Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File S. 17329, Oliver Chalker, Conn.

SERVICE
NUMBER
Conn.
Chalker, Oliver
S. 17329
carded
CONTENTS

22990
Connecticut
Oliver Walker
Willingness in the State of Conn who was a private in the Conn commanded by Captain _____ of the Regt commanded by Col Worthington the Conn Troops here for 2 years
Inscribed on the Roll of Conn at the rate of 80 Dollars — Cents per annum, to commence on the 14th day of March, 1831.
Certificate of Pension issued the 28 day of Decr 30 and Lieut Genl N. Barber. H of R
Arrears to the 14th of Mar 1834 200 Semi-annual allowance ending Sep. 4, " 40
$ 240
{ Revolutionary Claim, Act June 7, 1832.
Recorded by ED Brattle Clerk
Book 4 Vol. 3 Page 30

State of Connecticut,
Middlesex County - }
Probate Court of Saybrook in said County
On this tenth - day of Sept r 1852 personally appeared, in open Court, before the Court of Probate for the Probate District of Saybrook in the County of Middlesex and State of Connecticut now sitting at Saybrook in said District; the same being a Court of Record
Mr. Oliver Cheetham
Oliver Cheetham - a resident of Saybrook - in the County of Middlesex - and State of Connecticut, aged seventy two - years, who being first 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.
That he was born at Saybrook, County of Middlesex, State of Connecticut, the 12 th day of August 1760 - and that he has ever since resided in the same Town. That there is no record of his age as he knows of -
That about the 1 st of March A.D. 1776 - his brother, Samuel Cheetham, now deceased, enlisted at said Saybrook to serve, until the December following - and that the applicant immediately took the place of his said brother & served out the whole term of his said enlistment in his stead. That the company in which he served was commanded by Capt. John Day of said Saybrook; but he does not recollect the names of the other officers. That they were stationed in Fort Trumbull in New London, and there remained during the whole time - that they worked on the Fort, building it up etc. He does not recollect who commanded the Fort - He was then discharged -
That in December of the same year - to wit. 1776 - he enlisted at said Saybrook, for three months - and immediately joined the Army, company there - The company was commanded by Capt. Buck - Lieut. Scovell - and Ensign Kelsoy - all of said Saybrook. Marched to Providence R.I. and there kept guard, since which fleet bottom Boats, it was said to remove our Army on to Rhode Island, where the British Army then was - That he served out his whole time & was there discharged -
That in 1777, he was detached to serve in the Ship  Guerrill , and said to serve - from the mouth of ship until Sept r 2 That in September of the same year he was detached, and sent to Brimfield, on the North River to join the Army - and there joined it, but he cannot recollect who the officers were. He knows, however that the Regiment was soon afterwards connected with Col. Webb Regiment. After being there a few weeks, the two Regiments were ordered down to Kingsbridge, to take a party of Refugees, that were there doing mischief, by plundering. Went down in the night to near East Chester, in the morning went in, the scouting parties on both sides,

a number of prisoners were taken on both sides - So on heard information that a superior force of the enemy were going round to cut off the Americans - they then retreated to Rye - Some few weeks after that, returned to Pease Hill, remained there some time and then came back to Saybrook, went immediately to Saybrook Fort - remained there the rest of the year, and was then discharged at the Fort by Capt. John Shipman who at that time commanded there -
That in the summer of A.D. 1778 - he belonged to the Shore Guard, and served through the summer in it - It was commanded by Capt. Tully at that time - Col. Worthington he thinks had the chief command, but not certain about it -
That in June 1779 - he went with the Militia company to which he belonged, the same being at that time commanded at that time by Capt. Tully to New Haven to drive away the British who had landed, and were doing mischief there. That the Regiment to which said company belonged was commanded by Col. Worthington. That when they arrived the British were pretty much done their work, and were retreating - Col. Worthington's Regiment attacked their rear - some men were killed - and some prisoners on both sides - The British went down to the shore - embarked in their boats, and went off - The applicant says that he was about on this expedition, he thinks as much as two weeks -
That immediately after his return to Saybrook, he enlisted or was drafted, he cannot recollect which, and returned to guard New Haven, and remained there until the first of January - when he was discharged, and came home to Saybrook. That the officers of the company were Aaron Kelcey Capt. David Mitchell Lieutenant - and Parsons Ensign - That the company was full. That he entered said company in the month of June, and served until the month of January -
That he again joined the Shore Guard, and belonged to the same, through the summer of 1780. and served there, during that time. The Guard was then commanded by Capt. Tully -
That in the year A.D. 1781 - he again belonged to the Shore Guard, and served through the summer, at that time a man of the name of Bushnell, was engaged in inventing and constructing a machine, or torpedo to blow up the British ships, the applicant, assisted in guarding him, during the time,

that the applicant took a nicotine coil in his beard, which settled in the right eye, and entirely destroyed the sight of it. He says that other officers in Guilford, Bruns- -wick, and that they were ordered to do so, by the Officers.
He says, that he never applied for a pension before now. He says that he never received a military discharge.
The said Oliver Cheetham 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 and year aforesaid.
Oliver Cheetham
Before me Samuel Ingalls Judge of Probate.
We, Rev. Wm. Hotchkiss - a clergyman, residing in the town of Saybrook and George Pratt - residing in the same, hereby certify that we are well acquainted with Mr. Oliver Cheetham - who has subscribed and sworn to the above declaration; that we believe him to be 72 - 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 and year aforesaid.
Before me Samuel Ingalls Judge of Probate.
Rev. Wm. Hotchkiss Geo. Pratt
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 abovenamed applicant was a revolutionary Soldier, and served as he states. And the Court further certifies, that it appears to them that Rev. Wm. Hotchkiss who has signed the preceding certificate, is a clergyman, resident in the town of Saybrook - and that Rev. Geo. Pratt - who has also signed the same, is a resident in the town of Saybrook - and is a credible person, and that their statement is entitled to credit.
Samuel Ingalls Judge of the Court of the Court of Probate in the District of Saybrook - Connecticut -
I, Richard P. Williams - Clerk of the Court of Probate for the District of Saybrook State of Connecticut do hereby certify that the foregoing contains the original proceedings of the said Court in the matter of the application of Oliver Cheetham - for a Pension.
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal of this Twelfth - day of September 1839.
Office,
Richard P. Williams
Clerk.

Moses Chalker of Saybrook County of Middlesex and State of Connecticut, deposeth and saith that he is 74 years of age. That he is the Brother of Oliver Chalker who hath signed the annexed application for a pension, and from his youth up, hath lived either in the same family, or within fifty rods of each other, during the Revolutionary War in the said family. The deponent saith that he recollects that his said Brother Oliver served in the Army at New London in 1776 in the place of his said Brother Samuel now alive. The deponent thinks as much as one month. That in Oct 1776 said Oliver Chalker enlisted for three months in the Revolutionary Army, went to Rhode Island, and was absent as much as three months, when he returned - being served out his time according to his said enlistment, as the deponent always understood said supposed. That said Oliver Chalker served in the Guard, as the deponent understood, and always supposed, the forepart of the season of 1777 - and then, in the month of Sept r was detached, as the deponent understood and supposed to go in the State of New York, & did go, and remain in the Army there, and returned in a month or two, and then went into Saybrook Fort, and left Guard there until winter. That said Oliver Chalker belonged to the Shore Guard in the summer of 1778 - and served, the deponent thinks through it. That in 1779 he understood that said Oliver Chalker went with the rest of the company to which he belonged to drive the British from New Haven - and the deponent saith that he recollects that said Oliver Chalker immediately after his return enlisted, and went back to New Haven and remained until January, when he returned home. That said Oliver served in the said Shore Guard in 1780 & 1781 - he thinks through the season. The deponent further saith, that he was not at home during all the above several periods of time, but was part of the time in the Army himself - and that he was not personally knowing to all the facts as detailed in the application of his said Brother, as is hereto annexed, but that much of it said knowing, and that the whole has been a subject of conversation in the family many years ago - and that he hath no doubt of its entire truth.
In open court of Probate this tenth day of September - 1852 - and I certify that Moses Chalker since then has been examined with the said Oliver Chalker and has been found to be a credible witness.
Moses Chalker
Esther Bushnell of Saybrook in the County of Middlesex and State of Connecticut, deposeth and saith that he is 74 years of age. That from his youth up he has been well acquainted with Oliver Chalker, who hath signed the annexed application for a pension, and hath always lived within a quarter of a mile of him. That he recollects that said Oliver Chalker served in the Army at New London, but cannot say how long. That he served in the Army at Rhode Island, the deponent thinks as much as three months, and that it was in the Winter.

and said since Charles returned home in the spring - That he went away to the westward, and the Deponent understood joined the Army in New York, and returned in a month or two - since that he had served in the New York Fort, until winter - That the said Charles served in the Quaker number of seasons - but the Deponent cannot say how many - The Deponent further saith, that he hath not been able to give the dates of the above series from recollection, but he well recollects, the above of series Charles and his say series as above stated - The Deponent further saith that he hath many years ago, heard the said Charles relate at different times the same account of his series, as contained in his application, and that he fully believes it is true -
Proven in open court before me this tenth day of September 1882 - and I do hereby certify that the same is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Elisha Bushnell I, the undersigned, Clerk of the Court of Probate for the County of Middlesex and State of Connecticut, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original now on file in my office and of the whole thereof. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Court at Hartford, this tenth day of September, 1882.  Jemima Bushnell of New York in the County of Middlesex and State of Connecticut, do hereby certify that she is 82 years of age - That she is a sister of Oliver Charles who hath signed the annexed application for a pension, and that she lived in the same house with him until after the Revolutionary War - That she recollects, and says, that her said Brother Oliver went away to New London in the Revolutionary War, to serve in the army of her Brother Samuel, now dead - and that he was absent as much as a month - That soon after, encamping the same year, he enlisted to go into the Army for three months - and went away, and was gone that length of time, and then returned and that it was always understood and supposed that he served in Providence Rhode Island - That after that he went away into the Army in the State of New York, and was gone a month or two, when he returned and went into the New York Fort, and served until January - That he went to New Haven and served there one winter - and that he served in the Shore Guard a number of seasons - That is, from April to January - and the Deponent further saith, that, though she does not know, about his series, yet she well recollects what she has above related, and also of assisting in getting him out, when he went away - and that it was always understood and believed (as she supposed) by the family and all others who knew anything about it, that he did serve in the Army as he has stated, in his said application - and she fully believes the same - She says she is unable from recollection to fix upon the exact dates -
And further the deponent saith not -
Sworn and duly subscribed in open court of Probate before me this tenth day of September 1882 - and I do hereby certify that the same is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Jemima Bushnell Samuel H. Hall Judge of Probate
Jemima Bushnell

I Richard P Williams Clerk of the Court of Probate for the District of New Britain - County of Middlesex and State of Connecticut do hereby certify, that the writ- ing foregoing contains the original proceedings of said Court in the matter of the application of Oliver Cheetham for a pension - and also, his supplemental application under date of the 21 st July 1853 - of perjury of the first -
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal of office this 6 th day of August A D 1853 -
Richard P Williams Clerk
Ms. B. 1. 6 v. 30.
19329 Baker

State of Connecticut Middletown county ss. Probate Court of Saybrook in said County
On this 31 st day of July 1833 - personally appeared in open court before the court of Probate for the District of Saybrook in the County of Middlesex and State of Connecticut, now sitting at Saybrook in said County and District. The same being on oath of record. Oliver Chester - who heretofore made the annexed application for a pension, and who being duly sworn, deponeth and saith - That as regards the first term of service - to wit - the service in Fort Trumbull in 1776 - owing to old age and the consequent loss of memory he is unable to speak positively to the time when he joined the said company & when he left it, but he does know that he served therein at least one month . and in Fort Trumbull at New London as stated in said application - As to the 2 nd application service named in said application - to wit - in Dec r 1776 - he says that from old age and the consequent loss of memory he is entirely unable to say, what day in said December he so enlisted, but he is certain that he did enlist at that time & served out the term of three months . as stated in said application - There other companies there, making a Regiment all, including the company in which the applicant served, under the command of Col. John Ely -
As to the 3 rd service in said application named - to wit - in 1777 - from April to Sept r - he saith that from the cause aforesaid he is unable to say at what day in the month he was discharged, attached to service in S d Guard - or at what day he was dismissed - but he is certain that at that time he served at least four months . The Guard was under the command of Capt. John Shipman, he thinks. Col. Worthington had the chief command. The service was a constant service and on the Northern Shore of Long Island Sound, in S d Town of Saybrook
As to the 4 th term in said application mentioned - to wit - in 1777 - from Sept r 2 nd - he saith that he went to Peeko Hill in Sept r as therein stated, but from old age & loss of memory he is unable to state the day on which he left home - or on which he returned home, but from the best of his recollection he was absent at least four weeks .
In regard to the 5 th term of service named in S d application - to wit - in the Saybrook Fort - in the Fall of 1777 - he says that he went in to S d Fort as a common soldier as early as the 20 th of Oct r 1777 & served therein until the 1 st of January 1778 - when he was dismissed making Two Months & Ten days . The Fort & company was at that time commanded by Capt. John Shipman -
As regards the 6 th term named in said application - to wit - in the Guard in 1778 - the applicant saith that according to his best recollection which he entered in to said Guard the first of April to the first of January - making Nine Months .
As regards the 7 th term of service named in S d application - to wit - going to New Haven in 1779 - he saith that, from the best of his recollection & belief, he served in said application at least two weeks .
As regards the 8 th term of service named in said application - to wit - his service in New Haven in 1779 - he saith that he joined the company at New Haven, in the month of June, the last of that month & served therein until the 1 st of January making six months . The name of the Colonel he does not recollect -
As regards the 9 th term of service named in said application - to wit - the service in the Guard in 1780 - he saith that he entered in to S d Guard the 1 st of April 1780 - and served in S d Guard until the 1 st of January making Nine Months .
That as regards the 10 th & last term named - he saith that entitled in said application - to wit - the 1 st of January - making Nine Months - The applicant saith that said Guard was raised under the authority of the State of Connecticut - and always attached to the Saybrook Fort - Guard duty on the Northern Shore of Long Island Sound - that he acted as a private soldier -

The applicant therefore states, owing to old age and the consequent loss of memory, he is unable to state more positively as to the precise length of his service than seems to be the fact, and that, therefore, he is entitled to a pension. To his best recollection since leaving the service he served a period of twelve years, eleven months and seventeen days. — For which he claims a pension.
Oliver Chalker
On the said Court of the County of the District of Columbia, after investigation of the matter, finds that the above applicant was a revolutionary soldier and is entitled to a pension.
Samuel Engle Judge of said Court of District —

Hon. Mr. Davenport
Sir
I again return the papers of Oliver Chester - They are corrected - and I believe justice requires that they should be accepted -
Your ob t Serv t
Samuel Dugren Saybrook - Conn t
Dec. 16 - 1833
Please send the certificate to me - S. Dugren

19829 Oliver Chalkin 6. t
Return this cc
2 years private
$86
Hon N Barber
Hon N Barber
HefR
S Ingham
corrected.

WAR DEPARTMENT,
Pension Office,
Sir:
The evidence in support of your claim, under the act of June 7, 1832, has been examined, and the papers are herewith returned. The following is a statement of your case in a tabular form. On comparing these papers with the following rules, and the subjoined notes, you will readily perceive that objections exist, which must be removed, before a pension can be allowed. The notes and the regulations will shew what is necessary to be done. Those points to which your attention is more particularly directed, you will find marked in the margin with a brace, (thus: { ). You will, when you return your papers to this Department, send this printed letter with them; and you will, by complying with this request, greatly facilitate the investigation of your claim.
A Statement, shewing the Service of Oliver Chalkin C.T.
   Period when the service was rendered. Duration of the claimant's service. Rank of the claimant. Names and Rank of the Company officers under whom he served. Names and Rank of the General and Field officers. Battles in which the applicant was engaged. Country through which he marched. Place of abode when he entered the service, and age at the present period. Evidence by which the declaration is supported.   Years. Months. Days.     Apr 1776 into - 2 8 Private Capt Ely Col Forster Hudson at Fort Ticonderoga 72 born entered the service and now lives at Saybrook Meadows   Dec. 11 " " 3 " Capt Buck 64 C.T.   Apr 1777 - about 6 " forgotten   Jun 1778. Served through the the Summer Col Tully { Staves   June 1779 - until 1 14 " " "   then about 1 7 " Capt Kelsey   until 1780 3 "   summer 1780 Served through the the Summer Col Tully Shore guards   9481. Served through the the Summer "  
Service proved by A. Living witness - Certificate of a Congressman and a Citizen
I am, respectfully,
Your obedient servant,
* 1 Month
J. L. EDWARDS, Commissioner of Pensions.

REGULATIONS UNDER THE ACT OF JUNE 7, 1832.
The following regulations have been adopted:
This law has been construed to extend, as well to the line, as to every branch of the Staff of the Army, and to include under the terms "Continental Line," "State troops," "militia," and "volunteers," all persons enlisted, drafted, or who volunteered and who were bound to military service, but not those who were occasionally employed with the army upon civil contracts, such as Clerks to Commissaries and to Store Keepers, &c. Teamsters, Boatmen, &c. Persons who served on board of Private Armed Vessels are also excluded from the benefits of the law, as well as persons who turned out as patrols, or were engaged in guarding particular places at night, and were not recognized as being in actual military service.
Four general classes of cases are embraced in this law:
 1. The Regular Troops.  2. The State Troops, Militia, and Volunteers.  3. Persons employed in the Naval service.  4. Indian Spies. 
As rolls of the regular troops in the Revolutionary War exist in this Department, all persons, claiming the benefit of this law as officers, non-commissioned officers, musicians or privates, will in the first instance, make application by transmitting the following declaration, which will be made before a Court of Record of the County where such applicant resides. And every Court having by law a seal and Clerk is considered a Court of Record.
DECLARATION,
In order to obtain the benefit of the Act of Congress of the 7th of June, 1832.
State, Territory, or District of } ss. County of }
On this day of personally appeared (a) before A. B. a resident (b) of in the county of and State, Territory or District of aged (c) 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 provision made by the act of Congress, passed June 7th, 1832. That he enlisted in the Army of the United States in the year (d) , with and served in the (e) regiment of the line, under the following named officers:
[Here set forth the names and rank of the Field and Company Officers; the time he left the service; (and if he served under more than one term of enlistment, he must specify the particular period, and rank and names of his officers;) the town or county and State in which he resided when he entered the service; the battles, if any, in which he was engaged, and the country through which he marched. [This form is to be varied so as to apply to the cases of officers and persons who belonged to the militia, volunteers, navy, &c.]
He hereby relinquishes every claim (f) whatever to a pension or an annuity, except the present, and he declares that his name is not on the Pension Roll of any Agency in any State, or (if any) only on that of the Agency in the State of
Sworn to and subscribed the day and year aforesaid.
A. B.
[And then will follow the certificate of the Court.]
And the said Court do hereby declare their opinion (g) that the above named applicant was a revolutionary soldier, and served as he states.
I of the Court of do hereby certify (h) that the foregoing contains the original proceedings of the said Court in the matter of the application of for a pension.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal of office (i) this day of &c.
If, on examination of the proper record the names of applicants, making such declaration, cannot be found, they will produce such proof as the rule given in note (j) points out.
Every applicant who claims a pension by virtue of service in the State Troops, Volunteers or Militia, except those who belonged to the New Hampshire Militia and State Troops of Virginia, will make and subscribe a declaration similar to the foregoing, with the following additions, viz:
(k) We, A. B., a Clergyman, residing in the and C. D. residing in (the same) hereby certify, that we are well acquainted with , who has subscribed and sworn to the above declaration; that we believe him to be 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 and year aforesaid.
[And then will follow the certificate of the Court.]
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 them that A. B.
who has signed the preceding certificate is a clergyman, resident in the and that C. D., who has also signed the same is a resident in the and is a credible person, and that their statement is entitled to credit.
I, Clerk of the Court of do hereby certify that the foregoing contains the original proceedings of the said Court, in the matter of the application of for a pension.
In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal of office, this day of &c.
Every applicant will produce the best proof in his power. This is the original discharge or commission; but if neither of these can be obtained, the party will so state under oath, and will then procure, if possible, the testimony of at least one credible witness, stating in detail his personal knowledge of the services of the applicant, and such circumstances connected therewith, as may have a tendency to throw light upon the transaction.
If such surviving witness cannot be found, the applicant will so state in his declaration (l) and he will also, whether he produce such evidence or not, proceed to relate all the material facts, which can be useful in the investigation of his claim, and in the comparison of his narrative with the events of the period of his alleged service, as they are known at the Department. A very full account of the services of each person
It must appear whether there are or are not surviving of each term stated

will be indispensable to a favorable action upon his case. The facts stated will afford one of the principal means of corroborating the declaration of the applicant, if true, or of detecting the imposition, if one be attempted; and unless, therefore, these are amply and clearly set forth, no favorable decision can be expected. All applicants will appear before some Court of Record in the County, in which they reside, and there subscribe and be sworn to, one of the declarations above provided, according to the nature of his case.
The Court will propound the following (m) interrogatories to all applicants for a pension, on account of service in the Militia, State troops, or Volunteers, except the Militia of New Hampshire and the State troops of Virginia.
 1. Where and in what year were you born?  2. Have you any record of your age, and if so, where is it?  3. Where were you living when called into service; where have you lived since the Revolutionary war, and where do you now live?  4. How were you called into service; were you drafted, did you volunteer, or were you a substitute? And if a substitute, for whom?  5. State the names of some of the Regular Officers, who were with the troops, where you served; such Continental and Militia Regiments as you can recollect, and the general circumstances of your services.  6. { To a Soldier. } Did you ever receive a discharge from the service, and if so, by whom was it given and what has become of it? { To an Officer. } Did you ever receive a commission, and if so, by whom was it signed, and what has become of it? 
7. State the names of persons to whom you are known in your present neighborhood, and who can testify as to your character for veracity, and their belief of your services as a soldier of the Revolution.
The Court will see that the answers to these questions are embodied in the declaration, and they are requested to annex their opinions of the truth of the statement of the applicant.
The applicant will further produce in Court, if the same can be done, in the opinion of the Court, without too much expense and inconvenience to him, two respectable persons -one of whom should be the nearest clergyman, if one lives in the immediate vicinity of such applicant, who can testify, from their acquaintance with him, that they believe he is of the age he represents, and that he is reputed and believed in the neighborhood to have been a Revolutionary soldier, and that they concur in that opinion. If one of these persons is a Clergyman, the Court will so certify, and they will also certify, to the character and standing of other persons, giving such certificates.
The traditional evidence of service is deemed very important, in the absence of any direct proof, except the declaration of the party. And the Courts are requested to be very particular in the enquiry whether the belief is general, and whether any doubts have ever existed upon the subject.
Applicants unable to appear in Court by reason of bodily infirmity, may make the declaration before required, and submit to the examination, before a Judge or Justice of a Court of Record of the proper county, and the Judge or Justice will execute the duties, which the Court is herein requested to perform, and will also certify that the applicant cannot, from bodily infirmity, attend the Court.
Whenever any official act is required to be done by a Judge or Justice of a Court of Record, or by a Justice of the peace, the certificate of the Secretary of State or Territory, or of the proper Clerk of the Court or County, under his seal of office, will be annexed, stating that such person is a Judge or Justice of a Court of Record, or a Justice of the Peace, and that the signature annexed is his genuine signature.
No payments can be made on account of the services of any person, who may have died before the taking effect of the act of June 7, 1832; and in case of death subsequent thereto, and before the declaration herein required is made, the parties interested will transmit such evidence as they can procure, taken and authenticated before a Court of Record, showing the services of the deceased, the period of his death, the opinion of the neighborhood respecting such services, the title of the claimant, and the opinion of the Court upon the whole matter.
[a] The declarant must appear in open Court, unless prevented from doing so by reason of bodily infirmity; in which case the declarant will follow the rule laid down for his guidance.
[b] The declarant must make his declaration in the county where he resides. If he should fail to do so, he must assign a sufficient reason for not conforming to the rule.
[c] The age of the claimant must invariably be mentioned.
[d] The declarant must mention the period or periods of the war when he served.
[e] Every continental officer or soldier must give the name of the Colonel under whom he served; otherwise a satisfactory examination of the claim cannot be had. Every claimant must state, 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. 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 that 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 shown 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.
[f] The law makes the relinquishment indispensable.
[g] The opinion of the Court is always required.
[h] The Clerk must give his certificate in every case.
[i] The Clerk must affix his seal, and if it has no device or inscription by which it can be distinguished from any other seal, or if he 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.
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 papers 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.
Proof of Service.
[j] 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 claimant's 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.
[k] The notes from [a] to [i] are all equally applicable to the cases of Militia men, Volunteers and State Troops. The proof required by rule in note [j] applies to continental troops only.
[l] This traditional evidence is indispensable in militia cases.
[m] If a witness cannot be found, the declarant must state the fact.
[n] The answers to the interrogatories must all be written, and sent to the War Department, with the declaration.
Service in general must be stated to be constant and raised by authority as required in other cases

Rev. & 1812 Wars Section
W.S.
October 19, 1928
Charles R. Hale 33 Capitol Ave. Hartford, Conn.
Sir:
I have to advise you that from the papers in the Revolutionary War pension claim, S. 17329, it appears that Oliver Chalker was born August 12, 1760, in Saybrook, Middlesex County, Connecticut.
While a resident of Saybrook, Connecticut, he enlisted in March or April, 1776, and served with the Connecticut troops at various times until January 1, 1782, amounting to about three years, nine months and three days, as a private under Captains John Ely, Buck, John Shipman, Tully and Aaron Kelsey, and Colonels John Ely and William Worthington.
He was allowed pension on his application executed September 10, 1832, at which time he was living in Saybrook, Connecticut.
Respectfully,
WINFIELD SCOTT Commissioner

17329 INVALID.
1976 Oct. 17 tomb. source data t. 17 Chas. R. Hale
File No. 17329
Oliver Chalker
Fin Rev War
Act: June 7 th 32
Index: Vol. 1 , Page 67
[Arrangement of 1870.]

Hartford, Conn. Oct. 15 th 1926
Chief Clerk. Pension Dept. Washington, D.C.
Dear Sir:
Please send me Revolutionary war record of Moses Chalker of Saybrook, Conn. who died Nov-23-1842 age 84 and on pension roll of 1840 Also of Alvin Chalker of Saybrook, Conn. who died July 19-1846 age 86 and on pension roll of 1840.
We wish to get headstones for these veterans.
Yours very Truly Chas. R. Hale
33 Capitol Ave Hartford, Conn.
For groups
Alvin has
Osborn

Day Brook Conn. Jan. 16 - 1853
Sir
The papers of Digail Stannard - Oliver Chamber - John Buell - Ezra Kelso - Jeremiah Stevens - James Buell & Constant Redfield - are herewith returned to you - all corrected, I believe, according to the suggestions contained in your letter of the 18 th of Oct r last - which is also herewith enclosed -
It will be noticed that in some cases there is a little difference between the time of service in the Guard as stated by the applicant, and the time of the appointment of the commander, as given by the certificate of the comptroller - It will however be remarked, that in every instance in which an applicant states that he served, in the Guard under a particular officer, it turns out in proof that such officer was a state officer - called in to service by the State authorities -
When we consider the advanced age of the applicants - the frailty and uncertainty of the human memory at best - the very remote periods at which the events took place - that there was no motive to fix in the mind the date of them - and the well known fact that precise dates are always most difficult to be remembered - I think the wonder should be, not that so many, but that so few errors are committed -
At the time, the original applications were made out - much was said by some of the applicants about other services in guarding the coast - which I found were mere private periodical periods - such I was confident, were not the military services contemplated by the act of Congress, and so advised the applicants once in no instance were they included in a statement -

I am personally acquainted with all these applicants. They are respectable men and that their statements are correct, there cannot, where they are known be, the least doubt.
I am, with greatest respect
Your ob t Serv t
Sarah Ingraham
Hon. Geo. W. Crump
M. B. In all applications forwarded by me in which the proof is deemed insufficient I wish the Department to give me notice, before a final determination. I hope none such will occur.
Respectfully
Sarah Ingraham
M. B.
Since writing the above I have concluded to send in this bundle the application of Mrs. Deborah Ingraham. The reasons for it will be found on the back of the comptroller's certificate, attached to the within application of Oliver Chester.
Respectfully
Sarah Ingraham

Comptrollers Office Nov 27 th 1833,
I Elisha D. Phelps, Comptroller of Public Accounts of the State of Connecticut, do certify, that I appear that by the journal of the Council of Safety, that John Shipman as was appointed Lt. Com d of the Fort at Saybrook on the 28 th of March on the 3 rd of April 1778, vice, Lt. Seeley resigned, on the 28 th of March 1779 John Shipman was was appointed Lt. of the same post on the 17 th of Feb. 1779 John Shipman was appointed Lt. of the same place, on the 3 rd day of February 1780 he was promoted to rank of Capt., & on the 2 nd day of March 178, John Shipman was was appointed Capt. of the Fort at Saybrook, & commander of one of the boats ordered to be kept there. From the books &c. in this office, I suppose that John Shipman or John Shipman as refer to the same person. No roll of his company has been found, or evidence how long I was in service.
I find no account of Capt. Tully's being in service.

N.B.
Form making out Mr. Chetham's supplemented application. I have noticed in the Comptroller's certificate attached to the application of the Widow of Mr. James Ingraham - said - that John Shipman was appointed to command the Fort at Saybrook April 3 rd 1777 - Thus showing that Mr. Chetham was not mistaken I forward the applicant or petition of Mrs. Ingraham in this bundle - that you may have that certificate before you and thus save the delay in sending to Hartford after another -
If you will have the goodness to allow that certificate to answer in both cases, you will greatly oblige you
H
Oct. 2 nd
Samuel Ingraham
Dec. 16. 1833
Ms. A. 9. 2. 22 p. 10 11

By the State records, I fully was appointed a Capt. of the 1 st Co. in the 7 th Regt. of the Connecticut, in May 1782. E. Phelps
N.B.
Some making out Mr. Chetham's Supplemental application. I have noticed in the Comptroller's certificate attached to the application of the Widow of Mr. James Ingraham - that John Shipman was appointed to command the Fort at Saybrook April 3 rd 1777 - Thus showing that Mr. Chetham was not mistaken I forward the applicant a petition of Mrs. Ingraham in this bundle - that you may have that certificate before you and thus save the delay in sending to Hartford after another -
If you will have the goodness to allow that certificate to answer in both cases, you will greatly oblige your
H
Oct. 20 th
Dec. 16 - 1833
Samuel Ingraham

State of Connecticut } Probate District of Saybrook in S. County Middlesex County ss }
On this tenth day of December A.D. 1883 - personally appeared, in open court, before the Court of Probate held at Saybrook in and for the District of Saybrook - County of Middlesex and State of Connecticut - the same being a court of record - Oliver Chalker, who being duly subscribed and made oath to the annexed application for a pension - and was by way of a 2 d supplemental declaration, on oath, declare and say -
That he understands from the suggestions made by the Department, on the paper covering his said application that, it should appear whether there are survivors of his either of his said terms of service -
In answer to this suggestion - the applicant says - that he knows of no survivor of either of said terms of service - He hath made diligent inquiry, and can find none - All are dead - All the evidence in his power, of said services, is annexed to said application - & the applicant hopes, that is sufficient -
The applicant further understands from said suggestions - that the character, of the service in the Guard must be shown - He hath stated in his said declaration, & more particularly in his supplemental declaration of the 31 st July last, that he served in the Guard, stationed in Saybrook Fort in 1777 - from April until Sept 2 on term of at least 4 months - and again - from the 20 th of Oct 2 of the same year until the 10 th of January following - making 2. Months, & 10 days - all under Capt. John Shipman - The applicant hath caused to be procured & herunto attached, a certificate from the comptroller of public accounts, from which it appears, that Capt. or Lieut. Shipman, was appointed in April 3 d 1778 - He thinks, therefore, that he is mistaken in the year - that it was 1778 - That he served, instead of 1777 - as he had supposed - He says, he is certain, that he served under said Shipman, in said Guard & Fort - and the length of time above stated - making six Months & ten days - and that the said service was not occasional, but constant - and that said Guard was called in to service, by authority of law, as appears from said certificate - (N.B. See on the back of the comptroller's certificate)
In regard to his service under Capt. Tully, he says that he served, as he hath stated - but as he cannot find that Capt. Tully was an state officer, he must submit that part of his claim, without further proof -
Sworn to and subscribed, the day and year aforesaid James Ingalls - Judge of Probate -
Oliver Chalker

I Richard P Williams of Saybrook Clerk of the Court of Probate for the District of Saybrook, & State of Connecticut, do hereby certify - that the within contains the original proceedings of said Court, in the matter of the supplemental application of Oliver Chester for a pension.
In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal of office this 10 th day of December A.D. 1853 —
Richard P Williams Clerk.