Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File W. 10010, for John Le Vacher De Vanbrun, Maryland
Page 1

(3-1776)

SERVICE
Md.  

Le Vacher de Vanbrun, John
Ann

NUMBER
 
W. 10010
_________________________________________
CONTENTS
Page 2

Maryland 53 [right side of page torn off]
Ann Le Vacher de Van Brun 
of Baltimore in the State of Maryland
who was a               in the                comman[cut off]
by Captain              of the                     comm[cut off]
by                    in the                     
["line for" crossed out] Widow of John Le Vacher Van Brun who was an ensign in the War of the Revolution.
___________________________________________
Inscribed on the Roll of Maryland at the rate of 240 Dollars.00 Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March 1834.
____________________________________________
Certificate of Pension issued the 29 day of Sept. 1836 and delvd. to A. Yearley Esq. Present
____________________________________________
Arrears to the 4th of Sept.1836 $1,320.00
Semi-ant. allowance ending 4 Mar 37  120.00
[Total] $1,440.00 
{Revolutionary Claim Act June 7, 1832}
July 4, 1836
Recorded by D. D. Addison Clerk.
Book          Vol. 1  Page 183

[Side Page] [illegible] 20 1836 to A. Ye [illegible]
Page 3

No. 414
Ann La Vacher
widow of 
Lt. John La Vacher
Md.
rejected
act 4 July 1836

A. Yearly Esq.
Baltimore
Page 4

State of Maryland, City of Baltimore  To wit:
On this 30th day of July eighteen hundred and thirty six personally appeared before me Chief Judge of Baltimore City Court  Ann Le Vacher de Van Brun a resident of the city aforesaid, aged eighty four years who being first duly sworn according to law, doth on oath make the following declaration in order to obtain the benefit of the pension made by the Act of Congress passed July the fourth in the year eighteen hundred and thirty six; that she is the widow of the late John Le Vacher de Van Brun, a Lieutenant in the Maryland line who entered the stated service at an early period of the Revolutionary War and served until ["nearly" inserted] the close thereof as will fully appear by documentary ["proof now in possession of the War Department" inserted] and other evidence.  She further declares that she was married to the said John Le Vacher de Van Brun on the fourth day of September, in the year seventeen hundred and eighty one, by the Rev. Mr. Gates at Annapolis, in the State of Maryland aforesaid.  That her husband the said John Le Vacher de Van Brun embarked, on furlough granted by Congress June the seventh, seventeen hundred and eighty two for France.  That neither he nor the [page cut off]
Page 5

and eighty one, by the Rev. Mr. Gates, at Annapolis of Maryland aforesaid.  That her husband, the said John Le Vacher de Van Brun embarked, on furlough granted by Congress, June the eleventh seventeen hundred and eighty two for France.  That neither he, nor the vessel in which he embarked were ever heard of afterwards.  And that she has remained a widow ever since that period as will more fully appear by reference to the proof hereto annexed.  Sworn to and subscribed on the day and year first above written.
Ann Le Vacher de Van Brun
Baltimore City Court August 1st, 1836
I hereby certify to all whom it may concern that the above named Ann Levacher de Van Brun, a resident in the City of Baltimore aged about eighty four or five years not being able by reason of bodily infirmity to make her personal appearance in court.  I visited on her at her place of residence and then and there on the above date took her declaration ["(above written)" inserted] [illegible word crossed out] on oath
Page 6

administered by me and which the subscribed [illegible] presence.  I further certify that ["Mrs. Lavacher" inserted] Sarah Golder, Catherine Kitty whose depositions are hereto annexed are all ["both" crossed out] personally known to me and worthy of the most implicit credits.  I further certify that I also personally acquainted with James Chalmers Mrs. Ann Pitt and Jonathan Pinkney of this place whose depositions are also annexed and also with the Justice of the Peace before whom they were taken and that said depositions are also worthy of the most implicit credit.  I further certify as much as myself are natives of the city of Annapolis and well acquainted with the facts state by them.
I further certify that Baltimore City Court in which resides is a court of record.  Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 1st day of August 1836
 N. Brice, [illegible] Judge
Page 7

resides is a court of record.  Given under my hand and the seal of the Court this 1st day of August 1836.
N. Price Chief Judge

State of Maryland City of Baltimore [illegible]
I hereby certify that the Honorable Nicholas Brice by who[illegible] certificate was given and was [illegible] thereto subscribed his name was at the time of so doing Chief Judge of Baltimore City Court and to all whose acts as such due faith and credit and that this first day of August in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred and thirty six.
Thos Metcalfe Clk
Baltimore City [ilegible]
Page 8

State of Maryland
City of Baltimore  To Wit
On this twenty eighth day of October in the year of our Lord eighteen hundred thirty six; before me the subscriber, Justice of the Peace for the city aforesaid, came William Ball of the same city aged sixty eight years.  On the same day came also before me James Chalmers of the city aforesaid aged 74 years.  The said William Ball and James Chalmers being well ["known" inserted] to me as persons of good character and entitled to full credit and respectively made oath on the Holy Evangely of Almighty God, that they were personally acquainted with John Levacher De Van Brun, an officer of the Mayland line in the Army of the United States, at Annapolis in the spring and summer of the year 1781; at which time he was designated and known as Captain Levacher [illegible words blacked out].  He was afterwards intermarried with Miss Ann Howard, of the said city of Annapolis, sister of Samuel Harvey Howard Esquire, late Register of the High Court of Chancery of Maryland, and resident of Annapolis aforesaid.
Sworn to and subscribed by the said deponents before me this day and year aforesaid.
Wm Ball
James Chalmers

Alexr A. Kennard
Page 9

Baltimore October 28th 1836
This is to certify that I always understood from my deceased husband, John Levacher De Van Brun and others, that he the said Levacher De Van Brun was commissioned as a Lieutenant soon after he entered the American Army in the Maryland line, which was at an early period in the Revolutionary War.  During some time previous to our marriage he was designated and titled "Captain Levacher" as I have understood, in view, of a captain's commission which was intended for him.  We were married September 4th 1781.  And he sailed for France August 4, 1782 and was never heard of afterwards.  Ann Levacher Devanbrun
State of Maryland City of Baltimore   To wit
On this twenty eighth day of October 1836 before the subscriber a Justice of the Peace for the said city personally appeared Ann Levacher De Van Brun whose signature is affixed to the above certificate and made oath on the Holy Evangely of Almighty God; that the matters and things therein stated are true and correct to the best of her knowledge and belief.  And I hereby certify that the above deponent is a person of good character and as such is entitled to full credit.
Sworn before Alexr A. Kennard
Page 10

State of Maryland  }
Baltimore County  Sct
I hereby certify that Alexander A Kennard, gentleman before whom the foregoing depositions were made and who has thereto signed his name was at the time of so doing one of the Justices of the Peace of the State of Maryland in and for the City of Baltimore, duly commissioned and sworn.
In testimony whereof I hereunto subscribe my name affix the seal of Baltimore County Court on this 3rd day of November 1836.
Thos Kell Clk of
Baltimore County Ct.
Page 11

Revolution 
Maryland
WIDOW, &c.
______________
File No. 1001
Ann Le Vacher de Van Brun
Wid. of John Le Vacher de Van Brun
Lieut. Rev. War
_________________
Act:  June 7, '32
Indes:---- Vol. M, Page 295
[Arrangement of 1870]
Page 12

Revu. Cm. Revolutionary Claims
Dec. 26, '36
Sir, The petition of the widow of Lieut. John L. De Van Brun states that the papers containing evidence of the claim for commutation are in the Pension Office.  If so, will you send them or copies of them to me.
I am respectfully
Yr de [illegible]
J. M. Niles
Page 13

J. L. Edwards Esq.
Page 14

Sir,
I remit to you the papers relating to Ann Levacher de Von Brun together with a letter from Mr. Yearly who states that there is an affidavit or affidavits establishing the fact of the loss of the ship in which Levacher De Vanbrun sailed was lost with all on board.
Be so good as to examine & see if there be any such testimony on file & return the papers to me as soon as convenient.
Your friend
A. Beaumont
Feb. 23rd 1837
Page 15

Pension Agency
Union Bank of Maryland
Balt. 9 Nov 1837
Sir
An application has been made for the payment of arrears of pension due to Ann Le Vacher de Van Brun by the Administrator.  He has produced the certificate from the Orphans Court and likewise the enclosed certificate from the Court, of her death.  The amount due is small but as the case will settle others which are sometimes submitted, I have thought proper to ask your decision before paying; as the 3 Section of the regulations prescribing the more says, "If there be no widow child or children then the amount due such pension at the time of his death, must be paid to the legal representatives of the decedent. It is true that an administrator is a legal representative but whilst in the present case we know there are relatives alive, should the administrator be paid to their exclusion, particularly as these
Page 16

relatives are closely connected.  ["and" crossed out]
Is it also necessary that these relatives should appear together personally or by power of attorney or can anyone be paid the proportion due them.
I am compelled to be thus troublesome to you as I wish at all times so to pay the parties interested as to prevent any difficulty arising in the settlement of our accounts.
I am Sir
very respectfully
J. L. Edwards

I enclose herewith the vouchers in this case }

H. W. Evans [illegible]
Page 17

Major Hook
Page 18

Extract from the Act 7 June 1832
"And that no foreign officer shall be entitled to said pay" --
Extract from the Opinion of Attorney Genl. Taney on the above law:
"The words "Foreign Officers" were used in the proceedings of the Act Congress to designate the foreigners who held commissions in the American Army - and they must, I presume be regarded as used in the same sense in the law before me.  They are the only persons excepted from the benefit of the law."
It would appear from the above that Levackey did not come under the Act 7 June and his widow could only receive under the Act 4 July 1836 the pension which her husband rec'd.  He was not entitled to a pension & of course his widow is not.
Yrs.
B. [illegible]
Page 19

Washington Feb 17.1837
J. L. Edwards Esq.
Dr Sir
Will you be kind enough to furnish me with the evidence mentioned in this post script to the enclosed petitions & [illegible]
Your friend
A. Beaumont
Page 20

[illegible stamp]
J. L. Edwards, Esquire
Commissioner of Pensions
Washington City

Ann Le Vacher De Van Brun [illegible]
Page 21

Baltimore Nov 3 1836
J. L. Edwards Esq.
Commissioner of Pensions
Dear Sir:
In submitting the enclosed documents relative to the date of appointment of John Le Vacher to the office of Lieutenant, I beg leave to observe:
1 It seems reasonable to conclude that an enterprising young gentleman who had come to our help from a foreign country and entered the Maryland line as an ensign March 10 1777 would not remain a long time stationary in that office especially as it is well known that the Maryland line bravely met the foe and had its ranks thinned in battle.
2 The certificate of Messrs. Ball and Chalmers show a strong probability that at the time they were acquainted with him in the spring of 1781 say one year & four months prior to his death, he was a Lieutenant in command and a Brever Captain.
3  The certificate (official) of the Brever prove that he was certainly a Lieutenant on the 7 of June 1781, say one year & two months prior to his death.  And this certificate supports a strong inference that he was in that office some undefined period previously to the 7th of June 1781.
Page 22

4 His widow's certificate shows a belief founded on his own statements & others that he was appointed to the office of Lieutenant some four or five years before his death. 
The case is now respectfully and clearfully submitted for you to decide and to allow the venerable widow Lieutenant John Le Vacher De Van Brun such additional pension as your own good judgment shall decide to be her due.
Respectfully,
Your friend 
Alex Yearley
No. 10 St. Paul Street
Page 23

Baltimore, Sept. 14th, 1836
Sir
I have before me some of the papers in the case of Mrs. Le Vacher, the widow of a Revolutionary officer, and also a copy of the opinion of the Attorney General of October 27. 1832, to which you refer in your letter to Mr. Yearley dated August 10th 1836.  Without intending to draw into question the correctness of that opinion [illegible words crossed out], I beg leave to suggest a point in the case of Mrs. Le Vacher, which seems to me to abstract it entirely from the operation of that opinion leaving it, of course, included under the general provision of the Act of Congress of 1832 and 1836.
In the early part of the Revolutionary War, as you well know, the duty of raising troops devolved upon the States.  Even after a Continental Army was organized, the power of the state government continued to be exerted in aid of the efforts of Congress in every form that could provide the common purpose.  In fact, the only legislative power that there was, existed in the state governments.  They passed laws to encourage enlistments, by offering such inducements as were in their reach to their citizens to engage in the public service; they imposed disabilities upon such of their populations as were refractory, and they added to their strength by opening the door to citizenship and placing upon the same level with their own people such foreigners as might choose to take up arms.  The power of the states to do this is beyond dispute.  Maryland resorted to all the means in her power to fill the ranks of her quota and amongst them the naturalization
Page 24

of foreigners, who served in the field under her authority.  All her subsequent legislation is conformable with this design.  The persons thus incorporated into the American family by an authority which all must admit to be legitimate, were ever after treated as an integral part of the great whole.  The invalids were placed upon the pension list; the widows of the slain were provided for; and it is in proof before you, that the applicant in this case has received up to this day the benefit of the justice and liberality of Maryland by drawing the pension to which the laws of the state entitle her.  And, I say fearlessly that it is utterly impossible that Congress intended to exclude such cases from their pension list.
I admit that Congress had the power to give their money to whatever classes of persons they chose; but I maintain that they never intended to over-rule the early legislation of the states by reviving a distinction which that legislation was intended to destroy nor does the opinion of the Attorney General reach to that extent.  He says "The words 'foreign officers' were used in the proceedings of the old Congress to designate the foreigners who held commissions in the American Army and they must I presume be regarded as used in the same sense in the law before me."   Certainly they must be so construed or else the law will be construed away.  But when I show you two classes of foreign officers, one of which (and a small one) was separated from the general mass by the then sovereign power of a state leaving the great bulk in a less favored condition and subject to the full face of the disability in question,
Page 25

surely we must adopt that construction of the opinion of the Attorney General which gives the Act of Congress entire efficacy and yet abstains from overthrowing the legislation of ["may" crossed out] many states.  The act of '32 itself recognizes "state troops," and it must be admitted, I think, that the spirit of that act was intended to be in harmony with the legislation of the states and not adverse to it.  You make the Attorney General mount up to the era of the Revolution separating as he goes along the population of the country into two classes with an invidious hand, when the states  have (or at least the State of Maryland has) attempted for the last sixty years to blend the two into one indistinguishable mass.  I make this opinion conform to early state legislation and yet not upon a numerous class of officers whom no state chose to take under its protecting power, who were not permanently and legally identified with our people and who from their loose and floating characters must have been the precise persons intended to be excluded from the benefit of the act of '32.  Which construction will you adopt?
Without extending this letter so far as to refer to the veto of our Assembly by year and chapter, I will only further that I hold myself bound to share at moment that such acts were passed and that the present case comes within them.  You have, I believe, in the papers before you a reference to all of them.  Enclosed is a letter from Judge Duval which can be sworn to if required.
Yours respectfully
Benj C. Howard
Page 26

P. S.
I enclose a memorandum of the Acts of Assembly for fear you may not have a complete list.
B. C. H.
Page 27

Ann Le Vacher de Van Brun
$240 as ["ensign" crossed out] widow
of Ensign Le Vacher de Van Brun

Deliver cut:  to
A. Yearly Esq.
Present

[Sideways writing] J. L. Edward, Esq. 
Pension Office
Washington
Page 28

Payments to be made
at Baltimore
by H. W. Evans, Esq.
Agent for paying pensioners in the Agency of
Maryland

Have a new certificate allowing him as an
Ensign for 10 months & as a Lieut. 14 months

A Yearly, Esq.
Present

Recorded in the Pension Office in
Book     Vol.  
Page         by
Jno D. Wilson Clerk
Page 29

WAR DEPARTMENT
Revolutionary Claim
I certify that, in conformity with the 3d section of the United States of the 4th July 1836, Ann Le Vacher de Van Brun of Maryland, widow of John Le Vacher de Van Brun who was an Ensign in the War of the Revolution is entitled to receive two hundred forty dollars ["and cents" crossed out] per annum during the time she may remain unmarried, commencing on the 4th of March, 1836 and payable semi-annually on the 4th of March and 4th of September.
Given at the War Office of the United States this 29th day of September one thousand eight hundred thirty-six.
Lew Cass
Secretary of War
Page 30

Mr. Alex Yearley
No. 10, St. Paul's Street
Baltimore

Care of
Mr. James Chalmers
Page 31

Western Shore Treasury
Annapolis 29 July 1836
I hereby certify that Mrs. Ann Le Vache now of the City of Baltimore widow of Joh Le Vache has for many years received and continues to receive a pension from Maryland, in virtue of Ch. 52 of the Acts of the General Assembly of Nov. Session 1785 of one hundred and sixty dollars per annum payable quarterly.
George MacKubin
Treas. W. S. Md.
 Mr. Alex Yearley
Dr. Sir,
I take pleasure in furnishing the certif. requested by your letter of the 27th and regret that I cannot add any proof of Mrs. Le Vache's marriage.  On the Roll of Maryland, she is stated to be the widow of John and I have therefore so described her.  I refer also to the authority by which she receives her pension in the hope that the language of the enactment may be of service to her.
No list of marriages solemnized here in 1785 appear
Page 32

to have been returned to the Treasurer, but it's just now occurred to me that were you to write to N. Brewer, Sen. Esq. of this city, the facts you desire to prove, his memory will ["probably" inserted] enable him to ascertain them by affidavit.
I am very respectfully Sir
Your obd. Servt.
George MacKubin
Treas. W. S. Md.
Page 33

[illegible]
Gabriel Duval

Present
Page 34

[illegible] Hotel, Sept. 7, 1836
All the principal facts that's in the foregoing representation are within my knowledge & known to be true.  I was acquainted with Mrs. Le Vacher De Van Brun, when she was Miss Howard, from the year 1770 to the present time, and I knew Mr. Levacher from the time of his entering into the army:  he belonged to the Maryland Line, until he was lost at sea as stated.  Mr. Le Vacher under the laws of Maryland was commissioned as a citizen & entitled to all privileges as such.  He married in Annapolis & it was always understood that it was intended to remain in the U. States.
In my opinion, and I have not a particle of doubt on the subject, that he cannot be commissioned as a "foreign officer" under the Act of Congress of 1832 according to the true construction of that act.  By foreign officers under that act, meaning is to comprise those who for patriotic principles engaged in the service of the U. States & returned after the conclusion of the war to their native or adopted country respectively; - not those who married here & became citizens and resided, or meant to reside, permanently here.  I know J. W. Edwards:  his construction of the law of Congress is generally correct:  I cannot think, however, that on reconsideration & reflection he will adhere to the opinion which it is suggested he has given in the case of Lt. Levacher de Van Brin.
G. Duval
Page 35

[illegible stamp]
James Hook, Esquire
Office of the Com. Gen. of Subsistance
Washington D. C.
Page 36

Baltimore, Aug. 12, 1836
Dear Sir,
On returning to Baltimore I inquired concerning good old Widow Buchanan and was sorry to find that she was not married till after the close of the Revolutionary War, and of course, not entitled to the benefit of the law of July 4, 1836.
I must [illegible] well myself of your kindly offered aid by stating and begging your help in [illegible] French gentleman, John Levacher, came to our country in the year 1776 and entered our army in the Maryland Line at Annapolis and continued therein until the year 1732.  He was promoted to the office of Lieutenant and I should think (supposed) had to swear allegiance to our government in taking a commission in its army.  He fought, bled, and triumphed with our fathers in the [illegible]cause of American freedom.  In the year 1781 at Annapolis in Maryland, he married an amiable lady of that city, thus completely identifying himself with us.  After this, he aided in the final great triumph of our arms in the capture of Cornwallis and sometime afterwards in the latter part of 1782 he embarked in [illegible] granted by Congress for France in order to settle some private business purposing to return (having left his wife in the care of some friends at Annapolis) and make his accepted country his only home.  But Providence ordered it otherwise.  The Ship Fuverite, Captain Buchanan of Baltimore in which he sailed was never heard of after she left the Capes:  she with him & all on board were lost at sea.
His venerable widow (for whom [illegible]
Page 37

cases, the third section of the Act of July 4, 1836 and seem to be expressly made) has applied for the pension therein provided for. And all the required proofs and circumstances of her case plainly and clearly made out in her favor; when the pled is set up by Mr. Edwards that her husband was a "foreign officer"; and her papers are placed on the files"!!

Now my dear sir how is this [illegible] what can this be so? He held no foreign office when he came to our keep. The only office was purely American (and I should suppose that on being approved he would swear allegiance thereunto and of course become an American citizen - especially as he continued so many years with us fighting for us, as an American officer and married an American lady with avowed purpose of making our county his only home.  He never afterwards held any foreign office or character whatever. And the state of Maryland has recognized him as one of their continental officers by granting a small pension to his widow under their act of 1785. See laws of Maryland 1785 Chap 52 - under which said pension was obtained by her.

Can you help this vulnerable lady - would her Mr. Edwards be convinced by your stating the above particular to him that she ought not to be excluded; or if you were to see the Attorney General, would he not consider her a case which ought to pass.

Be please to let me hear from you on the subject. And greatly oblige not only my venerable friend but also your old friend & servant.

Alexander Yearley
Page 38

P.S. Previously to my late visit to Washington
I wrote to Mr. Edwards concerning Mrs. LeVacher's case - and Mr. Crump, (then) Acting Commissioner of Pensions wrote me that her husband having been a foreigner was no bar to her claim if he was commissioned by the
authority of the U.S. of State of Maryland
and actually served in the Maryland line " And in this opinion every lawyer and Gentleman to whom I have mentioned the case all concur - declaring the opinion that he was a foreign officer to be contradictory in fact, and subversive of the object of the Law.
Page 39

Baltimore, Sept 27th 1836

Sir

This letter will be handed to you by Mr. Yearley for whom I intend it to be an introduction and in case the papers in behalf of the claim of Mrs. Le Vacher should have been transmitted to the Secretary of War for his decision. I must ask you to permit Mr. Yearley to carry this also, as the sole object of his visit to Washington is to try to bring about a prompt and favorable adjustment of her case. He is personally acquainted with her and you may rely with entire confidence on any testimony which he may give.

In our letter of the 20th you request me to send you copies of the laws to which I referred. The printed volume is a large Quarto and I do not suppose you want that - and to transcribe all the laws on the subject would consume more time than I can bestow upon this solitary case of justice - My only motive for interfering at all is an anxiety that you should decide with that correctness which has hitherto marked you opinions and a belief that this claim in fact and in law is well founded - the Laws of Maryland must easily be found and I beg again to refer to you them. Your messenger will procure them in a few minutes, and Mr. Yearly will cheerfully assist you in the examination.

These laws show that officers in the situation of Mr. Le Vacher were naturalized by Maryland before she ceded the power
Page 40

of Naturalization to the Federal Government
and the papers in the case shew that she
(Maryland) has so construed her own laws
by placing Mrs Le Vacher upon the State
Pension List, as the widow of a Revolutionary
Officer -
In 1777 an act was passed for the
better security of the Government, containing various provisions (October 1777, Chapter 20) and in Sectn
24 all persons in service were considered as
having given sufficient proof of their attachment
to the State and placed on a footing with
citizens-- Lieut Le Vacher was then in service
-1778 March. Chap 15 Sec 5 reiterates the above
1779. July. Chap 6. declares that every
person who shall thereafter come into the
State and take the oath S e shall be
adjudged to be a natural born subject) c
1797 Chap 60 declares that all foreigners
who settled in the State before the 22 of
July 1779 (which Le Vacher did) shall
be deemed to be citizens of the State
as if they had been natural born Citizens
Now for the State Construction of these acts
1785 Chap 52 provide that widows of
the offices of the State of Maryland who
died in the continental service, should be
paid a certain allowance - and under
this act, Mrs. Le Vacher being considered the
widow of an officer of the State of Maryland
has received the allowance
Page 41

How it is possible to make
this officer a Foreign officer, I cannot see
---
The law of the State adopted
him-- he married and settled early in
the was amongst us-- he held a commission
as a citizen of Maryland - was recognized
as such whilst alive, and his widow's
claims allowed after his death
The opinion of the Attorney
General very property excludes all those
who were floating about the world and
took no root here-- It was not and
could not have been the meaning of
the Law to let in all these claims
upon the Treasury-- but it is utterly
impossible that Congress should have
intended to exclude the cases of men
who were expressly naturalized by the
Laws of the States, under whose Banners
they were then fighting -
If you have still doubt
I beg you to lay the case before
the Secretary of War
and am
Respectfully
Yours
Benjn C. Howard
Page 42

To The Honble Lewis Cass
Secretary of War
Washington

-untelligible February?- 31, 1836
Pension Office
Page 43

Baltimore Aug 29, 1836
Honorble  Sir

A few weeks ago I had the honor of
presenting at the Pension office the claim of the Venerable lady whose case is stated and explained in the closed paper Mr Crump who was at that time being commissioner of Pensions, had informed me that the fact of her husband having been foreigner is no bar to her claim, if he were commissioned by the authority of the United States or of Maryland, and actually served in the Maryland line, It happened, however that when all the
requisite statements & evidence were prepared and sent on, Mr. Edwards came home, and after examining them he informed me of the difficulty about foreign officer and that he had "placed Mrs Levachers papers on the file"
In mentioning the circumstances of this  case
to some highly respectable friends, they were astonished at we Edwards hesitancy, and advised me to apply to you, and if necessary, through you to the President
And General Smith who knows well
what the old Congress meant and what the Congress of 1832 intended by, foreign officers has accordingly addressed you a few lines, in which, my friend the Honorable Isaac McKim cordially concurs
Hoping that their views will meet your
concurrence and that this venerable relict of
the Revolution will be cheered with the
substantial gratitude of her country in the
evening of her days
I have the honor to be your
friend & servant
Alexr Yearley
No 10 St. Paul Street
Baltimore
Your early notice of this case
well relieve the anxiety of
this aged and highly respectable
Widow
Page 44

Aug 22
file with Mrs La Vachers papers
under act of 4 July
1836
Page 45

Land Office Annapolis, August 12th 1836,
Sir,
Having been confined to my bed for the last
two weeks by indisposition, I have not been able to reply to
your letter of the 2nd Inst
until now.
The rolls and
Army Ledgers of the revolution in this office, have been very
carefully examined in the case of
Lieut Le Vacher De Vanburn
he appears by a depreciation pay roll, to have received on
the 7th of June 1781, £161, 11 . 5 depreciation money issued
to the Maryland quota of troops on Continental Establishment.
his account also upon the Army Ledger stand stated up to July 1782-
I should therefore presume, that he left 
this County sometime in the year 1782 - the rolls however
affords no evidence of a furlough having been granted him to
revisit Fance"

By a paper in this Office, endorsed,-
"Arrangement of the five Maryd Regiments 1st January 1783, with the
promotions up to that period," there is the following entry
viz "Lieut. Le Vacher De Vanburn, appointed an Ensign the 10th of March 1777, date of promotion, not known.-- gone to France"
The records of the revolution in this office, afford no further evidence of his service,-
I am respectfully
Yr Obt St.
G. G. Brewer
Geo. W. Crump Esq,
(Rd)
Page 46

P.S. I forgot also to state that Leut. Levacher DeVan=
=burn, received bounty land from this State, for his revolu=
=tionary services.

G.G. Brewer
Page 47

Land Office,
Annapolis, November 30th 1836

I Certify, that it appears by a Depreciation Pay Roll, remaining in my Office, that John LeVacher De Vanburn - a Lieutenant of the Maryland Line, received £161.11.5 - Depreciation Money, issued to the Maryland Quota of troops on Continental Establishment, on the 7th day of June 1781-

George G. Brewer
Register Land Office, W.S. Md.
Page 48

John LaVarcher De Vanburn
M - Service - unintelligible

prob Widow
Page 49

ann C53
10010

Land Office,
Annapolis, October 31st 1836,
I Certify, that it appears by a Depreciation Pay Roll, remaining in my Office, that John LaVacher De Vanburn a Leiutenant of the Maryland Line, received £161.11.5 - Depreciation Money, issued to the Maryland quota of troops on Continental Establishment on the 7th day of June 1781,

George G. Brewer
Register Land Office, W.S. Md.
Page 50

Land Office, Annapolis, August 25th 1836,
I hereby Certify, that a paper on file in this office, - endorsed, "Arrangement of the five Maryland Regiments 1st January 1783, with the promotions up to that period," - there is the following entry, - unintelligible - "Lieut. Lavacher De Vanburn, - Ensign 10th MMarch 1777, Daate of promotion not known, - gone to * France" - and I also further Certify that his accounts upon the Ledgers and stated up to the 30th July 1782, - 

George G. Brewer
Reg Land Off. W.S. Md

*He had a Vurlough from Congress, evidence whereof is in possession of the Copmm of Pensions
Page 51

LAND OFFICE,
ANNAPOLIS,
August 12th 1836,
Certify that it appears by a Depreciation Pay Roll, remaining in my Office that
John Le Vachee De Vanbrun Lieut 2nd Regt of the
Maryland Line, received £161, 11 " 5d  --
Depreciation Money, issued the Maryland quota of troops on Continental Establishment, on the 
7th day of June 1781
George G. Brewer
Register Land Office, W. S. M.
Page 52

10
George Wm Crump Esqr.
Acting Commissioner of Pensions
Washington
D. C

Aug 8
proof
Ann Le Vacher
Act 4 July 1836
Page 53

State of Maryland City of Baltimore To Wit
on this fifth day of August eighteen hundred
and thirty six, Before me the Subscriber a Justice of the Peace for the City aforesaid came William Ball of the same City, and being of lawful age and entitled to full credit, made oath according to
law that he knew Lieutenant Le Vacher De Vanbrun of the Maryland line at Annapolis in the War of the Revolution; that said Le Vacher and
several other persons then known to him
this deponent, embarked for France on board
the Ship Favorite, Captain Buchanan of
Baltimore, sometime towards the close of said
War, and that the said Vessel and all
on board have always been considered as lost
at sea, as they were never heard of afterwards
On the same day also came before me
Mrs. Jane Hackett of the City of Baltimore
aforesaid, and being of lawful age and entitled
to full credit, made oath according to law that
some time about the latter end of the Revolutionary War, The Ship Favorite Captain Buchanan
of Baltimore sailed for France with a
number of Passengers on board amongst whom
was one of her own brothers, Frances Grant,
of Baltimore, and it has always been believed
and understood that said ship was lost at
sea with all the passengers, as none of
them were ever afterwards heard from or of.
Sworn to before
James Blair
Page 54

State of Maryland Baltimore County S- unintelligible, 
I hereby certify that James Blair gentleman before whom the written depositions were made and who has thereto subscribed his name was at the time of so doing a Justice of the Peace of the State of Maryland in and for the City of Baltimore duly commissioned and sworn.

In Testimony whereof I hereto set my hand and affix the seal of Baltimore County Court this 6th day of August 1836.

Thos Kell Clk/Balt - unintelligible
Page 55

Baltimore August 6. 1836
To George W. Crump Esqr
Acting Commissioner of Pensions
Dear Sir
Since my return to this city I have met with two respectable old citizens whose recollections go to establish the fact that the Ship Favorite with Lieutenant Levacher on board was lost at sea about the latter end of the Revolutionary War. See the first page of this sheet
Permit me to add that the Caption of
the Law of Maryland, 1785, under which she obtained the pay or pension certified by Mr Mackubin is as follows, to wit, "An Act for the relief of the Widows of such officers of this State who died in the continental service". See Laws of Maryland Chapter 52. November 1785. so that this venerable lady, Mrs Levacher, has been recognised by official acts of the State of Maryland as the Widow of an officer of the State of Maryland who died in the Continental service
If there should be any delay on the part of
Mr Nicholas Brewer of Annapolis in furnishing
at your request the official certificate from the
Records at Annapolis of the actual service
the Lieutenant Leacher, please to inform me and I will go to Annapolis, where I have no doubt living Testimony exists of his services for more than two years in the War of the Revolution.
From your Friend & Servant
Alexander Yearley
Ne 10 St Paul Street
Agent for Ann Levacher de Vanbrun
Page 56

Anna Arundell County Court

I hereby Certify that it appears
by the records of Anna Arundell County
Court that a license  to solemnize the rites of
marriage between  John Levacher  and
Ann Howard was granted  on the fourth day of
September in the year of our Lord one
thousands seven hundred and and Eighty one
In Testimony whereof the I hereto ad 
my name and affix the seal of Anna 
Arundell County Court this 30th day of July
1836
Wm Green Clk of aacc
Page 57

State of Maryland City of Baltimore To Wit:
-
I was acquainted with Miss Ann Howard and
Lieutenant John Levasher De Vanbrun of the American
Army - previous to the Marriage
which I believe took place in the year 1781. Miss Betsy Quinn
who was present at the Welling informed me of all the
circumstances of the marriage and that the ceremony
was performed by the Revd Mr Gates
And I visited them after they were married and keeping
house together
about the year 1782 he embarked for France as I understood on a visit to his friends and to make
arrangements for his permanent residence in this Country
but it is believed he was lost at sea as he was never heard
of after he sailed for France
I have known her ever since that time she has remained
Widow and is a Lady of highly estimable Character
Sarah Golder
Sworn to & subscribed in
my presence
N. Brice Chief Judge Balt City Court
of
ye
Page 58

Baltimore July 1836
I certify that I have known Mrs Le Vacher
all my life. I remember when she and her
husband Lieut La Vacher De Vanburn  kept
house together in Annapolis I was in the
habit of being at their house almost every
day and I have heard my sister Mrs
Elizabeth Clonch often mention, that  she
was present at their marriage, from contact
intercourse I know that Mrs. Le Vachers.  has long  remained a widow since the death
of her husband
Catharine Miller
Sworn to before me
this 30th July 1836
Page 59

[illegible]
State of Maryland City of Baltimore  To wit:
On this first day of August ["September" crossed out] eighteen hundred and thirty six before me the subscriber and a Justice of the Peace in and for the City aforesaid [illegible] personally appeared Johnathan Pinkney of the [illegible[ city, he being known to me as a gentleman entitled to ample credit and made oath in the Holy Evangely of Almighty God.  That he was acquainted with Lieutenant otherwise Captain John Levacher De Van Brun and also with Ann Le Vacher De Van Brun his wife at the City of Annapolis in the State Maryland in the early part of the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty two.  That as the deponent always understood the said Levacher was lost at sea as he embarked for France sometime in the year last mentioned and was never heard of, neither he nor the vessel after they sailed.  That in he had known his widow the said Mrs. Ann Levacher [illegible] from that period to the present time and that she has not again been married; that this deponent further saith that he also understands and believes that said John Levacher De Van Brun to be an officer under the United States in the Maryland Line in the War of the Revolution.  Taken and certified by day and year aforesaid that today in August 1836.  Thos W. Griffith
Page 60

State of Maryland City of Baltimore  To wit:
On this thirtieth day of July sixteen hundred and thirty six before me the subscriber a Justice of the Peace for the city aforesaid personally appeared Mrs. Ann Pitt of the same city being known to me as a lady entitled to ample credit and made oath in the Holy Evangely of Almighty God.  That at the time of the Revolutionary War, she resided at Annapolis in the state, and although very young at that time, she was well acquainted with Mrs. Ann Howard of that city and has a perfect recollection of Lieutenant John Le Vacher de Van Brun of the United States Army, before their marriage which was a matter of public notoriety at that time.  She also knew them as man & wife and they were known and received as such in the City of Annapolis aforesaid.  That it was understood he was lost at sea soon after the close of the War, since which time Mrs. Le Vacher de Van Brun has remained a widow and lady of respectable standing in society.
Anne Pitt
Page 61

State of Maryland  City of Baltimore
On the twenty-eighth day of July eighteen hundred and thirty six before the subscriber a Justice of the Peace in and for the city aforesaid personally appeared James Chalmers being of lawful age and entitled to ample credit and made oath in the Holy Evangely of Almighty God that he this deponent at the time of the War of the Revolution was acquainted with Lieutenant John Levacher de Van Brun of the Maryland line of the United States Army at the City of Annapolis at which place he was not acquainted with Miss Ann Howard, sister of the late Samuel Harvey Howard, before her marriage with the said Levacher De Van Brun, which marriage he believed took place about the year seventeen hundred and sixty one.  That he the deponent resided near them in the City of Annapolis at the time of their marriage and that standing [illegible] intercourse in society both before and after the period was with the most respectable inhabitants of that city.
Sworn before Thos. B. Potterson
Page 62

Maryland 53

Ann Le Vacher de Van Brun widow of John Le Vacher de Van Brun of Baltimore in the State of Maryland who was an Ens. & Lieut. in the...comp by Captain....of the ....comm....in the Revol. War

for 10 months Ensign 100
14 " Lieut 86.66
$286.66
- unintelligible - March 1837

Inscribed on the Roll of Maryland at the rate of 286 Dollars 66 Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1831.

...ficate of Pensuion issued the 7th day of Dec. 1836 and sent to - unintelligible - yearly

Arrears to the - unintelligible - of
Semi-ann. allowance ending

July 4. 1836 Revolutionary Claim

Recorded by D. Brown Clerk,
Book - Vol. 1 - Page 183

- unintelligible - $240

7 Dec. 1836
Set to An. J.M. Nila. Jan 2, 1837. - unintelligible - to Hon. A Beau-
mont, Feb 20, 1837 - unintelligible - Feb. 24 1837 -
Order to pay 13 Nov. 1837.
Page 63

To the Honorable
Benjamin Howard
in the case of Mrs. Ann Levacher
Widow of Lieutenant
John Le Vacher De VanBurn
Page 64

a. John Levacher was at that time actually engaged in the service of the State in the Maryland Line - commissioned by authorities of Maryland - he is, then by law, recognized as a citizen.  
b. reiterates the same - in terms more explicit.
c.  This clearly admits that all who came before 1779 were citizens already under the then existing laws.
d. Here is a practical illustration of the fact the Levacher was indeed an officer in the Line of Maryland who actually died in the continental service as his widow was thereby entitled to the small allowance on which she had since lengthened out a scanty existence.
e. Here is a positive declaration of Lieutenant Le Vacher complete citizenship:  he emigrated to the State before 1779 and in it was his settled home - his temporary absence ["from his family" inserted] on furlough being no evidence to the contrary.
Page 65

a) Laws of Maryland 1777 Chap. 20 ["Sec 4" inserted] October - requires oath of allegiance be taken by all the people of the state  - but excepts are those actually engaged in the War of the Revolution as having by their actual service given satisfactory proof of their attachment to the country and the government.
b) [illegible] 1778 Chap 10 Sect. 4. placed all those officials & soldiers engaged in the regular service of the state on the same footing with those citizens who had taken the actual oath of allegiance.
c) 1779 Chap. 6  Sec. 2 ["July" Inserted] requires all foreigners hereafter coming into the state to take the oath of allegiance.
d) 1785 Chap 52 [illegible] acct for the relief of the widows of the officers of this state who died in the continental service - providing half pay for their widows.
e) 1797 Chap. 60 Sec. 2 declares that all foreigners who emigrated to this state before July 1779 and who have continued in this state and their descendants shall have the rights of native citizens.
Page 66

Early in the Revolutionary War, a young French Gentleman named John Levacher, de Vac Brien arrived at Annapolis and was appointed in the Maryand line of the American army as an Ensign, in which line he was afterwards promoted to the office of Lieutenant. He was engaged in several battles, was taken prisoner, and after long confinement, exchanged after which he acted that great triumph of American arms the Capture of Conrwallis. He was married Sep. 4, 1781 at Annapolis by Parson Gates to Miss Ann Howard, Sister of Mr. Sam Harvey Howard of that city; in August 1782 he sailed from Annapolis for France on Furlough in order to settle some of his private business and return to this, his adopted country, as his future home; having left his wife (during his intended short absence) in care of her brother Mr. Howard at Annapolis, but the ship and all on board perished at Sea or they were never heard of afterwards. His venerable widow now in her 80th year is iving in Baltimore in needy circumstances; and was on the eve of obtaining a persion under the Act of July
Page 67

July 4 1836 When a difficulty was stated, by Hon Edwards the Commissioner of pensions, on the supposition that her husband was a "foreign officer" and as such was excluded by the land of 1832.

Now, Honored Dear Sir, Was - unintelligible - acquainted with Lieutenant LeVacher and his wife who was your neighbour at Annapolis
Can it be possible that he, in the meaning of the old laws of Congress, would be identified as a "foreign officer"?

Can you afford any aid to this very interesting and needy widow of the Revolution?
Page 68

To the Honble
Lewis Cass
Secretary of War
Washington
y 17
Page 69

John Le Vacher De van boun came to America from France early in the Revolutionary War. He enlisted in the Maryland line of the Continental Army as Ensign on the 10th arch 1777, in which he was afterwards promoted to a Lieutenant’s Commission (from loss of records the date of his promotion is not known). He was engaged in several battles was taken prisoner; was exchanged and served at the Siege of York and capture of Cornwallis in October 1781. He was married to an American lady at Annapolis Sept’r 4 1781 and continued in the army. On the 11th of June 1782 he obtained from Congress a furlough to visit France, intending to Settle Some private business of his own and return to his wife whom he left in care of her brother, Samuel Harvey Howard of Annapolis; He embarked on the 4th August 1782 on board the Ship Favorite Captain Buchanan of Baltimore. And was lost at sea; neigher the Ship nor anyone on board having ever been heard of after she went to sea.
Mrs. Ann LeVacher, his widow is now living in this city at the advanced age of 84 years; She is now, and has been for many years in very straightened(sic) circumstances. She is an applicant for the benefit of the law of Congress passed July 4, 1836; Her application and Voucher compleat(sic) are filed at the pension office, Washington; and the only obstacle in her way is the very strange idea that her husband was a “foreign officer” in the meaning of Act of Congress, June 7, 1832.
Page 70

By an Act of the General Assembly of Maryland passed October 1777 Chapter 20, the Oath of Allegiance is required to be taken under heavy penalties and disqualifications. But in Section 24 of said act it is stated that “Whereas all persons in the regular service of this State, or of the United States, or any of them, have already given, by such service sufficient proof of their attachment to the freedom and independence thereof. Be it enacted that no general field, or Commissioned warrant or Staff officer, nor any Soldier or person in the regular Service of this State, or the United States or any of them, shall be affected by any matter or thing herein contained.”
And the act supplementary to the above passed March 1778 Chap 25 Sect 5-places all persons engaged in the regular service of this State on the same footing with those persons who had taken the oath of allegiance.
Lieutenant John Le Vacher was then in the regular Service of this State and died a citizen of this State. How then can he be a foreign officer? His office was purely American. He was an American citizen of choice by law; And it was his intention to remain as such being absent only on Furlough with a view of settling some private business & returning to his adopted & beloved country.
Page 71

Baltimore 29th August 1836

Sir:
I have the honour(sic) to hand you a statement of the case of Lieutenant John Le Vacher. His widow as claimed a pension under the Act of Congress, and has been refused under the idea that he was a “foreign officer.” Certainly my dear sir, Mr. Le Vacher does not come under the Idea that I have ever formed of those Gentlement who were considered as foreign officers; he was to all intents and purposes an officer of the Maryland line, took his promotion as other officers had done, never belonged to any of the separate corps in which foreign officers had been employed. He was a Marylander under the law of the State, and could have voted at all our Elections. I pray you to consider the subject and if you have any doubt that you will submit the claim to the President. I have the honour to be your most Obed’t Serv’t, S. Smith
P.S. You know that the “foreign officers” were provided for and paid in Paris.
To the Honorable Lewis Cass
Secretary of War
Bath, August 29 1836
I concur entirely with Gen’l Smith in his opinion of Mrs. Le Vachers case, and sincerely hope that it may be in your power to afford the desired relief as I think it a fair claim.
I remain very respectfully Sor your Ms. Obt. Serv., Isaac McKim