Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File R. 73, for James Maxwell, Virginia

SERVICE
NUMBER
Va. Sea Service,
Maxwell James
R. 73
Va half pay
CONTENTS
See D.A. Acc. No. 837 Virginia State Navy James Maxwell, Ky S File Va. Half Pay

Petition for additional bounty, lands. The Heirs of James Maxwell - Capt d S.N.
In reporting upon the claim for additional Bounty, Land, for the services of Capt James Maxwell, I am, in some measure, forced to present the substance of a Report, which I made to his Excellency, the late Governor, upon the petition for the Bounty, Land which has been allowed.
In that report, I said - There is no evidence that James Maxwell was a Captain in the State Navy. The Cormorant, which vessel he commanded about the close of the war, was in the Trading Department. The papers concerning the Cormorant were bound in a volume of papers relating to the Navy; because it was thought they ought to be preserved, and could not more properly, be placed elsewhere. The Cormorant seems to have been in the trading Department. The letter of instruction from Duncan Rose, commercial agent of the State to Cap d Hardyman of marines (which is relied upon to support this claim) proves the fact that the Cormorant was, at the date of the instructions, a vessel employed in trade. As commercial agent, Duncan Rose had no control over any vessel in the Navy, nor over the marines in any such vessel. He had control, however, over the vessels employed in trade. Many of these were armed vessels; and some of them were defended by a peculiar force; to wit, Marines, enlisted for two cruises, or nine months. Cap d Hardyman was one of the officers employed in recruiting these Marines, and was subject to the orders & instructions of the Commercial agent. The Marines, who served in the Navy, were according to law enlisted for three years. Over these last Mr Rose had no control.
Captain Maxwell was Commissioner of the Navy, and Superintendent general of the ship yards &c; but as such was not entitled to bounty lands, under any law of the State.
This was substantially my report upon the original application for bounty land, for the services of Cap d James Maxwell.
The late Governor probably agreed with me in opinion
respect

respecting the principles and reasoning of that Report. But his attention was called by the petitioner (after that Report was made) to an act of the General Assembly of May, 1782. Hening's Stat. vol II. page 42. entitled "an act for protecting and defending the trade of the Chesapeake Bay." This act provides that the ship Cormorant & boat Siberly , should be immediately fitted out and prepared for protecting the trade & commerce of the Chesapeake bay, & its dependencies &c. The act directed the appointment of a board of Commissioners "to superintend & provide for the defence & protection of our Bay trade" &c. Amongst other provisions of this act was a provision that "such other officers" shall be appointed to command the said vessels as are at present in the Navy service of this State." Captain Maxwell was appointed to command the Cormorant.
The Governor was of the opinion; either that the force ordered to be raised by this act for the defence of the trade of the Chesapeake Bay, & its dependencies was a component part of the Navy, or that Capt. Maxwell's appointment to the command of the Cormorant was proof that he was before that time in the Navy service of the State, or both. Be this as it may, he allowed bounty lands to Capt. Maxwell heirs, for a service of 3 years as a Captain in the Navy. That that opinion was honestly, and conscientiously given I cannot doubt. It may be a correct opinion; but candour requires me to say, that I doubt its correctness. It is with reluctance I say it; for there is no man in the Commonwealth of Virginia for whom I have a greater respect than I have for the late Governor.
1 st — The Cormorant was in the trading Department, certainly until May, 1782. The act of Assembly of May, 1782, did not, as I think take her out of that Department. It placed her under the direction of a board of Commissioners, to defend the trade of the Chesapeake bay &c. She was not by that act, made a component part of the Navy. On our western frontiers, during the Revolution & after it, there were companies of Rangers Scouts & Spies, who were raised by law put under the order of the County Lieutenants, called out into actual service, (and the service was most hazardous and arduous) and paid by the State; yet

They were not of the State line. They did not receive bounty land. No more ought the officers of the Cormorant to receive bounty land. They were employed for the special purpose of protecting and defending the eastern frontier. The Rangers, Scouts & Spies defended the western frontier of the State.
2 d I do not think Capt e Maxwell's appointment, under the Act of Mar, 1782 to the command of the Cormorant affords proof that he was a Commissioned officer in the Navy, having actual command, or being entitled to it.
He was chosen on account of his being in the Navy service of the State. He was in that service at the time. He was in that service as superintendent gen l of the Ship yards. As commissioner of the Navy, Charles Thomas, the Superintendent of the public Rope Walk was in the Navy service; but none of them were commissioned officers in the Navy. Mr Frazar, who supplied the vessels of the Navy, was in the Navy service, but none of them were commissioned officers in the Navy, and as such entitled to bounty land.
With reluctance, and with great deference to the opinion of the late Governor (whose judgement upon this case, I am sure your Excellency does not feel as wish to disturb, and to which nothing but a sense of duty would have made me urge an objection) I must say, that I do not think Captain Maxwell was entitled to bounty land at all; and that there is no foundation whatever for the claim for additional bounty land.
The only papers filed with this petition, are - an extract from the journals of the Navy board - and a note or memorandum of the petitioner -
Resp ly submitted;
John H Smith Com te H ts
May 15 th 1834
To his Excellency Gov. Tazewell
Indorsed
Rejected Augt 4. 1834

1193
Executive Department
October 16 th 1834.
The within is a true Copy of an original paper on file in this Department.
J. M. Richardson Asst. Sec. Comth
New residence

№ 73
ACT OF FEBRUARY 14, 1871.
WAR OF 1812.
3216
Henry James Maxwell Capt.
U.S. Navy Revolution
Discharged _____, 18_____
PENSIONER:
Cif. No. _____
Hg. Pay. _____
Act of July 5 th 1832
50 1/2
Admitted
Received _____ 73, 187_____

Recd. P. Oct. 1834.
1188
899
Auditors Office
October 16. 1834.
Sir
I have duly recd. yours of the 11 th inst requesting that I would communicate such additional evidence as the records of Richmond contain of the services of Capt Maxwell.
The paper which you enclosed, and which I now return, is I believe the only proof or documentary evidence, to be found in this office . I have applied to the commisioner of Revolutionary claims who has charge of most of the Books and papers which concern revolutionary transactions, and I have been by him furnished with the enclosed copy of a Report made by him to the Executive upon the claims of Capt Maxwell's Heirs to additional Land bounty. This Report will probably shed some light upon the claim to Half pay.
Very respectfully
Your Obedient Serv
J. S. Heath and W. A.
The Hon Levi Woodbury

James Maxwell
6 Sept
Wm Maxwell
Relative wharf pay claim of
Capt James Maxwell Va Navy

To Jas E. Heath, Esq.
Halifax Co. Co., Sept 5.
My dear Sir,
You are aware that no adverse claim for the last 10 years, of the Virginia Army during the revolutionary war, I have against the Government for commutation (having heretofore received the half pay) on the same - if settled in Barron's case; & I have been informed that the Section of the Act Judiciary had such they announced that he would not pay all such claims if Congress did not adopt some pecuniary action during its session. I am Congress having since, & I suppose without doing any thing

on the subject, I write to request that you will have the good- ness to inform me when I may expect that you will be likely to act in our case (which I suppose was rejected docu- by Mr. Edwards (a Kin- brother on the subject,) and whether it will be at all neces- sary or proper for me to visit Barkington - or to do any thing whatever on the case.
You know the importance of this business to me. Will you be so good as to let me hear from you on the subject as soon as possible. I have to direct your letter to me, to the care of Mrs. Sarah E. Carrington, Bristol Lane P.O. Bristol & Co. (Mr.) Yours truly J. M. Maxwell.

James Maxwell dec'd Act July 5. 1832
May 1. 1845.
Recorded Vol 43 page 163.

Pension Office
May 1. 1845
I certify that I have examined the claim of William Maxwell, administrator of James Maxwell, deceased, who was a Captain in the Virginia State Navy during the revolution, and I find that under the act of the 3 rd of July 1832, entitled "An act to provide for liquidating and paying certain claims of the State of Virginia", he received half-pay at the rate of Two Hundred and Forty Three and one third Dollars per annum  month from the 22 d of April 1783 to the 4 th of October 1795: whereas he was entitled to half-pay at the rate of Two Hundred and Fifty Three Dollars and Ninety Three Cents per annum for the above mentioned period. The difference between the amount paid and that to which he was entitled is now claimed; and my opinion is that the claim should be allowed. It is requested that the sum to be allowed may be sent in a draft to the administrator at Richmond, Virginia.
Commissioner of Pensions.
Approved
Secretary of War.
Enter this

BOUNTY LAND WARRANT RECORD CARD*
NAME Maxwell, John GRADE Private LINE Maryland
WARRANT NUMBER 11519 ACREAGE 100 ISSUED February 1, 1790 To — not shown —
*The information concerning the issuance of warrants carded on this form is found in volumes 2 to 4 of "Land Warrants Issued Prior to 1800" which are registers of bounty land warrants issued to non-commissioned officers and privates under congressional resolutions of September 16, 1776, and subsequent dates. Other records relative to the applications for warrants appear to have been destroyed in the War Department fire of November 9, 1800. Information concerning warrants surrendered to the Federal Government is to be found in General Land Office records in The National Archives.