Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File S. 10413, Samuel Brown, Conn.

SERVICE
NUMBER
Conn
Brown Samuel
S. 10413
CONTENTS
carded
1750 or 1751 in Lyme New London Co Conn 110 at 11 in 1832, Rochester, New London Co Conn. Dec 13 1836 at Rochester Conn 2nd wife Sally

to Pension Agent Nov 15 1831
9.043
Connecticut.
Samuel Brown
of Middlesex, in the State of Connecticut who was a Colonel in the Company commanded by Captain Clark of the Regt commanded by Col. Canfield in the Connecticut line for Conductor Dr. McIntire 23 days December 2 " 7 "
Inscribed on the Roll of Connecticut at the rate of 442 Dollars 77. Cents per annum, to commence on the 14th day of March, 1831. Vending 13 Decr 1836, when he died and for $288.33
Certificate of Pension issued the 15 th day of May 1846 and sent to S. T. Pease Present
Arrears to the 14th of Semi-annual allowance ending
Payable to Holley Brown his Widow
{ Revolutionary Claim, } { Act June 7, 1832. }
Recorded by S. Brown Clerk, Book E. 2. Vol. 3. Page 6.

State of Connecticut } ss. Colchester New London County }
On this 11 th day of August 1832 personally appeared in open court before Benjamin Frembald Esq. Judge of the Court of Probate for the District of Colchester now sitting, Samuel Brown a resident of Colchester in the County of New London and State of Connecticut aged eighty two 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: ————— Robert 1 st That in June 1776 at Colchester aforesaid he enlisted and entered Captain Eliphalet Bullkley's Company of Connecticut State Troops in Col. Elisha Wolcott's Regt. for a tour of Military service, and served in said Company which was stationed at New London & Groton in Connecticut for the term of Seven Months and was dismissed about the first of January 1777 by his Officers but had no written discharge to his recollection.
2 nd That the latter part of December 1776 or the fore part of Jan y following at Colchester aforesaid he entered Capt. Nathl. Harris' Company of Militia of which James Ransom was Lieut. as a Substitute to William Follett of said Colchester who was drafted to perform a tour of Military duty, and did duty as a Substitute to said Follett, in said Company at New London in Connecticut until same time in the month of April 1777 when he was dismissed by Col. Dyer's Troop to whose Regiment said Compy. belonged —

3 rd That he was in the Service of the United States as a volunteer for the term of one month in the Spring of the year 1775 That at said time he went to Roxbury Mass. upon an alarm.
4 th  That And he declares that he hereby relinquishes every claim whatever to a pension or annuity except the present and declares that his name is not on the agency of any State. That he believes himself to have been born in the  said town of Lyme in said New London County in the year 1750 That he has no other record of his age except one made by his father which is so obliterated that he cannot tell by that whether he was born in 1750 or 1751. That he was living in said Colchester when called into service where he has ever since resided. That he never received a written discharge. That the following named persons living near and being well acquainted with him can testify as to his character for veracity and their belief of his services as a Soldier of the Revolution viz Lieut. John R. Watrous & Col. John Isham That he has no documentary evidence. That Solomon Scoull, Ambrose Foote & John T. Otis whose evidence is herewith will testify as to his services as here testimony herein after is herewith annexed Samuel Brown
Sworn to & Subscribed the day & year aforesaid
I Ambrose Foote of Colchester in New London County State of Connecticut certify & say that in June 1776 I entered and did duty in Capt. Elephalut Bulkeley's Comp y of Conn t State Troops in Col.

Woolcotts Regiment at New London and Groton in S t ate for the term of Seven Months, and that I will know Samuel Brown who has subscribed the foregoing declaration to be a Soldier in said Company who according to the best of my recollection served all of said term.
Given to Subscribed } Ambrose Foot the day & year aforesaid }
I Solomon Scovell of Colchester in the County of New London State of Connecticut certify & say that Samuel Brown who has subscribed the foregoing declaration was a Soldier at New London County with me during the Revolutionary War but how long I am not at this time able to state, That he belonged to Capt. Nathl. Harris' Company, and said Brown was dismissed at the same time I was which I think was in the month of April in the year 1777 and accompanied me home to said Colchester Given to Subscribed } Solomon Scovell the day & year aforesaid }
I John T. Otis of Colchester in New London County State of Connecticut certify and say that Samuel Brown who has sub d the foregoing declaration was a Soldier at New London Connecticut with me in the Revolutionary War in 1777 and belonged to Capt. Nathl. Harris' Company but how long I am not at this time able to state Given to Sub d } John T. Otis the day & year aforesaid }

293 Samuel Brown Application for Pension We John R. Walronz and John Shum both residing in the Town of Colchester, County of New London & State of Connecticut hereby certify that we are well acquainted with Samuel Brown who has subscribed and sworn to the above declaration; that we believe him to be eighty two 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 to & Sub. d the day & year aforesaid
John R Walronz John Shum
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 further certifies that it appears to said Court that the several persons who have sworn & subscribed the pre- ceding certificates are residents in said Town of Colchester and are credible persons and that their statements are entitled to credit —
Benj m Trumbull Judge of Court
I Benjamin M. Trumbull Clerk of the Court of Probate for the District of Colchester do hereby certify that the foregoing contains the original proceedings of the said Court in the matter of the application of Samuel Brown for a pension.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal of Office this 11 th day of August 1832
B. M. Trumbull

N o 2193 Samuel Brown, Application for a pension - with Supplement &c -

State of Connecticut New London County } ss. Colchester.
on this tenth day of December A.D. 1832 personally appeared in open court before Benjamin Trumbull Esq. Judge of the Court of Probate for the District of Colchester now sitting Samuel Brown the applicant for a pension in the foregoing declaration by him subscribed, who being first duly sworn according to Law, doth on his oath make the following declaration as a supplement thereto — to wit —
That he is confident he did duty in Capt. Alphalet Dulkley's company in Col. Draper's Brantus Wolcotts Regt. in which he enlisted seven months; that by reason of old age and the consequent loss of memory he cannot positively swear as to the precise length, either of his other terms of service, that in Capt. Nathaniel Harris company in Col. Shrop's Regiment he served according to his best recollection not up than three months, and that in his tour of duty at Roxbury Mass. ts he went there upon an alarm under the command, and in a company commanded by Captain Noah Day or Capt. Joseph Taylor which he cannot recollect as they were both Cap s of said company at different times turns, and that he thinks Joseph Wright was Ensign of said company, that he with the greater part of said company turned out upon said alarm and went to said Roxbury and did duty according to his best recollection not less than one month, and for such service he claims a pension, that he

has no documentary evidence whatever, and knows of no person whose testimony he can procure to testify to his service at Roxbury Mass. nor of any person whose testimony he can procure to testify to either of his other tours of service except Ambrose Foote, Solomon Scoull and John T. Otis whose testimony has been procured. That the Rev. Joseph Harvey of his present neighborhood can testify to his character for veracity and his belief of his services as a Soldier of the Revolution. And further states that he performed all his services as a private Sworn to and subscribed this 10 th day of Dec r 1832 Samuel Brown
I John T. Otis who have subscribed and sworn to a foregoing certificate, certify and say that I am in the seventy fifth year of my age, and that I lived near neighbor to Solomon Scoull who has also subscribed a foregoing certificate and that he died on the first day of December A 1832. I believe in the seventy fourth year of his age. Sworn to & Subscribed this 10 th day of Dec r 1832 John T. Otis
I Ambrose Foote who have subscribed and sworn to a foregoing certificate hereby certify and say that I am now in the eighty second year of my age Subscribed and sworn to this 10 th day of Dec r 1832 Ambrose Foote

Joseph Harvey a clergyman residing in the town of Colchester, State of Connecticut hereby certify, that I am well acquainted with Samuel Brown who has subscribed and sworn to the above and foregoing affidavit declaration and believe him to be eighty two 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 I concur in that opinion and that he is a man of good character for truth and veracity. Subscribed & Sworn to } Joseph Harvey This 10 th day of Dec r 1832 }
And the said Court hereby certifies that it appears to him that Joseph Harvey who has signed a preceding certificate, is a clergyman resident in said Colchester and credible person that his statement is entitled to credit.
Benjamin M. Turnbull Clerk of the said court of Probate for the District of Colchester do hereby certify that the foregoing contains the original and supplementary proceedings of the said court in the matter of the application of Samuel Brown for a pension. In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal of office this tenth day of December A.D. 1832 B. M. Turnbull

State of Connecticut County of New London
} ss Colchester
On this 15 th day of February in the year 1845 personally appeared before me Giles Shattuck Justice of the Peace in said County and State Dolly Brown who being first sworn according to law, doth on her Oath make the following declaration in order to obtain the balance of a pension due her deceased Husband Samuel Brown late of said Colchester That her said Husband is reputed to have served as an enlisted Teamster under Roger  Daniel Bulkley as Capt. or Conductor for a term of six Months in the year 1777 That he was afterwards reputed to have served as a Conductor or Wagon Master under Deputy Quarter Master General Rehemiah Hubbard for a term of near two years commencing in the year 1778 for which services she now claims an increase of his pension.
She further declares that she was the second wife of the said Samuel Brown and that she was married to him on the in the year 1800 and that her Husband died on the 13 th day of December in the year 1836 and at the time of his death he was in receipt of a pension under the Act of 1832 at the rate of thirtythree dollars thirtythree cents per annum.
The word Roger was erased and the name Daniel inserted before signing
her Dolly X. Brown Mark
Sworn to and subscribed on the day and year first above written and I further certify that the declarant is personally known to me and is the second wife and now widow of Samuel Brown late of the aforesaid Town now deceased and said Samuel Brown was reputed to have served as a conductor or wagon Master in the War of the Revolution and the declarant is a respectable person and credable person.
Giles Shattuck Justice of the Peace

I David Shattuck of the Town of Colchester in the County of New London and State of Connecticut being now eighty six years of age Depose and say that I was a Soldier in the Revolutionary War I was well acquainted with Samuel Brown of said Colchester during the War and since having lived neighbour to him to the time of his death which was about eight years since he was late Husband of Dolly Brown now residing in said Colchester I was knowing to said Samuel Brown being conductor of an enlisted Company of Teamsters in the Revolutionary War for two years or more And further the Deponent sayeth not
David his Shattuck mark
State of Connecticut
New London County ss Colchester this 15 th day of February A D 1845
Personally appeared David Shattuck signer of the foregoing Deposition and made Oath to the truth of the same Before Me
And I certify that I am well acquainted with the above named David Shattuck and know him to be a man of truth and veracity and a credible Witness
Giles Shattuck Justice of the Peace

I Justin Day, of Colchester in the County of New London and State of Connecticut being sixty four years of age Depose and say That the late Samuel Brown of said Colchester was my Father in Law that he died on the 13 th day of December 1836 that I attended his funeral and that the Widow of the late Samuel Brown is my Mother and resides with me And further the Deponent saith not
Justin Day
New London County } ss Colchester State of Connecticut }
Personally appeared Justin Day, who has subscribed the foregoing Deposition and made Oath to the truth of the same Before Me And I further certify that I am acquainted with the above named Justin Day and believe him to be a credible Witness
Giles Shattuck Justice of the Peace

Colchester 2 d Society (West Chester) Feb. 15 th 1845. I Spofford D. Jewett, hereby depose and say, that I am Pastor of the Congregational Church in Second Society of said Col- -chester - and have in my possession the records of the Church made by my predecessors in the Pastoral office, from the organization of the Church in 1739, to the time of my own Installation, May 1 st 1844 - That during the year 1836, the Church destitute of a settled minister - In that year, I find in the bill of mortality, the following entry - "Samuel Brown. Dec. aged 86." Spofford D. Jewett.
State of Connecticut } ss Colchester February 15 th A.D. 1845 New London County }
Personally appeared the Rev. Spofford D. Jewett, signer of the foregoing Deposition and made Oath to the truth of the same. Before me, Giles Shattuck Justice of the Peace.
I hereby certify that I am personally acquainted with the Rev. Spofford D. Jewett and know him to be a Gentleman of truth and veracity and a credible Witness Giles Shattuck Justice of the Peace

State of Connecticut
Office of Secretary of State
I hereby Certify that Giles Pratt Esq was on the 15 th day of January 1845 a Justice of the Peace in and for the County of New London, duly appointed and Commissioned - And that I believe the foregoing signatures genuine -
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said State at Hartford this 18 th day of February 1845
Danl P. Dyer Secretary of State

Samuel Brown (deceased) Weymouth, Dorsetshire A. Rall
W
See papers for S. A. Pough 24 th Feb. 1881,
Mr Cole
Feb. 24 1881.
Feb 10 - March 57
S. A. Pough

State of Connecticut New London County } ss.
A. P. 1851.
I Lydia Watrous of the town of Colchester County and State aforesaid Daughter of Samuel Brown deceased, who was a Wagon Conductor in War of the Revolution, and a pensioner of the United States under the Act of 7 th June 1832. at the rate of $442.77 per annum, and died on the 12 th day of December 1836. do hereby constitute and appoint J. H. Pugh, Esq. of Washington City my true and lawful Attorney for me and in my name, respectfully to request the Commission- er of Pensions to re-examine the said Sam- uel Brown's pension papers on file, with such additional evidence as may be presented, and allow such an increase of pension as he may justly have been entitled to. And I hereby revoke all powers of attorney in this case, that may have been given previous to this date. In testimony whereof I have hereunto sub- scribed my name this 13 th day of February A. P. 1851. In presence of { Ransom B. Babbitt Purvis & Williams } Lydia Watrous

State of Connecticut
District of Colchester ss) On this 22 d day of February A.D. 1850. Personally appeared before the Probate Court within & for said District at a Session thereof held at Colchester in said district Justin Day of said Colchester, who being first duly sworn according to law with an his oath make the following declaration in order to obtain an increase and arrears of Pension due his late mother Dolly (or Dorothy) Brown, under any act of Congress applicable to her case
That he is the Son of Dolly Brown deceased, who was at the time of her decease the widow of Samuel Brown deceased; that said Samuel Brown was a Revolu- tionary Pensioner of the United States; that his mother the said Dolly Brown in her lifetime made appli- cation for the arrears of Pension due her under the act of June 7 th 1832, on account of the services of her late husband the said Samuel Brown deceased, and only a part of which was paid to her; that the said Samuel Brown served as a Wagon Conductor; that the Declarant is the Son and only surviving child of the said Dolly Brown deceased; that said Declarant is also Executor unto said Dolly Brown, and unto the said Samuel Brown deceased.
Justin Day Subscribed and Sworn to this 22 d day of February A.D. 1850. by the above Declarant
Before me
David B. Gannett Judge of Probate for Colchester District

State of Connecticut,
District of Colchester Ss.
I David B. Canoll Judge of the Probate Court, within and for said District do hereby certify that satisfactory evidence has this day been adduced to said Court that Dolly Brown Widow of Samuel Brown deceased died at Colchester in said District on the 4 th day of August 1846, that the said Dolly in her life time drew a pension on account of the services of the said Samuel Brown in the war of the Revolution, that Justin Day the above Declarant is the son and only surviving child of the said Dolly Brown deceased and that the said Justin Day has been duly appointed Executor unto the said Dolly Brown and is fully empowered to act as such. And I further certify that said Justin Day is also Executor unto the said Samuel Brown deceased.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand this 22 nd day of February A.D 1850
David B. Canoll Judge of Probate for Colchester District
State of Connecticut,
District of Colchester Ss.
I Augustus W. Lord Clerk of the Court of Probate within and for the District of Colchester and Keeper of the Records and Seal thereof do hereby certify, that David B. Canoll whose name is above written and subscribed is and was at the date thereof Sole and Presiding Judge of the Court of Probate within and for the District of Colchester, duly Commissioned and Sworn.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of said Court on this 22 nd day of February A.D 1850 Augustus W. Lord Clerk

I Charles Northam of the Town of Colchester County of New London and State of Connecticut Depose and say that I am now seventy eight years of age was born and have always resided in the said Town of Colchester I was well acquainted with Samuel Brown of said Colchester in the time of the Revolutionary War he was capt. or conductor of teams at that time I remember it the better on account of two of my Brothers being conductors of teams at the same time My Brothers names were Samuel and Jonathan Northam the said Samuel Brown and My Brothers were engaged in this service in the years 1779 and 1780 I have often heard them converse about their sufferings in the winter of 1780 as it was very severe there was a great depth of Snow upon the ground and the weather was very severe it was extremely cold I am also acquainted with the widow Dolly Brown now residing in said Colchester she is now the Widow of the said Samuel Brown and before she Married him she was the widow Day her first Husband was a connection of Mine My Brother Jonathan mentioned above was not a conductor of teams but was a teamster in My Brother Samuel's Company and further the Deponent saith not Dated at Colchester this 16 th day of August A.D. 1845
Charles Northam
State of Connecticut } to Colchester New London County }
August 16 th A.D. 1845 Personally appeared the above named Charles Northam and made solemn Oath to the above Deposition before Me
I certify that I am personally acquainted with the above named Charles Northam and know him to be a respect- able Man and a credible witness Giles Hattrick Justice of Peace

State of Connecticut
Office of Secretary of State
I hereby certify that from and after the 20th day of June 1845 to the date hereof, Frederick Morgan and Silas Hattuck Esq. have respectively been Justices of the Peace, in and for the County of New London, duly appointed and commissioned, and I further certify that I believe their foregoing signatures to be genuine.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of State, at Hartford this 27th day of August A.D. 1845.
David P. Tinker Secretary of State

I John Isham of Colchester County of New London State of Connecticut do hereby say on Oath that I was twenty one years of age 26 th day of Feby last that I was born in S. Town of Colchester where I have always resided, that I was well acquainted with Samuel Brown of S t Colchester, deceased from my youth, who was a Revolutionary Pensioner of the United States under the Act of 1832 - that in April 1834 he applied to draw his Pension - I made out his papers & drew for him in May following thirty three Dollars thirty Three cents for his Pension from 1 st March 1833 to 4 th March 1834, and my impression is that I continue to draw his Pension as long as he live. if so the Book has got mislaid and cannot be found - Mrs. Betty Brown Widow of the S t Samuel Brown & formerly the Widow of Elisha Bay I have likewise been well acquainted with from my youth & she applied to me to draw the Bk ts of Pension due her S t Husband Sam l Brown at the time of his death I accordingly made out her papers and drew for her in Ap r 1837 $25.72 as appears from an entry in my Book which is inter d the amt s receiv d for different Pensioners up to that time - I further say that I have never known any other person by the name of Sam l Brown living in S t Town of Colchester who would enough to have belonged to the Continental Army, and further the deponent saith not
John Isham
New London County ss. Colchester August 18 th AD 1845 Personally appeared before me John Isham the above named deponent and made solemn oath to the truth of the foregoing declaration by him subscribed - and I certify that he is a man of respectable character, and a credible witness, that I am well acquainted with him as such.
Andrew Morgan Justice of Peace

March 2, 1937.
Mrs. Russell E. Corser Main Street Macedon, New York.
BA-J/ILL Chase Samuel Brown S. 10413
Dear Madam:
The record of Samuel Brown is given herein as found in pension claim, S. 10413, based upon his service in the Revolutionary War.
Samuel Brown was born in Lyme, New London County, Connecticut, in 1750 or 1751; the day of his birth and the names of his parents were not given. The copy of the record of his age was so indistinct that he could not determine whether it was 1750 or 1751.
While a resident of Colchester, New London County, Connecticut, he enlisted in the spring of 1775 and served one month as private under Captains Noah Day and Joseph Taylor on the Roxbury alarm; he enlisted in June 1776 and served about six months as private in Captain Eliphalet Bulkley's company, Colonel Erastus Wolcott's regiment, after which he enlisted and served about three months as private in Captain Nathaniel Harris' company, Colonel Dyar Throop's Connecticut regiment. From May 1777, he served as a teamster two months and seven days under Captain Daniel Bulkley, Conductor, and subsequently served twenty-one months and twenty-three days as Conductor of teamsters under Nehemiah Hubbard, Quarter Master General.
Samuel Brown was allowed pension on his application executed August 11, 1832, at which time he resided in Colchester, New London County, Connecticut; he had resided there since his boyhood.
The soldier died December 13, 1836 in Colchester, Connecticut. His death was recorded on the Congregational Church records, of Colchester.
Samuel Brown married in the year 1800, Dolly, the widow of

Elisha Day, of Colchester. Said Dolly was the soldier's second wife; the name of his first wife, date and place of that marriage and date of death of that wife were not given.
Dolly Brown, the soldier's widow, applied February 15, 1845 for pension on account of service of her husband, Samuel Brown, in the Revolutionary War. The claim was allowed. She resided then in Colchester, Connecticut, with her son, Justin Day, who was aged sixty-four years. Dolly Brown died August 4, 1846 in Colchester, Connecticut. She was called Dorothy or Dolly Brown.
In 1850, Justin Day of Colchester, Connecticut, stated that he was the only surviving child of his mother, Dolly Brown. In 1851, Lydia Watrous, also of Colchester, stated that she was the daughter of the soldier, Samuel Brown.
There are no further data pertaining to the family of Samuel Brown of Colchester, Connecticut.
In 1845, one Charles Northam, of Colchester, Connecticut, aged seventy-eight years, stated that he was born in Colchester, had always resided there, and that Dolly Brown's first husband (Day) was a "connection of his".
Very truly yours,
A. D. HILLER, Executive Assistant to the Administrator.

Connecticut 30,823. Samuel Brown, decd? 9.046
of Middlesex Co. in the State of Conn.
Conductor of Teams who was a Teamster — } in the company commanded by Captain Star of the regt. commanded by Col. Canfield, in the Conn.
time for Conductor 21 months & 23 days Teamster 2 " 7 "
Inscribed on the Roll of Connecticut
at the rate of 4 to 2 Dollars 77 Cents per annum, Dec. 1836. when he died to commence on the 14th day of March, 1831. Pend 13. Increased from $ 288:33.
Certificate of Pension issued the 15 th day of May 1846, and sent to L. J. Pease of Con. Present
Arrears to the 14th of
Pension allowance ending
Payable to Dolly Brown, his widow
{ Revolutionary Claim, } { Act June 7, 1832. }
Recorded by D. Brown, Clerk, bk E. 2. Vol. 3. Page 6.

9043 Connecticut
Set. to L. T. Pease March
Samuel Brown of Colchester in the State of Connecticut who was a Pri: in the Conn. commanded by Captain Buttleby of the Regt commanded by Col. Mroop in the Conn. time for State Troops
do. to Sec. War. Sta. do. to L. T. Pease, L. do. to Sec. War. Sta.
Inscribed on the Roll of Connecticut at the rate of 33 Dollars 33 Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1831.
Certificate of Pension issued the 20 th day of March 1833 and sent. Claimant Colchester. Conn.
Arrears to the 4th of March 33. $66.66 Semi-ann. allowance ending Sep. 33. 16.66 $83.32
{ Revolutionary Claim, } { Act June 7, 1832. }
Recorded by E. D. Bullock Clerk, Book 6 Vol. 3 — Page 3 —

March 2, 1937.
Mrs. Russell E. Corser Main Street Macedon, New York.
BA-J/ILL Samuel Brown S. 12311 Samuel Brown S. 10413
miss Dutke
Dear Madam:
Reference is made to your letter in which you request the Revolutionary War record of Samuel Brown, who was born November 6, 1751 or October 25, 1751, in Suffield, Massachusetts, or in Colchester, Connecticut.
The record has been found of the Samuel Brown who was born November 6, 1751 in Suffield, Massachusetts; the record has been found also of a Samuel Brown who was born in 1750 or 1751 of Colchester, Connecticut. Both records are furnished you herewith as they may aid you in your research.
Very truly yours,
A. D. HILLER, Executive Assistant to the Administrator.
Letter re Samuel Brown - S. 12311

C.R.
ESTABLISHED 1846
Mrs. M. E. Grosvenor, Millinery and Fancy Goods.
Hamilton, N.Y., Feb 25 1903
Commissioner of Pensions Washington D.C.
Dear Sir,
Can you give me any information in regard to Capt. Samuel Brown of Connecticut who served three years in Revolutionary War and earned his title by arduous services - his wife was Miss Day of Connecticut -
An early reply will greatly oblige Yours very truly (Mrs) M. E. Grosvenor

From G. M.
B
31 Col. St.
New London Co.
May 18-1896
To the Commissioner of Pensions.
Dear Sir,
Can you send me the military record of Sam- uel Brown, who is recorded in the list of pensioners resi- ding in New London Co. 1832? He served at one time in Col. Thomas Wheeler's Company of Stonington. Very truly yours Fannie Patten.

Rehook
10413
INVALID.
File No. 10.413
Samuel Brown Teamster Rec'd W
Act: June 7 th 1838
Index:—Vol. A , Page 46
[Arrangement of 1870.]

May 23 '9 sold per Miss Fannie New London Sw 13
6 used to e Potter Conn
Uch. 10-1903 Mrs. M. E. Goss Hamilton N.Y.
1937 - Mrs. 2- West 2nd Ave. River See letter in Mr. Samuel Hoxam's S.

Hon. Lewis Cass Secretary of War Washington D. C.

Colchester New London Co. Ct. Dec. 11. 1832
Sir
M c Samuel Brown is advanced in years and quite infirm and will be unable to be any more particular in his statement relative to his one months service at Roxbury, and should the evidence as to that term of service be deemed insufficient he would not wish his papers returned to give him an opportunity to procure further evidence as to that term, should the other terms be allowed.
Respectfully Your Humble Servt B. M. Trumbull for Saml. Brown
J. L. Edwards Esq.

To the Secretary of War
Sir
The undersigned feeling aggrieved by the decision of the Commissioners of Pensions, rejecting her application for an arrearage of Pension which she claims as due to her late husband Samuel Brown deceased for his services in the Revolutionary War, moves an appeal from said decision to the Hon ble Secretary of War and prays that a time may be assigned for a hearing of said appeal.
Dolly Brown By her att fy
Washington City
10 th March 1845
Sp ce J o Pease
The ground on  this on which is rejected is that the class of Conductors of which the husband of this applicant was one were acting under a civil contract and not in a military

Capacity and although this class of Conductors were usually Commissioned as Staff officers in the Q.M. Dept., it is claimed by the Commission that a written Contract between the Conductor and the Q.M. Dept. changes the nature of the service, and changes it from a Military to a Civil service. Although there is a resolve of Congress expressly authorizing the hiring of Teams for the public service under these Contracts are made

Sec. of War.
March 15, 1845—

Pension Office
March 15. 1845
Sir,
In the case of Samuel Brown, deceased, I make the following report:
In August 1832 the deceased applied for a pension under the act of the 7 th June 1832 and in his declaration set forth ten months service as a militia soldier  performed as he alleged in 1775, 1776 and 1777. The act gives to the Pensioner a pro rata allowance, and had the deceased performed any other military service than that set forth in his declaration, it does not appear to me to be probable that he would have omitted such service, since as it was well known that for every additional day's service between six months and two years, he would have received an addition to his  stipend proportioned to the duration of the service. He was allowed at the rate of $33.33 per annum. The widow now claims an augmentation of the pension, on account of service alleged to have been performed by him as an enlisted Teamster for service in 1777 for six months, and for a term of two years and

upwards as a Conductor or Wagon Master commencing in 1878. To the claim of the widow I make the following objections:
1. The insufficiency of the proof that he performed any service in 1877 as an enlisted Teamster. Congress never authorized such enlist- ments until the 16 th of March 1879, as will be seen by referring to the Journals. He perhaps might have been the same Samuel Brown, whose name appears on the paper purporting to be a copy of the roll of Daniel Butkley's teamsters; but there is no evidence whatever that these Teamsters were at- formed a tached to  component part of the Army.
2. The proof that Brown was a Wagon Master or Conductor in 1878 and 1879 is equally defective. The loose, general statement of David Shattuck is produced. He swears that Brown was a Conductor two years or more. He gives no particulars, nor does he pretend to say that Brown ever held an appointment of a military character. The payments made by a certain Samuel Brown as a Conductor prove nothing. It is the military character of the employment which the claimant

must establish before she can shew that she has the shadow of a claim; and when she shall have established that fact, some other proof than that now before us should be had to shew that the same Samuel Brown who was a Conductor was the identical Brown who was the claimant's husband. The name is frequently met with, and satisfactory evidence of identity is required in every case like this.
The allusion in my letter to Mr Pease, relative to the case of Jonathan Townsend, was not intended as a material objection to the claim of Brown's widow. It so frequently happens that wagon  masters conductors of teams were employed under a civil contract and performed duty with others who held their places under military obligations, that each case should depend on the particular evidence adduced. The shades of difference in some of those cases are so slight as scarcely to be discernible, and yet so important as to turn the scale for or against the claimant. Townsend's warrant certainly bears the impress of a military appointment, and yet the terms upon which he served imply nothing no obligation of a military character.
Hon. William L. Marcy Secretary of War.
I have the honor to enclose the papers marked from A. to E. inclusive and herewith enclosed. I respectfully ask a return of them.

L. J. Vance
2 Sep. 1845
John W. Campbell R. D. 10
10 miles
2
From the discharge.
That my wife Josephine Stephens, who has been my servant, since that period, has been naturally absenting herself, under a very constant & pressing cause due to a pressing & urgent necessity as she is naturally absent from her husband, and natural wife is natural for an officer and the officers in the army are there - even then any service which she has performed offering that has not been rendered which will never prove to be in any other document. The main object is the same as regards the former - the latter

27 Pension Office September 2 d 1845
Sir,
The paper which you handed to me in the case of the widow of Samuel Brown, deceased, has been examined and filed. This paper merely shews that there is a probability that Samuel Brown, who was employed as a conductor of Teams, was the husband of the claimant. The main objection to this claim, which was made known to you in my letter of March last, has not been removed by any evidence which you have produced. The questions in the case are these:— was Brown acting under a warrant from an officer duly authorized to appoint him to service? and did he serve in a military capacity? or was he employed under a civil contract? Unless it can be clearly shown that he was regularly appointed, ad ditionem and served under military obligation, no pension for staff service can be granted.
L. T. Pease, Esq. of Connecticut, Present
2 no entry

Pension Office
Dec r . 13. 1845
Comm te . of Pensions Report in the case of Dolly Brown
Upon the report dated Jan 3 d 1846 in this case the Secretary of War made the following endorsement:
"I am of opinion that the appli- cant is entitled to a pension. W. L. M."
"23 Jan. '46."

Pension Office,
December 13 th 1865.
Sir,
In the case of Dolly Brown, widow of Samuel Brown, I make the following report:
This claim is for services alleged to have been performed by her husband Samuel Brown, as a Wagon Conductor for eleven months during the revolution. There is ample proof that Samuel Brown was employed in that capacity; but there is no proof that he held a military appointment. I required of Mr. Pease her attorney, some proof that he did hold such an appointment. In the case of Bysel Phelps, which Mr. Pease affirms is in the same category, we had the affidavit of a very respectable man that he had seen Phelps's commission, and we had evidence also that Phelps received monthly pay. In the case of Brown we have no such evidence. Mr. Pease has shown me the affidavit of a person who gives an extract from one of Quota Master General Hubbard's books, from which it would seem that Brown was at one time allowed monthly pay. An inspection of the original book has been asked. The questions in the case are
1. Shall we receive the affidavit without an examination of the record; and
2. Shall we dispense with direct and positive testimony of Brown's having held a military appointment or commission?
The papers, twelve in number, are herewith enclosed; and I respectfully request a return of them.
I have the honor to be,
Very respectfully
Your obed. Servt.
J. L. Edwards
Hon. W. L. Marcy Secretary of War.

Hartford Ct Oct 8 th 1845
My Dear Sir
Yours enclosing the Pension Certificate of Bessel Phelps has just come to hand. Pray me to call your attention to the case of the widow of Samuel Brown. Dolly Brown, I think is the name of the widow. You will recollect that this case stood in the same category with that of B Phelps - upon the Washington papers. These papers will now, I suppose, be regarded as furnishing additional evidence of the service. In this light I have always received them. I presume therefore that you will not require me to pursue the appeal in the Brown case but will consider the question settled by the decision of the Secretary in the Phelps case - I shall take it for granted then, that the only matter now remaining for consideration in this case is the time of service.

and on this question it seems to me that the deposition of Bissell Phelps, (lately filed) ought to be regarded as conclusive of the full term of two years. — Phelps was a neighbor of Brown and must therefore have known him intimately, and having been engaged in the same service at the same, he could not well be mistaken.
In regard to the character of the witness you will see by the late Certificate of Dellingham as well as by the records of evidence of an earlier date, that no man is entitled to more full credit.
Phelps swears that Brown served as conductor either two or three years. If we were permitted to prove the traditions of the neighborhood we might show that he actually continued in this service for more than three years and until the close of the war. We trust therefore that you will allow the arrearage of a full pension to the time of her husband's death, deducting the amount never by him in his life time.

with great Respect I remain your most obedt and very humble servt
S. P. Pease
Hon'ble Edwards Concord Tennas

Hartford Ct Nov 5 / 48
Sir
I wrote you several weeks since in relation to the pending application of Dolly Brown widow of Samuel Brown deceased for an annuity due her deceased husband, and my letter remains unanswered.
Permit me to call your attention to this matter again and refer you to my former letter for the view there taken of the case. And in addition I now beg leave to call your attention to a resolution of Congress passed March 2 1778. Showing how fully this branch of the public service was committed to the control of the Q.M. General Dept it is as follows. "That Forage Masters, Wagon Masters, and other officers of the Department, be in the appointment of the Quarter Master General who is to be responsible for their conduct."

By another resolve passed the same day Charles Pettit is appointed Asst Q.M. Genl. I have found among the Hubbard papers a letter from Pettit to Hubbard which seems to me to establish the military character of the team service of which you and Doctor Crump have so long doubted. I subjoin a copy of the letter (The original is in the hands of the Rev Doct Sprague of Albany, who has obtained possession of many of Hubbard revolutionary papers).
Copy
Camp White Plains 19 th Aug t 1778 The Wagggon Master General informs me that a number of the Team Drivers, enlisted in Connecticut, have deserted the service and left their teams. He has therefore proposed to send Mr Paul Gutteridge Conductor in pursuit of them, to whom you will give all the countenance and assistance in your power towards apprehending and securing them. As it is with

great difficulty, & exposure to the public that train drivers of late have been obtaining, it is of great consequence to the service that deserters should be punished, as an example to others, and I cannot doubt that you will do all in your power to have the offenders brought to justice. Mr Gutteridge will be furnished with their names & description of the persons &c
I am Sir your
most obedt Servt
N. Wakefield Esq
Col. Pettet
D. 2. M. G.
Act D. M. G.
This would seem to be a consequence of the military character of the service. Pray let me hear from you.
Very Resp y your
most obedt
Servt
Hon. J. L. Edwards
S. J. Pearce
Cannot Resign &c

Sec. War 13 Dec. 1845

Pension Office
215
December 13 th 1845
Sir,
In the case of Dolly Brown, widow of Samuel Brown, I make the following report: This claim is for service alleged to have been performed by her husband Samuel Brown as a wagon conductor for eleven months, then during the revolution. There is ample proof that Samuel Brown was employed in that capacity; but there is no proof that he held a military appointment. I required of Mr. Pease, proof her attorney, some proof that he did hold such an appointment. In the case of Bishop Phelps, which Mr. Pease affirms is in the same category, we had proof that he the affidavit of a very respectable man that he had seen Phelps's commission, and we had evidence also that Phelps received monthly pay. In the case of Brown we have no such evidence. Mr. Pease has shown me the affidavit of a person who gives an extract from one of Quarter Master General Hubbard's books, from which it appears seem that Brown was at one time allowed monthly pay. An inspection of the original book has been asked. The questions in the case are 1. Shall we receive the affidavit under without an examination of the record; and

2. Shall we dispense with direct and positive testimony, of Brown's having held a military appointment or commission?
The papers, twelve in number, are herewith enclosed; and I respectfully request a return of them. I have the honor—
Hon. W. L. Marcy Secretary of War.
ack no entry

1 Term of Service of Samuel T Brown as Conductor of Teams
His account on the Hubbard Brook Commissions in Dec, 78 & Dec in Nov, 79.
In the absence of other circumstances to create a strong presumption of a further service it would not be unreasonable to take this as the measure of his service. But there are such circumstances. Let me ask you to consider it - In the first place the beginning and and end of the account with D. T. M. F. Hubbard by no means indicates the extent of the service as will be seen in comparing the account with Bingham, Merrill & others with the length of their service. They were paid elsewhere than at Hartford when the field of service did not lead to regular returns to that place.
Let us look a moment at some a single fact proved by a document recently found as connected the history & general course of this branch of the service.
We find Brown sent to Wenden to receive his teams consisting of 60 extra an Continental hay in the month of Feb, 79. This raises a raises a reasonable presumption, that it was

a long Campaign.
We find these Companies uniformly raised in the Spring at the opening of the Campaign generally, (a new Company) commencing soon in June, and in no instance at the close of a Campaign. When there must have been necessarily more Companies in array than wanted for the inactivity of military operations of Winter.
When was Brown Commissioned, and when did he raise his Company?
Certainly not at the close of a Campaign in Dec. 78 when his account in the Hubbard Books opens. To suppose so would be doing violence to the strongest presumptions arising from history & common sense.
We find Brown in service as a teamster in Darius Buckley Company in the Campaign of 77. When his qualifications for Command were brought under the observation of the Q.M. Genl. Dept. And in the Spring of 78 he must have been placed in Command of a Company of teams, & soon with the main army or at a distance from Hartford until his return to that neighborhood alarming in forays to recruit his teams, at the close

of the Campaign. To this Conclusion the mind is almost irresistibly drawn in view of all the facts.
It should be borne in mind that the records which would have shown the fact and date of these Concessions are lost without the fault of the parties concerned.
On every principle of law and equity an therefore and interpretation, liberal and most favorable to the applicant should be put upon the Circumstantial evidence, which in general, must necessarily be relied upon to make out his case. and accordingly upon this principle thousands have been pensioned under the act of '32 without one scrap of documentary evidence adduced in support of their claims.

Argument - to the Secretary, in the case of Polly Brown.

Dolly Brown widow of Samuel Brown late of Colchester in the State of Connecticut applied to the Comm t of Pensions for an allowance which she claims to have been due to her deceased husband for his services in the War of the Revolution as Conductor of Teams.
The claim was first rejected by the Comm t on two grounds.
1 st A want of sufficient evidence of identity. 2 nd That if Samuel Brown the husband of the applicant served as a Conductor of teams the service was not rendered in a Military Capacity, but under a Civil Contract
On a new hearing before the Comm t additional evidence was produced to both points, and deemed satisfactory by the Comm t on the first, but on the second the Comm t has again rejected the claim, and the case now comes up by appeal to the Sec y of War.
Samuel Brown is fully identified in all the documentary evidence produced in the case of Bissell Phelps as a Conductor of teams, his name with that of Bissell Phelps & others is found in the return made by Nathaniel Hubbard D. Q. M. S. of Conductors of teams to headquarters found among the Washington papers. And it is found on the books of Q. M. S. with an account like that with Phelps, in which he is charged as a subordinate disbursing officer, with monies

to account for, and credited with pay rolls of his Company and bills of Expenses for forage & subsistence.
It will be recollected that one ground of objection made by the Comm ee against the Claim of Phelps was, that the return spoken of showed a per diem compensation, — and on this principally if not entirely rested the Comm ee 's hypothesis that that their conductors were serving, not in a military capacity but under a civil contract.
But it appears by the books of D. M. G. that the per diem compensation was confined to the teams which at this period of the war, when the government had neither money nor credit to buy, were hired for the campaign at so much a day. The The conductor as in the case of all other officers receiving monthly pay.
The only difference in respect to the documentary evidence before the Comm ee between the case of Phelps & that of Brown was that in the latter, a sworn copy from the day book in which one of their pay rolls is extended, was produced instead of the original, and the Comm ee decided that a copy could not be received as evidence without an inspection of the original book — but that difficulty is removed and the original book is ready for the inspection of the Secretary.
The ledger of D. M. G. Hubbard containing the principle items of the account with Brown as Conductor and a day book in which several of these items are extended are now before the Secretary. In addition to the account with Brown, it will be seen by these books that the D. M. G. charges over these items to the

appropriate Departments of the Service - the pay rolls to the Quarter Master General and the bills of expenses to the Comptroller General. An original document found among the Hubbard papers is now added showing that Brown after the close of a Campaign was sent to Wadsworth to recruit his team upon Continental pay
We have then, in support of Brown's claim the books of his principal Disbursing Officer in which he is designated & paid as Conductor of Teams a well known officer of the Q.M. General's Department in the revolutionary war - provided for by repeated resolutions of Congress.
It will be seen by a resolve of Congress passed March 2 d 1778 that the appointment of three subordinate officers of his Dept is expressly given to the Q.M. Genl. and he is held responsible for their conduct
It is well known that the record of these appointments, if any thing like regular and well authenticated records ever existed, must have been turned with the War Office. - The next best evidence therefore, that the nature of the case admits of must be the books of the Disbursing Officer; and in this case the Disbursing Officer has the power of appointment; - and when we find on these books that Samuel Brown is designated & paid as Conductor of Teams Can there be a reasonable doubt of his

regular appointment to that office and his service in that capacity for such time as he was paid?
To illustrate the character of the evidence afforded by the books of a disbursing. Suppose that all the books of all the disbursing officers of the war had been preserved and were accessible to all parties interested. — They would furnish an exact measure of the whole amount of the war, showing the capacity in which every man served the time or length of his service & his compensation; — so that in executing the pension laws, there would be no room for imposition on the one hand nor injustice on the other. — They would supply the place, nay, for this purpose, more than supply the place of the burnt records, becoming records kept in that day would not have been so full and complete in respect to all the material facts put at issue between the government and the claimant in an application for a pension.
Unfortunately but few of these books have been found, but so far as they are found, they furnish data on which the government can proceed with the most perfect security.
The officer or soldier, may have been, and often was paid for different portions of his service by different

disbursing officers, so that the production of the books of anyone, may fail to exhibit and prove his whole services, but the government cannot be misled to its injury, by the production of a part anyone was be cause for so long time as the paid by any one disbursing officer, for so long time at least he must have served.
These books being, after the loss of the record, the highest & best evidence the nature of case admits of, and in the present case being full and decisive of the point in issue, if any mistake or error is set up on the other side, a new issue is raised and the burden of proof rests with them.
On the mere suggestions of a mistake, to call upon us to prove that our authority is not in error, is in effect calling upon us to prove a negative.
A Conductors of Teams is an officer in the Q.M's Dept, holding his appointment from the Q.M. Samuel Brown, the husband of the applicant, is designated & paid by the Q.M's as a Conductors of Teams as appears by his books kept in the discharge of the transaction. If this is not a record of the appointment of Samuel Brown to the office of Conductors of Teams & his services in that capacity; the record being lost, it is scarcely possible to regard it otherwise than as equivalent

to the record. This is after all perhaps nothing more than presumptive evidence that Samuel Brown was duly appointed and sworn as Conductor of Teams; but it is presumptive evidence of that Character that brings full conviction to the human mind and leaves no room to regret the want of more positive direct evidence — if any number of witnesses should come in & swear from recollection, that they stood by & heard the appointment announced, and saw the Commission delivered. Their testimony could scarcely in any degree strengthen the conviction.
Where the fact in issue is a necessary deduction from other facts proved by well authenticated documentary evidence, it is the highest species of presumptive evidence and always more satisfactory than any degree of positive evidence depending upon the uncertain recollection of witnesses.
And the Court in all other cases save that of Conductors of Teams has so regarded the evidence arising from the books of disbursing officers. And in case of Conductors saw them returned with Bissell Phelps on the Washington Paper (so called). — it was evidently the accidentally confounding the compensation of the Conductor with that of the hired

teams in a per diem computation. That led him to adopt his hypothesis of Conductors serving under Civil Contracts which a further enquiry into the facts shows to have been based upon an assumption of the Comm t wholly gratuitous & unfounded.
An examination of the books of the disbursing officer shows that these Conductors receive monthly pay like all others and the same as all others. — That there is nothing to distinguish them from other Conductors whom he has already pensioned, and rightly so, because upon the most unquestionably authority.
Since the foregoing was written I have read the last report of the Comm t to the Secretary in this case. He there distinguishes this case from that of B. P. Phelps, by saying that the latter was supported by the testimony of a credible witness who has seen Phelps Commissioned.
But the Comm t has allowed the following cases of Conductors of teams over Great Bearham. Phineas Merrill, Latham Parker & Alvin Alonzo all on the strength of the evidence afforded by the Hubbard books without a scrap of evidence of appointment or Commission other than what is derived from these books, and the present case is supported by the same documentary evidence in

in every particular and is in no way or manner to be distinguished from them excepting by the production of additional books tending to strengthen it which were wanting in some of those cases
Argument - to the Secretary, in the case of Dolly Brown.

  11 months half pay Conductor  20.00  2.20    6 " " Teamster  7.50  45    7 " " private  3 33 1/3  23 33 2/3    per annum   $ 288 33 1/3    Left whatever sum was paid to the husband
Augt 4 th 1778
Sarah Buckley Cond ce her
To Cash paid Samuel Brown as per Rept to acct be assoc for ——— £ 108, 0, 0
Dolly Brown's appeal.

Samuel Brown, dec d Act June 7. 1832
Increase to $ 442:77 per annum—
Conductor } mo. days. of Teams } 21 : 23 Teamster .. 2 : 7
Issue certificate payable at Hartford, Con. to Dolly Brown his widow, up to the 15 th Decem r 1836, when he died.
of former payments to be deducted.
Cert: to L. T. Pease Esq r of Conn. Present

Daniel Bulkley Company of Six months Steamers with time they began to Cast off
Mens names
1777
Daniel Bulkley Conductor May 14 Joseph Shaw Steamer June 2 Joseph Bulkley Ditto " 2 Charles Bulkley Ditto " 2 Joseph Brown Ditto " 2 Joseph Skinner Ditto " 2 Samuel Brown Ditto " 2 Joseph Johnson Ditto " 2 Benjamin Root Ditto " 2 Peter Bulkley Ditto " 2 Amaro Rawson Ditto " 2 Elkan Harris Ditto " 2

I certify that the within is a transcript from a Memorandum book kept by Jeremiah Wadsworth Commissary General in the Revolutionary War - That book is the property of the Connecticut Historical Society, now in my custody to be returned to the office of Society at Hartford Connecticut
J. J. Pease

Hartford, Augt. 4 th 1778.
Josh. Bulkley, Cond t . D r to cash paid Sant. Brown, as p rect . to £ 108. 0. be acct d . for
Pension Office, May 11, 1846.
We certify that the foregoing is truly copied from and compared with a book in this office belonging to the Connecticut Historical Society.
E. B. Robinson John D. Wilson

Dolly Brown widow of Sam l Brown late of Colchester, Middlesex County, Connecticut deceased, applies for an increase of pension claimed to have been due to her deceased husband
Samuel Brown was pensioned under the act of 1832 for some ten months service as a private in the militia until his death in 1836 - no other or further service was alleged in his application.
This service in the militia was alleged to have been rendered before June 1977 - After that period the widow in her application alleges that he served some six months as an enlisted teamster in a Company of teams commanded by Daniel Bulkley, that he was then appointed Capt or Conductor of teams and served some two years in that capacity.
In support of her claim she produces - 1 st The deposition of John Huxford who swears that in 78 & 79 he (Huxford) was in service as an enlisted teamster, that during the same period Samuel Brown of Colchester with whom he was well acquainted was in the service as Capt or Conductor of a Company of Teams. m 2 nd The books of Nehemiah Hubbard D. Q. G.

Exhibiting an account with Samuel Brown of Colchester as a Conductor of Teams, with the usual items of an acct with an officer in the service. such as money advanced to account for & credits of bills of expenses & payrolls of his Company &c 3 An Extract from the Washington papers (so called) in which the name of Samuel Brown with Bissell Phelps & others of the same Class is returned by the D. Q. M. Genl to head quarters, in August '79 as Conductor of Teams
This was the state of the Case as first presented and rejected by the Comm ee - one ground of rejection being, a want of sufficient proof of identity. The attorney for the applicant (who had no agency in drawing up the papers) saw at once that the objection of the Comm ee to the proof of identity was well taken, more especially, when regarded in connection with the omission to alledge the term service in the original declaration which now first came to his (the Attorney's) knowledge. and he was himself apprehensive that some mistake had been made in the person.
He accordingly immediately addressed a letter to Col o John Shaw of Colchester a gentleman of high intelligence & respectability, who from his age & extensive business as a merchant and in

various public employments, must have necessarily made him conversant with all the facts
From Col. Shaw he learned that there was no mistake & could be no possibility of any mistake. That Samuel Brown the husband of Sally Brown was the same Samuel Brown who served as Conductor of trains in the revolutionary war. was fact about which there could be no doubt.
That the revolutionary service of Brown could be known to him (Shaw) only by reputation as his age did not extend back to that period.
That there was only one man then living in Colchester of an age to recollect the events of the Revolution. - That this man although young at the time a boy nine or ten years old was well acquainted with Brown at that period living then in the same neighborhood & having an elder brother in the same service as Conductor of trains, and having ever after remained a neighbor of Brown until his death.
That in regard to the omission of Brown to alledge his service as Conductor in his original application he, Shaw, had understood that the omission was by advice of Benjamin Tumbull Esq. who drew up the declaration, who gave it as his opinion that the train service was not of a

military character and would constitute no claim for a pension under the act.
That this was mere rumor however, Theron Gull and all other persons known to have been present at the time being deceased.
After the decision of the case of Beman Phelps by the Secretary of War establishing the military character of this class of team men which was another ground of objection of the Comm ee against the claim. The attorney immediately sent for the deposition of Col o Isham & that of Mr Northam the gentlemen refused to his letter.
These depositions are now before the Comm ee .
That of Isham identifies Samuel Brown late of Colchester Vt - a revolutionary pension as the husband of the present applicant Dolly Brown. This was as far as he could go unless permitted to testify to mere hearsay and having a living witness of the highest credibility who could swear to the material facts from his own personal knowledge was not by the rules of evidence permitted to resort to hearsay or report.
Accordingly the deposition of Northam

is produced who swears to facts that fully identify Samuel Brown the late husband of the present applicant as the same Samuel Brown of Leominster who served as a Conductor of trains in the revolutionary war. The character of these witnesses is well supported and the proof of identity would be deemed conclusive in any Court of judicature in Massachusetts. Induced upon this evidence The facts are clearly established on the witnesses present there is no other alternatives

WAR DEPARTMENT.
Revolutionary Claim.
I certify that, in conformity with the law of the United States, of the 7 th June 1832. Samuel Samuel Brown, dec d . late of Connecticut, Wagon Conductor, Wagoner, Private & Musician, in the Revolution, was entitled to a pension, at the rate of three hundred and nine dollars, per annum; and having received forty-four dollars, per annum only, and died on the 8 th of April 1833, the amount due, from the 4 th March 1831 to the time of his death, is payable to Dolly Brown, widow of said Samuel Brown, dec d . The amount heretofore paid at the rate of $44 per annum, is to be deducted,
Given at the War Office of the United States, this 23 rd . — day of January one thousand eight hundred and forty-six.
Secretary of War.
Examined and } Countersigned. }
Commissioner of Pensions.

WAR DEPARTMENT.
Revolutionary Claim.
I certify that, in conformity with the law of the United States, of the 7 th June 1832, Samuel Brown, deceased, late of Connecticut, who was a Conductor of Teams and a Teamster, in the revolution, was entitled to a Pension at the rate of Four Hundred and Forty-two Dollars and Seventy-seven Cents per annum per annum; and having died on the 13 th of December 1836, the amount due, from the 4 th March, 1831, to the time of his death, is payable to Dolly Brown, his widow. Former payments to be deducted. This certificate is issued in lieu of one for $288:33 per annum, which has been cancelled.
Given at the War Office of the United States, this 15. day of May, one thousand eight hundred and forty-six.
Secretary of War.
Examined and } Countersigned. }
Commissioner of Pensions.

WAR DEPARTMENT.
Revolutionary Claim.
I certify that, in conformity with the law of the United States, of the 7 th June 1832, Samuel Brown, deceased, late of Connecticut, who was a Wagon Conductor, Wagoner, Private and Musician in the Revolution, was entitled to a pension at the rate of there  $285:33 hundred and nine  eighty three dollars and thirty three per annum; and having received forty four dollars  $33:33 per annum only, and died on the 8 th of April 1833, the amount due from the 4 th of March 1831 to the time of his death, is payable to Dolly Brown, widow of said Samuel Brown, deceased. The amount heretofore paid at $44 per annum, is to be deducted.
Given at the War Office of the United States, this twenty-third day of January, one thousand eight hundred and forty-six.

Pension Agency Hartford Feb. 3. 1846.
Sir
I enclose herewith the Notice to increase the pension of Samuel Brown dec d . at the close of the Letter I am directed to deduct former payments at the rate of $114 per annum. Mr Brown does not appear ever to have been paid except at the rate of $33.33 per annum, and supposing the sum of $114. to be a mistake I have thought proper to return the Letter for further directions.
I am very Respectfully Your Ob t Serv t H. Goodwin 2 nd Agent
A. D. Edwards Esq. Commissioner of Pensions Washington

Washington March 14 1880
Sir
Enclosed you will find an application of the heirs of Dolly Brown du ce for an increase of pension. Please examine & report the case to me
I have the honor to be
Respectfully
H. H. Sylester
Mr. J. H. Edson
P.S.

Pension Office
Decr 1880
Nov 18 th
Sir:
The application in the case of Dolly Benner del. for an increase of pension has been received and filed. The grounds upon which it is asked are not stated, and we are left to mere conjecture on the subject. It appears that the pension already allowed is for 21 months, 23 days as conductor of waggon, and 2 months and 7 days as Teamster. There is nothing in the evidence which would authorize the granting of a greater pension.
H. H. Sylvester Esq Charlestown N. H.

James E Heath Com of Pensions Ch
Washington City D.C. 6 th March 1857
As the authorise Attorney by letter of Atty filed is asked =fully ask that the Case of Saml Brown of Col. be reexamined and that his case be increased from $442, per annum to $1180, as "Conductor" of Trains, for at least 3 years. Particular attention is requir- ed to the affidavit of Digeal Phelps of Vermont who is pensioned for at $600, per annum, & who knew Brown during the War.
Yours very Resp ly Dick Pugh

Give the State.
Dolly Brown wid of Samuel
McColo
Feb 13 1887
for J Brown
Ex by N. S. Bowen Feb 24-57

Pa West Chester, January 31, 1851
The Commissioner of Pensions will please permit A. D. Gage to examine the papers in the case of Samuel Brown, and his widow Dolly Brown, late Revolutionary Pensioners. - We, the heirs, believe there are arrearages due
Justin Day,
only heirs of Saml. Brown & Dolly Brown

Lammul Boorn
advent 1200 private $3666 10 mi / pirata $33.33 - Claimant
(p73)

BRIEF objections to the admission of Pension Claims , of which those answered in the negative, in red ink, will apply to the claim of Samuel Brown which require further proof or explanation.
I. Does the declaration show where the applicant resides? II. Did the declarant make the declaration in the county where he resides? 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? 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? No VI. Has he given the names of the officers under whom he served, in conformity with the regulations? No! in all instances VII. Has he made a relinquishment of every claim to any other pension than the one under the Act of June 7, 1832? VIII. Has the Court given their opinion? IX. Has the Clerk given his certificate? 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?

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?
No
XII. If the clergyman's affidavit has not been produced, is there any reason assigned for not obtaining it?
No
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?
No to the last term.
XIV. † If the applicant has produced a witness or witnesses as to his service, has the magistrate who administered the oath certified that he, she, or they are persons of credibility?
Has the official character and signature of the magistrate been certified by the proper officer under his seal of office?
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?
The ages of none of the witnesses is given.
XVI. Are the papers authenticated as the regulations direct?
XVII. Are the seven interrogatories prescribed by the War Department answered satisfactorily? And, if not, which of them is not so answered?
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 the 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.
†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 authenticated 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 end 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.