Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File W. 6607, for Joseph Sutfin, New Jersey

SERVICE
New Jersey
NUMBER
Sutin, Joseph Rhoda
N 6607
CONTENTS

New Jersey 374 Rhoda Sutfin
Order to pay 31. Oct 1838.
of in the State of who was a N.J.  in the  commanded by Captain of the  commanded by on the widow  widow of Joseph Sutfin who late a private Dragon in the Revolution
Inscribed on the Roll of New Jersey at the rate of 47 Dollars 50 Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1834.
Certificate of Pension issued the 10 day of Jan 1837 and sent P. Wadsworth burgh Jr. Frederick N.J.
Arrears to the 4th of Sept 1836 $261.25 Semi-ant. allowance ending 4 Mar 37 . 23.75 $285.00
{ Revolutionary Claim, } { Act June 7. 1832. }
Recorded by W. G. A. dism Clerk, Book A Vol. 1 Page 52

12
John Hubert Linton - Aff'd Rhoda Linton - Aff'd for Pension -
P. Krecenthus J. G. Agent - Fruit & Co. N. Jersey

State of New Jersey
Monmouth County ss: David Sutfin of said County being duly sworn according to Law doth depose & say, that he is now 70 years old his a brother of Joseph Sutfin whose widow Rhoda Sutfin is now applying for a Pension, that he recollects that his said brother Joseph was out in the Militia of Monmouth County under Capt. John Walter after his return from his enlistment in Capt. Mynar's troop of horse at Cranbury during the latter part of the year 1777 & was stationed as a guard at Freehold & marched from there to different parts of the County. And this deponent recollects that himself, his said brother Joseph & his other brother John were out under S d Walter at the Battle of Monmouth, & this deponent is confident that himself & his said two brothers were in service in town of one month each as many as four during the year 1778 - but this deponent does not recollect the particular months - And this deponent further states that sometime after the battle of Monmouth his said brother Joseph joined the troop of horse in Monmouth County under Capt. Conover & served therein according to the exigencies of the service, but this deponent cannot remember the particular periods. This deponent further states that he believes that his said brother served at least two years during the Revolutionary war -
Sworn & subscribed this 26 th October 1838 before me a justice of the peace in & for said County William Lloyd
David Sutfin

And I the said William Lloyd do hereby certify that I am well acquainted with the David Sutfin who has signed the foregoing affidavit, & that he is a credible person in his statements entitled "Catharine's Confidence."
William Lloyd
Expt Sutfin affm

State of New Jersey Monmouth County ss: John Stewart of said County being duly sworn according to Law doth depose & say, that he is now upwards of 77 years old & that he is was acquainted with Joseph Sutfin whose widow Rhoda Sutfin is now applying for a pension during the Revolutionary war. This deponent first became acquainted with said Joseph Sutfin by serving in the same company of foot Militia of Monmouth County in the year 1776. This company this deponent thinks said com- pany belonged to the first Regiment of Monmouth Militia. This deponent was in actual service in & during the month of August 1776 under Capt. Thomas Harn. That during said month of August part of two companies were out under said Harn viz one half of the company of Capt. Kenneth Hark- inson & half of the company of said Harn. That Moses Davis who was a Lieutenant under Capt. Harkinson was also out as lieutenant of the said parts of said two companies also during the month of August of said, both of said com- panies belonged to the 1 st Regiment of Monmouth Militia. That said Joseph Sutfin belonged to the Capt. Harkinson part of said company, & was out in actual service in said company during the month of August of said. This deponent has a perfect recollection of having first become acquainted with the said Joseph Sutfin by being brought together in the service by the joining together of the two com- panies as of said. That by the laws in force in New Jersey at that time & through the exigencies of the country the one half of the Militia were called out every month, & in pursuance of said arrangement, one half of Capt. Huns Comp. any & one half of Capt. Harkinsons Company

under the Command of Col s Hays served dur- ing the Month of August 1776 - Moses Davis acting as Lieutenant. During the Month of September of course the fort was for the other helps of said Hays & Harkins's Company towards which under the Command of Capt s Harkins and Lieutenant from Hays Company, & that this alternate turning out continued until the Writings of the County of Middlesex were ob- liged to lay  lay down their arms for a time in the Month of December 1776. This disponent in pursuance of said arrangement was out again during the Month of October 1776, & this disponent has not the least doubt of firmly believes that said Sutfin was in service again during the Month of October 1776, with this disponent This disponent recollects that he was not ac- quainted with said Sutfin before the war to- gether as of said, but that an intimate friendship sprang up between them during the said two months service in 1776 which continued to the death of said Sutfin, & this disponent not recollecting of serving in the same company with said Sutfin after the laying down of arms as of said. This disponent is confident that said Sutfin served in said Company a term of one month in the Month of October 1776 - And this disponent further states that he very frequently after this saw the said Sutfin in actual duty during the Revolutionary war, but he cannot from loss of memory more particularly designate the times & periods -
Sworn to before me this 8 th October 1826 before me one of the Judges of the Inferior Court of Common Pleas in & for said County } John Hoback.

And I the said Judge before whom the foregoing affidavit was taken do hereby certify that as I am well acquainted with the said John Hulsat Esquire who is a justice of the peace in & for said County of Monmouth, & that he is a credible Person & his statements entitled to belief & confi- dence -
William Lloyd
I the Subscriber Clerk of the Inferior Court of Common Pleas in & for said County of Monmouth do hereby certify that William Lloyd before whom the foregoing affidavits were taken was at the time of the doing thereof & still is as judge of the Inferior Court of Common Pleas in & for said County a justice of the peace in & for said County duly commissioned & sworn & enrolled in my office & that I am acquainted with the hand writing of the said William Lloyd & that the name signed William Lloyd to the foregoing affidavits & certificate is in the proper hand writing of the said William Lloyd - In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand & affixed the seal of said Court at Newbold in said County this second day of November Eighteen hundred & thirty six - The undersigned of the Inferior Court of Common Pleas in & for said County & entitled first in this certificate - & the words & certifi- cates also herein first mentioned -
J. P. R. L. R.

12.
Rhoda Sutfin's
Old rolls Creahaven.
Nov. 28. 81 - One mo.
informed that 37.50 for 9 mo. Dragoon will be allow d
Adm d
3 mo pri. Inf y
9. Dragoon
47.50 $
J. Vredenburgh Jr. Freehold N.J.

Declaration of Rhoda Sutfin in order to obtain the benefit of the third section of the act of Congress of the 4 th Mar. 1836 State of New Jersey
County of Monmouth ss. On this fourth day of August eighteen hundred and thirty six personally appeared before the Judges of the Superior Court of Common Pleas in & for said County of Monmouth Rhoda Sutfin a resident of Newark in the County of Essex in said State aged seventy seventy three years ten months & six days, 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 Mar 4 th 1836, That she is a widow of Jacob Sutfin who was a light horse man or trooper, says a militia man in the service of the United States, during the Revolutionary War part of the time enlisted & part of the time in the Militia, That her said husband was a trooper in Companies of horse, That this deponent first became acquainted with her said husband in the month of May 1779, this deponent then residing at Newark in said County of Essex, & that they were married on the 28 th May 1780. - This deponent further deposes, That she has always understood from her said husband & also from all his neighbours, & this deponent firmly believes the truth thereof to be that her said husband was born at Fulford in Monmouth County on the 28 th May 1754, & also that her said husband entered the service of the United States as a common Militia man in the beginning of the war, about the time the British Fleet appeared off Sandy Hook, sometime in July 1776, & that he served every other month in the Militia of Monmouth County

until the Fall or Winter of the same year - when he enlisted in a troop of horse for three months. This deponent cannot mention the names of the officers under whom her said husband served as a militiaman previous to his said enlistment as a trooper - she not being then acquainted with him, & she having forgotten what names her husband may have told her - She recollects his men- tioned the name of Capt n John Walton, but this deponent cannot now assert, that at that period her said husband served under said Walton, her recol- lection of what she may have heard of that period being very indistinct - But this deponent perfectly recollects, her husband always saying & she has always understood from those acquainted with her said husband, that her said husband enlisted in the beginning of the Winter of 1776 in a troop of horse under Capt n Robert Moxon, for three months, & that said troop of horse was stationed at Cranbury in the County of Middlesex in said State, that Ralph Phillips was the first tenant of said County Company, & that the corner of said Company was David Ray. That her said husband performed his duty in said Company during the whole of said three months, that after the said three months were expired, that her said husband enlisted again for two months in the same troop, & served his time out - That during said time part of said Company was marched up into Morris County of said State & remained there until the British evacuation New Brunswick. That this deponent does not know whether her husband went into Morris County with that portion of the troop or remain-

ed at Cranbury, but believes that he was retained at Cranbury. That the object of said Company was to watch the British & to perform any service which might be required of them by the Gen- eral officers, That said Company was under the General command of Genl. Putnam who was stationed at Princeton - This This deponent further says, that she has always understood from her said husband & also from all those who were acquainted with him, & she firmly believing the truth so to be, that after the expiration of her said husband's enlistment for five months her said husband served in the Militia of Monmouth County every other month until the Battle of Monmouth, under Capt. Wm. Walton, Lieutenant Thomas Cook, the general officers were Genl. Putnam  Forster , Col. Holmes, &c. That Capt. Walton's Company some time before the Battle of Monmouth, was marched to Trenton in the State of New Jersey & that her said husband was then serving as a Common Militia Man in said Com- pany & marched as such with said Company to Trenton, & from thence through the country under Col. Morgan & was under said Col. Morgan at the Battle of Monmouth, flanking the British army on the South, That on a day before the Battle of Monmouth, while said Company were stationed near a brook flanking the British Army on the South, about 20 British came down to wash their clothes who were taken prisoners by Capt. Walton's Company & others lying there That besides Capt. Walton's Company, there was at the same time the Riflemen, part of Col. Holmes & part of Col. Samuel Forman's Regiment. under

Col. Morgan - Said Watson Company was a part of Col. Holiner Regiment -
That this claimant, said husband served according to the heat of the war then & seventy of the service, before & at the Battle of Monmouth, & after that period, her said husband served as a trooper in troops of horse in the Militia of Monmouth County, her said husband from being the transfer of foot service to serve for his Constitution - That her said husband shortly after the Battle of Monmouth joined & became a Member of a troop of horse under the Command of Capt. Jacob Leowen, of the Monmouth Militia & served the United States in said Company as a trooper until his said Marriage to this claimant on the 28 th May 1789.
After this said marriage claimant, she immediately removed into the County of Monmouth near Freehold, & resided there till two or three years after her said husband's death, which happened on the 27 th January 1824 - This claimant always understood that her said husband was born & brought up in said County of Monmouth, & this claimant & her said husband lived as man & wife in said County of Monmouth from the time of their said marriage until his death.
That at & after the time of their said Marriage this claimant knows that her said husband was a trooper & belonged to a Company of light horse under Capt. Jacob Leowen, in the Militia of Monmouth County - That he served in said Company, the United States, according to the exigencies of the service & wherever said Company was called upon until the close of the war -

That Said Company was always liable to be called out at a minutes warning, & were bound to be ready to march at a minutes warning - That Said Company was employed in marching & countermarching through different parts of the County to repel maraudering & depredations of the British & Tories - who from their vicinity to the City of New York, & their fastnesses in the inner & unguarded parts of the County, were continually harassing the inhabitants, & committing robbery & murder whereon they could find the parties unprotected. This deponent believes Said Troop of Horse was attached to Col. Holmes Regiment -
That this deponent knows that her Said husband was always after their said marriage ready at a minutes call & always went out & served in Said Troop when ever called upon which was very often - That this deponent cannot recollect from old age & failure of memory the precise times when her Said Husband was out on duty in Said Company, nor the precise length of time that he was out, but she perfectly recollects that he was was frequently called upon & did go out & remain from home in Said Troop as she vividly believes, & would be absent from a week to a month at a time - She has seen him she thinks as many as a hundred times dress himself in his uniform, mount his horse, & depart to join his Company, & that he would remain absent in said service two or three weeks at a time - And that her Said husband was subject to such calls perpetually & always went

when called upon until the close of the war in 1782 or 1783 1780, That this deponent & her husband lived a short distance from the public road, & that this deponent was then always, alarmed whenever she saw a person approaching the house, fearing that it was some person coming to call her husband out on duty. That during the Revolutionary war the Tories & Patriots in the County of Monmouth were very nearly balanced, & that besides this, the Tories were frequently aided from the City of New York, & that it required the greatest vigilance & continual activity in the Patriots to preserve their ascendancy. This deponent recollects, that her said husband was called out within a fortnight after their said Marriage, & that he went & was out on said service but for how long a period this de- ponent cannot now specify, nor can she specify for which the Company was then employed, but she per- fectly recollects the fact of his call & his de- parture & absence, & always understood from him after his return that during his absence he had been on duty in said Company.
This deponent has also perfect recollection, that after her said Marriage & before the close of the Revolutionary war her said husband was very frequently absent, for different periods of time, on such calls, & that she always understood from him on his return that he had been on duty in said Company of course - but she cannot state from want of recollection the precise time, nor the beginning or end of such periods of service. This deponent further

States, that she always understood from her husband & has heard him say, that his father's house was robbed of almost every thing at the Battle of Monmouth by the British Forces.
This deponent further says & declares that she was married to the said Nathl. Sutfin on the 28 th Mar 1780, in the year Seventeen hundred & eighty & that her husband the aforesaid Nathl. Sutfin died on the 27 th January Eighteen hundred & twenty four. And that she has remained a widow ever since that period as will more fully appear by reference to the proof hereto annexed - And this deponent further declares that she was married at the time aforesaid at Springfield in the said County of Essex by Jacob Van Arsdal a Minister of the Presbyterian Church at said Springfield. That she has not been able to get possession of any record of her marriage no record then being required by law, & that there is now no person living who was present at the ceremony except Elias Van Arsdal Councillor at Law of Newark aforesaid who was then only about 5 or 6 years old & who perhaps may have forgotten the fact - And this deponent further says, that the paper hereto annexed purporting to be "the New Testament" & containing a record of her marriage has been this day torn from her Family Bible by this deponent. That said Bible was given to this deponent by her mother three or four years after her said marriage & that she then put down on it the date

of her own & her husband's birth, & their marriage  afterwards the date of their children's birth as they were respectively born. as they were respectively born That this defendant has lived in Newark aforesaid for the last six years past, And that she has made her de- claration in the County of Monmouth because her witnesses & sons reside in said County of Monmouth, & she happens now to be on a visit to her said sons, & the Court being now in session at Fenholde, whereas the next Court does not sit in Essex County until the third Tuesday of October next, And besides the nature of her own & her witnesses' death, it would be very in- convenient if not impossible for her to get her important witnesses to Essex, who are very old & infirm.
Sworn & subscribed in open Court this 4 th day of August eighteen hundred & thirty six before me one of the Judges of said Court the words "afterwards" & "as they were respectively born" are leaf on this page & the words after the said marriage on 2 nd page & also a militiaman on 1 st page & in the militia of Monmouth County on 2 nd page & said meaning on same page indicated upon question.
Frederick Sutfin
State of New Jersey William Lloyd
Monmouth County ss. Mayor James Clegg being duly sworn according to law doth depose & say that he is now eighty two years of age, & that he was acquainted with Joseph Sutfin mentioned in the foregoing declaration of Abigail Sutfin that this defendant & the said Joseph Sutfin lived in the Township of Fenholde Monmouth County from their birth upwards & neighbors to each other & that this defendant was always intimate

THE NEW TESTAMENT OF OUR LORD and SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST,
Translated out of the
ORIGINAL GREEK:
AND
With the former TRANSLATIONS
Diligently Compared and Revised,
By His MAJESTY's Special Command.
Appointed to be read in CHURCHES.
O X F O R D,
PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS, By W. Jackson and A. Hamilton , PRINTERS to the UNIVERSITY; And sold by W. Dawson , at the Oxford Bible Warehouse, Paternoster Row, London. MDCCCLXXXII.
CUM PRIVILEGIO.
So Dut John John Boyd Isaac

1812 Joseph
Joseph Sultfin, was born May 28, 1754 Rhoda Glizbe - - Sept. 29, 1762
were married, - Mar. 20, 1780
Their Issue
Samuel Glizbe, was born, March, 5, 1782
Sally Howch, was born January 1785
Sally Was born December 23 1785
Jane Calton Was born January 30 1791
William Jennings Was born August 18 1791
Joseph Holsey Was born August 23 1795
George Washington was
Born October the 8th 1804
Jane B Rue was Born January 28th 1811

with the said Joseph Sutphin from their earliest boy- hood to the death of said Joseph Sutphin right on ten years ago. That this deponent perfectly recollects that the said Joseph Sutphin enlisted in the beginning of the winter of 1776-1777 in a troop of horse under the Command of Capt Robert Maysow in the service of the United States, at Freehold in said County of Monmouth, That this deponent and the said Joseph Sutphin enlisted on the same day, or at any rate within two or three days of each other for the period of three Months, That Ralph Phillips was the Lieutenant & David Ray was the Cornet of said Company. After the said enlistment the said Company was ordered to Cranbury in said State & there stationed, & re- mained there during the said three months. That the said Joseph Sutphin was on actual duty during the whole of said time, this deponent seeing the said Joseph Sutphin on duty daily - This deponent & said Joseph Sutphin being very frequ- ently together - After the expiration of said term of three months, this deponent & said Joseph Sut- phin again enlisted in the same Company for two or three months longer, Shortly after the last enlistment this deponent with a part of the said Company was marched up into Morris County in said State but the said Joseph Sutphin remained with the balance of said Company at Cranbury - but this deponent left the said Joseph Sutphin in actual service under his said enlistment, & this de- ponent has always understood & firmly be- lieves that the said Joseph Sutphin served out the balance of his two or three months faithfully & fairly in said troop of horse - And this de- ponent never heard any thing to the contrary

This deponent further states that immediately after the separation of the said two months, this deponent & said Joseph Sutphin returned to the place of their birth with their household & family & joined a company of Militia under Capt. John Walton. This deponent thinks in the month of July 1777. That said company was attached to Col. Elias Holsmer's Regiment, under Genl. David Forman. That Thomas Cook was Lieutenant of said company under Walton & this deponent was the Ensign in said company. That said company had its head quarters at Helder in said County, but was marched into different parts of the Country as the exigencies of the public necessities required, sometimes to Middletown Point along the Bay Shore, Long Branch & into the Northern & Southern Series, to protect the inhabitants from the incursions of the British & Tories, & sometimes to break up their fastnesses & haunts. That the said company was almost continually on duty until after the Battle of Monmouth in June 1778. That this deponent has a perfect recollection of the said Joseph Sutphin serving as a Common Militia man under this deponent in said company until after the Battle of Monmouth. That shortly before the Battle of Monmouth said company was ordered up towards New York to meet the main army under Genl. Washington, & this deponent recollects that this deponent & the said Joseph Sutphin accompanied said company, & were at the time on service together in said company, this deponent as Ensign & the said Joseph Sutphin as a Common Militia man. That other parts of said Holsmer's

Regiment & part of Col s Scam s Formans regim ent marched up towards Newton at the same time, & the whole put under the General Command of Col s Morgan - From Newton this division & the said Joseph Sutphin & their comrades marched down - where Col s Morgan was hanging upon the right wing of the British Army - & were a little South of the British Army when Col s Morgan at the day of the Battle of Monmouth, & that said Joseph continued in actual service as a Militia man until after the Battle of Monmouth - This deponent recollects of their detachment taking one day twenty or thirty British soldiers prisoners who came near a brook where they were lying -
This deponent further says, that after the Battle of Monmouth he heard said Joseph Sutphin say that the foot service was too severe for him, that he had a cough, the remains of the effects of the measles, & that on that account he the said Sutphin would join the line, that shortly after that this deponent understood & heard, & believed that said Joseph Sutphin did join a troop of horse in the service of the United States under the command of Capt n Jacob Coven, which said troop was stationed at Foulds of said & whose duty it was to scour the country in all directions & to be always in readiness at a minutes warning to march wherever relief or assistance might be wanting, or wherever the necessities of the Country required them - And this deponent further states that he was in the habit of seeing said Joseph Sutphin in

actual service as a trooper in said Company every few days until the close of the war in 1782 or 1783 - That the said Joseph Sutton generally rode when on service in said Company a Bay horse - The said trooper horse was attached to Col. Holmes Regiment, the same regiment that this deponent belonged to, & this gave this deponent frequent opportunities of seeing said Joseph Sutton upon duty in said Company - This deponent recollects the time of the marriage of the said Joseph Sutton, the said Joseph Sutton having been married a month or two before this deponent left in 1780. but this deponent does not recollect the month nor the day of the month, but this deponent remem- bers when the said Joseph Sutton brought his said wife home, to this County - This deponent said saw the said wife of said Joseph Sutton who is the same person who has made the foregoing declaration the next Sunday after she was brought home by her said husband (from the County of Essex where he married her), at the Church in the Township of Feubold, & that they then were received & passed as bride & groom - & that they have ever since that period been consi- dered by all their neighbours & been universally reputed in the neighbourhood to be legally mar- ried, & that they lived together as man & wife until the death of the said Joseph Sutton as aforesaid - This deponent further states that he has a perfect recollection of seeing the said Joseph Sutton after his said marriage before the close of the war, once & once again

again in actual service, chesped in uniform, in said troop of horse under Capt: Conover And this deponent has no doubt, that the said Japheth Sutfin was out in actual service in said troop of horse as much as one year after his said marriage doing actual duty as a trooper  as a trooper And this deponent has no doubt from what he saw & heard & knew of the said Japheth Sutfin of the duties to be performed, that the said Japheth Sutfin served as a trooper before his said marriage more than a year. This deponent has no doubt but that altogether the said Japheth Sutfin served the United States as a trooper in said Companies more than two years during the Revolutionary War, besides the time he serv- ed as a Common Militia man as aforesaid This deponent is now a pensioner of the United States & draws $420 per year
Sworn & subscribed to open court this 4 th Aug t 1836 before me one of the Judges of said Court The words the of the said Japheth Sutfin on this page being first interlined William Lloyd James Craig
State of New Jersey Monmouth County ss: George Washington Sutfin of said County being duly sworn according to Law, deponeth & saith that he is a son of Japheth Sutfin & Rhoda his wife mentioned in the foregoing declaration & was born on the 8 th Oct r 1804, that his father & mother always

lived together as man & wife as long as this opponent can recollect, by all his knowledge & that it has always been reported in the neighborhood, that they were legally married - That he has two several brothers living & are first living, all of whom have already been treated & considered as legitimate That this opponent to the said on the 27 th January 1824, & that his said Mother has not been married since, but still remains unmarried. The opponent further says, that the paper accompanying these papers, purport- ing to be from a Bible, has been this way from from an old family Bible & his said Mother for the purpose of sending with these papers & that the same has always, been consid- ered as long as he can remember & referred to, as the family record of all matters as are therein contained
Given & described in Open Court, this 4 th Augt 1876 before me one of the Judges of said Court of Common Pleas.
George W. Tiffin
William Lloyd St
State of New Jersey
Morris County ss. Capt Aaron F. Walker of said County being duly sworn according to law, de- poses & states, that he was acquainted with the late Donl. Tutfin, the same person who is mentioned in the foregoing official declaration, with his whole family several years before the Revolu- tionary war and was familiar with him till

his death which happened 10 or 12 years since that said Rufus always resided in Freehold in Monmouth County N. Jersey following the occu- pation of a farmer from his youth till his death so far as it was interrupted by the calls of his country during the Revolutionary war that this deponent is now 78 years old and this deponent is confident that said Rufus Rufus was some years older than this depon- ent. This deponent has always lived in Freehold aforesaid except about 10 years ending about 6 years ago, during which said 10 years this deponent lived at Mount Holly in said State. This de- ponent has a distinct recollection of seeing said Rufus out on duty as a common Militia man in the first company of Militia that was raised in Monmouth County. The said company was intended to be a company of Grenadiers & to march to Long Island, the company first ren- dered at Freehold aforesaid, & this deponent & the said Rufus joined said company at Freehold aforesaid together. This deponent being then very young & too small then for a Grenadier yet anxious to go with them acted as drummer & the said Rufus as a common Grenadier. This was a short time before the British fleet appear- ed off Sandy Hook, the Captain of said com- pany was Henry Waddell, Samuel Leman was first lieutenant & this deponent thinks the second lieutenant. The said company as soon as it was organized marched first to Elizabeth Town in said State, but after they got to Elizabeth town word was brought that the British fleet had appeared off Sandy Hook, & the company

was ordered immediately back into Monmouth Com y to defend it, which became peculiarly essential from its position & that of the British fleet - That the said Company was immediately marched down to the highlands of Haverhill in said County opposite said fleet, & remained there on duty for one month, during all which time the said Sutfin was in actual duty as a Com- mon Grenadier in said Company. The said Company was then relieved, & discharged, & never again reorganised, a great many of them including the Captain afterwards joining the British - This deponent recalls frequently seeing said Sutfin, after the said discharge of said Grenadier Company, in actual duty as a Com- mon Militia Man in different companies & sometimes he thinks said Sutfin served in the same Company with this deponent until about the month of November or at the end of the said year 1776 when this deponent & said Sutfin both joined a company of light horse under Capt n Robert Remsen of said County of Monmouth. This deponent & said Sutfin served in said Company he thinks a couple of months, & during said time were continually upon active duty the greatest efforts being required to preserve the ascendancy of the Whigs in said County. The first Lieutenant of said last mentioned Company was Jacob Lorimer, & this deponent thinks Rudolph Lorimer was the 2 d Lieutenant - This deponent & the said Joseph Sutfin then, this deponent thinks in December 1776 enlisted in a troop of horse under Capt n Robert

Ralph Phillips
As Major, Lieutenant for the term of three months, that said Company was marched to Garden & there stationed & remained, for the three months, watching the British & scanning different parts of the country, that said Ralph Sutfin was in actual duty as sent troops in said Company, for the term of said term of three months, this deponent being in the daily habit of seeing him in actual duty, in uniform, & often dining by his side. After the three months had expired, this deponent came home to Fenholt & Friesland, but the said Ralph Sutfin re-enlisted again for the term of two months longer. And this deponent has always been informed & firmly believes that said Sutfin served out his said term of enlistment of two months in said Company fairly & faithfully. That this deponent after he returned home as aforesaid joined the troop of horse under Capt. Jacob Conover in Monmouth, stationed at Fenholt & Friesland, that this deponent continued to serve in said last mentioned Company till the close of the war. That shortly after the Battle of Monmouth in 1778 the said Ralph Sutfin joined said troop of horse & served in said troop of horse with this deponent until the close of the war — That said Conover was Capt. of said Company for a while, that said Capt. was taken once prisoner while on service, somewhere near the south coast this deponent believes, & remained prisoner at New York for some time. Capt. Barnes & Smock served in said Conover's place till he was relieved, that some time after Capt. Jacob Conover died & Ralph Conover succe-

did as captain who served as cap n of said troop of horse even till the close of the war - said troop of horse was stationed at Newhold & was the only troop of horse in the County during the war, (Except a troop of horse enlisted for one year by Capt n John Walton with the  beginning of the year - November - Jan. and Feby two, but they did not serve their year out owing to the declaration of peace)
The said troop of horse in which this disponent & the said Sutfin served as officers said were consid- ered to be always on duty, they had no relief as the Militia were had, who were called out & served only every other month, whereas the said troop of horse were the same dis enlisted during the war, the duty of the said the troop was to defend the County generally, said County of Monmouth is very large, bounding the Na- tion Bay on the South, & running along the Atlantic Coast sixty or seventy miles, & pecu- liarly exposed to the combined machinations of the British Runaway Negroes & Tories. & the calls upon the Company to scan & protect different parts of the County was constant & & incessant. - & the said Company almost always on the go - Some part of said Company being always on some excursion. And this dispo- ment has a perfect recollection of said Sutfin Sutfin serving as a Trooper as aforesaid in said Company of horse from shortly after the battle of Monmouth in 1778 till the close of the war, this disponent being in the daily habit of seeing him in uniform mounted & in the county,

riding with near him, and very frequently riding out with him in different skirmishing expeditions. This deponent further states, that he has a perfect recollection of hearing of the marriage of said Capt. Sutfin during the Revolu- tionary war, & of seeing him in actual duty in said troop of horse after he had heard of his said marriage. This deponent is also acquainted with Rhoda, the widow of said Capt. Sutfin, & has been acquainted with her since the Revolutionary war. That he has always heard & believed that they were legally married & that has always been the universal reputation in the neighborhood - that they have several children who are universally believed & received in society as legitimate. And this deponent further states that the said Rhoda has never been married since the said death of her said husband. Don't Sutfin to this deponent's knowledge or belief - This deponent is now a pensioner of the United States under the act of 1832 & receives $100 per year as a trooper during the Revolutionary war - The Lieutenants under the said Capt. Sutfin were Coaneus J. Smith part of the time, & Sutfin Coaneus part of the time -
Given & subscribed in open Court this 4 th Aug t 1876 before me one of the Judges of said Court William Lloyd
{ Aaron F. Walker

And I the said William Lloyd the judge before whom the foregoing Declaration was made & affidavits were taken do hereby certify that I am acquainted with the said Rhoda Sutphin & have been so acquainted with her & her said husband for the last forty years, & also that I am acquainted with the said Major Craig & Capt. Aaron F. Walker & have been acquainted with them for the last fifty years, also that I am acquainted with the said George W. Sutphin & that they are respectively persons of credibility & their statements & affidavits worthy of credit and ought to be believed -
William Lloyd
And the said Court of Common Pleas do hereby declare their opinion, that after the investiga- tion of the matter, that the above named Rhoda Sutphin was a revolutionary soldier & served as is stated by the foregoing witnesses & the said declarant - And the court further certifies that it appears to them, that the said Rhoda Sutphin, James Craig, Aaron F. Walker & George W. Sutphin, are persons worthy of credit & ought to be believed -
Done in open court this fourth day of August light ten hundred & thirty six -
William Lloyd

State of New Jersey Monmouth County ss: Joseph H. Sutfin of said County being duly sworn according to law, doth depose & say, that he is now, forty years old this month, that he is the son of Joseph Sutfin & Rhoda his wife, that his said Father & Mother always lived together as man & wife & were always, universally reputed so to be, until the death of his said Father in 1824, and that his said Mother is now unmarried & has so always been since the said death of this deponent's said Father -  Sworn & subscribed before me one of the justices of the peace in & for said County this 8 th August 1836 - at Freehold in said County William Lloyd  Joseph H. Sutfin
State of New Jersey Monmouth County ss: Rhoda Sutfin being duly sworn according to law, doth depose & say that she has no documentary evidence of the Revolutionary services of her late hus- band, Joseph Sutfin, that at the time her said husband entered the service of the United States, he resided in Freehold Township County of State of New Jersey & continued to reside there until his death -  Sworn & subscribed this 15 th Augt 1836 before me one of the justices of the peace in & for said County William Lloyd  Rhoda Sutfin
State of New Jersey Monmouth County ss: Col John J. Conner of said County being duly sworn according to law, doth depose & say, that he is now aged 52 years - that he has been a resident of the township of Freehold

in Said County from his youth up, & been acquainted with the said Joseph Sutphin & Rhoda his wife for between thirty & forty years. That he has always understood & re- ceived & such has been the universal reputation in the neighbourhood, that the said Joseph Sutphin served as a Soldier during the revolutionary war, & was a very warm & active friend of the cause of Liberty. That the said Joseph Sutphin & Rhoda his wife have as long as this deponent has been acquainted with them lived together as man & wife until the death of the said Joseph, & that they have been always treated in society & universally reputed in the neigh- bourhood to have been legally married, & that they have always been received & visited in the best society in the neighbourhood as man & wife, that they have always been considered as persons of the highest respectability, the said Joseph & Rhoda having been for many years before his death members of the Presbyterian Church in Fitchburg & the said Joseph for many years previous to his death a deacon therein. And that the said Rhoda has not again been married since the death of her said husband, but still remains his widow. This deponent further states, that he is acquainted with James Craig, Esq. W. Sutphin, Oliver F. Walker - Joseph H. Sutphin who have made the foregoing affidavits, & that they as well as the said Rhoda are substantially persons of credit, & their allegations for the entitled to belief & confidence.
Sworn & subscribed this 17 th August - 1826 before me a justice of the peace in the said County
William Lloyd
John S. Cushman

And I the said justice before whom the foregoing affidavits of Joseph H. Sutfin, Rhoda Sutfin & John J. Conover were taken, do hereby certify, that I have been long well acquainted with them, & that they are respectively per- sons of credibility & their statements to the entitled to belief & confidence
William Lloyd
I the subscribe clerk of the Inferi- or Court of Common Pleas in & for the County of Monmouth do hereby certify, that the foregoing (except the three next preceding affidavits) are the original proceedings had before the said Court in the matter of the application of Rhoda Sutfin for a pension, & I do further certify that William Lloyd who has signed the foregoing papers was at the time of the doing thereof a judge of the said Court also a justice of the peace in & for said County & has ever since so remained & still so is, duly commissioned & sworn & qualified in the office of justice of the peace & that he has official acts as such full justice of the peace & do hereby further certify that I am well acquainted with the hand writing of the

Said William Lloyd & that the name signed William Lloyd to each of the foregoing declarations of fact & certificates is the proper hand writing of him the said William Lloyd -
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand & affixed the seal of said court at Fishguard in said County of Mon- mouth this eighteenth day of August Eighteen hundred & thirty six, the words "and it can well be thought to be given" first interlined in this my certificate.
D. Williams

Pay WIDOW, &c.
File No. 6607
Rhoda Sulfim Wid. of Joseph Sulfim Pr. Rev. War
Act: July 19 th 36
Index:—Vol. 86 , Page 254
[Arrangement of 1870.]

Sussex
See Lett rs P. Wredenburgh
Aug 31 1836
do - do - Nov. 17 '36
act 4 July 1836

reg of Wester Tn - Joseph Sutfin enlisted 3 mo - Capt Nixon mounted militia Cranberry afterward 2 " " " " Morris Co - after Battle of Monmouth - Trooper in Capt Conover - served till May 28 '80 - date of marriage -
Proof of
3 mo. Nixon's troop - then 2 mo. same Co.
Ensign of Waltons says he served from July 77 in Waltons Co until after the Battle of Monmouth.
Old rolls of Capt Covenhoven
Nov. 28 - 81 - J. S. 3000 -
\begin{array}{r}
 24.100 - 9 \\
 20 \overline{) 200} \quad ( 37.50 \\
 \underline{200} \\
 180 \\
 168 \\
 12
 \end{array}

Minton Bank
Pension Office
October 26 1888
Sir
Enclosed is a voucher requiring your special attention for payment
I am very respectfully
Your Ob Servt
Philip Dickinson Pres
J. L. Edwards Esq

Aug 22 d Cl. Act 4 July 1836
Ames J. Richards Esq. Garrisonian of Purvis Washington City D. C.

Feburra Aug 18-1876
fr
Permit me to call your attention to the enclosed application of Mrs Rhoda Scitfin for a pension under the late law of Congress. The case is made out with perfect clearness & by the most unexceptionable testimony. Very many of those who served in the same troop of horse, at the same time with her husband & in the same manner now being in the actual receipt of their pensions.
Truly yours
P. Beedenbough
Edwards & Sons of P. Beedenbough

Nov 14 11 22 AM '36 N.Y. 4 July 1836
W. L. Chaplin
J. L. Edwards Esq. Commission of Revenue Washington City - D. C.

Record No 10-1178
Sir
Inclosed are some additional affidavits on the application of Rhoda Siffin for a Pension, whose papers have been on the files of the Department for some months - The attention of the Department is respectfully directed to her claim -
Yours & c
A. Vredenburg
L. L. Gould

Khoo a suffix Dec 12 N. L. 4 p.m. 36 conc. AD
Received of Dec 7th free
J. L. Edwards Esq. Comm r of Pensions Washington City D. C. on Appeal -

Freehold Nov 23 rd 1858.
De Sir
By the last Mail I rec d a letter from the Department stating that Mrs Rhoda Sutfin could only be allowed for her husband's service nine months as a Mounted horseman - I presume these must be the 8 months under Histon & one month service under Capt s Overhoven -
By reference to Mrs Sutfin's papers it will be seen that Capt s J. F. Walker testifies to nine months service in the foot as early as June or May 1776 - as explicitly as any witness can testify to a fact. It will also be perceived that Benjamin Hulsaak testifies to two months service in the foot in August & October 1776 as explicitly as a man can testify to a fact. He also adds the circumstances which have impressed the facts before his memory - & by reference to the history of the times & to an abstract of the proceedings & Resolutions of the Provincial Congress of New Jersey furnished the Department by the Hon ble Gerrit D. Wall it will also be perceived that the nature of the service in the year 1776 was as the witnesses have detailed - Now why have not the Department allowed her for these 9 months, Do they not believe the witnesses - or is the nature of the service such as not to come within the law, if the latter let all the survivors from this County be struck off the list for they all claim for similar services - is not the time sufficiently specified. It is believed it is as specific as at this distance of time an individual can come without risk of Com- mitting perjury -
Again Major Jones, Craig & I believe Aaron F. Walker testify to a months service at the Battle of Monmouth in 1778 - I do not think that a fact can be more distinctly stated than that service is

With respect to his services in the horse after 1778, it is testified to by both Craig & S. J. Walker. Major Craig was a commissioned officer & I beg leave to call the attention of the Department to article "Seven" of the instructions of the Department under date of July 9- 1836-
With respect to the nature of the service I would refer to an abstract of the New Jersey laws of that period furnished the Department by the Hon. G. D. Wall of this State-
I find it impossible to prove by witnesses the exact periods of his service in this Corps, & at this period of time, it should be enough (taking into consideration the peculiar nature of the service in this County & of that Troop) to convict any man of perjury who would say that he could -
But Mr. Sutfin served as Mr. Walker did who claims pension for just such service in the same Corps & who swears that Sutfin served as he did & when he did, Mr. Sutfin also served as the other person who now draw pensions for serving in the same Corps did-
If however the Department still think that its duty to the public will not warrant a certificate for a larger amount, Mr. Sutfin will accept it provided it still leaves the door open for additional evidence & increase of pay -
Very resp ly Yrs obt. Servt.
J. L. Edwards Jr.
P. Wedsworth Jr.

Jan 9
J. L. Edwards Esq. Court of Prisons Washington City D. C.

St. Louis Feb. 10 th Jan y 5 - 1857
Dr Sir
Some weeks since I forwarded some papers to the Department relating to the claim of Mrs Rhoda Sutfin for a Pension under act of 4 July 1836, not having received an answer & presuming that they have been misplaced perhaps by the fire in the Post Office I beg leave to call the attention of the Department to her claim -
The same remark applies to the papers of Mrs Mary Cook. I also in the same letter propounded a question with respect to the pension of Mrs May and Wolton & a Mrs Day -
Yrs. &c. &c.
G. Vredenburg
J. L. Edwards Esq.
cont. has Mrs Walter's case
J. D. M.