Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File W. 7394, for Hudson Martin, Virginia

SERVICE
NUMBER
Va
Martin, Hudson Jane
W. 7394
died in 1830
and Va. Half Pay
CONTENTS

78 Increase. Richmond  Virginia.
Exp n Jane Martin dec d widow of Hudson Martin who died on the 28 November 1830. of Richmond in the State of Va who was a Grd pay in the Comp y commanded by Captain of the commanded by in the Continental line for 2 years
Inscribed on the Roll of Richmond at the rate of 600 Dollars 00 Cents per annum, to commence on the 4 th day of March, 1831, and end 15 Aug t 1838, when she died.
Certificate of Pension issued the 14 day of Dec r . 1850 and sent to R. H. Gray, Lynchburg Va and released from $480.00 Semi-annual allowance ending
Payable to Jno. M. Martin Esq r for surviving children Revolutionary Claim, Act July 4, 1836, Section the Chase Clerk, Page 378 Recorded by Book Vol. 2
See back of this file
Reported
Payable to Jno M. Martin for himself Hudson Martin Jane Fisher Nicholas S. Martin Geo. W. Martin & Mildred H. Carr.
only surviving Children
Certificate corrected & sent to R. H. Gray Esq r Present
Jan y 15 th 1837 notification also corrected
let S. Godwin Sept 8/57.
R. H. Gray 32 Jany 27/57 See y th the Mt - Mch 4/82

State of Virginia?
Nelson County - S To wit - On this 10 th day of Dec- -ember 1836 personally appeared before me a justice of the peace in and for said County Jane Martin, a res- -ident of said County and State aforesaid, aged 78 years on the 16 th day of July 1837 next - who being first duly sworn according to law, doth on her oath, make the fol- -lowing declaration in order to obtain the benefit of the pro- -vision of the made by the Act of Congress, passed July 4. 1836. That she is the widow of Hudson Martin who was a Lieuten- -ant and pay master in the Virg a Continental Line in the War of the Revolution - That she has frequently heard her said husband speak of being at Brandywine and Germantown & many other places during the Revolution, and call the names of many officers who were in service with him, but the lapse of time, and failure of her memory as to such matters at this time, prevents a more full and circumstantial statement. She states that her said husband was in service at the time of their marriage, and that he continued in active service for several years afterwards, and was with the troops at Charlot- -ville and Winchester before the close of the said War -
She further declares that she was married to the said Hudson Martin on the second day of December one thousand sev- -en hundred and seventy eight; the same being entered in her family bible now in her possession - and that her s d husband, the aforesaid Hudson Martin died on the 28 th day of November 1830 the same being entered in the family Prayer Book belonging to her now in her possession - and that she

has remained the widow of the said Hudson Martin ever since his death, as will appear by reference to the proof hereto annexed.
Jane Martin
Sworn to and subscribed on the day and year above written before me a justice of the peace of Nelson County as aforesaid John M. Smith.
I John M. Smith the justice above named do hereby further certify that the above Jane Martin could not with convenience attend before the Court of Nelson County in order to make her declaration, on account of her extreme age and bodily infirmity - and I further certify that the said Jane Martin is a person of strict veracity, and that her statements are entitled to full faith and credit - given under my hand this 10 th day of Dec r 1836.
John M. Smith
State of Virginia?
Nelson County } To wit - On this 10 th day of Dec r 1836 personally came before me a justice of the peace in and for said County, Nicholas L. Martin and made oath that Jane Martin, declarant in the annexed declaration, is now, and has been the widow of the late Hudson Martin ever since his death - and that said Hudson Martin died on the 28 th of November 1830 - He further states that the Registry of the Marriage of the said Hudson Martin and the above named Jane Martin is made in the hand writing of the said Hudson Martin, on the blank page in the family bible of his family now in the possession of said Jane Martin - Nicholas L. Martin

1101 3. ms. G. payment  State of Virg a } Nelson County } To wit - The within declarant Jane Mar- tin further states by way of addition to her annexed declara- -tion, that she was married on the day and year speci- -fied in her annexed declaration, in the town of Charlottes- -ville in the County of Albemarle and State aforesaid. Given under my hand this 20 th day of Decr. 1836 - John M Smith
State of Virginia, } To wit: Nelson County, } I, Spotswood Garland, Clerk of the County Court, of the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify, that John M Smith who hath given the preceding certificate is an acting Justice of the Peace in (and for said County), duly commissioned (and qualified); that his com- -mission was dated on the fifth day of April 1836, and will continue during good behaviour, (and that his signatures above and within written, are genuine). Given under my hand, and the seal of said County, this 10th day of December, 1836. Sp: Garland, Clerk.
State of Virginia, Nelson County, to wit: I, Joseph Shelton presiding Justice of the Court of Nelson County, in the State aforesaid, do hereby certify that Spotswood Garland, who hath given the preceding certificate is Clerk of the said Court, (and that his said attestation is in due form). Given under my hand at the County aforesaid, this 10th day of December 1836. (and in the 61st year of the Commonwealth). Jos: Shelton.

to I subscribed before me a picture of the peace as aforesaid. Given under my hand this day and year aforesaid - John M Smith
And the said picture further certifies that the above named Nicholas L. Martin he has known for many years and that his statement is entitled to full faith and credit - Given under my hand this day and year above written - John M Smith
And the said picture further certifies that on an inspec- -tion of the family bible and prayer book referred to in the preceding declaration of Mrs Jane Martin, and affidavit of Nicholas L. Martin, I find that the entries of marriages, births and deaths made therein are genuine - and that the date of the Registry of the marriage of Hudson Martin and Jane Lewis now Jane Martin, the declarant, is 28 th Nov. 1778. and that his death is stated in the prayer book referred to to have taken place on the 28 th Nov. 1830. Given un- -der my hand this day and year above written -
John M Smith

State of Virginia
Albemarle County Court Clerk's Office, Charlottesville.
I, Richard Clark of said County do hereby certify that I have examined the records of Marriages and the files of Marriage Licenses found in my said Office and can find no record showing that a License had been granted to Thomas Martin to intermarry with his wife Anne Lewis. I further certify that there is no regular list or records of Marriages in my said Office previous to the year 1790.
Given under my hand at my said Office this 12 th day of December 1836.
Richard Clark of Albemarle County
(Handwritten signature)
State of Virginia Albemarle County

Copy Hudson Martin's Will
(cont.)
//
then to be his own

I Hudson Martin of the County of Nelson do make and ordain here by my last will and Testament in manner following.
First having made advances to my son Hudson Martin to some amount in property & otherwise in money as stated on my books, I hereby give and devise the same and every part thereof to him and his heirs forever, Together with any bond or notes of his, I may have taken in heretofore or paid for him.
2dly Having heretofore made advances to my daughter Mary W. Dickinson deceased, both in lands and slaves and other property, my will and desire is the same do descend equally to conveyances already made, and the Laws of Virginia.
3dly Whereas I have heretofore conveyed to my son John M. Martin the lands charged him on my books Novem r 8 th 1817 Together with other entries at the time made thereon as a memorandum or contract by which he may become indebted, I give and devise to him and his heirs forever for all entries prior thereto, on his settling with James Napier the sum of Two hundred pounds for building the mill which I suppose long ago to have been done, I also give to my son John M. Martin in Trust for the use and support of my son George W. Martin that part of my land I live on on the east side of the road to be designated by the fence thro the field from the road to the draw bars, from thence across the river to a corner of Mr Coles on the opposite side, and with his lines to the road, thence with the road to where the cross fence starts from, to be used for his benefit in such manner as my said son John M. Martin may think most proper or otherwise direct.
4thly. All the remaining part of my land I now live on I lend to my loving wife during her natural life (or widowhood) Together with my remaining patent of mountain land containing Two hundred and seventy acres , and after her decease I give and devise to my son Nicholas L. Martin all that part lying on the west side of the main road, Together with the patent of two hundred and seventy acres before mentioned to him and his heirs forever.
5thly. I give and devise to my son John M. Martin the remaining part of the tract of land, I live on (after the death of his mother) on the east side of the road. to him and his heirs forever.
6thly. I likewise leave all the right, Title & interest I may have in the estate of my deceased father in law descending to my

loving wife Jane by the death of her mother, to be by my said wife disposed of in any way she may think proper among our children or Grand children.
7 th ly. Having become bound to my son John M. Martin by promise that he should have out of my estate in the sum of fifteen hundred dollars as an advance to my Daughter Mildred H. Carr the land I lived on that part given him is to make the promise certain, and before a general division takes place it is my wish to make my daughter Jane L. Faber & Mildred H. Carr equal in advance to others who have left me, I wish that each should have out of my Estate $1500. to be ascertained by disinterested men as to value of property, the first day of May 1828 with Interest.
8 th ly. All the property of negroes or furniture heretofore given to any of my children is hereby confirmed to them & their heirs forever.
9 th ly. My will is that my lands and negroes furniture stock &c be kept together during the life of my wife under the direction and advice of my Two sons John M. Martin & Nicholas L. Martin as far as may be consistent with law or equity meaning that part of land lent her during her life.
10 th ly. All my property both real and personal not hereby given, may be sold and conveyed by my Executrix hereafter named, and after paying all just debts, to make an equal division among all our children and Grand children agreeable to the laws of Virginia, always during the life time of my wife to retain in possession such slaves or other furniture as she may wish.
The land heretofore given my son Henry, deed revoking back to me with 185 acres adjoining known by the name of Little Love with all back lands & others is intended to comply with the contents of this will not herein otherwise mentioned.
Lastly I appoint my loving wife my sons John M. Martin Nicholas L. Martin and my son in law William Faber Ex rs & Executrix of this my last will and Testament written with my own hand & sealed with my seal. This 23 rd day of June in the year of our Lord Jesus Christ 1828.
Hudson Martin
At a Court held for Nelson County the 27 th day of December 1830. This Instrument of writing purporting to be the last Will and

Testament of Hudson Martin dec d was produced into Court, and there being no subscribing witness thereto, Charles Pierce was sworn, and deposed that he was well acquainted with the Testator's hand writing, and most believes the said writing and the name therein subscribed, to be wholly written by the Testator's own hand, and the Court being further satisfied from an inspection of the said Will, that the same is entirely in the hand writing of the Testator, the same was ordered to be recorded; and on the motion of Nicholas L. Martin, one of the Execut therein ors named, who made oath thereto, and together with John Whithead, Alexander Brown, and John M c Martin his security entered into and acknowledged his bond in the penalty of twenty Thou- sand dollars, conditioned as the law directs, certificate is granted him for obtaining a probat of the said Will in due form.
Teste.
Sp. Garland Ck.
A. J. Tute. Sp. Garland, Ck.

M rs Jane Martin widow of Hudson Martin —
12

Hudson Martin was born July the third 1752 O.S.
Jane Lewis was born July the sixth 1759.
Hudson Martin and Jane Lewis were married December the second 1779.
Nicholas Lewis Martin son of Hudson and Jane his wife was born September the 20 th 1779 about half past 11 o'clock P.M. & died August 1 st 1787.
Hudson Martin son of Hudson and Jane his wife was born July the 26 th about 9 o'clock P.M., in 1781.
John Massie Martin son of Hudson & Jane his wife was born June the 23 d 1783 about 3 o'clock P.M.
Molley Walker Martin daughter of Hudson & Jane his wife was born June the 13 th 1784 about 1 o'clock A.M. & died November 24 th 1814 about 3 o'clock P.M.
Jane Lewis Martin daughter of Hudson & Jane his wife was born January the 11 th 1790, about 3 o'clock A.M.
Nicholas Lewis Martin son of Hudson & Jane his wife was born December 11 th 1791, about 3 o'clock A.M.
Henry Buck Martin son of Hudson & Jane his wife was born January the 12 th 1794 about 11 o'clock A.M. & died January 16 th 1828 about 10 o'clock A.M.
George Washington Martin son of Hudson & Jane his wife was born February the 19 th 1796 about 1 o'clock A.M.
Mildred Kinsley Martin daughter of Hudson & Jane his wife was born February the 16 th 1801 about 6 o'clock P.M.
John Hudson Lewis son of John M. Mildred his wife was born the 5 th of December 1819 about 9 o'clock A.M.
Nicholas Lewis was born June 19 th 1794. Died Dec 8 th 1808 — Mary Lewis was born June 24 th 1792 — Died February 9 th 1824

Before CHRIST cir. 397.
CHAP. IV.
1 God's judgments on the wicked, 2 and his blessing on the good. 4 He exhorteth to the study of the law, 5 and telleth of Elijah's coming and office.
FOR behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.
a Luke. I. 78.
2 But unto you that fear my name, shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.
Before CHRIST cir. 397.
3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts.
b Exod. 20. 3.
4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments.
c Matth. 11. 14. Mark 9. 11. Luke 1. 17.
5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.
The END of the PROPHETS.

State of Virginia - Nelson County S.S.
I John W. Smith a justice of the peace in & for the said County, do hereby certify that on the 19 th day of Feby. 1837 the leaf containing the statements on Registry of the marriage of the late Hudson Martin and Jane Lewis & other entries, and which is hereto annexed, was taken from the family bible of the said Hudson Martin and by myself, and delivered to the attorney in fact of said Jane Martin to be exhibited at the War Department, together with the Prayer Book of said Jane Martin showing the day of the decease of said Hudson Mar- -tin, and when so exhibited to be returned to the said Jane Martin at her request. Given under my hand this 19 th day of February 1837 -
John W. Smith

State of Virginia Nelson County } ss
Be it known that before me George L. White- head — a Justice of the Peace for the County and State aforesaid personally appeared John M Martin of Giles County and made oath in due form of Law that he is the Executor of Jane Martin the Widow of Hudson Martin, That she was the identical person who was a pensioner, and who is now dead and to whom a Certifi- cate of Pension was issued under the third section of the act of Congress of the 4 th July 1836 at the rates of $320 per annum from the 4 th March 1831 to the Fifteenth day of August 1838 on account of the revolutionary services of the said Hudson Martin a Lieutenant in the Virginia Continental line — That the deceased pensioner, Jane Martin resided in the County of Nelson and State of Virginia, for the space of Forty five years before her death and that previous thereto she resided in Albemarle County.
That the said Jane Martin died in the County of Nelson on the 15 th day of August 1838 leaving the following Children then alive viz Hudson Martin Jane Bates formerly Jane Martin Nicholas L Martin George H Martin Melinda H Carr formerly Melinda H Martin
and the affiant. That he the affiant subsequently qualified in the County aforesaid as Executor of her estate, and is now the Executor of the same. The said affiant further states that he has been informed that the said Hudson Martin was Paymaster for more than two years, while he was Lieutenant as aforesaid, and that in the allowance of the Pension of $320 — under the act of Congress of the 4 th July 1836 no estimate was made of the services of said Hudson Martin as Paymaster, which the affiant is informed should have been taken into consideration if the fact had been made known to the Department. He refers to the Public records, and particularly to the extracts from those of the State of Virginia, which will accompany this application now made for the balance of Pension, so due and unpaid to the said Jane Martin Widow of said Hudson Martin from the 3 rd day of March 1831 to the time of her death viz. The Fifteenth day of August 1838
John M Martin

Sworn to and subscribed before me a justice of the Peace for the said County this 28 th day of April 1843 rd
Floyd L. Whitehead J.P.
Virginia Nelson County To Wit,
It appearing to the satisfaction of the Court, it is ordered to be Certified, that Jane Martin the widow of Hudson Martin herself late a pensioner of the United States at the rate of $320, per annum died in the County of Nelson on the 15 day of August 1838 leaving as her children then living the following persons viz Hudson Martin John M Martin Jane Martin formerly Jane Martin Nicholas L Martin George H Martin and Melvina H. Carr formerly Melvina H Martin That the said John M Martin qualified as the Executor on her estate and that he is still the Executor
Virginia Nelson County To Wit
I, Spotswood Garland, Clerk of the Court of Nelson County do Certify that Floyd L. Whitehead who hath Certified the foregoing affidavit of John M Martin the Executor of Jane Martin is and was at the time of giving said Certificate a justice of the peace duly qualified according to law in and for the County aforesaid and that the signature purporting to be his is genuine - I do further Certify that at the April Term of the County Court of Nelson an order was entered of record Certifying the time of the death of Jane Martin and the names of her children which said Order is truly Copyed, above.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the seal of my office this 29 th day of April 1843 rd
Sp: Garland, Clerk of Nelson County Court

REPRESENTATIVES OF HUDSON MARTIN.
————— MARCH 8, 1842.
Laid upon the table. —————
Mr. HALL, from the Committee on Revolutionary Claims, made the following adverse
REPORT :
The Committee on Revolutionary Claims, to which was referred the petition of the representatives of Hudson Martin, submit the following report :
The petitioners claim commutation pay for the services of Hudson Martin, as a lieutenant in the 9th Virginia continental regiment, and as paymaster, to the end of the war.
No evidence is produced; but the petitioners say they have been allowed the land bounty of a lieutenant, 2,666 acres, by the Executive of Virginia; and they refer to the original warrant, on file with the Commissioner of the Land Office at Washington, as proof of their right to commutation.
It appears, from an authentic list in possession of the committee, that the heirs of Hudson Martin were allowed 2,666 acres, the Virginia land bounty, June 30, 1838, for his service as a lieutenant for three years in the continental line; but the experience of the committee has satisfied them that the grant of such warrant furnishes not the slightest presumption that any such service was performed.
From rolls of the Virginia line, in possession of the committee, it appears that Hudson Martin was appointed ensign in the 9th Virginia regiment, March 11, 1776; that he became lieutenant July 26, 1776; and that he resigned April 25, 1778. His original commission, with the endorsement of his resignation upon it, is found in the volume of Virginia resignations, among the Washington papers in the State Department.
Having served but two years and two and a half months, he was not entitled to the land bounty of Virginia.
The committee recommend that the claim be rejected.

Rev. and 1812 Wars Section AWP/eel
May 18, 1929
Mrs. W.J.Oliver 109 N. Pleasant Street Prescott, Arizona
Madam:
I advise you from the papers in the Revolutionary War pension claim, W.7394, it appears that Hudson Martin was born July 3, 1752 (old style).
While residing in Albemarle County, Virginia, he was appointed March 11, 1776, Ensign in Captain Thomas Walker's Company, Ninth Virginia Regiment, was made a Lieutenant July 26, 1776, and served until April 25, 1778. He served as Lieutenant and Paymaster at Albemarle Barracks from January 22, 1779, to August 1, 1781.
He died November 28, 1830, in Nelson County, Virginia.
The soldier married December 2, 1778, in Charlottesville, Albemarle County, Virginia, Jane Lewis, daughter of Colonel Nicholas Lewis, of Albemarle County, Virginia. She was born July 6, 1759.
She was allowed pension on her application executed December 10, 1836, at which time she was living in Nelson

County, Virginia. She died there August 15, 1838.
Their children were:
Nicholas Lewis Martin born September 20, 1779, died August 1, 1787. Hudson " July 26, 1781. John Massie " June 23, 1783. Molley Walker " June 13, 1787, married ---Dickinson died November 24 23, 1814. Jane Lewis " January 11, 1790, married William Faber. Nicholas Lewis " December 11, 1791. Henry Buck " January 12, 1794, died January 14, 1828. George Washington " February 19, 1796. Mildred Harnsley " February 16, 1801, married ---Carr.
The following also appears on the family record:
John Hudson Carr, son of John F. and Mildred, his wife, was born December 5, 1819; Nicholas Lewis was born January 19, 1734, died December 8, 1808; Mary Lewis was born June 24, 1742, died February 9, 1824.
The following children survived their mother:
Hudson Martin, Jane Faber, Nicholas L. Martin, George W. Martin, Mildred H. Carr, John M. Martin.
Respectfully,
E. W. MORGAN Acting Commissioner.

Hudson Martin M.7394
Six pay rolls, of guards stationed at Albemarle Barracks during Revolution, under Col. Francis Taylor, have been removed from this case, with view of forwarding same to War Dept. at some future date. The rolls may be found in safe, in room of Chief of Old War and Navy Div.
Sent to War Dept. Nov 8. 1905
Co. D May 9 1905

1 I John Thomas of the County of Albemarle and State of Virginia now in the seventy eighth year of his age - do hereby certify that in the Spring of the year 1776 that a certain Capt. Thomas Walker living in the aforesaid County and State raised by enlistment for the period of eighteen months or two years, under the Continental establishment a Company of soldiers which he the said Walker commanded, and at the same time a certain Hudson Martin , of the aforesaid County & State, was appointed Ensign in said Company - and that soon after the said Company was raised it marched from Albemarle I believe to Norfolk and remained there and on the Eastern Shore of Virginia perhaps until the Spring of 1777 when he understood that the said Company was ordered somewhere to the North, in & about Philadelphia, and served the full term of eighteen months or two years as the case may be. He thinks the said Company was attached to what was called the 9 th Virginia Regiment, and he further thinks that the said Hudson Martin before the Company left Virginia returned home as he supposes on furlough for a little while, when he returned to the Company, and afterwards as he thinks the said Company was ordered to the North. After the expiration of the term of service for which said Company had enlisted for, and the whole time of which service he believes the said Hudson Martin served as Ensign - That the said Hudson Martin was appointed a paymaster at the Barracks established

established near Charlottesville Albemarle County Va. and thinks & has always understood remained in said capacity of paymaster & performing the duties of the said office until after the capture of Lord Cornwallis, when not long after the said Captain the Barracks were broken up. After the Barracks were broken up the said Martin resided many years in Albemarle County when he married a daughter of Colo. Nicholas Lewis of s d County - afterwards he moved to Nelson County where he resided many years & died some twelve or eighteen months ago. As given under my hand & seal this 26 th of July 1834.
John Thomas
(S.S.)
Albemarle County Va. Virg.
This day John Thomas personally appeared before me a Justice of the aforesaid County and State and made oath, that the above certificate contains the truth as far as knows and believes as given under my hand & seal this 26 th of July, 1834.
Geo. R. Jones
(S.S.)
State of Virginia
At a Court held for Albemarle County the 7 th day of August 1834.
The Court doth certify that John Thomas who has signed a Certificate relative to the claims of the Heirs of Lieutenant Hudson Martin, is a man of high

respectability, and his statements entitled to full credit. State of Virginia
Albemarle County Court Clerk's
Office to wit:
I Ira Garrett Clerk of the County Court of said County do hereby certify that the above is truly copied from the Records of said Court.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my name and affixed the seal of said County Court this 7 th day of August 1834 in the 59 th year of the Commonwealth
Ira. Garrett C.C.
1779. Dr. Hudson Martin Paymaster.
July 31. To a warrant on the treasury for — $ 480. 0.0
Cr. — Nothing
Extracted from the Ledger of the war. page 3.
Richmond 8 th October 1780
Sundry Accts. Dr. To Gen l Acct. of Goods — Viz.
Albemarle Guard ————— Dr.
For sundry clothing Capt. Hudson Martin for the use of Colo. Saylor's Regiment. pp. roll. Viz.
  981 yds Linen — — — — — £ 17. 2. "   325 1/2 " Do " " " " " 17. 5. "   42 1/2 " Do " " " " " 17. 2. "   1359 yds for 430 Shirts 

3 1/2 lbs thread
753 1/2 yds Cynalungs for 213 hunting shirts 6 lbs thread
Extracted from Demistead's Journal - page 73 
Tuesday 29 th of April 1783
A Warrant to Hudson Martin for one year } Int: on a acct: No. 501 dated this day in full of } the balance of his pay as Lieut. of Infantry } in the Continental line } £ 14. 19. 0
Extracted from Special Waste Book. No. 4. 
Thursday 29 March 1781
United States D r to Hudson Martin p r M r to Gu d . To amount of pay expenses to asf. acct - £ 404. 20. 5. 6 1/2 Hudson Martin p r Master to Quartermaster Alchem r . Warrant for balance of acct. settled this day £ 100. 3. 6 1/2 Extracted from Auditor's order Book. No. 5 
Richmond Virginia 16 th October 1780
Hudson Martin D r to United States } For error in charging that acct. with a } Warr t issued to him 12 th Aug t last - } £ 17. 000. " - 7 th October 1780 Hudson Martin
Warrant on acct. as paymaster to the Barracks £ 2. 000. " -
Extracted from Journal A pages 488 + 489

   Cr     With Hudson Martin   1781 By pay & subsistence rec d at Sun d times 128 5 40 15 1/2   By sundries of bap t State 4 15 —   Certificates 82 13 1/2   John Marshall   1781 By pay & subsistence rec d at Sun d times 500 103 9 2   Jan. By cash of Treasurer of Virginia 4800 64 " "   By sundries of bap t State 8 19 9   Certificates 341 7 4   2 d July 1782 Sworn to before H. Randolph   Error 20 321 7 4   With William Meredith   1781 By pay & subsistence rec d at Sun d times 424 18 82 10 1   Aug t By cash of Treasurer of Virginia 15000 30 — —   By do at Charlestown 18 8 —   By clothing at — — do of M. Simmons 44 — —   Certificates 666 3 7   With Benjamin Mosely   1781 By pay & subsistence rec d at Sun d times 251 7 8 12 1   Aug t By cash of Benjamin Harrison 15000 30 — —   By do received at Charlestown 8 8 —   By sundries & do of Simmons 39 0 —   By sundries of bap t Mos t 12 3   Certificates 278 9 8  
I George W. Lotter, Auditor of Public Accounts, hereby certify that the foregoing, is a true copy from book No 2. M t 3, of copies of accounts Sett d by state auditors d filed in this office - and that the leaf on which the Debit to the foregoing accounts should be is so torn & defaced as to be illegible given under my hand at the Auditor's Office in the

City of Richmond the 29 th day of September 1855
G. W. Glutton Aud t P. Hecks
No. 1.

No 2.

of officers whose accounts as settled are mislaid or lost with balances and amount of certificates issued
   Names Rank $ " "     John Hobson Lt Infy 97 10 8   John Higgins " 20 " "   James Newbrough Dt M c 24 18 9   Hudson Martin Lieut 27 11 1/2   James Pettijohn " 27 18 4   Robt Peyton S d Mate No 672 Ent d 36 " "   Henry Peyton Major No 632 Entered in place 115 16 "   Anthony Rigger Ensign 54 15 7   Boulding Wood Lieut 115 7 6   Thos White " 198 1 "   Lydia B. Wallace Brig Inspect r 68 10 4  
I George M. Clutter, Auditor of Public Accounts, hereby certify, that the foregoing is a true copy from a waste leaf of book No 2. M t o 3 of Copies of Accounts Sett d by State Auditors filed in this office. Given under my hand at the Auditor's office in the City of Richmond Va. the 29th day of September 1855.
G. M. Clutter A.P.A.

Hudson Martins a/c as P.M.
Bal. £ 274.10.5
h2

Dr. The United States In Account with Hudson Martin
62
Certificates at 27 1/4 10.5
I hereby certify that the above is truly copied from a Book of settlements made with the Officers of the Revolutionary Army. I further certify that Hudson Martin settled his Ac ct as Lieut on the 26th July 1782 and received a certificate for £27. 11. 0 3/4 which settlement has been mislaid or lost.
32-1210- (43) 196 250 1724 36.
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office Richmond this 6th day of May 1845. Jas. Heath and

Virginia
Jane Martin dec'd, widow of Hudson Martin, who died on the 28 December 1830, in the State of Virginia, who was a St. & Pay m in the [blank] commanded by Captain [blank] of the [blank] in the Continental line for 2 years.
Inscribed on the Roll of Richmond, at the rate of 600 Dollars 10 Cents per annum, to commence on the 14 th day of March, 1831, and end 15 th August 1835, when she died.
Certificate of Pension issued the 14 th day of Dec r . 1850. and sent to R. H. Gray Lynchburg, Va.
Arrears to the 4th of Increased from $150 Semi-annual allowances ending Payable to Jno M. Martin, Esq. for surviving children.
Revolutionary Claim, Act July 4, 1836, Section the Chase
Recorded by J. P. Chase Book Vol. 2 P.
Reported
Payable to Jno M. Martin for himself, Jason Martin, Sam Tuber, Nicholas S. Martin, Geo W. Martin, Villildred H. Carr, surviving children. - Certificate corrected & sent to R. H. Gray Esq. Present. 15 Jan 1851 - Notification also corrected.
Edwin Sep 8 1851 R. H. Gray Jan'y 27 1851 - Sec'y of the Interior March 4 1852 - Decision affirmed. wrote to R. H. Gray Oct 12 1852 - R. H. Gray Oct 22 1853 - Not Smith May 2 1854 - Hon. P. Ewing 8 June 1854 - R. H. Gray Oct 17 1853 - Same Nov 20 1855 - Hon. P. Powell March 26 1856 - Same April 2, 1856 - R. H. Gray
June 16, 1856.
Hon P. Powell Feb 17. 1857
Sec. Int o May 24. 57
Let R. H. Gray Aug 25/57
J. D. McPherson Oct 28/57

Transcript from the Ledger of this Part of the Virginia Line of the Ar
Dr
Credit (S. Hudson)
  1778   To balance to 1903 ... $ 140 00 March   $ 140 00   Dr Page 1903 8 -   Lieutenant (H. A.) 

Office of the recorder - Examination of the my of the Revolution. Page 332 A.
Martin
Cr.
  229 By William Palfrey 100 -   1038 " Robert Forman 40 -   $140 00   edson Martin By Amt from P. 332 $140 00 
Treasury Department Third Auditor's Office May 3rd 1805.

Jane Martin dec d Mother of Hudson Martin Va act 4 July 1836
U.S. District Court $480 per ann.
22
Commencing on 4 March 1837 and terminating on 15 August 1838 the day of her death. payable to John M. Martin executor of Jane Martin dec d for the benefit of himself, Hudson Martin, Jane Faber, Nicholas J. Martin, Geo. W. Martin and Nicholas H. Carr, only surviving children after deducting what has been paid at the rate of $320 00 per ann. Mina, Green of Richmond now Present

Extract from the Journal of the House of Delegates of 1781. November 27 th
Mr Richard Lee reported from the Committee of Trade that the Committee had, according to order, had under their consideration the petition of John Turberville to them referred and had agreed upon a report and come to several resolutions thereupon which he read in his place and afterwards delivered in at the Clerk's table where the same were again twice read and are as followeth: It appears to your Committee from the deposition of Captain George Lee Turberville that some time in the year 1778, he impressed a waggon, team and negro driver, the property of the petitioner for the purpose of attending a party of drafted soldiers to the Continental Army then in Pennsylvania - That the said waggon and driver were detained in the Continental Service by Lieut. -enant Hudson Martin the then waggon master at Lancaster and a Certificate given for them to this deponent - That by some accident the said certificate was lost or miscarried and that the said waggon, team and driver have never been returned to the petitioner, nor any compensation

made him for them.
State of Virginia } City of Richmond } To wit:
I, George W. Munford, Clerk of the House of Delegates and Keeper of the Rolls of Va do hereby certify and make known, that the foregoing is a true extract from the Journal of the House of Delegates of 1781.
Given under my hand and seal this 21 st day of Jan y 1837.
George W. Munford, C. & D. Keeper of the Rolls of Va.

AGENCY FOR CLAIMS.
ROBERT H. GRAY, of Lynchburg, Va., offers his services for the prosecution of Claims against the General Government before Congress or the Executive Departments, and also against the State of Virginia.
His attention will be more particularly devoted to Revolutionary Claims, including Commutation, Half-pay, and Pensions of all kinds, for both soldiers and widows; Certificates of Debt; Land Bounty Claims for services in the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, and also that with Mexico, or for Scrip in lieu thereof; for arrears of Monthly and Extra Pay, Mileage, &c. and also to other Claims, not herein enumerated.
He will be located in Lynchburg, Va., except during the sittings of Congress, when he will be in the City of Washington, devoting his attention to such claims as shall be entrusted to his care. He will also traverse the country in the prosecution of claims, and procuring of evidence.
The undersigned hopes, from his thorough acquaintance with the business he is engaged in, added to his devotion, zeal, assiduity, and perseverance, to merit the confidence of those who have claims to prosecute. In all cases, after the claim is allowed, the claimants will appoint their own special Attorney to DRAW the money from the Government, if not convenient to draw it themselves.
ROBERT H. GRAY.
REFERENCES.
We, whose names are hereunto subscribed, take pleasure in recommending Mr. R. H. Gray, of Lynchburg, Va., to those who have business in his line, as a trustworthy, competent, and very diligent agent for the collection of claims, pensions, &c.
R. M. T. HUNTER, of Va., U. S. Senate J. M. MASON, do do TH. S. BOCOCK, do House of Reps. A. ATKINSON, do do R. A. THOMPSON, do do WM. G. BROWN, do do HENRY BEDINGER, do do R. K. MEADE, do do T. S. FLOURNOY, do do A. S. FULTON, do do R. L. T. BEALE, do do JACOB THOMPSON, of Miss. do WM. H. DENNIS, Senate of Virginia. R. T. WOODS, do do THOS. M. ISBELL, do do THOS. H. AVERETT, do do THOS. H. DANIEL, do do ROBERT C. MITCHELL, Virginia Legislature. J. WILLS, do do Z. E. CHEATHAM, do do JAMES IRVINE, do do WM. CASKLEY, do do
WM. M. BURWELL, Virginia Legislature. JNO. CARROLL, do do BENJ. HEUER, do do R. G. RIVES, do do WM. E. McDONALD, do do GEO. W. SIBERT, do do J. D. STOVALL, do do SAMUEL B. MAJOR, do do DOUGLASS B. LAYNE, do do CHAS. PERROW, do do N. C. CLAIBORNE, do do W. H. EDWARDS, do do PAULUS POWELL, do do PHILIP PITNAM, do do W. V. HARRIS, do do GEO. W. HARRISON, do do E. BARKSDALE, JR., Attorney at Law, Halifax C. H., Va. O. G. CLAY, President L. & T. R. R. Co. D. H. LONDON, Merchant, Va. B. M. DE WITT, Editor Richmond (Virginia) Examiner.

This will show The Hon Secy of The Int n . my standing as a Gentleman, and an Agent.
Robt H Gray -
11.
Washington July 16/82 Robert H. Gray a/Heads from the division of the commission of Pensions in the case of H. Benjamin Martin here
Reference to Court of Pensions for report Interim Feb. 19, 1852.
See letter to Court of Pensions Feb. 19, 1852
28/1
ROBERT H. GRAY, of Washington, D.C., offers his services for the prosecution of claims
VEICIA FOR STAIRS

Hudson Martin W. 7394
February 18, 1939
XXXXXXXXXXXX
BA-J/MSF:MLB
Mrs. Emma Sellers 365 East Madison Street Franklin, Indiana
Dear Madam:
In a recent search of the Revolutionary War pension records, it has been found that in the record of Hudson Martin (W. 7394) which was furnished you December 2, 1935, the names of some of the children were reported, erroneously, that is, the name Lewis being used as part of all their names. A corrected report is furnished you herewith, to be used in place of the one furnished you, previously.
As the record of another Hudson Martin (S. 7175) was included in that report, both are included in this report.
Very truly yours
A. D. HILLER Executive Assistant to the Administrator

December 2, 1933.
Mrs. Emma Seblers 365 East Madison Street Franklin, Indiana.
BA-J/ILL Hudson Martin-W.7394 Hudson Martin-S.7175
Dear Madam:
Reference is made to your letter in which you request the Revolutionary War records of both soldiers named Hudson Martin of Virginia.
The records of these two pensioners are furnished herein as shown in the papers on file in pension claims numbered as above, based upon service in that war.
HUDSON MARTIN-W.7394
Copy - Miss Ford's history 122
Hudson Martin was born July 3, 1752 (old style),
While residing in Albemarle County, Virginia, he was appointed March 11, 1776, ensign in Captain Thomas Walker's company, 9 th Virginia regiment, was made a Lieutenant July 26, 1776, and served until April 25, 1778. He served as Lieutenant and Paymaster at Albemarle Barracks from January 22, 1779 to August 1, 1781.
He died November 28, 1830, in Nelson County, Virginia.
The soldier married December 2, 1778, in Charlottesville, Albemarle County, Virginia, Jane Lewis, daughter of Colonel Nicholas Lewis of Albemarle County, Virginia. She was born July 6, 1759.
Jane Martin, soldier's widow, was allowed pension on her application executed December 10, 1836, at which time she resided in Nelson County, Virginia. She died there August 15, 1838.
The names of the children of the soldier and his wife, Jane, are shown as follow:

Lewis Martin    Nicholas Lewis  Lewis ,  born  September  20,  1779,  died  August  1, 1787.    Hudson  "  July  26,  1781.       John Massie  "  June  23,  1783.       Molley Walker  "  June  13,  1787,  married  ---Dickinson,           died  Nov 24, 1814.    Jane Lewis  "  January  11,  1790,  married  William  Faber.    Nicholas Lewis  "  December  11,  1791.       Henry Buck  "  January  12,  1794,  died  January  14, 1828.    George Washington  "  February  19,  1796.       Mildred Harnsley  "  February  16,  1801,  married  ---Carr.   
-----  The following family data are shown also:
John Hudson Carr, son of John F. and Mildred, his wife, was born December 5, 1819; Nicholas Lewis was born January 19, 1734, died December 8, 1808; Mary Lewis was born June 24, 1742, died February 9, 1824.
The following children survived their mother, Jane Martin: Hudson Martin, Jane Faber, Nicholas L. Martin, George W. Martin, Mildred H. Carr, and John M. Martin.
*****
HUDSON MARTIN-S. 7175.
Hudson Martin was born May 14, 1761, in Albemarle County, Virginia; the names of his parents are not shown.
While residing in Amherst County, Virginia, he enlisted and served three tours in the Virginia troops as follows: from February 15, 1779, two months under Lieutenant Goodwin and Colonel Taylor, stationed at Charlottesville barracks; from some time in May following, two months as sergeant under the same officers, this service rendered as substitute for his brother, William Martin; from November 3, 1780, two months as ensign of Captain James Alexander's company. While residing in Fluvanna County, Virginia, he enlisted May 19, 1781 and served two months as private with the troops under General Lafayette, name of his captain not given, during which service he was in an engagement in the vicinity of "Old James Town".

After the Revolutionary War, Hudson Martin resided in that part of Amherst County, Virginia, which was later Nelson County.
He was allowed pension on his application executed November 26, 1832, at which time he resided in Nelson County, Virginia.
At the time Hudson Martin made application for pension, his brother, William Martin, was living and made affidavit in Nelson County, Virginia.
It is not stated that the soldier, Hudson Martin, was married.
Very truly yours,
A. D. HILLER, Assistant to Administrator.

W. 7394
February 6, 1911.
Mrs. Lucile M. Jensen, # 224 Water Street, Albert Lea, Minn.
Madam:
In reply to your letter dated the 29" ultimo and received the 1" instant, you are advised that in the claim of Hudson Martin, Wid. File No. 7,394, Rev. War, his Will which was executed in Nelson County, Virginia and dated June 23, 1828, mentions the following members of family: his wife Jane, sons, Hudson, John M., George W., Nicholas L., and Henry deceased; daughters, Mary W. Dickinson deceased, Mildred H. Carr and Jane L. Faber. and son-in-law-William Taber.
This Bureau does not furnish copies of such papers on file, but any person designated by you will be allowed to examine and copy said papers.
Very respectfully,
Commissioner.

February 18, 1939
XXXXX (XXXXXXXXX)
Mrs. Emma Sellers 365 East Madison Street Franklin, Indiana
Hudson Martin, W. 7394 Hudson Martin, S. 7175 BA-J/ILL:MLB
Dear Madam:
The records of two soldiers named Hudson Martin are furnished as follow:
HUDSON MARTIN W. 7394
The data which follow in regard to Hudson Martin were obtained from pension claim, W. 7394, based upon his service in the Revolutionary War.
Hudson Martin was born July 3, 1752 (old style).
While residing in Albemarle County, Virginia, he was appointed March 11, 1776, ensign in Captain Thomas Walker's company, 9 th Virginia Regiment, was made a lieutenant July 26, 1776, and served until April 25, 1778. He served as lieutenant and paymaster at Albemarle Barracks from January 22, 1779, to August 1, 1781.
He died November 28, 1830, in Nelson County, Virginia.
The soldier married December 2, 1778, in Charlottesville, Albemarle County, Virginia, Jane Lewis, daughter of Colonel Nicholas Lewis, of Albemarle County, Virginia. She was born July 6, 1759.
Jane Martin, soldier's widow, was allowed pension on her application executed December 10, 1836, at which time she resided in Nelson County, Virginia. She died there August 15, 1838.
The names of the children of the soldier and his wife, Jane, are shown as follow:
Nicholas Lewis Martin, born September 20, 1779; died August 1, 1787 Hudson " " July 26, 1781

Names of children continued -
   John Massie  Martin,  born June  23, 1783     Molley Walker  "  " June  13, 1787;  married Dickinson and died Nov. 24, 1814    Jane Lewis  "  " January  11, 1790;  married William Faber    Nicholas Lewis  "  " December  11, 1791     Henry Buck  "  " January  12, 1794;  died January 14, 1828    George Washington  "  " February  19, 1796     Mildred Harnsley  "  " February  16, 1801;  married ___ Carr   
The following family data are shown, also: John Hudson Carr, son of John F. and Mildred, his wife, was born December 5, 1819; Nicholas Lewis was born January 19, 1734, died December 8, 1808; Mary Lewis was born June 24, 1742, died February 9, 1824.
The following children survived their mother, Jane Martin: Hudson Martin, Jane Faber, Nicholas L. Martin, George W. Martin, Mildred H. Carr and John M. Martin.
*****
HUDSON MARTIN S. 7175
The data herein were obtained from pension claim, S. 7175, based upon service of Hudson Martin in the Revolutionary War.
Hudson Martin was born May 14, 1761, in Albemarle County, Virginia. The names of his parents are not shown.
While residing in Amherst County, Virginia, he enlisted and served three tours in the Virginia troops as follows: from February 15, 1779, two months under Lieutenant Goodwin and Colonel Taylor, stationed at Charlottesville Barracks; from sometime in May, following, two months as sergeant under the same officers, this service rendered as substitute for his brother, William Martin; from November 3, 1780, two months as ensign of Captain James Alexander's company. While residing in Fluvanna County, Virginia, he enlisted May 19, 1781, and served two months as private with the troops under General Lafayette, name of his captain not given, during which service he was in an engagement in the vicinity of "Old James Town".
After the Revolutionary War, Hudson Martin resided in that part of Amherst County, Virginia, which was later Nelson County.
He was allowed pension on his application executed November 26, 1832, at which time he resided in Nelson County, Virginia.

At the time Hudson Martin made application for pension, his brother, William Martin, was living and made affidavit in Nelson County, Virginia.
It is not stated that the soldier, Hudson Martin, was married.
Very truly yours
A. D. HILLER Executive Assistant to the Administrator

109 N. Pleasant St., Prescott, Arizona, November 28, 1928.
U. S. Commissioner of Pensions, Washington, D. C.
Dear Sir:-
I have been told that Hudson Martin , a Revolutionary soldier from Nelson County, Virginia, applied for pension. in 1833, I think.
If Mr. Martin is listed on the Pension Rolls, I should like very much to obtain a copy of his Pension Certificate. Please let me know also the cost of such a transcript.
Very truly yours,
(Mrs. W. J. Oliver.)
Etta J. Oliver

224 Water St., Albert Lea, Minn.,
Jan. 29, 1911.
Department of Interior, Record Division, Bureau of Pensions, Washington.
Dear Sir:
I have been informed that a copy of the will of Hudson Martin executed June 23, 1823. Nelson County, Virginia is on file in the Pension department.
The number is under file 7394 . Nelson County.
Can you tell me who is mentioned in the will?
And any other information.

Very truly yours, Lucile M. Jensen.

Rev  WIDOW, &c.
File No. 7394
Jane Martin
Wid.
Hudson Martin
Lt paymaster Conn.
Act: July 4 th 36
Index:—Vol. 66 , Page 4
[Arrangement of 1870.]
ship to Letter to Mrs. M. Jensen. (V.L.M. names of family) named in Will May 15 - Hish to Mrs. N.J. etc. copy of hist. to Mrs. Emma 4/22. Corrected list to Mrs. etc. M.W.B.

John H. ...

Williamsburg 2nd April 1779
Vendues Dr. to H. M.
Hudson Martin Gov t Warrant to pay the Guard over the conventional Charlottesville on account
£ 1500. " "
Extracted from Green Journal page 64
Dr. Officers of the Army for money advanced
1781
May 26 - G. B. T. advanced to Hudson Martin
P. Master £ 4800. " "
Extracted from Journal B. page 152
The foregoing entries entries are correctly copied from the Books mentioned.
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office Richmond
this 23 March 1838
Jas. Co. Heath Aud.
This is to certify, that it appears from a List in this Office of such Officers & soldiers of the Virginia Continental line, during the Revolutionary War, 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, that a certificate issued on the 29 th day of April 1783, in the name of Hudson Martin a Lieut of Infantry for

£82.13.0, which certificate appears to have been delivered to himself and was given for services prior to the 1 st January 1782.
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office Richmond, this 20 th day of March 1838.
Jas. E. Heath Auditor
This is to certify, that it appears from a List in this Office of such Officers and soldiers of the Virginia Continental Line, during the Revolutionary War, 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, that a Certificate issued on the 4 th day of May 1784, in the name of Hudson Martin as p. Mr. for £274.10.5, which certificate appears to have been delivered to himself, and was given for services prior to the 1 st January 1782.
To wit. pay as p. Master from 22 d Jan y 79 to 1 st Aug t 1781
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office Richmond this 26 th day of November 1834.
Jas. E. Heath Auditor.
This is to certify, that it appears from a List in this Office of such Officers and soldiers of the Virginia Continental Line, during the Revolutionary War, 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, that a certificate issue on the 26 th day of July 1782, in the name of Hudson Martin as a Lieutenant for $27.11.0 1/2 which certificate appears to have been delivered to himself and was given for services prior to the 1 st January, 1782. Note - The settlement on which this certificate was issued is lost or mislaid.
{No seal} {of Office}
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office, Richmond, this 20 th day of November 1836.
Jas. E. Heath (Auditor)
Vacation Department
Richmond Va July 26 1838
The foregoing seven pages contain true copies of papers filed in this Department
Y H Richardson
Deputy Comr -

Inverness Dept. March 10 th 1852
In noticing the discrepancies of the Examination in Martine's case - between his report of March 4, and the evidence, - as well as the letter he filed from the pen n office on this subject, we will not stop now to reply to his notice of myself - by name - but will proceed to point out some om p isions on his part - as to the evidence filed - as well as admissions in the preliminary investigation of said Martine's services, and consequent claim to the benefits of the Act of May 15 1828.
1 st The presumption: That because Martine had not applied for Com n or a pen n under this act in his life time! This would take sheets of paper to show the innumerable cases of good claimers , which were not presented in the life time of the officer - suffice it to say, that Martine was a Farmer of Wealth - a man of ease, and always said he never should call on Govt for any money or land since his time, in his life time. He died in 1829, or 30 - without knowing perhaps of this law! This being applied, and obtained his land in 1834 - and applied also for his Com n - which was rejected, because there was no evidence of his services before them. The Committee - except that, from 1776, to Apr. 1778, in the 9 th V a Regt - for which, a settlement of his a/c at the 3 d Acad y office is herewith filed - showing nothing due !
It is also known, that the Limitation Act of 1785, shut the door of the Treas y Dept t V o the settlement of Com n claims, at that dept t - nor was it raised, until about 1828, or 1830!
Hence, the great number of Com n claims, which have been presented and allowed between the years 1830, and 38 - and as regards his failing to apply for his pen n under the act of 1828, in his life time - the claim of the widow of (Ld d Buntline) of Orange Co y under this act has been paid - and that too for his services, in this same

Reg t . that Hudson Martin, was Pay Master, and so on as we saw in our to show, by reference to the per t . Rolls of 1828- and on which will be found the names of Cap t Jno Thomas, of the V a Roll, and Cap t Richd Paulton of the Geo. Roll &c. of this Reg t also; - and we will refer the Hon ble def t . to Franklins report on Reed claims to show that Col Francis Taylor, Maj Jno Roberts, Cap t Jas t Barlow, Cap t Jas t Purvis, Cap t Garland Burnley, Serg t Chas t Taylor, Lt Jno t  of this Reg t Taylor &c. are all reported for Com t and part of a Com t has had the same, as sup d in the disbandment of this Reg t in June 81.
There seeming to be no dispute as to said Martin having been pay-Master of the Guards, from the time of his ap t by Gov t Henry in Jan y . 79 th to Aug t 81- we will now proceed to show, that Martin was Lieut of the Guards from Jan y 79. to Aug t 81. and never resigned his Com t as such.
Gov t Smith reports him as Lieut Jan y 22 nd 79. to Aug t 81- and that there was no reason to suppose he resigned! nor was there any reason, or motive why he should resign as Lieut, and hold on as P.M. t Gov t Smith, at the time of his report on this case in 1883- had no other evidence before him of Martins services, but his ap t in the Acad y Books in V a which Books show, two different settlements with Hudson Martin as Lieut of the Cont l Line - To wit - July 26. 1782. showing a bal of £ 27 11. 0½ - and Apr t 29. 1783- of - £ 82. 13. - a proof positive that he was in service to the end of the as decided by the V a Com t -
War, - without ever having resigned - as the certificate of Mr. Heath then Secy of V a goes to show - as well as Gen l Portersfield's letter, for certificate, which was obtained after Mr. Smith had made his report. The 2 last settlements of Hudson Martin, above, as Lieut - was evidently for the latter part of his services, in the Reg t of Guards, or some later service! and had no connection with, or reference to his services in the 9 th Reg t up to Apr t 1778- at

which settlement there was nothing due him - therefore the bal- ances of £ 27. 11. 0 \frac{1}{2} - and £ 82. 13 - was for subsequent ser- vices to his resignation in Apr. 1778 - and too, the 1 st settlement was at the Aud d office of the Gen l Gov t - and the last in 82, 83 at the Aud d office in V a . Two distinct accounts, for 2 distinct services - The 1 st for 2 y s 2 \frac{1}{2} mo s . and the last for 2 y s and 6 \frac{1}{2} Mo.
Gen l Porterfield in his certificate, commits the error of confounding the two services of Master together - not seeming to be aware, that he Master resigned his Com n in the 9 th Reg t - in Apr. 78. and took an app t in the Reg t of Guards - Nov. 24, 1778 - (This last being the day, that the Reg t of Guards was organized) which mistake was very natural - he not being aware of there being any gaps between his 1 st and 2 d service.
The certificate of the Aud t showing the 2 different settle- ments of Master as Lieut of the Cont l line in 82, 83 should be conclusive of his being in service to the end of the war - Gen l Porter- field was satisfied of that fact - tho' he had lost sight of the last - as to the service he was in, at the close of the war both as to his being P. M. as well as Lieut.
Mr. Smith, did state the grounds upon which he reported him Master as Lieut in the Cont l line - To wit - his ap t at the Aud d office in V a he having no other evidence of Master's service before him when he made his report - Porterfield's certificate, not being then in existence - nor does he refer at all to his services prior to Apr. 78. He always refers, in making his reports on these claims - to every distinct item of evidence before him.
In the 1 st letter rec d on this subject of Sept. 10 1850, the Com n of previous admits services up to Aug t 81 - but erroneously requires proof of actual service up to the close of the war - 1783 -
In the 2 d of Dec r 14, 1850 - he adheres to the same position!

In the 3 d of Sept. 8, 1851 - he admits he is ent d to a part - Act 1828, as said but not as Pay Master - But all? Genl. Taney makes no distinc- -tion between the Acts of 1828, and 32, in regard to staff back. The last letters of Jan y . 22 - 1852. and report of the 4 th of March needs no further notice.
Respectfully -
Robt. H. Gray att d .
Priv.
-Order of Mr. H. Gray - in reply to the report of the preceding chief of the 4 th March 1852.

State of Virginia
Nelson County Court.
I Spotswood Garland, Clerk of the Court of the said County do hereby certify that at a Court held for the said County at the Courthouse thereof on the 28 th day of April - 1845 satisfactory evidence was exhibited to the said Court that Jane Martin (widow of Hudson Martin deceased) was a pensioner of the United States, at the rate of three hundred and twenty dollars per annum was a resident of the said County and died therein on the Fifteenth day of August 1828 leaving the following Children to wit Hudson Martin John M Martin Sam Taba formerly Jane Martin Nicholas L Martin George H Martin and Mildred H Carr formerly Mildred H Martin who are of lawful age
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal of Office this 28 th day of April in the year of our Lord 1845.
Sp: Garland, Clerk of Nelson County Court.
State of Virginia.
At a Court held for Nelson County, at the Courthouse on the 28 th day of August, 1845.
On the motion of John M. Martin, the executor named in the last Will and Testament of Jane Martin deceased, (which said Will was this day recorded in said Court,) who made oath thereto, and together with Nicholas L. Martin his security, executed and acknowledged a bond in the penalty of Ten thousand dollars, conditioned according to law, certificate is granted him for obtaining probat of said Will in due form.
A true copy from the records of said Court.
In testimony whereof, I Spotswood Garland, do hereunto sign my name as Clerk of the said Court, and affix the seal of my office, this 29 th day of April, 1845.
Sp: Garland, Clerk of Nelson County Court.

Lyndeburg, Sep. 23 d 1850.
Sir,
Yours of the 10 th inst. is before me all oning an increase of pension to the child s of Isaac Martin and widow of Hudson, Act July 1836 - but ref d - used to allow the pension justly due Hudson Martin himself - Act 1828, - (he having died in 1830 without receiving it) on the grounds that he had not rec d nor was entitled for Com n pay - or had land from the Gen l Gov t - and in answer to which objections I would observe that all the off s belonging to the Reg t of Guards at Charlottesville, Va. Barracks, on the of its being disbanded, were considered as entitled to Com n pay as Sup s off s - for a proof of which I refer you to the aff t of Cap. M c Thomas of that Reg t (who rec d his Com n pay - and a pension Act 1828) on file among the papers before Cong s U.S. Senate - in the case of Col. Chas. Lewis heirs for 7 years 1/2 pay - In the said Thomas became a Sup s off s on the disbanding of that Reg t - and he and Maj. M c Roberts Lt. M c Taylor Surg n Chas. Taylor & all rec d their Com n as Sup s off s of said Reg t - and the petition of Hudson Martin's heirs is now before Cong s for Com n under the precise circumstances that the above off s rec d theirs. The petition of the heirs of several other off s of said Reg t is also before Cong s for Com n under the Resolution of Cong s of Oct 21. 1780 - and March 22, 1783 - both of which recognized Com n pay to Sup s off s of the V a Cont l line.
Among the off s of said Reg t who belonged to it at the time of its being disbanded in June 1781 - under the same circumstances, that Martin was, and who have rec d the benefits of the Act of 1828 we find the names of M c Thomas Capt n M c Roberts Maj. Jas. Burton Capt. &c - all belonging to this Reg t at

at its dissolution, by the act of the Genl Govt - some of whom became Sup s at an earlier date than Martin did, and yet rec d the benefits of the Act of 1828!! Then why I ask, is this distinction made! Is it because the dep t has become more rigid in the discharge of duty and dispensation of Justice to needy pensioners? His tice is the same, without regard to time or circumstances.
- I think upon a full exam- ination of the merits of the claim for a pension for Hudson Martin's heirs, Act 1828, will find him you fully entitled with others of the same Reg t as a bonus who have not but be this as it may, it will not impede the issue of the increase of pension in the name of the widows I am Martin Act 1826. which you will please forward as early as practicable.
Yours Respectfully
Richd H Gray.
[Faint, mirrored text from the reverse side of the page, likely bleed-through from the original document.]

2
Lt. E. Heath Esq.
Com d . of pensines.
Present.

Wash ng Jan y 14, 1857.
Sir
Enclosed is the Pension certificate, issued in favor of the child ren of M rs Jane Martin, widow of Hudson Martin, (who was a Lieut and Pay-master in the Cont l line) payable to John M c Martin Executor - but who is dead, as the certificate of Nelson Court of Aug t or Sept r last shews - and that Nicholas L Martin (not Nicholas McMartin, as in the certificate) was appointed Adm r of Jane Martin, de bonis non - by the Court of Nelson - and is yet Adm r as the certificate of the Court will shew - and now on I presume file, in the Examining clerks room, and to which I refer you.
The question now is, will a new certificate of pension for the arrears, or increase, be issued in the name of favor of Nich o L Martin Adm r - and the old one cancelled, shall we act under the one issued in the name of Jno M c Martin Ex r ! If the latter, a letter from you directing such a course, with such instructions as you may be pleased to give, for the guidance and satisfaction of the Agent in Rich d W m Lauzon.
Please answer this as your earliest convenience - and direct your communication to me in Wash ng City, where I shall be until the close of the session of Cong l .
Yours Respectfully
Robt. H. Gray.

To the Hon. J. S. Edwards
Rich d & Imp. 21 st 1837
Dear Sir
The papers & declaration in the claim of Mrs. Martin for a pension under the act of July 1836 are herewith enclosed I hope the case will be aspe- dily acted on as may suit your com- -venience - Be pleased to address me at Washington City - I am much obliged
Yr. Ob t Serv t
Thos. Wood

Col. J. L. Edwards Commr of Pensions.
Richmond 6 May 1845.
Sir
Enclosed is the application of John Martin executor of the other children of Mrs Jane Martin widow of Hudson Martin for an increase of Pension.
The recd $320 p. year under act 4 July 1836 - The enclosed certificates of our Auditor show he was a Paymaster for 2 1/2 years at $480 p. year. She died 15 August 1838. She claims the increase from 4 March 1831 to 4 March 1838 - and at $480 from that time till her death on 15 Aug: 1838 (1838).
John Martin, is the Eldest Head of the family. Has the entire confidence of them all - one of his sisters lives in Ky. He was formerly a Member of the Executive Council of Va.
The two sets of papers enclosed - supply all the facts necessary to establish either the increase or the claim for the small balance. By referring from one to the other, each is made complete.
The original pension certificate is also enclosed.
I am Y r Ob t servt. Thos. Green

Spotsburg, May 20, 1850.
Sir,
I am authorized by the Adm l Nicholas Mar- ty, and other heirs of Mr. Isaac Martin de d of Wilson County, de d - widow of Hudson Martin de d a Lt, and pay mast r of the Reg t of Guards, Abbeville Barracks - to re-open her claim to a pension un- der the Act of July 15, 1836, for the purpose of claiming the additional pension of $80. per mo. due her, and unpaid, on the combined Pensions of Lt and Pay mast r from Jan 22 nd 1799 to Aug. 1. 1781. (See Com te Smith's Report) and as he never resigned his commission as The kind are it is also entitled to the pension due said Hudson Martin, under the Act of May 15, 1828, from the 3 rd of March 1826, to the time of his death, the day of June 1831 - as the Reg t to which he belonged was adopted and disbanded, as a Gen l Reg t and all the officers either became supernumerary or again joined other branches of the service and as such entitled to commutation pay by 5th act of March 2 nd 1833 in lieu of half pay under the Resolution of Congress of Oct r 21 1850 - and as such entitled also to the benefit of the pension Act of May 15, 1828 - as above - at the rate of $560. per mo. - To wit - as Lieut. $320. per mo. and as pay mast r $240 per mo. additional!!
Recapitulation -
$50. per mo. increase on Mrs. Martin's pen n from the 6 th March 1831 to the day of August 1838 - and $560. per mo. under the Act of May 1828, up to his death in June 1831 - at the

time Mr. Martins pension was allowed, you did not allow anything ad. for her husband, Staff-Rank of Pay-Master. This construction being given to the pension laws afterwards.
This increase of $80. p. An. is an analogous case to that of Mrs. Sarah Victor - widow of Jno. Victor of the Cavalry - who was also ad d - but at the issuing of her pension, you only allowed it on the Rank of Capt - but afterwards the ad d of $15. p. mo. as ad d - both under the act of July 4, 1836 - and Mrs. Victor's ad d  allowed and was paid to her at death after her death.
The fact, and time of Mr. Martins death being with the 3 d Aud t . all that is necessary is to issue a certificate of pension for the increase of $80. p. An. and such proceedings as you may direct as regards the $560. p. An. under the act of 1828.
Yours respectfully -
Robt H Gray

St Albion
6
Eduards Esq
Comm ee of pensions
Wash n City
D. C.
Gene Martyn Me. 25-1

Department of the Interior February 19, 1852
Sir -
I refer to you a letter from Robert H. Gray who takes an appeal in the case of Simeon Hudson Martin's heirs, and who complains of the operation of the regulation recently adopted -
If true his complaint would seem to be well founded - At all events, it is necessary that in rejecting claims you should state with precision the points of law or evidence in which they are deficient, for otherwise, it is manifestly impossible for claimants to comply with the regulation.
I am, Sir,
Very respectfully Yours & V. Servt. Alex. A. A. Stuart Secretary
James E. Heath Esq., Commissioner of Pensions -

Syracuse Oct 2 d 1855
Sir
Enclosed are 2 copies from heads in Nich o V o . N o 1. and 2, showing without doubt that Hudson Martin continued to hold his commission as Lieut. Col l in Albany Barracks, during the whole of his service there as Pay. Master up to 1781, but owing to the fact that the opposite or debit page to the account (18 o ) enclosed, being so torn and defaced as not be legible - or intelligible - suspicion was improperly cast on the claim - but having recently ex- amined the book myself containing the mutilated debit page - and finding that the accounts of Cap t M c Marshall Cap t W m Meredith, and Lieut Benj o Mosely - all of the Col l line are in a like state - all doubt is removed as to the fact that Hudson Martin was a Lieut at the Alb. Barr s the whole time that he was Pay. mast r , induct by the res o of Nov r 24. 1778, and May 27. 1778. none but off rs of the line could be appointed Pay. mast r of the Col l Reg t
I therefore request that the case shall be called up again on the add l evidence filed - and the certificate of pension is d in the name of the Ex o Nich o S. Martin - son of Hudson - for the benefit of the children - (several of whom are alive) under the Act of May 18, 1828 - which pension has never yet been rec d
I also enclose you a list of names - N o 2 - among which is that of Lieut Hudson Martin - whose a/c s have been lost or mis- laid - after the balance due him at one settlement, had been ascertained - and extended on the Ledger &c - These 2 records I trust will place it beyond all doubt, that Martin having first served from Jan y 76, to May, or Apr l 78, and then from Jan y 79, to Aug t 81, in the Reg t of Guards - over 4 years - that his heirs are ent l to this unpaid pension - Act 1828. which I trust will be now allowed

without further hesitation. you will please have the papers with you from the files in the Interior Dept where they are on appeal - and give to the claim the proper examination. See it - and which must necessarily result in its allowance. Respectfully - Robt. H. Gray.
ad. evidence in the case of H Hudson Mar being for a pension - Act May 15, 1828.
Robt. H. Gray
Agent.
en
Reply Oct 17/53

Washington City, June 11-1837
Sir,
I her with enclose Mr Gray's letter in relation to the claim of Hudson Martin, please get out the papers and return Mr Gray's letter to me as it relates to other matters,
Respectfully S. Godwin
Jas E Heath, Esqr, Comr of Pensions,

Appointment of —
Lieut Hudson Martin as Pay-master to the Reg. of Guards - Albany-le Barracks Jan. 28 th 1779.
By
Gov t P. Henry.
29

Sir
It is determined to give you the place of Paymaster to the Guards in Albermarl and it will be necessary for you to give security and come down for money as soon as they are called into duty of this you may have notice from Colo Lewis by applying to him I am Sir Yr humble Servant
£4800
257.10.6
P Henry
25
Jan 22 d 1779
The above is a true copy of a Paper in my possession filed with the Papers in the claim of the heirs of Hudson Martin now pending before the Committee on Revolutionary claims for Commutation 4th March 1852
C Murphy Head of Reps

Augusta Virginia 23 d July 1834,
On the application of one of the heirs of Hudson Martin deceased late of the County of Nelson, I do hereby certify that he the said H. Martin was a Lieutenant and pay master to the 9 th Virginia Regiment and although I have not personal knowledge of the fact, was always under the impression that he continued in service until the end of the war of the revolution.
Given the above date
Ro. Portfield Capt & Aid de Camp in the Va Line on Cont l Establishment
Executive Department
Richmond Va Jan y 19 1837
The above is a true copy of a paper filed in this department, with the papers upon which a claim for said bounty was founded, in the name of Hudson Martin
W. C. Richardson Secy Com te

Department of the Interior Washington November 10. 1852.
Sir,
I have examined the testimony in the case of Hudson Martin decd; and have affirmed your decision therein of which you will please advise the claimants attorney. The papers in the case are herewith returned.
I am very Respectfully Your Obedient Servant
Alex. A. A. Stuart Secretary.
James E. Heath Esq. Commissioner Of Pensions

Washington, D.C. Jan. 1881
In answer to yours of Dec. 21. I have to observe that you seem to believe that all officers who were in service at the close of the war, were entitled to the benefits of the Act of July 27, 1866, unless they were in actual service ! to the end of the war. The Act of 1828-29, etc., - those who were entitled to the benefits of Oct. 21, 1850, were entitled to a full pension under the Act of May 15, 1828!
I did not suppose, that at this time of day, a Commissioned officer would have to be informed that reduced, Supd. or retired officers of the Coast Line - after Jan. 1, 1881, were equally entitled to 1/2 pay, Comm. pay, or a pension under the Act of 1828, with ten years actual service to the end of the war; and as you seem to have great respect for the decisions of your predecessors, I will refer you to the cases of Capt. W. H. Thomas, Capt. Jas. Burdon, and Capt. Richd. Penruddock, all of whom belonged to the same Regt. that Lieut. Madison Martin was Pay Master of - was reduced in June 1881. (9 months before Martin was) and yet they received their pensions under the Act of 1828. It does require that the officers should have served to end of the war as you suppose to be entitled to their pensions, nor to Comm. or 1/2 pay - So they were in service after Jan. 1, 1881 - never having been dismissed, or superannuated - They are entitled, neither is it necessary, that they be in pay - should have been in pay, or by them. I can present you with many cases where the provisions of 1828 has

been first allowed and paid. you will therefore have to return the self same - and as the only claim you have to the pension has been allowed you will find no difficulty in upon the certifi- cate of pension as the parties are clearly entitled to it. and being so as Attorney for the heirs I consider it my duty to insist on its being issued.
As to the said of the int st having sustained the for- mer by reason of his silence in his rejection of the claim being considered conclusive of the facts, I dis- respectfully protest - this is but an assumed power at most - and can not prevent - but had he that right it gives us the right of then - learning of a claim one - so added - and as we may have it in thereafter. We have filed the and add -
This Sir is a clear case in favor of the heirs. as Maitland is as now as much entitled to a pension under the act of '22 as any other officer of the Reg t who has rec d it. of which there are several.
Yours - Respectfully
Robt. H. G. -

Chief Clerk's room March 3 d 1856.
Sir,
You will be so good as to have the papers in the case of Lieut Hudson Mar- tins heirs Act May 15, 1828 - placed on the table of Mr. Triplett for review and examination on the additional evidence filed - Tomorrow. as per promise Sir - respectfully -
Robt. H. Gray
Mr. M c Crea
Chief Clerk
Pension Office

Department of the Interior Washington, June 4. 1857
Sir:
Your refusal to reopen the case of Jane Martin de widow of Hudson Martin, upon the ground that the reference by the Claimants' Attorney to certain Resolves of the Continental Congress, is not the production of new and material evidence, meets my full approbation; and the Attorney has been so informed by this Department.
I am, very respectfully Your Obedt Servt
J. Thompson Secretary
Geo. C. Whiting Esquire Commissioner of Pensions

General Land Office August 1 st 1853.
Sir.
Will you have the kindness to enclose to me the papers upon which a Pension was granted for the services of Hudson Martin, a Lieutenant in the Virginia Continental Line, under Act of 1836.
It is important that these papers should be examined in connection with a Claim for bounty land pending in this Office under Act of August 31. 1852.
Very Respectfully Your obedt. servt John Wilson Commissioner.
L. P. Waldo Esq Commr of Pensions

Warrenton Va Feb 9 th /57
Sir,
Enclosed are some further resolutions of Cont l fully recognizing the Albermarle Battalion, Reg t as one of the additional Reg t s of the Cont l Army and was enumerated as a portion of the Cont l Army, which the State of Va was required to have held in readiness for the Campaign of 1780 as a part of her quota of Troops for the general Service, amounting to 6,070 for Va.
Also as to the rights of this Class of Troops, in being put upon an equal footing in every respect with the Line Officers, and as to the absolute necessity of this Class of Troops, admitted by Cont l .
By the reso n of Apr 10 1780 you will see that Cont l determined to make no distinction between the different Classes of

troops in the Cont l Service. The word Line, not being used even in the reso n of Oct r 1780.
The reso n of Dec r 31. 1781, and March 8 th 1785-which is explanatory of it- provides depreciation, commutation, and \frac{1}{2} pay, not only for officers of the line, and sepe- rate corps, but also to individuals not be- longing to either, or any organized corps whatever. See the cases of Ethan Allen and H on B en Lorington. Mr n St. papers, Page 129. 30. Vol 19. on claims.
on-
The evidence filed in this case, a full pension, of $ 600 per An. has been allowed the widow of Hudson Martin in the rank of Lieut and Pay Master! (act 1838) The latter rank he held alone in the Albermarle Bark y Reg t and is reported by Comm r Smith

of N o as Lieut. and Pay. Master of the V ol Guard line, from Jan y 22 d 1879, and afterwards Dept y to Aug. 1 st 1881. and on which his heirs were allowed land by the Exe. Dept of N o . See evidence filed.
A full pension on the rank of Lieut could not have been allowed, had not the service of Martin as Lieut in the Albemarle Bark s Reg t been estimated in part, and why a full pension is allowed the widow on the rank of Lieut and Pay. Master and the pension due the husband re- jected I can not understand.
The service of Martin as Lieut, from Jan y 79. to Aug. 81. has been admitted - by one Clerk, but says he belonged to the State line!! which was but, contradicted by another - reports both, signed by the Mind! I am willing you shall consider him as belonging to either the State , or Govt l line!
But should you still refuse to issue

The Certificate of pension, be so good as to have an impartial brief of the evidence pro and con - made out in the case, in order that should I appeal, the entire evi- dence may be presented to the Secretary who shall be called upon to act upon it.
In conclusion, The officers of this Regt. have rec d both their Pensions under The Act of 1818 (which we claim also for Martins heirs,) and also com- mutation pay in many cases. See Maj M c Roberts Capt. M c Thomas & Nero's Claims. Pages 256 and 260.
Upon the within additional evidence, we ask for a re-opening of the case of Lieut. Hudson Martins heirs.
Respectfully.
No. H. Gray.

Glasgow, Ky. April 26. 1854
Sir,
I am requested to Enquire what has been done with a claim prepared by the heirs of Hudson Martin for a pension on account of services rendered by said Martin as adjutant in the revolutionary war. Said Martin resided, at his death in Nelson County Virginia, & it is presumed that was his home during the time said services were performed. I make this inquiry at the instance of one of the heirs of said Martin , and am informed, the claim has been prosecuted by a man of the name of Gray.
Very Respectfully N. A. Smith

Lynchburg Aug d 31 st 1850.
Sir.
Enclosed is the declaration of Nicholas L. Martin Sam l of Jane Martin and of Nelson Gamm l N o claiming an increase of pension, for the services of her husband Hudson Martin Lieut. in arms and as pay-master of the Reg t of Guards at Charlottesville from, (as report by Comm ee Smith) the 22 d of Jan y 1779. to August the 1 st 1781 - after which he became Sup t - This statement of his services as pay-master also comports with the true history of the services of said Reg t to which said Martin belonged.
I also refer you to the aff ts of Col. Jno. Thomas of said Reg t  of Col. Col. Lewis's hand on file with the papers before the Com ee on Rev d claims in the Senate of the U. States - which also states above the fact of Hudson Martin having acted as pay-master to the Reg t of Guards at the Albemarle Barracks during the entire continuance of the said Reg t in service. The evidence I trust will be conclusive, to increase the pension to at least $560. if not $600. - and presuming that he must have been a cap. part of his time, to have rec d $480. for his services as pay-master, would increase his pension up to $600. per An m . We also claim the pension due said Martin under the act of May. 1828. at $600. per An m . from the 11 th of March 1831, to the time of his death Nov r 28, 1830.
Yours respectfully
Ro H Gray.

To The Hon. Secretary of The Interior
Feb. 16 1852.
Appeal -
Sir, It is with great repugnance of feeling, I find myself compelled, in duty to those I represent, to appeal in the the case of Lieut Hudson Martin, heirs, from the decision of the Clerk of The Pension dept (Mr. Triplett) refusing to issue to us the pension Certificate to which we are clearly entitled under the Act of Congress of May 15, 1828, which requires only that the services of the off r should have been such as to entitle him to the benefits of the Res n of B ry of the 21 st Oct, 1780 - and to which we will now proceed to show that said Lt Hudson Martin, heirs are entitled; by virtue of his services - up to as late as Aug t 1 st 1781 - as Paymaster, and Lieut, in the Cont l Line.
By The Report of Committee in 1842 Hudson Martin is shown to have been in service from 76, to Oct r 78, when he resigned - and his settled account at the 3 d and 4 th office, showed his account balanced in March 1778!! Upon the above evidence alone, the committee very correctly rejected his claim for Cont l pay, but if his which we will show after services had been before the Committee, at the time the result would have been, we imagine, very different, from what it was.
In January 1779. said Martin, appointed was Lieut, and Pay. mast r . in The Cont l Reg t of Guards, stationed at the Albermarle Barracks, to Guard The prisoners, captured at Burgoyne's defeat in Oct r 1777 - and sent to V a for safety.
Comm te Smith, appointed by the V a Leg. to report on these Res n claims,

Reports of Hudson Martin to have been in Service in the V a Cont l Line from Jan d . 22 d . 1779, to Aug t 1 st 1781, as St and Paymaster; and that There was no reason to believe that he ever resigned!
This Reg t was adopted by Cong s as a Cont l Reg t . Jan d . 9. 1779, (see and on other occasions - Journ l . of Cong s ), and was disbanded by order of Gen l . on the 15 th June 1781 - and all the off s became Disb d . - and the greater part of whom have rec d . their Com p . pay, or up d for it - and also their Pensi- ons under the act of May 15 1828 - (see Reports of Cong s . in the cases of Col Francis Taylor, Maj Jno Roberts, Capt s Jno Thomas, James Purvis, Lieut s Benton, Garland Burnley, Chas d Taylor &c. &c - to be found in work on Rev s claims, compiled by, Matt s S Franklin, in compliance with a Res n of Cong s the 11 th May 1836 - and published by Tho s Allen in 1838. and also that Capt Jno Thomas, Lieut s Benton, and Richard of this Reg t - Paulett has rec d . their pensions under the act of the 15 th May, 28, for the same Service, and became Disb d . by the disbandment of this Reg t before Martin did. (see Reports in the cases of Col Francis Taylor, Jno Roberts, Lieut s Purvis, Lieut s Benton, Garland Burnley &c. in the above work).
We also refer you see to the ap l of Hudson Martin as pay-master to this Reg t . by Gen l . of V a Henry, Jan d . 22 d . 1779 - directing him on arrival to give Security, and come down to Rich d . and get the money. &c
We also refer the Sec y of the Int r to the 3 certificates, and account of the Audit r of V a for, and V a said Martin, as St, and Paymaster running up as late as 1786 - and disbursing large am ts of money,
Also, several Muster-rolls - and orders receipts of off s and Sal d -

on det. Martin, as pay mast rest of of Guards, in up to as late as Aug t 1781 - and lastly the certificate of Genl No. Portefield all of which go to show that said Hudson Martin, was in service - 1 st from 1776 to Ap l 78 - and then again from Jan y 21, 79 to Aug t 81 - the Reg t being disbanded, and he on active in common with the rest, becoming Sup t - at that date, became clearly entitled to the benefits of the Res n of Oct r 21, 1780 - unless it can be shown by the Gov t - (the onus being on it) that he resigned after that period, never having been dismiss d , Superseded or cash d - and tho we are not required in law to prove a negative, yet we have done so in this case, showing clearly that he did not resign in -
1 st by the report of Genl. Smith, 2 d by the certificate of Genl. No. Portefield and lastly by the certificate of Det. E. Heath Esq r . (speaking of Martin's service from 1779 to 81) whose certificate as Asst. of V a is also filed with the papers - and to which, with the balance of the evidence referred to above, we would respectfully draw the attention of the Hon Sec y of War t with a hope that it will all be carefully examined, and used digested - and with confidence hope their decision will be favorable to the allowing of the pension. We shall make no comments on the extraordinary decision of the dept t before - but will close by stating that (and his widow in 1837 or 38 -) Martin died A D . 1830 - and being alive at the passage of the above law whatever pension was due him, at his death, will be paid to his Adm t Nich o Martin, of Nelson Co. V a whom you personally know

for the benefit of the living child u . I presume, and should you wish to read  4 the letters written to me on the subject - of dates Sept r 10, 1850 - Dec r 14, 1850 - Sept r 8, 1851, and the last! Jan y 27, 1852 - (most polite of all), you will call for copies, or use those in my possession - as you may prefer.
The above letters are not only contradictory in themselves - but in conversation, the Clerk M c T. A would shift his object- ives - 1 st  actual Service to the end of the war required! That being removed - he said I must prove that he Martin never resign d ! and lastly, that I could not show that Martin was pay master of this Reg t of Guards! which last objection I am satisfied that the aud t account in Rich d - Gov r Henry, aft Jan y 22 d 1779 - and the Rolls and orders filed will satisfy you that he was M c and pay-mast r of the Reg t of Gua- rds at Albemarle Barracks, from Jan y 22 d 1779 to Aug t 1 st 1781 - and that he never resign d ! - and consequently ent d to the benefits of the act of May 15, 1828.
Respectfully
Hon Alex r H. H. Stuart - Sec y of the Interior.
Robt. H. Gray

Oct. 18, 1853. Letter in case of Hudson Martin's heirs.
R. H. Gray.
a review of the claim of Hudson Martin's heirs - Act May. 1828 on add. evidence -
Robt. H. Gray
Mr Cole - Rev alt?
The papers in this case were taken up to the Secr. of the Interior last winter - and in a late examination of the pa- pers by Mr Dickens - it was ascertained of fact to show that Maclean left the service - which in- formation, the within references will give.
R. H. G.

Warrenton City Oct 18, 1853.
Sir
In the case Lieut Hudson Martin heirs Act May 1828. Demand is made to them here and at what time said Martin became Sup d in order to avail the heirs of the benefits of said acts we respectfully refer the Govt. to the report of Commr s Smith of Va a which shows that the Reg t of Guards of which reg t and he settled his ac ct as Lieut and Pay Master at the close of the war was disbanded in June 1781 - as will further appear by the reports of Cong s of 1834, to 1838 in the cases of Col Francis Taylor and Lieut Taylor and Col Benton cap t  of the Thomas s  reg t of said Reg t for their pay in the cases of cap t Rich d  and Lieut Thomas s and of said Reg t  who  received their pensions under the act of May 1828. (See Reid s claims compiled by Walter  the Franklin).
In and every officer belonging to the Reg t of Guards stationed at the Albemarle Barracks from 79 to 84 who did not resign received their pensions under the act 1828 and their pay - or for annuities reports made in the latter except the heirs of said Hudson Martin who died in 1829 - and whose widow rec d a pension in her own right of $600 per An m - on the service of her husb d in said Reg t on the Quota and pay of Lieut and Pay Master - but was not rec d his pension under the act of Cong s of May 1828 which his heirs now claim - and which is justly due.
Respectfully
Roll 76 Gray
He will also give the names of M c Roberts May who rec d their pay and

Pension act 1828. LA M a Taylor Com m Col Francis Taylor, Lt Col W m Fontaine, Cap Garland Bunly, Cap t Jas Perris and O Pettus S d all have been reports for Com m pay- and perhaps may have had the same and pension 1828- or their widows if alive.
The above are references sufficient to shew how other officers of said Reg t were provided for- and the certif- icates of the and d of the are evidence of his (Martin) having settled his a/c as Lieut and pay-master of said Reg t at the close of the war- indeed the rest of Com d of May and Nov r 1778- entitled reduced discharge and resigned off s of the Army to return to service when it could be obtained in the same rank they held before their dischar- ge- and also that Lieut s Masters, Pay masters and Adjt s should be taken from the line- which is proof of itself independant of the settlement of Martins a/c as Lieut s at the and d office in V a that Martin must of necessity have been Lieut s in the Reg t of Guards, at the time he was pay-master! and this being so, no one could be silly enough to suppose that he resigned his Com m of Lieut s and held on to the appointment of Lt Mart s only. Then in order further to shew how long he served in said Reg t we will refer the examination of it to to some receipt of debt in Reg t for their pay running up to late as August 1781 and by examination of to the above references, and also the settlement of his a/c at the auditors office in Phila Phil a in a/c 1778. The whole of his services will be shown- and the pension awarded. Court of Pensions, 3 Rob t H l Gray

Wash ng City Feb y . 15 1852
Sir,
Since writing the within appeal of the 14 th my attention has been drawn to a circular from the pension office, and circum designed by yourself in regard to cases of appeals from the decision of the former to your dept t for relief. I feel it my duty as an agent, of some 13 or 14 years practice in the prosecution of pensions &c o to make some remarks, repelling, so far as I am concerned, the imputed charge, of being the cause of hindering, the facilitating of the business of the pen n office, by making vague appeals from the decision of the clerks of the pen n dept t without specifying the precise grounds, upon which my appeal is based, both as to the law, and the evidence in the case; and I think the within enclosed appeal in the case of H Hudson Martin's child u upon reading will satisfy you, that I have not offended against the last circular regulations of the dept t of the Int o in the subject of appeals - but inasmuch as the charge seems to be made broadcast against agents - I feel it my duty (so far I am concerned) to vindicate myself against the charge of delaying business &c o - but before I do this affirmatively, I will enquire, how an agent specify
17.1852

his objections in detail, to the decisions of the examining clerk, where he does not state his objections in detail, to the law and evidence - but merely writes us in Broad-Castle as in the letter of the 27 th of Jan y . last - (evidently written in a bad spirit), in the case enclosed of St Hudson Martin!!
Then Sir, we trust before you require us to specify our objections to the decision, both as to the law, and the evidence, you should require the examining clerks (both as to lands , as well as pensions ) to so specify their objections to the allowing of the application, for either the land-warrant or the pension. So that we may either meet their objections if illegal , or comply with their demands if possible.
I will now vindicate myself by showing my course in regard to Broad cast reply from the fin ce dept. rejecting the application, without specifying the objections - but only remarking, "The evidence is not satisfactory," In re this I corresponded with the dept. in regard to this vague on three party ref. of answer; forever keeping us in the dark as to what will satisfy them.
Sometimes a single objection is made, as to the proof of marriage not being satisfactory - or according to the rules! After clearing up that, another is raised, as to services - and so on, when, in order to facilitate business

all their objecties have been  should be made at once to the proof of service or marriage; in order that that they might be met; and I have written the dept frequently, that their captions, Ege-parte cause of proceeding against claims, would only run the Govt to more expense - for if an agent is satisfied in his mind, that from the evidence filed in the case - he is ent d to the certificate of p er - it might be rejected a dozen times, and still he would perse- vere, and consider himself recreant, to his clients should he give up the struggle. We know, where there is any thing due as well as the dept - and many times much better! - and hence we can can make  issue , are appeals, to the higher powers of the Govt for justice and protection; when repulsed by the clerks.
But Sir we would invite your particular attention to such claims on appeal of mine , as shall shall come from you  us , to see if we do not specify, and elaborate sufficiently, to come within the demands of your late circular. I am glad you have put it out. For heretofore, in many cases, my communicators with the Govt dept has been has been objected to on the score of their length - They had not time to read them They are short, that "be more I must be short! now I must be more specific! but still give all and yet be short The details Sir; now this is hard to do; but I do not com- plain -

only let the rule be consistent - and work both ways - both as to Govt as well as the agents.
In the case of Hudson Martin act May 15, 1828 enclosed - your circular perhaps inquiry that I should notice, and answer the objections, made to the allowing of the term the pen u more particularly.
In the letter of Sept 10. 1850, Mr. Edwards expressly admits the services of St Hudson Martin up to Aug. 1782 but requires of us, what he had no right to do, to prove his actual services to the end of the !! not admitting Sup 2 Jan. 1781 service after
In the letter of Oct 14, 1850 Mr. Heath requires actual service to the end of the war also but which in private conversation he modified - so as to admit Sup 2 Jan. 1781 service after 2 Jan. 1781 - which is right!!
In the letter of Sept 8 th 1851 - he admits that he is entitled as Lieut but says that he Martin had already rec d the benefits of the act of May 15, 1828, but which proved on examination to be incorrect.
In the last letter (Jan y 27 1852) he objects to the claim broadcasted - repudiating every thing that he had heretofore said, as to his being entitled, or to his services - written as I observed above under an excited state of feelings!! much more could be said Sir, in regard to the from diff to course in protracting business, by making frivolous objections to claims - but I forbear, nor will I even infer that prejudice to certain agents, has impeded their claims - "but it is certainly very remarkable that claims rejected - are afterwards allowed when put under the management of other agents - without any additional evidence being filed whatever!!" Respectfully - Robt H Gray.

Journal of Cong - Jan 9 th 1779.
Resolved, That a Battal n of 600 men properly officered, be forthwith raised on Cont l establish t in N o for the space of 1 year from the time of their enlistment, unless sooner discharged under the direction of the Gov r and Council of that State, who are hereby empowered to appoint the officers of the said Battallion, out of those of the N o line, who have been left out of the late arrangement of the Cont l Army, as far as their numbers will reach: The Reg t to consist of 1 M o Col Command t and Capt - 1 Maj and 6 Capt. 6 Captains, 1 Capt. M o 7 Lieut s - 9 Ens. 1 Surg n , 1 Surg. Mate, 8 Companies of 75 men each, including Corporals, 3 Sergeants, 1 drum and Fife To each Comp y .
That these Troops be stationed at, and not removed (except to such distances as the duties of the Port may) from the Barracks in Albemarle County, as guards over the Convention Troops - That they receive the usual pay of the Cont l Army, and a suit of Clothes as a bounty to each non-Commis d Officer and private.
That, as soon as the said Reg t shall be so far completed, as to be able to do the duty of the Port, the Militia now in the Service there be discharged.
Journals of Cong Dec. 10. 1779 - Resolved -
That Governor Jefferson be informed, that Congress approve of the measures taken by the Executive of the State of Virginia, in sending to the Port of Charlottesville, as guards to the Convention Troops, a newly-raised Battallion of Infantry - and a Troop of Light-horse of their State - Troops; and that these Troops, be considered in the Cont l Service, and received

Continent l . pay and rations, while doing duty at the Conventon Barracks,
That the Board of War be directed to order the party of Col Blades Reg t . of Light dragoons at Charlottesville, to proceed to S. Carolina, forthwith to join the Reg t . there.
Journal of Cong s Sept 20, 1780.
Resolved, That it be recommended to the Gov t and Ex ec . Council of the State of V a , to be prepared to march the Conventon troops from Allentown Barracks, by the way of Winchester, to Fort. Frederick, in the State of Maryland, upon an invasion of the State of Virginia, in case the conjuncture of affairs should render the measure necessary.
That the States of Maryland and V a be requested to take eventual measures, for providing Magazines of provision, at or in the neighbourhood of Fort. Fred k for the supply of the Conventon troops.
That the Board of War take measures for the march of the new raised Reg t . of Maryland - by such route, as to cover the march of the Conventon troops.
Friday Oct 16, 1778.
We also find of the above an Res n of Cong s as follows -
Resolved, That Gen l Washington be directed to take the necessary steps for removing with all convenient speed - all the Prisoners of the Conventon of Saratoga, to the Town of Charlottesville V a - and to apply to the Gov t . of V a for a sufficient force of Militia to guard said prisoners.

Resolved - That Barracks be built - and that prisoners, and fuel be furnished &c - and that a regular account be kept - and forward the same on to the Board of War. &c. The Towns of Lancaster and Yorktown in Pennsylvania - were named as suitable places - but was rejected - and that of Charlestown adopted. See Journals of Cong. Oct. 16. 1778.
The Committee of Delegates will see from the foregoing Resolutions of Cong. that these Convention prisoners - taken at Saratoga - were thrown in Virginia as early as Oct. 78, and were guarded by her Militia mostly - until Jan. 1779. when the Ab. Barracks Reg t was organized - first for 1 year - to be regarded rather in the light of a state Reg t or as Vol. Independent Corps - as others were. Such as Lees, Armands, Hazens &c - but finding that its services would be longer needed than was at first anticipated - Cong t adopted it as a Cont t Reg t - and dictated the Chap. of Officers that should command it - so far as they should go - and at one time gave orders for its removal out of the state! See Sept. 20, 1780! Thus and placing taking this Reg t fully under the control of Cong t as a Cont t Reg t - and clearly coming within the purview of the Res o of Cong t of Oct. 80, Dec 81, and Mar h 1785. Nor could it be deemed reasonable or just, the that State of Va a having already guarded these prisoners, from Oct. 78, to Jan y 79. mainly with her Militia forces. She should be further required to furnish a Reg t of Regular Troops for 2 1/2 years more, and serve to to the end of the war if required by Cong t - and not to be entitled to their pay, in common with other Troops like situated - but to be treated as mere Militia or Vol. Companies - is too monstrous, to be sanctioned by any well balanced, liberal minded man, or officer of the Govt. It would be too cruel, and ungenerous, to be entertained for a moment. It would.
But, the greatest marvel of all in this case. is, that Mr. Hall, in his Report - rejecting the

Computation, asked for by Hudson Martin here in 1842 - Should have so entirely overlooked, the evidence of his services - from Jan. 79. to Aug. 81. contained in the report of Commr. Smith of 1834 - which he had in his possession - and frequent- -ly referred to in his reports on N a claims in 1842 - nor could he find any thing in the Auditor's Books at Rich d N a showing that Martin had settled his a/c there! as Secy. and Pay. Mast. of the Coast line - for services - after Jan. 1. 1831. How are we to account for these omissions, in his report of 1842. rejecting the commu- -nities here? But yet not more singular, than the very careful refraining on the part of the Commr's clerks in the case. To notice one any of the strong features in of it - going to make his services so clear, and plain, as to render it  make almost impossible to reject the claim. But it is so - and that while right is on one side - wrong is on the other! We are in your power, do with us as you think best. Respectfully. No. H. Gray - att.
Rec d of Compt. adopting
the Rep t of Guadalupe on Coast.
re-
To be filed with the papers in the case of H ud on Martin being for a pension -
Not. May 15, 1828
St

Off. Sol. Court of Claims Washington Oct. 20. 1857
Sir,
Please furnish copy of the decision of your office upon the claim of the late of Hudson Martin (or his representatives) for pension under act of May 15, 1828 - or if no written decision was made, then a copy of any report from your office which will show the grounds of rejection.
Very respectfully Chas. D. Henderson
Deputy Sol.
Mem o : Hudson Martin Lieut. 9 th Va. Cont. Reg. t resigned April 1778 - Appointed Jan y 1779 St. and Paymaster in the Albemarle Barracks regiment to August 1781; and thence forward to the close of the war as supernumerary.

Officers of the Reg t of Guards - Allerman's Bar- racks who rec d Disch as Capt s Officers under the Act of Cong. of Aug. 31. 1852.
To be filed with the pa- pers in the case of Hudson Martin's heirs - for a pen- sion. May 15, 1828.
Rev. H. Gray Agent

General Land Office: April 14 th 1850.
Sir:
I have to inform you, in reply, to your letter of the 10 th instanc, that the following Virginia Military Claims have been satisfied by the issue of Deeds, pursuant to the Act of August 30 th , 1850, in account of the services of Officers living in the Regiment of "Garnett", at the Shenandoah Barracks, Va, which Regiment was created by an act of the Continental Congress, of date Oct 1778.
Charles Taylor , a Col in the Continental Line, from Oct 1775, to the end of the War.
Charles Lewis , a Col in the Continental Line from June 1775, to the end of the War. & Benjamin Tristram , a Captain in the

Continued since for three years.
Yours truly, Chas. W. Lame, Thos. A. Smith, Pennsylvania.
Rev. H. May, Jr. Washington City.

Treasury Department, Pension Auditors Office May 3, 1856.
Sir:
Mr. G. W. Gray has addressed to me a note requesting a copy of the account of John Hanson Martin of the Virginia Line of the Army of the Revolution to be filed with the papers in your Office, and in compliance with his request, which he makes on an order from Nicholas L. Martin as executor of said Hanson Martin I herewith enclose a transcript of his account as appears from the Ledgers of the Revolutionary Army on file in this Office.
Very respectfully Yours Obs. Servt.
Wm. F. Tanner Auditor.
Colonel Minot, Esq. Commission of Pensions. ?

Encase -
Jane Martin, wid of Hudson
va.
Dec 4 - July 1886
Ad. 2 yrs St - + Pay Master $600 per ann. from 1 st Mar 1831 to 15 th Aug. 1838, when she died.
For me pay mts to be deducted.
Payable to Nicholas L. Martin, adm, for the ben- -eft of Jan 1851 Hudson Martin, John Martin, Jane Faber, Nicholas L. Martin, George W. Mar- tin & Mildred K. Carr, her only survi- ving children -
Cur. sent to
R. H. Gray
Present.
7
6

I think I am authorized to say that the "Albemarle Barracks Regiment" was treated heretofore by the Treasury Department as a Continental Regiment.
If any doubt exists on that subject the records from the Treasury Department can be called for.
Th: S. Biscoe
H of Reps June 13 th 1856

Treasury Department May 7. 1836.
Sir:
The request contained in your letter of the 3 rd ulto, that the department would furnish you with certain information in regard to the Albemarle Barracks Reg't, cannot be granted.
I am, Very Respectfully James Guthrie Secretary of the Treasury
John N. Gray, Esq. Washington D.C.
The information requested, which has been refused as above - was whether the Albemarle Barracks Reg't was not recognized as a Cont. Reg't - and also whether certain Officers belonging thereto, named in my letter to the Sec'y of the Treas'y about the 1 st inst. were not allowed, and paid their Pensions under the act of Congress of May 15, 1828 x. Rob't H. Gray x Maj M c Roberts, Cap. M c Thomas, do. Jas s Burton, and H. Nich d Pauld!!

Sir,
Chief Clerk's Office May 2 d 1856,
Will you be pleased to permit me to review the papers in the case of Lieut Hudson Martin for the purpose of making a brief of the evidence - with a view to obtain the pension for the heirs act 1828. So I get them by Monday it will do. Respectfully.
Robt H Gray att d for SR
J. M c Int Eyr No 578.36- va Com d of pensions.

Pension Papers of Hugh Martin and widow Jane Martin Accts 1828- 1836-8 from Virginia - or Louisiana - No. B. Gallagher
Copy 2/11/11

Wednesday, February 9. 1780
Resolved, That the reasonable expense of any State hath incurred, or may incur, by raising, and having in the Cont l Army, more than that State shall hereafter appear to be their Just proportion of the Troops actually serving in said Army from time to time, shall be allowed to such State, and equitably adjusted in a final settlement of their accounts with the U. States.
Resolved, That for the ensuing Campaign, the States be respectively required, to furnish by draft or otherwise, on or before the first day of April next, their respective deficiencies, of the number of 35.211. men in To wit, Virginia 6.070. in
That all of the men, whose times of service, do not expire before the last day of September next, be counted towards the quotas of the States, to which they respectively belong; whether they long compose, the Battalions in the Line, in the several States, those of the additional corps - including the Guards , the Artillery and horse, or the Regimented Artificers, in the departments of the Quarter-Master Genl l . and Comm ssy Genl l . of Mil. Stores, who being credited to the States respectively, should be provided for, dressed, and healed, in the same manner with the men in the several State-lines; and it is recommended to the several States to make like provision for the officers and men of the Artill y

horse, additional corps including the Guards, and Regimented Artificers, as may be made in pursuance of any resolution of Cong s for the officers and men of their respective Battalions; with such exceptions, respecting the Regimented Artificers, as have been made by Cong s , in their Acts concerning them. Journals of Cong s . Vol 3, 432.
Thursday, March 30, 1780
Resolved, That the Executive of the State of N H be requested to supply a sufficient quantity of provisions for the use of the Convention prisoners, and their Guards, at the post of Charlestonville; such supplies to be credited to the quota of provisions required of the State, by the reso n of the 26 th of February last.
Journals of Cong s Vol 3, page 445.
The above resolution of Cong s are to show, that Cong s considered the Reg t of Guards, in the light of an additional corps, of the Cong s Army, common to all the states - and not attached to the Line - and preserving rights, at least superior to the Regimented Artificers, the officers of which corps, have been allowed both, commutation and \frac{1}{2} pay.
See Doct Baird's case in the Court of Claims; as well as many other instances, where commutation or \frac{1}{2} pay. has been allowed to officers.

belonging to Separate , or additional Corps of the Cont d Army.
Below, also is the Reso n of Cong s of August 23 d 1782, Shewing that Separate Corps of the Army, are placed in every respect, on an equal footing with the Officers of the Line, both as regards Seniority of rank, as well as pay. &c.
Ro. H. Gray
att d for &c.
Journal of Cong s August 23 d 1782. Whereas, It may occasionally become necessary, for the good of the Service, that the Cavalry and Inf ty of the Legionary , and Partisan Corps should do duty Separate , or by being detached, with other Troops:
Resolved, That the Commanding Officer of the Army, in which any of the Legionary , or Partisan Corps shall serve, may, when the good of the Service, in his opinion shall require it, detach either the Cavalry, or Inf ty thereof Separately , on occasional Service, as he may think proper to do duty by themselves, or with any other Troops, if in his opinion the public good required it.
Resolved, That the Legionary , and Partisan Corps, shall generally be entitled to take rank according to Seniority; but shall be liable to such disposition, as the said Commanding Officers shall find expedient for the good of the Service; and the Officers of both Horse, and Foot, shall take rank according to priority of Commission.
Journal of Cong s Vol 4. Page 53.

In addition to the within, The Comm'n of pension is referred to the Resn. of Cong. of Apr 10, 1780, in which the language is used; "it being the determination of Cong. that all the Troops serving in the Cont'l Army, shall be placed on an equal footing," "Rev. Claims Page 13.
In the famous Resn. of Oct 21, 1780. the word Line is not used at all, but simply "Officers,"!! see Page 12.
By the Resn. of Dec. 31, 1781. in addition to Officers of the Line, and Separate Corps of the Army, "Officers not belonging to the line, of any particular or separate Corps of the Army," are equally provided for! And by the Resn. of March 8 th 1785. last, the Resn. of Dec. 31, 1781. was not considered as allowing commutation or \frac{1}{2} pay. It is here distinctly stated, that those Officers who retired under the Resn. of Dec 31, 1781. are equally entitled to the benefits of the \frac{1}{2} pay and Comm n as those who retired under the Resolves of the 3 d and 21 st of Oct. 1780.
Rev d Claims. Pages. 14 and 16.
Note. The absolute necessity of additional Corps - Independent of the Line is admitted by Cong. - and were variously termed, additional , separate , independent , partisan , and legionary Corps. all however being synonymous with each other - and the same rights guaranteed to them, according to the Service rendered &c. No. H Gray.
No 22

✓
Robert H. Gray Lynchburg, Virginia 23 Sept. 1857.
Enclosed copy of my letter declining to reopen the case of Sam Martin - & denies that he took the grounds stated in said letter - &c -
Coale
The Chief Clerk will please to direct what disposition is to be made of this letter. Yours truly
Robert H. Coale Clerk
June 29/57
Respectfully referred to the Com. of Pensions Moses Kelly Dept. Int. June 25/57
Rec'd 24 June 57. Mr. Pritchett

Seymour June 23 d 1857.
Sir
Enclosed is a copy of a letter Just re d which purports to be your refusal to re-open the case of Jane Martin (not asked for) for the grounds (if I can understand the confused composition) that the pretence advanced by me, that a mere reference to the records of the Court-Martial is new and material evidence , is not admissible.
I deny Sir, that I took any such grounds as is contained in the above quotation from your letter of the 4 th Inst; but that I placed in the hands of Mr. Whiting, the Com r of P., the Resolutions themselves , and which were had been filed before - but which Mr. W. said was not new evidence : because , he considered himself already in possession of it, and that he should be presumed to know all about it! What a Solomon to be sure.
The claim of the heirs of Lieut Hudson Martin - (not Jane Martin de d ) has been objected to on different grounds, at different times, as the whims of the different clerks might strike them.
By Mr. Triplett, because Lieut Martin (as he states) was a state line officer and By Mr. Geddes, because he was not in service as a Court Officer after Jan y 1. 1781 - tho' his widow, in 1838, or 39. had been allowed a full pension of $320. per An m on the rank of Lieut. and which

full pension, could not have been allowed, unless a part of Lieut. Martin's Services while attached to the Reg t of Guards had been included. At a later period the pension of M c Martin was increas d to $600. including the rank of Pay-mast r which he held, in addition to that of Lieut. from Jan d 22 d 1779. to Aug. 1. 1781. when the Reg t was disbanded, leaving the Off r in a Super d condition. See the official report of Commr. Smith, which is in poss n of the Com r of pensions, and filed with papers.
In my letter of appeal to you, I noticed the contradictory letters Judge M c Int r was made to sign by the artificers of the different blocks, Triplett, and Geddes. thus stultifying himself in the most shameful manner: Which letter of appeal of mine, you did not read I presume, nor could you have done so, or you would not have signed the one of the 4 th Inst, without showing yourself utterly indifferent as to the state of things which exist in the pension office, in regard to which I thought I made allusion, distinct enough, to require on your part, an investigation in to the matter; but which you n , do not seem to notice.
I charged then, as I do now, that this claim has been kept from payment for several years by deliberate mis-representations as to the service, performed evidence, as well as the character of the Reg t he Martin belonged to from Jan d 22 d 1779. to Aug 1. 1781. Let us see.

Mr. Hiptell, with the report of Commissioner Smith before him - represents to Judge Mindt, that Martin was a State Line Officer , and rec d his pay from V a as such - while the report itself represents Martin as Lieut and P. Mast n of the V a Cont t line, from Jan y 22 d 1779. to Aug t 1. 1781! What do you call this?
Upon the strength of this letter report of Mr. Hiptell, signed by Judge Mindt, the Hon. Paulus Durell, to whom addressed - called on Judge Mindt, and claimed the \frac{1}{2} pay - due by virtue of said decision, under the Act of Cong s of July 5 1832 - The Judge finding the blunder self him self and his Clerk had made, puts the matter in to the hands of Mr. Geddes, another clerk to rectify, and doctor up - so as to make Martin out a kind of Non-descript Officer - neither one thing or the other neither State or Cont t . See my argument filed, as to his fallacious statements, and reasonings. but in order to make out his case he falsifies even the report of Judge Hall himself on the subject.
You will see Sir, that the object of both of these Clerks was to make it appear that Martin was not a Cont t Officer after Jan y 1. 1781; or else they would be compelled to allow the pension due Martin in his life time under the Act of 1828; hence the disgraceful Subterfuges they resort to, in order to defeat it.
The Sec y of Int r will be able to perceive by this time the importance of producing testimony of the highest kind to show the light in which

This Reg t was raised by Cong g - hence the filing of all the Res ns , of Cong g we could find - was made, as the Gov t of pensions, perhaps not to be satisfied with what had already been filed by us. I was determined to give him something that could not be rejected.
The last resolution of Cong g (not reference merely) filed - places the the thing beyond cavil or doubt, that the Reg t of Guards was first appointed, and then recognized by Cong g from time to time from 1779 to 1781 - as a Component part of the Cont l Army; and never has been otherwise considered, from 1783 to the present time. except by Judge Hall of Vermont! the Prototype of these examiners, who they believe in, in preference to the War Department, The Treas y Dept, or the Committee of Cong g all of which Authorities have recognized this Reg t as a Corps of the Cont l Army - and allowed its Officers, their lands, pensions, and Com ry pay as such!!!
And Sir, Independent of the re peated recognitions of this as a Cont l Reg t allowing the widow of Hudson Martin of 600 per An m on the ranks of Lieut, and P Mart n is sufficient of itself, to require the allowance of the pension under the Act of 1818. (as Martin lived until 1830 -)
Indeed, so palpable is the perpetration of the wrong done in this case, as to Justice, (had we the legal right to demand it - as we should have) the issue of a Mandamus for the Com r of pensions - requiring him to issue the certificate of pension in favor of Martin heirs under the Act of 1818. and also to pay under the Act of Cong g July 5. 32. And should your Honor be per- mitted to read this last appeal to you for Justice - and still re- ject it - it will be come my duty as a faithful agent, to take the case up to Cong g , where a Special Committee will be asked for, to make a full investigation of Matters and Things in the pension office, and War y Dept touching the cause, and conduct of certain Officers, in the suppression of the

and misrepresentation of the facts &c.
This letter is a mere epitome of what might be said in this case of Martins - who in addition to the evidence of Service referred to - settled his depreciation as a Genl. Officer and Slave Service by the books of the Auditor in Richd N d since Jan d 1781. as a Genl. Officer - and also N d Land from N d as such - See evidence filed with papers.
In conclusion we will refer your honor, to the papers in the case for rigid examination - and not to be governed alone by the false statements prepared by the examining clerks and signed by the Commr, without any knowledge whatever, as to the Truth , or Falsity , therein contained.
You will be pleased Sir to have me furnished with a copy of the letter of the Comr. of pensions, refusing to re-open this claim - as I know I am within the rules in regard to new evidence - and also please send me copies of the private  back  back correspondence, in this case - between the Comr of pensions Mr Heath, and Mr Stewart, Sec y of War referred to in the letters of the latter to Mr Heath of the 6 th of Feb. and 10 th Nov. 1852 - The contents of which I have a right to know, but copies of which has been denied me, by your immediate predecessor.
I would also request, that you obtain the proper certificate from the War Dept (which has been refused me)

Showing that various Officers of the Reg. of Guards, have rec d their pensions through that Dept. under the Act of May 15, 1828.
You will see Sir, how, almost impossible it is then, for Claimants, to obtain Justice at the hands of Gov t , when its high Officials, are throwing every difficulty in the way of their payment instead of facilitating them as they should be disposed to do; at any rate not to write Final at the foot of letters prepared by certain prejudiced Clerks, giving g garbled, and fallacious Statements of the facts in the case. It is so.
This appeal in behalf of Claimants for Justice, I trust, will not go unheeded, but that a thorough investigation into this case, will be required of the Officer, on its merits alone; and to give me an opportunity to meet his objections before you write Final on it.
I had a right to expect, that the report of the Com t to you would be forwarded to me, in order that I might have an opportunity to answer it, before you however should make up a Final opinion in the case. But Sir, a decision can never be Final in so just a case as this, unless it be a decision in its favour. Indeed I should consider myself recreant as a prosecutor of Claimants, were I to cease day or night, to urge its payment on Gov t — and should you still turn a deaf ear

to the calls of Justice - and be sustained by Cong d . I still have another Tribunal to appeal to - the Court of Claims
I have furnished new evidence in in accordance with the rules, and as such claim a re-opening, and re-examination of the claim
With great respect,
I remain your ob. Serv t
Robt H Gray.
Jacob Hon. H. A. Thompson
Sec of Int.
Wash n City D. C.

Incarn June Martin, in aid of Hudson Martin - for acc 4 th July 1876 - ad. 2 yrs at P.M. $600 per ann.
7 In favor of same parties for same time as in for me curt.
21
Letter sent to Dr. W. Gray Lynchburg Va.

copy
C

Department of the Interior Washington June 4 1887.
Sir,
In reply to your letter of the 18 th ultimo appealing from the action of the board of pension, on the case of Jane Austin, I have to inform you, that the refusal of that officer to re-open the case, upon the pretence advanced by you, that the mere reference to the records of the Continental Congress, is mere and material evidence, meets my entire ap- proval. The former decision of the Department with my entire approval. rejecting the claim is final.
I am respectfully
your obed Servant
J Thompson.
Secretary.
Robert W Gray Esq Washington D.C.

Lynchburg Nov. 8, 1855
Sir,
Yours of the 17 th Ult. is at hand, in which you seem to misapprehend, the object of my letter of the 2 nd of Oct r . it being an application under the Act of May 1828, on the Services of Hudson Martin indited in the Reg t of guards, at the Allemaile Barracks from Jan y 1779. to August 1781. he acting at the same time as Pay. Master to said Reg t . as the evidence from the Auditor's Office Richd clearly goes to show. Said Hudson Martin had previously served in the Cont l Line from 1776. to Apr l 1778. making more than 3 years in all, as the evidence filed will prove.
Said Martin being through their then Agent Mr. Thompson applied to Cong s for the Com l pay due them - in 1834 - but strange to say there was no evidence of Service filed at that time with the Committee except that, from 1776, to Apr l 1778. (which you will also find filed with the papers for a pension for the widow - Mrs. Jane Martin - Act July 7. 1838 - who was allowed $600. per An m . on the rank of Lieut and P.M. and this could not have been done had not Services as Lieut been allowed for 2 years or more - which would have embraced a part of the time he served as Lieut. in the Reg t of Guards!
Cong s very properly rejected the application for Com l pay in 1834. on the evidence filed - as it did not show, that he Martin was in Service in the Cont l Line after Jan y 1. /81. But kind when I took up the case about 1847. I filed the evidence of his Services, in the Reg t of Guards - extending from Jan y 79 to Aug t - 81. and it would no doubt have rec d a favorable report from the Committee on Rev s Claims, but for the fact, that

that Commr Smith in his report 1833-4 Speaks of Lieut Hudson Martin A P  (in the singular) as such, as being lost! which was not the fact, as there is a Sufficiency of it preserved to show that on a settlement of his A P . in A P 83, there was £82. due him, and at another time there was £27. due him as Lieut, which was Independent of the sum of £274. due him as Pay Master! recollect this.
The manner also in which the Audt. of V a in his Abstract as as to the A P of Lieut Hudson Martin heretofore alleged in speak- ing of it as lost or mutilated, was calculated, and did throw suspicion on it - as it was apply to -  my made to his A P alone, when in fact, the A P of some 12 or 15 other Genl Officers were lost also - and the mutilation spoken of, effected the A P of some 3 or 4 other Officers also - both of which lately facts taken from Martins base all suspicion of fraud having been intended by any agent of his - in the mutilation and in this particular, the A P forwarded by myself on the 2 d of Oct r . differs from those statements heretofore filed. The credit side of Martins A P as lately furnished, is suffi- ciently perfect too, to show that he was in service as a Lieut in the Genl line in 1781! The mutilation of the debit side, occurred; it is not known when but cer- tainly prior to 1833 at which time Commr Smith made his report, as to the evidences of service of the different Officers, who had not rec d their lands up to that time. and inasmuch, as no application for his land was made before about 1837 or 38 or pension either; this mutilation was not effected by any agent of his, but other persons; and for nasty purposes no doubt. Commr Smith reports Martin in service as Lieut P.M. from Jan y 79. to Aug. 81. but says nothing of his services from 76 to 78;

which Services he was ignorant of, no doubt because the evidence of it was to be found alone in the Books of the 3 d Aud t in Wash g City. Where he did not think to apply for information; but confined himself to the records at Rich d V a .
In confirmation however of Hudson Martin's Services as Lieut t in the Reg t of Guards - in addition to the printed record evidence from the Books of the Aud t Office in Rich d the fact alone that by the resolutions of Cong s of the 27 th day of May 1778, and the 24 th day of Nov r 1778 which requires all Staff Officers to be taken from the list of the line (See Journals of Cong s . Vol 2. Page 867) is proof positive, that it was a matter of impossibility, that Hudson Martin could have occupied the post of Pay Master in the Cont l Line, without also holding the appointment of Lieut t or Ens t in the line. you seem to think the view of the subject altogether, for you have never yet answered it.
But why this grudging disposition, to do justice to the widows and heirs of our old Revolutionary heroes? It would do my heart good, whenever I had an opportunity under  as Com r of pensioners to give them the mite due their Ancestors; and that they are clearly entitled in this case, I have only to remind you that not a solitary Officer of the Reg t of Guards, who have applied for their pension under the Act of May 1828, but what has rec d it - except Martin and not one of them but has either rec d or been reported for Com r pay! Then why make the case of Lieut t Hudson Martin an exception, when he continued in Service too later than either of the other Officers of the Reg t - none of whom continued later than June 1781. while he remained until Aug t 81.

The Committee of Congress raised an objection to all- ing Com ry pay to Martin, because he had not rec d his pension under the Act of May 1828- and the Ex cl Clerk in the pension Office - withheld, the pension, until the Com ry pay is allowed! and in this manner, a joint claim for both pension and commutation - is buffeted about from one tribunal to the other - and between the two, falls to the ground!
This Sir, is positively a good claim, and clearly made out. and I do not see how any examining clerk, who will give the papers a deliberate, and unprejudiced examination, can come to any other conclusion than to allow it. I do not see that it is necessary for me to say more on the sub- ject - for should I convince you V s you will you will be of the same opinion still - but I am in hope you will not have to be convinced by anything that I shall have said, but by the evidence filed in the case.
Yours respectfully -
Robt. H. Gray
Agent.
Note. By the Res n of Congress of May 27. 1778, the 3 Staff officers, of Adj. 2 d Mast. and Pay-Mast. are to be taken from the line! and by the Res n of Nov. 24, 78. prisoners of War - Adj s 2 d Mast s and Pay-Mast s in reduction of Reg t s or Disignation - are permitted to resume their former position in the service! Martin, had the privilege of resuming his former position of Lieut. in the line. nor could he have held the post of Pay-Mast without having done so. and having done so , he could not have resigned between 79. and 81, without losing his position as P.M. nor was any reason why he should do so.
Robt. H. Gray

Nº 15971
(R)
ACT OF FEBRUARY 14, 1871.
WAR OF 1812
3287
Hudson Martin
LI-
badine
Revolution
Discharged _____, 18 See Widow Jane Admt
7394
PENSIONER:
Cif. No. _____
NY Pay Act of June 7th 1832
5009
Received _____, 187 7394 Jane

It is my Master Anderson Martin
27

I hereby certify that it does not appear from such examinations as have been made of the old Books and Records of this Office, that Lt. Hudson Martin of the Continental Line of the Army of the Revolution ever resigned his Commission as such.
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office Richard this 20th day of January 1837
W. Heath Audt.

WAR DEPARTMENT.
Revolutionary Claim.
I certify that, in conformity with the 3d section of the law of the United States, of the 4th July, 1830, Mary Martin of Nelson Co. Va. widow of Hudson Martin decd who was a Lieut. in the war of the revolution
is entitled to receive Three hundred Twenty dollars and _____ cents per annum, during the time she may remain unmarried, commencing on the 4th of March, 1831, and payable semi-annually on the 4th of March, and 4th of September.
Given at the War Office of the United States, this 10th day of March one thousand eight hundred and thirty-one.
Examined and } Countersigned. }
[Handwritten signature or initials]

14
MEMORANDUM
FOR
THE RECORDS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE
ON THE SUBJECT OF THE RESERVATION OF CERTAIN LANDS FOR THE USE OF THE SCHOOLS AND INSEPARABLE APPURTENANCES THEREOF
IN THE MATTER OF THE RESERVATION OF CERTAIN LANDS FOR THE USE OF THE SCHOOLS AND INSEPARABLE APPURTENANCES THEREOF AND IN THE MATTER OF THE RESERVATION OF CERTAIN LANDS FOR THE USE OF THE SCHOOLS AND INSEPARABLE APPURTENANCES THEREOF AND IN THE MATTER OF THE RESERVATION OF CERTAIN LANDS FOR THE USE OF THE SCHOOLS AND INSEPARABLE APPURTENANCES THEREOF

This is to Certify, That it appears from a List in this Office of such Officers and Soldiers of the Virginia Continental Line, during the Revolutionary War, 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, that a Certificate issued on the 29th day of April 1783 , in the name of Hudson Martin as Lt. of Infantry for £ 82. 13. 0, which Certificate appears to have been delivered to himself and was given for services prior to the 1st January, 1782.
Note - The leaf in the Book of settlements, stating the term of service, is torn off & lost.
{ No Seal of Office. }
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office, Richmond, this
20 day of Jany 188 7 .
Full Beall AUDITOR.

Sir Please to pay my wages to William Priest and you'll Oblige me Gabriel Murphy
S. M c Martin P. M c N g

Bal. as P.M. I 274.10.5
5

This is to Certify, That it appears from a List in this Office of such Officers and Soldiers of the Virginia Continental Line, during the Revolutionary War, 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, that a Certificate issued on the 4 th day of May 1781 , in the name of Hudson Martin as Pay Master for £ 274. 10. 5 , which Certificate appears to have been delivered to himself
and was given for services prior to the 1st January 1782. Toldih-pay as P ay Master from 22 Jan y 79 to 1st Aug st 1781.
Given under my hand, at the Auditor's Office, Richmond, this
6 th day of May 1845.
J. H. Heath
AUDITOR.
{ No Seal of Office. }

19
AUDITOR
188
...with regard to the Auditor's Office, Department of...
Handwritten notes
...to the new print to the 1st January 1882.
Handwritten notes
...the papers of the... ...to be returned to the... ...in the Office of...

This is to Certify, That it appears from a List in this Office of such Officers and Soldiers of the Virginia Continental Line, during the Revolutionary War, 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, that a Certificate issued on the 24th day of May 1784 , in the name of Hudson Martin as Pay Master for £274. 10. 5, which Certificate appears to have been delivered to himself and was given for services prior to the 1st January, 1782.
Told it - pay as pay Master from 22 Jan'y 79 to 1st August 1781.
No Seal of Office.
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office, Richmond, this 20th day of January 188 7 .
AUDITOR.

Wm Slaughter Esq
to
Hudson Martin Esq

Sir, Please pay my wages Due me from the first of Aug. to till the 13 th Dec r 1780 & Allg d &c.
M c H. Martin P.M.
Wm Slaughter Esq.

688

Charlottesville 16 April 1781
Sir Please to Pay to Mr John Bickley the Wages due to him from the first day of August 1780 to this eleventh day of April 1781. Inclusive
  John Bagby  Subt  And you will oblige yours &c    Thos. Hardin  do  Henry    Dudley Bagland  Coop l  Lewis Turner do    Wm Dickason  do  Dudley Ellis do    Wm Henderson  do   
To Mr Hudson Martin P.M.R.G

15
AUDITOR.
day of, 188
Received of the party at the Auditor's Office, Richmond, this
the sum of _____ for the year 188
the sum of _____ has been delivered to
the name of
for the balance of their Full Pay
the sum of _____ has been paid to the Officers

This is to Certify , That it appears from a List in this Office of such Officers and Soldiers of the Virginia Continental Line, during the Revolutionary War, 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, that a Certificate issued on the 26 th day of July 1782 , in the name of Hudson Martin as Lieutenant for £27. 11. 0½ which Certificate appears to have been delivered to himself and was given for services prior to the 1st January, 1782.
Note - The Account on which this Certificate except has been Lost or Mislaid.
{ No Seal of Office. }
Given under my hand at the Auditor's Office, Richmond, this
20 th day of January 188 7 .
J. H. Beall AUDITOR.

Let. To Agt. June 16, 45, Payl. to Jno. M. Martin Ex. for benefit of himself and family, Jane Haber, Nicholas S. Martin, Geo. W. Martin, & Milored H. Carr. only Surv. Children Let. Bobt. H. Gray 10 th Sept 1850
to same same Rcts 22 1853 N.A. with May 2/54 Hon. P. ... 8 June 1854. R.H. Gray Oct 17/53 same Nov 20/53 Hon. P. Powell Mch 18 1856
Decision of the Comr confirmed Secy of War let. to R.H. Gray Nov 12 1853
of Duncan Martin who died on the 28 November 1830, of Nelson in the State of Va. who was a 1 st Lieut in the Com. commanded by Captain ... of the ... commanded by ... in the Continental line for 2 years
Inscribed on the Roll of Pensions at the rate of 4 50 Dollars 00 Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1834, and ending 15 Aug. 1838, when she died.
Certificate of Pension issued the 16 day of June 1834 and sent to Thos ... of Richmond Va.
Attest ... Present ... ending
Revolutionary Claim, Act July 4, 1836, Section the 3
J. L. Swann, Clerk, Vol. 1 Page 171

see letter to H. N. Aug 10/44
Virginia 578
Mary Martin
widow of Andrew Martin
who died on the 28 November 1836 of Nelson Co in the State of Virginia who was a Ser t in the Company commanded by Captain [blank] of the Reg t commanded by [blank] in the Continental line for two years
Inscribed on the Roll of Virginia, at the rate of 370 Dollars - Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1831.
Certificate of Pension issued the 10th day of March 1837 and sent Thos M c Leod Esq Pres d . of
Arrears to the 4th of Mar 1837 1920 Pemi-ant. allowance ending 4 Sept " 160
30 $ 2080
{ Revolutionary Claim, Act July 4, 1836, Section the }
Recorded by [blank] Clerk, Book [blank] Vol. [blank] Page 191

No 2180 Hudson Martin Va
ad 15 May 1828
25 -

State of Virginia,
Nelson County To wit.
On this 24 th day of August 1850, before me Bro. W. H. Atkinson a Justice of the peace in and for said County, personally appeared Nicholas L. Martin Administrator of Jane Martin dec d who being first duly sworn according to law, doth on his oath make the following declaration, in order to obtain an increase of pension, for the benefit of the children of said Jane Martin, under the Act of Congress of July 4, 1836 - and also the benefits of the Act of May 15, 1828.
That he is the administrator of Jane Martin dec d of said County, the widow of Hudson Martin dec d who was a Lieut and Pay Master in the Continental line of service, at the Albemarle Barracks, from the 22 d of Jan y 1779, to the 1 st day of August 1781 - when he became Supernumerary to the end of the war. That he the said Hudson Martin died in said County on the 28 th day of Nov. 1830, without having rec d the pension due him under the Act of May 15, 1828 - leaving a widow, Jane Martin above mentioned, who rec d a pension under the Act of July 4, 1836, at the rate of $480. pr An. only up to the time of her death, the 15 th of August 1838 - when in fact, she should have rec d a pension, on the rank and services of her husband, as Lieut. and pay master, at the rate of $600. pr An. from the 4 th day of March 1831, to the time of her death as aforesaid - which declarant now claims, as well as the pension due the said Hudson Martin, in his life time, at $600. pr An. from the 4 th of March 1826, to the 28 day of Nov r 1830, under the Act of May 1828, as aforesaid.

That in addition to the services of said Hudson Martin above recited, that he rendered other active service previous to the time above recited - making over 3 years in all and for which Land was allowed his heirs, since his death.
Feeling assured therefore that the aforesaid additional pension, is due the heirs of the said Jane Martin as set forth in his declaration, respectfully asks that a certificate of pension, may be issued to him for the benefit of the children of the said Jane Martin, which will be named in the certificate of Nelson County, which will accompany this declaration.
N. Martin Court Adm. non Jane Martin
Sworn to and subscribed, the day and year above written -
Before me - Jno. W. Dutton, J.P.
State of Virginia, Nelson County to wit At a Court held here for said County on the 26 th day of August 1850. The declaration of Nicholas L. Martin Administrator de bonis non of Jane Martin dec d . was presented in Court claiming additional pension for the heirs of Jane Martin, under the acts of July 4 th 1836, and May 15 th 1828. And the Court having examined the same, do certify to the Department of the Interior, that the said Jane Martin is the widow of Hudson Martin dec d of said County, who was an Officer in the Revolutionary War, in the Continental line of service, and died on the 28 th November 1830, leaving

a widow Jane Martin above named, and who received a pension at $480. per annum, and died the 15 th of August 1838. leaving 5 children to wit. Hudson, John, Jane Faber, Nicholas L. George W. and Mildred N. Carr. And that the said Nicholas L. Martin was appointed Administrator de bonis non of Jane Martin dec d . by said Court, on the 25 th day of November 1845. And that John W. Dickinson Esqr. before whom the said Nicholas L. Martin was qualified to his declaration as Administrator is an acting Justice of the peace in and for said County, duly Commissioned and qualified as such, and that the signatures purporting to be his affixed to the papers in this Case, are genuine.
In testimony whereof I Spotswood Gen- land Clerk of the County Court of Nelson County, in the State of Virginia, do hereby Certify that have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of my Office, this 26 th day of August A. D. 1850. and in the 73 rd year of the Commonwealth.
Spotswood Genland Clerk of Nelson County Court 3

Know all men by these presents that I John M Martin executor of Jane Martin deceased widow of Hudson Martin deceased of the County of Nelson and State of Virginia a Revolutionary Pensioner of the United States do hereby constitute and appoint
and State of Virginia my true and lawful attorney for me and in my name to receive from the agent of the United States for paying pensions in Richmond State of Virginia the balance of the pension due the said Jane Martin deceased, widow of Hudson Martin deceased from the 4 th day of March 1838 to the _____ day of _____ 184_____ being the day of her death
Witness my hand and seal this _____ day of _____ 184_____ Sealed and delivered in the presence of {
State of Virginia Nelson County to wit
Be it known that on the _____ day of _____ 184_____ before the subscriber a justice of the peace in and for the said County personally appeared John M Martin executor of Jane Martin deceased within named, and acknowledged the foregoing power of attorney to be his act and deed. In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand the day and year first above written
State of Virginia
I Spotswood Garland, Clerk of the Court of Nelson County certify that Floyd L. Whithead _____ is a justice of the peace in and for said County, and that the foregoing signatures purporting to be his are genuine
In testimony whereof I have hereunto affixed my seal of Office and subscribed my name this 29 th day of April in the year 1845.
Sp. Garland, Clerk of Nelson County Court.

State of Virginia County of Nelson to wit
Be it known that before me F. L.ago J Whitehead a Justice of the Peace in and for the County aforesaid personally appeared John M Martin and made Oath in due form of law, that he is the executor of Jane Martin (widow of Hudson Martin deceased) the identical person who was a pensioner and is now dead, and to whom a Certificate of Pension was issued of which the following is a true Copy
War Department
Revolutionary Claims
I certify that in conformity with the 3d section of the law of the United States, of the 4th July 1836 Jane Martin of Nelson Co Va a widow of Hudson Martin dec d
who was a Lieut in the war of the revolution is entitled to receive Three Hundred & twenty dollars and _____ Cents per annum during the time she may remain unmarried Commencing on the 4th of March 1831 and payable semi- annually on the 4th of March and 4th of September Given at the War Office of the United States this tenth day of March one Thousand eight hundred and thirty seven R. A. Butler
Secretary of War
Examined and Countersigned
J. L. Edwards
Commissioner of Pensions
That the deceased pensioner resided in Nelson County in the State of Virginia for the space of Forty five years before her death of the truth of which statement I am fully satisfied Witness Joseph M. Bates. John M. Martin
Sworn to and subscribed this 28 th day of April 1845 before me in the presence of
F. L.ago J. L. Whitehead J. C.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR.
Claim for Military Service.
Increased from $480 per annum.
I certify that, in conformity with the law of the United States, of the 4 July 1836, the pension of Jane Martin dec d late of Virginia, widow of Hudson Martin, who was a Lieutenant of Artillery in the Revolution, has been increased from four hundred and eighty to Six hundred Dollars per annum, commencing 4 th March 1831, and ending 15 th August 1838, when she died, payable to John M. Martin, Executor, for sole use & benefit of himself, Hudson Martin, Jane Fifer, Nicholas S. Martin, George M. Martin and Mildred H. Carr, her only surviving Children, after deducting what has been paid at the rate of four hundred and eighty dollars per annum
Given at the Department of the Interior, this 14 th day of December one thousand eight hundred and forty fifty
Alex r H. Stuart.
Secretary of the Interior.
Examined and Countersigned. }
J. E. Heath Commissioner of Pensions.

Hudson Martin

Hudson Martin's case act of 15 May 1828
The act of 15 May 1828 embraces only those officers who were entitled to half pay under the section of long up of 21 October 1850, vizt, those who should serve to the end of the War, or who should be reduced under said Resolve.
The resolve of 21 Oct 1850 has never construed to embrace others than lineal officers, there under act of 15 May 1828 none but lineal officers were admitted as pensioners.
The act of 7 June 1832 was framed purposely to obviate this objection as to Staff & other officers not lineal or otherwise comprehensible in its provisions.
Hudson Martin was no doubt a Lieutenant in 1778 & resigned his appointment. Had he remained a

7 Leutenat will be Octobr 21 st 1780 The above Supplementary his claim would be admissible under the act of 13 May 1828; or had he survived the act of 7 June 1832 he would have been entitled under this last named act to be furnished as Paymaster. But it is said he entered the Regiment of Guards in 1779 & served till the summer of 1781. It may be true that he entered the Regt. as Lieut in 1779, but there is no proof that he served till 21 st October 1780 as a Lieutenant. On the contrary, Smith in his reports says he recd. about £82 as Lieut, the credit being for 6 months service as Lieutenant and in 1779, I say, he settled his accounts as paymaster to 1781!

If therefore Smith's reports are allowed as proof of what has been shown they report, it follows that Martin was simply a Paymaster I not a lineal officer in 1780 & is not as such entitled to the benefits of the act of 15 May 1828.
There is not the slightest proof that Martin was a lineal officer in 1780, and as the act of 15 May 1828 only embraced such officers as were entitled to half pay under the resolve of 21 Oct 1780, & as Martin never received, nor claimed, the nor was entitled to the benefits of that resolve, his claim is inadmissible under the act of 15 May 1828.

ad d evidence filed - to obtain a first act 1828. on the services of Hudson Martin from Jan y 79. to Aug. 81. for the benefit of the child u - Nichol d Martin Adm r of Jane Martin, in to whom the claim descended - and to whom the certificate is to be issued - To wit -
1 st Report of Com. of Cong s 1842. showing the grounds upon which the claim for Com t was reject d - There being no evidence filed showing his services from Jan y 79. to Aug. 81. 2 d -
Pay Rolls of Capt s Madison Timberlake Bury, & Thomas showing that they belonged to the same Reg t of which he was P. Master - all of whom, and others of the same Reg t rec d or was report d for Com t pay by a Com e of Cong s and a part of which Reg t - To wit - Col s  of Orange Benton Jno Thomas of Buckingham - and Maj s M c Roberts of Culpepper rec d their pen s under the act s of 1828, before they rec d or applied for Com t pay - 3 d -
Sundry Rep s for pay of sold s . up to Apr l 81. (others up to Aug. 81. filed before Cong s )
The Commission of Martin filed is in the Ex rs def t of V a and his appointment as P.M. by Gov r Henry of V a is filed within the papers before Cong s on which to obtain his Com t pay. As to the question of Resignation (or not), the certificate of L d H arth then Asst t of V a is conclusive on that point. Please issue cert t of pen s as early as practicable - Respectfully - Rob t H Gray adm r

also Richard Panlitt, admin time (No 1138) under May '28 -
Lt Pay M 9 th Va Regt -
For Ben - two was in the Cincinnati troops under Col Taylor - & Gen Wood - One Thomas was in the 1 st Va Regt - under Col Thomas & Gen Wood -
Mem o of ad. Service in the case of Hudson Marine heir - for a pension - cost May 16. 1828
Recd 74 Gray 1828
20