up in the air, that but few could reach, or understand them, and then punish his subjects for their violation.

Distant claimants upon reading the pension laws, very naturally conclude, that you will be satisfied with the same amount and degree of evidence that would be sufficient to establish similar claims in a court of law or equity, and go to work, and make out their claims accordingly, and when presented, they are told by you , that this will not do.—that a much greater amount of evidence is requisite, and such an amount and degree of evidence,  as render the law in many equally meritorious and just cases, a nullity, a species of tantalization, and mockery. Thus injustice and injury is often done to honest claimants.

In Bacon's Abridgement, volume 2, page 597: "It is holden to my Lord Chief Justice Holt, that at common law it was not necessary in any case, that a proof of any matter of fact, should be made by more than one witness, and that the single testimony of one credible witness was sufficient to prove any fact." And it is the constant practice of the courts of equity in England, and in this country, to ground their decrees upon the testimony of a single witness. The ecclesiastical courts of England were also compelled to observe these rules. Vide, the authority above referred to. Archibald's Criminal Evidence, pages 156-157. It is held, that in cases of treason and perjury, the testimony of two witnesses is necessary, or one witness with corroborating circumstances: "In all other cases one witness is sufficient."

See, also, 2d Hawk, 6, 46, 2; Fost, 233, where the same principles are maintained. Philips on Evidence, vol. 3 page 565, "one credible witness is sufficient even to convict of a crime, and a useless repetition of witnesses is discountenanced by law. The Judge might by the civil law, in his discretion, stop the multiplication of witnesses to the same matter, and this is not an unusual exercise of discretion in our own courts."  See, also, Wood's Civil Law, 317. "Greenleaf on Evidence," vol.1, page 324, also says, "that whatever was evidence at common law, is still good evidence under the express constitutional and statutory provisions of the American government." You thus perceive, Sir, that upon these principles, if Mr. Ripley had been upon his trial for treason or perjury, with the weight of evidence before you, he would have been convicted, and, in England, drawn and quartered, and his head severed from his body, and placed at the disposal of the sovereign.

Again, Starkie, on Evidence, vol. 1 page 552; "the testimony of a single witness, where there is no ground for suspecting either his ability or his integrity, is a sufficient legal ground for belief; that is strong enough to produce actual belief, every man's experience will vouch." Now, Sir, we have seen the integrity of these witnesses to be above suspicion; and as to their ability—they have detailed with sufficient particularity the facts and circumstances, which enable them to know the truths to which they testified. Their ability to know the truths to which they have testified is as unquestionable as their integrity, and you cannot question the one without, at the same time, questioning the other. Bouvier says, vol. 2, page 659, " when we are called upon to rely on the testimony of another in order to form a judgement as to certain facts, we must be certain, 1st, that he knows the facts in question, and that he is not mistaken; and, 2dly, that his is disposed to tell the truth, and has no desire to impose on those who are to form a judgement on his testimony. The confidence, therefore, which we give to the witness must be considered, in the first place, by his capacity or his organization, and, in the next, by the interest or motive which he has to tell or not to tell the truth. When the facts to which the witness testifies agree with the circumstances which are know to exist, he becomes much more credible thon when there is a contradiction in this respect. It is true, "he says, "that, until impeached, one witness is as good as another, and that one witness is sufficient to establish a fact."

Now, Sir, with these principles in view, let us with candor and frankness examine and consider the HISTORY OF THE CLAIM.

The papers now sent, with those sent you on the 4th and 24th May last, when considered with those before placed upon your files, will justify me in the assertion that the following are the facts:

In the fall of 1832, Epaphras Ripley being then insane, his son in law, John W. Shipman, employed a man named Barton, to obtain a pension for said Ripley, and went with Barton and Ripley to the Court, to make out papers. Ripley had some papers, and among them a discharge for militia service in Vermont, which discharge was often seen by Shipman and by Bishop Chase; but as Ripley often talked of being at the taking of Burgoyne, and knew Col. Warner, he and Barton got a notion that he served in the Continental Line under Warner, and Barton made the claim accordingly, although Shipman desired him to claim for his Militia Service in Vermont, and knew his name was on the rolls at Montpelier.

Soon after that, his insanity became of such a nature that his town authorities appointed a guardian over him, and Mr. Shipman thought proper to take no further trouble about it. About that time Mr. Barton died. The Pension Office, not finding the name of Ripley in Col. Warner's rolls, rejected the claim, and so it was dropped.

On the 2nd November, 1851, while at Albany N.Y., a stranger named Alpheus Tilden called upon me, urged me to prosecute the claim for him, and as he exhibited such papers as induced me to believe it was a righteous claim, I consented. On the 28th of that month, I sent to your office, proof of the highest respectability, to shew that said Ripley was insane at the time of application and continued so; that having lived in the same town for seventy years, his family and friends had always heard him say, he served first in Connecticut and then in Vermont, under Captain Hutchins and Col. Herrick; and a certificate of the Comptroller of Vermont that the name of Epaphras Ripley appears on his Revolutionary Roll for the following service, viz:

From Aug. 1, 1777 to Dec. 3, 1777, in Capt. Parmalee Allen's Company, Col. Herrick's Regiment - 125 days.
From May 1, 1778, to Nov. 30, 1778, in Capt. Hutchin's Company of Provincial Troops - - - - - 7 months.
From Oct. 11, 1780, in Capt. Hutchin's Company, of Col. Herrick's Regiment - - - - - - - -  8 days.
From Sept. 5, 1781, to Nov. 19, 1781, Capt. Hutchin's Company, of Lieut. Col. Saml. Fletcher's Battallian, 74 days.
From Nov. 20, 1781, to May 1, 1782, in Capt. Hutchin's Independent Company of Troops, 93 days Corporal, 68 days Private, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 161 days.

Total, 16 months 5 days, as Private, 3 do. 3 do. as Corporal.
Amounting to 19 months 8 days service.
Page 108

3

The Certificate of the Rev. Dr. Chase, Bishop of New Hampshire, which accompanied those papers, convinced me that the claim was a good one, but it appears your office thought it was only an expression of his opinion that Ripley was a Revolutionary solider; when he says expressly, that he saw his discharge and other papers, in 1832, and became satisfied he was entitled to a pension, but his insanity prevented him from pursuing the right course; he would have his own way and failed.

But the greatest objection you make to the claim is the affidavit of Andrew Bradford, the only witness who saw him in service, who swore, in 1832, that 
"In the spring of 1777 he became acquainted with Epaphras Ripley, a private 
" soldier who belonged to Capt. Bronson's Company of Col. Warren's Independent Regiment of Ringers, that he saw him
"first at Fort Independence, at Hubbardston Battle, at the taking of Burgoyne, and at other places as the army moved
"during his enlistment--that he was discharged in New York, he thinks at West Point, before he was, his time being out." 

Now although Andrew Bradford was old and might not have known or remember the precise Company to which Ripley belonged, yet from facts stated in the history of Burgoyne's Campaign, it is more than probable that Ripley was then in Warner's Regiment, and might not have been enrolled, for at pages 25 and 26, that History says, "When the 
"troops arrived at Hubbardston in Vermont, they were halted for nearly two hours, and the rear-guard was increased by
"many who did not at first belong to it, but were picked up on the road, having been unable to keep up with the Regi-
"ments. The rear-guard was here put under the command of Col. Seth Warner, with orders to follow the army." "The
"army then proceeded to Castleton, about six miles farther--Col. Warner, with the rear-guard and stragglers, remaining
"at Hubbardston." This was July 6th, 1777.

The same book, (herewith sent you.) at page 34, says, "Col. Warner had been detached with his Regiment into
"the State of Vermont, with order to assemble the militia of the country," &c.

At page 92, it says that on the 16th of August, 1777, in speaking of attacking Burgoyne that "Col. Nichols was 
"detached with two hundred men to the rear of his left, and Col. Herrick with three hundred to the rear of his right."

It is evident there was much confusion in the army at that time, and as we have record of his service from 1st August to 3d December 1777, in Col. Herrick's Regiment, and several tours afterwards under Capt. Hutchins, he must have been with Herrick at the above battle, and also at the "taking of Burgoyne" in October following, and it is most probable he was one of the "stragglers" with Warner at Hubbardton, and might have been temporarily under Capt. Bronson, when Bradford first saw him;  so that Bradford's evidence is more than half confirmed by History, and by the fact of Ripley talking all his life of serving under Hutchins and Herrick, and seeing Burgoyne; as proven by five members of his family, besides other respectable persons, among whom are Luther Webb and John Shipman, who knew him nearly seventy years.

The objection of your office, that it was another man of that name, is now completely answered, especially as it is not pretended nor believed that any other Epaphras Ripley ever was pensioned, ever applied, or ever was known to have lived. The unfortunate man now under sentence of death in your City for the murder of his wife, was convicted on cirumstantial evidence, but the evidence was not as strong as we have now presented to establish this claim; and when you shall have considered the old and the new evidence, with the facts and arguments herein set forth, you will see Sir, that the claim of Epaphras Ripley cannot be rejected without a disregard of every feeling of gratitude, every principle of law, equity, reason and justice--every rational presumption , and all the known principles of human nature and action. It will also brand the several witnesses with the crime of perjury, as far as your action can fix such a stigma; a result too monstrous and painful to be contemplated, or to be expected from an impatial mind, conscious of its own rectitude, and therefore not ready to suspect others of crime before High Heaven.

As the proof of his death, heirship, administration, and power of attorney to me, are on your files, I shall expect to receive your certificate stating that Epaphras Ripley of Vermont, is placed upon the Pension List for services in the Revolutionary War 3 months and 3 days as corporal, and 16 months and 5 days as private, from the 4th March 1831, to the 11th February 1853, when he died; and the same is payable at Montpelier, Vermont, to John W. Shipman, administrator, for the benefit of his nine children named in the certificate of heirship.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully,
Your obedient Servant,

Edmund F. Brown
Attorney for Claimants
Page 109

Pension Office,
April 26. 1853.

Sir,

I have, at your request, very carefully examined the case of Epaphras Ripley of Vermont, and have to inform you that I am compelled to adhere to the decision of the Office, heretofore repeatedly expressed by letters, to you and others. 

Very Respy, &c.
(signed) L.P. Waldo,
Commissioner.

E.F. Brown Esq.
New York City.

[in margin on left side]
Unfairly; as all the family statements, which are explanatory and substantiated, are excluded, as unworthy of belief.
Page 110

(Copy.) 

Pension Office
August 11th. 1853.

Sir: 

The additional evidence in the case of Epaphras Ripley, of Vermont, has been received.

This claim has been repeatedly examined, x without any evidence having been discovered, justifying its admission. The great difficulty existing to its admission, has been the ※ impossibility of identifying the "Epaphras" whose services are described in the certificate of the Secretary of State of Vermont, with the applicant of that name. Andrew Bradford is the only witness who testifies to the service in Vermont, but his name is not found ^ on our Pension Roll, and there is nothing beyond his own assertion, to show that he was in a position to know. Epaphras's account of his services, is so indefinite, that every attempt to identify him with the Soldier of Vermont has been in vain. It would be well to ascertain, if practicable, whether any other soldier of that name enlisted from Windham, or whether he was not the only man of that name who enlisted from that place. Some further links, as to identity must be shown, before this claim can be admitted. The Secretary

^ it is on printed Roll

[all below is found in the left margin]

x Because you will not see it.

※  The identity is clearly proven

Bradfords' proof is all corroborated except Officers names and after 50 years it is not surprizing that a man of 70 or 80 should forget the position of an occasional acquaintance, altho he would never forget his face or name
Page 111

of Vermont may discover from what place the Epaphras of the Certificate enlisted, by a farther examination of his Rolls. Evidence as to the date of Epaphras's Marriage has not been adduced nor is there any proof as to the date of his Wife's death. The evidence on which it was Satisfactorily proved to the Court that Epaphras died 11th. February 1853, and that he left the number of children described in the Certificate of Court, must be exhibited before the Office. The Certificate is insufficient. —

I am &c.
(signed) L.P. Waldo
Commissioner.

E.F. Brown Esq.
of Washington,
New York City.

[all below found in left margin]
Not discovered.

These papers have been since filed

This letter is no answer to my arguments
Page 112

New York City, 15. Sept. 1853.

(copy.)
Hon. L.P. Waldo,
Comm. of Pensions.

Sir:
The papers required by your letter to me of 11th August ultimo, I have the honor to enclose herewith, viz: --

Certificate of Secretary of Vermont, shewing that he has made another search, (according to your suggestion,) and that his Rolls do not shew the Towns or Counties where the Soldiers resided; that there is but one Epaphras Ripley on his Rolls; and that on two occasions said Ripley was allowed for sixty miles travel.

[written in left margin with line connecting to "sixty miles"]
About the distance from Rockingham where he resided, to the Western front of Vermont where the Army was chiefly employed. [end insert]

Also, Certificates of Judge and Register of Probate, with six Affidavits, proving the marriage and deaths of Epaphras Ripley and his wife, & names of children.

Allow me to further to refer you to your printed Pension Roll, for Vermont, page 76, and the 7th name from the top is Andrew Bradford, of the New Hampshire Line, who saw our Mr. Ripley at Hubbardston, at the taking of Burgoyne, and at other places.

I am happy Sir, that this fact with the 60 miles travel named in the certificate

[appears to be on page underneath]
His wife was sister to two of the most repectable
Page 113

of the Secretary, furnishes the "further link as to identity," which you require; and trust that the papers are now so complete that you will take pleasure in forwarding me the Pension Certificate without further delay.

With great respect, &c.

(Signed) Edmd. F. Brown
of Washington.
Page 114

(copy.)
Pension Office, 
October 10. 1853.

Sir

The additional evidence in the case of Epaphras Ripley, has been received and filed.

After another thorough examination of the whole case, I feel more certain than ever that the testimony submitted does not support the claim, and in reporting this decision, I would call your attention to one or two facts:

1st.— Epaphras Ripley himself say: "In January or February I enlisted for 3 years in the Regiment commanded by Col. Warner and Company by Captain Bronson. I enlisted at Fort Independence, and was in the battle of Hubbardston Vt. and at the taking of Burgoyne (Oct. 1777) and went to the South and at the expiration of my enlistment was discharged in the State of New York."

2ndly. Andrew Bradford, the only Witness introduced by Epaphras Ripley himself swears "He enlisted in the War for 3 years in the year 1777 — and in the Spring of 1777, he became acquainted with Epaphras Ripley, a private Soldier, who belonged to the company commanded by Capt. Bronson and Regiment by Col. Warner, an independent Regiment of Rangers. He first saw Epaphras Ripley at Fort Independence (the place of enlistment) and at Hubbardston Battle and at the taking of Burgoyne

"His Wife was Sister to two of the most respectable


[All below is in the left margin]
All a mistake!

We have proved that he was insane and was overruled by his Agent, in his first application in 1832.

All corroborated but names of officers. He doubtless saw Ripley in the "noise & confusion" of Hubbardston and Saratoga
Page 115

and at other places as the Army moved during his enlistment. He, Ripley, was discharged when his enlistment was out, at West Point he thinks." This Witness is certified to be credible.—

Now, if Epaphras Ripley and his Witness swore to the truth, then the said Ripley served under Warner and Bronson from 1776 or 1777 to 1780.— an enlistment of three years. There is no attempt to discredit them. Then, how can it be imagined that the Same Epaphras Ripley served in August 1777 under Capt. Allen & Col. Herrick, in 1778 under Capt. Hutchings and in 1780 in Col. Herrick's Regiment.

It is not doubted that an Epaphras Ripley served as certified to by the Secretary of Vermont, but there is not sufficient evidence to disprove the statements of Claimant's father and to identify the two Ripleys. Before the claim could be allowed the statements of Epaphras Ripley himself must be clearly shown to have been false, and the testimony of his only Witness, Andrew Bradford, the same. As this has not been attempted, nor is it presumed will not be the claimed is rejected.

Very Respectfully &c.
(signed) L.P. Waldo,
Commissioner.

E.F. Brown,
(of Washington)
New York.

[All below is in left margin]

Discharged from one of his Militia tours, of which there were five.

Not so!! We have proved that he was released from his Connecticut enlistment, and that he served under Hutchins and Herrick.

The proof of his Insanity and your own Rolls "disprove" his statements; while most of Bradfords are proven by History.
E.F.B.
Page 116

33,023

Epaphras Ripley

March 9/53 [?]
Page 117

New York City, 18. March 1853.

To the Commissioner
of Pensions

Sir:
Having accidentally met Col. Niles, one of the Examining Clerks in your Office, last week in this City, and learned from him that he has on his desk my letter to the Secretary of the Interior, of 12. Feb. 1853, being my Appeal in the case of Epaphras Ripley, of Vermont; and having to day seen the death of said E. Ripley announced in a newspaper; I have to request that you, or Col. Niles suspend further action for a few days, as I have written to one of his heirs and shall probably have some additional papers to file,
which may occupy two or three weeks in preparing, and which may throw additional evidence of the justice of the claim.
Very Respy.
Your Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington.
Page 118

New York
Feby 12 1858
Edmd F Brown
appeals from decision of
Com: Pension the case
Epaphras Ripley,
Feb 18 /53
Niles
acknowledge referred to the Com
missioner of Pensions for
a report
Feby 17 /83
Rec'd Feb. 15, 1853
Page 119

Hon. Alex. H. H. Stuart,
Secretary of the Interior.
New York City, 12. Feby. 1853.
Sir:
I have the honor, most respectfully, to appeal to you, from the decision of the Commissioner of Pensions in the case of Epaphras Ripley
of Vermont, an Insane applicant for a Pension under the Act of 7th June 1832. His decision was received by me on the 5th inst., and this appeal would have been prepared sooner, but I have been absent in Massachusetts, and in
New Jersey
With due respect and deference to the opinion
of the Commissioner of Pensions, and the Clerk who has had this case in charge, I must beg leave to differ with him and feel confident that you will also if you look at the facts and the objections. 
I claim the allowance on the following grounds, viz: 1st That we have proven service, 16 months Private & 3 mo. Corporal
2nd-- The name is so very uncommon, that all probabilities are that he was the only one.
3rd - We have proven him insane from the first application 20 years ago, both by the craziness of his declaration, and the Certificate at the bottom of it; and it is fully confirmed by the Certificate of Bishop Chase, which proves him to have been a Revolutionary Soldier, and he must have served Somewhere.
Page 120

4th - The objection on account of some of the papers being in the handwriting of a man charged with fraud in another case, has been fully explained in my letter to the Commissioner dated 10th Dec. last; and said objection falls to the ground when the facts so clearly set forth by Bishop Chase are considered in connection with his application 20 years ago, and the Certificate of the Comptroller of Vermont, filed by me on 28.Nov.1851.
5th - The Pension Office appears disposed to claim all the doubts for Government, and give the
Claimant none.
6th - The Office asserts that the Soldier who performed the service, was a different person, without giving any reason for so bold an assertion; while the papers do not justify such a conclusion. The Claimant is, I believe, still living, nearly 100  years old, a Pauper on his Town, and deserves your sympathy and early action.
Please favor me with your decision in a
few days.
With great respect, I have the honor to be,
Sir, Your Mo. Obt. Servt. 
Edm.F. Brown
of Washington,
Atty for claimant. 
Now at New York City.
Page 121

Private
New York City, January 6th - 1853. 
Hon. J.E. Heath,
Comm. of Pensions
Sir:
I have the honor, most respectfully, but urgently to solicit from you a reply to my letter of 10th ult, which shews how your office has been mistaken in the case referredto, and that consequently said case has not had a
fair and impartial examination, to which it is
entitled by having been 13 months on your files.
With great Respect
Your Obt Servt
Edm.F. Brown
of Washington
If W. Heath is absent, Col. Niles will please
answer.
Page 122

New York City, 23. Dec. 1852.
Hon. J.E. Heath,
Comm. of Pensions.
Sir:
On the 10th inst. I addressed
you a letter, which you probably received on 13th inst. in which I explained that by a mistake of your Office they had not before them when they wrote me on 13th May last, the papers which I filed on 28 Nov. 1851, two days after the
last dates to which said letter referred.
It has always been the practice of your office
to make first in order the correction of its own errors, and I naturally supposed Col.Niles would immediately re-examine the case and consider my arguments, which are unanswerable, and send me the certificate: but, I have received no reply!!!
I have recently heard from Washington, a Report,
which I cannot believe, that you now refuse to allow any claim where the amount is over $1000. Surely this cannot be true. My youngest child, 7 ½ years old knows better than that, and that justice requires that if an amount is due and there is money enough to pay it, it ought to be paid, whether it is 2000 dollars, or 2000 cents.
You are a Virginia Gentleman, and a believer in the Christian Religion, and I feel a
Page 123

confidence that you are not so regardless of the
rights of men and women, and the principles
of the Good Book on which all law is
founded.
It will not cause any thorns in your dying pillow, to grant a pension to poor old Epaphras Ripley, for I have clearly
shown he is entitled to it.
Please favor me with an immediate reply, and confer an obligation on
Very Respectfully,
Your Obt Servt
Edw. J. Brown
of Washington.
Page 124

New York, 10. Decr .1852.
Hon. J.E. Heath.
Commr. of Pensions.
Sir:
Justice to you and to me requires that I should explain, and that you should hear the other side of the case of Epaphras Ripley.
I am prepared to shew you how you have misprehended some of the facts, at least, and misunderstood my course in relation to it.
In your letter to me of 29th. Nov. 1852, you say
you are surprized that I have been expecting a Certificate.
If you will look at your letter of 13th. May last,
you will perceive that you there state that several letters had been written to different persons, the last on 26. Nov. 1851, "all saying, that the claim has been rejected for want of "evidence of service
; and in another place you state that "there has been no further proof of service adduced."-
This letter of yours of 13. May was written before you saw the evidence which I filed on 28 Nov. 51, two days after your last letter to S. Ripley of 26. Nov. above alluded to; and therefore it ought not to surprise any one that I should expect a certificate on good evidence which
-- had not been examined, but must have been misplaced,when your letter of 13th May was written, which says, "there has been no further proof of service adduced."
Your letter of 29th ult. very properly states that
Page 125

"the conduct of Agents should not be permitted to prejudice "a claim which is really a good one"; but whether you call it prejudice, misunderstanding, erroneous judgment, a hasty and partial glance at all the facts, or by any
other name, you have certainly been mistaken in some important facts alluded to.
In the first place, I respectfully but solemnly protest against the construction you place upon Bishop Chase's Certificate, viz: that it "merely establishes the fact that Ripley was regarded by him as a Revolutionary Soldier, and as embraced
by the law of June 7, 1832."
If we could place it in a Court, no Judge or
Jury would so lightly interpret such a certificate, from such a man, who is too high to be impeached for his veracity. Hear what he says,
"I knew him well, [from 1819 to about 1833] and often heard him speak of being out as a soldier in the Revy. War."
"He laid before me several papers, whose contents I do not now recollect, except that I have an impression that one of them was a tattered paper purporting to be a military discharge
On examination I became satisfied that his claim was a good one." "Being under a sort of insanity, he had fixed his mind on an absurd plan of procedure and would not allow his papers to be used in any other way." He then concludes by saying that he fully believes he was in service between one and two years, and left it not
without honorable discharge.
In the 2nd place; I believe you are mistaken
Page 126

in your conclusion that the Epaphras Ripley whose service
I have proved, was "another and different person," and will
now show you that the ground upon which you arrive
at that conclusion are not fair and in accordance with
the evidence. As to what "he claimed, the Declaration
which I sent you last spring, shewed plainly his insanity, for
instead of naming particulars, he said in two or three
places, he did not recollect. Andrew Bradford (who
has long been dead) said he knew him in the Spring
of 1777, as belonging to an Independent Regt of Rangers, and
the first service mentioned in the Certificate of the Compt
of Vermont which I filed, commenced August 1.1777,
and the other service was rendered at different times
in 1778, 1781 & 1782, and those services were rendered
under Captain Hutchins and Col. Warner & Herrick,
the same officers about whom he often spoke to his son,
his son in law, and his Brother in Law long before he
was Insane and before he ever thought of applying
for a Pension; as their evidence shews
However good or bad Tilden may be, it is not
likely he could influence to falsehood such a man as
Luther Webb is shown to be by Rev. Joel Clapp, Rector
of Immanuel Church, and as this case was commenced
long before Tiden had any thing to do with Pensions, he
could not have manufactured the case. It is certain
he served somewhere; he showed Bishop Chase "several
papers, which doubtless had reference to several different
tours mentioned in Comptroller's Certificate.
Page 127

Nothing short of the actual appearance on your
Pension Rolls of another Epaphras Ripley, and positive proof in his papers that he performed the service for which we claim, ought to satisfy you that our man was not the one; and such of course is not the case or you would not have given the reasons you have for that conclusion
Upon the receipt of your letter of 29th ult. I wrote
the Secretary of New Hampshire and enclosed a fee for a search, but the name is not there, as you will see by his letter herewith enclosed.
It is but reasonable to infer that Bradford told
the truth, and that Ripley served but a short time in Warner's Rangers and by some means the Roll of that month or months may have been lost; and that afterwards he served in his own State, as shewn by the Comptrollers Certificate.
Under all the misunderstandings of the case,
I trust you will consider it entitled to another
revision and give the above facts in all their bearings, your particular attention; in which case I doubt not you will admit that I have proven the case, and send me the certificate of Pension.
If you still insist that I must have a power
of Attorney from the Guardian, please send me his name, as I forgot to keep a memorandum of it it when I sent you the certificate of his appointment.
Very Respectfully,
Yr. Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown,
of Washington.
Page 128

Col. Wm Ogden Niles
Pension Office
New York City
10. Decr 1852.
My Dear Sir:
Please do
yourself and me the justice to examine the
enclosed, for there has been a misunderstanding
on both sides.
Have the kindness
to favor me with a reply at the earliest
possible moment.
Very Respectfully
and Truly yours,
Edm. F. Brown
Washington
Page 129

☞[underlined] Private [/underlined]

New York City, 24 Nov. 1852.

Hon. J. E. Heath
Commr of Pensions.

Dear Sir:

Please favor me with your consideration of the following: 
Tomorrow will be the Annual Thanksgiving Day, & just [underlined] 52 Weeks [/underlined] since I prepared and addressed to you the
papers in the case of [underlined] Epaphras Ripley, [/underlined] which I sent you
the following day; since that, three of my friends have urged
its examination, and I have written you [underlined] several letters [/underlined] public and private
Fifteen days ago, Col. Niles
promised my brother he would attend to it as soon
as he got thro a Report for the Secretary. [underlined] Eight months [/underlined] 
I have been expecting the Certificate.
Verily, [underlined] "my sufferings is intolerable." [/underlined]
Will you please give me half an hour
of your time and examine the case with all
the explanations, which are ample & sufficient.-
Very Respy 
Yr. Obt St.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington
Page 130

Hon. J.E. Heath,
Commissioner of Pensions.
Politeness of Eleazer Brown Esq.
Page 131

New York City, 6. Novr. 1852.

Hon. J.E. Heath,
Commr. of Pensions.

Sir:

Fearing that my several letters written you the past six weeks, may have been tied up with others to wait their turn, and so have not met your eye, I send this to my Brother, who is a Clerk in the same Building with your Office, and request him to place it in your hands.

Please do me the favor to inform my Brother verbally for me, when the case of Epaphras Ripley, of Vermont, an Insane applicant under Act of 1832, will be acted on. If you have not seen my private letter to you of 1st inst., recd. at your Office on 3d., please send to to your files for it. 

I am in trouble, or would not thus trouble you.

Very Respectfully, 
Your Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington.
Page 132

[Hand with index finger pointing to the right] Private.

New York City, 1st. Nov. 1852

Hon. J.E. Heath.

My Dear Sir:

If you have any sympathy for a suffering fellow_creature who feels that he is a Gentleman, and reduced to almost beggary and ruin for the want of a few Dollars to which he is justly entitled, pray do, 

For the LORD's Sake, have Mercy upon me,

Give me a fair hearing, and do that Justice to me and my Client which your late Chief Clerk refused, after his repeated promises to my friends.

But one case I have left in your Office, and that has been there eleven months!!!

On 29th. Sept. last, I wrote you stating how the late Chief Clerk (Capt. Triplett) had acted, and giving a brief sketch of the case, & urging good and sufficient reasons why it ought to be acted on without further delay. I fondly hoped you would look into the case yourself, and have been
Page 133

been to the Post Office every day since, in the confident expectation of receiving the Pension Certificate, which I feel certain you will grant if you will consider the facts in the case.

I have written you every week since, but can get no reply, and I take this method of writing you a Private letter, because I am confident of the
Justice of the Claim; and am in Distress for want of the small sum I shall realize from Commissions on it.

I have been indirectly interested with others in dome claims that have been delayed and rejected, so that I consider that I have

Lost One thousand Dollars this year!!

Now, my Dear Sir, I do not ask nor expect you to allow and unjust claim, but I ask you to look at the facts proven, and
Page 134

then ask yourself,

Is not his service proven?
Is not his identity proven?
Is not his insanity proven?
Is not his very uncommon name, and his 40 or 50 years reputation as a Revolutionary soldier sufficient evidence that he is the man?

Could Bishop Chase give such a Certificate falsely, or ignorantly?

You will doubtless grant the Certificate, which please forward to me at this City, and confer a favor on


Very Respy. Yr. Obt. St.
Edm. F. Brown,
of Washington

P.S. As my peculiar circumstances cause me to look daily to the Post Office with intense anxiety, please drop me a line the moment you allow it. and send it in the Washn. P.O. before 3 oclock so I may the next morning know when to look for it.
E.F.B.
of Washn.
Page 135

E.F. Brown's letter
Page 136

New York City,
26. Oct. 1852.

Hon. J.E. Heath,
Commr. of Pensions.

Sir:

Having felt the truth of the old Proverb, "Hope deferred maketh the heart sick," I am compelled again, most respectfully, but earnestly, to ask you to take up the last case I have in your Office, viz: Epaphras Ripley, Act 1832.

The case is so clearly just, I feel a confidence you will allow it if you will only give it your personal inspection for 20 or 30 minutes. 

Please send the Pension Certificate to me at this City, and oblige

Very Respectfully,
Your Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown,
of Washington.

Tomorrow will be eleven months since I sent it in.}
Page 137

New York City, 
October 20th. 1852.

Hon. J.E. Heath,
Commr. of Pensions.

Sir:

I have the honor to ask a reply to my three letters, viz:

1st. — Written Wednesday 29. Sept. 1852
2nd. — do. do. 6. Oct. "
3rd. — do. Thursday 14. Oct. "

all on the same subject, viz: — 
the claim of Epaphras Ripley, of Vt. Act 1832.

Please forward the Pension Certificate to me at this City.

Very Respectfully,
Your Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington
Page 138


for Pension
Case of Epaphras Ripley
Official Business.
Free. Special
Hon. James E. Heath
Commissioner of Pensions,
Washington City
D.C. U.S.
E. F. Brown's letter
Page 139

New York City, 14. Oct. 1852.

Hon. J. E. Heath,
Commissioner of Pensions.

Sir:

Please allow me, most respectfully, to urge your consideration of the last claim I have in your Office, for the following reasons, viz:

1st. — Because it is, beyond all doubt, a just & honest claim.

2nd. — Because it has been over ten months in your Office.

3rd. — Because your late Chief of Clerk promised my friends to attend to it months ago, & failed to do so.

4th. — Because the Claimant is Insane, and poor.

5th. ,and last, but not least. — Because the Agent is in need of the little commissions he will receive on it. 

It is in the claim of Epaphras Ripley, of Vermont, Act 1832, filed by me, Nov. 28. 1851.

Please forward the Certificate to me at this City.

With Great Respect,
I have the honor to be, 
Sir, Your Mo. Obt. Servt. —
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington City

P.S. — As it seems impossible to keep a Chief Clerk long in your Office, allow me to suggest that you try me in that capacity, as soon as you allow me the above mentioned claim, which is my last.

E.F.B.
Page 140

New York City, 6. October. 1852

Hon. J. E. Heath,
Commr. ofPensions.

Sir:

Please favor me with a reply to my letter to you written one week ago this day, relative to the claim of [underlined] Epaphras Ripley [/underlined] of Vermont, an Insane applicant for Pension under [underlined] Act of 7. June 1832. [/underlined]
As it is [underlined] over ten months [/underlined] since I filed this claim, and as it has met with many unfortunate delays, I trust you will make it one for your [underlined] personal inspection immediately, [/underlined] that justice may be done the old Gentleman.
Please forward the Certificate to me at this city.

With great Respect,
Your Obt. St.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington
Page 141

Private.

New York City, 29. Sept. 1852.

Hon. J. E. Heath,
Commr. of Pensions.

Sir: 
Seeing by the Telegraphic news this morning, that Mr. Triplet has resigned as Chief Clerk, I take the liberty to state that he has done me great injustice, and I confidently look to you, believing you will make a personal inspection, especially as the Claimant is a poor insane pauper over 90 years old.

Were it not for the low state of my Finances, I would come on and see you, believing that I could convince you that the claim is just and honest, but as the case is a peculiarly hard one. I trust you will call for the papers and spend 20 or 30 minutes in the consideration of them.

More than four months ago, I wrote you on the sam case, and received a reply dated 13. May 1852, by which it appeared the papers had not all been found and examined. I sent an answer, and requested my friends, Messr. Thayer and Addison to urge the taking up of the case, and I learned that Mr. Kirby examined it, and was not satisfied with the evidence, and that Mr. Thayer asked Capt. T. to take it in hand; that Capt. T. put the papers on his desk and promised at various times to take them up, and especially that he would do so as soon as Congress adjourned. He then
Page 142

get leave of absence for two weeks, & has now resigned.

The case is simply this:

Objection was made to it, because Claimant's name does not appear on the Rolls of a Connecticut Compy. in which he said he served; while on the other hand, the Episcopal Bishop of N.H. (Chase) certifies he was Insane when he applied, 20 years ago, had proof of service, but crazily went the wrong way to work.

The Bishop, and neighbors who have known him 40 years ago, prove clearly his character as a Revy. Soldier, while the Secretary of Vermont proves he did service in that State, of over 16 mo. as Private, and 3 mo. as Corporal; and as he bears the uncommon and unheard of name of Epaphras Ripley, it is morally impossible it could have been any other man.

Andrew Bradford may have been mistaken as to the Company he supposed him to belong to when he saw him in service, or Ripley may have been in that Company as a substitute and answered for the man whose name was enrolled, as was the case in one or more instances —— but suppose that part to be all a mistake, the old Declaration which I sent by Mr. Thayer, has a Certificate that when he made it in 1832 he was so Insane that a Guardian was then appointed; and the proof of Vermont service, and his identity are so clear that I feel confident you will allow the claim.
Page 143

Please send to Capt. Triplett's desk, for all the papers in the case of Epaphras Ripley, of Vermont, Act 7. June 1832, and give them your personal examination, and you will do an act of justice to one of the few Heroes who still survive, and who did actual service in the time that tried mens souls.

Your compliance will confer a great favor on

Very Respy. Yr. Obt. St.
Edm. F. Brown
Atty. for Claimant

Please forward me the Certificate of Pension, addressed thus:

Edmund F. Brown,
of Washington, 
Now at New York City.
Page 144

Washington July 23. 1852.

Hon J. E. Heath Comr of Pensions,

Sir,
The enclosed letter came to me some time ago when I was confined to my room, and unable to attend to it. The information desired, will be understood from the letter, better than I can state it, and I therefore send you the letter itself.
The Pensioner resides in Weathersfield, in the State of Vermont.
If you can give me the desired information you will much oblige.
Very truly
Your Obt. Servant
Wm Hebard
Page 145

Private.
Hon. J.E. Heath,
Commr. of Pensions.
New York City, 5th. May 1852. 
Dr. Sir:
As the present administration of your office is admitted to be as liberal in granting favors as to time, if not more so than your "illustrious "predecessor"; I take the liberty to ask that a certain case presented by me sometime since, be made "Special", and issued at once, for the
following reasons, viz: -
1st - Because it was admitted on 14. February last, & a Certificate of Guardianship required.
2nd - Because the Certificate of Guardianship was filed five weeks ago, and I have your printed acknowledgment of its receipt, dated 3. April 1852.
3rd - Because the applicant is very old, insane, and a pauper on his Town, and the Pension will enable his Guardian to add comfort to his few declining days.
4th - Because it has been the practice of your office in the days of Col. Edwards and Dr. Crump, to take up cases out of turn, when extraordinary reasons were given, as in this case. Indeed I have known instances where a case was admitted, (as in this) and some paper  required, to lay it aside, and as soon as the paper was presented to issue the Pension Certificate; a course which even an enemy to your office could not condemn.
Page 146


To prevent delay, I sent the last papers to my
Brother, who is a clerk in the 2nd Auditor's Office,
requesting him to deliver them in person, and he
wrote me that he delivered them to your chief
Clerk, Capt. Triplett, with whom I have not the
honor of being acquainted; but as five weeks have expired, and I have given good reasons for expecting early action, I trust that neither you nor he will be offended at this; but that you will have it hunted up and issued immediately.
It is the case of Epaphras Ripley, of Vermont, an Insane applicant for Pension, under Act of 7. June 1832, now nearly 100 years old.
Service proven by record evidence. - Identity provenby Bishop Chase of New Hampshire, and others.
Your early attention will confer a favor on
Very Respectfully, Yr Obt St.
Edm. F. Brown Atty. 
As there is another E. F. Brown about this City, please direct thus:--
Edmund F. Brown
(of Washington City)
Now at
New York City
Page 147

March 31-52
Completion of the case
of Epaphras Ripley
an [underlined] Insane [/underlined] applicant
for Pension.  Act 1832.
Please make [underlined] Special [/underlined]
and [underlined] immediate. [/underlined]

E F Brown
New York
[E F Brown New York is written over Kirby March 31/52.]

Hon. J. E. Heath
Commissioner of Pensions
Washington City,
D. C.
Page 148

Hon. J.E. Heath
Commissioner of Pensions.
New York City, 27. March 1852.
Sir:
Your letter of 14th ult. reached me some weeks since, stating that "the evidence of the
of appointment of a Committee or Guardian for Epaphras Ripley, an insane applicant for a Pension under Act of 7. June 1832, from Vt. has not been received at this office."
Circumstances in the family of the Guardian in Vermont prevented the completion of the business until a few days since, but I have now the honor to enclose herewith, a Certificate
of Court, shewing that John W. Shipman has been legally constituted Guardian of said Epaphras Ripley.
As your letter above referred to states nothing further, I conclude of course you have admitted the claim, especially as his service in Vermont is proven for 3 months and 3 days as Corporal, and 16 months and 5 days as Private. As the testimony is clear that he also did service in Connecticut, I now enclose a letter from the Comptroller, shewing that he has no Rolls of
Rangers, and the Militia Rolls were sent to Washington; hoping that you will allow a full Pension.
As he is very old and in need, allow me to ask
that you issue his Pension Certificate immediately, and send it to me here.
Very Respectfully, Yr. Obt. St.
Edm. F. Brown
of Washington City.
Atty.
Page 149

Comptroller of Vermont.

18. March 1852.

Epaphras Ripley.

No Rolls of Rangers.
Militia Rolls in
Washington City.

No. 6

See Pension Claim
filed 28. Nov. 1852, 
by
E. F. Brown
of Wash. D.C.
Atty.
New York City,  }
27. March 1852 }
Page 150

Comptrollers Office
Hartford March 18th 1852
Edmund F Brown Esq.
Sir
Your letter of the 16th ult
with one dollar enclosed has been received.
I have made a careful examination of our Rolls
for the name of Epahras Ripley and do not find
that name on any now in this office.
We have the Rolls of Col Swift's & Warner's Regts
which belonged to the Connecticut Line of the
Continental army, but Ripley's name is not
found on either of these. We have no Roll
of a Regiment of Rangers, nor have we the
Roll of Col Mott's Regt. This was a Regt. of
Militia,  the Rolls of which were sent to Washington after the war, and we can furnish
no evidence of the service of Privates
belonging to it. This service was for about 6 months in 1776.
I am, sir
very respectfully
yr obnt servt,
Geo. Robinson
For Comptroller
Page 151

In the matter of Epaphras Ripley of Vt.

Declaration of E.R.

Sept 1832__ Aged 41 __ Enlisted in June or July, in  Windham, Con. in a company commanded by _______ Regt. of Col. Mott. Ct. [illegible]___ for 6 months. After this enlistment was out, enlisted three years in Regt.of Col. Warner, Capt. Bronson's Co. at Fort Independence. Wat at the battleof Hubbardston and taking of Burgoyne. Was discharged in the State of New York. (Gives no year)

Proof of Service____  Secretary of State of Vt.  certifies that Epaphra Ripley performed the following service, as shown by pay rolls in his office.

125 days Private {Capt. Parmalee Allen Col Herrick Regt. From Augt 1 1777 to Dec. 16 1777}

7 months " [private]  Capt. Wm Hutchings. From May 1 to Nov. 30/78

8 days " [private] {Do__ Hol. Herreick's Regt. from Oct. 11.1780 to Oct. 19.1780

74 " " [days...private] {Do__Lt. Col. Saml. Fletcher's Regt. From Sept 5. 1781 to Nov. 19 1781

93 Corporal  Do. indept[?] Co. at Castleton & [illegible] Between No 20.1781 & May 11. 1782.

making in all 13 mos. 27 days - Private & 3 months 3 days Corpl.

Proof of Identity

It will be observed that Claimant alleges service in Con. & proves it in Vt.
x he also alleges it it Vermont.

There is an abundance of Traditionary evidence that Ripley served in Vermont. Col. Warner & Capt. Bronson served in Vt., and were at the taking of Burgoyne. These are the Officers mentioned in Ripley's Declaration, & reconciles his statement with
Page 152

all this traditionary history of Ripley's Vt services.

John Shipman -- the commanding officers Ripley often named as commanding during most of his last services were Col. Herrick and Capt. Hutchings.

Octavia Shipman -- (Daughter of Ripley) "Recollects that her father ofter spoke of the officers he knew & saw." (May not this account for the old mantioning the names of Herrick & Hutchings? He may have seen and known them) She recollects him mentioning Gates, Burgoyne, Herrick and Hutchings. Her father was with Col. Ethan Allen at the taking of Ticonderoga (June 1775) Col. Ethan Allen was captured Dec. 1775 and released May 1778.

Charles Ripley -- (son of Epaphas) "Have heard my father say that he was in the Vermont troops under Col. Warner & Capn Hutchings. that he was at the taking of Burgoyne.

John W. Shipman -- (son-in-law to Ripley) Had heard Ripley speak of being in the Vermont Troops, and serving under col. Herrick and Capt. Hutchings. was under Herrick at the taking of Burgoyne.

Andrew Bradford -- Deponent became acquainted with Epaphras Ripley in the spring of 1777 -- a private in Capt Bronson's Company and Col. Warner's Regiment. I first saw him at Fort Indepence. Afterwards at Hubbardston, and at the taking of Burgoyne. This corroborates the old man's statement.

Luther Webb -- (Another relation) "I have frequently heard Epaphras Ripley speak of Col. Herrick & Col. Warner. I have understood from him that he inlisted several times in the Vermont Troops.

Bishop Chase -- Has no recollection of the name of the Officers.
Page 153

Three children -- (of Ripleys) -- They have repeatedly heard him say he was in the service in Vermont- under Col. Herrick & Capt. Hutchings.

Heirship & Administration regularly proven.
Page 154

Washington City, 27. Novr 1851.

Hon. J. E. Heath
Commr of Pensions

Sir:

I have the honor to enclose herewith, the claim of [underlined] Epaphras Ripley [/underlined] of Vermont, for [underlined] Revolutionary Pension, [/underlined] under [underlined] Act of 7 June 1832 [/underlined]; and expect in a short time to send you the proper Certificate of the appointment of a [underlined] Guardian [/underlined] to whom his Pension can be made payable, as [underlined] he is insane. [/underlined] 
Allow me to ask your special attention to the accompanying certificate of the Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire the Rt. Rev. Bishop Chase, which ^shows^ that it is an honest claim, and with the other testimony herewith sent, proves that he has been insane more than twenty years past.
Mr. Ripley made an application in 1832 in which I believe he only claimed for his service in Connecticut, and the papers I have seen purporting to be a copy of his Declaration then made, appeared to be a [underlined] crazy affair, [/underlined]  which is accounted for in the Certificate of Bishop Chase; but the evidence now enclosed shows that he served in Vermont after his service in Connecticut; and whether his name appears on the Rolls in Connecticut,  or not, I am not yet
Page 155

informed.
The accompanying Certificate of the Secretary of Vermont proves conclusively that he served as [underlined] Private over 16 months, [/underlined] and as [underlined] Corporal over 3 months, [/underlined] and his name [underlined] Epaphras  [/underlined] is a very [underlined] uncommon [/underlined] one (probably the [underlined] only [/underlined] one in the whole Revolutionary Army) his [underlined] identity [/underlined] will be admitted without hesitation.
As soon as I can obtain the Certificate of Guardianship I will forward it to be placed in your files with this; in the mean time, please give the papers early attention, as the Claimant is a Pauper, and nearly one hundred years old.
Very Respectfully
Your Obt. Servt.
Edm. F. Brown
Page 156

[envelope?]

Ripton Vt
Nov 8

His Excellency the President
of the United States
Washington City,
D. C.

Free
Page 157

Interim
Nov. 10 Vt.

Ripton Vermont November 6th 1851.

I have today I think got a clue to my papers which was taken from me by Tillden, and I write this to prevent another fraud on the government. I have this day met with Shulbel[?] Ripley son of Epaphras Ripley, a Revolutionary soldier, who has been unsuccessful in getting his pension and is now, and has for a long time been insane unable to act for himself. Sd Shubel told me that Decd had by his request got the evidence in the case of his father and had got all the papers kneeded in his case. I asked him if he had got the papers which Tillden took from my house he said he could define the papers , but Weed had all that was wanting and would succeed before Mr. Meechem.

This leads me more fully to think that Tillden & Weed are connected, and if he has the returned papers of a former application which Tillden took without my knowledge, he has with them a reprimand for taking up a claim against a former applicant it was considered an evidence of fraud and the papers returned. Some of these papers are those described in my letter to the President. I have before stated that I undertook to arrange this claim for Mr. Meecham to pursue for the benefit of the old man and not for Pension agents. Mr. Meechem has searched the Records at Washington and found him on the Roll of the Connecticut Line, after his discharge he enlisted in the service of Vermont and by different terms served nearly through the war. I have the certificate of the Secretary of State to [illegible] his service in Vermont. I was informed by the department that his case "was dismissed for want of Evidence to sustain it"

Now I have collected the old mans affadivit taken on a former Application in his lucid moments and the affidavit of one who knew him in the army
Page 158

And those before alluded to from this state Now I wish to know if this testimony if presented by Mr. Meechem would be accepted as a good claim if accepted by the department it would be next of cours to enter the case in Probate Court and and appoint a guardian aggreeable to the laws of this state for insane persons.

if the claime is accepted Mr. Meechem would be immediately be empowered to act on the case I request an answer and also that the papers I have described if presented may be [illegible] and sent to me or Mr. Meechem.

I have no faith in Weed and should not be surprised if evidence should be Manufactured to suit an ocasion.

Respectfully yours
James Pearse
Page 159

Middlebury Vt. Sept. 17. 185[?]

Sir

My father Epaphras Ripley was a soldier in the Revolutionary War and has been Insane for the last thirty years. I would thank you to inform me how I shall proceed to obtain a pension for him.

I am Respefully
Your Obt Servant
Shubal Ripley


Hon J.E. Heath
Commissioner of Pensions
Washington D.C.
Page 160

[on left side]
43
Ripton Vermont
James Pearse

Rel. to the application of Epaphras Ripley for a pension for serrvices in Revolutionary War.

Referred to Comr of Pensions. 
Dept Mb
Oct 28/51

[written perpendicular on right side]
Interior
Oct 16
Page 161

Ripton Vermont 1851[?]

Your kind answer to mine of June last came to me through the pension office dated 30 Sept. I did not expect an answer, (but only to stop the flight of a treasury Hawk I wrote to you) I accept the by answer that you are willing that the case of Epapras Ripley should be pensioned by Mr. Mechem and the papers mentioned in my former letter were the old mans affadivet taken some years ago in his lucid days before his insanity became confirmed and also the affadivit of one who knew him in the army of hte Revolution and also a certificate of the Secretary of the State that he served two times of enlistment in the Vermont line (which paper will be reviewed) and  [illegible] other papers of correspondence not required at Washington together with the returned papers of the former applicant reprimanding him f [for?] presenting a claim without withdrawing all former claims.

The most important of these will probably be sent to Washington by Tilden, he was so [illegible] in obtaining the papers. I think he will sort the papers before presenting them.

On receiving your answer I went to see Mr. Mechem and some of the heirs of the old man who adressed me to pursue the matter Mr Mecham told me that he would do what he could and thought if the papers could be obtained the case was made out in evidence I wish you to express [?] to me your mind on this subject as the expense of Probate may be severe [?] if his case is lost. but there has been no case more deserving that this if the Poverty of aged soldiers prompted the heart Monro to recommend the Pension Act how would his heart bleed to see an aged maniac cast on the cold feeling of an unfriendly World
Page 162

and by making my claim through the probate
through Mr Meechem you must be convinced that no fraud is intended, a widowed daughter of the old man lives in the same neighborhood with Mr. Meechem and he can inform you of the whole history of this affair, and as you wish only to guard against imposition I am inclined to think that you will consider me too Frank and bold to be deceptive, and if favorably
accepted, a guardian can be obtained and a power of attorney maid [made] out and sent by Mr. Meechem on his return to Congress. I am thus plain because the family is very poor and cannot bear the expence without a hope of success
This being an extraordinary case is my
apology for troubling yo[u] with this Letter
yours Respectfully James Pearse
Page 163

[envelope]

Millard Filmore
President of US
Washington City

FREE

[There is a very dim postmark with the only visible information JUN.]
Page 164

Com & pensions for investigate
Ripton June 7th 1857
I have for about & weeks past been doubting 
my duty as a loyal citizen whether I ought to expose
a fraud on an old Revolutionary Soldier and designed
to sap the Treasury of the United States.
I will give a brief statement of the case and 
then to the man or men who will appear as claimants
at the Pension office.
Epaphras Ripley was enlisted with his brother Charles
by their father in the Connecticut line, of the revolution
as will appear from the Records at Washington
Charles Richey Received his pension and is since dead
Epaphras became partially in same and made two attempts
for a pension and failed, he is now living in confirmed
insanity, and in need of all the aid which the pension
act was designed to bestow; I last fall became acquainted with
his condition and offered my assistance gratuitously to
make or more attempt to gain his rights from 
Government I counseled with the Hon. James Mechem who told me he would serve him at 
Washington of
I would make out the claim be examined the files and found his case marked rejected but 
informed me
that if his claim could be fairly presented, he had no
doubts it would be paid I then corresponded with a number
of persons to obtain the old papers which had been returned
to deferent agents employed for him, these papers I
at length obtained and find that he is acknowledged
to have served in the Connecticut line and in a differed
enlistments in the Vermon troops serving nearly all
the war of the Revolution but for some incurred he was
danged his claim I had got about ready to present the case
to Mr. Mechem when to my surprise on returning home
found the papers gone my wife and Daughter told
me that a gentleman by the name of Gilden had
Page 165

called in the name of Charles Ripley his son in
whose name the correspondence had carried on and
and demanded the papers which they gave up to him
I find that he has given no receipt for the papers and
has got no power of Attorney and what remains unpressed
he will doubtless manufacture to his own liking, he
is suspected to be in connection with one Deed of
Kinds burgh D. who applied for the case last winter
I was then at home and put him off by stating to
him that I Meehan had undertaken the case
thought I discovered in him the arch Rogue that
would such at once the soldier and the Governor
I had designed to proceed in this case by order of Probate
agreeable to the laws of this State for insane persons
I hope that the fraud may be stopped as Epaphras
Ripley is perfectly insane or cannot act for himself
and all recent papers must be falls
hope that if his claim his presented by either
Selden or Deed they may be supported and given
Churchman as I am confident that neither
Epaphras Ripley or his heirs will ever be benefited
by them and they certainly need all the said
the Pension act was designed to bestow
all which is Humbly submitted by
James Pease
To Millard Fillmore
President of the
United States
Page 166

Hon J L Edwards
Comr of Pensions
Washington City of
Page 167

Bellows Falls Vermont Apl 7, 1840
Sir
I have received your communication of
the 1st inst relative to the declaration of Tabitha
Ripley  for a pension for Epaphras Ripley, and have
only to regret that in my letter enclosing her declaration
did not refer you to the previous declaration of
Epaphras Ripley which I certainly should have
done had I supposed such reference would have 
facilitated the investigation of the claim, or 
furnished any evidence affecting such investigation
in its results, and indeed the necessity or propriety
of such reference did not even occur to me
I had no knowledge of the declaration of Epaphas Ripley until sometime after it was made
when it was placed in my hand and forwarded to
your office and having been informed that it
was not supported by the roll I do not recollect
that any proceedings were afterwards had upon
But having lately been assured that Mr. Ripley 
did perform service in the Vermont troops I 
applied to the Secretary of State of this State and obtained the certificate now in your office and
he being insane at this time I caused a declaration
to be made for his benefit by Tabitha Ripley his
Daughter and from that declaration it appears that
his mental incapacity has existed for several years
past from which I infer that it is probable