Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File W. 4,149, William Campbell, Va.
Page 227

That Colo: Gren. Givans regiment was of the Continental line has long since gone into Judgement, & that Judgement cannot be obtained, at this day; See opinions Att'o Genl. The object of the Memorial quoted by the Examiner was (he asserts) to identify the Memorialist with the State line was a view to the "procurative" of half pay." It was I presumed, a Memorial to the Legislature of Va on whose parties he had no other claim - [?] forward of the action both of Congress & the State Legislature, he could make no other statement, yet in that same Memorial he States other facts which are pretermitted by Examiner, apparently with the adroitness of an attorney, rather than with the impartiality of a Judge. That Memorial states that he was originally appointed in the Continental line, - that he was Coerced, in the State line, in spite of his protest to the contrary, - and further that he served the United States upwards of seven years, and to the close of the war of the revolution. These two important facts set forth in the same Memorial must be taken with the extract quoted as parts of one whole, - for by settled rules of law, the confession must not be garbled. Had Colo Campbell then known what was afterward incurred in the journals of the Legislature & which your Examiner ought to have known, 1st that his regiment was restored to the Continental line, 2dly that this restoration was admitted by the public declaration, of Virginia, and the deliberate  adjudications of the Legislature & Executive
Page 228

branches of the federal government, he would have had no occasion to bewail the wrong put upon him or to utter in that Memorial the bitter imprecation against his government, "that policy was permitted to silence the voice of Justice" It is also stated by your Clerk that in his Memorial he does not claim for his Militia service - and why? He was demanding his half pay - due only for Service in the line, and it would have been wholly superfluous (perhaps mischievous) to detail services rendered in an other Character, holding no connexin, with his legal claim to half pay. He however says as your Examiner quotes "That he was always ready to obey the Call of his country"- These words were [illegible]  & with meaning - They should be fairly interpreted, as having some meaning, for Colo. Campbell was a man of no mean capacity & little given to superfluity of words. The 12th day of February 1781, he obeyed the Command of the Marquis LaFayette, a Major Genl of the Continental line, to the command of a Battalion of Militia, and such was the excellence of his Military service, or Colonel Dabney asserts in his certificates, that in the summer & fall of 1781 he was assigned to & had the Command in service of a full regiment. of Militia. The possession of Those brevet Commissions was in itself conclusive evidence of actual service, for they could be given for no other use or purpose - See 10C Henings Statutes or large pager, 310 & 414 I quote the paper from pensions - Also a copy of the Resolution of the Legislature of Va the 2d June 1781, & the
Page 229

Certified Copies of the letter of that date from Govr Jefferson, to Brim Genl Morgan & Major Genl the Marquis Lafayette. The Examiner proceeds to say (I think with importance to Colo. Campbell & to the proof), "The actual or active service Then of the Claimants Husband in the State line terminated according to his own Showing in 1782" - "and that he continued constructively in service to the end of the war"-, The proofs in the case show that he was not constructively only, in Service, but that he was in "actual & active" Service. There is the Commission of Genl Lafayette, for actual service & which could only be given for actual service in the field. It is followed with & by the Certificates of Colo Dabney his Comrade in arms that he was in Command of a regiment of Militia - That certificate of Colo Nicholas those in his belief he (Campbell) served to the close of the war. The testimonial of John Taylor of Caroline that Major Campbell was conscribed in drilling & disbanding the Troops at various places, the particular dates required owes the Inspector. There is his own book of accounts & shows the entries on which made in 1783 he charges the State with 220 days as Major & 128 as Division Inspector. There is the Oath of his wife, good evidence in her own Case under the rules for the benefit of the Act of June 7th 1832. and the Deposition of Mrs Gibbs his Sister a Lady of high Character - (a widow of the Revolution)
Page 230

whose respectability is testified by the Magistrate as it may as well be by every one who knows him, and there it also his letter to Genl William Madison forty one years ago detailing his military services to his country in the Revolution at a time he expected to be in nomination for the office of Adjutant Genl of Virginia. In that letter he refers to several Members of the Legislature to bear testimony to the truth of what he says On such an occasion a bad man wd have had motives to speak the truth when he was seeking a high office addressing a distinguished man, whose aid he expected and that letter was doubtless written as authority for Genl Madison to speak out those military services as therein set forth and where was it to be spoken? Into the ears & to the face of Legislators who had been companions of his services & suffering in the war who could & would have denounced a falsehood & its author.  For the truth of that letter those Legislators, were both his guard & his support. But Colonel Campbell was no bad man.  His integrity, was proverbial (See Judge Marshalls letter & Govr Hamiltons appointment of Col Campbell as Division Inspector) If "Tradition"  under the rules for the law of June 7th 1832 may be useful, how much more preponderating is such a statement from the officer himself made under Such Circumstances?
Your Examiner in the teeth of this mass of evidence having settled to [?] that Campbell never was in actual service after the consolidation
Page 231

of the State troops, [?] to the conclusion that he was only "constructively in service," and by this process of reasoning did direct the case & the claimant into the jaws of a precedent established by you on the application of this [?]  and widow of Capt: Read. Whatever opinion I may hold of that precedent, it is my duty to submit to it as a binding authority, with this single remark that a solitary precedent is regarded as conclusive when against the old Lady, & yet precedents for twenty one years, that favor her claim & demand its payment are disposed of by your ingenious Clerk with the dash of his official pen. He goes farther by opining you that this degraced case was stronger than his capabilities. Now the records show that Capt Read was discharged of service, the 5th of Feby 1781 whilst in [illegible Cowfords ] came your Examiner admits that he was in service in 1782 when the troops were
Consolidated And it cannot be doubted if know evidence be not [illegible  there] and oath a freak of weakness & folly without an object, that Col Camp well remained much comper, not in service only, but in actual service. It is obvious to a court observer that the report under review conformed in strange confusion, what Col Campbell says of his services in the regular army, when he was
seeking half pay for those services, with what
he ask a court & said & is now proved of his
request service in the Militia of the State,
Page 232

under appointment of the Margins formerly a Major Give in the service of the United States & next in bonds of Virginia. And to give effect to this Confirm & raised he states that "the holder of a Militia, commission was subject to be called into service at any time as there is in my opinion no proof whatever that he was 
so called out &c." He (the Exr says that "it is true Mission bears date the 23rd of June 1783 and dates  back to the 12th of February  preceding." Now Col Camp will say that he was appointed the 5th Feby 1781 and what let me ask was the commission he recd?  or the duties conferred & enjoined? I pointed your Clerk to the act of assembly as therein said commission & the book in which he we find time: at page 340 of the tent Vol: Hen Statutes, will be formed the law passed in 1780 for embodying the Militia for active
Service for the defence of the State and provides in these words. That "the militia to be called into service by this act shall be officed & regimented by the Governor with advice of Council aforesaid. The field officers May either be chosen from the Militia officers in the
County from wherein the then shall be drawn, or from such persons as may be in this State, who have gained experience long service in the Continental army" see Col. Marten Continental and in May 1781 page 414 same book, it is enacted in those countys "the
Govnr with advice of Counsel may order out such [illegible hasten] officers as may be approved, to command any in which shall take the field."  and by a Resolution of
-
Page 233

of the Genl Assembly of Va. of the 2nd. of June 1781, Genl Morgan +[and][ Genl Lafayette are authorized to appoint any officers to Command the Volunteers [underlined], Militia [underlined], or others [underlined] [crossed out word] that may be speedily embodied.  See Journal +[and] Govr Jeffersons letters to Morgan +[and] Lafayette, copies of which, I gave your Examiner. These Legislative acts authorised [cross out begins] these [end cross out] appointments of others [underlined], therein the Militia officers [last two words underlined], in the Counties only ['only' double underlined] for actual services [three words underlined], after the Militia shall be then order'd for service {previous four words underlined] -- and the holder of such a Commission does by its possession exhibit Conclusive proof that he was in actual command of Such Troops in the field. At home the ordinary Militia officers were alone in Commission.  In the field those "particular officers of long experience in the Continental army", [crossed out word not legible] were called to the command of Militia, +[and] only ['only' underlined] whilst in Service [insert begins] +[and] to all that major amounts indur'd [insert end] and those read in the history of Virginia, know well that a clamour was raised against Govr Jefferson for his exercise of this identical [last two words underlined] power, which ended in a proposition to unseat him, after he was out of office [last six words underlined]. He showed the laws that gave the power and the [crossed out word not legible] necessities of the Country proved the wisdom of its exercise.  Geo Nicholas (the mover of the impeachment,) was prompt to admit his error, and [insert begins] subsequently [insert ends] on the motion of Mann Pass +[and] Banister resolutions unanimously passed affirmatively in Jeffersons Course.  Colo: Campbell had no Militia [underlined] commission (properly speaking) [underlined words in brackets] until 1790; as I showed the Examiner by producing the Commission itself of that date [last two words underlined].  And the authority under which he commanded, was [crossed out word 'temporary'] special in its character confined to the war [last four words underlined] for
Page 234

12
to the active command of [underline begins] embodied Militia in the field.[underline ends] The presumption both of Law, +[and] effect is [crossed out word not legible] irresistable, that the possession of the brevet [underlined] is conclusive of the fact of active Service under it -- for it is used for Service only; and in that service for the war. tho notice is taken of the depositions of Mrs Gibbs (the sister of Campbells) a Lady of great respectability, who swears that she saw this Commission of Major, before he went to the Siege [insert begins] of York [insert ends] +[and] been the pocket in which he carried it in.  Now this was given before the Commission was formed +[and] where it was believed to be lost __ for repeated applications were made at the pension office by her Power of the H of R +[and] by herself last year, +[and] we were assured no such paper could be found +[and] yet it is now {underlined] found. ' +[and] it is as Mrs Gibbs swore it was, a Major's Commission Such a Commis'n as Colo. Campbells letter to Genl Madison States it to be except that it runs back to the 12th instead of [insert begins] being dated [end insert] the 5th  of Feby. 1781. and this tends greatly to strengthen Mrs Gibbs' evidence, and to coerce credence for what she further States: namely that her Brother (Colo Campbell) was in service when married [last two words underlined], and after marriage [last two words underlined]. It is mortifying to see the contempt with which the corroborating Testimony of Mrs Gibbs is treated , in this Report. A Lady of as high character for piety +[and] intelligence as Most of any part of our Country -- She was the niece of Edm'd. Pendleton's -- the Sister of Colo Campbell +[and] the wife soon after of another officer of Gibson's Regt. possessed with every means of knowing what she swore to
Page 235

13.
and this Campbell too is disposed of in a way equally Summary & incredulous. These Ladies swear  to events that occurred when they were both young. The one immediately after & the other before her marriage. They swore of facts associated with their own marriage. What incident could so touch the memory? Why are they to be disbelieved?  Their testimony is full to the point & clear as it is full. How does your examiner dispose of the statement of Col John Taylor of Carolina?  There is says your Clerk no evidence of the service as "Division Inspector" When Colo Taylor testified to the performance of these very services by Campbell, which such Inspector was [?] to perform! Let it be remembered that John Taylor was the [?] & kinsman of Edw'd Pendleton of Carolina & William Campbell Judge Pendletons nephew & it will readily be seen why Colo. Taylor should well remember Campbells duties & services. Is Colo Dabneys certificate which proves that in the fall & summer of 1781 that Campbell was given (from his excellence as an officer) the command of a Regiment in the field? This too can prove what Col C. says in his letter to Gen'l Madison.  And that letter to Gen'l Madison ought [?] to be sufficient with a deliberating head [marked out: if joined to a sound heart] to prove every act asserted in It.  It bears date about 41 years back and was
Page 236

14
written his friend and neighbour on the occasion of a vacancy in the office of adjutant Gen'l of Virg'a for which Colo. Campbell was a candidate.  Gen'l Madison was expected to nominate him, because James Barbour (Campbells County Delegate) was then Speaker of the Ho. of Delegates.  He refers to members [marked out: who] of that House who served with him in the war.  Many members of that body were in the war.  The letter disclosed with [?] modesty the train of his services.  Even a bad man would not have dared to have spoken falsely under the circumstances.  It was to be read in the ears & to the faces of men, whose personal knowledge could have detected the falsehood? & whose duty it w'd have been to expose & denounce its author.  Those members who had served with Campbell  stood there both as his guard & his support.  His guard against uttering falsehood, his support for the Truth of what he said.  Far from stating too much, he stated too little.  The record shows that his modesty surpassed his merit, by the restraint it imposed on the full disclosure of all his services.
The Report [?] to dispose of the whole claim & all its proofs in the [?], by assuming the position, that the war closed the 22d April 1783 - and that the marriage of this widow took place in August 1783 &  Therefore it was not service during the war.
Had he consulted the files of the office, & the Reports to Congress, he would have found many precedents to falsify this conclusion.  He w'd have found widows whose marriage took place after April 1783 who have been admitted to the benefits of this pension. and he
Page 237

15
would have found officers who were denied lands and commutation because they lost service by death or resignation in August & September 1783. If the precedent of a solitary case (Ian Legrands) be a bar to the claim upon one point, several precedents on other grounds allow it. But let Chancellor Wythe answer him on the question of the close of the war by the act of Virginia. "no man will (says that venerable  & eminent Judge) pretend that the proclamation of the Governor of Virg'a, one of the Thirteen [marked out : states] confederate states could end the war prosecuted by the British King against all those states united."  Seer. Due: 191  Sep 22d Cong.  Nor cud Virginia utter any such declaration She kept up Troops long after her Govr's proclamation and in her allowances of additional lands for revolutionary service, Virginia invariably estimated the 3d of November as the period of the close of the war. The error which makes the [?] of the argument by the Examiner, is in the fact perseveringly adhered to that Campbell was of the State & not of the Continental line. Whilst the archives of the War, the Treasury, & the Pension's officers, and the Journals of Congress show innumerable precedents, and payments, & pensions to the officers of that same regiment, as of the Continental line & in the allowances of Land by the U. S; Campbells own Sec'y is one of them.  It was Congress alone at the epoch of the close of the war that had power to [?] authoritatively the close of that war, both to the Confederate States & to their Continental troops.
Page 238

16
and on this question, Congress has spoken in language too distinct for misapprehension.  By its Solemn Resolves of the 23d day of April 1783, Congress declared "That the time of the men engaged to serve during the war, does not expire until the ratification of the definitive Treaty of peace." By other Resolves of the Body under date of the 26th May 11th June & 9th of August & 26th Sepr 1783 parts of the army were furloughed.  And on the 18th of October 1783 a proclamation issued from Congress discharging the troops from service on the 3d day of November 1783.  Which proclamation further "discharges from further services in the field, the officers decamped and on furlough giving them full permission to return from service, without being longer liable from their present engagements, to be called into command." 
The Att'o Genl gave an opinion that the war claim with the "ratification of the definitive treaty of peace." and his error as to the April 1783, is clearly shown to have been the result of his adopting that date from the interrogating propounded & which states April '83 as the date of the ratification.  Whilst all the records make & show the 14th Jany 1784 the day of [?] ratification.  The certificate of the soldiers for the [?] for service to the close of the war bear date the 4th of Nov'r 1783. the day following that which is named in the proclamation of the 18th of Oct 1783, for the discharge of the troops. Many continued until Jany 1784, as the Register of the Treasury can shew; & Colo John Jameson among others- But the act of Congress of March 2nd 1833 settles This point of [?]
Page 239

17
"Your Examiner proceeds to say [marked out: that] he is aware that it has been asserted within a few years that the war did not in fact end until Nov'r 1783, but that this late [?] construction cannot affect the validity of the decision referred to &c" It never could have been otherwise and the "few years" certainly [?] back as far as April 23rd 1783 when the old Congress spoke with its decision & repeated it Oct'r 18th 1783. When [?] [?] [?] to [?] imperative [?] (as quoted above). The practice of all the departments of the Government of the [?] is to the same effect.  It also has long ago gone into judgment and cannot now be disturbed. To this end Judge Taney and Mr. Butler have each given opinions as Att'o Genl.
The Act of Congress of [marked out: July 11th 1836] March 2nd 1833 before cited is conclusive--any officer who served in the War of the Revolution in the [?] specified in the act of June 7th 1832, (which embraces all of officers & soldiers) "whose marriage took place before the expiration of the last period of his service".  The question really [?].  In this case the testimony proves that this [?] marriage did take place before the expiration of the law & period of her Husbands services and [?] of doing Justice to a [?] & a [?] on the [?] & so [?] service, the arts of an ingenious
Page 240

have been taxed to defeat the claim and which when sifted of its dross, shews a lame and impotent conclusion.
Colo. Campbell was not sunshine patriot & no "Summer day soldier."  He was South and North when the first blow was struck & when the last gun was fired.  He was in that hard winter at Valley forge, where the sufferings of the army were traced on the snow by the blood of its feet; a [?] man, he held the regard of Washington. The affection & friendship of Edw'd Pendleton, Marshall & Madison, The confidence of Lafayette and the respect of Hamilton--and this is shewn by the papers before you.
His widow says that nine daughters of Campbell and herself are now dependent on her. And that she is very poor is known to all.  The Pension laws are all bottomed on a grateful [?] for invaluable service. The Act of June 7th 1832 is particularly required to be executed in a liberal spirit
Page 241

19
allowing pensions for meritorious service in the Revolutionary War.  The Statute Book is full of such reproofs.  They multiply annually and with this sense of Congress so imperatively & repeatedly uttered, your Examiner denounces a claim so just as this, because he thinks it a late [?] construction of the law, to assert, that the war ended on the day the Congress in 1783 declared it by public proclamation to have terminated! & which is expressly reg'd by act of March 2d 1833 passed by Congress on this point.
Submitted with all Respect.
J. S. Barbour

I omitted to remark on the objection to the copy of the acc't of Colo. Campbell.  All the State laws admitted copies.  You r office admits them by decision of the head of it.  Families do not like to part with antient [sic] relicts. The Book is of value & it is a precious possession.  I have no doubt, they w'd bring it here & exhibit it, if it is wished, on condition of its return.  Two Magistrates have examined the acc't certified it & forwarded it to you as a True Copy. & that it is written in 1783 in Colo Campbells own hand is also in proof.  But if here the Examiner Thinks it of no value.
J. S. B.
Page 242

No. 10

19 June 1795 by
to pay [illegible]
Page 243

Bermuda Hundred  the 19 June 1795

Sir

You have herewith a copy of Capt. Cowes final pay-roll from which it will appear than nine dollars too much hath been paid upon it, owing to an error in addition.  It also appears that the balance due to Lumpkin & McAlister in this roll, were retained and yet in a list of deductions furnished me by Mr. Pendleton they do not appear - Viz - deducted by William Nothoban from the [illegible of each pay-roll - 
Captain Moses Green's Company
Sergt. Spencer Wethers                   18
Sergt. Robt. Wilson                           21
Corl. William Tincer                          10
Privates James Wheeler                     6
Private William Redman                     6
Capt. Armo. Greens comp
Benj Blackburn  [illegible]                  6

                                                            67

If you shan to find that these two, were actually deducted, and there shant to not appear to you
Page 244

you any good reason therefore, you may pay them the balance of Am'c dollars each lot will be  allowed your Am'c dollars of which Mr Pendleton will have to pay or, it will be species that you rec'd 9 Dlls too much , to the Sum of 547 Dlls -- as Raws __ proportion of the due bill __ for Supposing Lumpkin P McAlister paid. ___ the whole and official __ roll, should be only 975 __ instead of 984 _ wch__ I now consider as paid. ___
I submit it also to you __ if you please to say whether those deducted from Mister P A -- Greens Company __ ought to be paid. ___ You should be able to Judge now whether they actually recd more pay than is stated in their final pay _ rolls, __. and whether they were entitled to Same pay as the [illegible word] of their respective companies. ___ Also __ Mr Pendleton J M. Uridole, will no doubt be able to advance them funds, +[and] you can more readily give them this information than I can ___  and, I will not question your disposition to do it. ___ I will thank you also if convenient __ to inform them, as well as Roebuck __ that if they can't Send in their rect rolls by the time I before stated _ or by the 15th of next month at farthest __ I expect to be at just over the mountains until late in September.___ They may be enclosed at May
Page 245

time by private safe applys __ to care Colo. Carryton an John Hopkins esqr
I am Dear Sir; with very Sincere esteem +[and] respect
Yr Mo. Ob __Serv
Mett Heth

Colo William Campbell
Orange
Page 246

Mrs Susan Campbell
Affidavit
made Jany 10, 1852


[the following entries were made upside down and backwards lower on page]

Susan Campbell
Evidence 

+
Page 247

State of Virginia
County of Orange

To wit
This day Mrs Susan Campbell widow of the late Colo. William Campbell, who was an officer of Colo. George Gibson's regiment in the War of the Revolution;  made oath before me a Justice of the Peace for the County +[and] State aforesaid, that in the month of September last, she was informed that it was written in her declaration (made many years ago & [and] not in the Pension office at Washington,) that her said husband had never been in actual service after the surrender of Cornwallis at  York _ Town __ She is wholly unconscious of ever making such a declaration, & [and] it is entirely inconsistent with the written letters, accounts & [and] other statements, made by her said Husband in his lifetime  +[and] to which she now refers __.  That declaration was prepared by a gentleman of high character who was her friend, +[and] by no doubt wroth the declaration aforesaid according to his belief of the facts at the time.  And from the confidence which she justly reposed in that gentleman, she supposes +[and] now believes that she subscribed the declaration aforesaid without an examination of it:  or it is possible, that the said declaration may have referred to her Husband's service in Gibson's regiment only, +[and] not to his other service, as set forth by him, in the documents before referred to __    She was then in feeble health & [and] was also deaf, the gentleman who wroth the declaration was likewise deaf.  she believes the mistake must have grown out of his misunderstanding what she said, +[and] insists on her right now to correct it ___   The said Mrs Campbell, (widow)
Page 248

aforesaid) now solemnly repeats an oath, that when she was married to her said Husband, that he the said William Campbell was dressed in his Military dress or regimentals, +[and] that he was in actual service in Virginia after his said marriage with her.   And I further certify that I have carefully examined Mrs Campbell (the widow aforesaid) on this point & [and] having fully explained to her this affidavit, to which she has solemnly sworn in due form of Law.  I give full credit to what she now states. ____  Given under my hand and seal this 10th day of January 1852
John S. Cowherd. J.P.  [the word 'seal' encircled by a line having inward and outward loops]
Page 249

The Committee on Revolutionary pensions to Whom was referred the petition of Mrs Susan Campbell of Orange County Virginia have had the Same under Consideration +[and] Submit the following report --
The petitioner is the widow of Col: William Campbell who died in October 1823 [cross out begins] +[and] whose marriage [end cross out] [insert begins] +[and] [insert ends] to whom she was married on the 19th of August 1783.  She has been admitted to the benefits of the Act of Congress approved the 7th of July 1838 +[and] she claims to be [cross out begins] admitted to the [cross out ends] entitled to the pension allowed widows by the Law of July 4 1836.  The third section of the Act last mentioned (under which this claim is made) provides, that if any person who served in the War of the Revolution in the manner specified in the Act of Janu 7. 1832 have died leaving a widow whose marriage took place before the expiration of the last period of his service, such Widow Shall be entitled to receive during the time she may remain as married the annuity or pension which might have been allowed to her husband by virtue of Said Act if living at the time it was passed.
Page 250

2

The Act of June 7. 1832 to which the Act of July 4  1836 is supplementary provides that each of the surviving officers Non Commissioned officers, Musicians, Soldiers, +[and] Indian Spies who shall have served in the Continental line or State troops, volunteer or militia, at one or more times, a period of two years during the War of the revolution, and Who are Not entitled to any benefit under the Act of May 15.  1828 be authorised to receive the amount of his full pay in the line according to his rank not exceeding the pay of a Captain in Said line to Commence March 4.  1831  +[and] Continue during his natural life
Col Campbell having died in the Year 1823 was of course not entitled to any benefit under the Act of 1828,  It appears very Satisfactorily by certificates of officers of higher grades submitted to the Committee that Col Campbell was an officer of Great Merit +[and] there is no doubt from the evidence also submitted that he rendered important services during the War +[and] for a much longer period than is required by the Act of 1832.  He should therefore have been entitled of having to a pension under that
Page 251

3
My 29/52
These papers missing when it came to my hands
Act commencing on the 4th. [crossed out word unintelligible] of March 1831.  By the Supplement of 1836, as above Stated, his widow is entitled to the same pension during the time she remains unmarried +[and] Commencing at the Same date, provided her marriage took place [underline begin] during the war +[and] prior [underline end] to the [underline begin] last period [underline ends] of her [underline begins] husband's service. [underline ends]
The application of the petitioner to the Commissioner of Pensions for a pension under this act of 1836 was refused, And a pension allowed under the Act of July 7 1838 Commencing March 4, 1836 for five years, now extended by [cross out begins] the act of [cross out ends] sundry subsequent Acts to a pension during Widowhood.  The claim Now is therefore for the five years pension [insert begins] refused her by the Commissioner [insert ends] commencing on the 4 Mar 1831 +[and] ending on the 4 March 1836.  This the Committee think she is entitled to receive.
The [crossed out illegible word] only questions in the case as it appears to your Committee are __ Did the Marriage take place during the war of the revolution?  [crossed out word not legible]  Was it prior to the last period of the husbands service therein?
By the report of the examining clerk at the pension of-
Page 252

4 

-fice, it appears that some question was made as to the time when the war closed and it seems to be insisted that the date of the Marriage (August 19. 1783) is subsequent to the the close of the war.  This is a mistake as will appear by examination of the papers relating to the treaty of Paris found in G W. S. Stat: at large  L +[and] B. Edition pages 54. 58. 80 +[and] the Journals of Congress 4 vol.  page 323
The provisional articles for a treaty of Paris between this Government +[and] Great Britain were signed on the 30th of November 1782 +[and] therein it is stipulated, that the treaty is not to be concluded until terms of peace are agreed upon between Great Britain +[and] France
The armistice declaring a cessation of hostilities was signed on the 20th of January 1783. The definitive treaty of Paris was signed by the Commissioners of the respective Armies on the third of September 1783, +[and] the same was ratified +[and] proclaimed by Congress on the 14th of January 1784.  It is submitted that the war did not close until the [crossed out word] ratification of the treaty by Congress.  This appears to have been the opinion of Congress in 1783, (4 Journals of Congress 193) April 23rd when [crossed out word 'they'] it was asked
Page 253

5
"that in the opinion of Congress the time of the men engaged to serve [underlined begins] during the war [underline ends] does not expire until the ratification of the definitive treaty of Paris."
It was also the opinion of Mr Wirt Attorney General, as appears by his opinion in 1825 (found in the first volume of the opinions of Attorneys General page 459) [crossed out word 'in'] which concludes as follows __  "upon the Whole I am of the opinion [underline begins] that war existed until the treaty of Paris was ratified; [end underline] or in other words, that the war of revolution did not terminate till April 1783". This Attorney General is obviously mistaken as to [crossed out word] the date of ratification of the treaty, but his whole argument is intended to prove that the ratification concluded the war. [crossed out phrase not entirely legible]
If the war did not terminate till [crossed out word 'after'] January 1784 (the marriage having taken place August. 19. 1783) the only remaining question is whether Col Campbell served at all in the interval between those dates.
The evidence that he did so Serve is Satisfactory to the Committee
Page 254

6
It appears that Col. Campbell after serving in Gibson's regiment under Gen Washington in the Northern [crossed out word] army [cross out begins] in the years 1776 , 1777  7 [cross out ends] as Captain from 1777 till the autumn of 1780 became Supernumerary for by the expiration of the time for which his men enlisted +[and] for want of men to command. He then returned to Virginia. In the month of January [February crossed out] 1781 the Legislature of that state by resolution authorised Gen. Lafayette +[and] Gen Morgan to Commission [crossed out word 'to'] such Supernumerary officers as desired Service to command [crossed out word 'in'] the militia.  Col. C.  received by authority of Gen Lafayette from Col. Towle a brevet Commission as Major to the Second regiment of militia in his [crossed out word 'Brigade'] (Col. Towle's) Brigade. [crossed out words 'How long +[and]'] but what were [crossed out word 'the'] his services [crossed out 'of Col Campbell'] under this Commission +[and] how continuous does not appear from the evidence Submitted. The Nature of the Commission however shows that he must have gone into Active Service, +[and] the lapse of time sufficiently accounts for the want of evidence of living Witnesses of the Continuity of the service.  This [insert begins] is not material as the [insert ends] point is to show service after August 19th. 1783.
+[and] It appears from a receipt of Presley Surf Ltn of Light Infantry dated October 21. 1781 given to Col Campbell for two horses impressed from Warner Lewis that he was in service at that date
Page 255

7 
The first evidence on this point to which the Committee will refer is a warrant [?] Dec 24, 1832 by this Government to the heirs of Col Campbell for three hundred acres of bounty land under the resolution of Congress of September 16, 1776 vix "Resolved that 88 battallions [sic] be enlisted as soon as possible to serve during the present war; & that each State furnish them [?] in the following proportions &c that Congress make provision for granting land, in the following proportions to the officers & soldier who shall so engage in the service & continue therein [marked out: during the war] until the close of the war or until discharged by Congress &c." Ad there is no evidence that Col Campbell was discharged by Congress the Committee submit that the land warrant issued under this resolution is a recognition by the Government of Col Campbell as an officer who served [marked out: during the war] till the close of the war.
It further appears by a sworn copy from Col Campbell's book of annuity that he has charged the State of Virginia in the year 1783 for 220 days pay  as Major of Militia & 128 days as Inspector to [?] & for subsistence for those periods. Considering
Page 256

8
the testimonials submitted to the Committee of the high character of Col Campbell as an officer & a gentleman, it is impossible to doubt that these services were actually rendered.
But further evidence submitted, The Committee have before them the affidavits of the Petitioner & Mrs Gibbs the Sister of Col Campbell to the fact of his being in the Service at the time of the Marriage & of his continuing in it afterwards.  Of these ladies Gov. Barbour writes to the Commission that he will vouch for their "unquestionable honesty."
Mrs Gibbs states in her affidavit that she well remembers the marriage "that she was then Young & her memory good & she retains a distinct recollection of that Marriage and many of its [?]. Her brother was married in his Military dress or uniform, that he was called Major Campbell & wore the regimentals of Major as she believes."
[marked out: She remembers that after her brother's Marriage she was again in] The Witness states further that she remembers [marked out: his] Col Campbell's return from the army after the siege of
Page 257

9
York & the Surrender of Cornwallis & that after his marriage "In [?] his fathers house for the [?] remain away some time & at his return home, some of his brother officers of the Army returned with him & this occurred on several occasions" and Mr has a full & distinct recollection that this happened after his marriage with the present widow who was his only wife"
After a lawful examination of the case, the Committee are Satisfied that the petitioner is entitled to a pension under the Act of July 4, 1836 & therefor recommend the passage the accompanying bill granting petitioner a pension under the Acts of 1832 & 1836 [marked out: from] Commencing March 4, 1831 & ending March 4, 1836.
By order of Comm'ee
G. H. Brown
Page 258

Record Division.

August 3, 1908.

Mrs. W. Carlton Adams,
#744 Tate Avemie,
Memphis, Tennessee,
Madam:

In reply to your letter dated the 24" and received the 27 ultimo, you are advised that from the papers in the claim Wid. File No. 4179, it
appears that William Campbell entered the service in 1775 as a Sergeant in Captain Gregory Smith's company, Seventh Virginia regiment; in 1776 was a Second Lieutenant in First Virginia regiment, and Spring of 1777 First Lieutenant and Captain in Colonel George Gibbons First Virginia regiment. February 12, 1781 was Major in Second Regiment, 2 Brigade Virginia Militia and August 1781, Lieutenant Colonel in same Militia, served to end of
War. Appointed Lt. Col. of Orange Co Va. Militia June 25, 1790 and also appointed Major of U. S. Infantry January 10, 1799,
He married in King and Queen County, Virginia, August 19, 1783 Susan Pierce. He died October 23 or 29, 1823. His widow was allowed pension on an application executed September 19, 1833 while a resident of Orange County Virginia, aged seventy three years. She died in Orange County, Virginia, March 18, 1852. Their children were Catharine H. Dulaney; Mildred F. Campbell; Arria Welch; America W. Campbell, Eliza F. Campbell; Mary B. T. Campbell; Susan Graves; John p. Campbell; Joseph W. Campbell;
William Campbell; Virginia Maury; and Frederick W. Campbell.
Very respectfully,
Acting Commissioner.
Page 259

Rev. War Section.  AWF

May 1, 1923.

Major Robt. B. Shackelford,
Headquarters 312th Medical Regt.,
Office of the Chief of Staff,
Poland & Dauphine Sts.,
New Orleans, Louisiana.
Sir;

In response to your letter of the 14th ultimo, I have to advise you that from the papers in the Revolutionary War pension claim W. 4149, it appears that William Campbell entered the service in 1775 as a Sergeant in Captain Gregory Smith's company, Seventh Virginia regiment; in 1776 was a Second Lieutenant in First Virginia regiment, and Spring of 1777 First Lieutenant and Captain in Colonel George Gibsons' First Virginia regimen.  February 12, 1781 was Major in Second regiment, Second Brigade Virginia militia, and August 1781 Lieutenant Colonel in same militia, served to end of War. Appointed Lieutenant Colonel of Orange County, Virginia militia, June 25, 1790 and also appointed Major of U. S. Infantry January 10, 1799.
He married in King and Queen County, Virginia, Aug-
Page 260

ust 19, 1783, Susan Pierce. He died October 23 or 29, 1823. His widow was allowed pension on her application executed September 19, 1838, while a resident of Orange County, Virginia, aged seventy three years. She died in Orange County, Virginia, March 13, 1852.
Their children were Catharine H. Dulany; Mildred P. Campbell; Arria Welch; America W. Campbell; Eliza F. Campbell; Mary B. T. Campbell; Susan Graves; John P. Campbell, Joseph W. Campbell, William Campbell; Virginia mar. Hills Maury; and Frederick W. Campbell.

Respectfully,
Commissioner.

[?] by Miss Wilson
Page 261

Rev. and 1812
Wars Section
AWF/eel

January 4, 1930

Mr. Alan W. Graves
Haverford
Pennsylvania
Dear Sir:
I advise you from the papers in the Revolutionary War pension claim, W. 4149, it appears that William Campbell entered the service in 1775 as a sergeant in Captain Gregory Smith's Company, Seventh Virginia Regiment; in 1776, was a Second Lieutenant in First Virginia Regiment, and in the spring of 1777, First Lieutenant and
Captain in Colonel George Gibson's First Virginia Regiment.
February 12, 1781, was Major in Second Regiment, Second Brigade Virginia Militia, and August, 1781, Lieutenant Colonel in same militia, and served to the end of the war.
He was appointed Lieutenant Colonel of Orange County, Virginia Militia, June 25, 1790 and also appointed Major of U. S. Infantry January 10, 1799.
He died October 23 or 29, 1823.
The soldier married August 19, 1783, in King and Queen County, Virginia, Susan Pierce.
She was allowed pension on her application executed September 19, 1838, while a resident of Orange County, Virginia, aged seventy-three years.
She died March 13, 1852, in Orange County, Virginia.
Their children were:
Catharine H. Dulaney; Mildred P. Campbell; Arria Welch;
Page 262

America W. Campbell; Eliza F. Campbell; Mary B. T. Campbell; Susan Graves; John P. Campbell; Joseph W. Campbell; William Campbell; Virginia, who married Hill Maury, and Frederick W. Campbell.
No relationship is shown between General William Campbell, the hero of King's Mountain, and the above noted soldier.
Very truly yours
E. W. MORGAN
Acting Commissioner.
Page 263

Rev. and 1812
Wars Section.

December 10, 1923.

Mrs. N. M. Jordan, Jr.,
Tennille, Ga.
Madam;

I have to advise you that from the papers in the Revolutionary War pension claim, W. 4149, it appears that William Campbell entered the service in 1775 as a sergeant in Captain Gregory Smith's Company, Seventh Virginia Regiment; in 1776 was a Second Lieutenant in First Virginia Regiment, and Spring of 1777 First Lieutenant and Captain in Colonel George Gibson's First Virginia Regiment.  February 12, 1781 was Major in Second
Regiment, Second Brigade Virginia Militia, and August 1781 Lieutenant Colonel in same militia, served to end of war.
He was appointed Lieutenant Colonel of Orange County, Virginia Militia June 25, 1790 and also appointed Major of U. S. Infantry January 10, 1799. He died October 23 or
29, 1823.
Soldier married in King and Queen County, Virginia,
Page 264

August 19, 1783, Susan Pierce, she was allowed pension on her application executed September 19, 1838, while a resident of Orange County, Virginia, aged seventy three years. She died in Orange County, Virginia March 13, 1852.
Their children were Catharine H. Dulany; Mildred P. Campbell; Arria Welch; America W. Campbell; Elisa F. Campbell; Mary B. T. Campbell; Susan Graves; John P. Campbell; Joseph H. Campbell; William Campbell; Virginia [marked out: Moury] mar. Hill Maury; and Frederick W. Campbell.

Respectfully,
Commissioner.
Page 265

April 26, 1935
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
William Campbell-W.4149
BA-J/AWF

Mr. John C. Hubbard
Weimar
Texas
Dear Sir:

Reference is made to your letter in which you request the Revolutionary War records of Samuel Campbell , 2nd and 1st Lieutenant of the Virginia troops, and died August 27, 1778, and William Campbell, Captain of the Virginia troops.
Revolutionary War data furnished by this office are obtained from claims for pension and bounty land made to the United States, based upon service of soldiers in that war. A search of the records fails to show such claims on file on account of the Revolutionary War services of a Samuel Campbell, as described by you.
The Revolutionary War record of William Campbell which follows was obtained from the papers on file in pension claim, W. 4149, based upon his service in that war.
The date and place of birth of William Campbell are not shown in the claim, nor are the names of his parents given.
He was at a "military school" in 1774 and a part of 1775, when he volunteered and was a sergeant in Captain Gregory Smith's 7th Virginia regiment was in the battle of Gwyn's Island, was appointed in the fall of 1776, and lieutenant in the 1st Virginia regiment, and in the spring of 1777 appointed 1st lieutenant and later captain in Colonel George Gibson's 1st Virginia regiment, wintered at Valley Forge. He was appointed, February 12, 1781, Major in the 2nd Regiment, 2nd Brigade Virginia militia was at the siege
Page 266

of Yorktown. He was appointed, June 25, 1790, Lieutenant Colonel of Orange County, Virginia Militia, and appointed, January 10, 1799 Major of United States Infantry.
William Campbell married August 19, 1783 in King and Queen County, Virginia, Susan (Susanna) Pierce. He died October 23, 1823.
The widow, Susan Campbell, was allowed pension on her application executed September 19, 1838, at which time she was seventy-three years of age and a
resident of Orange County, Virginia. She died March 13, 1852 in Orange County, Virginia.
The following children survived their mother:
Catharine H. Dulaney
Mildred Campbell
Arria Welch
America W. Campbell
Eliza F. Campbell
Mary B. T. Campbell
Susan Graves
John P. Campbell
Joseph W. Campbell
William Campbell
Virginia Maury, whose husband was Hill Maury
Frederick W. Campbell.
Mrs. Elizabeth Gibbs, "own" sister of the soldier, William Campbell, stated that she was born in King and Queen County, Virginia, that she was present at the marriage of her brother and Susan Pierce; the said Mrs. Elizabeth Gibbs was a resident of Madison County, Virginia in 1851 and was then the widow of Captain Churchill Gibbs. Judge Edmund Pendleton of Virginia was the uncle of the above mentioned William Campbell.
Very truly yours
A. D. HILLER
Executive Assistant to the Administrator
Page 267

May 13, 1936
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
WILLIAM CAMPBELL
W. 4149
BA - J/MMHF: MLB

Mr. J. A. Stewart
Louisville Axe & Tool Company
4780 Crittenden Drive
Louisville, Kentucky

Dear Sir:

Reference is made to your letter in which you request photostatic copies of the papers on file in the Revolutionary War claim for pension of Susan Campbell, of Orange County, Virginia, based upon service of her husband, Captain William Campbell.
In a search of the Revolutionary War pension records, it has been found that the papers to which you refer are very frail indeed. Of course the process of making photostatic copies necessitates extra handling which is injurious to such very old documents.
As official reports from this office have been accepted by various historical, genealogical and patriotic societies as authentic, such a report has been prepared for you and is enclosed herewith. The data incorporated in this report were found upon a very careful examination of all papers on file in the pension claim, W. 4149, of Susan or Susanna Campbell based upon service of her husband, William Campbell, in the Revolutionary War. It is hoped that this report will be just what you need in your research.
It may be stated that should you be in this city, you may examine and collect data from this claim for pension by calling at this office. These records are located at present in the Navy Building, 19th and Constitution Avenue, Wing 8, Room 1851.
Very truly yours
A. D. HILLER
Executive Assistant
to the Administrator