Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File W. 21470, for Jonas Johnston, North Carolina

SERVICE
NUMBER
Nb.
Johnston, Jonas or Johnson Esther
No. 21470.
CONTENTS

To the Hon. Ch.
William L. Marcy Secy of War
Referred to Comt of Pensions W. L. Marcy
Jan 24, 1846
Geo. D. Hawkins
Appeals from decision of Pension Office in be- half of Distributees of Mrs Estlin Johnson.
H22. Rec Jan'y 23/46
Pension Office report N 3
H
N 6. 3909. Oct 36
Cl to Com 16 July 46
See to
Hon. J. R. Daniel
H 6. 16.

To the Hon ble
William L. Marcy Sec'y of War.
In behalf of the Distributaries of the late Mr. Estin Johnson widow of Col. Jonas Johnson of the Revolutionary army, this case has been again carried before the Commissioners of Pensions upon new evidence, and rejected by him; An appeal is respectfully asked for from his decision to you.
This case has been allowed for heretofore, for six months service, and that for the last six months service rendered by Col. Johnson immediately preceding his death. He died in service on the 29 th day of July 1779 on Drowning Creek in So Carolina in his march home.
The Commissioners admits that Col. Johnson was appointed a Major in Edgecombe County on the 22 nd of April 1776. And Mr. Estin Johnson his widow, in her Declaration for a Pension declares that her husband entered the army as a Captain. Thomas Bontz a Revolutionary Pensioner proves that Col. Johnson arrived at Wilmington, and in that section of country from March to October 1776. John Bryan another Revolutionary Pensioner proves the same service. Henry Barnwell another Revolutionary Pensioner proves the same service. Also Micajah Pittaway & D r Robert Williams two other Revolutionary Pensioners, and Mrs. Catherine Johnson, all prove in part the same service. This evidence although well supported for credibility, has all been rejected by the Commissioners & set aside. To fortify this Parol Testimony, in behalf of the Claimants, I adduce the certificate of the Comptroller of N o Carolina which is on file, showing that in "a Book of Settlement of the Army accounts at Kingston, the name of Col. Jonas Johnson is associated with the name of Henry Harn, and that they had received for their services , and for purchasing of guns in Edgecombe County the sum of $376.15.5 dated November 1776. We claim that so much of this sum of money as paid Col. Johnson for his military services as Maj r as testified to by the foregoing witnesses from March to Nov r .

1776 was his in that character. And which proves the length of service between those dates to have been Eight months. The balance of this sum was paid to Henry Horn, and for arms. The Comptroller further certifies that Col. Johnson rec d . for himself and for others for their services in November 1777 the sum of £129.9.7. He also certifies that other sums of money were paid to Col. Johnson in 1778 and 1779. many of them large showing his great connexion with Military service in N. Carolina. The Testimony in this case does not sufficiently locate these particular sums, to specified service, though they all imply it, too strong to be doubted. But the Parole Evidence for the Pro rata of service, to meet these various sums, and payments is to be found in general terms, in the Dispositions of Mrs. Catherine Johnson, Doctor Robert Williams and in the Declaration of Mrs. Ester Johnson for her Pension. What portion of service Col. Johnson rendered between his Tour to Wilmington and his Farm to S o Carolina, where he died, embracing and pertaining to these various sums, and what portion of these various sums he received for his services, can only be left to liberal estimation, as the Commissaire admits Col. Johnson to have been a very meritorious officer.
According to the Parole Evidence, as well as the Recorded proofs in this case, it is very evident, that Col. Jonas Johnson served as a Capt n . a Maj r . & a Col. in the Revolutionary war for the full period of Eighteen months. Six months of which have been allowed of pay for. Leaving one year pay now due.
Similar recorded proofs to this, in the case of Col. Johnson from the Comptroller of N o Carolina showing from his Books these payments, has governed the Commissaire here to fore in allowing the claims for a Pension to the Widow of Col. James McRiggie of Arkansas formerly of N. C. and these proofs have directed him, in very many other cases to allow the claims. It is much to be regretted then,

that his departure, should now appear, not allowing him to apply him to apply him to apply the same just rule in the case of the widow of Col. Jonas Johnson, who he has in his various decisions often admitted, to have been an officer of great merit. I hope the decision will be reversed, as made by the commission, and the claim for one year further Pension may be allowed.
I have the Honor to be most respectfully your very Humble serv t
M c D. Hawkins Bleekhoff of the Distrubutors of W m Estlin Johnson.
P.S. any decision in this case to me and the applicants will reach me through the Hon ble J. R. J. Danck. To whom reference is made. J. D. H.

W.H.P. act July 21. '47
Hon. Geo. S. H. session, Jan. 13. 48. Let to Hon. L. R. Daniel June 1/50
No 3909
N. Carolina
Esther Johnson Johnston Dec. Widow of Jonas Johnson
who died on the 29 July 1779
at Edgcomb in the State of N.C. who was a Colonel in the — commanded by Captain — of the — commanded by — in the
since for increased from $150.
Inscribed on the Roll of N. Carolina at the rate of 500 Dollars 00 Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1831. and ending 19 February 1841, the day of her death
Certificate of Pension issued the 21. day of July 1847 and handed to Mr. D. Hawkins pres.
Arrears to the 19th of Feb 1841 $ Semi-annual allowance ending payable to Prudence Hines, and Mary Ruffin only surviving Children.
{ Revolutionary Claim, Act July 4, 1836, Section the 3 }
Recorded by J. D. Arlin Clerk Book C. Vol. 1 Page 185

Declaration
In order to obtain the benefit of the Section of The act of Congress of the 4th of July 1836.
State of North Carolina } on this 23d day of December 1839. Edgecombe County } personally appeared before me a Justice of the Peace for the County of Edgecombe Mrs Esther Johnston of the said County now in the Eighty ninth year of her age, who being first duly sworn according to Law, doth, on her oath, make the following declaration, in order to obtain the benefit of the provision made by the act of Congress passed July 4th 1836.: That she is the Widow of Colonel Jonas Johnston who entered the service of the State of North Carolina in the year Seventeen Hundred and Seventy Six as a Captain for Edgecombe County and by a reorganization of the Troops my husband was made a Major of the County in the same year. and a short time after he was raised to the Rank of Colonel of Edgecombe. My husband was actively engaged from the commencement of the revolution in service both in this State and the State of South Carolina up to the last of the month of July Seventeen Hundred and Seventy nine at which time he died on Drowning Creek at the house of Thomas Arnis on the South Carolina line he being on his return from the army in South Carolina as will more fully appear by his letters of that period filed as evidence. She declares that her husband Col Jonas Johnston was on two occasions in service in the State of South Carolina comprising in all not less than eight or nine months. For the second expedition which was commenced in February Seve- nteenth Hundred and Seventy nine and terminated with his death at Drowning Creek on the twenty ninth day of July of the same year. She his widow reaching the place a few days

previous to his death.
She further declares that she was married at the house of Aquilla Sugg in Edgecombe County on the Seventeenth day of November, Seventeen Hundred and Sixty Eight; that her husband the aforesaid Col. Jonas Johnston died as before stated on the Twenty ninth day of July Seventeen Hundred and Seventy nine; and that she has remained a widow ever since that period; as will more fully appear by reference to the proof hereto annexed.
Easton Her Johnston mark
State of North Carolina }
Edgecombe County }
This day personally appeared before me a Justice of the peace for the County above written Mrs. Easton Johnston of the said County who subscribed & swore to the foregoing declaration in due form of law. I also certify that the family Bible of Col. Jonas Johnston and his wife Mrs. Easton Johnston has been produced to me and I have cut from it the record of the births of their children and attached it to this declaration by three seals. I have had also produced to me the only remaining papers of Col. Johnston to throw light on his Revolutionary services; which comprise six letters written by Col. Johnson to his wife while in service in South Carolina and which I have placed in an unsealed envelope, with my name on it. The commissions and other papers of Col. Johnson his widow declares have been long since destroyed by moths and were burnt not knowing they would be of service.
I also certify that the very infirm state of Mrs. Johnston's health and her blindness prevent her attendance at a Court.
I also certify that she has produced to me an entry in a family book of the period of the death of Col. Jonas Johnston which

is in the proper hand writing of Col: Amos Johnston the Brother of Col: Jonas Johnston which I have also affixed to this declaration by three seals. Given under my hand and seal this 28 th day of November 1839. J. F. Hughes (JF)
The Ages of Jonas Johnston and his Wife & Children Selah Johnston was born the 28 th Day of May in the year 1770 Elizabeth Maud Johnston was born the 11 th Day of February in the year 1772 Prudence Johnston was born the 15 th Day of March in the year 1775 Mary Johnston was born the 21 st Day of December in the year 1776 William Johnston was born the 2 nd Day of February 1777 born by John Putty 193

is in the proper hand writing of Col: Amos Johnston the Brother of Col: Jonas Johnston which I have also affixed to this declaration by three seals - Given under my hand and seal this 23 rd day of November 1839. J. F. Hughes
Jonas Johnston Son of Jacob Johnston and Mary his wife Died July 29 th Day 1779 Jacob Johnston Father of Jonas Johnston and husband of Mary Johnston Died the 11 th Day of December 1781 William Johnston Son of Jonas Johnston and Esther his Wife Died on Thursday the 7 th Day of Nov r 1793

Agent to examine all the papers and documents in relation to said claim, on file in the Departments at Washington City, or elsewhere; to file additional evidence or arguments; and to receive the Certificate which may be issued for said Claim, which Certificate I wish made payable to
H. H. Phelps
to appoint one or more substitutes under him for the purposes herein expressed; and to do all things that I might or could do were I personally present. Hereby ratifying and confirming all that my said Attorney and Agent shall lawfully do in the premises.
E. H. Sherman NC
WITNESS my hand and Seal this 26 day June A. D. 185 7
Richd. H. King
Signed and Sealed in the presence of W. D. Harewood

STATE OF North Carolina } ss. COUNTY of Wake }
BE IT KNOWN, That on this 26 th day of June A. D., eighteen hundred and fifty one before the undersigned, a Justice of the Peace in and for the County and State aforesaid, personally appeared Richard Haines a resident of Raleigh in said County, and made oath according to law that he is one of the heirs of the late  Esther Johnson
who was a Revolutionary Pensioner of the United States , as the widow of Col James Johnson under act of 4th July, 1836 at the rate of _____ Dollars per annum; that he has been informed that the said Pension ought to be increased; that he is directly interested as a claimant in said Pension, and makes this affidavit to be filed with such additional evidence or arguments as my Agent may use in prosecuting said claim.
Sworn to and subscribed, the day and year aforesaid, before me. Wm Dallas, Haywood J. Peace.
Richard Haines
I, Wm Dallas, Haywood Justice of the Peace, in and for said County do hereby certify that Richard Haines who executed the foregoing paper is a respectable resident of this County, and is, I believe, directly interested in said claim as therein set forth.
Wm Dallas, Haywood J. Peace.
I, James T. Morrison Clerk of the County Court of the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that Wm D. Haywood before whom the foregoing papers were executed, was, at the date of the same, a Justice of the Peace in and for said County duly authorized by law to administer oaths; and the name thereunto subscribed, is his signature.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed my official Seal, this Eighth day of July A. D. 1857 .
James T. Morrison Clerk

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That I, Richard Hines , of Wake County  State of North Carolina do hereby constitute and appoint H. H. Sylvester Esquire my true and lawful Agent and Attorney, to prosecute the Claim of Mrs. Esther Hines for any amount of Revolutionary Pension, or increase of Pension that may be due; and I hereby authorize said Agent to examine all the papers and documents in relation to said claim, on file in the Departments at Washington City, or elsewhere; to file additional evidence or arguments; and to receive the Certificate which may be issued for said Claim, which Certificate I wish made payable to
H. H. Sylvester
Esther Hines HC
to appoint one or more substitutes under him for the purposes herein expressed; and to do all things that I might or could do were I personally present. Hereby ratifying and confirming all that my said Attorney and Agent shall lawfully do in the premises.
WITNESS my hand and Seal this 26 day June A. D., 185 1
Richard Hines
Signed and Sealed in the presence of W. D. Haywood
STATE OF North Carolina } ss: COUNTY OF Wake }
On this 26th day of June A. D. 185 1
before me, the subscriber, a Justice of the Peace in and for the County aforesaid, personally appeared Richard Hines and acknowledged the foregoing Power of Attorney to be his act and deed, for the purposes therein mentioned.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand, the day and year aforesaid.
Wm Dallas Haywood J. Peace

Claims death

State of North Carolina
Wake County I. James S. Marriott, Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions - do hereby certify that satisfactory evidence has been exhibited at my office to prove that Mrs Esther Johnson widow of Col. Jonas Johnson of the County of Edgecomb. State of North Carolina died on the 19 th day of January 1841, that by her last will and testament she constituted and appointed Jonas S. Carr and Peter Hines her Executors that Jonas S. Carr one of the Executors aforesaid died on the 16 th day of May 1843 and that Peter Hines of Edgecomb County State aforesaid, is the only surviving Executor by appointment under the will of Mrs Esther Johnson aforesaid
In testimony whereof I have hereunto affixed the Seal of said Court and Subscribed my name at office in Raleigh this 20 th day of June 1843
James S. Marriott Clerk

Payment to be made at by Agent for paying pension- ers, in the Agency of
Recorded in the Pension Office, in Book        Vol- ume        Page        by Clerk.

WAR DEPARTMENT.
Claim for Military Service.
I certify that, in conformity with the law of the United States, of the 4 th of July 1836 (Third Section) Esther Johnson, deceased widow of Jonas Johnson, deceased, who was a Colonel was pensioned at the rate of One Hundred and fifty dollars per annum, from the 4 th of March 1831 to the 19 th of February 1841, the day of her death; and that her pension is now increased to Five Hundred Dollars per annum, for the same period, the amount paid on the former certificate to be deducted. Payment to be made to Prudence Hines and Mary Ruffin only surviving children of said deceased widow.
Given at the War Office of the United States, this 21 day of July one thousand eight hundred and forty-Seven.
Examined and } Countersigned. }
Secretary of War.
Commissioner of Pensions.

18.1897- History to Herbert Smith Wilmington U.C.
21-470 WIDOW, &c.
File No. 21470
Esther Johnson
Widow of Jonas Johnson Fort Bragg
Act: July 4 th 1836
Index:—Vol. 68 , Page 381
[Arrangement of 1870.]

August 17. 1843. Let. to Pension Agent at Fayetteville, N. Carolina.
Nephew J. S. A. S. Smith 15 May 1845.
Hon. Sec. on appeal 13 Apr. 1845 -
Col. Hawkins 15 Apr. 46
North Carolina 390
Esther Johnson Johnston deceased widow of Jonas Johnson
who died on the 29th July, 1779 of Edgecombe in the State of N. Carolina who was a Colonel in the _____ commanded by Captain _____ of the Regt _____ commanded by himself in the N. Carolina line for 6 months.
Payment to be made to Prudence Weines and Mary Ruffin only surviving children of said deceased.
Inscribed on the Roll of North Carolina at the rate of 150 Dollars _____ Cents, per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1831. and terminating 19th Feb. 1841 the day of her death
Certificate of Pension issued the 17th day of August 1843. and sent to John G. Morby, Richmond Va.
Arrears to the 4th of Sept. 1840. $1425.- Pension allowance ending 19th Feb. 1841 the day of her death 68.75
$1493.75
{ Revolutionary Claim, Act July 4, 1836, Section the }
Recorded by Thomas Kumpkin Clerk Book C Vol. 3 Page 18

Write J. L. Edwards Compt r of Pensions to inclose to you without delay the papers in the case of Mrs Esther Johnston widow of Col Jonas John- ston to be placed in the hands of Mr Pierce

Mr Sylvester's Letters -

W. Key's Letters -

W. Mosby's Letters -

Members of Congress Sellers -

Hon Self (on appeal) Apr 13. Col. Hawkins " 15. " " " " " Aug 15 - " " Nov 30. -

Esther Johnson N. Carolina Roll, act 36 - No 3909.
see letter to Col. J. D. Hawkins, Aug. 15. 1846 - do. Nov. 30 th / 1846

"N.C., 4827"
No 43
Esther Johnston, widow of Jonas.
See let to Hon. Ed. Stanley Dec: 16. 1839. " " R. H. Mosby Jan'y. 7. 1840. " " Hon. Ed. Stanley" 10. 1840. " " F. S. Key " 30. 1840. " " Hon. Ed. Stanley Mar: 11. 1840. " " same — Apr: 3. 1840. " " same — " 23. 1840. " " R. H. Mosby " 24. 1840. " " same — " 27. 1840. " " F. S. Key. May 13. 1840. " " same — " 20. 1840. " " Sec: of War. June 27. 1840. " " F. S. Key — Nov: 26. 1840. " " same — Dec: 8. 1840. " " F. S. Key & R. H. Mosby " 23. 1840. " " Hon. W. P. Mangum Feb 2. 1841. " " Hon. F. Pierce Feb. 3. 1841 — Cofus of papers deliv. to F. S. Key Esq, May 13. 1842
Cheh 4 July 1836.

19 July 1841
The day of her death
6/75
5/67
1250

Copy of a Letter to Col. Jonas Johnson
27 June 1778
Ms. A. 9. 2. 11

Dr Sir
Kingston 27 June 1778
Your favor of Yesterday I have now before me, and confess I am under very great concern at it not being in my power to furnish the money you mention, for to my very great astonishment, this day Capt Blount returned with only Forty Thousand pounds, which will not pay half of the boun- ty of the Men raised in consequence of the late Act of Assembly. I should rejoice in having it in my power to serve you, but in the present case, I could not acquit my- self in my Own Judgment, was I to give a preference; I shall therefore keep the money in my possession until the meeting of the Coun- cil, which is appointed to meet here on Thur- day next, when, I would advise you to attend with your receipts, or other Vouchers to show you have paid the bounty to your Men &
I

have no doubt you will receive it. —
I congratulate you on your late election and am with esteem
Sir Your most obedt Servt
Col. Jonas Johnston

N o 59 Col. Jonas Johnston
26. June 1770
Answ r 27.

Pogecombs County, may it please your Excellency Sir these Lines will Inform You that On the 23 of this Instant our Detachment Marched for Halifax all in High Spirits I have payed them their Bounty to a man the money I Borrowed at my Own Risk Under An Expectation of Receiving of it when Mr Bignal Returned But he Informed me that the money was not Come from the Northward and further Informed me that Your Excellency and Council had Given the Pay Master a Draught on the Treasury for the Bounty of the Several Company But as I have payed  my  men  at  my  own Risk and my Honour is Now at Stake for the money as I Borrowed it of Gentailmen at home will want it shortly and if Your Excellency fail Sending it to me I must Either forfeit my honour or Seize my own Estate and Yesterday Received a Letter from Mr Bignal that Capt. Blund was Returned with money from the Northward from Your Ever Readiness to serve the Publick to the best Advantage and not to Let the Innocent Suffer with the Gilty I Hope if it is not quite Inconsistent with Your Duty you will

will send me the Money by the Bearer M r s Richard Tomlinson and his Rec d shall be good Against me for what Ever Sum Your Excellency Please to send in my Last to You I stated The whole Amount at 4800 Dollars but one of our men Died Before he Rec d his Bounty So that 4750 will be the sum now I know my Enemies would Rejoice to see me fail getting the money So that Either my Honour or Small Fortune might Sink as they Last week failed in their Attempt Not withstanding their Great pains and another Lye bill as abominable as the Other, A Balance of 73 Votes in my favour my all is now at Stake and if I fail getting the money Great Youse will be maid to my Hurt Both of Honour and Estate Sir I am Your Excellency's Most Obedient Serv t June 26 th 1778 Jonas Johnston

To His Excellency Rich d Caswell Governor of N th Carolina Sir
Col. M c 5. J. Johnston
26 June 1778
Answ d 3. 27.

a letter from Mr Jonas Johnston 4th June 1778
This is a letter from Mr. Jonas Johnston

To His Excellency Rich d Caswell Governor of N o Carolina
This - } Jon } Jones of } Mt. Bigond
a letter from Mr Jonas Johnston 11 th June 1778

Edgecomb County, June th 11 - 1778
May it please Your Excellency these Lines Comes to Inform You that On th 14 of May We Raised Our Batts of Men for this County 33 Volunteers The Others Were Balleed and pointed Out by the Field Officers and Are Nearly Ready to March Nothing more will Detain them Over 5 or 6 Days then the Lack of Money to Pay them their Bounties which I Hope Your Excellency Can Furnish me with and If in your Power I r If please to Send it by Mr. Robert Bidwell Esq r the whole Amount if I am not Mistaken is Just 4800 Dollars Your Excellency Complying with the Above Request will be thankfully Acknowledged by Your Most Obedient Friend and Most Hum ble Serv t Jonas Johnston

Jonas Johnston Letter concerning Two deserters..
Jonas Johnson to Genl Caswell May 1777
11° 2
To His Excellency Richard Caswell Esquire Capt general of the state of the North Carolina

Edgecombe June the 13 day 1777
County To His Excellency the governor and gentill men of the Councill of state
Sir this is to in forme your Excellency and gentill men of the Councill that about 10 days ago Colonel Judson returned a list of deserters numbered in this County whereof I have lately Issued orders to every Captain in the County to search their districts for the same amongst whom one was of Joseph Grasway and Martha Joiner who did not consider themselves as deserters for the reasons above In the dishonours hearing enclosed but came forward with and surrendered them selves to me and only begged it as favour of me to say as state of their case before your Excellency and Councill and that what ever is determined on they will rest perfectly satisfied with and should it be be the Sence of your Excellency and Councill for them to returne or not to returne to their regiments you will be kinde enough to let me know that I may know how to proceed with them and so no more at present But Sir I still remain yours Excellency and the Honourable Councill most obediant Servant Josiah Johnston.

1867
J. W. 1881
Esther Johnston
Edgicourt Country.
2/10/22

Camp near Brandy in the Waterloo
Having wife these 6 mos to let you know that I am in perfect Health at present and so is all my men except John McCune who is sick with the Rheumey I visited him yesterday in the evening and recd an order to march to a gasta and be stationed there as the Govenor of South Carolina ordered it will be almost a month to our arrival
Since past in that quarter I am well pleased at the station as I hope it is healthy I am as well satisfied as I can be at so great a distance from you and my children I crossed the line of this state the 22nd day of April in the evening and at home shall be discharged the 22nd day of July I shall make out the discharge home in my power it is your business for me to mention any thing of my private affairs as I know not how they can only should be glad to have my work be so soon as possible we have wasted the enemy in to late engagements with very small loss it may be relied on as a fact as one of our men is here that recd a shot wound in the action the people of this state are turning out all but to a man I hope the men with us will not be defeated as some have been before and so no more at present But hope they will find you and my little children in perfect health and remember my love to you all and all in giving their love to you all
16th April
James Adair

Camp at Mr Summers's Plantation 33 miles westward of Charlestown
June 6 th 1779
May it please your Excellency
I am very sorry to inform you of the unhappy situation of myself & Regiment being very poorly supplied by the Inhabitants of this State, & Numbers of the Men have not a Shilling to procure the least Necessary for themselves. I am also very sorry to inform you that I am thoroughly sensible of my inability in a Military Capacity and find the same misfortune prevails in those of a higher Rank of our own State which in my opinion is one Reason why our men are not treated so well as they otherwise might have been, notwithstanding our men remain in high Spirits and are determined to be Victorious or die in the attempt if they engage, they have performed wonders in the Eyes of Spectators & I believe them to be equal to any militia on the Continent, the Enemy have fortified themselves on John's & James's Island where they have fortified themselves so well that I believe it would be impossible to force them from their lines without the loss of a great many men, we are now within Six or eight miles of their lines but different times have Relation a Thousand Negroes a Number of Prisoners & about Four Hundred Horses without the loss of but very few men. I am Convinced the Safety of this State depends on the Spirited exertions of our own & I believe if there is not men sent from there to supply our place Our State will become the Barren Fettle Remain with due Respect,
Y r Excellency's mo ob t & H ble Servant
James Johnston

Hon. Edward Stanley Member Congress City Washington
No 42

Pitt County 17 th April 1840
Dear Sir
I was this day called by Mr R. A. Morley with six affidavits viz. of John Bryan, Robison Jenkins, Moses Highsmith, Henry Barnhill, John Anderson and James Hayle, taken by H. A. Hopkins, H. P. Bryan and Gould Hoyt Esqrs. Those men except Mr Hayle was all revolutionary soldiers, they all reside in the County of Pitt and as I have no doubt was born and raised in it, I have been personally acquainted with them when they were all young men and believe them all to be nearly of my own age, which will be eighty two if I live to see the 25 th August next, I think John Bryan is at least as old as I am, and altho I am not able to state the extent of his military services I feel confident himself and John Anderson, did serve at least one tour with me, altho men of common standing in society, I have never known the least blemish in their characters,
I have nothing new in this section of country to inform you, we are in health and tolerable good spirits, please make my respectfull compliments to your lady, also remember me respectfully to my friend Judge Strange and my old acquaintance to Hon. Lewis Williams, accept the best wishes of your sincere friend Robt Williams

His Excellency Richard Caswell Esquire Governour of the State of North Carolina

Col. Johnston of Edg.
N. Carolina 6. June 1779.
Ms

Complete certification
No. 6
No. 3
H. H. Sylvester
Preb.
June 17. 1843

Camp Office
North Carolina
June 14 th 1843
I William T. Collins Compt Pub Accounts do certify that I have examined the Books of settlement of the Army accounts of the Militia of the State of North Carolina for Revolutionary Services &c and it appears as stated in said Books of settlement, that Col Jonas Johnson of Edgecomb County was allowed the sum of $11.26.37 for Emigration on the 3 rd February 1776. which is in Book No. 18. and that Jonas Johnson was paid sundry in Feby 1779 $16.45. in March $2111.17 in April $1523.22. in July $524. same year. and in the month of Decr 1776. the sum of $52.89. in April, as will appear in Book E. of Contingency. and that on the 20 th April 1778. the sum of £126.9.7 was paid to Col Jonas Johnson for skins of and sundry officers - also in Decr 1778. the sum of £400 pounds, was paid "Col Jonas Johnson Expenses in marching troops to the Genl rendezvous" that on the 16 th of March 1779. the sum of £4.200 pounds was allowed Col Jonas Johnson for pay and bounty of the drafts and volunteers of Edgecomb County - and the sum of £400 pounds was allowed Col Jonas Johnson to defray the expenses of the troops - and the sum of £126.9.10 was allowed by the Council of Safety as will appear in "Book of allowances of Claims from April 1776. to May 1779" given under my hand
Wm T. Collins

Not. 7 Hills certificate
No 4
No 7
Feb 32.

North Carolina
Monday August 21 st 1775.
At a General meeting of Delegates of the Inhabitants of this Province, at Hillsboro the twenty first day of August A.D. 1775. aforesaid. A majority appearing, continued their meetings from day to day until the 10 th day of September 1775.
Thursday September 7 th 1775.
The Report of the Committee, appointed to bring in a plan for regulating Minute men and Militia being taken into consideration.
Resolved that the Province be divided into six Districts, as they stood heretofore under the Superior Court Law, Viz. Edenton, Halifax, Hillsboro, Wilmington, New Bern and Salisbury Districts. That a Battalion consisting of ten companies of fifty men rank and file, each, be raised in each District; and a Colonel, Lieutenant Colonel, Major, ten Captains ten Lieutenants ten Ensigns, twenty Sergeants, ten Drummers and ten Fifers be allowed for every Battalion. That the Field Officers for each and every Battalion be recommended by the several Districts, and appointed by the Congress, and that the number of men to be enlisted in the several Counties in the different Districts be also recommended by the several Districts, a nearly as may be to the number of effective men in each County. That the Field Officers in each District appoint a suitable person or persons in each County to enlist minute men, which said minute men, when their Companies are compleated shall choose their Captains, Lieutenants and Ensigns, and the said Captains Lieutenants and Ensigns of each Company shall appoint the respective noncommissioned Officers, That when any Company is compleated, and the officers chosen, the Captain shall give notice to the Chairman of the County Committee, who shall thereupon call the Committee together to review the said Company, at such place as the Chairman shall think proper. And the Committee or a majority of them, finding the Company compleat with able and proper men, shall grant a Certificate thereof to the Captain. That the minute men be enlisted for six months, and whenever called into actual service, be subject and

bound by the rules and regulations for the Continental Army provided by the Continental Congress; That in case of Insurrections, Invasions or other emergency such Captain or Captains, as may be nearest to the scene of action or first informed of the danger, shall have power to order all or part of his or their men as may be necessary into immediate service, and shall give notice to the Colonel or Commanding Officer of the Battalion to which he or they belong, and the Colonel or Commanding Officer shall upon such information from a Captain, or in the first instance have power to order all or every part of the Battalion as he shall think proper into service, and march them to any part of his District, but he shall give notice to the Committee of Safety of his District, and shall be subject to their orders when convened. But as soon as the provincial council shall meet the power of the Committees of Safety shall cease, with respect to such Battalion, and the Colonel or Commanding Officer thereof, shall be subject to the control of the said Council.
State of North Carolina
Office of Secretary of State.
I William Hill Secretary of State in and for the State of North Carolina, do hereby certify, that the foregoing are true and perfect abstracts from the Journals of the Provincial Congress, which met at Hillsborough in 1775.
Given under my hand this 19 th day of March 1846.
W. Hill Secretary of State

Mrs Estlin Johnson widow of Col. Jonas Johnson made application for a Pension in right of her Husband's Military services. And in her Petition Claimed for upwards of two years service of her Husband in the Revolutionary War.
The evidence of Thomas Bently a Revolutionary Pensioner proves that Jonas Johnson as Maj r took command of two Companies from Edgecombe County in March 1776 and Marched to Wilmington where he served and in that region from March until some time in October 1776. upwards of six months. John Brian another Revolutionary Pensioner proves same services same services . Henry Barnwell another Revolutionary Pensioner proves the same.
Micajah Pittaway & Doctor Robert Williams two Revolutionary Pensioners and Mrs Catharine Johnson all prove in part the same services.
This Testimony is fully corroborated by Record proof and the witnesses are proven to be of the highest credibility.
The commissioner of Pensions admits that the Provincial Congress of N o Carolina elected Jonas Johnson a Maj r for Edgecombe County on the 22 nd of April 1776. And the Comptroller of N o Carolina certifies that Col. Jonas Johnson received for his services in connexion with one Henry Horn the sum of £376.15.5 and for the purchase of Arms dated November 1776. The Comptroller also certifies that Col. Jonas Johnson rec d . for his services in December 1776 £52.89. The Parole proofs of the Witnesses named prove that Col. Johnson was in service from March 1776 until the 29 th day of July 1779 when he died in service on his way Home on Drowning Creek in S o Carolina.
The Record proofs of the Comptroller of N o Carolina show that Col. Johnson named for himself and sundry officers for their services in November 1777 the sum of £126.9.7, and in 20 th April December 1778 a like sum of £126.9.7 for his services. And in December

1778 the sum of £400 was paid Col. Johnson for expenses marching troops to the General rendezvous And on the 3 rd of Feb y 1779. he was allowed the sum of $1126.37 and that he was paid in Feb y 1779 $16.45 And on the 16 th of March 1779 he received £4200. And also in March $2111.17 was allowed Col. Johnson for pay and bounty of the Drafts & volunteers for Edgelcomb County; And the further sum of £400 was allowed Col. Jonas Johnson to defray expenses of the Troops & volunteers for Edgelcomb County. In April he was paid $1523.22. In July $524 same year. These various payments made to Col. Jonas Johnson prove clearly that he was in service from March 1776 till his death in 1779. But to establish it most clearly and beyond all doubt. The Comptroller certifies that the sum of £126.9.10 was allowed Col. Jonas Johnson by the committee of safety, as well appears in Book of Allowances of Claims from April 1776 to May 1779. This shows beyond question that his services covered the whole time between these two periods. And that he served from May 1779 to the 29 th of July 1779 when he died in the service is admitted by the Commissioners. All these proofs are on file in the Pension Office, and the Rude proofs contemptible since August 1843. and since that time, they seem not to have been well considered, or duly appreciated.
M c D. Hawkins
On behalf of the Distributors of Mr. Ethan Johnson

No 10
N o 3
Depositions
R. H. Mosby

State of North Carolina }
Scott County }
The amended affidavit of Mr John Bryan taken to explain & prove more fully the service stated by him in his former affidavit which he rendered under Col Jonas Johnston. This affiant being first duly sworn according to Law testifies and says. That he is informed that his evidence is objected to first, because he did not state the service he rendered under Col Johnston in his own declaration; and secondly that he was too young to have served at that time - When this affiant applied for a Pension he was then and has continued up to the present time to be deprived of the use of his legs by palsey; so as to be confined to the house and unable to get from a chair without assistance - In that situation this affiant could not procure evidence to establish all the service he performed; and the only reason why his services as stated in his former affidavit under Col Johnston was not mentioned was that Col Johnston being dead and this affiant not knowing any person then alive who could prove it; he was told it would not be allowed - This affiant got two persons to repair his papers & he has every right to believe that great injustice has been done to him by their ignorance - First in stating his age & secondly in omitting to state all the service he rendered - When this affiant went into service 'in seventeen hundred & seventy six' under Col Johnston this affiant was eighteen years old - and if it is made to appear by his declaration that he was not so; the person who set the date down certainly made a mistake - My father in his lifetime had a record of the ages of his children & he told me that I was born on the Twenty Sixth day of May seventeen hundred & fifty eight and I am now eighty two years of age. My old friends Majr Anderson and Dr Williams both of whom I served with both know that I was in service and old enough - I served with Dr Williams he being a surgeon immediately after the defeat of Genl Gates in and near Charlot in this state for three months - In conclusion this affiant solemnly declares that he did serve under Col Johnston as stated in his first affidavit - and any statement giving to disprove it is certainly wrong.
Given under my hand this 15th day of April 1840.
John Bryan

State of North Carolina } Pitt County }
This day personally appeared before me a Justice of the Peace for the State & County above written Mr John Bryan and subscribed & swore to the foregoing affidavit in due form of law. I also certify that I am fully convinced in my own mind that Mr Bryan is as old as he has stated; and if it is made to appear that he is younger by the papers drawn up when he applied for a pension I am fully convinced that it was done through negligence or inattention on the part of the person who drew them up - I again certify that Mr Bryan is a man entirely to be believed in any statement he may make.
Given under my hand & seal this 15th day of April 1840.
H. A. Hopkins JP
I Henry P Bryan a Justice of the Peace for the County and State above written hereby certify that I have attended at the taking of the foregoing affidavit and know that it has been done in strict conformity to law. I entirely concur in all the facts stated by Mr Hopkins above.
Given under my hand & seal this 15th day of April 1840.
H. P. Bryan HPB -
State of No. Car. } Pitt County }
I Archibald Parker Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County aforesaid do hereby certify that H. A. Hopkins and H. P. Bryan are acting Justices of the peace for the County aforesaid and that due faith and credit ought to be given to their official acts given under my hand & seal of our said Court at office in Greenville this 17th day of April A.D. 1840.
Arch. Parker Clerk

State of North Carolina }
Pitt County }
The affidavit of Majr John Anderson of Pitt County & a pensioner of the united states now in the Eighty first year of his age; who being first duly sworn according to law testifies and says. That he was at the Battle of Moores Creek in the minute service and on his return home he enlisted as a regular soldier under Captm Enloe of the 5th Reg: commanded by Col Buncombe. and continued in the continental service until February 1780. He then returned home and in 1780 immediately after the defeat of Genl Gates this affiant served a tour of duty with John Bryan for three months in and near Charlotte in this state and in 1781 I served another tour of duty for three months in & near Wilmington & Smithville with John Bryan.
This affiant is told that the testimony of Mr Bryan is objected to 1st because he was too young to serve; and secondly that he did not claim in his own declaration the service rendered under Col Johnston. As above stated I marched to the north & continued there until February 1780. I cannot therefore speak of the service rendered by Mr Bryan under Col Johnston of my own knowledge but I am as well convinced he did serve it as I can be of any fact whatever. Because I know when on the expedition to Charlotte he frequently mentioned it; and from that time to the present I have always heard him tell the same story. I have also heard others who served with Bryan under Col Jonas Johnston often mention the same service & that Bryan was in it. In relation to the age of Mr Bryan I have to say that his father and mine resided in two and a half miles of each other & I have known him from my infancy; it is certainly wrong that he was not old enough to serve at the time he has mentioned. I know that he was not only old enough but did serve; and if any person has made him out too young I again repeat it is wrong for he is to my knowledge about my age I do not think there can be more than a year difference if that. In conclusion this affiant says that John Bryan was a good soldier; and has always sustained a good character. At the time I gave evidence to establish his claim to a pension; he did most certainly mention his services under Col Johnston and

if it is not mentioned in his declaration; it was rather omitted from negligence or not stated because no direct proof was known to establish it. Given under my hand this 17th day of April 1840.
attest
John Anderson
State of No Car
Pitt County
This day personally appeared before me Goold Hoyle a Justice of the peace for the State and County aforesaid Major John Anderson one of the oldest and most respectable citizens and made oath to the foregoing affidavit in due form of Law. I also certify that his testimony is entitled to full faith & credit, given under my hand and seal this seventeenth day of April A.D. 1840
Goold Hoyle J.P.
Goold Hoyle
State of No Car
Pitt County
I Arch d Parker Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County aforesaid do hereby certify that Goold Hoyle is an acting Justice of the peace for the County aforesaid and that due faith and credit ought to be given to his official acts given under my hand & seal of our said Court at office in Greenville this 17 th day of April A.D. 1840
Arch d Parker Clerk

State of North Carolina }
Pitt County }
The affidavit of Mr Henry Barnhill of Pitt County a Pensioner of the United States now in the Eighty Third year of his age. Who being first duly sworn according to law testafies and say's. That he entered the service in 1776 under Capt James Armstrong and marched to Fayetteville and was at the Battle of the Widow Moores Creek, and on his return to Pitt he was mustered into the minute service and marched for Wilmington where this affiant served for six months from March to October of 1776. While at Wilmington this affiant well knew Majr Jonas Johnston and this affiant served under him a part of the time.
This affiant was born & raised in the same neighbourhood with Mr John Bryan and he can testafy that Mr Bryan is quite as old a man as he is; he can also testafy that at the time that this affiant was in service in 1776 Mr Bryan was not only old enough but actually served. This affiant well remembers his serving in South Carolina. On the return of this affiant from Wilmington he enlisted in the service as a nine months man & marched to the north under the command of Captm Childs, and Col Hogan.
In conclusion this affiant knows if it is made to appear that Mr Bryan was too young to be in service at the time mentioned, it is certainly wrong. This affiant has known Mr Bryan man & boy all his life and he does not believe him capable of making a mistake in a word he is a man of truth & good character.
Given under my hand this 16th day of April 1840.
Henry Barnhill
State of North Carolina }
Pitt County }
This day personally appeared before me a Justice of the Peace for the State & County above written Mr Henry Barnhill a very old & respectable Citizen and subscribed & sworn to the foregoing affidavit in due form of law. I certify that Mr Barnwell is a man of good character.
Given under my hand & Seal this 16th day of April 1840
Henry A. Hopkins JP

State of North Carolina
Pitt County
I Arch d Parker clerk of the court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County aforesaid do hereby Certify that Henry A Hopkins is an acting Justice of the peace for the County aforesaid and that due faith and credit ought to be given to his official acts
given under my hand and seal of our said court at office in Greenville this 17 th day of April A.D. 1840.
Arch d Parker Clerk

State of North Carolina
Pitt County
} The affidavit of Mr Moses Heighsmith of Pitt County a Pensioner of the United States now in the Eighty second year of his age. This affiant being first duly sworn according to Law Testifies and says. That he was born and raised in the same neighbourhood with Mr John Bryan and can testify to the fact that he served for several years in the war of the Revolution. The first service he rendered I well recollect was at Wilmington at the commencement of the war; and I have often heard him mention Col Johnston as the officer he served under. I have a perfect recollection of his leaving home when he marched from Tarboro for Wilmington; and I know he was again in service in S. Carolina and at the Battle of Stono. This affiant has been requested to state the age of Mr Bryan; he is informed that it is doubted if he was old enough to serve as stated above. I have lived near to Mr Bryan man and boy all my life and from my own age and my knowledge of him I am fully convinced indeed I know that he is an older man than I am. And this affiant can't assert that to his knowledge Mr Bryan rendered the service above mentioned. And if it is made to appear that he was too young to serve at the commencement of the Revolution; it is certainly wrong; for I know he was and did serve.
Given under my hand this 16th day of April 1840.
Moses Heighsmith
State of North Carolina
Pitt County
} This day personally appeared before me a Justice of the Peace for the County & State above written Mr Moses Heighsmith & subscribed & swore to the foregoing affidavit in due form of law. I also certify that Mr Heighsmith is a very old & most respectable citizen; and his testimony is entitled to full credit.
Given under my hand & seal this 16th day of April 1840- Henry A. Hopkins

State of No. Ca Pitt County
I Richd Parker Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County aforesaid do hereby certify that Henry A Hopkins is an acting Justice of the peace for the County aforesaid and that due faith and credit ought to be given to his official acts
Given under my hand and seal of our said Court at office in Greenville this 17 th day of April A.D. 1840
Richd Parker Clerk

State of North Carolina
Pitt County
} The affidavit of Mr Roberson Jenkins who being first duly sworn according to Law Testifies and Says. That he was born & raised in the same neighbourhood with Mr John Bryan and resided near to him all his life - when this affiant could first recollect and then a small boy he well knows that Mr Bryan was then a man grown. This affiant is fully convinced in his own mind that Mr Bryan is fully as old as he has this day stated in his affidavit - and if it is made to appear that he is younger I am fully convinced it is a mistake made by the persons who fixed his papers - I am now Sixty Five years old and I again repeat that when I was a very small boy Mr Bryan was a man grown.
I am fully convinced that the misstatement of his age was made through ignorance or carelessness in the persons who made out his papers - It is equally certain that the persons who undertook the management of the business were not acquainted with unto the knowledge of this affiant.
Given under my hand this 15th day of April 1840
Roberson Jenkins
State of North Carolina
Pitt County
} This day personally appeared before us Justices of the Peace for the State and County above written Mr Roberson Jenkins and subscribed & swore to the foregoing affidavit in due form of law - We also certify that Mr Jenkins is a man of high character and his statements are entitled to full credit.
Given under our hands and seals this 15th day of April 1840.
H. A. Haskins (S) (Seal) H. P. Bryan (S) (Seal)

State of North Carolina
Pitt County } I Mich d Parker Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County aforesaid do hereby Certify that Henry A. Hopkins is an acting Justice of the Peace for the County aforesaid and that due faith and credit ought to be given to his official acts
Given under my hand & seal of our said Court at office in Greenville this 17 th day of April 1840
Mich d Parker Clerk

State of North Carolina Pitt County
James R. Hoyle of the County and State aforesaid being duly sworn according to law, maketh oath that about one year since he went to the house of John Bryan in the County aforesaid for the purpose of drawing a declaration for the said Bryan to receive his pension from the United States on account of Revolutionary Services. The said Bryan gave this affiant a statement of his services, adding at the time that what part could be proved by other soldiers, and what could not, during the conversation affiant recollects that Bryan stated some service under Col Isaac Johnson of Edgecombe, and that some of his services could only be proved by Reading Moore who had died about one week ago prior to that time; And this affiant sup- posing that it would be unnecessary to make a claim for services which could not be proved, thinks that he omitted to state the service performed which could not be proved by other persons. And if the service under Col Johnson is not mentioned in the declaration it was omitted by me for the reasons aforesaid. This affiant has understood that Mr Bryan is represented in his declaration as being only seven years old at the commencement of the Revolution; if it is so stated it must be done by mistake this affiant is clearly of opinion that Mr Bryan stated to this affiant that he was Eighteen years of age when he entered the service; — This affiant has no hesi- tancy in stating his belief of Mr Bryan's veracity, and as far as his knowledge extends he (Bryan) bears a good character in his

neighbourhood for honesty and integrity
Shown to and subscribed before me the 17 th day of April 1840
Asa R. Hoyle
Goold Hoyle J.P.
State of N. Carolina } Pitt County } I Arch d Parker Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County aforesaid do hereby certify that Goold Hoyle is an acting Justice of the Peace for the county aforesaid and that due faith and credit ought to be given to his official acts
given under my hand & seal at office of our said Court in Greenville this 27 th day of April A.D. 1840
Arch d Parker Clerk

State of North Carolina } Pitt County.
I certify to all it may concern that I have attended and was present at the taking of the following Affidavits by R H Mosby to be used as evidence in an application for a pension in behalf of Mrs Easter Johnson widow of Col Jonas Johnson, the affidavits of John Bryan Robson Jenkins Moses Haysmith Henry Barnhill, John Anderson and James R Hoyle. The foregoing affidavits have to my knowledge been taken in strict conformity to Law. I am a Justice of the Peace for the County of Edgecombe and attended personally and supervised the taking of the above evidence at the request of Mr Mosby.
Given under my hand Seal
this 17 April 1840
John F. Hughes (D)
Sworn to and subscribed before me the day and date as above
Goold Hoyle J.P.
State of North } Pitt County }
I Arch Parker Clerk of the court of pleas and quarter sessions for the county aforesaid do hereby certify that Goold Hoyle is an acting Justice of the peace for the county aforesaid and that due faith and credit ought to be given to his official acts. I also certify that I have personal knowledge of Major John Anderson, Henry Barnhill Moses Haysmith, Robeson Jenkins, James R Hoyle & John F Hughes. They are all known to me as persons of unimpeachable characters and their testimony is entitled to full faith & credit given under my hand & seal this 17 th day of April A.D. 1840 of our said court at office in Greenville.
Arch Parker Clerk

Certificate of No 34 Claim's death

State of North Carolina
Wake County I James S. Manis Clerk of the Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions for the County of Wake & State aforesaid. It being a Court of record, do hereby certify that Satisfactory evidence has been exhibited at the office of said Court to prove that Mrs. Esther Johnson widow of Col. Jonas Johnson died on the 19 th day of February 1841 and that Mrs. Pendarsee Hines and Mrs. Mary Ruffin are the only surviving children left by Mrs. Esther Johnson aforesaid.
In Testimony whereof I have hereunto affixed the seal of said Court & subscribed my name at office in Raleigh this 30 th June 1843
James S. Manis Clerk

Hon E. Stanley
ap. 3. 1840
To the Court of Pensions E. Stanley Esq. Hon.
ms

H. A. April 2 nd 1860
J. L. Edwards Esq
Sir, I enclose you the testimony which completes the case of Mrs. Estlin Johnston.
I believe it is now completely made out, by the testimony of respectable witnesses. —
Very truly yours
C. W. Greville
Let me respectfully solicit an early attention to this case. Mrs. Johnston is very old and infirm. — Delay will be equal to absolute denial. —

To the Hon ble William L. Mary Supt. of War.
In the communication which I had the honor to address to you, in January last, as an appeal from the Division of the Commissioners of Pensions, in behalf of the Distributors of the late Mrs. Esther Johnson, widow of Col. Jonas Johnson, for a Pension, I failed to ask for a Pension large enough to cover the services of Col. Johnson, owing to my unfamiliarity with the case. This I discovered, when I returned to N.Ca, and had a conference with the Claimants. And this induced me, through the Hon ble J.R. Daniel, to ask the favor of you to suspend your decision upon the case, until I could have an opportunity, better, and more fully to state it to you. With your permission, I will now proceed to do so.
This case has been acted upon, and allowed by the Commissioners, for six months service, rendered by Col. Jonas Johnson in 1779, immediately preceding his death. He died on the 29 th of July 1779, on Drowning Creek in S.C. Carolina on his March Home from that service.
The Provincial Congress of N.Ca, which sat at Hillsboro on the 7 th September 1775, passed an Ordinance, (see Mr. Secretary Hill's certificate herewith filed) to raise Minute men for six months service. Under that Ordinance, after the Battle of Moore's Creek, in Feb y 1776, two companies of Militia were raised in Edgecombe County, to March to Wilmington to suppress the Tories, and to oppose the British. According to this Ordinance of the Provincial Congress, the two companies appointed their own Captains, and inferior officers, subject to the Committee of Safety, who commissioned them. The field Officers were to be commissioned by the Provincial Congress. Then two companies were raised, the 1 st of March 1776, one of-

them was commanded by Capt n Henry Irwin Toole, and the other by Capt n Hall. Jonas Johnson acted as Major no Sanctit Under the authority of the committee of safety, who under the Ordinance of the Provincial Congress, had to pass upon, after inspecting the two companies, and to give certificates as Commissions to the Captains. No Major, owing to the infancy of the Military service, in that day, had been appointed for Edgecombe County, by the Congress, the appointing Power. A Major was particularly required for this service, Congress was not in session, and it is fair to suppose, Jonas Johnson rec d from the Committee of safety, the appointment of Major, relying, that the Congress would confirm the appointment "so soon as they might convene". They convened at Halifax in April 1776, and on the 22 nd day of that month they confirmed the appointment of Major Jonas Johnson. On the 19 th day of the same month, Major Jonas Johnson, was appointed to collect arms &c, three days before his appointment as Major. (see W m S t Hills certificate on file). The Parole Testimony - the Depositions of Micajah Pittaway, Henry Burnhill, John Bryant, Thomas Bently, prove the Military service of Major Jonas Johnson from the 1 st of March to October 1776, except Pittaway, he proves only the beginning of the service. D r Robert Williams and Mrs Catharine Johnson, prove in part the same service. The Compt- -troller of N.C. Ex che q r , certifies (whose certificate is on file) that in a Book of Army settlements & Accounts, Col. Jonas Johnson is associated with Henry Horne, and that they received for their services, and for the purchase of Arms £376.15.5 dated November 1776. Col. Jonas Johnson as Major was intitled to $60 per month. to November 1776 is 8 months

From the 1 st of March to November 1776 the date of the settlement, is 8 months. Eight months pay at $60, amounts to $480, Equal £198 leaving a balance of £284. 15. 5 = Equal to $370, to pay Henry Horn and for Arms. This Record proof of pay, and the Parole Testimony of service by Maj r Johnson it would seem, should make this part of the case conclusive. In the Book of Rules and Regulations, laid down by the War Department to govern in Pension cases, at page 92; Governor Cap, then Secy at War, directs the Commissioner, in the case of Peter S. Schuyler "that service in a Military office" (such as Maj r Jonas Johnson held from the 1 st of March to the 22 nd of April 1776, when his appointment was confirmed by the Provincial Congress) "although the commission may not date back to the commencement of the service, entitles a person to a Pension for such service." To this clear proof of service by Maj r Johnson, the Commissioner objects that he could not have marched as Major, because he was not made a Maj r until the 22 nd of April 1776, but that he went in a civil capacity to carry arms, which he had been appointed to purchase. Whereas, his appointment to collect arms, was only conferred upon him, on the 19 th of April, three days before the commission of Maj r . (see W. Hills certificate on file). He objects further to the proof, because he says it is indispensable necessary, that the service, should be proven by Documentary, or Record evidence, if either can be had, if not, then by the Testimony of at least one credible witness. Here are both kinds of evidence in this case to sustain it. He objects at one time, to Henry Barnhill's evidence, because he stated in his Deposition,

that Major Jonas Johnson was in the Battle of Moore's Creek. Then he (the Comptroller) admits, in his letter December 8 1840, he was mistaken in that obligation. He objects to the same Testimony, upon the Ground, that Barnhill's evidence states, he served under Col. Littlebridge. Barnhill's deposition, does not say Littlebridge, but Lillington, that he served under Col. Lillington. All the witnesses referred to, are proven by Depositions filed in the case, to be of good Character, and entitled to the fullest credibility. And this proof establishes that Maj. Johnson served and was paid from the 1 st of March to November 1776, making 8 months. The Comptroller of NC further certifies, that Col. Jonas Johnson was paid in December 1776 $52.89 in Vaca for his services, and that in November 1777 £126.9.7 was paid Col. Jonas Johnson for himself and sundry officers. These two last sums would pay him for 4 months service, and leave $143 for the other officers. The Comptroller further certifies, that the sum of £126.9.7 was allowed Col. Johnson by the Council of Safety, as an allowance for claims from April 1776 to May 1779. This sum would pay upwards of $60 per month for more than 5 months. He further certifies, that in December 1778 £400 was paid Col. Johnson for expenses in marching his Troops to the General Rendezvous. This process Military service. And he further certifies, that on the 3 rd of February 1779, Col. Jonas Johnson was allowed the sum of $1126.37 and that he was paid sundries in Feb y 1779 $16.45. Then

sums would pay Col. Jonas Johnson for a Military service of Twelve months & more. In March 1779 Col. Jonas Johnson Marched with his Regiment to S th Carolina, in which service he died, on the 29 th of July 1779. Which last service for six months, has been allowed by the Com miss ioner. And in March the 16 th 1779 the Comptroller certifies, that Col. Johnson Re d the sum of £4200 pounds, for the pay and bounty of the Drafts and Volunteers of Edgar- -comb County. And in April £1523.22. In March £2111.17. This latter sum, would pay Col. Johnson for Military service, for largely more than a year. The certificate further prays payment to Col. Johnson in July of £524. and that the sum of £400 was allowed Col. Jonas Johnson to defray the expenses of the Troops. All these monied transactions prove a service, of a military service, of Col. Jonas Johnson, almost without interruption, from the 1 st of March 1776, to the 29 th of July 1779, the day of his Death, on his March Home. Add all the proofs together, and note their dates, and it is seen most clear, that Col. Jonas Johnson, served in a Military character, from the 1 st of March 1776 to the 29 th of July 1779 the day of his Death by the most reasonable calculation, upwards of three years, certainly more than two years.
Mr. Com miss ioner Edwards, admits in his correspondence, that Col. Johnson, was a Meritorious officer & Patriot, but that proof was needed to prove their

Military character.
Doctor G. W. Crump acting Commissioner, in his letter to the Sec'y at War of the 16 th August 1843, when the six months were ordered to be allowed by the Secretary at War, to the Widow, states that Maj r Johnson commanded two companies of Militia, in the spring of 1776, as an escort to transport arms, to Wilmington. That the length of service is not ascertained; overlooking, that the Parole Testimony in the case, ascertains it, to be from the 1 st of March, to October 1776. & the Record proof of payment, from the 1 st of March to Nov r 1776. Doctor Crump also refers to the letters of Col. Johnson to Governor Carroll, (which I now beg the Secretary at War to look at,) and the large sums of money according to the certificates of the Comptroller of N.Ca. which had just then been filed in the Pension Office, was entrusted with, to pay his Regiment, as well as himself, to prove the Patriotism & services of Col. Johnson.
It is strange that commissioner Edwards, and acting commissioner Crump, should in opposition to the most conclusive Testimony, take up, and maintain it, that Major Jonas Johnson, when he marched to Wilmington on the 1 st of March 1776, that he went in a civil capacity, to escort arms. There is no proof in the whole case to establish it. On the contrary, the service to collect arms, was only cast upon him, on the 19 th of April 1776. by the Provincial Cong.

The death of Col. Johnson in 1779, and the act of Congress granting Pensions having passed in 1836, nearly 60 years thereafter, and the contemporaries of Col. Johnson, most of them, living in a sickly country, nearly all of them had gone to the grave, before the law was passed, and now it is believed not one of them lives. Yet no man in N.C. has left a more brilliant character, handing down to posterity by tradition , than Col. Jonas Johnson, for his Military services, his Patriotism, & his activity, in the service of his country, at the expense of his own life, & fortune. He was a man of not much education, which makes his own Record, the more deficient, but he possessed all the good qualities of great merit & the soundest patriotism.
The Military Records of N.C. were so imperfectly kept, that they furnish the poorest evidence, of the Proud service, of her most distinguished sons. And as the Pension Laws, are intended, as a reward to Patriotism in the way of a bounty, to the Widow of a Brave Officer, who perished, and lost his life, in the service of his country, too much nicety of evidence, should not be required, since all the Witnesses are dead. By such requirement, the purposes of the laws will be defeated. The many proofs, then, in the case of Col. Johnson, their positive, circumstantial, and diversity of character, when taken in connexion, prove the service of the military service he performed, clearly, and without the possibility, of fraud upon the laws. And that

was the great requirement of the law makers intended, I presume. Any other intention, would defeat itself, by making the offered bounty a thing to be struggled for, without the possibility to attain it.
Most of the Record proofs from the offices of the Comptroller and Secretary of State of N. Ca., are recent, filed since 1843. And the certificate of W m Hill, showing the Ordinance of the Provincial Congress to raise Minute men, and how, is now filed for the first time. All of which is most respectfully submitted by,
M c D. Hawkins On behalf of the Distributors of W m Estlin Johnson widow of Col. Jonas Johnson.
No 8
Note D. From the last clause in the Ordinance of the Provincial Congress, Power and Control, is given to the committee of safety, over all Colonels, and commanding officers, to direct their movements in the Public service, during the recess of the Provincial Congress. which clearly implies, the appointment of a Major, if one is needed, until the sitting of the Congress!

No 18
No 1
Ino. Bryan.
H. E. Stanley H. P. L.

State of North Carolina Pitt County } The affidavit of John Bryan now a pensioner of The United States taken to prove the services and death of Col Jonas Johnston of Edgecomb County in the War of the Revolution. This affiant being first duly sworn according to Law Testafies and says. That he first entered The service in The spring of Seventeen hundred and Seventy Six in the month of March and marched to Wilmington and was there placed in a Regi- ment under The command of Col Lillington Majr Jonas Johnston being The Major of The Regiment. I served from March until October of That year at Wilmington under The command of Majr. Johnston. In The month of March Seventeen hundred & Seventy nine This affiant marched under The command of Captm Samu Lanier in a Regiment commanded by Col Jonas Johnston for South Carolina and served from That time until The middle of June of That year, at which time we were discharged and on our way home Col Johnston died on The way at Squire Amison on Browning Creek near the North Carolina line. This affiant has The most distinct recollection of The services of Col Johnston and his bravery at The Battle on Stone. We were discharged but a short Time after The Battle and This affiant shall never forget his saying to us That he should never get home, being Then sick.
Given under my hand This 28 th day of March 1840.
John Bryan

State of North Carolina
Pitt County
This day personally appeared before me a Justice of the Peace for the State and County above written Mr John Bryan a very old and most respectable citizen of Pitt County and subscribed and swore to the foregoing affidavit in due form of law. I also certify that Mr Bryan is universally known as a soldier of the Revolution and his testimony is entitled to full faith and credit.
Given under my hand & seal this 28 th day of March 1840.
Henry A. Hopkins (P)
State of North Carolina
Pitt County
I Archibald Parkin Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County aforesaid, do certify that Henry A. Hopkins Esquire whose signature appears above is an acting Justice of the Peace for said County and that due faith and credit ought to be given to his official acts.
Given under my hand & seal of our said Court at office in Granville this 28 th day of March A.D. 1840
Arch d Parkin Clerk

No 17
Thos Bentley.

State of North Carolina
Pitt County
} The affidavit of Thomas Bentley a Citizen of Pitt County and now a Pensioner of the United States taken to prove the Revolutionary services of Col Jonas John- ston of Edgecombe County. This affiant being first duly sworn according to Law testifies and says. That he was drafted in the month of March Seventeen hundred & Seventy Six and marched for Wilmington under the Command of Capt. Godfrey Stancell and served in and near that place until the month of October. When we arrived at Wilmington we were put in a Regiment Commanded by Col Lillington Majr Jonas John- ston being the Majr of the Regiment I continued to serve under Majr Johnston until we were discharged in October as above stated. Majr Johnston being in service all the time. After that this affiant was mustered into service as a Twelve months man under Capt. McRae and marched to South Carolina. This af- fiant will recollects hearing of the death of Col Johnston the period when it took place he is unable to say as he was not then under his command.
Given under my hand this 26th day of March 1840.
Thomas Bentley

State of North Carolina } Pitt County }
This day personally appeared before me a Justice of the Peace for the State and County above written Thomas Bentley universally reputed and believed to be a soldier of the revo- lution and a man of strict veracity and substance and swore to the foregoing affidavit in due form of law.
Given under my hand & seal this
26 th day of March 1840
J. W. Lantrip J.P. (25)
State of North Carolina }
Pitt County }
I Archibald Parker Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County aforesaid do hereby certify that Charles I Wantriss whose signature appears above is a Justice of the Peace for said County, and that due faith and Credit ought to be given to his official acts
Given under my hand & seal of office in said Court at office in Granville the 27 th day of March A.D. 1840
Arch d Parker Clerk

No 4
W 7
[Faint, mirrored cursive handwriting, likely bleed-through from the reverse side of the page. The text is mostly illegible but appears to be a formal letter or document.]

Raleigh N.C.
Compt office
I William H Collins Comptroller of Public Accounts in and for the State of North Carolina do hereby certify that it appears in a Book of Settlements of the Army accounts at Kingston, that the Name of "Jonas Johnson" appears to be associated with the Name of Henry Wooten as having received for " their services " and purchasing Guns in Edgecomb County, this State, the Sum of Three Hundred and seventy six Pounds, Fifteen shillings and Nine pence (£376. 15. 9) dated November 1776. See Book No 1 letter B page 26. I further certify that it appears of Record in Book A. No 2 page 15, that the Name of Col Jonas Johnson is there exhibited as having received the sum of One Hundred and Twenty six Pounds, Nine shillings and seven pence (£126. 9. 7) for the services of himself and others - which payment is dated November 1777. given under my hand and seal This 30 th day May 1845
Wm H Collins Compt

Claim of Mrs Johnson for a Pension, as Widow of Col Jonas Johnson -
The military service of Col l Johnson for six months is the single fact to be proved by the Claimant.
That he was on a tour of military duty and died when he had served four months on that tour is admitted. - This was in 1779 -
We might contend that the proofs & documents extend this service to 5 months - Certainly it exceeded four.
Now then, it only remains to produce satisfactory evidence that he served on the some other tour of duty, the other two months, or rather less, to make up the six months. - but say, two months.
It appears he was appointed a Major in April 1776 - When the history of that period, between his appointment in April 1776 & his death in 1779, is remembered; & we learn from Dr Williams & the other Witnesses, who first gave their depositions, that Col l Johnson was a prominent and active man in those disturbed times, & often absent from his home on various tours of duty, though the periods of their duration are not remembered, the mind of any Enquirer into this fact would be at once, from these circumstances alone, strongly led to believe that all these services together ought to be presumed to have (been)

been at least equal to the remaining two months required. Particularly when we know that the usual period of service for those called out, in those times, was seldom less than three months. —
At any rate, we should feel disposed not to scan very critically any honest & fair evidence upon the subject, but to give a liberal interpretation to any proof that might tend to shew that a service of two months, in all, was really rendered by this officer after getting his comf n as Major in April 76, & before his setting out as Colonel in 1779, on the expedition in which he died. — It is hardly possible to conceive, in the state of things then existing, such a man as he is proved to have been, after getting his major's comf n ardent, active in the service & often from his family on duty, not to have served two months before 79. —
Add however to this very strong presumptive evidence the former evidence of Pettoway —
He undoubtedly & positively proves an actual service in the Spring of 75 by Jonas Johnson, of more than two months — counting to the 10 May, the period of that Witness's enlistment, from the commencement of the expedition to Wilmington. — But to this it was objected that he had not then got his comf n (it not being given till April) & that he was engaged in a civil & not a military duty, viz t that of taking ammunition to Wilmington, & being unable to shew that he then had a Comf n , or that this was a military tour of duty, the whole period proved by Pettoway, except the interval of a few weeks between the date of his Comf n & the enlistment of Pettoway, was cut off by the former Report

of the Compts. - leaving only two or three weeks to be added to the four months & upwards before proved in 79. Still leaving a month & a little more to be made out. -
That seemed rather a hard decision - for, in the first place, as evidently the service began when the expedition set out for Wilmington, or at least, as soon as the party arrived there, it would not have been unreasonable to conclude that the officer, who led the party and commanded it when arrived there either held a Compt n , or was acting under the authority of one to be subsequently issued. - But Pettomay's evidence did not stop there - he proves that when he returned from the South in the fall, he saw Col l Johnson, parade his men at Below Tarborough, for enlistment, & understood they had then recently returned from the tour of service in which, at his enlistment in May, he had left them in Wilmington - & heard his men say to him on that occasion, in answer to his calls on them to enlist, that they had but recently, within a few days, returned home from that tour.
This however was rejected as hearsay - strictly & technically perhaps it was so - but surely this was rather a hard decision. - But then it was proved that this tour of duty was military & not merely civil duty - It was performed by two companies, with their Captains, & tho' they carried wagons of ammunition, yet very properly a military force was raised for service in Wilmington, where the ammunition was wanted, & where without a military force it could have been of little use. - It was not a mere escort for the magnus

wagons - but a military force, called into service & the Major commanding it is found to have been Jonas Johnson. -
So stood the case upon the former evidence with only a month, or a little more, wanting to be make up the required period, made out by downright positive proof to which no exception could be taken -
- and with circumstantial evidence & presump- -tive evidence of the highest & most persuasive character leaving scarcely room for doubt as to the fact required.
And now it is admitted that a Witness has added the required positive proof - This is John Bryan - If his testimony is received the case is fully made out, by positive proof -
It is objected to -
It seems that, in a deposition or declaration on oath, as to his own pension, he some time ago stated that "he was born in in 1751, as appears by the record of his birth left by his father in the County of Bertie N.C."
And he now swears that "he was born on 26 May 1750, as his father told him, who had a record of the ages of his children." -
Now let this objection be fairly weighed -
The fairness of the man's character is fully sustained, & indeed seems to be admitted - for the objection is made to rest wholly upon "discrepancies, no doubt owing to the infirmities of extreme old age". - To determine how far such discrepancies should affect this evidence, it should be seen how far these statements as to the Witness's age are material.
On the former occasion the statement about his age was wholly immaterial to his claim - it was not necessary that he should be exact & correct as to his birth - and it seems that on that occasion,

occasion he referred to a record of his birth left by his father in the County of Bertie, which then he believed stated his birth to have been in 1761. — This declaration was made by him in Pitt County, his present residence — He could not therefore have spoken with the record before him, but either from his own recollection or the statement of some other person as to its contents. —
Either of these may have been inaccurate. And now, when his recent deposition was taken, he may, by better information, as to this record, or more accurate recollection, be able to state his birth more correctly. Certainly it shows no such inculcility of memory as to affect his credit in the statement of a positive fact: even if he was ever so mistaken as to what a record, not in his possession, & which he may not have seen for a long time, stated as to the year of his birth. —
But now, that his age is thought to be material, as showing that he must be mistaken in saying that he served a tour of six months in 1776 with Col d Johnson, let us see, if, besides his own oath, there be not abundant other evidence to prove his age. —
Let the plain positive proof of Dr Williams, Anderson, Barnhill, Highsmith & others, now filed, be examined, & how is it possible to doubt that his statement of having been born in 1750 is correct? — At all events they show conclusively that at the beginning of the war, in the Spring of 1776, he was old enough to serve & did serve. —
(The)

The objection first taken to the proof of Bryan was that from his age, as stated in his former deposition, he could not have been old enough to have served in 76 under Col. Johnson as he has sworn he did —
and also, that in his own case he made no claim or statement of this service in 1776. —
And now the only question is — are these objections fairly removed? —
As to the first, Was he not old enough, in the Spring of 76, to have served? — If three or four highly creditable Witnesses swearing positively, that they have known him all their lives — That they knew him in the Spring of 76. — That he was then old enough to serve —
& further that he did actually then serve, & that they served then with him — if this proof can remove the objection, then there is an end of it — and if it cannot, then all the records of births & any other evidence that can be imagined, will be equally unavailing. —
As to the other objection of his silence as to this service in 1776, in his declaration when making his own claim, which no doubt more than anything else led the Comfs? to consider some explanation or further proof necessary, surely that must be considered as satisfactorily accounted for. — It was not inserted
(in

in his declaration because from the recent death of one of his old companions he believed that no proof could be got of it. and because another service equally available as to his claim could be proved. —
But his evidence is strongly corroborated by the proof now made by Mr Hogle, who drew his declaration for him, & swears that at the time he did actually state the  other services, which could only be proved by Reading Moore, then just dead, & that he omitted the other services thus stated, supposing it unnecessary as they could not be proved. Among the services thus omitted, he states there was a service under Col l Jonas Johnson. This is also confirmed by Anderson.
It seems to be thought, in the letter to Mr Stanley, that this Witness has "evidently confounded the services in 1776 with the service in 1779 under Col l Johnson" — but it is plain that the Witness speaks of "some service under Col l Jonas Johnson of Edgecombe", among the services stated by Bryan but omitted in his declaration for the want of proof, & certainly could not have meant the service in 1779, which was not omitted, but stated in the declaration & proved.
The same letter states "that in the Spring of 1776 a detachment of Militia escorted five arms &c a from Edgecombe to Wilmington, but Jonas Johnson was acting at that time under his civil appointment to procure arms. And there is no evidence that the amount of the escort was equal to a Captain's company, much less to that of a Major or Colonel." —
Here it is plain that Pettibone's evidence has been overlooked, for that states explicitly that "a draft was made of two companies to march to Wilmington then threatened by the Enemy" — that his company "was commanded by Cap t Irvin Fox and the other by Cap t Hall" — that "the two companies comprised from 100 to 200 men" — & that they marched under the command

of Major Johnson" — that "they carried with them several wagons of ammunition, & on their arrival in Wilmington the men under the command of Col Johnson were formed into a Regiment, together with those from other Counties, & Col Lillington was made Colonel & Major Johnston acted as Major." — This then is clearly sufficient evidence to show that this was a military & not a civil service, that there was not only a Captain's but a Major's command, & that Jonas Johnston, as Major, commanded it, and it was only considered deficient before, because he did not get his Comp n till April, & Pettibone went away the 10 th of May, so that it only covered the interval.
That deficiency is now supplied by John Bryan's evidence — He is positive & clear that that tour of duty in which he served under Major Johnston continued for six months. — The only two objections taken to this proof are removed by the additional evidence — both he and Hugh account for the omission of the statement of this service in his declaration — and his age is proved, not only by himself, but by four other respectable witnesses — so that as far as any fact can be proved by evidence, it is shown that he was old enough to have served, & that he did serve, on that very tour of duty. Not only do these witnesses corroborate his statement as to his age, but as to the material fact of his having actually served on that tour of duty in 1776. — If this is believed (as it certainly must now be) then his proof that at the same time Jonas Johnston was the Major under whom he served can be no longer questioned.
(In the letter before alluded to, it seems to be suggested)

suggested that this record of his birth left by his father in Bertie County N.C. ought to be produced.
With submission, this does not seem necessary nor reasonable — It does not appear to be in his possession — It was left by his father in Bertie County: but is not said to be there now — and a paper not in the power of the Claimant to procure ought not to be required, if other sufficient evidence of the fact can be had.
Now, even supposing that Bryan himself had shown such a want of memory as to this record, as not to be thought competent to prove the fact of his having been 18 yrs old when he rendered this service in the Spring of 1776, yet, undoubtedly, three or four old respectable and intelligent men, swearing positively to his age from their own knowledge of him from youth, & swearing moreover, as some of them do, that they knew he actually did serve at that time, must make any further evidence unnecessary. — One or two of them also, it may be added, corroborate, from their own personal knowledge, the fact of Jonas Johnston's service as a Major on that occasion at Wilmington in 1776, though they do not state the duration of the service. —

It is remarked in the letter to Mr Stanley before referred to, that
"The regulations under the act of June 1832 expressly admitted traditional evidence where Claimants alleged upon oath that no other or better testimony could be found" — and this reference to the regulations seems to be made for the purpose of showing that Bryan, if he really rendered this service in the Spring of 1776, ought not to have omitted it, & would not have omitted it in his declaration, but would have stated it, & relied on traditional testimony to sustain it.
But this argument is inconclusive; because, in the first place, it does not appear that he could have furnished even traditional testimony of this service, & again because there was another service viz: that of 1779 which could be proved by positive evidence, making it unnecessary to resort to the traditional evidence if ever so allowable. —
But this reference to this regulation as to the admissibility of traditional evidence, becomes important to the Claimant in this case — For if admissible in Bryan's case, it is also admissible here.
Now, if there was no positive evidence for the supposed remaining two months, or somewhat less, of Col. Johnston's service, yet surely there is a mass of traditional testimony as to his service in 1776 at Wilmington, as strong as can ever be found to prove a fact. — Look at Pettoway's proof of the publicly avowed statements of the men who served under Johnston, made in his presence, of their having just then returned from this tour of duty — Look also at the declarations now made on oath by the present Witnesses, of the uniform & general tradition, as to that expedition, of the whole neighborhood & of the men who served in it, & of their belief from these uniform traditional statements, that such a service was rendered, & that Bryan served in it, & that Johnston was the Major. — This, if traditional evidence is admissible (ought)

ought to have been enough, even without the positive evidence of Bryan. —
It may also be remarked as to no commission being shown till April 1776, that the history of those times shews that the Com ees of safety in each County granted Com ss under which the Officers acted, till regularly issued Commissions from the Governor could be subsequently obtained and that no records have been preserved of the proceedings of these Com ees — This makes it almost certain that when these two Companies marched from Tarboro' on the occasion of the Enemy's threatening Wilmington, under the command of Major Johnston, he must have held such an appointment, which, when he received afterwards in April the regular Commission from the Governor, was either surrendered, or no longer thought worth preserving.
There is another remark in this letter to Mr. Stanley, which to say the least of it, is most extraordinary, to be found, in what is called "a summary of the case". It says
"It is true that a general statement of his (Col. Johnston's) service at Wilmington in 1776 has been put forth in the papers, without any specific narrative of the tour, the names of the Captains, and probable amount of the force".
Now the passages of Pettibone's deposition, thus strangely forgotten, have been already quoted: shewing the very identical things thus represented to be wanting. — Thus it would seem that a Claimant who produces new proof when required, unfortunately exposes himself to the danger of having his,

his former proof forgotten or disregarded. -
Washington 24 ap? - 40.
F o Key in behalf of the Claimant.
Key No 16

Key
No 29

Washington 28 Jan'y — 40.
Sir
It appears from your letter of 7 th Jan'y that you consider the proofs in favor of Mrs Esther Johnson's claim to a pension liable to two objections. —
The first is, that there is only parole proof of the rank of her husband, and you say that "the rank of a commissioned officer cannot be allowed upon any parole proof." — That he was commissioned as Major, we presume will not be questioned, after the certificate presented to you this day. — This paper shews that on the 22 nd day of April 1776 Jonas Johnston was appointed by the Provincial Congress first Major of Militia in the County of Edgecombe. — Here then is record evidence shewing that on that day he held a commission not only as a Major, but as the first Major of the County — so that the parole proof of his being subsequently the Colonel of that County is strengthened by the nature of the commission, entitling him to the promotion, & rendering it in the highest degree probable that he received it, proved by the certificate. — If therefore there was such a rule that parole evidence alone could not be considered sufficient to (more)

is admitted by you, in your letter. You say "The Witness Pettaway estimates the tour of the detachment escorting the ammunition to Wilmington in 1775 and the tour to S. C. in 1779 at 6 months: but that is an estimate which this Department is bound to make upon definite and established details - So far as this Witness's narrative affords any data to determine the length of the service, it is very clear that his estimate is exaggerated."
Here, then it is admitted, in respect to this objection, is a Witness who proves the required fact - the 6 month's service. Why is this not sufficient? - It is said - "it is very clear that his estimate is exaggerated." How is this very clear? His last tour was between 4 & 5 months - that cannot be disputed. If therefore the tour to Wilmington in 1775 continued for a month and a half, or at most for two months, it was sufficient to make up the six. The time of that tour to Wilmington, it is true, is not distinctly proved: but as the ordinary terms of service at that time, when a detachment of militia was called out, was for three months, the presumption would be very strong that it was a tour of at least three months, which was more than sufficient, with the tour to S. Car. in 1779 to make up the six months. This ought to be sufficient to show that there is no ground for the suspicion that this Witness has exaggerated - But this is not all. We contend that he gives the most conclusive and irresistible data in his narrative to repel this suggestion of exaggeration. - He dates the service on which he was drafted and marched under the command of Johnston to Wilmington as beginning in February 1775 - at Wilmington enlists under Capt. Brinkley, & shortly afterwards, viz in April  and that Col. Johnston was then acting as Major that year, marched for Charleston. - Now from February when the tour began to April when he left Johnston's command to go to Charleston, is two months. Would he not therefore be able to know & to swear conscientiously that Johnston served, to his knowledge, at least two months on that tour, which added to the time of the last tour on which he died (would)

would make the 6 months he has proved? Surely no Witness ever more fully confirmed his estimate by the details of his narrative than this Witness has done, and we feel confident that you will, upon your own statement of his evidence compared with the details to which we have just referred, acquit him of exaggeration. —
And what, if there were no such confirmations of his estimate? The proven six month's service — and this is admitted, if obtained, to be sufficient. —
And after the additional & strong confirmation of the credit & character of this Witness presented to you to-day, how can he be disbelieved or doubted? Gentlemen of the highest intelligence and character have testified to the degree of credit that may be given to Dr Robert Williams, & the confidence that may be reposed in his statements — And he has sworn that the testimony of Micajah Pettaway is entitled, in his opinion, "entitled to the fullest credit and belief." —
The Court of Edgecombe County also certifies that "from the known respectability of Dr Robert Williams of Pitt County, and Captain Micajah Pettaway and Mrs Catherine Johnston of this County, who have testified in this matter the Court is fully persuaded that Col Jonas Johnston rendered the service proved." —
If the testimony of a Witness thus sustained can be disregarded, it is in vain to attempt to prove any fact by human testimony. We feel confident that you will do justice both to the Witness and the Claimant by giving full credit to his statement. — We are very respectfully,
Yrs. — F. H. Key Or the Secretary for Claimant.

Mosby
10 22
To,
James L. Edwards Esqr.
Commisioner of Pensions
Washington City -
Feb 12

Littleton Novr: 29th 1839.
To James L. Edwards Esq.
Sir,
In obedience to the request of Mrs Esther Johnston of Edgecombe County and that of her friends I hasten to lay before you her application for a pension under the act of the 4th July 1836. I am also instructed to ask of you an examination of the evidence in the case so soon as it reaches you that you may be apprised of the necessity of acting promptly in relation to the matter.
You will please apprise me of the receipt of the papers and the period when it will be in your power to take them up for consideration.
I remain very Respectfully
Your obt: S r :
R. H. Mosby

To George W Crump Esqr.
Richmond Sep 13 th : 1840.
Sir
On reaching home from Charleston a few days since I received your report addressed to Mr Stanley rejecting the application of the Widow of Col Jonas Johnston for a pension. Before I proceed to answer the objections stated in your communication I must frankly disclaim that in all my experience (not a little by the way) connected with business in your office - never before did I know a case rejected as this has been. Had I not the most perfect conviction amounting to absolute certainty that you are incapable of doing a private or publick wrong, I assure you the rejection of this case would impress upon me opinions which I intentionally avoid to express. I feel confident that the report is not the result of your own judgement after an examination of the evidence in the case, or it would not have been contained perversions and misrepresentation of the facts with a view of justifying its rejection. I fear my dear Sir that what I have written will not fall with all the harmony of music upon your ear, allow me again to disclaim all intention of personality or to offer one word injurious to your feelings. In disclaiming that, I do not intend to forfeit or to give up one jot or tittle of my own or in any way to suffer the rights of Mrs Johnston to be compromised; for in my view of the matter I have rights as well as the Government, and I am unwilling that it shall deprive me of them or to suffer others to do it. allow me most respectfully to invite your attention to the evidence in the case and to compare it with the report for instance you say "That he held a military command 1779 is fully proved by letters written

n. 2

discharge him from the camp early in that year, but whether as Captain or in "a higher grade does not appear." The letters filed in the case were private and all to his wife; and the failure of Col: Johnston to affix his official title as Commander of a Reg: of North Carolina militia should it appears to me excite no surprise; I certainly never intended or expected to establish his rank by them; They were filed to show that the evidence of the witness and particularly that of Mr Pettaway was cor- rect. If you will examine his testimony you will find that he proves the rank of Col: Johnston in 1776 and in 1779. You will find that he not only proves these facts but he declares that he performed a tour of duty under him in 1776 at Wilmington which is clearly stated; its commence- ment and termination - and notwithstanding the fact - your report says - "With regard to the services of Mr Johnston prior to this time (1779:)" "There is no proof offered to show its nature or extent. It does not ap- pear he left home until he went to S. C." Now if you will examine all the testimony Pettaway and Mr Johnston you will find that they expressly prove the fact of his leaving home in 1776 as a Major & in 1779 as Col: commanding a Regiment. I think my Sir when you examine this testimony you cannot fail to agree with me that I am hardly dealt with by the report; and I trust it will plead a full justification for what I have said in the commencement of this letter. The concluding part of the report asserts and demands a state of proof which I unhesitatingly pronounce to be in conflict with the law, and the rules by which these cases are to be settled. The report says - "His having command of a company of local militia will avail the widow nothing, until it shall be shown that he "was called into actual service by the authority of the state" -
So require of an applicant to show or produce the official order of the Govern- ment to Col Johnston authorising or commanding him to march & ap- prehend would be difficult to do; Knowing as you do that there are no

records of the service of the militia. The report speaks of "his commanding a company of local militia assailing the widow nothing". This again is a new doctrine; and I shall be pleased to know what is meant by "local militia", in contradistinction to such as will be considered the true and veritable militia acknowledged by the department. But what right have you to call the command of Col: Johnston in 1776 when he marched to Wilmington as local militia, when it is in proof that he was acting as a Major in a Regiment drafted to serve for six months from Edgecombe County. Will it be contended for one moment that his service rendered in North Carolina is not as available as his service in South Carolina in 1779. I feel that it would be doing injustice to you to pursue this matter further. I have most deeply to regret that neither my health nor the state of the roads will allow me to go on to Washington to avail myself of personal explanation in relation to this case. By reference to Williamson's and Martin's History of N. Ca: or Jones's defence of it, a book given by me to the Commissioner you will find a list of the officers appointed by the 1st provincial Congress and you will there find the name of Jonas Johnston as Major of Edgecombe County.
I have in conclusion to say that if you knew how ill able I am to have imposed upon me the trouble of retaking testimony in this case; I am sure you would not do it unless there existed some just cause to require it at my hands. For myself, for Mrs Johnston I ask but justice and after you come to give (as I beg you will do) a personal inspection of the case, I have the most perfect conviction that it will be promptly rendered to me.
With my best wishes for your health and prosperity
I remain your friend
I solicit a prompt answer to my R. O. Littleton N. Ca.
R. H. Mosley

Dec 15
Wadsworth
on
Rev. Mr.
Luther Johnson.
James L. Edwards
Commissioner of Pensions
Washington City.

Dear Sir
Near Henderson Depot Granville County N.C. Dec r 9 th 1846
I have rec d your letter assigning your reasons for not allowing $158. a year in the case of Mr. Sithu Johnson as Sunderland you would do. You have not however followed me to the evidence in your office; To wit the certificate showing that Col. Johnson was allowed $126.9.10 for extra services between April 1776 and May 1779. That evidence I say is in the Pension Office; and I suppose you found the certificate for $126.9.7 paid Col. J. and sundry officers in 1777, and you mistook that for the proof I relied upon to convince you of the propriety of allowing the $158 a year. The two sums were paid at different times according to the dates. I admit the certificate you state, and if there was no other I would feel myself concluded by your reasoning. But as that is not the case; for the evidence I refer to, and which you have overlooked is on file in the Pension Office, and as I expect to go on to Philadelphia this winter I must ask you to suspend further action in the case, until I can see you.
I have the Honor To be
Most respectfully your Humble Serv t
B. G. W. Crump.
Jno. D. Hawkins

To D r . G. W. Crump Dear Sir,
Nash Henderson Depot Granville county N.C. Nov m 19 th 1846
The certificate of Pension directed to me for the Bears of the late D r . Robert Williams. I rec d . yesterday, it having been shipped to Greenville, from whence it was forwarded to me. And I assure you it was with great disappointment, that I rec d . that certificate alone. For at our last interview I was led by you to believe that you would allow the claim of Esther Johnson for $158. because you figured up the sum of $126.9.10 to allow that amount of Pension, a year from the time the other allow- -ance was made to the time of her death, a period of near Ten years. I fully understood this much from your remarks, and especially, at the conclusion of our conference, when I asked you if it was necessary for me to remain longer in the city of Washington, you replied not, and then took down my address, and said the Certificates should be inclosed to me immediately. In part you said, they , would reach Henderson by the time I should. When you promised to send me the certificates & saying they would reach Henderson as soon as I should, you certainly conveyed the idea of more than one certificate — that in the case of D r . Williams was one — the other in the case of Esther Johnson was the only other one embraced in our conference. I was certainly justified in holding this opinion, from the language you used; and the

more especially as the evidence in the case according to the certificate of Maj r Collins the Comptroller of M ty . is certain, and conclusive, "that Col. Jonas Johnson was allowed by the council of safety the sum of £126.9.10 as an allowance of Claims, from April 1776, to May 1779." This positive, documentary proof of allowance and payment, to Col. Johnson, in connection with all the other proofs in the case, and with your manner of disposing of this particular evidence, led me certainly to expect, when you promised to send me certificates , that you would send me one in this case, and for the sum of $158 a year as stated. In April 1776, you have admitted, Col. Johnson was made a Maj r , and you have allowed a Pension for a portion of his service, at that period. You also have admitted, he was in service in S th Carolina as a Col. commanding a Regiment, in May 1779, and up to the 29 th of July of that year, and for which service you have also in part allowed a Pension. The documentary proofs in the case, are full, showing his services between those periods. He was paid the sum of £126.9.10 as Col. for extra services, certainly in a statutory character, rendered between April 1776, and May 1779. How then can you reject this positive, pointed, and special proof of service, amounting to $158, between those periods? It was in this way, I was certain, you saw, and appreciated the case. And when you promised to send me the certificates , I had not a doubt about it,

and so I stated on my return home to William Johnson Andrews, the grand son of Col. Johnson, the real ben- eficiary in this case, who is needy, but most worthy as a Citizen. He served to inflate his hopes, but to prostrate them, by distressing disappoint- ment. But, sir, I hope you have not come to any other conclusion, and that it is still your purpose now to send me the other certificate in the case of Wm Johnson for the $158 a year as heretofore understood, in fulfillment of the just expectations, and most righteous demands of the case.
If you will pardon me I will now call your attention respectfully, to a remark you made in the way of a reflection upon the certificate of the Comptroller of N.C. You said he had certified that a common soldier had received thousands for services, when his pay was rightfully but small, and that of course you were bound not to input his certificate. I was then disposed to make the explanation which I am now about to make, but I purposely deferred it. That explana- tion is this: Under the laws of N.C. from 1776 to 1782, to supply the demands for money to carry on the war of the Revolution, and for other purposes, a vast amount of Bills of credit were issued, called, and used, as money, from time to time. These Bills of credit were during the times ascertained to be too numerous to be redeemed, and in 1779 they began to depreciate, and by the 1 st of January 1782, they had depreciated to 800 for one. and so they remained ever after. The Legislature

of 1783 passed a Law, fixing the rates of Depreciation, for every month, in every year, from 1777 to 1782, as a rule for the government of the Courts in all cases of litigation, as well as to fix the money medium among his citizens. This was legalizing a Depreci- ation, which had prevailed in practice during the time. And according to that Depreciation, Soldiers & all others were paid. And this will account to you, why the Comptroller, certifies as paid, to a Soldier, such a large sum. If it was paid, after the 1 st of January 1782, it was at a Depreciation of 800 for one. And if before that time, according to the scale of Depreciation. This explanation I hope, Sir, will discharge our Comptroller, from the imputation of making a Certificate fraught with wrongful extravagance.
I have the Honor
To be,
most respectfully,
your Humble Servt.
R. D. Hawkins.
On behalf of the Distributors of Estate Johnson.

Halifax N.C.
May 23. 1857
Dear Sir
You will confer a favor both on Hon. Rich d H. Hines, of Raleigh and myself if you will cause such of the Papers in the case of Esther Johnson for a pension as will shew the part her husband Col Jonas Johnson of Edgecombe took in the Revolutionary war. It is sought to be obtained, to be placed in the hands of a gentleman who is engaged in writing an historical work, and who has applied to Mr. Hines for information respecting his relative Col Johnson. Please enclose the copies of the papers which may shed light upon the character and services of Col Johnson to Mr Hines, at Raleigh N.C.
Mr James E Heath
Com. of Pensions
very respectfully
JR J Daniel
P.S. The application of Mr Johnson was under the act of July 4/36 & was filed about 1840 or 41. JR J D.

Hawkins
Nov 25. 1846
The Hon. Ab
De-
Estlin Johnson Member
James L. Edwards
Commissioner of Pensions Washington

Pension Office
August 16. 1843
Commissioner of Pensions Report in the case of Esdras Johnson
No 2.
No 1.
I am of opinion that full six months service is established And that the pension should be allowed accordingly Wm. D. [initials] 2 Aug 16. 1843

Pension Office, August 16. 1843
Sir,
I beg leave to submit to you the case of Esther Johnson, under the act of 4 th July 1836, and to ask your instruction as to the disposition which should be made of it, on the present exhibits.
The voluminous proofs, parol and documentary filed in the case, clearly establish the following facts; that her husband was in Spring of 1776 a Major of the Militia in Edgecomb County, and an Agent of the State to purchase Arms; That he commanded two Companies of drafted Militia in the Spring of 1776, as an escort to a transport of Arms to Mt. Minglo; that the length of this term of service is not ascertainable with satisfactory precision, but has been considered as less than two Months. That in 1779 he was again in service in command of a Regiment, in a neighboring State, and died four Months after entering upon the campaign. In order to entitle her to a pension, it should be clearly established that her husband served at least six months in field or garrison, in a Military Capacity; upon the exhibits above alluded to, the Department has heretofore decided that six months

Service was not duly specified and established, as the rules for an administrative adjustment of a pro rata pension required. Although no further attempt to specify any terms of service between Spring of 1776 and Summer of 1779 is made, certain letters of her husband to the Governor of the State, and a certificate of the Comptroller are now submitted as proof of at least as much service within the above dates as will eke out six months. These letters show that he was a patriotic and very active Militia Officer; and the Comptroller's Certificate shows, that he was entrusted with a large amount of moneys for the expenditures of his regiment; and one item of £126 9. 7 is paid to Colonel Jonas Johnson for himself and sundry officers."
I have the honor to ask your decision upon the question submitted by the Attorney of Claimant, whether this recently discovered documentary and record evidence, does not afford satisfactory proof that her husband must have served, including his service at Wilmington in Spring of 1776, at least two months before 1779, which, added to the service of that year, in which he lost his life, would bring her claim within the provisions of the pension laws.
Hon. J. M. Porter, Secretary of War.
I have the honor to be very respectfully, Your obedient, G. M. (signature)

Secy of War
13/4
No 2
No 5.
James L. Edwards Esq. Com te of Pensions City of Washington
56m p
M rs Johnson N.C.
40

Secy of N. (a)
Oct 9 1860

State of North Carolina Secretary of State's Office
Sir
Your letter of the 3 rd instant was received this morning. The Provincial Congress which met at Hillsboro on the 20 th August 1775, passed an Ordinance on the 7 th Sept r 1775, directing that Minute men should be enlisted for six months & that when called into actual service should be subject to and bound by the rules and regulations of the Continental Army, provided by the Continental Congress. In the Journal of the Provincial Congress which met in Halifax on the 4 th of April 1776. See, that on the 19 th of April 1776, in making appointments of persons in the different Counties in the State, to receive, procure and purchase Fire Arms for the use of the Troops, Jonas Johnston was appointed for Edgecombe County, and on the 22 nd day of April 1776, Jonas Johnston was appointed 1 st Major of the Militia of Edgecombe County, but there is nothing said of his services. There was no Assembly in this State until May 1777.
Very respectfully
James L. Edwards Esq r
Your obed t Serv t W. Hill
This ordinance was no doubt in force until laws were enacted on the subject.

No 13

State of North Carolina
Secretary of State's Office
I William Hill Secretary of State in and for the State of North Carolina, do hereby certify that it appears from the Journals of the Provincial Congress which met in the Town of Halifax in this State in 1776, that Henry Horn and Jonas Johnston were appointed by said Congress, to receive, procure and purchase Fire Arms for the use of the Troops in service in said State, and that on the 22 nd day of April 1776, Jonas Johnston was by the said Provincial Congress appointed first Major of Militia in the County Edgecombe in the State aforesaid.
Given under my hand this 15 th day of January A.D. 1840
W. Hill

July 21 st 1847
Col Edwards and myself have settled the case of Elisha Johnson and all twenty months services of his late Husband Col Jonas Johnson and that I agree to that time as being the amount of service.
Mr. D. Hawkins Redoubt the heirs of Mr. Johnson increase to $500-

6 2 2 2 4 11
Col. Hawkins claims for service in 1776 eight 6 months claims 2 months on Nov. 1777 claims 2 months, due April 1778 Dec. 1778 Fleming claims 2 months claims from Jan. 1779 to his death, 4 which was 29 July 1779 claims 4 months for last project

Feb. 3. 1779
Nov. 1776 £376:15:5 for himself & purchasing Guns
Dec. 1776 $52:89 Contingencies
Nov. 1777 £126:9:7 for his services & others
Dec. 1778
20 April 1778 £126:9:7 for himself & Sundry officers
Dec. 1778 £400 for expenses in marching
3 Feb. 1779 $1126:37 paid Col. J. Old
Feb. 1779 $16:45 emigration
* March 1779 $2111:17
April 1779 $1523:22
July 1779 $524.
* 16 March 1779 £4200 - for pay & bounties of drafts & volunteer corps - £400 was allowed Col. J. to pay extra extra expenses of troops
£126:9:10 was allowed by the Council of Safety as will appear in Book of allowances of claims from April 1776 to

Mar 1779

May 13. 1842
N 36
James L. Edwards Esq. Council of Pension. New Bedford.

h:4
n 24

H.R. Dec: 12 th '39
To the Commr. of Pensions,
Sir,
I have been informed that the widow of Col: Jonas Johnston, is an applicant for a pension. Will you inform me what disposition has been made of her application, or what additional evidence is necessary?
Respectfully &
Edw. Early

Simsbury Connecticut
May 11 th 1842.
Sir
I have recently had referred to me a claim of Esther Lobster for a pension, with which I perceive you are well acquainted. There is a copy of the declaration or evidence among the papers. Will you do me the favor to send a copy of them to me earliest leisure.
I am very Respectfully
Your Obedt Servt
Will. H. G. Chapman
J. L. Edwards Esq }

Feb 3. 1824
No 19
J. L. Edwards Com te & Passengers Washington Hon. J. Pierce Senate W.P. S.C.

Committee Room
Feby 2 nd 1841
Dear Sir
Will you have the goodness to favor me with the grounds on which the claim of Widow Esther Johnson was rejected by you & your views upon the subject. I shall also be glad to have certified copies of the evidence in the case as soon as practicable.
With much respect
Yr obedt Servt
J. P. Pierce
Ch Committee on Pensions
J. L. Edwards Esq Comm ee on Pensions Washington D. C.

Compt. Wks to Hon: Edw. Stanley,
April 3 rd 1840
W 27.
+

(Copy)
Pension Office
April 3 d 1840
Sir:
I have the honor to inform you that the additional evidence in the case of Mrs Esther Johnston widow of Col. Jonas Johnston dec d enclosed in yours of 2 d inst. has been examined and filed.
The witness Geo e Bentley alleges that he served in the company of Capt. Standle, Regiment of Col. Lillington, of which Jonas Johnston was Major, from March to October 1776, at Wilmington, N.C.
Now it appears from his declaration under oath that his first service was in 1780 under Capt. Hall for 3 months, to re-inforce Genl. Greene; and his other term in 1781 in the N.C. Line. This is all the service he claimed in his application for a pro rata pension, entitling him to very little more than a half pension, with which he appears to have been satisfied. The other witness John Bryan repeats the allegations of Bentley respecting the service of 1776 and testifies to the term in 1779, which is not in issue now, having been settled at 4 months. This witness like the other

is shown by his own declaration, to have entered the service for the first time in 1779 and was too young to have been in service in 1776, as now alleged under oath. His original declaration was amended and explained by supplements and proofs, until his claim was finally adjusted for 8 months in 1779 under Col. Armstrong and 3 several short terms in the Militia Companies of Hodges and Moyer of Col. Spruill's and Gwalt's Regiments in the years 1780 and 1781, amounting in the whole to a little more than a half of a full pension.
His testimony being rejected the claim remains in the same situation it was at the date of my last letter to you, except so far as the above testimony may have thrown a discredit around it.
There is no doubt of the well merited revolutionary reputation which the tradition of Edgecomb accords to the late Col. Jonas Johnston, but the enquiry here is how far that reputation was acquired by actual military service in field and garrison. This must be ascertained with the requisite precision to constitute a rateable pension. I have the honor to be, very respectfully J. L. Edwards (signed) Hon: Edw. Stanley House of Representatives

Bentley born '59 - Declaration - Pension 50$ - act 7. June 32 3 mo under Capt. Hall in Genl. Greene's army and afterwards 12 mo. in the N.C. in S th Carolina -
Bentley - deposition -
March 76. Capt. Stancill - Major Jonas Johnson - Col. Lillington for six mo. at Wilmington -
Bryan born '61. - Declaration -
No 38 79 - Capt. Lanius - Col. Armstrong - 5 mo in S th Carolina 80. 81. do under Hodges - Discharge of Col. Spright's & Sewall's Regt after several supplementals
Bryan - deposition -
March 76. served with in Regt. Col. Lillington Major Jonas Johnson to Oct. at Wilmington

Stanley
No 37

I have been called upon to state my knowledge of the character of Dr Robt: Williams, Arch: Paken, Jas: R. Hoyle, and Majr John Anderson of Pitt County N.C. Carolina, and of John D. Hughes Esqr of the County of Edgecombe, in said State. — There is not a man of better character in the world than Dr Williams. — He is universally and deservedly beloved and respected wherever he is known. —
Mrs Paken and Mrs Anderson and Mr Hoyle all live in the same County, and the two former I know personally very well — they have been very friendly to me. Mr Hoyle, I don't so well know. He is however a man of influence and standing in his County, has the character of an honest man, and although a post master, and a violent partizan, he is trusted by

been opposed to him, with the transaction of important business matters. I know he is highly esteemed by many who quarrel with him, about the time of the elections. — He is the confidential business agent of the wealthiest man in the County, opposed to him in politics. — The Parker who testifies to his character, is the Clerk of the County Court in Pitt, and bears as high a character as any man in the County. — I am forced to give what others think and speak of the Jas. R. Hoyle, for political differences, have prevented my knowing him well. — I cannot withhold however from doing him justice. —
Mr. Hughes I know very well. He bears a high character, and is generally respected in his neighbourhood. —
Washington City 22 nd April 1840
Edw. Stanley

Committee
No 35

Committee Room on Pensions U.S.S.
Feb. 16. 1841
Sir.
I herewith return, agreeably to your request, the certified copies of the papers in the case of Esther Johnston —
I am, Sir. Respectfully your All Sec t —
By Franklin Pierce
Hon: J. S. Edwards. Ch 2 Com: G. H. C. Whitman Clk. Comm ee of Pensions —

Feb 1. 1841.
Esther G. Weston
No 33
L. Edwards Esq. Comm ee of Pensions Washington
Hon. W. T. Mangum Senate U.S.

Senate Chamber 1 st July 1841.
To The Commissioner of Pensions
Sir,
The enclosed indicate certain papers in your office, that it is desirable may be placed before the Comm te of Pensions of the Senate.
Will you be so obliging as to have them placed in the hands of Mr. Pierce, the Chairman of that Committee.
Yours Obediently
William P. Hargrave
R
Will you enclose the papers to Mr. Pierce, before the meeting of the Committee tomorrow?
I opened the letter to add the P.S. W.P.H.

Having been requested by Mr Stanley to say what I know of Doctor Robert Williams of Pitt County North Carolina, I therefore state that I served in the General Assembly of North Carolina with the said Dr Robert Williams many years ago, when he was a member of that body from Pitt County and myself from Surry County; that the character and reputation of Dr Williams both as a man and a physician, stood high among all his acquaintances; that he was deemed a most worthy and venerable man by all persons; and that by those who lived nearer to him, and were better acquainted with him than myself, no one man ever was considered as having a better character, or entitled to more credit - Given under my hand at Washington the 26 th of January 1840 -
Louis Williams, M. D. -

I am personally acquainted with Dr. Robert Williams of Pitt County whose deposition is on file in the case of Mr. Esther Johnson and am acquainted with his general reputation which is I believe of North Carolina  unquestioned with the State. No man stands higher and the most undoubted credit is due to his statements on oath or otherwise
E. Mangum Aug 28 th 1840 -

I fully concur in the statement of Judge Strang and Rev Williams. No man bears a higher, a more irreproachable character than Dr Williams. —
Chas. Strang
Washington City 1840
Ms 21

S. 389 Sept 14
15 August 1840.
Indian affair.
Mr. [unclear]
but.
for

Hon. all Strange & Brown Esther Johnson's claim
No 45.
Hon. J. A. Poinsett
War Department
Mr. Mus- by.
2m

Senate Chamber
June 15 th 1840
To the Hon?
The Secretary at War
Sir
We understand an appeal has been taken from the decision of the Comm ee of Pensions in the case of Mrs Esther Johnson of the State of North Carolina and we have her requested to call your early and particu- lar attention to her claim.
We accordingly earnestly desire your prompt and particular attention thereto and are with very high respect
Yr Ob t Serv t .
Geo. Strange
B. Brown

Certificate of Wm F. Collins Compt.
No 2.
June 14 th 1843

Compt o Office North Carolina
June 14 th 1843
I William F. Collins Compt. Pub. accounts do certify that I. had examined the Books of settlement of the Army accounts of the Militia of the State of N o Carolina for Revolutionary services &c, and it appears entered in said Books of settlement that Col. Jonas Johnson of Edgecomb County was allowed the sum of $1126.37 old emission on the 3 rd Feb y 1779 which is in Book H. of 5 and that Jonas Johnson was paid sundries in Feb y 1779 $16.45. In March $2111.17. In April $1523.22. In July $524 some year, and and in the month of December 1776 the sum of $52.89 in specie as will appear in Book E of Contingencies, and that on the 20 th April 1778 the sum of £126.9.7 was paid to Col. Jonas Johnson for himself and sundry officers. And in December 1778 the sum of £400. pounds was paid Col. Jonas Johnson expenses in Marching Troops to the Genl. rendezvous - That on the 16 th March 1779 the sum of £4200 pounds was allowed Col. Jonas Johnson for pay and bounty of the drafts and volunteers of Edgecomb County. And the sum of £400 pounds was allowed Col. Jonas Johnson to defray the expenses of the Troops. And the sum of £126.9.10 was allowed by the council of safety as will appear in Book of Allowances Claims from April 1776 to May 1779.
Given under my hand Copy. (Second) Wm F. Collins

No 5 108 I have considered the argument & documents submitted by the Attorney in the case of Esther Johnston widow of Col James Johnston on appeal from the decision of the Commissioner of Pensions. The evidence that Col. Johnston served for a longer period than four months & eighteen days is deemed not satisfactory thereby
J. B. P.

No 31

We have just received the copy of your letter to the Secretary of War of 12 May 1835 —
This document, we trust, removes every difficulty — You perceive by it that our claim to have the period of Col. Johnston's service computed down to his death, is not opposed (as you thought it was) by the decision of the Comfr or Secretary, or the practice of the Office —
On the contrary, it is plain that the construction we give to the Pension Laws, & which we have endeavored to maintain in the preceding remarks, is the same it has received from yourself in similar cases. —
Of course we think it unwise to say more
I am very truly Yrs
J. T. Key R. H. Mosby

24 June
M 234
June 26. 1840
Pension Office - Report - No 15
The Marble
J. R.
Sec of War Dec 15 1840
The Report & papers upon which it was made - were returned to Mr Key in person - and subsequently returned by him to the office - See M 235-
23 June - 40.

Washington 23 June - 40.
Sir -
Having just made a further examination into the papers in Mrs Esther Johnston's case, we find that the date of Col d Johnston's death, as entered in the family record, is 29 July 1779.
The Witnesses, particularly Pettibone & Mrs Catherine Johnston state that the tour of duty in which he died, as was  his return in home, commenced in February 1779 — What time in February they do not state, & there is nothing to shew. —
Let the middle of the month be taken as a fair date, where it does not appear what the real date was, & this would make the period of service 5 months & 14 days — leaving deficient, to make up the required 6 months, 16 days. —
and Pettibone's proof is admitted for 18 days from the date of the commission, 22 April 1775 to 10 th May 1775 — two days for more than necessary. —
Even, if the last day of February 1779 (making not a fair average, but the strongest presumption possible against the claim) is taken for the commencement 18/

of this term, then the period would be, from the last day of February to 29 July 1979, five months - leaving only one month deficient -
Then the portion allowed of Pettaway's prof in 1970 of 10 days, being added to the five months, leaves us only deficient 12 days -
And surely, Mrs Catherine Johnston's evidence, besides Bryan's & the other witnesses, ought to be more than sufficient to supply this. -
We are Sir very respectfully
Yr Most Servt R. H. Mosby
They
To the Honble Sec. of War.

Washington 22 June — 40.
Sir —
We beg leave in behalf of Mrs Esther Johnston to place before you copies of the proofs & papers laid before the Compt. of Pensions, from whose rejection of the claim we have appealed. —
The packet endorsed "Reports of the Compt." will shew you the grounds upon which the Compt. has decided. —
The packet endorsed "Statements & arguments in reply to the Compt.'s reports," will shew you (as we think) how the Compt.'s objections were removed, & the grounds on which we have made our appeal. —
as the Compt.'s final objections are stated, we think, independently of other grounds, this case should be considered as settled by the recent decision of Brown's case, & several former decisions to the same effect, particularly Mrs Matthews case. — This decision in Brown's case (as also Mrs Matthews') conforms to the rule as to Militia officers — that a commission is not essential — nor record or documentary evidence of their having been a compt. — but that the grade of the officer may be proved by " the affidavits of persons of known respectability ".
We respectfully beg leave to refer you to our argument in Brown's case. —
(H)

If this proof be admissible, then this case is made out conclusively —
For it will not be denied that Col. c Johnston served four months on the tour of 1779 on which he died — The Compt. r admits (see his 2. d report) that he served on that tour four months. —
Two months then alone are wanting.
He admits also Pettibone's proof of a service on another tour from 22 April - 76, the date of his Commission as Major to 10 May when Pettibone left him in Wilmington, in command as a Major. — We have then 18 days more — There is now wanting one month and 12 days —
Three Witnesses prove that this service did not commence on 22 April 76, the date of his Commission — but in the February, or 1 st of March preceding — They swear that Jonas Johnston then marched from Tarborough to Wilmington, as a Major commanding a battalion, & the names of the Captains commanding the companies composing the battalion are given — one or two of them swear that they served under him in one of these companies. —
But the Compt. r excluded that portion of this service which was before the actual date of his Commission, on two grounds —
One, that there was no record or document

to shew that when he thus marched with this battalion to Wilmington, he had the rank of major - & that his grade could not be proved by parol evidence. —
This ground is removed by the decision of Brown's case. —
Then the Compt. says there is documentary evidence, as Brown's rank is mentioned in Gordon's history. —
Surely the statement of his rank in a history is not equal to the proof done by 3 respectable witnesses who swear positively from their own knowledge. —
The other ground on which the Compt. refused to note this service as beginning in March or February, was as stated in his report 4, that he escorted, as these witnesses prove, on that occasion, wagons with arms & ammunitions to Wilmington, & he connects this with the fact that Johnston was employed to purchase arms — He thus concludes that this was not a military service, but under this employment to purchase arms.
But the certificate of the minutes of the Compt. shew that he was not employed to purchase arms till 19 th Ap l — 76 — Consequently the service was, as proved by the witnesses, a military service — He commanded the detachment as major, & marched to Wilmington, & after getting there, & after the Compt. met, got his commission 22 nd April 1976. — Counting the (whole,

whole of this service, more than the time re- -gained is obtained. —
Again we say — independent of this proof Mrs Johnston's evidence ought to have been held sufficient to make up the two months.
She swears that he was out on military duty more than two months, besides the time on which he died. — That from the beginning of the war to his death, he was out more than half the time — and the other Witnesses prove, & among them several of the highest respectability & intelli- -gence, that Col. Johnston was often out on military duty, though they cannot specify the dates of the times in which he served, & that from the beginning of the war to his death, he was remarkable conspicuous for his zeal & activity. —
And then the positive proof is strengthened by circumstantial evidence. —
It should also be added that the whole time is fully proved by Bryan — & he is a credible witness — & the mistake about his age is explained, & is not sufficient to discredit him — for which we refer to the proof —
We are very resp ly
Yrs aff ly Servants — R. H. Mosby P. H. Key
No 30

Washington May 10 th — '40.
Sir
I have just rec d your letter in which you state, in relation to Mrs. Johnston's claim for a pension, the affidavit deposition recently filed, that — "This affidavit does not remove the objection in this case. The rules require that the tours of service performed by her husband, shall, in all such cases as this, be clearly specified: & this the witness has failed to do."
When I submitted this deposition to you, I did not think it necessary to accompany it with any remarks; because it appeared to me so fully to supply all that you had considered wanting in the proof, that I felt not the smallest doubt as to the allowance of the claim.
I beg therefore that you will allow me now to offer for your re-consideration a few brief suggestions.
I understand you to be entirely satisfied with the proof as to Col l . Johnston's service in the last tour of duty in -79 in which he died. You must have been also as well satisfied of his regular appointment as a major, while he was on duty at Wilmington in the Spring of -75; for of that there was record evidence in addition to the proof by witnesses who were with him.
Nor could you have had any doubt as to his having been a prominent & active Patriot, from the beginning of the war till his death, & of his being often out on military services. — The traditional evidence (allowed by the rules) and indeed the positive evidence of the most respectable & intelligent witnesses that any community could furnish, can leave no doubt as to this.
11 (Now)

Now all that the act of Congress requires is proof that he served "a term or terms in the whole, not less than six months." —
On the last tour in '79, in which he died, it is admitted he served a little upwards of four months — as to this, you expressed yourself fully satisfied, & admitted that all that was required further, was, to shew that he served "a term or terms, in the whole, amounting to the two months, or a little less than the two months which were wanting."
Then there was proved the expedition to Wilmington in the Spring of 1865 — that he actually served as a major in that expedition, more than these two months, cannot be, and I believe, was not questioned: but you thought it proper to deduct from the time thus proved, the period that intervened between the commencement of the service in March & the actual date of his Comf n  was 22 April  in June (I think) & the residue would only leave about three weeks of service rendered from the date of his offer to the time the Witness (Pettaway) left Wilmington. —
We thought this a hard decision, because the traditional evidence (allowed by the rules) shewed that he & the battalion he commanded at Wilmington served fully six months. —
2 nd ly because we thought, as he took the command of these two companies & marched them to Wilmington in March, that, although he did not actually get his Comf n till June, he ought to have been considered as serving either under an informal Comf n from the Com te of Safety (as history shews was then in practice) or under a promise or expectation of a Comf n afterwards issued. And this latter view would seem to be sanctioned by the letter of Gov r Cope of 2 Feb y 1863, to which you referred me. For that letter shews that an actual Comf n was not deemed necessary & that service rendered under "a promise of a commission", would be sufficient. —
The ground upon which you felt obliged (to /

to deduct this portion of the service of that tour, which was prior to the date of his commission, was the impression you were under that he was then acting under a civil appointment to collect & purchase arms. But I believe you were satisfied that this civil appointment was not given to him till after-words - indeed the date, 19 April is explicitly stated - So that there is nothing to shew that he commenced that service in any other way, or in any other quality, than as the military Commander of the two companies mentioned, as proved by the testimony; & this was in March 1775 - If this deduction is not made, the case is made out. -
But let this deduction be made - and then how does the claim stand? - A man proved by the general & traditional evidence to have been eminently active for his military services from the beginning of the war, till he died in service & to have been promoted to the rank of Colonel or Lieut. Col., served upwards of four months in -79 & died in service - also, at the beginning of the war, in the Spring of 1775, (even allowing the deduction for the period between the commencement of his service in March & the actual date of his commission) another period of say 3 weeks. - Thus leaving one month's service to be proved, either in that term, or some other term of service, prior to the one in -79 in which he died.
This is all. - and I think under such circumstances - with the proof before you, general & traditional & presumptive, your own mind would have felt as little doubt as to the fact, that you would have thought it not unreasonable to presume it, from the circumstantial evidence, & that positive evidence was not necessary.
(But)

But you thought it your duty to require the positive evidence, & we did not complain of it. —
And this is furnished now by Mrs Esther Johnson, who swears, that on the various terms of service in the which he acted, from the first, to the last, in which he died, she is confident he served, excluding the last, more than two months. — She lived all the time close to him & his family, & had abundant means of knowing — & her intelligence & respectability is most abundantly proved. — And now, why is this not sufficient? —
You think the rules require that the terms of service shall in all cases be clearly specified — & Mrs Johnson is unable to specify the particular terms & their dates & times & places of service, as to the these various occasions from the beginning of the war to his death in 1799.
Now certainly, there is nothing in the rules requiring a more particular specification than the proof of this case affords. — Four months of term in -99 is admitted to be sufficiently specific — so also whatever is allowed for the service at Wilmington is sufficiently specific — What then is wanting? — about a month's service — Can any thing be more reasonable (particularly with the other strong evidence in the case as to the the duration of that service) than to apply her evidence to that term served at Wilmington? — When this remark was made as to the want of specification in her evidence of the terms of the service, on the rules, I think it could not have have been recollected that all that was wanted was to prove a deficiency of about a month — That all else had been fully proved by evidence by evidence not only specific, but perfectly satisfactory. —
I cannot but hope you will reconsider the case, & deem the proof sufficient.
I am very respectfully
Yrs P H Key
for the Claimant.

apl 3. 1840
Stump
Hon J. L. Edwards Comm. of Pensions Washington
no 28
Key

Washington 2 d April 1840.
Sir,
I have rec d a letter from R. H. Mosby of N. Carolina in which he informs me that he has procured & sent on to your office additional testimony in the case of Mrs. Johnston. He refers me to Mr. Stanley of the A. Reps who is acquainted with Bentley one of the witnesses whose deposition he has sent on, & who will testify to his respectability -
As I am about to leave Washington to make a tour in the West on which I shall be absent for probably some months, I shall esteem it a favor if you will examine this case in the course of the week (or I expect to start in the ensuing one), and advise me of

The decision of the office, which I venture to hope may be favorable now that all difficulties seemed to be removed by the production of the additional testimony. Should the decision be as I hope it will I will thank you to send me the certificate before I start on my projected trip.
Very resp Yours
F.S. Key -
Hon J.L. Edwards Comr of Pensions.
Respectfully

N. 235 Remarks on Mem. Report of Comfs. of 27 June — 40. in the case of Mrs Esther Johnston. June 29 th 1840. Pension Office.
N 39

Washington 27 June — 40.
Sir,
We have just read the Report of the Compt. of this date, on the claim of Mrs. Esther Johnston to a pension for the services of her husband Col. Jonas Johnston. —
We are surprised to see such a statement of the evidence as this paper contains, such a reference to the former reports, made before the whole evidence was submitted, an apparent adherence to objections that we presumed were entirely removed, & such a view of the grounds, on which the appeal now before you, rests. — Justice to this claim will require that we should trouble you with more particular references to the proofs, & a more particular exposition of the errors & defects of this report than we could have supposed would have been necessary. —
We had hoped that it would have been frankly admitted to you that this officer appeared, from the most uncontroverted & respectable evidence, to have been a man "conspicuous" for his zeal & services from the beginning of the war to his death, & often out, on various tours of military duty, besides the one on which he died.
This cannot be denied or doubted, & we refer you to all the  the testimony particularly of Dr. Williams & Mrs. Catherine Johnston, whose intelligence & respectability are sustained by the highest evidence. We also expected that the commencement and termination of the last tour of duty on which he died in South Carolina in 1779, as shown by the clearest evidence, would have been plainly & fairly stated —
(that,

months. — By the Comf's own showing then, even now, two months' service is alone wanting — he is compelled to allow the 18 days proven by Pettaway, & this reduces the amount required to one month & 12 days — This is the utmost at which he can state the deficiency. — But this same Pettaway instead of proving 10 days service, proves a service beginning in the the beginning of March 1770 & ending (even if he is confined — to his personal knowledge of it, & the traditional evidence which he gives of a much longer period (though declared inadmissible by the rules, is disregarded) on the 10th May 1770, when he went away from Wilmington leaving Major Johnston then in command of a battalion. These two months & ten days are reduced to 18 days by the Comf? because Major Johnston's Comf. n is shown by the certificate of the Sec'y of State of N. Car., to have borne date on the 22 nd April 1770 — and therefore he only allows the proof to operate from that date to the 10 th May, when Pettaway left him in command. — Is this correct? —
The grounds upon which this disallowance of this portion of the time is justified, are to be found in the Comf's letters, to which he has referred, as sustaining his present views —
"My letters of 23 & 24 April last will show the grounds of it." — The letter of 23 rd April thus states it. — "It is true that a general statement of his service at Wilmington in 1770 has been put forth in the papers, without any specific narration of the tour: the names of the Captains, & probable amount of the force". — Every one of these particulars was stated in the affidavit but had been overlooked, & we are surprised that it should still be adhered to. The proof of Pettaway, Bryant & Bently shows a very "specific narration of the tour" & the companies & the names of the Captains composing the battalion commanded by Johnston are expressly given by Pettaway — see their depositions. —
The Comf adds — "Pettaway's first account of it is probably the correct one: that in the Spring of 1770 a detachment of (militia)

2. escorted fire arms & ca from Edgcomb to Wilmington."—
The account of Pittaway thus referred to is (see page 4.) that in "the month of February 1776 he was drafted & marched from Labborough with a detachment of militia men commanded by Col: Jonas Johnston for Wilmington with ammunition for that place". — — The Compt. takes no notice, & seems to have overlooked or disregarded, the further statement of Pittaway & of the other Witnesses, showing "the amount of the force", the two companies, & the names of the Captains. — There is nothing no foundation therefore for this objection.
He proceeds — "but Jonas Johnston was acting at that time under his civil appointment to procure arms." — This same mistake is made in the Compt's letter of 24 April, wherein he considers that this service of Johnston was under his civil employment of procuring arms, & on which ground he refuses to allow this service as a military service. In that letter he says of his march to Wilmington in March-76 — "He was employed in procuring fire-arms previous to that period ." —
Under the impression thus received, the Compt. rejected the claim for this service in a military capacity, as Major, from March or February 1776 — It was a plain mistake — Not strange that to have been made at the time — but greatly so to be now persisted in when shown, as it was to him, after those letters. — There are two certificates signed W. Hill from the Sec of State's Office N. Car. One of them (page 25) states, that Jonas Johnston was appointed to procure & purchase fire-arms, but gives no date to his appointment. From this the Compt. might choose to presume that it was prior to (his,

traditional evidence than this cannot well be concurred.
But there are two other Witnesses Bryan & Bentley who expressly prove this service to have been performed by Johnson for the whole six months. — and they are confirmed by a third, Henry Barnhill, (page 48) who swears that "he served on that tour from March to October & saw Johnson there, & served under him a part of the time".
But these two Witnesses are Discredited —
We request you Sir to read their Depositions & those of the other Witnesses, who not only sustain their credit fully, but most sufficiently explain the circumstances relied on by the Compt. as justifying him in entirely disregarding their proof — Bryan makes a mistake about the date of his birth the date of his birth in a record not before him — This is explained, & his age proved by four other respectable Witnesses, removing the difficulty first felt by the Compt. on the ground that it appeared from this mistaken date, that he could not have been old enough to have served in 1775. — But the Compt. says " They are Discredited by their own declarations on file ". — And this is made out thus — They do not in their own declarations for a pension, state a claim for this service in 1775 under Col. Johnson. — Surely their omitting to state this service, might even if there was no explanation given of it, have been charitably supposed (particularly in the case of men of fair character, as they are proved to be) to have arisen from their not knowing it was necessary, or that they could not prove it, or some other honest cause. — In Bryan's case the explanation is made, & is full & ought to be satisfactory — It is shown he did mention it at the time, by the gentleman who wrote his declaration, & that it was omitted because he believed nobody was then living, by whom he could prove it.
(We)

We will trouble you no further as to this objection, requesting you only to examine the evidence upon the subject.
If these Witnesses are believed, apart from all the other evidence, there can be no objection to the claim.
Confirmed as they are by all the other testimony, we feel confident they will be held entitled to credit.
One other brief view of this case, & we will close -
1 st We say 5 \times  \frac{1}{2} months service are proved in the tour of 1878, and the other half month more than covered, by the admitted 10 days proved by Ottoway - even if even if the last of Feb'y is taken for the date.
2 nd We say, if this is not so, then the admitted 4 months \times 10 days leave wanting but a month \times 12 days, and they are more than made up by (even if 2 months, instead of one month \times 12 days, are required) by allowing the time proved by Ottoway from the March to Wilmington in February or March 1878 to 10 May 1878 - which is now shown not to have been a civil service (as supposed by the Compt.) but a military service. -
3 rd We say the proof shows this service in 1878 was not only for the required two, but for six months.
Lastly we beg to call your attention to the 2 nd deposition of Mrs Catherine Johnston - & allowing the time of service wanting to be the full two months, we contend she clearly establishes it. -
Her testimony does not consist simply of an affirmative answer to the question put to her - She is proved to be a respectable intelligent woman - She is the widow widow of Col Johnston's Brother, always lived close to them, & cannot well be mistaken in what
(She)

She states — She says (page 39) and this is her answer to the question — "I cannot state at this time the precise period, or the length or termination of the various tours of duty performed by Col c Johnston before he left home for South Carolina in 1779. But I can say and testify to the fact that from the commencement of the war up to the period of the death of Col Johnston, he was repeatedly in service. and I do know most positively that he performed more than two months duty before he left home on the expedition to South Carolina in 1779, which terminated in his death. In fact from the commencement of the war up to his leaving home in 1779 he was from home and in service the latter half of the time". — We beg leave also to request your attention to the manner in which this meritorious officer is spoken of by Dr Williams, in pages 8 & 9. —
Under these circumstances we consider that if the full two months should be estimated as wanting to add to the service in which he lost his life, terminated in 1779, & if all the other evidence of his tour in 1778, was out of the case, Mrs Catherine Johnston has fully & sufficiently supplied it — So that in four different ways, & on four different grounds, we respectfully ask for the admission of a claim which appears to us (if highly meritorious services of a zealous & patriotic man can deserve the public bounty) eminently to be entitled to it. —
We are very resp ly Yr aff te Serv ts
R. H. Mosby P. Key
} for Mrs Johnston.

Mem. Dr. Williams's letter & Pettorway's 2 nd deposition are not copied among the papers we left with you - We beg to refer you to these, which are among the original papers. - -

Washington
18 Dec. 1840
Sir, —
We are glad to observe that you admit it in your letter of the 8 th that upon your re-examination of Barnhill's deposition, "it appears that he did not state that Moose's Creek battle was fought between March & October 1776, as you had supposed in your former letter. —
"But we are surprised you should now think that it is apparent from all his arguments on oath that he must have intended to assert "what comes to the same thing — and are still more surprised that you should consider the construction you first put on his deposition (now admitted to be wrong) which made him state a battle to be fought at a time contrary to the truth, & contrary to his own former statement of it, "the most charitable construction" you could put upon his language —
How you find out now, that "he intended to assert" what he did not assert (as is now admitted) & what is directly contrary to what he did assert, we are at a loss to imagine. Nor can we understand how it is "charitable," first to charge a witness

with asserting what he did not assert; and then, when you are convinced of that error, to charge him with having intended to assert it. —
Of course, by this way of proceeding, he is still discredited —
Another circumstance to his discredit is his naming the Colonel of the Regiment Lillibridge — You say it appears from Jones' history that there was no such officer — But it appears from the same history, that there was an officer of the name of Col d Lillington — and surely a charitable construction would have considered this a mistake not affecting the credit of the witness. —
The only remaining circumstance is, his not having related this service in his original declaration on his application. —
As he may have omitted it from want of recollection, or, (as was positively proved in the case of another witness) from his belief that being unable to prove it, he need not state it, this circumstance alone ought not to discredit him in what he now swears to positively; particularly when it is considered that he is proved to be a highly respectable man, worthy of

credit, & when moreover this same identical service is proved by Bentley, & Bryant & Anderson,  the unimpeached witness, and strongly confirmed by the facts stated by Pettibone, whom you acknowledge to be an accredited witness.
Allow us to call your attention to another mistake, as we think, in your examinations of the evidence in this unfortunate case. —
You think Bryant's mistake of the date of his birth in referring to his father's record, is a fatal objection to his evidence, unless the record can be produced. — This would seem to admit that if you could see, by the record, that he did mistake in this reference, it would be a sufficient excuse for a witness whose character is fully sustained by abundant evidence. — Now though we have been unable to procure the record, yet we have proved his age by three unimpeached witnesses to be as he states it — ought not this to be considered as satisfactory as the record would be? —
Allow us also to mention another.
One month & twelve days service are admitted by you to be all that is wanting to make up the required service of six months —

Mrs. Catharine Johnston (proud to be a highly respectable & intelligent witness) swears that Col. J. Johnston served, besides the tour in in 1779 in which he died, half the whole time of the war, & that she can positively state he served on these preceding tours of duty more than two months. — You object to this, that she answers affirmatively to such a question — now we beg you to look at the question and her answer — We contend that it is not a leading question — that it is fairly put & fairly answer- -ed — and ought to be taken as fully proving more than was required. It is true she does not specify the particular tours of duty — their objects, commencement and close. — But can this be held necessary in a case like this — to make up so small a deficiency in the service of a man distinguished for his zeal & activity, as proved by Dr. Williams and all the witnesses? — And particularly, when there are at least three witnesses proving a partic- -ular service at Wilmington, the force of whose evidence, you admit, entitle him to the 18 days service you have allowed as proved — & which

you limit to 18 days only because Pettaway then left him in command of a battalion at Wilmington, & could not prove, but by hearsay & circumstantial evidence, that it lasted longer.
We do hope you will consider this proof of Mrs. Johnston & your objection to it. — We confidently believe that this alone ought to be held sufficient to make up the deficiency. —
Again, three or four witnesses prove a military service in the early part of -76 in which J. Johnston commanded a battalion which marched in Feby. or March to Wil- -mington —
Yet this has been decided not to have been a military service, but an agency to purchase arms, because he was appointed such an agent on 19 Apr. - 76, & because it appears that he was paid some small sum for arms in the March or February preceding. That service, if allowed from its commencement to the 22 d April 1775, when he received his commission, would be more than sufficient — That the service was render-

6. - ed before he got his commission is not a sufficient objection, as is settled by the opinion of the attorney general, stated by Genl. Cato when Secy. of war on 15- Jan. 1833. (Page 92 of Pension law) -
Now the only question then is - Was this service a military service, or an agency in purchasing arms? -
And this is proved by the witnesses, who positively so state it, I name the Captains Commanding the two companies who formed the battalion under Jonas Johnston - Their testimony to our surprise has been considered insufficient -
But now you have undoubted record evidence that this march of these men to Wilmington was a military service. The book obtained from Raleigh shews a company of officers & privates serving forty two days preceding the 22 d of April -
Allow this time, & the period wanted is proved. - Surely it cannot be questioned that the entries in this book show a military service performed by these men - that the

detachment did march to Wilmington has never been disputed by you, & that Col. Johnston then as Major commanded it, is positively proved by three witnesses —
In your letter to Mr. Stanley of April 23 d 1840, you admit the correctness of Pettaway's statement as to the marching of this detach- ment, but you call it an escort of militia & say that Jonas Johnston was then acting under his civil appointment to procure arms. —
Your only difficulty has been that it was not a military service, but merely the transporta- -tion of arms that Johnston had been author- -ized to purchase. But this cannot be pre- -tended now, when this act book shews both officers & men of this detachment of militia, were settled with, as for a military service.
You admit in your last letter that Barnhill served for 42 days ending 26 th April 1776 under Capt. Armstrong — This you say is established by the documents before you — you have never yet questioned the fact of Jonas Johnston's marching to Wilmington with that same detach- -ment. Three witnesses prove it, besides Pettaway whose statement you admit to be "probably cor- -rect" in your letter of 23 d April last. If

Then you admit, as you now do, that Barnhill's service in this detachment was a military service, how can you any longer question that of Jonas Johnston?—
We hope therefore that these 242 days service will be considered as sufficiently proved, to make up the time wanted to complete the six months.—
There is however another ground on which alone, independent of every other, the month and 12 days wanting are made up.
In your estimation of the service of Col. Johnston on the tour of duty in 1789, in which he died, you make the expiration of the term of service the period at which it ceased, instead of continuing it down to his death; which you admit is shewn to have been on 29 th July 1779.—
It seems the term for this tour of duty expired when Col. Johnston was in S. Carolina, and that on his journey home, after the expiration of the term, he was taken sick, and died on 29 July.—
We say that under these circumstances his service continued to his death — and if

That period is fixed for the termination of his service, we can demonstrate that the full period of six months service is proved. —
The question therefore is presented for your consideration whether, in the construction of those pension laws, if an officer or soldier is discharged, (the term of service having expired) in a distant state, he is not to be considered as in service during his journey home, & if in that journey he gets sick and dies, whether he is not to be accounted as in service to the period of his death. —
We are sure you will admit that it ought to be so. Nothing can be more obviously just. —
Is there any thing in the law to prevent this just and reasonable construction?
These acts require service to be proved. Any officer & c "who shall have served" — But they do not define what is service — Nor what shall be its commencement or termination — They no where say that a soldier or officer's service shall be held to terminate when the term assigned for the term of duty, or the period of enlistment expires, and the man

is discharged at a distance from his residence. — The Comp t is to determine in every case, according to the circumstances, when the service expires, & there is nothing to prevent his allowing the man thus discharged, time to journey to his home.
If it is just therefore (as it must be admitted to be) there is nothing in the law to forbid justice from being done. —
But still further — Congress has plainly seen that they consider it right to do this justice, in estimating the services of officers and soldiers situated in similar circumstances —
In the joint resolution of 14 July 1832, it is declared "that in the execution of the act of 7 th June 1832 the time of imprisonment, as a Prisoner of war, shall be taken and computed as a part of the period of service."
Upon the same principle, the time of a journey, or of sickness, should be computed — This resolution shews that congress did not think the service should be computed simply by the duration of the term of enlistment, but if the officer or soldier is kept or detained longer than that term, the service is to be commensu-

11. - rate with the detention. This detention is as obvious and unavoidable in a case of journey or sickness, as of imprisonment, and as much entitled to be remunerated. -
But the act of Congress, 16 th April 1816 does define what is military service, & shows that Congress considers a soldier on his journey home from the place of his discharge, as being in military service & provides for him accordingly. -
The act is entitled "An act making further provision for military services during the late war." And the first section provides for the case of any officer or soldier enlisted for 1 year or 18 months, who shall have died, while in service, or in returning to his place of residence." -
Undoubtedly this would cover a case where the year or 18 months expired, & the man was discharged & died on his journey home. -
Congress call it, by the title of the act, and provide for it, as a military service. -
We therefore claim that this construction shall be given to the law & that the termination of Col. Johnston's service shall be considered the 29 th July, the admitted day of his death on his journey home. -
We are resp ly  R. H. Mosby Yrs  H. King

July 17 1843
N. C. Canoe at 1836
Esther Johnson
No 14
Hon J. S. Edwards Comm. Pension, Washington City D.C.

Charlestown N.H. July 13. 1843
Sir
Enclosed you will find some additional proof in the case of the claim of Mrs. Estlin Johnson due.
I hope upon the receipt of this paper, that her claim may be allowed for the benefit of the lab- ored Jenny Johnson. Please report to me and send me the certificate.
I have the honor to be
Very Respectfully
H. H. Nylund
Hon. J. L. Edwards Comm. Pen.

Case of Mrs. Esther Johnson, pre- sented by Mrs. D. H. Hawkins for a full pension.
A 35
5 Feb 1847
Pension Bureau

N. L. Records -
No 41
[Faint, mirrored cursive handwriting, likely bleed-through from the reverse side of the page]
[Large, faint cursive signature or initials, likely bleed-through from the reverse side of the page]

Raleigh N.C.
Compt office
I William H Collins Comptroller of Public Accounts in and for the State of North Carolina do hereby certify that it appears of Record in my office that a Special Certificate appears to have been issued in the name of Esther Johnson for Twenty Two pounds Eight Shillings (£22.8) in the settlement of the Army Accounts, which issue of Certificate may be found in Book No 2 Letter H page 55. given under my hand and seal this 3 day of May A.D. 1845
Wm H Collins Compt

Barnhill
Nov 20
Nov 26. 1840
J. S. Key, Esq.

State of North Carolina
Witt County
} The amended affidavit of Henry Barnhill take to explain and prove more fully his knowledge of the Revolutionary services of Col: Jonas Johnston. This affiant being first duly sworn according to Law, Testafies and says. That as stated in his former affidavit he marched from Greenville to Wilmington and served in and near that place for Six months viz. from about the 15th of March 1776 to the first of October of the same year. On our reaching Wilmington we were mustered into a Regiment Commaned by Col: Lillington, and Jonas Johnston was Major: We were first stationed in Wilmington and in the month of May we were ordered and marched for Smithville the mouth of the Cape Fear where the enemy had landed Majr Jonas Johnston commanded the detachment, and I served under him at Smithville and between that place & Wilmington all the month of May & June 1776. certainly two months. I was as before stated in the same Regiment with him for the Six months I served at Wilmington and near it and I know he served as long as I did viz. Six months. In my former affidavit I have said I served a part of the time under Majr Johnston; in saying so I had reference to the two months service performed under his immediate command. Capt: James Armstrong commanded the company to which I was attached.
Given under my hand this 16th day of Novr: 1840
Henry Barnhill

State of North Carolina
Pitt County
This day personally appeared before me a Justice of the Peace for the County of Pitt, Mr Henry Burnhill and subscribed and swore to the foregoing affidavit in due form of law. I also certify that Mr Burnhill is one of the oldest and most respectable citizens of this county, and due faith and credit is due to his testimony
Given under my hand & seal this 16th day of November 1840.
Henry A. H. Hopkins Jr
State of North Carolina
Pitt County
I Archibald Parker Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County aforesaid do hereby certify that the signature of Henry A. Hopkins that appears to the foregoing affidavit is genuine & that he is an acting Justice of the Peace of said County & that due faith and credit ought to be given to his official acts
Given under my hand & Seal of the said Court at office in Greenville the 16th day of November AD 1840
Archd Parker Clerk

12 th May 1843
No 6
Col H. Johnson
Hon J. L. Edwards Census of Pension

May 12 1847
Sir
I beg leave to submit the following papers numbered from No. 1 to No. 5. inclusive. to be used as evidence in support of the claim of Estlin Johnson, under of John Johnson deceased. The papers have been referred to Congress. I will thank you to call upon Mr Blake of the House of Reps. for such papers as may be on file in his Office in relation to this claim.
I have the honor to be Very Respectfully H. H. Crafts
Hon J. L. Edwards Committee of Pensions

Sylvester — No 32

Apr 12 '45
Sir;
In the case of Esther Johnson, v. N.C. widow of Jonas Johnson, a Col on the N.C. Militia, who was allowed 6m d or 10 d a year since, I have to state, that it now appears that on the 19 th of April 1776. Jonas Johnson of Edgecombe was appointed to receive and procure arms &c. See Forces Am. Archives Vol 5. p 1329. And that on the 22 nd April 1776. Jonas Johnson was appointed first Major for Edgecombe Co. See page 1333. He continued in service as will appear from his papers from that time to Aug 1779 when he died at St. L. or his Mark to the South. Will you please give this case your attention.
Yours Respectfully &c
H. H. Sykes
Col Edm d

Referred to the Pension bureau for a report.
The ground of the appeal is that Mr. Pookin decided a point on which the bureau asked
his advice * That the policy did not affect W. L. Mayhew
Richard H. Clements

In the case of Mrs Esther Johnson for a Pension.
The Hon ble Mr May, secretary of war, is most respectfully asked to reconsider his former opinion, and to grant a rehearing of this case. He has decided that this case was heretofore submitted to, and fully considered by two of his predecessors, The Hon ble Messrs Poenitzel and Porter. When the case was carried before Mr Poenitzel, it was before any record evidence or documentary proofs were filed in the case. That evidence was filed in August 1843, and from its importance, according to the Rules of the Pension office it entitled the case to a rehearing from the decision of Mr Poenitzel.
On the 16 th of August 1843 the Commissioner made a statement to Mr Secretary Porter of some of the merits of the application of Mrs Esther Johnson, and asked him, upon that statement , if he might allow her a Minimum Pension for 6 months - which Mr Porter consented he might do. In this application and decision, there was no full investigation. It was only intended to decide the point of allowing a 6 months Pension upon the facts submitted . Then if Mr Secretary Porters' decision was not upon full investigation, and does not thereby conclude the Hon ble Mr May as regards a rehearing of the case, I will respectfully ask him to be allowed to make to him, the following argument for the allowance of a full Pension to Mrs Esther Johnson.
If he goes into the examination of the whole case, he will see by the evidence of the witnesses in the case To wit: Thomas Bently, Capt n Micajah Pittaway, John Bryan, Henry Barmhill, D r Robert Williams and Mrs Catherine

Johnson, that Major Jonas Johnson served 6 months in a Tour to Wilmington and that region of country from April to October 1776 - and that he served 6 months in a Tour to S o Carolina ending on the 27 th of July 1779 when he died on his way home.
The Record or documentary proof furnished by William F. Collins Comptroller of N o Carolina shows that in the settlement of the Army accounts at Kinston £376.15.5 was paid November 1776 Jonas Johnson and Henry Harn for their services, and purchasing guns in Edgecombe County.
The Comptroller further certifies, that in the settlement of the Army accounts of the Militia of N o Carolina the sum of £126.9.7 was paid Col. Jonas Johnson for the services of himself and others in November 1777.
He also certifies that in the settlement of the Army accounts of the Militia of S o Carolina Col. Jonas Johnson was paid the sum of $1126.37 February 3 rd 1779. and in February 1779 sundries $16.45. In March $2111.17. In April $1523.22. In July $524, all same year.
The Comptroller further certifies that on the 20 th of April 1778 the sum of £126.9.7 was paid Col. Jonas Johnson for himself and sundry officers .
He also certifies that in December 1778 the sum of £400 was paid Col. Jonas Johnson for expenses in marching Troops to the General rendezvous. This fact proves that Col. Jonas Johnson must have been in service at this time. He also certifies that in the month of

March 1779 the sum of £ 4200 was paid Col. Jonas Johnson for pay and bounty of drafts &c. And that the sum of £ 400 was allowed Col. Jonas Johnson to defray expenses of Troops.
The Comptroller further certifies that the sum of £ 126. 9. 10 was allowed Col. Jonas Johnson by the Council of Safety, as will appear in Book of allowances of Claims from April 1776 to May 1779.
To support my foregoing statements, I refer the Hon ble Secretary of War to the Depositions filed in the case, all of which are proven to have been made by honest men and of good credibility. — To two certificates from the Comptroller of S th Carolina, showing the payments of the foregoing sums of money to Col. Jonas Johnson on Military account and for Military services. Especially refer the Hon ble Secretary to the letter of D. G. W. Crump to Mr. D. Hawkins which accompanies this communication, designating the sum of £ 126. 9. 7 paid to Col. Jonas Johnson for the services of himself and others , dated November 1777, and which sum or payment was deemed upon the form of his Report, sufficient by the Secretary to make the Minimum Pension which was allowed Mr. Johnson, and without Secretary Pains it, and the Commissioner theretofore, had refused to allow it. The validity placed upon this payment by the Secretary at War at that time, I hope will be extended to all other similar payments stated in the Comptrollers certificates. It is obvious that the payment made to Col. Jonas Johnson on the 20 th of April 1778 of £ 126. 9. 7 for himself and sundry officers should receive a construction as favourable

as that given by Secretary Porter to the payment made in November 1777 for the like sum, and for a like purpose. It is also equally clear that similar form , in the way of construction should be given to the item of payment of £126.9.10 which was allowed Col. Jonas Johnson by the Council of Safety as will appear in Book of allowence of claims from April 1776 to May 1779. This last payment covers the whole ground to form a full Pension. And if the same construction or validity be fixed upon it, which the precedent established by Mr Secretary Porter, fixes upon the sum of £126.9.7 paid in November 1777 and which was attached to that sum - And if the other payments to be appreciated and received in a similar light, I hope the Hon ble Secretary at War will have no hesitation in allowing a full Pension in the case of Mr S on Jonas Johnson.
The certificates of William F. Collins Comptroller of N o Carolina refer to, certify and establish, that all these foregoing sums of money were paid to Col. Jonas Johnson on Military account, and settlement, and for Military services, in the Revolutionary War.
All of which is most respectfully submitted by
Geo. D. Hawkins
Chairman of the Claims.
Referred to the Pension Bureau for a report.
The ground of the appeal is that Mr. Park decided a point on which the Bureau asked his opinion.
*That the party did not object
W. L. Marshall

No of Reps
20. Dec 47
In Allow me to call your attention to the letter herewith enclosed & request of your early answer to the question therein contained - Return to me Col. Bell's
letter -
MSK
J. L. Edwards
Geo. Henson
Pension Office
D. C.

10 Pension Office, Com t . of Pensions.
Report in the case of Mrs. Esther Johnson.
Feby. 10. 1847.

1 Pension Office, February 10. 1847.
Sir,
In the case of Esther Johnson, deceased, which is again brought to your notice by Col. Hawkins, I have the honor to make the following report.
In January 1846, Col. Hawkins made an appeal to you in this case for an increase, which called forth my report of 13. April 1846. That report so conclusively answers every ground for increase for service to Wilmington, in 1776, and to South Carolina, in 1779, that I beg leave to adopt it as a full reply to Col. Hawkins' remarks and references in relation to the justice and liberality of the computation of those towns in the pension allowed her.
Your endorsement upon

That report, shews, that you considered the whole evidence, upon which the increase was asked, as too indefinite to establish further service than had been allowed, even if you had not deemed the decision of your predecessor upon the proofs a bar to re-opening the case.
Col. Hawkins appealed from your decision to the President, and by an endorsement on the appeal it appears to have been referred to the Attorney General, whose report is not on the files of this Office.
At a subsequent time, the Chief Clerk, for the satisfaction of Col. Hawkins, thoroughly reviewed all the papers and addressed to him the letter of the 30. November last, which he has submitted to you.
The appeal now made is founded upon the same grounds and sustained by the same proofs

and references. It is a claim for 2 years service from Spring of 1776, to July 1779, of a N. Carolina Militia Officer.
The papers do not shew, that he was in actual command of an embodied corps, except in the tour to Wilmington, in 1776, and to South Carolina, in 1779. The length of these tours was authoritatively decided by Mr. Poinsett, upon appeal, to be 4 months and 18 days. After that decision, the Comptroller of N. Carolina, certified among other items of money received by her husband, the sum of $126. 9. 7- for himself , and sundry Officers. This evidence, while it might shew that a portion of that payment was for military service, afforded no data whatever to determine its length, or any descriptive feature of it, as required by the rules for adjusting a pro-rata pension.

It was submitted to Mr. Porter, Secretary of War; and my report of August 16. 1843, and his endorsement thereon, will explain the liberal estimate made of that proof in an allowance for six weeks service in order to bring her case within the minimum of the Act.
The Comptroller's Books, embrace the payments on Army accounts; and the only payment to her husband which appears to have been made for his pay, was the item above referred to, upon which Mr. Porter allowed the claim.
Col. Hawkins is of opinion that the Comptroller's certificates show that he received two sums of $126.9.7- for himself and other Officers , which, if well founded, would afford a very plausible ground of increase, upon the

5 principles assumed by Mr. Secretary Porter, when her claim was adjusted. But there is nothing but the dates given to the entries in different Books, which would warrant the ground that the identical sum of $126. 9. 7- was twice paid her husband, for himself and other Officers.
The allowance of $127. 9. 10- by the Committee of Safety, has no date, and is deemed the authority under which the subsequent payment (which appears to be entered on different books at different dates) of $126. 9. 7- was made.
It may be remarked, that if Col. Johnson with his appropriate command did take the field between 1776, and 1779, it must be susceptible of like proof with that which established the tours in 1776 and 1779. But there is no proof, direct or traditional,

To shew, when he was called out, where he served, the object and occasion of the tour, its length, &c.
The specification, required alike by the rules, and by the pro-rata computation of the pension, was required, as you will have seen, in the admission of the claim; and the present appeal is to extend that principle for an allowance of 18 months service of a Militia Field Officer upon indefinite items in the Army accounts, upon which a liberal estimate was made when six weeks were allowed by Mr. Secretary Porter.
I have the honor to be, Sir, Very Respectfully, Your ob t . Servant.
Hon. W. L. Marcy, Secretary of War.
J. L. Edwards

No 1.
Pension Office
April 13. 1846,
Comm. of Pensions,
Report in the case of Esther Johnson, deceased,
This case was heretofore submitted to, and fully considered by, two of my predecessors; the Hon Stephen Poinsett and Porter. The latter, on additional proof, de- cided to allow for only six months service. The additional evidence now submitted does not vary the aspect of the case, nor add to its strength, being only of the same indefinite charac- ter, as to the fact of further service, or the character thereof
as

Pension Office, April 13, 1846.
Sir,
I have the honor to return you Mr. Hawkins' letter of appeal in the case of Esther Johnson, dec d . and to submit the following report:
It should be remarked that this is a claim asserted subsequently to the death of the real beneficiary of the law, and is to enure, if allowed, to the benefit of those who have no claim whatever in their own right to the benefit of the public bounty. They are, therefore, not entitled to that liberality which would strain the proofs and the rules in behalf of the venerable objects of the public bounty. This claim has been examined, canvassed and re-c canvassed for some years, as well with agents in this city and in North Carolina, as with members of Congress, both in ordinary correspondence and in appeals to your predecessors.
My letter of 16 th August, 1843, will shew you that it was finally admitted, for 6 months service, by the Secretary of War, by waiving the

rules indispensably requiring the specification of each term of service, and according a very liberal estimate of the service upon the proofs filed. This letter will also shew you that Mr. Hawkins is wholly mistaken when he asserts that the pension allowed was for six months service in 1779, in an expedition to South Carolina, which, by law, was limited to 3 months after passing the line.
The said testimony, respecting Col. Johnson's service at Wilmington, to which Mr. Hawkins now refers, was discredited at the time it was offered, as he has been shewn, and I did not anticipate any further reference to it. The allowance in this case for that service has been the subject of a great deal of correspondence, and the estimate of its duration, made in this office upon solemn appeal to Mr. Poinsett, confirmed.
It is a sufficient answer to Mr. Hawkins' remarks upon the sums received by Col. Johnson to refer to Col. Johnson's letter to the Governor to shew that it was not for his pay, except in one instance, and Mr. Porter deemed that payment for himself and other officers, evidence of sufficient service to

make out the minimum of six months.
I have the honor to be,
Very Respectfully, Sir,
Your Ott. Servt.
J. L. Edwards
Papers, numbered from 1 to 8, are herewith enclosed.
Hon. W. L. Marcy,
Secretary of War.

No 1.
Pension Office
April 13. 1846,
Comm. of Pensions,
Report in the case of Esther Johnson, deceased,
This case was heretofore submitted to, and fully considered by, two of my predecessors; the Hon. Stephen Poinsett and Porter. The latter, on additional proof, decided to allow for only six months service. The additional evidence now submitted does not vary the aspect of the case, nor add to its strength, being only of the same indefinite character, as to the fact of further service, or the character thereof as
that upon which Mr Porter decided. Under the regulation of this Department in regard to the non-revision of former decisions, which will be explained to the applicants, Mr Porter's decision cannot be disturbed.
War Dept., { Geo. L. Marcy. April 14/46 } Secy of War

No 6 No 9
Memorandum in the case of Esther Johnston, pre- sented by Mr Key.
Papers to be returned to the Pension Office.
Substance adopted & allusion of the Com. of Pen. - sustained -

Memorandum in the case of Esther Johnston, widow of Col. Jonas Johnston.
In this case some of the witnesses swear that Johnston entered the service early in 1776; but the fact as it appears of record is that he was commissioned on the 22 d of April of that year. His service did not commence before that time. Pettaway, the only witness who swears positively as to his service in that year, left Col. Johnston's command on the 10 th of May. He of course could have had no personal knowledge of his service after that period. All therefore that is clearly proved by record evidence and an eye witness is only 18 days of that year. In 1779 he served a tour amounting to not more than four months. The men were called out in March most probably. One of the witnesses swears that it was in March. Others assert that it was earlier; but none are positive. They crossed the line into S. Carolina on the 10 th of April and their time expired on the 12 th of July following, as appears from a letter written by Col. Johnston himself. He served only 4 months and 18 days, and the Act provides for none whose husbands served less than 6 months.

An Appeal to the President of the United States.
From The decision of the Secy of War.
In the case of the distribution of Mrs Esther Johnson widow of Col. Jonas Johnson
For A pension
The Commissioners of Pensions, - will send to me the papers - referred to - in this petition, - & will return - the petition to me: June 25 th 1846.
Simz V. Paine " " " "
Referred to the att d General, who will report to me in this case. June 26 th 1846. J. K. P. -

To His Excellency James K. Polk
President of the United States.
M rs Esther Johnson widow of Col. Jonas Johnson of the Revolutionary Army, applied to the Commissioner of Pensions for a Pension under the Pension Laws of the U. States, and produced her Proofs both parole, and Record, which she deemed full, and ample, to allow her a full Pension for two years service of her deceased Husband, who died in the service. The commissioner only allowed her, for six months service. Additional evidence was afterwards filed, and application again made to be allowed a full Pension according to Law. This the commissioner refused. Whereupon an appeal was taken from his decision to the Secy. of War; who it seems from the tenor of his decision, having full confidence in the opinion of the Commissioner, declined fully to examine the case, and confirmed the Decision of the Commissioner.
M rs Johnson after many refusals of her just rights, through a long protracted period of her life, has recently died, and her rights, by the opinion by the opinion of the Atty. Genl. of the U. States, given in such cases, having vested, relating to her representations and distributions, who considering great injustice to have been done their ancestor M rs Johnson, and also to themselves, by the aforesaid Decisions — They therefore most respectfully pray an appeal from the decision of the Secy. of War, to the President of the U. States; and they further pray your Excellency, to have their case referred to, and examined, by the Atty. Genl. of the U. States, for his decision

and report, whether the Pension Laws have been duly ad- -ministered, in this case; and they ask of your Excellency to order such other and further relief in the premises, as the justice and merits of the case may demand.
All of which is most respectfully submitted by,
Jn. D. Hawkins
in behalf of the Distributors.
of Mrs. Esther Johnson widow of Col. Jonas Johnson.

Letter of Dr. G. W. Crump

Pension Office, November 30, 1845.
Sir,
My absence to attend a court in New England, and consequent accumulation of business since, had put it out of my power to re-examine the case of Esther Johnson, dec d .
I beg leave to set you right in relation to the circumstances which induced me to re-examine the case. In your written and oral communications, you assumed that the Comptroller's certificate shewed that £126. 9. 7 was allowed to Col. Johnson for services between 1775 and 1779. In reply, (without examining the certificate,) I stated that if that amount was paid him for his service it would be ground for increase equal to the half-pay, and at your request "figured it out." Upon taking up the several certificates of the Comptroller, and more particularly my report to the Secretary on the 15 th August, 1843, I find this phraseology used: "The name of Col. Jones John=

son is exhibited as having received £126. 9. 7 for the services of himself and others which is dated November, 1917,"—and that the receipt of that sum for himself and others was deemed, upon the force of my report, sufficient by the Secretary to make the allowance of the minimum pension. Although I could scarcely believe that there was any material paper filed, which had not been closely scrutinized and liberally appreciated in the adjustment of her pension, I was very willing to re-examine the whole case upon your suggestion that an item of £126. 9. 7 was shown to have been paid between 1916 and 1919 for his services. The above quotation and copy of my report to Mr. Porter will show that you are mistaken and that the sum referred to embraced the pay of others, (how many or how much is unknown,) was specially decided upon by the Secretary. With every disposition to serve you, I have to regret that we should differ so widely upon a case which has received so repeatedly the most thorough examination.
That payment, which you assumed to be for

her husband's services for a time when no allowance had been made her, was, as you will recollect the particular point which I promised to examine, and the foregoing will show you that that payment has been duly weighed by the Head of the Department and computed and settled by him in the pension he accorded her.
I have the honor to be, Very Respectfully, Your O ff . Servt.
G. M. (rump)
Col. John H. Hawkins, Henderson Depot, Granville, N.C.

Certificate of W. F. Collins Compt. No 1.
May 3 rd 1845.

Raleigh N.C.
Compt Officer
I William T. Collins Comptroller of Public accounts do hereby certify in and for the State of North Carolina do hereby certify that it appears in a Book of settlements of the Army accounts at Kinston that the name of Jonas Johnson appears to be associated with the name of Henry Horn as having rec d for "his services" , and purchasing Guns in Edgecombe County, this State, the sum of three hundred and seventy six pounds fifteen shillings and six pence (£376.15.5) dated November 1776 see Book No 1 letter A page 26. I further certify that it appears of Record in Book A No 2. page 15 that the name of Col. Jonas Johnson is there exhibited as having rec d the sum of one hundred and twenty six pounds nine shillings seven pence (£126.9.7) for the services of himself & others which payment is dated November 1777. Given under my hand & seal this 3 rd day of May 1845.
Wm T Collins

Raleigh 8 th July 1851
My Dear Sir,
Enclosed you will receive the form of attorney of Hon Richard Wines one of the heirs of Jethro Estlin Johnson widow of Col John Johnson. He is unable to apply for the increase supposed to be due in her pension claim under act of 4 th July 1836.
I am of opinion there is about $1000 due in that case for increase which you will please investigate as early as convenient.
You said nothing of the rights of Col John D Hawkins' estate for increase in Col Philander Hawkins' claim? —
Yours very truly Geo. D. Smith
H. H. S. S. S. Washington City

No. 2
Deposition of M. Pittaway
No 13
Hon. Ed. Stanley H.R.

State of North Carolina } The affidavit of Captm: Micajah Pettway Edgecombe County } taken to prove more fully his knowledge of the service and death of Col Jonas Johnston in the War of the Rev- olution. This affiant being first duly sworn testifies and says. Immediately after the Battle of Moore's Creek in the latter end of the month of February 1776 a draft was made of two Companies of men from Edgecombe County to march to Wilmington then threaten- ed by the enemy. The Company in which I was drafted was com- manded by Captm Henry Irvin Pool, and the other by Captm Hall. The two Companies comprised from 180 to 200 men. We marched under the command of Majr Jonas Johnston and carried with us several wagons of ammunition; on our arrival at Wilmington the men under the command of Majr Johnston together with those from other counties were formed into a Regiment and Col Lillington was made Colonel and Majr Johnston acted as major. We were from the 1st of March to the 1st of April stationed in Wilmington and from that time to the 1st or 10th of May stationed at a camp below Wilmington on the Cape Fear River and at that time I enlisted under Captm Brinkley of the 3d Regt: and left Majr Johnston at the camp and in a few days after marched to South Carolina first to Georgetown then to Charleston and then to Savannah. and remained until the month of October when we were ordered to return and join Genl Washington to the North. We marched back through South & North Carolina and on reaching Tarborough, we halted for a few days; to recover from the the fatigue of the journey and enlist men. I will rec- lect that Col Johnston had a parade of his Regiment to beat up for recruits and to all his appeals to the men to enlist I know he was constantly answered that they had but a few days re-
Turn

from serving under him six months at Wilmington and could not be expected to leave home again immediately. The few who did enlist I often heard speak of the service at Wilmington under Majr: afterwards Col Johnston. and that I had returned home almost as soon as they did. From these facts I am as well convinced of Col Johnston's serving in and near Wilmington for six months as I can be of any fact whatever. That I served under him for two months before my enlistment I can positively affirm as true - I cannot name the day we left Tarborough but I will know it was immediately after the Battle of Moore's Creek for we met on the way the prisoners taken in that Battle on their way to Halifax. From that time to the first of May I was under the command of Majr: Johnston in and near Wilmington. This affiant served in the army under the command of Genl Washington up to the very last of the month of October 1778 when he was discharged at a place called The Orchard about 10 miles from West Point in the State of Connecticut. He then returned home and recollects will as stated in his former affidavit the service and death of Col Johnston in South Carolina.
Given under my hand this 4 th day of March 1820.
Micajah Prather

State of North Carolina
Edgecombe County
This day personally appeared before me a Justice of the Peace for the County above written Captain: Mccaiah Pettaway and subscribed & swore to the foregoing affidavit in due form of Law. I also certify that Captain Pettaway is one of the oldest and most respectable citizens in Edgecombe County and his testimony is entitled to full credit.
Given under my hand & seal this 4th day of March 1840.
Wm F Hughes (JB)
State of N. Carolina
Edgecombe County
I, Joseph Bell Clark of the Court, for the County aforesaid do hereby certify that Mr. F. Hughes is an acting Justice of the Peace for the County of Edgecombe & full faith and credit should be paid to his official acts as such
It also certify that his signature appended to the foregoing affidavit is genuine
In testimony whereof, I hereunto have set my hand, & affixed my seal of office as Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County aforesaid this 4th day of March 1840.
J. B. Clark C.C.

Catharine Johnson
No 26

State of North Carolina } Edgecombe County }
This affiant testifies and says that she resided near Col Jonas Johnson at the commencement of the revolution and up to the period of his death in 1779, and since that time within three quarters of a mile of his widow up to the present moment. This affiant has been requested to answer the following inquiry.
You state in your former deposition that Col Jonas Johnson was frequently absent from home, as an officer, with the militia on various tours of duty previous to his last service in 1779 in which he died. Question - Can you say whether or not the whole time of such services or three preceding tours of duty before that on which he died, was equal to, or exceeded the space of two months in all?
Answer. I cannot at this time state the precise period, or the length or termination of the various tours of duty performed by Col Johnson before he left home for South Carolina in 1779. But I can say and testify to the fact that from the commencement of the war up to the period of the death of Colonel Johnson, he was repeatedly in service, and I do know most positively that he performed more than two months duty before he left home on the expedition to South Carolina in 1779 which terminated in his death. In fact from the commencement of the war up to his leaving home in 1779, he was from home and in service the better

half of his time -
Catharine Johnston
State of North Carolina Edgecombe County }
Personally appeared before me Ino F Hughes one of the acting Justices of the Peace for the aforesaid County Mrs Catharine Johnson of the County and State aforesaid, who after being duly sworn according to law, testifies that the facts set forth in the above deposition are true and correct to the best of her knowledge and belief
Given under my hand this 2 nd day of May AD 1840
Ino F Hughes (J.P.)
State of North Carolina Edgecombe County }
I have Norfleet Clerk & Master of the Superior Court of Equity for the County aforesaid do hereby certify that John F Hughes is a magis- trate as above and that the foregoing signa- ture purporting to be his is genuine - I further certify that Mrs Catharine Johnston whose name is subscribed above is a lady of the highest repute and entitled to full credit.
In testimony whereof I have here- unto affixed my seal of office & subscribed my name at Tarborough this day

4 th day of May in the year 1840
J. Worflut Clerk Master in Equity

No 12. 4827 Esther Johnston Widow of James N 6 Act 4 July 1835
paper N 1
adm d 6 mo Co o 150 $
from 4 March 31 to 19 day of July 41 to In- -dian Wines & Mary Ruffin only surviving Children of Esther Johnston
J. G. Mosby Richmond Va

State of North Carolina } The affidavit of Micah Edgecombe County } Pethaway a citizen of the county where written and a pensioner of the United States now in the Seventy ninth year of his age. This affiant being first duly sworn according to Law Testifies and says that he was born and raised in the County of Edgecombe and in the year Seventeen Hun- dred and Seventy six in the month of February he was drap- ted and marched from Tarboro with a detachment of men commanded by Col Jonas Johnston for Wilmington with ammunition for that place - and on reaching it I enlisted under Capt: Brinkley of the 2 Regiment and shortly after viz in April of that year marched for Charleston South Carolina then threatened by the enemy. Col Johnston was then acting as a Majr: and remained stationed between Wilmington and Smithville the mouth of the Cape Fear River and in the fall of Seventeen Hundred and Seventy six I was marched through North Carolina on my way to the north and at that time Col Johnston had returned to Edgecombe County and was made Colonel of the County. This affiant was in the army under Genl Washington until the fall of Seventeen Hundred & Seventy Eight and was discharged in the month of October. on his return home he still found Col Johnston actively employed in suppressing the Tories; and in the month of February Seventeen Hundred and Seventy nine

Col Johnston marched with his Regiment to South Carolina and served up to the period of his death which took place in July on Drowning Creek at the House of Mr Ames near the North & South Carolina line. In conclusion he can testify that Col Johnston served in the expedition to Wilmington six months and from February Seventeen Hundred and Twenty nine up to his death in July of that year in South Carolina. This affiant also knows that Col Johnston was not only married but at the time of his death he left five children whom this affiant has lived near from that time to the present, and in conclusion he testifies that Mrs Esther Johnston now applying for a Pension was his lawful wife, and to his knowledge has never married.
Micajah Pettaway
State of North Carolina } This day personally appeared Edgecombe County } before me a Justice of the Peace for the County above written Mr Micajah Pettaway of the said County and subscribed and sworn to the foregoing affidavit in due form of Law. I also certify that Mr Pettaway is a very old and most respectable citizen of this County universally respected and believed to be a Revolutionary Soldier and known to me as a man of strict truth.
Given under my hand and seal this 23 rd day of November 1829.
J. F. Hughes (JP)

State of North Carolina } The affidavit of Mrs. Ca- Edgecombe County } tharin Johnston now in The eighty sixth year of her age - who being first duly sworn according to law testifies and says that she was born and raised in Pitt County near the Edgecombe line and has lived all her life near to Mrs. Jonas John- ston - she knows that Mr. Johnston was married to Col. Jonas Johnston in the month of November Seventeen Hun- dred and sixty eight; and from the year Seventeen Hundred and seventy one this affiant has resided a close neighbour to Mrs. Jonas Johnston up to the present time.
To the personal knowledge of this affiant Col. Johnston was repeatedly in service before the expedition to South Ca- rolina in which he died - Col. Johnston marched from this county in February Seventeen Hundred and Seventy nine for South Carolina with his Regiment, and my late Hus- band Jonas Johnston went with his wife to South Carolina to see him when on his death bed. From that period to the present this affiant has lived constantly close to Mrs. John- ston being in less than a mile of her and she can testify that she is the identical person married to Col. Jonas Johnston in Seventeen Hundred and sixty eight at the house of Aquilla Bugg in this county and that she has never married

Since the death of her husband Col Jonas Johnston - Not up my hand this 26th day of Novem ber 1839.
Catharine Johnston
State of North Carolina } Edgecombe County } This day personally appeared before me a Justice of the Peace for the County where within Mrs Catharine Johnston who subscribed and swore to the foregoing affidavit in due form of Law & also certify that Mrs Johnston is one of the most respectable ladies in the County of Edgecombe and her testimony is entitled to the fullest credit and belief.
Given under my hand & seal this 26th day of November 1839.
Geo F Hughes GP

State of North Carolina } The affidavit of Doctor Robert Wil- Pitt County } liams of Pitt County now a Pension- er of The United States and late a Surgeon in the War of the Re- volution. This affiant being first duly sworn according to Law Testafies and says. That at an early period of his life viz. as early as the year Seventeen Hundred and Seventy one or Seventy Two he well knew Col Jonas Johnston of Edgecomb county and at the commencement of the Revolution Col: John- ston was a conspicuous man both in a civil and military ca- pacity which he continued to do up to the period of his death while on an expedition to South Carolina. This affiant can Testafy to the following facts in relation to the marriage of Col: Johnston's and the service he rendered as Col: of Edgecombe County in the War of the Revolution. This affiant having lived all his life except two years at Windsor and three years at Greensville in ten miles of the widow of Col: Johnston. 1st I am fully convinced from my knowledge of facts connected with the history of that period that Col: Jonas Johnston whose widow is now applying for a pension is the identical person known to this affiant as the wife of Col Jonas Johnston as early as the year Seventeen Hundred and Seventy one or Seventy Two. and that he was in the practice of Physick and Surgery under and with his father before the commencement of the Revolution in the neighbourhood of Col: Jonas Johnston; In the early part of the year Seventeen Hun- dred and Seventy nine or eighty Col Jonas Johnston marched from

from Edgecombe County in command of a detachment of men to South Carolina and in that expedition Col: Johnston died. in service. The precise period of the commencement or termination of the service of Col Johnston this affiant is unable at this time unable to state - But he is satisfied it was either in the year Seventeen Hundred and Seventy nine or eighty - and terminated in his death - From the period of Col Johnstons death up to the present time this affiant has known Mr Johnston and his children who are five in number. This affiant can testify that Mr Micajah Pettaway of Edgecombe County was a soldier of the Revolution and his testimony in the opinion of this affiant is entitled to the fullest credit and belief - and is also that of Mrs Catherine Johnston of the same county.
Given under my hand this 25th day of November 1839.
Robt Williams
State of North Carolina } this day personally appeared Pitt County } before me a Justice of the Peace for the county above written Doctor Robert Williams of the said county and one or more and subscribed the foregoing affidavit in due form of law. I also certify that Doctor Williams is one of the oldest and most respectable citizens of the State and his testimony is entitled to fullest credit and belief.
Given under my hand and seal this 25th day of November 1839.
J. L. Cowman J. P. Seal

State of North Carolina } In addition to my affidavit this day Pitt County } given respecting the Revolutionary services of Col. Johnston and the period of his marriage - I have been requested to add my professional opinion of her present state of health - Some five years since Mrs Johnston was attacked with paralysis and from that period to the present I have considered her death might be rea- sonably expected at any time - and I give it as my profes- sional opinion that any business effecting her rights or interests which would be lost by her death, should not be at all de- layed - Given under my hand this 25th day of Novr: 1839.
Sworn to & subscribed } The day & year above written } before me.
J. L. Dorman Esq
Robt. Williams
State of North Carolina } Pitt County } I Michl Parker Clerk of the Court of Pleas & Quarter Sessions for the County aforesaid do hereby certify that John L Dorman Esq whose signature appears to the foregoing affidavit is an acting Justice of the Peace for said County and that due faith and credit ought to be given to his official acts.
Given under my hand & seal of my said Court at office this 25th day of Novr. 1839 Michl Parker Clerk

State of North Carolina
Edgecombe County } I hereby certify that I have been the family physician of Mrs. Esther Johnston of this county for a number of years and I feel no hesitation in giving it as my opinion that her state of health is such as to render it very necessary that any trans- action affecting her interests or any interest made to depend on her life should be settled as speedily as possible. Mrs. Johnston has been afflicted with paralysis ever since 1831. and from that time to the present she has been incapable of having her house
Yadkin. Nov. 26th 1839.
P. Lugg M.D.
Sworn to and subscribed before me the day and year above written
H. C. Clanton J.P.

State of North Carolina
Edgecombe County } I Joseph Bell Clerk of The Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions for Edgecombe County do hereby certify that Henry Austin & John F. Hughes are acting Justices of the Peace for Edge- combe County; and that full faith and credit are due to their official acts as such. I also certify that their signatures affixed to the foregoing affida- vits of Captain Micajah Pettaway Mrs Catharin Johnston and Doctor P. S. Sugg are genuine.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of my office as Clerk of the Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions for Edgecombe County. at Tarboro this 26th day of November in the year 1889.
J. P. Bell C.C.C.

Edgecombe County November Term 1839.
ordered that the Declaration and accompanying evidence in an application on behalf of Mrs Esther Johnston for a Pension has been presented to the Court and from the known respectability of Doctor Robert Williams of Pitt County and Captain Micajah Pettaway and Mrs Catharin Johnston of this County who have testified in the matter. The Court is fully persuaded that Col: Jonas Johnston rendered the service herein proved and died in the service of the Country in the Revolution
I Joseph Bell Clerk of the Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions for Edgecombe County do hereby certify that the above is a True Copy of an order made by the Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions now in Session for Edgecombe County - In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal of office at Tarboro this 26th day of November in the year 1839.
J. B. Bell
actual of John

Wilmington -
North Carolina
April 18 th 1897 -
Commissioners of Pensions Washington D.C.
Dear Sir -
I have been informed that one of my ancestors Mrs Esther Hamel Johnston, widow wife of Col. Jonas Johnston of North

Carolina of the Revolutionary War — received just before her death in about 1839 or 1840 — a pension from the Government for her husband's services in the Revolutionary War. I have been told that he was promoted to the rank of Brigadier-General on the battle field of Stono S.C. 1779. Will you kindly inform me if the records in the Pension Office show what title he had. I am anxious to know his rank. Thanking you in advance for your kindness — I am — Yours truly, Mrs. J. Herbert Smith

U. S. D. W. 21470.
This Bureau can furnish the military record of only such Revolutionary soldiers as were pensioned or whose widows were pensioned for their services.
Such of the original muster and pay rolls of the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812 as are now in the possession of the Government are on file in the Record and Pension Office, War Department. Original rolls and other records pertaining to service in the Revolutionary War may also be found on file in the archives of many of the original States.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
BUREAU OF PENSIONS,
WASHINGTON, D. C.,
O. W. & N. DIV.
REVOLUTIONARY.
May 18, 1897.
Madam:-
✓ Replying to your request for information concerning Jonas Johnson, an officer of the Revolutionary war, you are advised that Esther Johnson, widow of Jonas Johnson, made an application for pension on November 33, 1839, at which time she was 89 years of age and residing in Edgcombe County, North Carolina, and her pension was allowed for the actual service of her husband as a Colonel in the North Carolina troops, Revolutionary war, for a period of six months. He enlisted in Edgcombe County, North Carolina.
Very respectfully,
Commissioner.
Mrs. G. Herbert Smith,
Wilmington, North Carolina.