Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File R. 16,031, for John Marston, Virginia

SERVICE
NUMBER
Va
Marston, John
P. 16,031
Va. Half Pay
BLt. 2223-200
CONTENTS
See N.A. Acc. No. 874 050 111 Half Pay John Marston

allowance of boat Land for 37 years service in Continental Line
B.

Executive Department
January 29 th 1848.
The Heirs of John Marston are allowed Land bounty for his service three years as a Lieutenant in the Continental line. 200 acres allowed him by resolution of Congress of 16 th September 1746, to be deducted
The Register will issue a Warrant accordingly if not drawn
Wm Smith
A Copy of a paper on file in the Virginia Land Office Teste,
S. H. Parker Reg. L. Office

Know all men by these presents, That we Sarah S. Minge, Robert B. Bolling & Sarah M. Bolling
do hereby constitute, nominate and appoint William Helms our true and lawful Attorney, to prosecute any claims to land or money that may be due from the State of Virginia and United States, or either, on account of the revolutionary services of John Marston, a Lieutenant Virginia State line and to demand and receive from the proper offices in Richmond and Washington, any Land Warrant or Warrants so due, and to surrender them at the General Land Office, in order to obtain Certificates of Scrip in lieu thereof, which he is authorized to receive, sell and assign. Or if said Warrants be already surrendered, then to demand and receive the Certificates, and to sell and assign the same. If no Scrip can be obtained, he is authorized to receive the Warrants, which may have been surrendered, and to locate or sell the same as he may think best. Said Attorney is also authorized to prosecute by suit or petition, and to demand and receive from the State of Virginia and the United States, any Half Pay or Commutation and interest that may be due, particularly under the act of 5th July, 1832; and to substitute and appoint one or more Attorneys under him, with a general or special authority to do all he is permitted to do, and revoke the same at pleasure. We hereby ratify and confirm whatever said Attorney or his Substitutes may lawfully do in the premises.
As witness Our hands and seals this fourth day of November 1836
Sarah S. Minge [SEAL.]
Robt. B. Bolling [SEAL.]
Sarah M. Bolling [SEAL.]
[SEAL.]
[SEAL.]
[SEAL.]
[SEAL.]
[SEAL.]
State of Virginia - - - to wit: Charles City County - - - County
This day, personally appeared before me, a Justice of the Peace for the said Sarah S. Minge, Robert B. Bolling & Sarah M. Bolling subscribers to the foregoing Power of Attorney, and acknowledged the same to be their free act and deed. As witness my hand and seal, this fourth day of November 1836
Wm. Harrison J.P. [SEAL.]

State of Virginia
Charles City County to wit:
I Robert W Christian Clerk of the County Court of said County in the State of Virginia aforesaid, do hereby certify, that William T Harrison whose name is subscribed to the Certificate on the other side written, dated the fourth day of November 1805, of the acknowledgment of the parties therein mentioned, is and was at the time of signing the same a Justice of the peace in and for the said County of Charles City duly commissioned and qualified according to the Constitution and laws of said State of Virginia
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the County aforesaid at the Courthouse thereof this 14 th day of
November in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty seven 1837
Robt. W. Christian
Minge and Bolling & wife To John of Attomey
£ 1000
£ 114
Pennington

Elbow 2/40
Petition of John Mowat's adm. for commutation in lieu of half pay for life - hereafter allowed to him -
act 5 July '32
N. E. Scott Kavrentain Na

6 To the Hon: Thomas Jefferson Secretary of The Home Department of State -
Respectfully submitting, your petitioner William Belur, of the County of Fauquier, in the State of Virginia, that heretofore, in the Circuit Superior Court of Law and Chancery of the County of Berneice and City of Richmond, as the administrator, de bonis non, of John Marston and, he recovered judgment against the State of Virginia for five years full pay, in lieu of half pay for life, for the services of his intestate , as a Lieutenant in the State line, in a Regiment commonly called "Dobney's Legion", to the end of the war of the Revolution, with interest thereon, at the rate of six per cent. per annum, from the 22 d day of April 1783 until payment.
The claim was founded upon two acts of the General Assembly of Virginia, one entitled "An act concerning officers, soldiers, sailors and marines," passed in May 1779, whereby half pay for life was promised to all officers of the army, being citizens of the State, who should continue in service until the end of the war, or becoming supernumerary should again enter the service if required so to do by, to commence from the

determination of their command or service ". the other passed March 1783, whereby a commuta- tion of five years full pay with interest, was allowed, in lieu of the half pay for life, to such of the said officers as should continue in service to the end of the war .
The judgment of the said Circuit courts proceeded upon the ground that the proofs showed that John Intestate  and other contin- ued in actual service until the end of the war, since it was only upon such condition that the commutation was promised which was agreed to his representative.
From this judgment the Attorney General of the state obtained an appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeals, and that court being in opinion, upon the proofs in the case, that the intestate became supernumerary, and was not in actual service at the end of the war, reversed the judgment, and proceeding to render such judgment in the premises, as in its opinion, the Circuit courts ought to have rendered, restricted the recovery to half pay for life, fixing the commence- ment thereof on the 14 th of April 1782, the time at which the service was held to have determined.
The judgment came within that class of

of claims, which by the act of Congress of the 5 th of July 1832 was directed to be settled at the Treasury Department of the United States, and your petitioner, accordingly, presented the same to that Department for settlement.
The Commissioners of Pensions, understanding the act of Congress as requiring all such claims to be adjudicated by the Department upon their merits, wholly disregarded the judgment of the Virginia Court, and required the evidence to support the claim to be furnished to the Department.
Upon a consideration of the evidence, he was of opinion that the said contract did not become superannuary, but continued in actual service until the end of the war, and fixed the commencement of the half pay from that time as the determination of his service.
This decision of the Commissioners, made under date of the 27 th February 1848, was approved by the Hon. Mr. Poinsett Secretary of War.
Your petitioner feeling himself aggrieved by the decision took an appeal to the President of the United States, but on a communication, dated the 30 th November 1844, from the Hon. Mr. Wilkins then Secretary of War, your petitioner was informed that "the case in question had

" been carefully examined upon the evidence " which had been presented, and as great an " allowance made as is justified". The Hon. Secretary insisting that whilst the acts of Congress practically directed payments to be made without investigation by the Department in the cases in which judgments had been rendered, at the time of the passage of the acts, yet with respect to the " cases which had not been prosecuted to judg- " ment the act of July 5 th 1852 required the " Department to adjudicate them upon the " merits - that is to ascertain by evidence, the " nature of the service, its commencement and " termination" &c.
By this means the United States avoided payment of the full amount of the recovery against the State, and your petitioner was deprived of a portion of the fruits of his judgment.
Your petitioner now further represents that upon the principles on which the Depart- ment proceeded, his claim ought to have been so adjusted as to allow him the commu- tation of his years full pay and interest, in lieu of the half pay for life.
The Circuit Court, taking the same view of the evidence, gave judgments for the

commutation, and it cannot be doubted, taking the facts to be as the judgment judgment assumed them to be, that the recovery in the lower court was in strict conformity with the principles of the cases in the Supreme Court of Appeals, according to which the act of the 5 th of July 1832 entitled this claim to be settled.
Your petitioner, therefore, prays that the matter may be examined into, and his claim settled so as to allow him as a commutation as aforesaid, his full pay with interest thereon at the rate of six per cent. per annum from the 22 nd day of April 1783 until payment, in lieu of half pay for life, for the services of his testator testator as Lieutenant in the Virginia State line, in the Regiment commonly called "Dabney's Legion" to the end of the war of the Revolution.
And Your petitioner will ever pray
Callahan Belk for N. E. Scott. Joel

In the name of God, amew - I Susanna Marston, of the County of Surry, being in as good health as for the last four years, but of perfect mind and memory do make and ordain this my last will and testament, revoking all others heretofore made by me.
First. I give to my friend Major John Peter my house in Cabin point, known by the name of the Yellow Store, with an half acre of land attached thereto, to him and his heirs forever.
2 o . I give to my relative William Lightfoot my negro boy, Edmund, son of Susy, to him and his heirs forever.
3 o . I loan to my niece Sarah S. Minge all the rest and residue of my estate wherever to be found both real and personal during her natural life, then my will and desire is that the estate so left to my niece Sarah S. Minge, should be equally divided between whatever children she may have by her marriage with Mr. John Minge. And lastly, my will and desire is that in case none of the children of my niece Mr. John Minge arrive to the age of twenty-one years or marries, that then the property bequeathed them go to my relative William Lightfoot provided he arrives to the age of twenty-one years or marries, and in the event that he does not arrive to the age of twenty-one years or marries my desire is that the property be given to the heirs of the children of my niece Sarah S. Minge by her intermarriage with Mr. John Minge. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal this twenty-sixth day of September one thousand eight hundred and sixteen.
In presence of - Anthony H. Lamb Law. R. Pierce, John Minge, Jr.
Susanna Marston

At a Court held for Surry County, May 24, 1819, The aforesaid Testament and last Will of Susanna Marston, deceased was presented in Court the same being proved by the oaths of Anthony Lamb and John Minge, junior, two of the witnesses thereto, was by the Court ordered to be recorded.
Teste,
John Faulcon, c. s. c.
A copy teste.
W. S. Booth, clk
I John Marston of the County of Surry, being at present in a low and imperfect state of good health but of a sound and disposing mind do make and constitute this my last will and testament in manner following, acknowledging as I have ever done the existence of One Supreme Ruler of the Universe to whom I am bound for life and its necessary support; I freely resign my soul into his gracious will, conscious of his mercy and compassion at the most trying hour of affliction. Imprimis. I do give and bequeath unto my loving wife Susanna Marston all my estate both real and personal of what kind soever I may die possessed of, and I do nominate and appoint my said loving wife Susanna Marston my sole executrix, and I hope she will make every necessary preparation for the payment of my just debts, to let the world know, I have laboured but to be just. As witness my hand and seal this 25 th October, 1797.
Sign, seal & declared to be J. Marston's my last will & testament in the presence of -
James Belches, Jr. } William Cooke, } Jas. Stewart. }
At

At a Court held for Surry County, March the 27 th 1798. The within written last will and Testament of John Marston, deceased, was presented in Court by Susanna Marston Executrix therein named and the same being proved by the oaths of James Belches, Junior, William Cooke & James Stewart, the witnesses thereto, and by the Court ordered to be recorded; And on the motion of the said Executrix who made oath and gave bond with Thomas Peter her security in the sum of ten thousand dollars conditioned for the due administration of the said decedents' estate, certificate is granted her for obtaining letters of administration thereof in due form.
Tests:
Jacob Faulcon, C. S. C.
A copy tests:
Walter S. Booth, clk.
(endorsement.)
It is stated, That the testator John Marston was an officer in the Virginia State line during the revolutionary war, and as such entitled to half-pay for life under the act of May, 1779. And the question on which my opinion is asked, is, whether this claim, which had not been recovered by him during his life, passed by his will to his wife? or whether he was intestate in regard to it, so that it will devolve to his next of kin according to the statute of distributions?
I am of opinion, it passed by the will to the wife. It is apparent the testator meant to give all he had to her, including moneys due him. The words "I may die possessed of" as here used mean the same as "I may die entitled to;" and the will should be understood as if it read - "I give my wife all my estate real and personal of what kind soever I may die entitled to."
B. W. Leigh.
June 28, 1833.
Rec d of Mr. Christian ten dollars for this opinion. B.W.L.

In Charles City County Court the 18 day of, July 1833. On the motion of Sarah S. Minge, It is ordered to be certified that it satisfactorily appears to the court that John Marston (an attested copy of whose will is this day exhibited in court) who was a Lieutenant in the Revolutionary War, and that Susanna Mars- ton (an attested copy of whose will is also exhibited) is the same Susanna to whom the said John Marston by his said will has given his estate; and that Sarah S. Minge of Sandy Point, Virginia, is still alive and the person mentioned in said Susanna's will; and that Sarah Bolling, wife of Ro. B. Bolling also of Sandy Point is the only child of Sarah S. Minge and John Minge; and the clerk of this court is directed to fur- nish for the said Sarah S. Minge and Ro. Buck- ner Bolling a copy of the certificate hereby ordered to be attached to the attested copies of said wills. A copy.
Teste: Ro. W. Christian.
State of Virginia,
Charles City County to wit.:
I Robert W. Christian, Clerk of the County Court of said county in the State of Virginia do hereby certify that the above to which this is attached is a true copy of an order of the court of said county made on the 18 th day of July, 1833, as fully and wholly as the same is now of record in my office.
(Seal) In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said county at the court house thereof this 13 th day of January in the year one thousand eight hundred and thirty-four.
Ro. W. Christian, C.C.C.
State

Pension Office, August 23, 1839.
Sir:
The petition which you have presented, asking for commutation with interest, from 1783 in the case of John Marston, deceased cannot be allowed. Marston, as it will be perceived by referring to the 9th Vol. of Leigh's Reports, page 44, did not continue in actual service until the end of the war, and was therefore not entitled to commutation of five years full pay with interest from the end of the war. The Court of Appeals upon an appeal at November term in 1837 reversed the judgment of the circuit superior court, and the decision of the Auditor of Virginia also, and directed that officer to issue a warrant in favor of the appellee, for his testator's half-pay, and nothing more. And the records of this office shew that half-pay under the act of July 5, 1832 was allowed to you as administrator for his service as a supernumerary officer.
At the time when the claim was allowed it was the practice to allow half-pay in all cases from April 1783, whether the officer left the service at that period or prior thereto. The half-pay, therefore commenced at that time, although he left the service in April 1782.
Under the decision of Mr. Secretary Poinsett, in the case of Applethwait in August 1838, we are bound to respect the decisions of the Supreme courts of Appeals of Virginia in all cases arising under the act of July 5, 1832.

We cannot therefore allow the claim now presented.
I am, respectfully,
Your obt. Servt,
J. L. Edwards Comm. of Pensions.
William Helm Esq. of Virginia Present.

I know nothing of the decision of Mr. Poinsett in the case of Appleton , mentioned in the annexed letter of Col. Edwards. It is certain that Mr. Wilkinson, in this case, decided that the department was not bound by the adjudication of the Virginia courts, but was required to adjudicate it upon its merits, and to ascertain by evidence, the nature of the service, its commencement and termination . See a copy of his letter hereunto filed . In this case the department did disregard the judgment of the Virginia courts, and adjudicating the case upon the evidence before it, decided that the service of Marston  terminated with the war , and allowed the half pay from that time.
Col. Edwards is mistaken when he says that at the time when the claim was allowed, it was the practice to allow half-pay in all cases from April 1783, whether the officer left the service at that period or prior thereto. Such a practice would have been in disregard of the plain letter of the law, which gives the half-pay to "commence from the determination of the command or service". Besides the statement is contradicted by the records of the department. From the records in the file-room of the Register's Office, it appears, that James Wilkinson was allowed half-pay from the 6 th of Febry. 1781; Augustine Courtenay from the 6 th of May, 1781; Lt. James McClellan from the 19 th of Febry 1780; and Charles Ewell from the 6 th Febry. 1781, these being respectively the dates of the determination of their

commands or services - By adjudging in this case, upon the evidence before it, that Morrison's services terminated with the war, the department disregarded the judgment of the court of appeals of Virginia, and paid to the United States the sum of $172.44.
Is it fair now, is it upholding, when the consequence of this action on the part of the department is to charge the United States with a larger sum of money, that this same department, should disregard its own solemn decision, and settle itself under the judgment of the court which it formerly upholds?
Respectfully submitted
N. E. Scott
etc.
in absentia

Passes referred to in the Brief, in the case of John Marston.

NO
ACT OF FEBRUARY 14, 1871.
WAR OF 1812
John Wareham
various Revolutions
Discharged _____, 18
5008
REJECTED
Nf. Pay _____ act-32
Received _____, 187
Attorney.

Lt John Marston
act 5 July 1832
Claim for commutation

1 May 11. 1850.
Wm Helm.
Enclosed papers, and in consequence of decision in claim of Capt. Rich? Mason, asks a re-hearing in the claim of his estate Lieut John Mansfield.
Hon. Thomas Ewing.
Secretary of the Navy
//

Brown's Hotel, Washington city D.C. 11 th January, 1850
Hon. Sec Interior
Sir
The decision of your Department in the case of Capt. Richard Barron's representative the other day inst  as I think  me in asking a rehearing in the case of my testator Lieutenant John Marston, and ask commutation for his service as a Lieutenant in Colonel George Gibson's regiment & subsequently in Colonel Charles Dabney's Legion to the end of the war, I respectfully ask that the evidence I now introduce in addition to that which was previously before you may be read 1 st The certificate of Col. Dabney that "Marston served upwards of Three years in the service of this state " 2 nd The allowance of bounty land by the Governor & council of Virginia in 1848 to the heirs of Lieutenant John Marston for Three years service in the Continental Line 3 rd The evidence of Churchill Gibbs a brother officer & a man whose character was without a blemish, read it - it speaks for itself 4 th The auditors certificate of £114. 0. 0 advance pay 18 th February 1782, and delivered to Capt. Thos. Hamilton who was reported in service by the board of officers convened by order of the executive of Virginia See page 46. House report No 191. 1 st Session 22 nd Congress, see also p 53 same report Capt. Hamilton reported in service, Marston is likewise reported in service, all of which is respectfully submitted
I have the Honor to be, Sir, very respectfully Your obedient servant
admr: debonis (C. M. Helms) now

Rec 6 Sept 1833.
499.
Jefferson town 4th Sept. 1833. Cuyahoga County, Ohio.
Sir
On the 26 July last James Pulliam, & his wife of Spotsylvania County V.a. executed to me a power of attorney authorizing me to ask for & demand at the Treasury of the United States their interest in the half pay Claim of John Marston, a Lieut of Gibson's Reg. Virg. State Service; payable under 3 rd Sec. of an act of Congress 5 th July 1832 for liquidating & paying certain Claims State Virg. for. Mr Pulliam is a daughter of Lieut. John Marston and has a Brother & sister living in Kentucky. Mr Pulliam has written to those in Kentucky to execute to me a power of attorney similar to the one he has already executed to me, to collect their respective interests in the claim above mentioned; and in a short time I expect to receive the papers. I have a certificate from Col. Thos. Minor of Spotsylvania County, stating; "he knew John Marston before the Revolutionary war, during the war & in the service and was acquainted with him since the war and that he and in Spotsylvania County V.a." I am thus explicit in giving Col Minor's Certificate because I have understood that application was about being made by persons claiming to be the heirs of John Marston who and mean

Petersburg V. a. and as I think I can prove beyond the shadow of doubt that John Marston who died in Spotsylvania County Virginia is the identical John Marston returned as a supernumerary Lieut. of Gibson's Reg. by the Board of Officers convened for that purpose in 1782 I deem it my duty to give this information without delay
I have the honor to be
Your obedt Servt
Wm H Helm
Hon
Mr. J. Dean Sec. Treasury

LA 1073.
LA 1096.
1897.

Sir
Department of War, Bounty L d Office
April 10 th 1838
The enclosed letter from Mr. W m Helms, which was referred to this Office on the 7 th inst. being evidently intended to produce an impression that neglect on the part of this Office, had caused the delay of which he complains in regard to the claim for bounty land to which his letter refers, I have the honor to state that, whatever delay has occurred in the adjustment and satisfaction of this claim is attributable to the perverseness of Mr. Helms, himself. On his first application, several months ago, and again on a subsequent occasion, he was distinctly informed that, the claim would be satisfied, when the parties interested in it would comply with the established rules of the Department in making their application, that these rules exacted nothing that could be considered onerous or embarrassing, and a printed copy of them was handed to him, and the necessity for a compliance with them, explained. He was further informed that in all cases of allowance of claims in this Office, suitable Vouchers were required to be filed and preserved in justification of such allowance.
Mr. Helms's letter, without date, and written in this City, was referred to this Office on the 3 rd ult. and contained nothing more than the Within Power of Attorney, executed in November 1836, and referring the Department for further evidence, to papers filed in the Pension Office — Mr. Helms was several days in this City prior to the writing of this letter, and repeatedly near the doors of this Office, and, if I am not mistaken, called

not on one occasion, to make some inquiry; and yet, instead of presenting, in person, the power of Attorney when he first came to the City, and thereby affording an opportunity, during his stay, for adjusting any existing difficulty, he seems to have preferred, on the very eve of his departure, to leave a document, which he must have been well aware, from what had been previously told him, was, in itself, inadmissible.
Notwithstanding the pressure of business which constantly & necessarily confines me to my Desk, and prevents me from leaving it to go to other Offices to search for, and examine papers, copies of which ought to be prepared and furnished by applicants or their Agents, I took the earliest opportunity to examine the papers said to be in the Pension Office, and was there informed that, they had been transferred to the Treasury Department, and on application at the Auditor's Office, was shown a mass of papers containing near 20 pages of Manuscript, among which were two Wills, one of which was that of the deceased Officer in whose right the parties were claiming, and the other, that of his Widow, and Sole Devisee, together with sundry papers and evidence to show who were the distributees of the personal estate of the testator — as these papers related solely to a claim for Pensions, and not a fee Simple Right, and as the power of Attorney indicated an expectation on the part of those who signed it, that they each possessed an interest in the land bounty claimed by them, I found on reference to the Wills, that but one of the parties who signed the power, namely — Sarah M. Bolling, was legally entitled to the bounty in question, in which

View of the case, I was confirmed on exhibiting the papers, yesterday, to the Attorney General—
It will be perceived, from the tenor of the enclosed form for application to be complied with by Mrs. Bolling, that nothing more is required from her, than a Declaration (made according to the best of her knowledge and belief) in regard to the rank and service of the Officer, and the line and Regiment to which he belonged; that she has been informed on all these points, is evidenced by her application for bounty land, and her participation in the recently settled claim for "half pay"; Hence there can exist no reasonable objection to a compliance with the form now sent, nor can I perceive any good reason why the settled rules of the Depart., as they apply to this case, should be made to bend to the wishes or convenience of Mr. Holm, or any other Agent for claims, under similar circumstances—
I shall have to obtain from the Auditor such papers as are necessary to file in the case, and have them copied in this Office—
Very Respectfully Your obt. Servt
Wm. Gordon
Sam l . Cooper Esq r Acting Secretary of War

I also further certify that it appears from a List of Officers names who have received certificates for one and two years advanced pay agreeable to Act of Assembly passed November Session 1781, That a certificate issued on the 18th February 1782 for £114. 0. 6 in the name John Marston a Lieut. of Infantry in the State Line, which certificate appears to have been delivered to Captain Hamilton.
Given under my hand at the Auditor Office Richmond this 24th day of December 1849.
J. E. Heath Ward

THIS IS TO CERTIFY, That it appears from a list in this office of such Officers and Soldiers of the Virginia State Line as settled their accounts and received certificates for the balance of their Full Pay, according to an act of assembly, passed the November session 1781, directing the Auditors of Public Accounts to settle and adjust the pay and accounts of the said Officers and Soldiers from the 1st January 1777 to 31st December 1781, (see Hening's Statutes at Large, vol. 10, p. 462,) that a settlement was made on the 2 nd day of May 1783 in the name of John Marston as Lieut of Infantry and evidence of the indebtedness of the State to him for £ 155. 8. 2 delivered to himself but as the original settlements or copies thereof are not to be found in this office, the term of service embraced therein cannot be stated.
Given under my hand at the First Auditor's Office, Richmond, this 21 st day of December 1849
J. A. E. Heath
W. A. Lewis
[No Seal of Office.]

Colonel Dabney's certificate

Richm. April 30 th 1783
I do certify that Lieut. John Marston has served upwards of three years in the service of this state Cha. Babney Lt. Col.
Executive Department Richmond Va Jan y 7 th 1850
I certify the above to be a true copy of a paper filed in this office.
W. H. Richardson Sec

Churchill Gibbs Dip.
C.
Mr. Churchill's address v } Copy C. Gibbs. The Council

State of Virginia
Madison County S.S.
The deposition of Churchill Gibbs a surviving Officer of the revolution to be read and used as evidence in a cause now pending and undetermined between John B. Christian admr: de bonis non with the will annexed of John Marston dec d a Lieutenant in the war of the revolution against the Commonwealth of Virginia for five years full pay in commutation of his half pay for life for his revolutionary services.
Question by the Plaintiff's Attorney
Were you acquainted with John Marston in the revolutionary war? if so, state to what regiment he belonged, what was his rank in the army, where he lived when he entered the service, and if he continued in service until the close of the war?
Answer by Churchill Gibbs
I was very well acquainted with John Marston in the army of our revolution; he and myself were appointed Lieutenants on the same day in the first Virginia State regiment commanded by Col. George Gibson and served together in said regiment until it returned from the North to Virginia in the year 1780; I was then appointed Brigade Major in General Parker's Brigade of Militia, and Lieutenant Marston was transferred to Col. Chas. Dabney's Legion and was stationed at the Point of Fork, and it has ever since been my impression he continued in service until the close of the war of our Revolution.
Question by the same
Will you state what are your reasons for believing John Marston served in Dabney's Regiment until the close of the Revolutionary War, and the day, month and year, you consider the close of said war.
Answer by the same
My reasons for believing John Marston served as a Lieutenant in Col. Dabney's Regiment until the close of the war are those, I very frequently heard from the Officers of Dabney's reg. They were all old friends and intimate acquaintances, Marston among the rest of them and

and after the close of the war I met with said Marston in Richmond and we talked about his service and I now as much believe he did serve until the close of the war of the revolution as if I had witnessed his service all the time and have seen him discharged. The close of the war in Virginia as settled by our Courts is the 22 nd of April 1783, and further the deponent saith not
Madison County, to wit;
Churchill Gibbs
Sworn to and acknowledged before me a Justice of the
Peace in and for said County This 12 th day of Dec r 1836
W m Fink
A copy
to
J. Robinson Col. Air te C o . for Hon ble D. Law side

E

E
Return of Officers of the State Legion.
   Names. Ending of Service.     Charles Habney, Lt. Col. Commt. April 23, 1783.   Alexander Licht, Major Retired 1st Jany 1783,   Windsor Brown, Capt. April 23, 1783.   Abner Crump, Capt. ditto.   Frederick Woodson, Capt. Stranged 8th Feb. 1783   John Fleet, Lieutenant. ditto.   Wyatt Coleman, Lieutenant. April 23, 1783.   James Harper, Lieutenant. do.   William Slaughter, Lieutenant do.   David Mann, Lieutenant do.   Robert Boush, Ensign do   Christopher Roane, Capt. Art. y Stranged 8th Feb. . 83,   Cary Wyatt, Capt. Lieut. April 23, 1783   Nathaniel Rice, Lieut. do   William Armstead, Capt. Cavalry, Stranged 8th Feb. 1783.   Studley Legges, Lieutenant, do.   Nathaniel L. Sarage, Lieut. do.   Samuel Tinsley, Cornet. do.   William Granes - - do. do.  
Chas Habney, Lieut. Col. Commt.
Note.
The above is copied from a copy, the original of which is filed in the High Court of Chancery, in the suit - Roane & vs The Com'ths.

F

F
Richmond, Virg. the 5th May, 1783
Army
Warrant to William Graves, Quar- ter Master to the State Legion out of the Military fund in part for pay and subsistence from the first April, 1782 to 22 d April 1783, as per order of the Executive — — — — — £ 38.
Do to do. out of do. in full pay } 43.12.4 do. from do to auto — }
I certify that the foregoing is truly copied from the Journal of 1783, now in this Office.
Given under my hand at Richmond, this 11th day of Oct. 1849.
J. C. Heath, 1 st Auditor, Va.
Third Auditor's Office, Feb. 20, 1850.
I certify the foregoing to be a true copy from papers on file in this Office.
J. S. Gallaher, Auditor.

H

Pension Office Feby. 23 d 1850.
I certify that it appears from rolls of Col. Gileson's Regiment on file in this office, that Churchill Gibbs and John Marston were both appointed 2 nd Lieutenants on the 7 th December 1778.
J. J. Gourley Ch. Clk.
At page 41 9 vol. Ligh the accuracy of Gibbs' memory is called in question. Gibbs says in his evidence that he and Marston were appointed Lieutenants on the same day. The record gives credit to his memory and does not discredit his veracity.

John Marston N o . 2223.

Warrenton, Virginia 18 th June 1838
Sir;
I herewith enclose the Power of attorney & do, really regret that I have given you so much trouble about this small case, Accept my thanks for the part you have taken in it
I am, Most truly Your obedient humble servant -
J. M. Helm
Capt. Cooper act. Sec. War.
~

11156 Wm Helm
June 28 1838
General Land Office
2223 - 200
Recd Rec
Copy of Power atty
Required by the Mathews
for
Sent to Genl Land Office
Washington City July 2 1838
Dear Sir
Hon.
Free
30 1/2
June 24 30 1838

Warrenton, Virginia 28 th June 1838
Sir;
I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of yours of the 22 nd Inst. enclosing Land Warrant No. 2223 in the name of Sarah M. Bolling, for the Revolutionary services of Lt. John Marston deceased and as I, also, this day enclose the Warrant to the Commissioner of the Genl. L. Office to be satisfied with Land Scrip, I must ask the favour of you to allow the power of attorney to be filed in that office as their Voucher upon which to issue to me the Scrip due on the Warrant.
I am, Sir, Most respectfully Your obedient humble Servt.
Wm H. Helm
Capt. Cooper Act. Sec. War. }

bounty lands

The within Copies of the Wills of John Marston & Susannah Marston, were withdrawn from the 3 d Auditors Office where they had been filed with other papers relating to a claim for pay under the act of 5 th July/ 1832. in right of S t M r . Marston de d the originals whereof are now on file in the Third Auditors Office —

Warrenton, Virginia, 19th May 1838
Sir,
I have enclosed to Rott. B. Bolling Your two letters with the report of the officer having charge of the bounty land office, & the printed form of application for United States bounty land with a request that he would get his wife Sarah M. Bolling to comply with the requirements of your Department - in order to enable you to order the clerk having charge of the Bureau to issue the I.O. or order for the revolutionary services of Lt. Geo. Matstom
I have the honor to be, most respectfully, Your obedient servant -
Wm H Helm
Sec. War.
5

B1152 - June 15, 1838
3 Bourne, Land Office
To the Hon
Current the moment issue in this station
R. June 15, 1838

Sir
Petersburg Virginia June 12 th 88.
The enclosed papers were sent me, by Dr. Wm Helm of Fauquier County in this State, accompanied by the request; that Mrs Sarah M. Bol- ling, might testify to certain facts in relation to her late husband John Newton, according to the printed form sent me & that all the papers might be returned to the Department of War, provided Mrs B. could do so. In compliance with the Dr's request. The papers alluded to are none herewith returned. Mrs B however cannot testify and declare that John Newton was or was not a lieu t in the Revolution, neither can she speak as to what time he entered or how long he served in the War, nor under whom, or where he served. She can however declare in general terms that she has heard from her late Mother, Mrs Minges, that said Mother did according to Mrs Minges information serve in the War. She can further declare that she is the sole heir, or will appear by the wills of John & Sarah M. Newton, and finally that she

has never  received the bounty- land promised to S d J. Munton, on the foot of the M.S., but cannot say whether he did or did not receive or transfer his claims.
Very respectfully
To the Hon ble  the
Robt. B. Bolling " "
Sec. R. Poinsett
Sec. of War of the U.S.
Dear Sir, with all respect

Department of War April 11 th 1838.
Sir,
I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 5 th instant, in reference to your application for bounty land in behalf of the heirs of John Marston deceased, and in reply to transmit you a report of the Officer in charge of the Bounty Land Office on that subject.
Very respectfully Yr most obed. Servt J. Cooper. Acting Secretary of War
Doctor William Helms Warrenton, Virginia

Ms. A. 9. 2. 23. 327
FREE
2 Dec 1847.
J. L. Edwards Esq., Com te of Pensions Washington City D. C.
[Faint handwritten text, possibly "Yours sincerely"]
2223
Ms. A. 9. 2. 23. 327

Richmond Va Nov: 30th 1827
Dear Sir,
Will you be so kind as to inform me whether the name of John Marston, a Revolutionary Soldier of the Va line, appears on the files of the proper office; and if so whether he is entitled to Bounty Land from the United States. He served as a lieutenant during the war, and it is believed by his heirs that he never received his Bounty Land. I think that he was a member of the Continental Army.
Having some business to transact with the pension office, and being desirous of doing it in that way which would be most agreeable to you, I respectfully enquire of you whether you would prefer the parties making their applications in person, or by letter.
An Answer to the above enquiries at the earliest day will be thankfully received.
J. L. Edwards Esq Com r of } Very Respectfully Pensions } Eaton France
Decem r 4 th 27. Informed Mr. France, that Warr t . N o 2223 for 200. acres issued 21 st June 1833. in right of John Marston, dec d , who was a Lieut t . of the Va a Line - also, that, there is no existing law authorizing the issue of land Warrants of either the Revolutionary, or the late War classes.

ap 10 1843
Ino Mansfield 5 July 32.
11
Commissioner of Pensions Washington City D.C.

Free Capt. Bowles
Idar
Warrenton

✓ Department of the Interior January. 18 th 1850.
Sir,
I herewith enclose additional evidence in the case of Lieut. John Manslow, A.S.O., and I am of the opinion, that the case should be re- opened for examination.
I am very respectfully Your Obedt Servant.
J. Emory Keckley.
James L. Edrards Esq. Bureau of Pensions.

St. Marston

Department of the Interior Washington
25 August 1849.
Sir,
In the case of the late Lieut. John Mauston, brought before this Department by your letter of yesterday, it appears that it has already been decided by the Commissioner of Pensions, — an appeal taken to the Secretary of War, and the decision of the Commissioner confirmed by that Officer. — A review is now asked for, not upon a recent decision, but after a lapse of many years.
The rules of the Department forbid the re-examination asked for. These questions, like all others, of a judicial character, must at some point be considered as settled and terminated.
Very respectfully,
Your obedient Servant,
H. C. Scott Esq. Warrenton, Va.
J. Ewing Secretary.

Jan'y 22/50
[Faint, illegible handwriting]
Friend Mr. Marston Mr. Coombs
Wm. H. Allen

It appears from the Muster Roll Field Staff and Company Officers of 12 th Va. State Regiment than
John Mays
4
Churchill Gibbs was both appointed Lieutenant in 1 st Regiment on 2 Decem 1778; and also Mays is found upon the Roll of Left Wing Company

As a Ch. Act, and part as a small op and Reprint - for Oct 1977

Brown's Hotel, Washington City D.C. 22 nd January, 1850.
Sir
I was informed yesterday at the Department of the Interior that the Secretary had opened the case of Lieutenant John Marston for commutation of Half-pay, upon my application, & that it is at this time before you for examination. My only object in addressing you this is to call your attention to the remarks of the Court of appeals in their decision (see 9 th vol. Leigh p. 41) of this case; Gibbs did not say in his evidence that Marston was transferred to Dabney's Legion in 1780. In his evidence he simply says after speaking of his service with Marston in Col. Gw. Gibson's Reg. to the north that they returned to Virginia in 1780 and that he was himself appointed Brigadier Major in Parkers Militia and that Marston was transferred to Dabney's Legion. He don't say that took place that year and of course means that it took place when Dabney's Legion was formed - here I will remark the accuracy of Gibbs' memory; he says he & Marston were appointed lieutenants the same day and the records bears him out in that statement; - See Muster roll of Field, Staff, and company officers 1 st Va. State Regiment They were both appointed lieutenants 7 th December 1778.
The Court then go on to say that Dabney having returned a list of officers who were with him at the end of the war and Marston's name not appearing on that list that he could not have been in service. But Col. Dabney was stationed in Hampton York Town or Portsmouth at the close of the war & Marston was at the Point of Fork up the James river 50 miles above Richmond & that may have been the cause of his name not appearing on the list of those officers that were with him Dabney at the close, & he Marston was on a separate command at the Point of Fork, - Gibbs says he met with him Marston at Richmond

and conversed with him and merely believes he served to the end of the war. The evidence is all with you and is respectfully submitted for your consideration.
I am very respectfully yr. ost. Servt.
Wm. Helm
Id. Edwards Co. Pa.
Con. Parsons

Copy of Mr. Walke's letter
1814

Copy B
War Department, November 30 th 1844.
Sir, The President has referred to this Department your communication to him, appealing from the decision of the Commissioner of Pensions upon the claim for half pay in the case of Lieut. John Marston, deceased. You claim a greater allowance than has been made & base this claim upon a judgment of the Court of Appeals of Virginia rendered subsequently to the act of July 5 th 1832, under which these claims for half pay arise. That act positively directed payment to be made without investigation by the Department, in the cases in which judgments had been rendered, because, without doubt, as those cases were before Congress, that Body was satisfied of their merits, and therefore of the correctness of the judgments. But with respect to the cases which had not been prosecuted to judgment, the act of July 5 th 1832, requires the Department to adjudicate them upon their merits, to ascertain by evidence the nature of the service, its commencement and termination, and the rank and corps, whether they were so far similar to those in which judgments had been rendered by the Court of Appeals, that the State

State, according to the principles of those judgments, would be bound to pay them. To omit such an adjudication, would, in the opinion of this Department, be a palpable neglect of duty. The Department has every disposition to pay all proper respect to the decisions of the Court of Appeals, but having regard to the provisions and intent of the act of July 1832, it cannot be governed by them alone. The case in question has been carefully examined upon the evidence which has been presented, and as great an allowance been made as it justified.
Very Respectfully Dear Mr. Scott.
(Signed)
W m Wilkins Secretary of War
William Helm Esq. Warrenton Virginia

Shelby (Warrenton Co.), Va. 8th April 1843
Sir;
Yours of the 4th inst. is received, & before me, & but for the error committed by me in copying my letter to you of the 1 st inst. I should not, I must hope, have been under the necessity of writing this. I will copy yours to the error alluded to - "Sir: I have received your letter of the 1 st inst. asking me to review the case of Lieut. John Marston deceased, in order to ascertain whether I have allowed payment in strict accordance with judgement."
Such a letter would have been offensive  disrespectful It would have been a disrespectful allusion to your judgement of which I beg leave to disclaim any intention of making
In the original of which, mine of the 1 st inst. to you was a copy, the definite article article "the" comes between the words "with" and "judgement" and the words "in question" follow next after judgement and finishes the letter, which makes that part of the letter read thus, - "in strict accordance with the judgement-in question"
If you will read over my letter you will find the judgement-alluded to is the judgement of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, so having repaired my blunder, as I hope to your satisfaction I must conclude by expressing a hope that you will consider the judgement of the Va. Supreme Court of Appeals as sufficient evidence to sustain my claim, and I trust, Sir, that I am specific enough in my request when I complain that by your decision of the 27th February 1838 I am deprived of

nearly fifteen months of the half pay found by the Court of Appeals to be due to Marston's administrator
You, Sir, adjusted this claim in compliance with the Act of Congress of the 5 th July 1832, did you not thereby recognise it as an outstanding case, or claim? & if so did you not comply with this Act of Congress in adjusting & settling it on the principles of the half pay cases already decided in the Supreme Court of Appeals of Va a ? No. That Court decided that when an officer became supernumerary and quit the service his half pay should commence from that time & in this case The Court decided upon proof satisfactory to them, that Lieut John Marston left the service & became super- numerary on the 14 th day of April 1782
You allowed pay in the case to commence from the 22 d day of April 1783, - you can you produce any proof that Lieut. John Marston served to the end of the war and then became a supernumerary officer? If you cannot I furnished the best proof of the determination of his service to wit. The judgment of the Court of Appeals & demand payment in strict ac- -cordance with the said decision
I am, Sir, very respectfully, Your obedient servant
W m H. Helen
J. L. Edwards Esq r Com. of Pensions

Irving Hotel, Washington city D.C. 26 th February, 1850
Sir
You were frank enough to say to me the other day that any evidence that I could produce showing that Col. Dabney's  the list of officers spoken of by the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals in Marston's case was incomplete would so far lessen the force & weight of that Judgement, I have already satisfied you that William Graves Graves, who is reported on that list as "deserted 8 th February, 1783," was paid up to the 22 d of April, 1783, by the proper authorities of Virginia, so that in his case at least the correctness of the list may be called in question, I now call your attention to the name of William Spencer , a Lieutenant of Light Dragoons of Col. Dabney's Legion recently settled with for service to the close of the war - That name is not on Dabney's list so much relied on by the court of Appeals, the evidence of Samuel Lindsey is herewith enclosed, he says Spencer was stationed at Winchester , Va. from the time he aided in guarding the prisoners taken at the siege of York until the Legion was disbanded - May. That not fairly account for his name not appearing on Col. Dabney's return, he being stationed at Winchester, Dabney some distance below Richmond. Gibbs says Marston was stationed at the Point of York a place containing all at the Magazines of Virginia. See life of Genl. Muhlent - Burg page 256 - 8

certainly that place required a strong guard
Genl Muhlenberg speaks of Winchester as a place of general rendezvous for all the troops then collecting &c. Sep. 286 - So that Spencer was there with the troops. This life of Muhlenberg was written long since Gibbs or Tinsley saw their evidence in the respective cases of Marston, & Spencer.
At page 42 of Leigh the Judge says Marston was admitted to have been reported in service by the board of officers that sat in 1782 of them in service, and adds "Between that time period and the termination of the war, he must have either resigned, or become a supernumerary by the subsequent reductions of the regiments, which are known to have taken place". "I cannot presume he resigned his commission at that late period. The Commonwealth indeed does not allege it, and if she did the burden of proof would be on her." "I think then we ought to conclude that he thereafter became a supernumerary." Now where do they find authority to allege he became supernumerary when they admit they have none to say he resigned?
I beg Sir that you will give this subject your attention and make such further statement of this case as may be deemed just & proper
I am, Sir, very respectfully, yr.
J. H. Coombs, esq.
Chief Clk. Pension Office
abt Servt A. W. Helms
Advt of Lt. Genl. Marston

1 st Session 22 d Congress
Chap. LXXVI. — An act for the relief of the heirs of William Vawter.
Be it enacted, etc. that the proper accounting officers of the Treasury be, and they are hereby, required to settle and adjust the account of the heirs of William Vawter, and allow to them five years' full pay for their father's services as a Second Lieutenant in the Revolutionary War with such interest thereon as the party would have been entitled to if a final settlement certificate had been issued for the amount of his commutation, and the same had been subscribed to the loan created by the act, 1790, providing for the funding of the debt of the United States, which 5 years' full pay is the commutation of his half pay for life; to be paid out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated.
approved May 25 th , 1832.
Vawter belonged to same regiment with Marston and supernumerary in 1780, yet he got commutation and subsequently half pay.

Reports of Committee 1 Res 23 rd Congress Vol 2 nd No 230. Report of the Marshall made Jan 30 th 1834

Lt James Marston

Commonwealth vs the Adm or of Lieut James Marston of the Virginia State Line
See 9 th Leigh's Reports of Virginia Court of Appeals. Page 36.
The following principles are settled:
I. Who entitled to half pay.
I. An officer of the Virginia Line on State establishment during the Revolution, who became Supernumerary, after the passing of the Act of May 1779, ch. 6 th - but before the end of the War, and so continued (that is Supernumerary) till the end of the War , is entitled to half pay life, and to half pay only, upon the Authority of Lilly's Case 1 st Leigh pages 255 which being directly in point, is to be followed.
II. Who entitled to Commutation.
I. It is decided, that officers in the State Service, who continued in actual Service till the end of the War , were entitled to demand Commutation of five years full pay, with interest from the end of the War, in lieu of half pay for life, according to the practical Construction of the Acts of Assembly relating to the subject; but officers, who became Supernumerary before the end of the War , could only claim half pay for life, not Commutation. Same Case page 36
III. Where claims, for half pay may be settled.
1. The Act of Congress of July 1832, authorising the settlement of claims of officers, of the State Service in the State Service of Virginia for half pay, at the Treasury of the United States, is no reason for refusing the settlement of such claims at the Treasury of Virginia, or for our Courts, declining to adjudicate such claims, and to decree them when found justly due. Same Case

Certificate - John Marston del d at 5 July 1832
Feb. 27. 1838
Record Vob 43. page 132.

Pension Office
February 27. 1838
I certify that I have examined the claim of the heirs of the late John Marston, dec d who was a lieutenant in the first Virginia State regiment commanded by Colonel George Gibson; That he continued in the service until he became a supernumerary officer; That he died in Surry County, Virginia, between the 25 th October 1797 and the 27 th March 1798; That the case is embraced by the provisions of the act of the 5 th of July 1832 1832, entitled "An act to provide for the liquidating and paying certain claims of the State of Virginia;" That the claim should therefore be allowed at the rate of One Hundred and Sixty Dollars per annum, from the twenty second of April nineteen hundred and eighty three, when the war terminated, to the twenty seventh of February fifth of October seventeen hundred and ninety seven; and that the amount is payable to William Adair, of Virginia, administrator de bonis non of said John Marston, dec d .
Approved
Commissioner of Pensions.
Secretary of War.

Decision in Mawston Case

Don as M axton's Adm r
Abstract of Case
An officer of the Virginia line in State establishment during the revolution who became supernumerary after the passing of the Act of May 1779 (ch 6) but before the end of the war was continued until the end of the war is entitled to half-pay for life under the act upon the authority in Lilly's Case 1 Leigh 525, which being directly in point is to be followed.
"Quere whether an officer in the State service who became supernumerary before the Act of May 1779 (ch 6) was entitled to the benefit of the provision thereof?
It seems that officers in the State service, who continued in actual service until the end of the war , were entitled to demand commutation of five years full with interest from the end of the war, in lieu of half-pay for life according to the practical construction of the acts of assembly relating to the subject.

but officers who became supernumerary before the end of the war could only claim half-pay for life, not the commutation—
"The act of Congress of July 1832, authorizing the settlement of claims of officers in the State Ser- vice of Virginia for half-pay at the treasury of the United States, is no reason for refusing the settlement of such claims at the treasury of Virginia or for our courts declining to adjudi- cate such claims, & to decree them when found justly due—
Extract from Justice T. Brokenborough
"The next question is whether the decision of the auditor is to be affirmed. He admits that the board of field officers who sat in 1782 reported Lieut. Marston as entitled to half-pay. That report has been adjudged to be authentic by this Court in Silly's Case . He was then re- ported to be "in service". Between that period & the termination of the war, he must have either resigned

or become a supernumerary by the subsequent reductions of the regiments, which are known to have taken place - I cannot presume that he resigned his commis- sion at that late period. The Common- wealth indeed does not allege it, lest she did the burden of proof would be on her . I think then we ought to con- clude that he thereafter became a su- pernumerary." -