Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File R. 7779, for Richard Oglesby, Virginia

SERVICE
NUMBER
Oglesby, Richard Susan
R 7779
residence of widow in 1842
CONTENTS

Pension Office
March 19. 1842
Sir,
In reply to your letter on the subject of the claim of Susan Oglesly, I have to state that the proof offered in support of the alleged service of her deceased husband Richard Oglesly is not such as will justify the allowance of her claim. The view taken of this case as expressed in my letter to you of the 24 th ulto, I still feel bound to adhere to.
I must decline laying this claim before the Sec. of War, as you desire. The papers are placed upon our files, and should you think proper to take an appeal from the decision of this Office, or to apply to Congress for relief, they will be subject to the call of such committee as the case may be referred to.
I am, very respectfully Your Obed. Serv. J L Edwards
W. H. Gray Esqr Lynchburg Virginia.

Synch. March 25. 1842
Sir,
Enclosed I send you the letter of 2 d L d Ed- wards declining till, to issue a certificate of Pension to M rs Susan Oglesby (of Bedford County) wife of Rich d . Oglesby - on the grounds, 1 st of Consanguinity to the Claimant - of 2 of the witnesses presuming I suppose - that interested feeling would too strongly sway  their Testimony - and 2 nd that of the witnesses ages - being from 12 to 16 at the time the services of said Rich d Oglesby was rendered: both of which objections, I consider as entirely with- out good cause, unreasonable, and unauthorized by the Rules laid down by the Executive - regulating the taking of evidence in such Cases.
My object in troubling you with this Commu- -nication, is to procure your assistance in the appeal I take from the decision of the Com. of Pensions in M rs Susan Oglesby's Case - and to have the papers withdrawn from the Pension Office, and laid before the Com. on Claims or the Com. on Pensions - as you think best including the correspondence between us on the subject - in order to have before the Committee the argu- -ments on my part - to shew why this class of evidence should not be rejected: with draw- ing however the proposition of compromise on my part - that sooner than take an appeal he might issue the certificate for $20. pr. An or 6 mo. service instead of - at least $30. or 9 or 10 mo. service, which

I think it is clearly proven - and shall throw myself on the Justice and liberality of the Committee of pensioners - which I suppose is the appropriate Committee to lay rejected pensions before.
I take the ground as the Committee will see, in my letter to Mr. Edwards, that, as in Law and Equity, Consanguinity on part of the witness to either party, does not bar the parties the benefit of such Testimony - neither should it be rejected in the establishment of the Services of the old Rev. Soldier, in order to procure the pension justly due his widow: and 2ndly that witnesses that were from 10 to 16 years old at the time the Services were rendered - are better qualified after the lapse of 60 years to give evidence as to facts - than those who were 20 or 30 or more years old at the time - because, the latter class are now superannuated, and have actually forgotten facts that occurred within their knowledge during the Rev. war while the younger class are still vigorous and retain events that transpired at that time; and can transmit them distinctly and correctly to the present generation. Nor are the witnesses in this case the least interested - for it is well known by Mrs. Oglesby's children - (a part of whom is opposed to her getting the pension, on acc. of her old age, and wealth) that she intends to give the proceeds

to one of her grand children, when she gets it. I consider this case as well established as is necessary - and better than some that has been allowed by the Commissioners - and hence the cause of this appeal. I am in hopes that the late state of the Treasury will not cause a delay in making a favorable report in Mr Oglesby's case - in tho, the payment may be postponed to Sep. 1842. or March 1843!
which your petitioners ever pray may be the result of their action on the subject
Robt. W. Gray A.G.
for Mrs Susan Oglesby

Susan Oglesby
Jan. 14. 1843
Ref d to Rev. Pensions
Mar. 1 - 1843
Doc. filed
11. M. G.
Committee dis- charged
J. Taliaferro
Jan. 21. 1843
Comm. dist d to him
Taliaferro J. dis & to lic

Syracuse Jan. 7 1842
Sir,
Enclosed I send you the Affidavit of Louis B Reynolds in the case of Mrs Susan Oglesby the widow of Richard Oglesby dec d . of the County of Bedford. The Affidavit of Reynolds proves one other - and corroborates the positive evidence the other witnesses - to wit, Dan l . Oglesby, Mr. Wolff, and Mr. Witt - which evidence was rejected by the Committee - (as you said in your letter to me but which I have never seen) because of the relationship of the principal part of the witnesses to declarant, and the dec d . Rich d Oglesby.
I never did think the objection to the evidence was valid - but now corroborated as it is by impartial evidence, I am in hopes there will be no difficulty on the minds of the Committee, on reviewing her case, to have her certificate of pension issued - or allowed and granted in what way they may choose. More corroborative evidence could be obtained - but owing to the fact of Oglesby having moved about so much it is difficult to know where to hunt for more positive evidence; he being dead, and his heirs not knowing to whom to apply to prove his services. Under these circumstances of the case I think the Committee ought not to object on account of the consanguinity of the witnesses to the claimant - especially when the Committee is informed, that the witness in this case is in no way interested - as the benefit of the pension is given by Mr. Oglesby to her Grand Daughter Mr. Noel. which will be sworn to if necessary. Please have the Aff t of Mr. Reynolds filed with the other papers in Mr. Oglesby's case - in the Committee room on pensions - and have her claim reviewed, and re-heard - and I in hopes with a favourable result send my letter with it - and my respects to the Committee - praying that they may report favourable to continuance of the pension law of July 7. 1838, for

the benefit of widows - especially of the legal line - drawing back from the 4th day of March 1811, and for life to all who was married prior to June 1812, the time of the declaration of the last war with G. Britain, with such guards and exceptions, as in the wisdom of the Com- -mittee they may see fit; and by which atten- -tion on your part, you will confer a favor on the parties concerned and your humble servant.
R. H. Gray Agent for Susan Oglesby's heirs
Susan Oglesby add. doc. Rev. Penson
B. if a formal memorial is necessary in renewing this case before the committee you will please prepare one; but I imagine none is necessary.
R. H. G.
Mr. Cole
Susan Oglesby
Jan. 14. 1843
Col. H. Gray - Rev. Penson
Mem - 1 - 1843
out file -
Committee dis-
charge -
J. Taliaferro
Jan. 21. 1843
Some ship? to be
Taliaferro J. dis
& file

March 5. Michael's Place
Sir,
your letter of the 24th Feb y is at hand - and of the contents of which I must confess I am greatly disappointed - that is, your objection to the character of the evidence in proof of the services of Rich d Oglesby. I should greatly have preferred, if it was possible, to have proven Oglesby's services by persons unconnected by the ties of Consanguinity to the widow - but as it has now become a matter, almost to impossibility, to prove military services of Revolutionary services, by living persons who was in the service with the husbands of widows now claiming pensions - owing to removals, deaths, infirmities of mind &c of those who were their contemporaries; we necessarily have to resort to the next best, and most unexceptionable evidence that can be procured to prove the services, &c. But in this case I think your objection to the evidence on the score of Consanguinity is not valid either in Law or Equity. In a court of Law or Equity the parties have a right to prove their claims even by their nearest relatives - other than their wives.
That being considered a matter of delicacy [only] persons disconnected by the ties of Consanguinity are and ought to be preferred to testify in the establishment of any claim either to the Govt or any individual. Your objection to the evidence, on the ground of their youth, or non-age, is not founded on experience or you would not have made it! From the experience that I have in the matter - it is much safer to depend on the memory of persons now living in regard to facts coming within their knowledge - (which transpired in and during the latter part of the Rev y . war) of from 10 to 16 years of age at the time - than to depend on the memory (minds) of those who are now 80, 90, or more years old - in regard to the same facts - altho, the latter may, at the time the circu- -mstances transpired, have been equally cognizant of the fact.

And to show you that my views - (experience) is correct on this subject - I could cite you to a case - when a soldier, who had gotten his ankle sprained on the field of Battle-Guilford - on being questioned, if he knew any thing of the man being at the Battle of Guilford, who had pulled his ankle in place - Said, that he did not recollect any thing of his being there! I merely mention this fact - coming within my own knowledge - to prove that it is safest to depend on the youngest evidence you can get - so that they were less than 8 or 10 years old at the time, the circumstance transpired -; and as in this case, the witnesses, knowing when Oglesby left home, and when he returned from service - in the several tours of duty - ought to be as satisfactory to your mind that he rendered the services claimed for him - as if they had been with him throughout. The ages of the witnesses - if you will examine, - at the time 1781 - when the greater part of the services of Oglesby were rendered - ranged from 12 to 16 years the ages of all others - at this time of day - most to be depended on to prove two services during the latter part of the war. Nor does the Rules in my humble opinion give the Com. of P. the power or discretion, to reject positive evidence on the score of consanguinity to the widow. Owing to the obstructions thrown in the way to the establishment of widows pensions - I shall not attempt to establish any more, founded on military services - unless the rules of evidence shall be so enlarged, as to render it possible to prove the service to the satisfaction of the department - by other than positive evidence, which now amounts to impossibility. Oglesby having removed from Albemarle, to Nelson, and from thence to Bedford - and the removals and deaths of his contemporaries in service - render it impossible to prove his services by other than the evidence I have sent. The procuring of evidence, corroboration of that which is filed - showing that he was heard to say in his lifetime that he was in the Rev. war - at the times & places alleged - would add to, or strengthen - so as to remove your objections - such I presume could be obtained - if so, you will please write me. and further, as a compromise - rather than appeal from

your decision in toto - I will accept on the part of the widow - the allowance of 6 mo. services - or of 20 per An. under the law of July 4. 1836 - which would be $220 up to the 11 th March 1842. I have no doubt myself, but, that Oglesby rendered all the terms set forth by the act - if no more: and Altho I think his services could not have amounted to less than 9 or 10 mo. yet, rather than be burdened any further with this small claim - I propose to take the minimum allowance of $20 per An. rather than take it before the Com. of Pensions when I am satisfied that 9 or 10 mo. service would be allowed. The evidence in this case, is I think stronger than the evidence in Mr. Roberts (Alice) - which you confirmed at 6 mo. tho' I do not think you allowed enough in her case - but rather than appeal I assented to a reduction. Suppose Sir, you lay this case before the Secretary of War; I should like to hear his opinions in regard to the illegality , - as you make it of consanguine testimony. With these views I await your further correspondence on the subject - hoping, that as I have never yet, appealed from any of your decisions - I still may never have occasion to do so: and as I have never sent you any claim which you have rejected - notwithstanding your rigidity, in the discharge of your duty - truly I have never attempted to encumber you with trivial and frivolous claims - and bestowing my labour for nought! you should also be satisfied by this time, that I would not forfeit my reputation as an Agent - in attempting to establish unjust, and unfounded claims - and thereby practice a fraud on the Govt. I await another communication from you on the subject embraced in this letter.
Yours respectfully, No. H. Gray A.S.
B. There can be no objection to the evidence of Oglesby's children - except that of their being interested in any pension, which might be recd. by the widow. But in this case, that objection can not apply - for if you will examine the Afft. of Mr. Woll - you will find

that she disclaims being the least interested in the result - she alluded to the fact that M rs Oglesby had promised one of her married grand-daughters that if her husband thought proper to get one to establish her pension - that when she got it - she would give it to her. Daniel Oglesby also is aware of this fact - therefore both M rs Neill, and Daniel Oglesby are both disinterested witnesses - making all three of the witnesses disinterested.
Then this being the case - which will be qualified to if necessary - there can be no more objection to a child proving his Father's services, than any other person: and not so much as for a child to prove his Father's claim to money or property, vs a third person - because in that case - the the son or daughter would to a certain extent be interested witnesses - inasmuch, as they might presume that ultimately this money or property would descend to them. M rs Oglesby herself, on account of her extreme old age, and independent situation - is not solicitous on the subject on her own account - but to give it to one of her grand daughters - and she has 2 other children over 60 years of age whom Aff ts would be useful in telling what they heard their Father say about his services - but they both being independent - and too, knowing the probable destination of the money when obtained - has rather discouraged the attempt to obtain their mother's pensions. I mention this fact to show that it is not a Family movement to get M rs Oglesby's pension, right or wrong - but that the cause is divided against itself on the subject - because in fact none of them are interested in the result.
I am in hopes that after this exposition of the matter, you will see no objections to the evidence, and send M rs Oglesby her certificate of pension as soon as possible. Yours Respectfully,
Robt V. Gray

August 1, 1932.
Mrs. Evelyn Oglesby Page 123 -35th Street Newport News, Virginia.
RA-J/MSF/ILL XXXXXXXXXXXX Richard Oglesby R. 7779 aw
Dear Madam:
Reference is made to your letter in which you request the record of Richard Oglesby, a soldier of the Revolutionary War.
The records of this office show that a claim for pension was made by Susan Oglesby, under the Act of July 4, 1836, on account of the service of her husband, Richard Oglesby, in the Revolutionary War (R. 7779).
The records show that her claim was not allowed because she failed to furnish the required proof of service and marriage; that on February 3, 1848, the papers in her application were withdrawn from the pension files and sent to the House of Representatives for action by that body and were never returned to this office, therefore, there is on file no statement of hers in regard to the service of Richard Oglesby or of their marriage; the Congressional records show that in the 30th Congress, 1st Session, page 358 of the journal, the petition for pension of Susan Oglesby, widow of Richard Oglesby, was referred to the Committee of the House on Revolutionary Pensions and is recorded "Discharged; laid on table".
In 1842, one Robert H. Gray of Lynchburg, Virginia, as agent for Susan Oglesby of Bedford County, Virginia, named above, made inquiry in her behalf in regard to her claim for pension.
The statements in his letters all revert to statements made by the widow and the affidavits filed in support of her claim, which as stated, are not now on file in this office, so it is not possible to definitely state the whole when so much is associated with previous transactions.

He stated that Richard Oglesby "removed from Albemarle, to Nelson, and from thence to Bedford" no dates given; that the soldier served at least nine or ten months in the Revolutionary War, no dates nor officers names shown.
He referred to those who made affidavits as relatives of the soldier, one, a son, Daniel Oglesby, and the intimation is that two of the others, Mrs. Christians Holt of Bedford County, and Mrs. Conny Witt of Nelson County, were daughters of the soldier, but no definite statement can be made. One Mrs. Noel was living in 1842, a granddaughter of the soldier; she was possibly a daughter of Mrs. Christians Holt, statement vague. Two other daughters over sixty years of age in 1842 were referred to, names not shown.
The dates of birth and death of the soldier and his widow, Susan, are not shown, and this office has no further information relative to the soldier or family.
Very truly yours,
A. D. HILLER, Assistant to Administrator.

REJECTED
1982-Aug. 1 - Hist. to Mrs. Evelyn Oglesby Page - MNH3/SLC
77779.
P. O. Susan Oglesby Service: _____
Enlisted: _____, 18
Discharged: _____, 18
Application filed: _____, 18
Printed list of 1952 Rejected Suspended Claims gives Cause Alleged: suspension: "For Further proof"
Re-enlisted 1953
Attorney: _____
P. O. _____
_____ Recognized. _____ Contract.
_____ Cert. of Dis. Searched for _____, 18

Returned to P. P.
Paper sent to CLK 1/2
Feb 3 1848 under Rec d
H.R. of Jan 31. 1848.
Elk ft. m. etc.
charges
7779

5528
Let. to Hon. Edw. Hubbard
April 24. 1844
Let to same Feb. 6. 1845.
Let Rev. J. S. Wilson
Mar. 8/52

Ho. of Reps. Feb 11. 1852
Sir
I have the honor to request, on behalf of the Com. on Rev. Pensions, that the papers relating to the application of the heirs of Sarah O'Leary for a pension, may be forwarded to this Committee, with the view of the Commissioner upon the application.
Very respectfully
Your obedt. Servt
John S. Millson
Chair m Com. Rev. Pensions.
Genl E. Heath Esq Comm. of Pensions

Lusan Oglesby
for a pension
heirs to be named
May 19 th 1842
Ever 20 th 1844
Wm Miller on Revp
Pension
W. W. Fulford

B. H. Gray
March 19. 42
bc
[Faint mirrored handwriting, likely bleed-through from the reverse side of the page]
[Faint mirrored handwriting, likely bleed-through from the reverse side of the page]
[Faint mirrored handwriting, likely bleed-through from the reverse side of the page]

Pension Office March 19 1842
3444
Sir
In reply to your letter on the subject of the claim of Susan Oglesby, I have to state that the proof offered in support of the alleged service of her late husband Richard Oglesby is not such as will justify the allowance of her claim. The view taken of this case as expressed in my letter to you dated the 24th ult o , I still feel bound to adhere to.
I cannot find this one
I must decline laying this claim before the Secretary of War, as you desire. The papers are placed upon our files, and should you think proper to take an appeal from the decision of the Office, or to apply to Congress for relief, they will be subject to the call of such committee as the case may be referred to.
Ro H Gray Esq Syracuse N Y
Yours
oc

March 8, 1852
Dear John S. Millson

Pension Office, March 8, 1852.
Sir
In reply to request, I have the honor to state that the papers in the case of Susan Eggleston, widow of Richard, who claimed a pension under the act of July 4, 1836, were sent to the Clerk of the House of Representatives on the 3 rd of February 1848, and have not been returned to this office.
The claim was rejected for the want of sufficient proof of service and marriage; and a committee of Congress to whom the papers were referred concurred in the views of this office.
Hon John S. Millson, Chairman Committee
I have the honor to be Respectfully,
Richard H. Russell,
Yours &c.
House of Representatives,
Com of Pensions,

Washington City Jan 28, 1845.
The Additional Affidavits of Louis B Reynolds and Elizabeth Hanly, having been obtained since Mr. Oglesby's case was taken before Congress, - in further proof of the marriage, and services of her husband - they are herewith returned to the Commission of Pensions, for review, and adjudication - hoping all former objections are hereby removed, and that her claim will be allowed.
H. of R. Jan 30 th 1845.
Dear Sir
Permit me to invite yr. attention to the within papers & the foregoing statement. The claim seems to be sustained by all the requisite testimony usually relied upon by yr. Department - yr. obt. servt. E. H. Hubbard

H. of R. March 20 th /87.
Dear Sir:
I enclose as requested the papers in the case of Isadora Oglesby & respectfully ask an examination of the claim. If the examination results adversely please state the points of difficulty-
Yr. Mo. M. Hunt Chairman

Pension Office 572 March 28 1842
Sir,
Your letter of the 23d March respecting the claim of Susan Oglesby (an Eliz th Winey) has been rec d . On the subject of the former I addressed you a letter on the 19th instant, which has probably ere this been rec d by you.
In the case of Mr Winey, I have still to inform you that the proof that Eliz th Winey, the claimant's husband, was one of the two identified individuals whose names appear upon the Virginia rolls in the Infantry Artillery of that State, is not satisfactory. No less than six individuals of Pocahontas Co.
applied for and obtained certificates under the act of March 18 1818, prior to the year 1820: three of which were dropped on account of perjury.
As Eliz th Winey lived until 1830, he never applied, nor does it appear that

R. H. Gray March 25. 42
O.C.
that he possessed any such amount of property; nor was he called upon by any one as a witness to prove their claims. In reply to your request asking advice how to proceed in order to lay open their claims before the Committee of Pensions, I have to state that the Department exercises no control, on any claim beyond its action in the Office. Any advice or recommendation in the further prosecution of a claim & therefore any acts for the prosecution not allowed by it, would be irregular and improper. Yours
O.O.
R. H. Gray Esq. Lyndhurst, W

Hubbard
Susan Oglesby
mil of Richards
May 9, 1842.
Com: Rev: Pensions
July 21. 1842
Com te discharged (barrels)
The character of the evidence in this case is such as not to entit- -tle it to the first grad- -ability The Marriage of the claimant is not sufficiently proven
Court. Report Adverse
May 1842
Hubbard Mr. D. D. D.

27, Congress. 2. Session.
Congress of the United States In the House of Representatives May 9, 1842.
On motion of Mr Coles,
Resolved, That the Committee on Revolutionary Pensions be instructed to inquire into the propriety of granting a pension to Susan Oglesby, the widow of Richard Oglesby, a soldier of the Revolution, and that they call for the papers belonging to the case, now on file in the Pension Office
Attest
M. J. Clarke Clerk

Jan 31. 1842
Phila. 4. 1836.
See: Ogle, by
5. 528.
FREE
Jas. L. Edwards Esq. Comm. of Pensions Washington City

Synchburg Jan 26. 1842
Sir,
Enclosed I send you the declaration of Mrs. Susan Oglesby of Bradford County - and the Affidavits of Dan e Oglesby, Christiana Neott, of the County of Bradford, and Mrs. Mary Witt of Nelson County - corroborating said declaration in almost every particular - I induce it is a rare case, that 3 several aff ts and the declaration should concur so completely. in regard to the services of the soldier - each tour, being specified by each witness, and declarant - only some small difference, in regard to the length of some one of the tours. I consider that about 18 months services are proven in the present case - be so good as to forward the pension certificate of Mrs. Susan Oglesby - the declarant in the present case as soon as possible. I refer you also to Baldac ll Dan iel cert to W. P. I. P. Yours Respectfully Robt. W. Gray A.G.
B. I have just rec d . your letter of the 21 st in regard to Bounty land-claims - and the searching of records for evidence to establish the services of Rev d . Officers and Soldiers - in order to obtain their  own lands - or pensions for their widows - you may well imagine my surprise at such conclusion.
You first require, that the services of the Regular line - State and Continental - shall be proven by record evidence alone! - and as if to make a mockery of their claims - you deny the claimants the right to examine the only records in existence, by which their services can be proven!!
I am in hopes Sir, that I misunderstood you in this particular - and request that you will favor me with another communication on the subject - more in detail - for if the services are to be proven by the records and then denied the right to examine the records - the pension system so far as regards the widows of Regular Officers and Soldiers are at an end - please write again on this subject Yours respectfully - Robt. W. Gray - A.G.

123-35 th St., Newport News, Virginia June 19, 1932.
Pension Office Revolutionary Claims, Washington, D.C.
Gentlemen,
I wish to obtain any information you may have regarding the Richard Oglesby mentioned below, who died about 1811, and the nature and validity of his military claim.
Bedford County, Will Book No. 4, page 356:- Will of Daniel Oglesby, who died in 1859 mentions a brother William and a sister Catherine Holt, who died childless, and states that the three were children of Richard Oglesby, deceased, "who had a military claim in the hands of Mr. Robert H. Gray, pension agent."
An early reply together with any data you may be able to give me will be deeply appreciated.
Yours very truly, (Mrs.) Evelyn Oglesby Sage.