Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File W. 21947, for Daniel Peavey, Massachusetts

SERVICE
NUMBER _____
Mass. N.H.
Perry, Daniel or Peerey Mary
N. 21947 B.L. Nt. 26,050 1/2 - 160 - 55.
CONTENTS

3593,
Let to A. V. G., Eastman Jan 8/57
New Hampshire Pats
Mary Peavey widow of Daniel N. H. who served in the Revolutionary war, as a Private
Reported Feb 1/49
Inscribed on the Roll at the rate of 33 Dollars 33,
Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1848.
Certificate of Pension issued the / day of Feb 1849 and sent to
Am. S. Fick Hoff R
Reg 3 rd Mn 55 th NW 32253
Recorded on Roll of Pensioners under act February 2, 1848, Page 118 Vol. 1.

10872 New Hampshire Daniel Harey of Shafford in the State of New Hampshire who was a Private in the Company commanded by Captain Dow of the Regt. commanded by Col. Brewster in the New Hampshire line for 10 months
Inscribed on the Roll of New Hampshire at the rate of 33 Dollars - 33 - Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1831.
Certificate of Pension issued the 18 th day of May 1833 and that P. Cognate Salomon N.H.
Arrears to the 4th of March 1833 $116.66 Semi-ant. allowance ending Sept. 16.67 $83.33
{ Revolutionary Claim, } { Act June 7, 1832. }
Recorded by N. A. Atkinson Clerk, Book E Vol. 18 th Page 110

32.253, At Month 3,
Mary Peavey, wid of Daniel Peavey - m
Revolutionary War
Admitted 160 acres,
Warrant No 26.050 1/2
Issued May 16/56-
And send to
Geo. K. Eastman
Farmington
Vol. P. 59. N. H.
June 21/56. Note Bureau of Fine Slaves Office D.P.P.

Dorothy Youngs affidavit No. 4-

I Dorothy Young wife of Moses Young of Alton in the County of Stafford and State of New Hampshire shire, aged forty eight years, depose and say that being the Daughter of Daniel Peavy and Mary his wife, I have always been well acquainted with my said father's family - that the eldest of my mother's children was a son and was named Shadrach, who has been dead a number of years, he having died in the public service, as a soldier - that the second child was a Daughter by the name of Salome, who has also been dead a number of years and I have always understood and been informed that I was the third child born and that I was forty eight years old the 20 th day of June last past, which would make the time of my birth June 20 th 1790 -
I am also knowing that my mother has been a widow ever since the death of my father, which took place I think in July 1836, and still is a widow residing in the family with me - Dorothy Young
State of New-Hampshire Stafford County ss. August 29. 1838 - Then personally appeared the above named Dorothy Young, with whom I am per- sonally acquainted and who is by me considered fully entitled to credit, & made solemn oath that the foregoing affida- vit by her subscribed is just and true Before me Nehemiah Eastman Jr. Clerk

Daniel Ravys affidavit No. 3-

I Daniel Peavy of Farmington in the County of Stafford and State of New Hampshire, aged sixty four years, depose and that being the son of Daniel Peavy late of said Farmington and Alton in said County by a former wife; I know that my said father, Daniel Peavy, was married to his second wife, whose name was Mary Dugan, according to the best of my recollection about fifty years ago - that the marriage was solemnized by a Justice of the Peace, by the name of Joby Daul, then an active Justice of the peace within and for said County of Stafford - that I was at the house where the marriage took place on the day of the marriage, tho' being then but a boy was not present at the performance of the ceremony - That my said father by his said second wife had a numerous family of children, the eldest of whom was Sherdenah Peavy, who long ago died in the public service, as a soldier, the second child was a daughter and she is dead, the third child's name is Dorothy, who is now the wife of Mous Young -
I further depose and say that said Daniel Peavy and Mary, his wife as aforesaid, continued to live together as man and wife until they were separated by the death of said Daniel Peavy, which according to the best of my recollection took place, the in July 1836 and that said Mary Peavy has ever since continued to be and now is the widow of said Daniel Peavy -
Daniel Peavy
State of New Hampshire
Stafford County p. August 29. 1838 - Then personally appeared the above named Daniel Peavy with whom I am personally acquainted, & who is by me considered to be entitled to full credit, and made solemn oath that the foregoing affidavit by him subscribed is just and true - Before me
Nehemiah Eastman Jus. Peace

Hon James L. Edwards
Letter to Mr Edwards &
Certificate included

State of New Hampshire Shafford County ss. Court of Common Pleas - Clerks Office.
"On wednesday the twenty ninth day of March seventeen hundred eighty six Mr Daniel Pevey & Mrs Molly Durgin both of Rochester per duos a certificate that they were lawfully published were married by me. Jahes Dame Justice Peace"
The foregoing is a true copy from the Records of Jahes Dame, Esquire, (which were left in this office fourteenth Sept. 1815. as appears by the filing on the wrapper that includes said Dame's Records & files) with the exception of the date of the year which is in fair legible figures as follows viz "1786." Attest F. Cagwell. Clerk -
"Mr Daniel Pevey & Mrs Molly Durgin both of Rochester intend marriage"
"This certify that the within name d Pevey and Durgin have been published as the law directs - Rochester Novem r 3 d 1785. Josiah Main, Town Clerk"
"On wednesday ye 29 th day March 1786 the above Pevey & Durgin were married by me. Jahes Dame Just. Peace"
The above three extracts are copied from a small slip of paper attached by a wax seal to the page of the book where the first extract is copied from and from its appearance I have no doubt was the original Publication and certificate of the Town Clerk on the back

of it and also the original certificate of the Justice of the Marriage which was afterwards copied into his record book -
I also certify the above extract first made is from what purports to be the Justice record book of John Dume Orgun - which was probably left in this Office in pursuance of a Law of this State requiring all records of Justices of Peace, on the decease of such Justice, to be deposited in said Office.
In testimony of all which I have hereunto set my name and affixed the Seal of said Court this seventh day of September Anno Domini 1838. T. Gagnwell, Clerk

Souer N.H. 7 Sept 1838 - Hon James L. Edwards,
At the request of Hon W. Eastman, I forwarded by this morning's mail a Packet containing certain applications of widows for a Pension, among them was that of Widow Peasey. Mr Eastman wrote me that having no record evidence of marriage he wished me to search "among old James Dawes old books or papers" for "any evidence of his having married the Daniel Peasey to Mary Durgin & if so to furnish that evidence in Mary Peaseys case".
In pursuance of this request I send the foregoing. I suppose you well know that formerly Molly and Mary were considered the same name.
I would also state that a month since I forwarded to you the papers in the case of Widow Judith Cagswell for a Pension, who is my Mother, with a request that the result of the application might be commu- nicated to me at this place. I have heard nothing from the Department. I should not now have troubled you with this remark but I have been informed that cases that were sent on about the same time have been decided sometime since.
If the papers have not been received at the Department, or if an answer has been sent which ought to have been here previous to this, will you have the goodness & inform me -
Reply Yours Francis Cagswell.

58 Mary Peoney 32.253

State of New Hampshire
County of Belknap ss Be it known that before me
Samuel Downing Jr a Justice of the Peace within and for said County and State, personally appeared Mary Peavey a resident of Alton in said County and State aforesaid and made oath in due form of law that she is the identical person, to whom the Pension Certificate No. 3593 was issued as the widow of Daniel Peavey, who was a private in the revolutionary war; under which Certificate she is intitled to receive annually the sum of thirty three dollars and thirty three cents said Certificate bears date the first day of February A. D. 1849 and authorizes her to draw said Pension from the 4 th day of March 1848 and is signed by W. L. Meigs Secretary of War and examined and countersigned by J. G. Bennett for Commissioner of Pensions—That she makes this declaration for the purpose of obtaining the bounty land to which she may be entitled under the act approved March 3 d 1855—
Witness Oliver C. Dorr
Mary her Peavey mark
Samuel his Dorr
We Oliver C. Dorr and Samuel his Dorr residents of Alton in the state of New Hampshire upon our oaths declare that the foregoing declaration was signed and acknowledged by Mary Peavey aforesaid in our presence; and that we believe from the appearance and statements of the applicant that she is the identical person she represents herself to be—
Oliver C. Dorr
Samuel his Dorr
The foregoing declaration and affidavit were sworn to and subscribed before me on this 23 rd day of March A. D. 1855; and I certify that I know the affiants to be credible persons; that the claimant is the person she represents herself to be, and that I have no interest in this claim—
Samuel Downing Jr Jus. Peace throughout the State

The State of New Hampshire Strafford ss.
Court of Common Pleas. Clerks Office.
I, Reuben Hays Jr. Clerk of said Court hereby certify that Samuel Downing Jr. is a Justice of the Peace and of the Quorum throughout the State, duly commissioned and qualified, and was such at the time of taking of the within foregoing affidavit and that the foregoing signature purporting to be his is true and genuine; that all his official acts as such are entitled to full faith and credit, and that the aforesaid Court of Common Pleas is a Court of Record.
In testimony whereof I have hereto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Court this twenty ninth day of March A.D. 1855
R. Hays Jr. Clerk
58 P Mary Pease 32.253

I John Nutter of Barnstead in the County of Strafford and State of New Hampshire depose and say that I am well acquainted with Daniel Peasey of Alton in said County and am well knowing that he enlisted into Capt John Drews Company and served in the same as stated in his declaration before the Court of Probate for the County of Strafford the 10 th day of Sept 1832 - having been myself, a revolu- tionary soldier 2
Barnstead Nov 16 th 1832
Jno Nutter
State of New Hampshire Strafford ss Nov 16 th 1832
Then personally appeared the above named John Nutter and made solemn oath that the foregoing affidavit by him subscribed is just and true Before me and I hereby certify that the said John Nutter is a man of respectability trust & veracity
Gerrymann Hodgen J st Pa

State of New Hampshire Secretary's Office Concord Nov. 20. 1832
This certifies that Benjamin Hodgdon, whose name, in his own sign manual, is hereunto attached, is a Justice of the Peace in said State, duly constituted and sworn.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set the Seal of the State the day and year aforesaid.
Joseph Robinson Deputy Secretary of State.

Daniel Peavy
22/35

DECLARATION.
In order to obtain the benefit of the Act of Congress, passed June 7, 1832.
County of Stratford } State of New-Hampshire, ss. At a special Court held at the dwelling house of Daniel Peavey in Alton
On this 10 th day of September 1832, personally appeared in open Court before the Judge of the Probate , now sitting, Daniel Peavey a resident of Alton in the County of Stratford and State of N. H. aged 83 years, who being first duly sworn according to law, doth on his oath make the following declaration, in order to obtain the benefit of the Act of Congress, passed June 7, 1832.
That he entered the service of the United States under the following named officers, and served as herein stated—
Daniel Peavey of said Alton New Hampshire formerly of Rochester in said State in July 1776 enlisted into Capt John Drent Company New Hampshire Militia Detachment Colps & David McNeil Col. M y M y ans regiment and marched to Concordia and there served five months say service which there was principally in fortifying building forts etc After I was discharged from the said five months service on my return at Charles town D r V r I was solicited again to enlist and did enlist into Capt Lows Company in Colo Brim or Brewster regiment on some such name I do not perfectly recollect it was of the Massachusetts line I then returned to Concordia and served five months longer I have no documentary evidence and I know of no person living who can testify to this last five months service the said Whitecomb's Company was called the Rangers and I actually served ten months under the said two enlistments
He hereby relinquishes every claim whatever to a pension or annuity except the present, and declares that his name is not on the Pension Roll of the Agency of any State.
Sworn to and subscribed, the day & year aforesaid before me  Daniel Peavey Daniel C. Atkinson Judge of Probate
We, H. D. Burrill & C. B. Goss residing in Alton — and Brins Cogswell residing in Gilmanton hereby certify, that we are well acquainted with Daniel Peavey — , who has subscribed and sworn to the above declaration ; that we believe him to be 83 — years of age ; that he is reputed and believed, in the neighborhood where he resides, to have been a soldier of the Revolution, and that we concur in that opinion.
Sworn and subscribed the day & year aforesaid before me  H. D. Burrill Daniel C. Atkinson Judge of Probate
And the said Court do hereby declare their opinion, after the investigation of the matter, and after putting the interrogatories prescribed by the War Department, that the above named applicant was a Revolutionary Soldier, and served as he states. And the Court certifies, that it appears to them that H. D. Burrill who has signed the preceding certificate, is a clergyman resident in Alton and that Brins Cogswell , who has also signed the same is a resident in Gilmanton and are credible persons, and that their statement is entitled to credit. That said Daniel Peavey by bodily infirmity was unable to attend Court from his house  Daniel C. Atkinson Judge of Probate
I, James Bartlett Reg d of the Court of Probate do hereby certify that the foregoing contains the original proceedings of the said Court, in the matter of the application of Daniel Peavey for a pension.
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Court, this 10 th day of September A. D. 1832
James Bartlett Reg d

1391 Mary Piovly's papers No 1-2-3-4-
Dedication No. 1-
Wid of Daniel
N.H.
Act 7 July 1838
Mammal 1786
died 1838
Allac $33.33 per ann from
Eastman Esq Farmington N.H.

DECLARATION.
In order to obtain the benefit of the act of Congress, of the 7th July, 1838, entitled "An act granting half pay and pensions to certain widows."
STATE OF NEW-HAMPSHIRE.
STRAFFORD SS.—On this twenty sixth day of August A.D. 1838 personally appeared before Ezekiel Hurd one of the Justices of the Court of Common Pleas several  in and for said County of Strafford — Mary Peavy a resident of Alton in the County of Strafford, aged Seventy three years, 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 7, 1838, entitled "An act granting half pay and pensions to certain widows:" That she is the widow of Daniel Peavy who was a private in the army of the Revolution and as such soldier was a Pensioner under the Act of the Congress of the United States in 1832, as will be made to appear by reference to the Pension List, Roll of the New Hampshire Agency —
She further declares that she was married to the said Daniel Peavy on or about the twelfth day of April in the year seventeen hundred and eighty five that her husband, the aforesaid Daniel Peavy died on the sixteenth day of July A.D. 1836 that she was not married to him prior to his leaving the service, but the marriage took place previous to the first of January, seventeen hundred and ninety-four, viz: at the time above stated. Mary Peavy Mark Witness: William Eastman Ezekiel Hurd Sworn to and subscribed, on the day and year above written, before
Ezekiel Hurd Justice of The Court of Common Pleas
I hereby certify that the applicant cannot, from bodily infirmity, attend the court.
Ezekiel Hurd one of the Justices of the Court of Common Pleas

State of New Hampshire
Shafford county ss. I Francis Coggwell clerk of the court of common Pleas for said county hereby certify that Ezekiel Hard, Esquire, is a Justice of said court as within and that the within signatures purporting to be his are genuine in my belief -
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my name and affixed the Seal of said court this six the day of September A.D. 1838 -
Francis Coggwell, clerk
Ms. A. 9. 2. 139 Mary Brantley papers No 1-2-3-4-
Declarations No. 1-
Will of Daniel
W.H.
Act 7 July 1838
Maurice 1786
Will 1838
Allow $33.33 per ann
from
HE Eastman Esq Farmington N.H.

Danice Deacy A Hampshire
Parish 10 Monk
22135
P. Cogswell Gilminton R A

BRIEF in the case of  Daniel Peavy  N.H.  vs of Strafford  in the State of  (Act 7th June, 1832.)
 1. Was the declaration made before a Court or a Judge? before the Judge  2. If before a Judge, does it appear that the applicant is disabled by bodily infirmity? yy  3. How old is he? 83 
4. State his service, as directed in the form annexed.
   Period. Duration of Service. Rank. Names of General and Field Officers under whom he served.   Years, Months, Days. As a Gen.     July . . In 1776 enlisted 5 Private Col Drew Col Weyman   " " 5 " Col Low Col Brewster  
 5. In what battles was he engaged? none  6. Where did he reside when he entered the service? Rochester N.H.  7. Is his statement supported by living witnesses, by documentary proof, by traditional evidence, by incidental evidence, or by the rolls? Traditional one Living Witness  8. Are the papers defective as to form or authentication? and if so, in what respect? 
I Certify that the foregoing statement and the answers agree with the evidence in the case above mentioned.
George L. Taylor
Examining Clerk.

32,253 act Mar 3/53 April 2/53
Civil War N. Eastman, Aug. 15/55 let " " " N 48 Sept. 1/55 let " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " "
2/11/56 Mary Bracey widow Daniel Bracey executor
No 227 J. L. Com. 227 J. L. Revolution Continuer N 16 Feb 48 3593
No 160 Act May 16/56 B D L D
Civ. Aug. 15
M. G. N. Eastman Farmington Dover N.H.
Vol P. page 55.

I Daniel Darn of Rochester in the County of Strafford and State of New-Hampshire, aged sixty nine years, depose and say, that being the son of Joby Darn late of the same Rochester Esquire deceased, and having always resided in the same house with him until his decease, and having had the care of his papers, books &c after his said decease, I am knowing and will recollect the fact that he was called upon, as a Justice of the peace, to join in marriage Daniel Peavy late of Farmington & Alton in said County of Strafford now deceased—that according to the best of my recollection it was about fifty years ago; when the said Peavy was then married to his present widow, but the precise period I cannot tell— I, however, recollect after my father's decease of seeing among his old books and papers a certain paper purporting to be a certificate of the publication of the said Daniel Peavy of his intended marriage to his said intended wife, and recollect of seeing said Certificate pinned on to his old book of Records—
I further depose and say that I have this day in arriving the old papers &c but cannot now find said Certificate —
Daniel Darn
State of New-Hampshire Strafford County ss. August 28 th 1888—Then personally appeared the above named Daniel Darn, with whom I am personally acquainted, and who is by me considered to be entitled to credit, and made solemn oath that the foregoing affidavit by him signed, is just and true
Before me
Nehemiah Eastman Jr. Pro.

State of New Hampshire
Shafford County ss.
I Francis Cagmell clerk of the Superior Court of Judicature for said County hereby certify that Nehemiah Eastman is a Magistrate as is mentioned within and that the signatures purporting to be his to the annexed affidavits are in my belief genuine -
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my name and affixed the Seal of said Court this sixth day of September A.D. 1838
F Cagmell, Clerk.
Daniel Daines affidavit No. 2

Taken from a package sent by N. Eathman with directions to direct to N. & G. W. Eathman Farmington N. H.
Cole

BRIEF objections to the admission of Pension Claims, of which those answered in the negative, in red ink, will apply to the claim of Daniel Peavy which require further proof or explanation.
I. Does the declaration show where the applicant resides? yy II. Did the declarant make the declaration in the county where he resides? yy III. If the applicant did not make the declaration in the county where he resides, is there any reason assigned for his not doing so? IV. Has the declarant mentioned the period or periods of the war when he served? yy V. * Has he mentioned with precision the length of his service, and the different grades in which he served, in language so definite as to enable the department to determine to what amount of pension he is entitled? yy VI. Has he given the names of the officers under whom he served, in conformity with the regulations? yy VII. Has he made a relinquishment of every claim to any other pension than the one under the Act of June 7, 1832? yy VIII. Has the Court given their opinion? yy IX. Has the Clerk given his certificate? yy X. Is the Clerk's seal affixed? And if so, has it a device or inscription by which it can be distinguished from any other seal? yy

XI. Has the applicant obtained the evidence of a clergyman and another respectable citizen as to their belief respecting his age and the general belief in his neighborhood relative to his revolutionary service?
Certified by two citizens
XII. If the clergyman's affidavit has not been produced, is there any reason assigned for not obtaining it?
XIII. If the applicant has no documentary evidence, and has not obtained the testimony of at least one living witness, has he stated in his declaration that such proof cannot be had?
XIV. † If the applicant's name is not found on the rolls of military service, has he produced a witness or witnesses as to his service? yy
If he has produced direct proof as to service, has the magistrate who administered the oath, certified to the credibility of the witness or witnesses? yy
Has the proper officer certified to the official character and signature of the magistrate as the regulations direct? yy
XV. Does it appear from any of the papers that the witness was in such a situation, or of such an age, as to have a personal knowledge of the applicant's service? yy
XVI. ‡ Are the papers authenticated as the regulations direct? yy
XVII. Are the seven interrogatories prescribed by the War Department answered satisfactorily? And, if not, which of them is not so answered?
2. 6.
EXPLANATORY NOTES.
* QUERE V. In a case where the applicant cannot, by reason of the loss of memory, state precisely how long he served, he should amend his declaration by making an affidavit in the following words:
"Personally appeared before me, the undersigned, a Justice of the Peace, &c. A. B. who, being duly sworn, deposeth and saith, that, by reason of old age, and the consequent loss of memory, he cannot swear positively as to the precise length of his service, but according to the best of his recollection he served not less than the periods mentioned below, and in the following grades; For _____ year _____ months, and _____ days, I served as a _____ For _____ months and _____ days, I served as a _____; and for such service I claim a pension."

It is important in all cases to determine with precision the period for which each applicant served, and the particular rank he held, as the law directs the pension to be paid according to the grade of the pensioner and the length of his service. The use of the phrase about three or four months is too indefinite, and all such qualifying expressions are objectionable. Some persons who apply for pensions merely state they served two years in the militia, &c. without specifying the tours; the names of the officers, and other particulars respecting their service. This form of a declaration is highly objectionable. It must in every case be clearly shewn under what officers the applicant served; the duration of each term of engagement; the particular place or places where the service was performed; that the applicant served with an embodied corps called into service by competent authority; that he was either in the field or in garrison; and for the time during which the service was performed, he was not employed in any civil pursuit.
QUERE XIV. Proof of Service.
In a case where the name of the applicant is not found on the records of the Department, he must prove his service by two credible witnesses, who are required to set forth in their affidavits the time of the claimants entering the service, and the time and manner of his leaving the same, as well as the regiment, company, and line to which he belonged. The magistrate who may administer the oaths must certify to the credibility of the witnesses, and the official character and signature of the magistrate must be certified by the proper officer, under his seal of office.
QUERE XVI. Mode of authenticating papers.
In every instance where the certificate of the certifying officer who authenticates the papers is not written on the same sheet of paper which contains the affidavit, or other paper authenticated, the certificate must be attached thereto by a piece of tape or narrow ribbon, the ends of which must pass under the seal of office of the certifying officer, so as to prevent any paper from being improperly attached to the certificate.
In every case where the clerk of the court, or other certifying officer, has no public seal of office, the certificate of a member of congress, proving the official character and signature of the certifying officer, should accompany the papers.

Farmington N.H. Sep. 1 st 1855
To the Commissioner of Pensions,
Sir,
Again that awful 3 d Section of the act of 3 d March 1855 makes it applicable in the application of Mary Peasey for Bounty Land as the widow of Daniel Peasey who was a private in the revolutionary war and a pensioner. Her application is numbered, it seems, - 32,253, and is suspended, for the same that the revolutionary service of Daniel Peasey , the husband of the applicant not does appear of record in this office."
Now as to the facts in this case, Daniel Peasey the private served in the war of the revolution more than six months, (else he could not have been placed on the pension list as the law then was) and on application made by him for a Pension proved his service to the satisfaction of the Powers that were and was placed thereon and drew his pension. The evidence of this it is to be presumed is in your office. He, in due time, died leaving this woman his widow and as such widow she applied for a pension and is at this time drawing the small sum of $33.33 per ann. Does not all this furnish "Record evidence" of service?
The words "Record evidence" as mentioned in your circular is not mentioned in said third section, or any other part of the act. The language is that in no

rare shall any such Certificate be issued & unless the party Claimant claiming it shall establish his or her right there- to by recorded evidence of said service", and we apprehend that there is a difference between a Record and recorded evidence ". The difference shows itself in this—The history of an action of an action in Court, as written down by the Clerk, will be, after the Court shall have adjourned, a record of that case, but the depositions and other written evidence that may have been filed in the trial of the same action, are not the record, but they are the recorded evi- dence in the case. Technically speaking you have no records in your Department. The Rolls of the army are not Records, unless Littleton, Coke, Bracton, Bacon, Blackstone and all of the rest of Elementary writers have been making Irish Bulls all of their lives—
It is the duty of us all who are subjects of the law to as- certain if possible what was meant by the law makers when they passed the act under consideration; in order for which we first look at the language of the act and the object of the act—
What was the object of the law in this case? It was to give land in certain cases on the production of a cer- tain kind of evidence. It does not require the pro- duction of a Record ; it only requires " recorded evi- dence of said service". This recorded evidence may be the Rolls of the army, it may be the evidence in the form of affidavits filed years ago in support of a

application for a pension and the enrolling the Pensioner's name as a Pensioner on the list of the clan to which he belonged—
Apply then principles to the facts in this case and the writer would ask, in all seriousness, if here is not recorded  evidence enough to secure to this poor applicant the right that was intended for her? It seems to the writer of this that the case under consideration not only comes within the spirit but with in the very letter of the law— but we submit to the decision of the commissioner, hoping that he will take the view of the matter that we do—
Respectfully yours &c
N. & G. N. Eastman

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
160 ACRES
160 ACRES
Bounty
Land
Department
of the Interior
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF PENSIONS
This hereby Certified, that under the Act of March 3 rd 1855, entitled, An Act in addition to certain Acts granting Bounty Land to certain Officers and Soldiers who have been engaged in the Military Service of the United States...
Mary Peavy, widow of Daniel Peavy Private
Revolutionary War
is entitled to the sum of ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY ACRES , at any Land Office of the United States, in one body, and in conformity to the legal subdivisions of the public lands, upon any of the public lands, subject to sale at either the minimum or lower graduated prices.
Given under my hand and seal this 21 st day of May 1856
No. 26,227
G. S. Shanks Bureau of War Pensions, New York
[Signature]
Commissioner
Note: You can locate this Certificate, at any of the United States land offices, or it will be located for you by the General Land Office on the return of it, with your request to that effect endorsed thereon, specifying the State and Land District in which you wish the location made. If you locate it, fill up and sign the following application.
To the Register of the Land Office at _____
I locate this Certificate, in the _____ in Township _____
quarter of section _____ of Range _____
Register.

1936 Mary Piavny-
$33:33 per ann
N. Eastman Farmington N. H.

Declaration
In order to obtain the benefits of the act of Congress of the 3 rd March 1843 granting pensions for one year to certain widows, who have received pensions under the act of July 7 th 1838—
State of New Hampshire
Strafford County ss On this second day of June 1843 person ally appeared before the subscriber one of the justices of the Peace within and for the County of Strafford aforesaid Mary Peavy a resident of Farmington in said County of Strafford aged seventy six years, who being first duly sworn, according to law, doth on her oath make the following declaration in order to obtain the benefits of the provision made by the act of Congress passed on the 3 rd March 1843 granting pensions to widows of persons who served during the Revolutionary war. That she is the widow of Daniel Peavy late of Alton in said State of New Hampshire deceased, who was a private in the war of the Revolution and served in the Company, as part or all the time, under the command of Capt. John Frew, of the New Hampshire line, but to what Regiment it was attached, I do not recollect— that she was placed on the pension List, Roll of the New Hampshire agency under the act of July 7 th 1838 at the rate of thirty three dollars and thirty three cents a year, which amount she annually recd.
She further declares that she is still a widow—
Witness— Nehemiah Eastman Daniel Peavy
Mary her  mark Peavy
Sworn to and subscribed on the day and year above written Before me
Nehemiah Eastman — Jus. Peace
I further certify that I am personally acquainted with said Mary Peavy and

and know her to be the identical person, who was the wife and is now the widow of the said Daniel Peavy as is by her before declared —
Nehemiah Eastman Jus. Peace
State of New Hampshire Strafford county, ss. Superior court of Indictment, I, John H. Smith, Clerk of the Superior court of Indictment within and for said county, hereby certify that Nehemiah Eastman, is a Justice of the Peace for said county, duly commissioned and qualified, that his commission is dated August 6. th 1838, and that the same will expire August 5. th 1843, and that the within signature, purporting to be his, is genuine —
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said court, this sixth day of June A.D. 1843 —
John H. Smith, Clerk

Mary Peavy
au
28/4

Declaration
In order to obtain the benefit of the act of Congress of 2 d February 1848, entitled, "an act making further provision for surviving Widows and Soldiers of the Revolution."
State of New Hampshire.
Belknap County, ss:— On this 16 th day of September 1848, personally appeared before the subscriber, Nehemiah Eastman, a justice of the Peace throughout the State of New Hampshire, Mary Peavey now a resident of Alton in said county of Belknap aged seventy eight years, who being first 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 on the 2 d February 1848 granting pensions to widows of persons who served during the Revolutionary War. That she is the widow of Daniel Peavey, who was a soldier in said war but I have forgotten who his Captain was or when his service was performed
That said Daniel Peavey was placed on the Pension Roll of the United States in consequence of his service as such soldier and that she, as the widow of said Daniel Peavey was placed on the Pension Roll under the act of Congress of June 17 th 1844, and received the annual amount of thirty three dollars and thirty two cents. She further declares that she is still a widow
Signed in presence of us
N. Eastman
E. G. Smyth
her Mary X Peavey Mark
Sworn to and subscribed on the day and year above written
Before me
Nehemiah Eastman Jus. Peace &c.
And I further certify that the said Mary Peavey the declarant is personally known to me
Nehemiah Eastman Jus. Peace &c.

The State of New Hampshire County of Strafford ss. Court of Common Pleas
Clerk's Office I, John H. Smith Clerk of said Court, hereby certify that Nehemiah Eastman is a Justice of the Peace throughout the said State of New Hampshire, duly commissioned and qualified, that his commission is dated June 20 th A. D. 1844 and will expire June 19 th A. D. 1849 and that the signatures within purporting to be his, are true and genuine.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Court this eighteenth day of September A. D. 1848.
John H. Smith, Clerk

3593
Rev. Denson

State of New Hampshire
Shafford County p On this 22 nd day of November one thousand eight hundred and fifty before the subscribed justice of the peace in and for said county & State personally appeared Mary Peavy and made oath in due form of law that she is the widow of Daniel Peavy who was a soldier in the war of the revolution; that she now receives a pension at the rate of thirty three dollars and thirty three cents per annum, under the act of February 2 nd 1848- that she asks for any arrears or increase of Pension that she may be found entitled to as due her, under any of the acts of Congress appli- cable to her case- that she resides in Alton in the county of Belknap and State of New Hampshire and is a widow-
Witness A. Eastman
Dorothy Young
Mary her  X Peavy mark
Sworn to and subscribed before me the day & year above mentioned
Nehemiah Eastman Jus. Peace
I certify that I am well acquainted with the above named Mary Peavy and know her to be the same individual she represents herself to be -
Nehemiah Eastman Jus. Peace

Farmington N.H., Sept. 13 th 1855-
Sir,
In yours of the 7 th inst. signed by S. Cole for the Commissioner - You say that the 3 d Section of the act of 3 d March 1855 requires record evidence of service & not recorded evidence as you assume d .
Now the writer of this was the writer of that letter, and it is denied that any thing was assumed in that letter contrary to the fact. The fact is, the words " Record evidence " are not in the act of the 3 d March 1855; but the words " recorded evidence " are in the last line of the 3 d Section of that act - or else, not only is the copy now before the writer, erroneous, but all of the others, which he has seen are equally so, for they all agree in this expression; hence it is to be presumed, if the late Commissioner (Waldo) undertook to make an exposition of the true sense of this section and mistook or misquoted the language of it, the error was in him and not in the language of the act and of course his Circular, which you speak of as having been issued on 5 th April last, but which we have not seen, was well calculated to mislead applicants and their agents -
In yours of the 7 th inst. in speaking of the Circular above mentioned you say, "a copy of such Circular is herewith enclosed" to which we reply we have received no copy with your letter, but shall be much pleased to -

As, therefore, it is perfectly clear that the late Commissioners misquoted the act of March 3 d in the before mentioned circular as you state, and as the law , and not, the circular, must govern, we with all due respect, ask the present Commissioner to give this subject a new examination,
We think the language of the 3 d Section of the act is exactly right to reach such case as that of Mary Peavey, or else the language has no meaning—Daniel Peavey the husband served in the Revolutionary war—after the act of 1818 was passed he applied for a pension as having served within the provisions of that act, so as to be entitled. He of course filed his declaration, furnished such evidence as the Department then required whereby he established his claim—a Pension was granted—his name enrolled on the N. H. Roll as a Pensioner—at length he dies, leaving this Mary Peavey his widow—She applied for a pension in due time and furnished the necessary evidence of marriage, death &c. and is placed upon the list of Pensioners. So things were until the 3 d of March 1855, when the new act is passed, the 8 th section of which is in these words—“And be it further enacted that the officers and soldiers of the revolutionary war, or their widows, or minor children shall be struck to the benefit of this act.” The 3 d Section of the act requires that the party claiming such Certificate or warrant shall establish his or her claim right thereto by “ recorded evidence ” of said service—
It would seem from this language then used in

This set that the writer of the Section meant exactly what he wrote and that he had this very case and case like it in his minds eye when he wrote that paragraph and that he expressed in the most apt manner the very idea which he intended, whereas if he had used the words Record evidence , it would have been unenjoyable like and absurd—
However we submit the case cheerfully to the consideration of the Commissioner, believing that he will cheerfully correct any errors that his predecessors may have committed, or that he, himself, may commit—
Respectfully yours &c N. G. N. Eastman

Farmington, May 27 th , 1856.
Hon. J. Minot, Dear Sir,
The land warrant issued to Mrs Mary Peavey is herewith returned, she having died two days before the date thereof (which, I fear, is the time of its issue) & the same by such death becoming void.
Is there any relief in this state of affairs for her heirs?
Please acknowledge the receipt of said warrant.
May I once more call attention to the cases of two other old ladies: viz; - Betsy Howe & Betsy Batchelder
The papers in the case of the latter though sent a year since have never yet been heard from.
Respectfully Yours Geo. N. Eastman

Farmington N.H. Nov. 9 th 1855
To the Com. of Pensions,
Yours of 23 d of Oct. last was recd. some days ago in relation to the application of Mary Peavey, widow of Daniel Peavey for Bounty land No. 32253.
In your letter you say "The Certificate of the Secretary of State of New Hampshire in support of the bounty land claim of Mary Peavey does not relate the service of her husband, Daniel, as her husband alleges he served two terms, one of 5 months under Capt. John Drew & Col. Wymann in 1776 in New Hampshire militia & the other five months under Capt. Low & Col. Baun or Brewster. Capt. Whitcomb commanded his company, part of the time of his last service"
We cannot conceive how you come to the conclusion that you seem to, in this case. Could not Daniel Peavey have served two terms and his aged widow, eighty years afterwards, not have full recollection of it, tho' she may have one have full knowledge of it? There is evidence at Concord, the writer supposes, as well as in your office that Capt. John Drew commanded a company of N.H. Troops in Col. Wymann's Regiment in 1776

and there can be no doubt that Darius Peavy, the husband of the applicant was one of those men. If he served five months & no more, is not the widow fully entitled? Or if he served five months at one time and a like term another, tho we have not been particular in describing all the service, how does that harm the applicant's claim?
It is our desire that the case be re-examined as we can see  no ground for the rejection or suspension of the claim. We conclude that there is nothing brought to our view, as a reason for its suspension, that should put us to the trouble and expense of hunting up further records or evidence, until we know what proof will be satisfactory — Respectfully yours &c N. & G. N. Eastman
P.S. Did not Darius Peavy, possibly, in his affidavits, on file, mean Capt. Titcomb instead of Capt. Whitcomb, and Col. Badger, instead of "Col. Brew, or Brewster"? We had a Capt. Titcomb and a Col. Badger, commanding N.H. Troops in the revolution, but the names mentioned, are not common. N. & G. N. E.

Rev
WIDOW, &c.
File No. 21947 Mary Peavey Wid. of David Peavey Priv. Rev. War.
Act: Feb - 2 d 1848
Index:--Vol. 16 , Page 124
[Arrangement of 1870.]

New Hampshire 1154
Mary Peasey of Alton widow of Daniel Peasey, die?
who was a pensioner under the Act of 7 June 1832 and who died on the sixteenth July 1836, at Strafford in the State of N.H. who was a priv in the comp commanded by Captain Law of the regt commanded by Col Brewster in the N Hamp line for 10 months.
Inscribed on the Roll of Portsmouth, N.H. at the rate of 33 Dollars 33 Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1834. 17th July 1836
Certificate of Pension issued the 22 day of Novr 1838, and sent to N. East- man, Farmington, N.H.
Arrears to the 4th of Sept 1838 $71.18 Semi-annual allowance ending 4 Mar 39 16.66 $87.84
{ Act July 7, } 1838. }
Recorded by D M c Curdy, Clerk, Book A. Vol. 1. Page 50.
Col. N. Eastman Aug. 31. 1843.

State of New Hampshire.
SECRETARY OF STATE'S OFFICE.
I DO HEREBY CERTIFY, That from an examination of the Books and Documents, relating to Military Services in the war of the Revolution, which remain in this office, it appears that the name of Daniel Peavy is borne upon the Vol. 1, Page 60 A. Pay Muster Roll of Capt. Men raised for Company as a  bander out of  in said Company , Col. Evans & Col. Badger's Regiments Mustered & paid by James Knowles Esq. "Mens Names", Daniel Peavy - 2 months pay to Officers - one months pay and bounty to Soldiers £ 9 " 18 - Travelling Fees 7 " 6 - Sum Total 10 " 5 " 6 At the head of said "Muster & Pay Roll" is the name of "Joseph Badger Junr. Capt.", and it concludes as follows on page 69. "State of New Hampshire Augst 29 th 1776 I the subscriber Appointed by the State above said Muster Master Have Mustered & paid the within company agreeable to said Roll - They all being good Able bodied, effective men & well accoutred - Sign d James Knowles"
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of said State, this Seventeenth day of October 1855
Samuel H. Slater
Secretary of State.

Farmington N.H. Oct. 18 th 1855
To the Com ee of Pensions,
You will find enclosed some "Record Evidence" from the old muster Rolls of the N.H. troops, deposited in the Secretarys office at Concord in this State, in the case of Mary Peavey , application for Bounty Land, No. 32,253, as the widow of Daniel Peavey , a private in the war of the Revolution,
This application is made under the act of 3 d Mar- 1855 and notice of it being suspended given us under date of August 15 th 1855 and we suppose it still remains suspended. We hope, however, that this evidence, now sent, will be satisfactory and that we may soon have her warrant as she is very aged and infirm, and in case of her decease, she will leave no minor child for her right to descend to, in such event-
Respectfully yours &c N. G. N. Eastman

26.050 1/2
160 acres

32. 253. Nov 1835.
Mary Peavy - wife of Daniel Peavy.
✓
M 26, 227 fms 160 am, Cameo Jan 21/56. Died before issue, Dec 26, 050 1/2 fms 160 am, O.K.
/ M/

32253
Mary Peavy
160 26.22 3/4
2622 3/4
160
Mary Peavy
32253

32253
Mary Peavey
160
26227
26.227
160
Mary Peavey
32253

Farmington N.H. May 20 th 56
Dear Sir:
I wish to call attention to the case of Mary Peavey suspended under the act of March 3 rd , 1856 & No. 32,253, and would like to have said case examined under the Act of May 10 th , 1856.
Respectfully
Yours
Gro. N. Eastman

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE.
STRAFFORD, ss.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Clerk's Office.
I, JOHN H. SMITH, Clerk of said Court, hereby certify that Nathaniel Eastman is a Justice of the Peace within and for said County, duly commissioned and qualified, and was such, at the time of the taking of the foregoing affidavit, that his commission is dated June 22 nd _____ A. D. 1844, and will expire June 21 st A. D. 1854, and that the fore- going signature purporting to be is true and genuine; that all his official acts as such are entitled to full faith and credit, and that the aforesaid Court of Common Pleas is a Court of Record.
In testimony whereof I have hereto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Court, this
twenty fifth day of November A. D. 1850.
John H Smith Clerk.

32253
Mary Harvey
wid Daniel
NK ad 488 July 3593
Boynton
Washington D.C.
ERE
To the Commissioner of Customs

Jenkins
6
Am. Inst. Inst.,
Corr. of London
Washington
City
D.C.
26 227-Neo
FREE
RECEIVED MAY 27 N N.H.

Mary Peabody (Mrs. Thos. Peabody)
Reg 85- no 32253 No 2 8-1 3593 N.Y.
Boston
Commonwealth of Mass.
Washington
D.C.

Free
To the Commissioner of Pensions
Washington D.C.
Bozeman
48-no 3593
322253 Mary Peewits Dear Sir,

No. 32,253 Act of March 3 d 1855 Evidence in amendment
Boynton
Genl. Minot Comm r of Pensions Washington City. D.C.
PAID
32

3 Boynnton
32253
To the Commissioner of Pensions
Miss. Melv 48 3593
M c Peavy
Washington D.C.
Mary Peaveys lease of land application No. 32,253, additional evidence , under act. Mar. 3 d 1855

Rep o .
2844
N. Hampshire Portsmouth
Mary Peavey
widow of Daniel Peavey who was a Private in the Revolution
Inscribed on the Roll at the rate of 33 Dollars 33 Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1843.
Certificate of Pension issued the 23. day of Nov. 1843 and sent to N. Eastman Farmington, N.H.
[Act of March 3, 1843.]
Recorded in Book 1. Vol. 1. Page 20.