Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File W. 24139, Adam Vigal, Md.
Page 1

(8-1776)

SERVICE
Md.

Vigal, Adam
or Vicall
Martin, Ann

NUMBER
W.24139
B.L.Wt. 533-160-55

CONTENTS
Former widow
Page 2

6644 [illegible]
Ann Martin widow of Adam Vigal
Revolutionary War
Now a grandmother
Capt. Benjin Spyker
Col. John Gumby
7th Md. Regt
[illegible]
Page 3

District of Columbia 1165
Ann Martin who was widow of Adam Vigal who was a private in the Revolution
Inscribed on the Roll at the rate of 80 Dollars per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March 1843
Certificate of Pension issued the 28th day of July 1842 and sent to JP Keller, ordinance office
[Act of March 3, 1843]
recorded in book A, Vol. 1, Page 242
Page 4

Blacked out page
Page 5

District of Columbia
Washington County
On this Seventeenth day of March AD One thousand eight hundred and fifty five, personally appeared before me, a Justice of the Peace within & for the County & district aforesaid Ann Martin, aged [illegible] of ninety years, a resident of said County & District who being duly sworn according to law declared that their the widow of Adam Vigal, deceased, who was a soldier in the Revolutionary War with Great Britain which terminated 1783.
She further states that her memory does not evade her to state the time when her said husband enlisted on [illegible] he served & when he was discharged but that all the papers and information she had [illegible] the subject, as well as proof of her marriage and widowhood, will be found as the file of the Pension office, and was filed by her at the time she obtained a pension under the Scot of Congress, [illegible] Pension to Widows of Revolutionary Soldiers , who had married a [illegible]. She further declares that she is now a widow, and receives from the United States a Pension in the rate of Eighty dollars per annum.
She makes this declaration for the purpose of obtaining the Bounty land to which she may be entitled under the Act approved. 
March 3, 1855
Ann Martin 
We, William Miles and Elizabeth Vigal, residents of the District & county aforesaid, [illegible] our oaths, declare that their foregoing declaration
Page 6

Was signed and acknowledged by Ann Martin in out presence and that we believe, from the appearance and statements of the applicant that she is the identical person she represents herself to be. 
William Miles
Elizabeth Vigal
The foregoing declaration and affidavits were [illegible] and [illegible] before me on the date and year above written; and I certify that I know the affiants to be credible persons; that the claimant is the person she represents herself to be, and that I have no interest in this claim.
SC Dum
Page 7

8.407 crossed out

Ann Martin
formerly widow of
Adam Vigal
S. Columbia
"Wid:"

M. Keller
Ordinance Office
Page 8

Declaration
In order to obtain the benefit of the act of July 1838 and of the Act of 23 August 1842:

District of Columbia: 

On this 2d day of September 1842, personally appeared before the undersigned Chief Judge of the Circuit Court of the said district Ann Martin, a resident of Washington City in said district, aged between 73 and 74 years who being first duly sworn according to law, doth, in her oath, make the following declaration in order to obtain the benefit of the pension made of the Act of Congress passed July 7th 1838 and the Act explanatory of said Act passed August 23 1842; That she was married to Adam Vigel who enlisted in the year 1777 and served as a Grand [illegible] or Officer for 3 years in the Maryland line. She further declares that she cannot through uncertainty recollection the precise date of her marriage with said Adam but that it was within 5 to 7 years after the first pease with Great Britain, and she solemnly asserts that it was before the year 1794 because if her first born child, which child about 3 years ago was now living, she would be about 51 years of age; and she declares that the said child was born upward of the year after her marriage with said Adam; She further declares that her said husband Adam Vigle died about the year 1789 or 1800 as will appear by the testimony heretofore filed by her; that she afterwards married Mordecai Martin who died about the year 1826; that she still remains a widow, as this will appear by
Page 9

Reference to her papers heretofore or files; and she further declares that she has no other documentary evidence than what she has filed in the pension office, and that a valued relic, in the testament in which was recorded the dates of her marriage and birth of her first children was accidentally lost by one of her neices, many years ago. 

Sworn as above, and subscribed by the said Ann Martin, before me. Mr. Granch. 

Her Mark Ann Martin
Page 10

Prince George’s County, To Wit:

I hereby certify that I well knew Adam Vigle in the American Army, in the Revolutionary War, that he was an excellent Gun Smith, and belonged to the traveling Forges. Given under hand of Mr. William J. Stephen’s of Putnam County in the State of Georgia, a Lieutenant in the third Regiment of the Virginia Division of the American Army in the Revolutionary War, this 27th day of September 1824. 
WJ Stephens
Prince George’s County, to Wit
Be to known that on this 27th dat of September 1824 before the subscriber one of the State of Maryland’s Justices of the Peace in and for the County aforesaid and personally appeared William J. Stephens of Putnam County and State of Georgia and made Oath on the Holy Evangelist [illegible] God that the matter continued the above Certificate is true. 
Sworn before John Anderson
Page 11

WJ Stephens
Abbr
“Gunsmith to travelling Forges”
Page 12

Blacked out page
Page 13

Blacked out page
Page 14

Maryland, Montgomery County, to Wit: 
Be it remembered, that on this third day of December in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and thirty eight before one, one of the Justices of the Peace, of the State, for the county aforesaid, appears Benjamin Gaither, and [illegible] and saith that he was acquainted with Adam Vigle, and that he departed this life on his premises, in Montgomery County, MD, about the year A.D. 1802 and after his death, he avowed his widow, Ann Vigle to Mrs. Barns’s who received her as her daughter this deponant further saith that he understood that the said Adam Vigle served the Revolutionary War in the Maryland line, as an artificer, and that he knows he was a Black Smith by occupation when he was acquainted with him. 
Sworn to, and subscribed by the said deponant, before me. Abrasion Thrift, J.O. 

/s/ Benjamin Gaither
Page 15

1 Sept 1842 
M. Allison
[stamp] Annapolis MD Aug 30

J. L. Edwards, Esq.
Comm, of Pensions
Washington City D.C.
Page 16

Land Office, Annapolis
30th August 1842
Sir, 
Your letter of the 27th [illegible] was received. In reply, I have to state that by the [illegible] rolls of the Revolution in this Office, it appears that Adam Wykoll or Vycall, enlisted as a private, in Capitain Spykars Company, of the 7th Maryland Reg. For the term of three years, on the 2nd day of July, 1777, and was discharged the 2nd day of July, 1780, and paid. This is all the evidence the records afforded of his service. I find his name upon no record as an artificer. I have looked at the refolation of the General Afoombly of this State, MP 53 of December [illegible] 1832 which places Ann Martin, the widow of Adam Wykell or Vycall upon the pension roll of Maryland, and she is allowed only the half pay of a private under that refolation. In your letter, the name is spelt Vigal, upon the roll it is entered “Wykell or Vycall” and is so spelt in the refolation above referred to. 
The Pay lists of the Army, which I have carefully examined show nothing of the pay of an artificean, I am therefore, inclined to supposed, that he was pleased on the same footing as a private soldier of the Continental Army. Adam Wykell or Vycall, did not obtain bounty land from Maryland for his Revolutionary services. 
I am very respectfully,
Your [illegilbe]
/s/ G. G. Brewer
Page 17

8119
Ann Martin
former widow of Adam Vigal
District of Columbia

"H"
Page 18

Treasury Department
3rd Audits Office
18th February 1846
Sir, 
I have had the honor of receiving your letter of the 17th instant, enclosing some old papers in relation to Adam Vigle, and from which it would appear he was in service during the revolutionary war, as an Artificer, and as such, I infer, from the papers, that he was attached to the Maryland line. 
The papers endorsed by you, are herewith [illegible] and in relation thereto, and in reply to your letter, I have to state that the revolutionary records on file in this Office, do not show any thing to be due to “Adam Vigle for pay or otherwise”. Indeed I have not been able to find his name among the soldiers of the Maryland line of the Revolutionary Army. 
It may be proper to mention, that if the records showed any thing to be due to Mr. Vigle, for his services if could not be now paid, because all claims, for revolutionary services, have been barred payment, but law, a great many years since. 
With great Respect, 
[illegible signature]
Hon. [illegible]
House of Reps. U. States
Page 19

Washington, July
Has E. Hearth, Esq.
Commissioner of Pensions
Sir: I beg leave to call your attention to the enclosed additional evidence, from the Department of State, in support of the claim of Ann Martin, widow of Adam Vycall, as an Artificean of the Maryland Line, in the Revolutionary War. 
The evidence was on file, especially the certificate of Lieut. W. J. Stephen’s, of the 3rd Reg. Md Division, states that Adam Vycall served in the war as an Artificer or Gunsmith, and that he belonged to the Travelling Forges. 
The certificate oft the Department of State, is specifically explicit as to the date of service. “The roll of of Capt. Bej. Spykers Copmany, dated White Plains, 9th Sept. 1778, has the following [illegible] under apposite the name of Adam VIcall. 
“Adam VIcall - Time engaged to serve three years.  - On command.”
It is concluded that he served until the 2d July, 1780 but you will deduce from the certificate of the Department of State that his name was never afterwards returned, from the 9th Sept.1778, as belonging to Capt. Spyker’s Company, as a Private
Page 20

Of the 7th Maryland Regiment. The word “on command” will give the dates necessary to supply the omission in the evidence of Lieut. W. J. Stephens. 
I have the honor to be, [illegible]
Very respectfully, 
Yours this [illegible]
[signature: W. E. Kennaugh]
Page 21

Edwards, Esq. 
Commissioner. Of Pension
Jonas P. Kellar
Page 22

Washington, Sept. 20, 1868
L. L. Edward’s, Esq. 
Com. of Pensions
Sir, I enclose the declaration of Ann Martin fr the award of her pension under the Act of Feb 2d 1868; and request that her certificate, when issued, be addressed to my care. 
I am Sir, Respectfully, 
Yours officer, Jonas P. Kellar
[illegible] Office
Page 23

Pension Office, June 27, 1854
Sir, 
Herewith you will receive the argument in the care of Adam Vycall which you left with me in August last. It got among some papers relating to half pay cases I was there examining, and was filed away with them by the Clerk. I found it by accident this [illegible]
I remain yours [illegible]
[signature: L. P. Waldo]
Page 24

Washington 13 May 1843
J. L. Edwards, Esq.
Comm. Of Pensions, 
Sir, 
I [illegible] herewith the declaration of Ann Martin, Widow of Adam Vigal, in order to obtain an extension of her [illegible] of her pension under the Act of 3d March 1843; and have to request that the Certificate , with issued, may be addressed to my care. 
I am [illegible]
You [illegible] servant, 
Jonas P. Kellar
Page 25

Pension Office
October 21st 1852
Sir, 
Adam Vigal or Vycall enlisted as a private soldier in the Maryland service during the Revolution, and seems to have continued under the same engagement to the close of his term. No matter to what his duties, he was afeigured by his officers, whether to those of a private in the field or a blacksmith or gunsmith in the shop, the terms of his enlistment were not varied by his occupation, and he was still rated and paid as a private, and his pension must be based upon that pay. Congress promised higher only to those who enlisted as artificers - no those tho, having enlisted as privates, were transferred to Artificers’ duty, and hence no higher pension can be allowed. 
Very respectfully, 
Your Obe. Servt, 
(Signed) JEHeath
Hon. Comms. Of Pensions
Page 26

Serf. Of State
“D.W”
Page 27

Department of State
Washington, July 12 1837
W.e. Kennaugh, Esq.
Washington
Sir: 
An examination of the Washington Papers have been made, as requested in your letter of the 8t in search, for evidence of the service of Adam Vycall or Wykell, as an artificer of Capt. Spyker’s company, during a part of the Revolutionary War; with the following result: -
The name of Adam Vicall occurs in a “Roll of Capt. Benjamin Spyker’s Company, 7th Maryland Regiment, commanded by Colonel. Sn Gunby, White Plains, 9th Sept 1778,” with the following memoranda opposite his name: -
Page 28

“Adam VIcall - Time engaged to serve - 3 years. On command.” It may be added, that, of fifty names on this roll. There are by six, besides that of VIcall, designated as “on command although there is no allusion to artifices’ service in this return. 
No return of Maryland Artifices has been found, nor, in any other return of Capt. Spyker’s Company does the name of Vicall appear. 
I am, Sir, respectfully,
Your obedient servant. 
Danl Webster
Page 29

44
Washington
Oct 27, 1837
Vespasian Ellis
Appeals from the decision of this Comm. Of Pensions in the case of Adam Vigal or Vicall’s widow, an appellant for [illegible] of Pension.
Captain Triplett will please report in this case.
PM [illegible] 4, 1854
Ref. To Comm Pensions for a Report. 
Dept. [illegible]
Page 30

Washington Oct 29th 1851
Hon. AHH Stuart
Sec. Interior
Sir: 
I respectfully ask an appeal from the [illegible] division, given 21st instant, in the case of Adam Vigal or Vycall, where widow claims an invoice of pension. The enlisted paper refer to the claim is filed the more [illegible] to refer to it at the pension office. 
Very respectfully, 
Your ob servant
Vespasian Ellis
Atty for Kennaugh
Page 31

8119
Ann Martin
Formerly widow of Adam Vigal
Dist Col
Admitted
Private 2 yrs [illegible]
Capt. Spyker Col. 
7 Md Reg’t
Died in 1800
Act of July, 38
J.P.
W. Kellar
[illegible]
Page 32

Pension Office
December 21, 1841
Madam,
The papers which you handed to me this morning are herewith returned. For the reasons given in the letter of the 3d Auditor to the Hon. W. Goode, your claim to pay on account of the alleged service of the late Adam Vigle cannot be admitted. 
It appears from these papers that M. Vigle was a blacksmith during the revolutionary war, and belonged to a travelling forge. Whether he was a soldier of the Maryland line, I cannot say, as we have no Maryland notes in this Office. But if it were clearly shown that he was a soldier, you could not draw a pension under either of the widow’s pension laws, because your second marriage would prevent you from receiving a pension under the act of July 7, 1838, and as you were not married till 1788, three years after the war ended, you would not be entitled to the benefits of the act of July 4, 1836. 
I am very respectfully, 
Your obed servt
J. L. Edwards
M. Ann Martin
Present
Page 33

Kennaugh
Page 34

Washington July 16 1831
Jas E Heath, Esq.
Commissioner Pensions
Sir: I have to request a re-examination of the evidence now on file in your office, in support of the claim of the Mrs. Ann martin, widow of Adam Vigal, pensioner under the Act of 1838 at $80 per annum. 
The evidence submitted, and to be admitted will fully prove the claimant’s husband, Adam Vical, served two years or more in that capacity, in the  seventh regiment, Maryland Line. 
I have the honor to me, 
Respectfully, 
Your ob servant, 
W.B. Kennaugh
Atty
Page 35

Adjutant General’s Office
Washington Sept. 24, 1852
Sir: 
I have received your communication of the 21st ins submitting for consideration the following questions to wit: 
“1st. In what capacity or occupation would you deem seven mem. Of a muster roll of fifty men, with the words ‘on command’ placed opposite to each name?”
“2d. In what capacity would you deem a private, with the following memornanda opposite his name: Adam Vigal _ enlisted to serve 3 year _ on Command?”
In answer, I have to state, that according to military usage in such cases, the words “on command’ placed opposite to the name of any soldier, on the muster roll of his Company, would indicate that such soldier is detached from his Company, on some military duty. The term is general, and implies a separation of the individual from his particular Company or regiment, for the time being, for some special duty elsewhere, the nature and character of which duty may vary, according
Page 36

To the wants of the service. The term, therefore, might with equal propriety, apply to the case referenced to in your letter, as well as to a detachment sent out from the main body, to preform a particular service, with or without [illegible]; although according to present practice, the remark in the first case would be ‘on special (or esha) duty.’ And in the second ‘on detached service’ - the words, simply ‘on command’ being now seldom used. 
Very respectfully, 
Your obdt serv’t
S. Cooper
[illegible]
Mr. F. A. Harry
Washington
D.C.
Page 37

Ann Martin widow of Adam Vacall - Revolutionary war Maryland Line. Application for increase. [illegible] papers state the service as an Artificer. 
Col. [illegible]
Page 38

Oct 16 / 50
Washington 
Oct 12 / 52

Frank Harry
Wit: to the case of the widow of Adam Vigall or Vialls-
Oct. 16 / 52
Written to M 18 1852
Page 39

Washington, Oct 12, 1852
Hon. Alex HH Stewart, 
Secretary of the Interior
Sir: I herewith transmit the enclosed letter from the Adjutant General US Army explaining the military acceptation of the term “On Command” and beg leave to submit it as additional testimony in the case of Mrs. Ann Martin, formerly widow of Adam Vycall, dec. an Artificer in the Army of the Revolution which was rejected by the Commissioner of Pensions. 
This claim is based upon the condition of the Act of 1832 and the general practice of the Pension Office governing in such cases, that the applicatant shall be maid according to the rank or capacity which held while committed with the Army. 
As the decision of the Commissioner was found on a misapprehension of the grade given to Vycall, from the fact of his having been taken from the ranks, and detailed or placed ‘on command’ for the special duty of a Gunsmith or Artificer (a misapprehension which I have and doubt the enclosed letter will remove) I respectfully request that you will direct the Commissioner of Pensions to reexamine the case in [illegible] therewith, and report the same to your Department. 
Very respectfully, 
Your obd servt
F. A. Harry
Page 40

Ann Martin 
Formerly widow
Of Adam Vigal
Dist. Of Columbia
Suspended
[illegible]
To G. G> Brewer
Page 41

W. E. Kennaugh
Present
E. Heath Esq. 
Commissioner of Pensions
Page 42

533
160 Ann
Page 43

L. J. Waldo, Esq. Commissioner of Pensions 
Washington City DC
Page 44

Rev. Widow, &c.
24139
Ann Martin
Widow of
Adam Vigil
Pri. Rev. War
Feb 2, ‘48
Vol. M. Page 12
Arrangement of 1870
Page 45

[illegible] 2d Feb 48

[illegible]
Page 46

No. 6644
Act of March 3, 1855
Received Mar. 19 1858
Ann Martin
Wid. Of Adam Vigal
Revolutionary War
Warrant no. 533
All. 160 acre May 18/53
[illegible]
Washington City
Page 47

Kennaugh’s brief
“K”
Page 48

Claim of Ann Martin, for increase of Pension as the widow of Adam Vycall, an Artificer
This claim is based upon the construction of the  Act of June 7th 1832, and to the practice of the Department in similar claims. 
The evidence in the case maybe briefly stated: 
Adam Vycall inlisted as a Private in Captain Spyker’s Co. 2d July 1777 for three years, and is admitted to have served for that time.
The claim ain’t asserts, and did so state in her first application for pension, that her husband was an Artificer, and offered evidence to prove him such; and that his service as an Artificer was for two years. Additional record evidence is now offered, from the Military rolls of the State Department, which evidence, upon a careful examination, will give the precise period when Adam Vycall’s duties as a Private “ceased” and that of an Artificer “commenced” for the evidence there states, that his name appears, in July 1778, thus: 
“Adam Vycall, on command,”
And that, after that date (July 1778) he is never returned on the company rolls of Capt. Spyker as a Private” So certificate Dept. of State. 
This fact must therefore be borne in mind, that he was, never, after July 1778k returned as a Private, and consequently must therefore have ended his service as such. 
The first question to be disposed of is, where, and in what capacity and for which he was doubtless well-known to have been qualified for; and his name never afterwards occurring on the returns of Capt. Spyker’s Company, must be received as pristine proof that he was never after the date of July 1778, regarded by Captai SPyker, or any other officer of that company as a private.
Now it surely will not be asserted that he did not serve as an Artificer, when the testimony of a commissioned officer asserts directly to the contrary. We therefore offer the evidence of of Lieut. Stephens, in con-
Page 49

Motion with, the certificate from the Deaprtment of State, to show when, where, and in what capacity, Adam Vycall was serving after July 1778, when his duty as a Private in Spuker’s company ceased. 
Lieut. Steven’s in his certificate dated in 1824, says that he knew Adam Vycall during th Revolutionary War. That he was an ingenious Gunsmith, and belonged to the Travelling Forges. 
Lieutenant. Steven’s says he knew him not as a Private in the ranks, but as a Gunsmith attached to a distant office, that of the Travelling Forges. The remaining evidence in conformity, and asserts that he was by occupation a Gunsmith, and that he was known to have served with the Army as an Artificer. 
The only remaining question to be disposed of is whether [illegible] detailed or appointment, to serve in a different capacity, when that service is perceived to have been rendered in a higher grade than that for which he was enlisted, it is not embraced in the Act of June 7, 1832, and does not entitled the [illegible] of that Act. In other words, is there any thing contained in the provisions of that act by which the claim and can be excluded. Whether the claimant’s husband enlisted as an Artificer, or was paid as an Artificer, is a matter which the Act of 1832 make no inference. The Government [illegible] of Adam Vycall’s recapitation as a Gunsmith, and the Act of 1832, says he shall be paid according to his rank. “Did the law intend to draw a distinction between person who had performed the same description of duties, and give to one what was refunded to another for the like service? I think not. Such a discision or notion would have no foundation in justice.”
“Service in a military office, even although the commission may not be issued or may not date back to the commencement of that service, entitles the person to a pension for such service. See Pension Laws, P. 98 - Opinion of Sec. of War. 
Respectfully submitted, 
W.E. Kavanaugh
For Claimaint
Page 50

6753
District of COlumbia
Ann Martin, formerly widow of Adam Vigal and who died in the year 1800 of Washington in the Dist. Of Columbia, who was a Private in the company commanded by Captain Spyker of the 7th Maryland line for 2 years. 
Transcribed on the Roll of the Dist. Of Col. on the rate of -80- dollars - cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1836. 
Certificate of Pension issued the 3d day of September, 1842 and sent to M. J.P. Keller, Ordinance. 
Arrears to the 4ths of March 1861 $400
Act of July 7, 1838
Recorded by D. Brown, Clerk. 23 August 1862
Book A. Vol. 2. Page 232
Reported to Agent
Page 51

Ann Martin
H. G. At 48
Ms. Cole
July 14th 1837
[illegible] - July 16 -51
Mr. Kennaugh
Page 52

Know all men by these Present, that I, Ann Martin, of the City of Washington, and now inscribed on the Act of Congress of 1838, granting pensions to the widows of Revolutionary officers and soldiers at the rate of $80 per annum, as the widow of Adam Vycall or Vigal, who was an Artificer, of the 7th Regiment Maryland Line, and who served three years from 2d July 1777 to the 2d July, 1780 - do hereby authorize and empower and by the present do ordain, constitute and appoint, W. E. Kennaugh of Washington City, my true and lawful Attorney for me, and in my name, to examine the evidence upon which said pension was allowed, now on file in the Pension Office, and to do all other lawful acts in and about the premises by which hereof: conceiving that I was not placed on the Pension Rolls at the rate per annum that I was by law entitled, as the widow of an Artificer, and which will appear by the evidence submitted, and the true construction of the Act of 1832 - hereby ratifying and confirming all the acts of my said Attorney in the virtue hereof; Amos Holton personally appeared before me, Amos Holton, a Justice of the Peace in a for the County of Washington and District of Columbia, Ann Martin, the fourteenth day of July, Eighteen hundred and fifty One, who acknowledged the above to be her free act and deed for the [illegible] therein mentioned. 
Amos Holton, J.P. /seal/
Page 53

District of Columbia
County of Washington
On this nineteenth day of September in the year of our Lord One thousand eight hundred & forty eight personally appeared before the undersigned a Justice of the Peace, in and for the said County, Ann Martin, a resident of the said City and District to me well known, and aged eighty years or more, who being first duly sworn according to law, doth on her oath make the following declaration, in order to obtain the benefits of the pension made be the Act of Congress passed on the Second February 1868, granting Pensions to widows of persons who served during the Revolutionary War: 
That this is the Widow of Adam Vigal, who was a private in the Army of the Revolution, and that she as heretofore received a pension at the rate of Eighty dollars per annum, under the act of 17th June 1866. She further states that she is still a widow. 
Her mark/Ann Martin
Sworn to and subscribed on the day and year above written, before the subscribers
James Lawrenson, JP /seal/
Page 54

July 31
Thomas Gittings, Esquire
Simpsonville
Montgomery County
Maryland
Page 55

Treasurer for the Western Shore of Maryland
Pay to the order of
Twelve dollars for three months and eighteen days pension due to me, 1 July 1833.
Witness
State of Maryland, Prince George’s County, fol:
On the August 1888, Ann Martin of the said County came in person before me the subscriber one of the said State’s Justices of the peace in and for the same County and made oath on the Holy Evangely of Almighty God that she is the identical person who signed the above order and who is on the Pension Roll of Maryland in virtue of a Resolution of this Legislature. 
Adam Vigal, the first husband of the said Ann Martin, gunsmith to the Army, serviced the Army in Georgetown DC and never obtained his pay -. Mrs. Martin has been [illegible] the above for five or six years [illegible] the Treasurer of Maryland.
Page 56

Washington,
Aug. 8, 1853
Sir, 
In behalf of the party prosecuting the claim, I respectfully call your attention to the claim of Ann Martin, widow of Adam Vycall, a soldier of the Revolution. 
The Examiner seeming to have given more consideration to the negative than to the positive, [illegible] in the case, and therefore a review is respectfully asked. It is not claimed that Vycall belonged to the Maryland Artificers, and therefore the objection is partile. The claim is hat he was transferred to the Travelling Forgers, helping to the Governmental Artificer corps. Please examine the enclosed
Page 57

Argument. 
Very respectfully
Yours
Jon Gallaher
Hon. L.P. Waldo
Page 58

Maryland, Montgomery County To Wit:
Be it remembered that on this twenty fourth day of November in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty eight before me, one of the justices of the peace of the state, for the county of one said appears Samuel Gloyd sen. and Jane Gloyd and severally deposeth and smith that about the 1788 or a little after that time say, not exceeding five years [illegible] they were present when Ann Barnes was married to Adam Vigle by the Revd. McPenger and that they lived together for several years when the said Adam Vigle departed this life - that some time after the said Adam Vigle’s death, the said Ann Vigle married a certain Mordecai Martin, who has since departed this life. - that the said Ann Martin remains a widow, and resides I the District of Columbia. 
Sworn to and subscribed by the said demon ants, before me, Abralom Flrift, J. P 
/s/ Samuel Gloyd. Sen 
/s/ Jane Gloyd
Page 59

State of Maryland [illegible] hereby fortify that Absalom Thrift [illegible] then deposition seems to have been [illegible] the line thereof one of the State of Maryland’s Justice of the Peace in and for the said [illegible]
Page 60

District of Columbia
County of Washington
On this thirteenth day of May personally appeared before the subscriber a justice of the Peace, in and for said County, Ann Martin, a resident of Washington City in said County to me well known aged upwards of seventy years of age, who being first duly sworn, according to law, doth on her oath, make the following declaration in order to obtain the benefits of the  [illegible] made by the Act of Congress, passed on the 3d March 1843, granting pensions to Widows of persons so served during the Revolutionary War. 
That she is the Widow of Adam Vigal who was a Gunsmith in the Maryland line and that she received a pension at the rate of Eighty dollars per Annum for five years under the Act of July 7, 1838. 
She further declares that she is still a Widow. 
Witness Jonas Kelly’s
/s/ Ann Martin
Sworn and subscribed before me this 13th day of May 1842
Wallan Jr. JP /s/seal
Page 61

Thomas Kelly
Mr. Young
John McDaniel
Mrs. Ferran
Thomas Sa
James Savier
Adam Vicall

McNeal
Janiston
10 Smithsonian
Page 62

Coley
Washington, July 12 1857
Sir: An examination of the Washington Papers had been made, as requested in your letter of the 8th installment. For evidence of the service of Adam Vycall or Wyskall, as an Artificer of Captain Spyker’s company during a part of the Revolutionary War, with the following result:
The name of Adam Vicall recurs in a Roll of Captain Benjamin. Spyker’s Company 7th Maryland commanded by Col. John Gandy, White Plains, 9th Sept. 1778. With the following memoranda opposite his name: “Adam Vicall - Time engaged to served 3 years - on command.”
It may be added that of fifty names on this roll, these are but six besides that of Vicall designated as “on command” although there is no allusion to Artificers service in this section. 
No return of Maryland Artificers has been found, nor in any other Return of Capt. Spyker’s company does the name VIcall appear.
Page 63

Sami Gloyd
Certificate for Mrs. martin
+
Benji Gaither
afft
Page 64

Washington, April 30th, 1853
Loren P. Waldo, Esq.
Commissioner of Pensions
Sir: I have to request your opinion upon the following questions in connection with the claim of Ann Martin, widow of Adam Vycall, a soldier of the Revolution, which claim was rejected by the late Commissioner ^of Pensions in January last. 
Can the widow of a deceased soldier of the Revolution, under the Act of 7th July 1838, claim in right of her husband according to his rank “an amount bearing such proportion to the annuity granted to the same rank for the service of two years, as his term of service did to the term aforesaid.” In other wires, is not a widow whose husband served three years in the Regular Line - 12 months as a Private and 2 years as an Artificer, entitled according to the construction of the Act of 1832, as published in the Pension Laws- to the highest amount of pay recognized by law for such service, and which her husband would have claimed had he survived the passage of the Act of 1832?
“For” says the Attorney General ^ in his construction of the Act of 1832, page 47, Pension Laws “if an applicant has served in different grades for a time sufficient to entitled him to a pension it must be graduated by the respective terms of service in each grade. His pension is to be according to his rank - that is according to the rank in which the service was rendered. The service for which the law intends to remunerate him is the service he performed during the prescribed period of time, and it measures the compensation by the rank in
Page 65

[page]2 
which the service was rendered 
It was under this construction of the Act of 32, that the claim of Ann Martin was presented to the attention of the late Commissioner, and in order that you may see how far this claim is embraced within the provisions of the law, as well as the construction of the same by the Attorney-General, I beg leave to trespass upon your time for a few moments by the introduction of the testimony: 
Extract from the Washington Papers now on file in the State Dept 
Adam Vycall, the claimants husband inlisted as a Private in Capt. Spyker's Company 7th Regiment, Maryland Line, for three years from July 1777. to July 1780 
In the monthly Return of Spyker's company for Sept. 1778, (the 7th Maryland Regiment being stationed at White Plains N.Y.) the following memoranda appears opposite to the name of Adam Vycall: 
Adam Vycall & Six other names } on command} White Plains N.Y Sept. 1778. 
This memoranda is relied upon to prove, in connection with the testimony of a commissioned officer, the ocation of Vycall's duties as a Private in Spyker's company: for although the Returns are made monthly for the years 1779 & 1780 yet the name of Adam Vycall does not appear as in any manner connected with the same after Sept. 1778 
To prove the two years remaining service, as an Artificer, since it is admitted he served till 1780, the Certificate of a commissioned officer is introduced. This certificate  is entitled to every degree of consideration and respect, from a gallant officer, and contemporary survivor, and a Pensioner under the Act of 1818. It is the free, voluntary testimony of an officer who knew Adam Vycall in the Revolutionary army. Was acquainted with him by name and knew his occupation, that of an excellent Gunsmith, and that he be
Page 66

Longed to the “Travelling Forges.” Certificate dates 29th Dec. 1834, and is a follows: 
“Prince George’s Co. MD
27th Dec. 1834
I hereby certify that I well knew Adam Vycall in the American Army, in the Revolutionary War. That he was an excellent gunsmith and belonged to the Travelling Forges.
signed W.J. Stevens
Lt. of 3d Zerg. Va. Division”
Another certificate from a contemporary survivor, who says “I knew Adam Vycall in the time of the Revolutionary War, which I was in the service of Gen’l Smallwood, and after the close of the war, and heard him repeatedly say that he never got any of his pay as an Artificer, in which office I saw him” Name and date worn off by age. 
Traditionary evidence of Benjamin Gaither, of Montgomery Co. MD have understood that the said Adam Vycall served in the Revolutionary Army, Maryland Line, as an Artificer, and that he knows he wa a blacksmith by occupation when he was acquainted with him. 
Certificate of Geo. G. Brewer, in service to an inquiry, for the service of Adam Vycall as an Artificer. The certificate is already introduced from the State Department Rolls. M. Brewer’s opinion in regard to the Artificers service is not evidence, and is therefore not to be considered. 
The is completes the evidence, the regulations of 1838 having been fully complied with in the claim of Ann Martin, widow of Adam Vycall. 1st record Evidence. 2d certificate of a Commissioned Officer and a Pensioner per Act of 1818
Page 67

Then evidencing in Putnam Co. Georgia. 3d Certificate of a contemporary survivor, 4th Traditionary evidence. 
There is no doubt after the introduction of each testimony as to Vicall’s service as an Artificer - the precise pension of his service as a Gunsmith attached to the Travelling Forges, which was a Regular Corps, remaining to be proved. This point must be proved by the certificate of Lt. Stevens in connection with the last monthly return of Capt. Spyker’s sig. Sept. 1778. And taken in connection, what do they prove? Sufficient to satisfy any unprejudiced mind, that where the monthly Returns of Spyker’s company are silent after this last date, that then the actual knowledge and intimacy of Lieut. Stevens begins - for he only knew Vycall as an ingenious Gunsmith, belonging to the Travelling Forges. Captain Spyker’s does not claim him after 1778, or else he would have [illegible] him.
How different the case would be, for example, if Lieut. Stevens, in his certificate had said “I herby certified that I well knew Adam Vycall in the Revolutionary Army. That he was an excellent gunsmith, and belonged to the Travelling Forges, and that his service extended for two years in that duty.” 
If this certificate would have been received, according to the general practice of the office, as sufficient evidence of each and service, that is objective ground for its rejection because it is introduced in a different form. Traditionary evidence of revise is deemed impartial in the absence of direct proof:
Had Vycall deserted after he was detailed from Spyker’s command in 1778, that fact would have been very plainly stated in the Company Returns of 1780, and the Commissioner of Pensions could have denied the right of the claimant to recover for any service beyond the last Return of 1778: for there his service as Private ended in that particular month of service. 
But Vycall did not desert, but served out the term for which he
Page 68

Enlisted, from 1777 to 1780-12 months as a Private and 2 years as Artificer, although doubtless, under a keen sense of the injustice done him, in taking advantage of his particular [illegible] (a Gunsmith) so much in demand at that period, and yet allowing only a Private’s pay. It therefore it is admitted that Vycall did serve as an Artificer with the Travelling Forges (which was a continental branch of service, and Militia( as certified to by his superior officer, then according to the construction of the Act of 1832, the pension “must be graduated by the respective term of service in each grade.” The service for which the law [1832] intends to remunerate him is the service he performed during the prescribed period of time, and it measures the compensation by the rank in which the service was rendered.”
But it is contended by the late Commissioner, that inasmuch as the applicant’s husband did not enlist in the Continental Artificer Corps, commanded by Col. Flowers, that is sufficient grounds for the rejection of the claim. That a Private can be detailed to perform any service, and yet not claim the compensation due such service!
The commissioner should have borne in mind, since he so scrupulously insisted that Col. Flowers Regiment of Artificers was the only one embued as being entitled to the pay due that rank, that the Resolve of Congress, authorizing the creation of this Regiment, also authorized Col. Flowers to procure the services of such other competent persons, as many as he though necessary, upon the most reasonable terms. But did ^not Congress recognize the rank of Artificers by setting the amount of pay? Why did they affix $20 per month as a Private Artificer’s pay, but that they recognize the rank as superior to any other branch of service, and measured the com
Page 69

pensation by the rank in which the service was rendered. And the Commissioner did not take into consideration the Resolve of Congress of the 16th November, 1779, which says: "Resolved That the allowance of pay subsistence, and clothing of the other officers and soldiers of the said Artificers, be the same with that of the Artillery Artificers under the command of Col. Benj. Flowers.

If the position assumed by the late Commissioner be correct, what other Artificers can this resolution have reference to There certainly was other Artificers than Baldwins and Flowers Corps; and the words "the said Artificers," can only be taken in a general sense, as applicable to all Artificers at that time in service. 

The 7th Maryland Regiment being stationed at White Plains in 1778, it is but fair to presume that inasmuch as Maryland had no distinct Artificer companies in the field permission was given by the commanding officer to detail from the Maryland Regiment such ingenious mechanics as could be found, and incorporate them among the Artificers --such as the "Travelling Forges," in which Vycall was placed; a Continental Artificer Corps. And so the Artificers of Col. Flowers Regiment received $20 per month, and Vycall, and all others of a like character, detailed from the ranks, received $8.00 per month. But if this injustice was permitted, then the Act of 1832, seeks to correct the error, by allowing pay according to the rank in which the service was rendered. Whether the Government took advantage of his occupation as a Gunsmith
Page 70

[page] 7
and paid him as a Private or that he did not inlist in the Regiment of Artificiers authorized by Congress -- these are objections, which according to the general construction of the Act of '32, can have no reference to the claim The Act of '32 seeks not to know what were the peculiar circumstances under which applicants for relief may have rendered service -- but that service, "at one or more periods", being rendered, in full accordance with the law, whether in Infantry, Artillery of Cavalry --and the applicant so prove that service, the Act of '32 measures the compensation by the rank in which the service was rendered.  "For, did the law intend to draw a distinction between persons who had performed the same description of duties, and to give to one what was refused to another for the like service." I think not. Such a discrimination would have no foundation in justice. See Opinion Atty Genl, p. 48, Pension Laws. 

 Enough has been said to prove the positions assumed by the late Commissioner of Pensions as being directly in opposition to the general interpretation of the law of '32. And in order that full justice may be done, I beg leave to call your especial attention to the following admitted pension claim, as a precedent, and as also showing the practice of the office for years past in similar claims. The claim is that of Joshua Critchfield, of Ohio, pensioned per Act of 1832, as Private & Artificer, Va. Line, 
Also at p. 394. Prestons Resolutions, Claim of Edward Post, Art.
Also " at p. 384 Preston's Resolutions claim of John Woodward " 
Also at p. 352 Preston's Resolutions claim of  E. Belknap
Page 71

[page] 8 
Precedent 
Joshua Critchfield, Fairfield, Ohio. Private & Artificer Va. Line, pensioned Act of 1832 

1 Declaration of Joshua Critchfield, Nov. 1832, aged 79. In 1776. Col. Moses Rollins engaged him to recruit, furnished him with money, and promised him an Ensign's commission. In 1777, he served 3 months in Capt. Charles Clinton's Company. In June, 1778, he enlisted in the 13th Reg. Virginia Forces, commanded by Col Moses Rollins. That being a Black Smith, he was induced to join the line of Artificers, at the instance and solicitation of Chas. Clinton, who acted as Quartermaster. That in the capacity of Artificer he continued in the service for 18 months shoeing horses, and regularly received from the Quartermaster 'the wages or pay of a Soldier".  Discharged 1779. Has no documentary evidence of his service as Artificer.  Never received a written discharge. Did not belong to Flower's Regiment 

2. Traditionary Evidence of James Anderson and Joseph Nicholls. Neither of them engaged in service during the war. They express their belief that he, (Critchfield) did serve as an artificer for 18 months, from what they had been told by Quartermaster Clinton, and what they had observed at the time.

This completes the evidence in the claim. Claim allowed 18 mos as Artificer and 5 months as Private, at $124.67 per annum per Act of '32
Respectfully submitted.
Page 72

Brief
_____

Case of the widow of Adma Vicall or Vicallis
for increase of Pension
Page 73

Brief

Case of the widow of Adam Vicall or Vicallis for an increase of Pension 

Statement 
This is a mere question of law, as to whether a Soldier who had enlisted and been rated on the Rolls as a private, should be entitled to the pay of an artificer which is a higher grade of pension because he had been detailed for and employed as a Black Smith-- There is no question raised as to the evidence of Service - The report of the Commissioner and the argument of Mr Ellis enclosed, discuss the whole question fully- Respectfully Submitted Nicholas Cleary
Page 74

Pension Office 
October 21. 1837 

Sir:
Adam Vigal or Vicall enlisted as a private soldier in the Maryland in service during the Revolution and seems to have continued under the same engagement to the close of his term. No matter to what duties he was assigned by his Officer, whether to those of a private in the field or a blacksmith or gunsmith in the shop, the terms of his enlistment were not varied by his occupation, and he was still rated and paid as a private, and his pension must be based upon that pay. Congress promised higher only to those who enlisted as Artificers, not to those who having enlisted as privates were transfered to Artificers duty, and hence nor higher pension can be allowed 
Very Respectfully yours
John Wilson
W. E. Kennaugh Esq. 
---- for Army pensions
Page 75

I do hereby certify that I knew Adam Vigal in the times of the Revolutionary War while I was in the service of General Smallwood and after the close of the war and heard him repeatedly say that he never got any of his pay as an Artificer in which office I was him also on [illegible] and knew very well also after the war was over, and that he was a very ingenious man, and lived near me. When we had frequent conversation about the battle at stony point if such place as he was at and that the said Adam Vigal was the [page cut off]
Page 76

Appeal case. 
Adam Vicall’s Widow
V. Ellis
Argument of _____
Page 77

Appeal case of the widow of Adam Vycall or Vycall. Md. Line
To the Secretary of the Interior
Sir: 
The widow of Vigal or Vicall, was pensioned as the widow of a private, & she originally claimed that he was an “Artificer”. She now adduces proof of this fact & asks an increase from $80 to $240 pension.

1st Point. Service is admitted by the original allowance. In fact, Vicall was an enlisted man for 3 years, & it appears by the Certificate marked “Brewer” that he served out his term of enlistment. M. Brewer says however there is no roll of Maryland Artificers He supposes that Vicall was on the footing of a private. We oppose testimony to suppositions.
 
2d Point. That Vicall was an Artificer, see letter from Secretary of State, marked ‘D.M.”, which shows that after a certain period of service as a private, Vicall is “on command’ that is, detailed & charged with other duties. The
Page 78

The affidavit of Lieut Stevens, an Officer who was in the service, shows that Vicall was “gunsmith to the travelling forges.” What is gunsmith but an Artificer, & that too of the highest grade! The widow in her original declaration swears that he was an Artificer & served as such 2 or 3 years! 
Benjamin Gaither says that he understood he was an Artificers in the service. Another Certificate, so mutilated that the signature is not visible, says in the body of it that he saw Vicall on furlough & he spoke then of his being an Artificer & complained (as all Revolutionary soldiers did) that he had not had his pay! 
There then is abundant proof that he performed duty as an Artificer. 

3d Point. Service & grade of service having been proved, & the length of service also it is to be asked, why the increase is denied.

Under this hand I will examine the commissioner's report, or the report which is sanctioned by his signature and approved.
Page 79

the report assumes 

1st that the pension is regulated exclusively by the pay which the soldier recd or was entitled to receive-  
This position is not in accordance with the Comm's decision, in the cases of Rodham   Kenner's widow & of Isaac Briscoe, on the Kentucky roll, to which refer. iIn these cases the Com decided, that under the act of 1832 all persons of all grades claiming under the above named act, must be pensioned according to the Continental rate of pay, for services in the same rank, and the Continental line. As Secretary of the Interior you confirmed that decision on appeal. You took the ground, that uniformity in pensions was the propose of the act 1832 & the pension is graduated by the Continental rate of pay, without regard to the pay which the party actually received. That confirmation of the Com's decision makes it the law of the pension Bureau.  But it seem quite convenient now to assume
Page 80

that Vicall only recd the pay of a private though he performed the duty of an artificer, & that ergo his widow must be content with a private's pension!
With all due respect, allow me to say, that there is no proof that he only received the pay of a private-- non constant, that if paid at all (for he complained that he had rec'd no pay at all) he did not receive an artificer's pay. But no matter what pay he actually received, his widow is entitled to the pension, according to the pay given an Artificer in the Continental line, or else your decision in Briscoe's and Kenner's cases is to be disregarded. What that pay was, is ascertained by reference to the Journals of Congress. According to the [illegible] in the pension Office it was $144 down to this year & more it is fixed at $240 for a full pension.
 For the pay of Artifices see resolve of Congress 12 February 1778, and resolve of 12 January 1781, which last resolve embraces the artificers generally.
Page 81

p 5 
By these resolves it seems to me, & especially by the last one, the continental pay of artificers was $240 pension or $20 per month. But from 1832 down to this year, the pension was $144 for 2 years service.  I submit this question as to the rate of pay without further comment, only adding that if $20 per month was not the Continental rate of pay, then there was no fixed rate, for [illegible] no other rate specified in the Journals of Congress.
 But the report assumes again, that "if a private was transferred to other duties & did not change his rate of pay".  I deny this position, and require proof of so absurd a practice in this position implies. But the report illustrates the position by saying that Sergiants frequently had command of companies & were still Sergiants & rec'd only the pay due to Sergiants.
Page 82

To this 
I have only to say, that it is very possible that Sergeants may have had temporary command of Companies, for very brief periods, but that, in all cases so far as my information goes, a commission [illegible] an officer & not a few days accidental command & that artificers required no commissions & privates might therefore be transformed into artificers where they have good mechanics without the necessity  of confirmation at head quarters. I will add that presence a detailed artificer could just as well repair a gun, or make a waggon, as an enlisted one, & that "rank" was not conformed by enlistment but by service  in a particular grade.
This bring me to consider another very remarkable position, taken by the commissioner in his report, wherein he says, "none were entitled to artificers pay but those who were enlisted into designated companies of artificer "!!  What a saving to
Page 83

the Treasury, such a doctrine would have made, if it had been known in 1782! Why six hundreds of persons have been pensioned since 1782 as
artificers in the militia at $144 per (instead of $80), yet it has just been discovered, that none were entitled to artificers pay but those in 
designated Companies [illigible] enlisted"!
Were the militia ever "enlisted"? Were they in the favored companies "designation"?
Why his please refers to Vol 2 of the printed pension lists page 394 for the name of Edward Pratt artifier of militia, page 384 for the name of John Woodward artifir of militia page 382 for the
name of E. F.Bellknap, artifier of the militia, all pensioned at $144, nearly twenty years ago, I refer every [illegible] page of the printed lists where you find this position refuted!
Page 84

Why Sir, the Commissioner in his report
seems to have wholly lost sight
of the meaning of the act of 1832 which
in terms
gives pensions to militia
Officers, soldiers &c, as well as to the
continental line, from the month
of its passage down to this memorable
year, militia artificers have been
pensioned, not as privates but as
Artificers though not enlisted in
designated companies. Several
hundred such instances 
are to be
found, scattered though the five
printed volumes of pensioners
I maintain then that pensions for
artificers service are equally due to
all who
performed that service
As to the rate, I repeat that it
was uniformly
fixed at $12 pr month
for continental as well as militia
artificers, in 1832, & so continued until
this year, when under the resolve
of 12 Feby 1778 $20 pr month was allowed
Page 85

allowed.
p 9
to those who served in J &
Baldwins corps. But the resolve
of 11 Jany 1781 seems to me equally
to applyto all artificers & under
your decision in the cases of
Briscoe & Kenner's widow,
before mentioned, if $20 be the
continental rate of pay for artificers,
then the widow of Virall
is entitled to $240 pension, or
otherwise
to $144 pension, instead of $80-.
I therefore say
in behalf of
the widow of Viall, that she ought to
be placed
on the posting of "the
Regiment of artificers"
specified in
the resolve of 11 Jany 1781 
respectfully submitted
Vespasian Ellis