Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File W. 25,800, James Hooker, Conn.

SERVICE
NUMBER
Conn.
Hooker, James Mary
No 25,800
CONTENTS

9688 Connecticut.
Mary Hooker, dec d , widow of James, Hooker Con who was a Military or Hospital Store Keeper in the Revolution.
Inscribed on the Roll at the rate of 600, Dollars 00 Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1843. and end 7 th October 1846.
Certificate of Pension issued the 23 rd day of Mar. 1857 and sent to
Hon. Ezra Clarke Jr. Hartford Ct.
[Acts of March 3, 1843, & June 17, 1844.] and special act March 3. 1857 —
Recorded in Book A Vol. 1. Page 157.

I Roswell Miller of the Town of Windsor in the County of Hartford and State of Connecticut a Revolutionary pensioner aged eighty one years & upwards do testify and say that I enlisted to serve as a Guard to guard the Continental Stores then in the care and charge of James & Horace Hooker of this Town on the 12 th day of March 1778 and continued in that Service for the term of two years, for which Service I now receive a pension of 80 Dol rs p r . Annum. During all the time I served as a guard, James & Horace Hooker, acted as Store-keepers, to receive & deliver Stores to the Continental Army, James Hooker was the Oldest of the Brothers and was the active efficient person to take charge of the Stores and receive & deliver them as aforesaid. The 1 st James Hooker died in this town as near as I can recollect about thirty five years since, and his Widow Mary Hooker still survives him, & is now residing in Bloomfield (formerly a part of this town). Horace Hooker & his wife died more than twenty years since in the State of New York as I am credibly informed.
Roswell Miller
State of Connecticut } County of Hartford } } Joseph July 28 1841
Personally appeared before me Roswell Miller a Near Neighbor, & with home I am well acquainted & I subscribed to the above & made solemn oath to the truth of the same & I further certify that he is a respectable & credible witness. I further certify that I am well acquainted with Mary Hooker widow of James Hooker the 1 st & is now residing in the Town of Bloomfield formerly a part of this Town.
Giles Eelsworth Justice of the Peace

James Hooker and Mary Chaffee were Married November Seventh One Thousand Seven hundred and eighty four
I hereby certify that the above is a true and exact copy from the Town records of the Town of Windsor in the county of Hartford & State of Conn t with the exception of the date which is expressed on the records in plain legible figures as follows Nov r 7 th 1784 W m Howard
I William Howard Town Clerk of the Town of Windsor in the county Hartford & State aforesaid do hereby certify that I hold the office of Town Clerk in the Town & State aforesaid, and that the above is a true extract from my records with exception of the above named as certified by me — W m Howard Town Clerk
State of Connecticut } County of Hartford } At Windsor July 28 th 1841.
Personally appeared before me W m Howard with whom I am well acquainted & know to hold the office of Town Clerk as aforesaid, and subscribed to the same & made solemn oath to the truth of the same & I further certify that he is a credible respectable witness Giles Ellsworth Justice of the Peace

State of Connecticut } County of Hartford } ss Hartford County
On this Twenty ninth day of July in the year A.D. One Thousand eight hundred and forty One personally appeared before Seth Terry Esq. Judge of Probate for the District of Hartford Mary Hooker a resident of the Town of Bloomfield in the County of Hartford and State of Connecticut aged eighty One year and upwards who being first duly sworn according to law doth on her Oath Make the following Declaration in Order to obtain the benefit of the provision of the act of Congress passed July 7 th 1838 entitled an act granting half pay and pensions to certain Widows: That she is the Widow of James Hooker who served as Stone-keeper to the Army of the United States in the Revolutionary War in the medical department. She further declares that she was married the said James Hooker on the Seventh day of November in the year One Thousand Seven hundred and eighty four and that her husband the aforesaid James Hooker died on the tenth day Dec r . One Thousand eight hundred and five; that she was not married to him prior to his leaving the Service; but the marriage took place before the first of Jan y One Thousand Seven hundred and Ninety four viz at the time above stated
Sworn to & subscribed the day and year first above written before me
Mary Hooker Seth Terry Judge
State of Connecticut, Hartford County I Seth Terry Judge of the Court of Probate

In the District of Antrim certify that the foregoing, and annexed, contain the proceedings before said Court in the mat- ter of the application of the Widow Mary Heooke for a pension - That the subscribing Magistrate John Ellsworth is a Justice of the Peace for Antrim County duly qualified by law to administer Oaths and that the Applicant & Witnesses in this case are credible persons & entitled to belief under Oath - In testimony whereof I have hereunto
subscribed my name and affixed my seal of Office this 29 th day of July AD 1841.
John Ellsworth Judge

State of Connecticut } County of Hartford } ss.
Be it known that before me George Robinson a Notary Public in and for said County and State duly authorized by law to administer oaths personally appeared Henry Sill and Rhoda Simmons both residents of Windsor in Hartford County, and made oath that they personally knew Mary Hooker, the widow of James Hooker deceased, late of said Windsor, and that to their knowledge the said Mary Hooker died on the seventh day of October in the year one thousand eight hundred and forty six, and the names of her children are Hannah Yates, James Hooker, Horace Hooker, Henry T. Hooker and Eliza Hooker, who are her only surviving children.
Sworn to and subscribed on this 14 th day of March 1857 before me and I certify that the deponents are credible witnesses,
Geo Robinson Notary Public
Henry Sill Rhoda Simmons

State of Connecticut District of Hartford } Hartford Probate District
I Henry Perkins Judge of the Court of Probate for the District of Hartford in said State do hereby certify that satisfactory evidence has been exhibited to said Court by the Depositions of Henry Sill and Rhoda Simmons herunto annexed who are credible witnesses, That Mary Hooker Widow of James Hooker de late of Windsor in Hartford County died on the 7 th day of October in the year One thousand eight hundred and forty six — and that her only surviving Children, are Hannah A. Yates — James Hooker — Horace Hooker — Henry T. Hooker, and Eliza Hooker.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the Seal of said Court at Hartford this 16 th day of March 1857
Henry Perkins Judge of Probate

State of Connecticut Hartford County ss. Hartford:
On this 11 th day of May in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred & fifty, Personally appeared before the Judge of the Court of Probate for the district of Hartford, Eliza Hooker, a resident of Bloomfield, in the County of Hartford aforesaid aged 52 years, who being first duly sworn according to law, on her oath makes the following Declaration in order to obtain the benefit of the provisions made by the Act of Congress passed July 7 th 1838, and the Act of the 3 rd of March 1843 and also of the Act of June 17 th 1844:
That she is the daughter of James and Mary Hooker deceased: that her Mother the said Mary Hooker, did in her lifetime make a Declaration, and claimed a Pension under the Act of Congress of 1838 for the service of her husband as a Storekeeper: that the said Declarant now claims, that her said Father served as an Assistant to Doct. Isaac Foster who was Deputy Director General for the Eastern District and that her father the said James Hooker had charge of an Hospital Magazine at Windsor Connecticut, and for proof of the foregoing, she refers to the accompanying papers, and to the papers transmitted with the Declaration of her Mother Mary Hooker deceased.
Eliza Hooker
Sworn & subscribed this 11 th day of May A.D. 1850
William A. Matson Judge of Probate

State of Connecticut
County of Hartford } ss. Hartford May 11 th 1860
I William N. Matson Sole Judge of the Court of Probate for the District of Hartford holden at Hartford in and for the District of Hartford, do hereby certify that satisfactory evidence has been exhibited to said Court that James Hooker was a resident of the County of Hartford, in the State of Connecticut and died in the town of Windsor in said State in the year 1805 on the 10 th day of December; that he left a widow whose name was Mary Hooker, who died at Schenectady in the State of New York on the 7 th day of October 1846 leaving five children whose names are Hannah A. Yates, James Hooker, Horace Hooker, Eliza Hooker and Henry T. Hooker who are now surviving. In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name at Hartford this 11 th day of May A.D. 1860.
William N. Matson Judge of Probate
State of Connecticut ss.
I Lester A. Roberts Clerk of the Court of Probate for the District of Hartford and keeper of the seal thereof, hereby certify that William N. Matson whose name is subscribed to the foregoing is and was at the date thereof Judge of said Court, that I am acquainted

with his hand writing and that the said name is his own genuine handwriting and signature.
In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the seal of said Court at Hartford this 11 th day of May A.D. 1850 Gister G. Roberts Clerk

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
BUREAU OF PENSIONS.
H. F. 25800
Washington, D. C., _____, 19_____
In reply to your request of _____, received _____ for a statement of the military history of James Hooker a soldier of the REVOLUTIONARY WAR, you will find below the desired information as contained in his (or his widow's) application for pension on file in this Bureau.
   DATES OF ENLISTMENT OR APPOINTMENT. LENGTH OF SERVICE. RANK. OFFICERS UNDER WHOM SERVICE WAS RENDERED. STATE.   CAPTAIN. COLONEL.     July 1774 Nov. 1780 as Military and Hospital Storekeeper in Windsor Conn.         
Battles engaged in, _____
Residence of soldier at enlistment, _____
Date of application for pension, July 29 1841  Claim was allowed
Residence at date of application, Bloomfield Hartford Co. Conn.
Age at date of application, She was 81 yrs. old.
Remarks: He mar. Nov. 7. 1784 at Windsor Conn. Mary Chaffee and died at Windsor Conn. Dec. 10. 1805. She died at Johnnysbury N.Y. Oct. 7. 1846 leaving five children. Hannah R. Yates, James, Horace, Eliza and Henry J.
Respectfully,
brother Horace
Commissioner.

James Hooker Cont. Comm. W. 25800
A return of stores delivered by James and Horace Hooker for the use of the Military Hospital from Feb. 1778 to Sept. 1779.
An account between Isaac Foster and James & Horace Hooker from Oct. 1779 to Sept. 10, 1780.
7 letters relative to supplies
3 receipts
22 orders.
have been removed from this claim to be sent to the War Dept.
AW.
Oct. 22, 1912.
Sent to War Dept. Jan. 16, 1913.

1914 Mch. 7 His wife Mary D. Hobker 1917 Apr. 10 Mrs. M. D. Hobker been furnished
WIDOW, &c.
File No. 25800
Mary Hobker widow of James Hobker Mult. S. B. Rawson
Act: March 3rd 1848. same, 19th Feb
Index:--Vol. March 3rd Page 352
[Arrangement of 1870.]

11.853
Connecticut.
Mary Hooker dec d , widow of James Hooker. who died on the _____ of _____ in the State of Connecticut who was a Military or Hospital Store Keeper. in the commanded by Captain _____ of the _____ commanded by _____ in the Revolution time for
Inscribed on the Roll of Hartford at the rate of 600 Dollars 00. Cents per annum, to commence on the 4th day of March, 1836.
Certificate of Pension issued the 23 rd day of March 1857. and sent to Hon. Ezra Clarke Jr. M.C.
Arrears to the 4th of Hartford Semi-annual allowance ending Oct.
Revolutionary Claim, Act July 7, 1838. Special act Mar. 3, 1857. Recorded by J. G. Gelly Clerk. Book 2 Vol. 1 Page 132.

Henry Hooker cont.
July 7 1838

7951
Mary Hooker, Connecticut
Lepe Ives 23 d Sep 1841- A Ray 16 Dec 1841- same, 10 July 1845- D.D. Address. 31 October 1849- Abijah Bar- lin July 1850- L d claim examined & disallowed by Sec- retary Interior. See letter to A Ray Jan y 25 1851- Hon Freeman Smith May 30 1850 W. A. Peugh 21 July 1854- Hon Ezra Clark July 11 1850 Hon G. W. Jones July 10, 1857. Hon E. Clark Jr 7 th March 57
July 7 1838-

No 7957 Mary Booker born
Set to Jesse Ives 23 Sep 41 " " A. Ray 11 Dec 41 " " Same 11 July 45 " " D D Discon 31 Oct 49 " " Abolished July 23/50
Claim examined & disallowed by Secy Pension. See letter to A. Ray Jan 26 1851 from T. Smith May 30/51 act 7 July 1888

No 7951
Mary Hooker -
Conn.
Letter to,
Jepo Ines 23 rd Sept - 1841.
A. Ray - 16 th Dec - 1841.
A. Ray - 10 th July - 1845.
D. D. Addison 31 st Oct. 1849.
Abijah Collins July 23 rd 1850.
Claim examined & disallowed by Secretary Interior. See letter to A. Ray. May 25 th 1851. -
Hon: Truman Smith. May 30 th 1851.
S. A. Pugh 21 July 1851.
Act of the July 1838. -

HR. 532
Mary Hooker

HEIRS OF MARY HOOKER.
[To accompany bill H. R. No. 532.]
August 2, 1856.
Mr. WOODRUFF, from the Committee on Revolutionary Pensions, made the following
REPORT.
The Committee on Revolutionary Pensions, to whom was referred the memorial of Mary Hooker, widow of James Hooker, praying a pension under act of 7th July, 1838, and subsequent acts, respectfully report:
That the widow claims that her husband was "military or hospital storekeeper from late in 1777 to the latter part of 1780, being more than two years. " In support of this allegation, she introduces the evidence of Roswell Miller, Frederick Chapman, and Elijah Denslow, certified to be credible, who receive pensions for guarding the very store of which Hooker was keeper, and who swear to their knowledge of his having acted in that capacity more than two years. Return S. Mather was a school-boy during the Revolution, and well recollected the fact that Hooker was a keeper of the continental stores at Windsor.
There is a letter from Isaac Foster, deputy director general of the eastern department, to James and Horace Hooker, requesting them to act as storekeepers at the town of Windsor, and their reply, agreeing to do so on the usual terms. There is a requisition from them upon the governor of Connecticut, for a guard of a sergeant and twelve men to protect the public stores in their custody. There are various letters, running through a period of about three years, from public officers to James and Horace Hooker, in which their functions as storekeepers are spoken of, and in which they are sometimes addressed specifically by that title. Amongst others, she has exhibited original letters from Dr. Foster, Gen. Nehemiah Hubbard, Commissary General Holt, Surgeon General Turner, Daniel Jones, assistant commissary general of forage, and others, in which directions are given for disposing of the public stores, or requisitions made from them, or settlements regarding them. It is also shown that the government paid the rent of the house in which the stores under their custody were kept; and in a communication addressed by General Washington to James and Horace Hooker, an extract of which is taken from the archives of the State Department, they are addressed

specifically, "hospital storekeepers." (See paper A.) The date of the marriage is properly established.
It is admitted that storekeepers were a component part of the army, and many have been pensioned for their service as such, but the allowance of this claim has been resisted on the assumption that these parties were acting under a civil contract. But it is not shown that any officer had a right, or even pretended, to fill a military post with a civilian , and thus to dispense with the safeguards which Congress had thrown around the duties intrusted to its employees; for every military storekeeper was subject to martial law, the penalty for embezzlement amounting to death; and it is a violent presumption to suppose that the director general should pretermit this security, and substitute a civilian's responsibilities for the graver ones attaching to the military character, nor has your committee been able to find any authority for his so doing.
As the duties of military storekeeper at a post were not inconsistent with the position of a merchant, the fact that the Hookers held the latter position at the time of their appointment, and possibly afterwards , does not in the least militate against the conclusion at which your committee have arrived.
Nor can there be perceived the significance of the fact that a commission was received on the amount of public money passing through their hands. During a considerable part of the Revolution all purchasing commissaries were paid only such commissions, and yet their military character has never been questioned.
In view, then, of the duties performed by them, confessedly identical with those of all other "military storekeepers," of the positive statute requiring them to be subject to martial law, and of their official character being recognised by the "commander-in-chief," your committee cannot resist the conviction that James Hooker was military storekeeper, and accordingly report a bill for the relief of the petitioner.

17.63
Washington Dec 2. 1880
Callier & Ray
ask for a re-examination of the case of Mrs. Mary Hooker, widow of James Hooker, claim- ing under Act July 7 th 1838.
Respectfully referred to the Commission of Pensions for re-examination Dept. M ts Dec 2. 1880 }

1 As this case has been much mooted I will concisely state the grounds on which I humbly conceive it should be allowed.
The claim has at previous times been before the Court & has been disallowed.
There is no dispute as to the fact of service in some capacity, but whether that service was in a civil or Military capacity is the question.
The journals of Congress 1777 & 1778 show that Dr. Stearne Forster was appointed a Deputy Director Genl of the Hospital department shall have to appoint his subordinates & that he as such had power to appoint his subordinates. pages 117 118. 125.
The papers in the case show that he Dr Forster did appoint Hooker to superintend or keep the hospital established by him at Windsor Connecticut. Now if he was serving in a civil capacity merely. It presents the singular fact that while all the subordinates were acting under the in a military capacity he the head of the concern in the absence of the Dep Dir Genl was serving in a different capacity.
It is not likely that a mere civilian would have had charge of such a

a suit & large concern at the Military hospital magazine at Windsor while Dr. Fortin himself and all the other Subordinates were liable to the severities of Martial Law.
The evidence in the case does not require so forced a conclusion. And I refer to the other evidence before afforded as well as that now offered on the contrary I believe it to be the other way all that I have seen or of which I have heard is of this character.
The extract from the journal of the Gen. Council of Safety of Connecticut from Mass. Hist. Soc. P. 529 in Mass. Hist. Soc. office The order to furnish him a horse the better to enable him to perform the duties of his appointment.
The supplying of rations or forage for that horse - all tend to show that he was acting in a military not civil capacity.
I solicit a careful revision of all the evidence in the case -
We show no commission we admit but show duties performed necessarily presupposing such a commission or warrant.

In this application we claim that he served as an assistant Deputy Director. In former applications it was met upon the ground of being a Stone Keeper.
The resolutions of Congress page 118 prescribe the duties of Assistant Deputy Directors "to superintend the Hospitals committed to their care & to assist in mending the articles before specified under the control of the Director or Deputy Director Genl."
These were the precise duties performed by James Hooker. Hence we are authorized to believe that he acted as an Assistant Deputy Director for which we now claim —
I refrain from an extended examination of the evidence required only that the same may be carefully examined by the department & a decision had as soon as possible.
Yours respectfully
Abijah Calhoun
at Washington
Can. S P. Waldo
M. C.
Home Representation

Mary Hooper R.R. Widow of James Hooper R.R. praying pension for services of her husband in the Revolutionary War
July 19. 1806 Ref. to the committee Rev. Pensions
1806 Aug 2 Bill 532 =
Mr Ezra Clarke Jr.

Brief in the case of Mary Hooker, widow of Jas Hooker, Wartford County and State of Connecticut act 7 July 1838, & Special Act 3 March 1837
Claim, ("original," or "for increase," )
Proof exhibited, (if original.)
Is it documentary, traditional, or supported by rolls? If either, state the substance.
Allowed by Special Act of Congress. approved March 3, 1837
(If for increase.)
Has additional evidence been filed since the admission of the claim? If so, what?
Rev Ezra Clark, Jr., Name and residence of Agent M. C Wartford Ct
S. D. Allen Examining Clerk.

Mary Hooker, dec d widow of James Hooker, Military or Hospital Store Keeper, Ct.
Special Act 3 March 1837 & 7 th July 1838. $600 per annum. Comm g 4 th March 1836 & ending 7 Oct 1846, (except two yrs) payable to
Hannah Alts. James Hooker, Horace Hooker, Henry T. Hooker & Eliza Hooker, only sur- viving children.
(Roll act 7 July 1838 March 3/43 & 17 June 1844)
Wm Ezra Clarke Jr LLC Wartford Ct

Pensions Office, March 7 th 1837.
Sir:
Before the claim of the heirs of Mary Hooker, can be adjusted, a certificate of some Court of records must be furnished, showing the date of her death, and the names of her children.
I have the honor to be Very respectfully Your Obt. Servt., J. Cole for Commissioner
Hono Ezra Clark, Jr., M.P. Hartford, Conn.

Pension Office,
February 10, 1857.
Sir,
I have the honor to enclose a copy of a letter of the 23 d , of July 1850, to Abijah Gattlin, Esq., which will disclose the ground upon which this Office refused to allow the claim of Mary Hooker, widow of James, of Connecticut,
The papers in the case are also returned,
Very Respectfully Yr obed Servant W. D. Harkness Comm'r
Hon G. W. Jones, Chairman Com on Pensions, U. S. Senate

Washington D.C., 18 th July 1857
Hon L. P. Ward. Comt of Pensions Sir
I respectfully request that you cause an examination of the case of Mary Höcker of Ct. a suspender case under act 1858 with a view to allow her of Pension as Hospital Steward. The case has been rejected for want of evidence of his military character. Her evidence is in my possession, when the case is called up I will produce.
Yours &c
S. A. Pugh

Washington City D.C. Jan 28 1877.
Sir
The enclosed. "An Act No. R. 532 For the relief of Mrs Mary Hooten" is here- =with referred to your Office, for facts or papers such as your files may afford, and the case seems to demand
Very Respectfully
Your Ob st Serv t
Geo W. For
Ch m Com on Pensions
U.S.S.
Heon Geo. C. Whiting Com r Pensions

House of Rep s
Washington July. 11. 1856.
Received from Hon Josiah Minot Comm. of Pensions, the papers in the suspended case of Mary, widow of James Hooker, of Conn. under act of July 7 th 1838
Ezra Clark Jr

Mr Clark's re- ceipt for the papers of Mary Hooker M rs of J. L. about July 7/1838

12 Feb 1858
Letter from A Ray filing evidence showing that James Hooker was only a merchant held no military rank. Mr Ray abandons therefor the claim.

Washington
February 12/53
Genl. C. Heath Esq.
Commissioner of Pensions
Sir
As far back as 1841. I was engaged as attorney in the case of Mary Hooker late of Connecticut do o . in a claim then pending under act July 7. 1838. On account of James Hooker's services as Hospital Store Keeper, being a partner of the firm of James & Horace Hooker as Merchants.
The correspondence in the case will doubtless show from 1841 to 1845, I was the acknowledged agent in the case: during the time, I made diligent examinations of all the military records at Hartford Connecticut, pertaining to the appointment and pay, of military staff officers; with the view to ascertain the character of James & Horace Hooker's Store Keepers; but without any success.
In 1850 Mr. Catlin (former Comptroller of Connecticut) obtained a new power of attorney in the case from one of the heirs, in his own name, and with a mass of testimony collected from the Historical Societies of Connecticut and Massachusetts, which he presented in support of the claim, to show, the military capacity of the Hookers. Your reply dated July 23. 1852. indicated a full consideration of all the new proofs: But it produced no change in the decision of the office.
After this, Mr. Catlin engaged with me, to draw up an argument in the case, and to submit the question for the consideration and decision of the Secretary of the Interior, claiming at the same time, that Mary Kingsbury widow of Andrew had been pensioned on account of her husband's services as Hospital Store Keeper. On an examination of the papers filed in her application (in connection with Mr. Evans late chief clerk) we found the evidence in her case to be of the most conclusive character, in regard to her husband's appointment, and pay.

as Hospital Store Keeper, Connecticut line . Not formed  had no application nor precedent for the case of James Hooker.
The argument presented to the Secretary of the Interior was dated Dec 2 /50, and his decision was made Jan 25 following. Sustaining the opinion from your Office, and a copy I transmitted to the parties interested. Since which, Miss Mary Hooker has written once or often upon the subject of her claim, and having understood she has appointed another agent, and not wishing to embarrass the claim by my association, now withdraw from any further connection with it in any way.
I herewith enclose several old letters sent to me by the claimant they properly belong to the papers filed in the case, they only show that Sol. Isaac Foster Sep r 2. New Y k communicated with James and Horace Hooker's as Merchants. and They cannot affect the opinion expressed in your letter of July 23. 1850 . nor disturb the decision of the Secretary of the Interior of the 25 Jan y 51 in the case.
I remain Sir
Your most Obedt Servt
Alas. Day
First a letter from Sol & Hon d Hooker, dated
Trinidad Jan y 11. 1778. to Sol Foster. offering for sale 3000 lb coffee.
2 nd Sol Foster reply. dated San Juan Jan y 30. 1778. directed to Messrs. Sol & Hon d Hooker's Merchants
3 rd Sol & Hon d Hooker. letter dated Trinidad March 1. 1778. sending an invoice of goods sold to Sol Foster. stating they wanted money, as they were engaged in navigation
Two other letters from Sol. Isaac Foster dated Boston Jan y 3. and Dec 21. 1780 to Messrs. Sol & Horace Hooker, Merchants. Trinidad Cow t .

Department of State, Washington. May 26 th 1852.
D. D. Addison, Esq. Washington.
Sir:
In reply to your letter of the 11 th instant, I have to inform you, that in the Washington Letter Books Vol: 18:9: page 125, there is a letter addressed by General Washington, to "Messrs: James and Horace Hooper, Hospital Storekeepers", dated "Head Quarters, New Windsor, June 26 th 1779."
Your enquiry relates particularly to the name of James Hooker , but the name of Hooper as above furnished, being found in the connection mentioned in your letter

letter, it is presumed that the identity of the person may be established from some other source.
I am, Sir, respectfully Your obedient servant,
W. H. Cumper. Acting Secretary

Washington city Jany 18/51 Hon A. H. H. Stuart
Dear Sir Will you please communicate the information which will enable me to respond to the enquiry of my friend Mr Catlin. It seemed to me on looking at the papers that the case of Mary Hooker ought to be favorably entertained with much respect I am faithfully
Your friend Irving Smith

p. 76
March 3 d 1857
Washington City
Jan 18. 1857
Dear Friend Smith
Enc; letter from A. Collins Relative to the claim of Mary Hooker for Revolutionary Pension
Recd 2 March
Immediate attention
Ms A. 3
Coffey T. P. W. D.
Referred to Com. of Pensions for his attention & reply
Dept. Int. 2 March 1857

Hon G. M. Jones Chairman Committee on Pensions U.S. Senate
Copy of a letter of the 23 d July 1830, showing why the claim of Mary Hooker could not be allowed by the Pension Office.

Copy
Pension Office.
July 23, 1850,
Sir,
The several transcripts from the records of the Historical Societies of Connecticut and Massachusetts transmitted, by you, in the case of Mary Hooker, widow of James, does not remove the objection to the admission of her claim.
We can discern nothing in these papers showing either the appointment or the services of either Hooker's husband as Military Store Keeper. They all refer to James & Horace Hooker as Merchants, and not to James Hooker as a Military Store Keeper. In all the orders and communications to them, they are addressed to Messrs James & Horace Hooker. No Commission or other paper showing the appointment of James Hooker as Hospital Store Keeper have been produced and the fact of James & Horace Hooker having been allowed a Commission of 2\frac{1}{2} per cent upon the amount purchased by them, in addition to their accounts for storage, clearly shows, clearly, that they were acting as Merchants and not as officers of the Line or Staff of the Continental Army or State Troops.

The position, heretofore, taken by this Office, that James & Horace Hooker were merchants and partners, doing business under that style & name, at Windsor Connecticut; that Dr. Isaac Foster, Deputy Director General, employed them in December 1777 to provide Store-rooms & to take charge of the Hospital Stores then about to be removed from the East; and that they continued the agents of Dr. Foster until Nov 26 1780, when they rendered their account for expenses & services attending the same same! That the Certificate of Dr. Foster approving their account, shows conclusively, that the whole transaction, was nothing more than the fulfilment of a private contract and that Mrs. Hooker's husband never performed any Military Service whatever, has not been weakened, at all, by the papers you now present.
The Service of Mrs. Hooker's husband was not such as to entitle her to a pension, Her claim can not be allowed.
Signed by the Commission
Abijah Collins Esq Caring the Ld General
H M R

Pension Office July 23. 1850.
Sir,
The several transcripts from the records of the Historical Societies of Connecticut and Massachusetts transmitted by you in the case of Mary Hooker, widow of James Hooker do, not remove the objection, to the admission of her claim.
We can discover nothing in these papers showing either the appointment or the service of Mrs Hooker's husband as Military Store-keeper. They all refer to James and Horace Hooker as merchants and not James Hooker as a Military Storekeeper. In all the orders and communications to them they are addressed to Messrs James & Horace Hooker. No Commission or other paper showing the appointment of James Hooker as Hospital Storekeeper, have been produced, and the fact of James & Horace Hooker having been allowed a Commission of 2 1/2 per cent upon the amount purchased by them in addition to their accounts for Storage labor &c shows clearly that they were acting as merchants and not as Officers of the Line or Staff.

of the Continental Army State Troops
The question heretofore taken by this Office that James and Horace Hooker were Merchants and partners doing business under that style and name, at Windsor, Connecticut," that Dr Isaac Foster, Deputy Director General, employed them in December, 1777, to provide Store Room and to take charge of the Hospital Stores. Then about to be removed from the East and, that they continued the Agents of Dr Foster until November 26, 1780, when they rendered their account for expenses and services, attending the same; that the Certificate of Dr Foster, approving of their account shows conclusively that the whole transactions were nothing more than the fulfillment of a private contract, and that Mrs Hooker's husband never performed any Military service whatever, has not been weakened at all by the papers you now present.
The service of Mrs. Hooker's husband was not such as to entitle her to a pension. Her claim cannot be allowed.
I am Very Respectfully Your Obedt. Servt.
J L Edwards
Commission of Pensions
Abijah Cattlin, Esq. Chair of Houl S. P. Waldo, House of Representatives.

State of Connecticut District of Hartford
At a Court of Probate held at Mansfield within & for the District of Hartford
Present, Henry Pitkin Esq. Judge. Satisfactory evidence has been exhibited to this Court that Mary Norton late of Bloomfield in said District, deceased an applicant for a pension died upon the 7 th day of October 1846. and that she left surviving  who now survive her the following Children, viz. Eliza Norton in said District. Harriet A. Yates of Schenectady in the State of New York. Maria Norton of Poughkeepsie Horacy Norton of Rochester & Henry J. Norton of Syracuse in said State of New York.
In testimony whereof I have C. Perkins Clerk of said Court of Probate hereunto set my hand & seal of said Court this 2 nd day of December A.D. 1850.
Isaac C. Perkins, Clerk.

Woodbury
Conn t
Oct r 24 th 1849
Sir
In my letter to you of the 22 nd inst., I requested you to withhold an action on the James Hooker Case until you heard further from me. My reason for so doing was that I had addressed a letter to Mr Addison some two or three weeks since, requesting information on the subject of the claim, and had rec d . No answer. I have just rec d . a letter from up him apologising for his neglect to reply to my inquiries, and that he had asked you for an action on the claim and to furnish him with objections, if any. You will now please act upon it as if I had not written you on the subject, and I now withdraw my objections to his agency in the matter.
I am very respectfully Yr obt Serv t
Bery n Colton
J. L. Edwards Esq r Comm r of Pensions Washington D.C.

Washington City D.C. Oct 10 th 1849.
Dr. Sir -
I am authorized, as you will perceive from the enclosed letter of Mr. Benj. Colton, of Ct. to request of you the favor of a re-examination of the Claim of Mrs. Hooker, widow of James Hooker, dec d under the act of July 4 th 1836, now suspended and on file in your office. You will therefore greatly oblige me, if you will cause the examination to be made at an early day, and the objections to its admission, pointed out, that I may endeavor to remove them.
I am Very respectfully Yr. Mo. Ov. St. N. N. Addison
To J. L. Edwards Esq d Commissioner of Pensions

Aug 17/49
Wadsworth
Revolutionary
J. L. Edwards Esq.
Comm of Public

Woodbury Litchfield Co Conn t Aug t 13 th 1849
Sir
I sent to your Dep t . Some Six or Seven years, since, the claim of the widow of James Hooker for the services of her husband as a military Store-keeper in Windsor Conn t , and in recently looking over Hinmans History (a copy of which I left at your office in Feb. y last) I noticed that James & Horace Hooker of S d . Windsor, stated to the Council of Safety in Conn t , that they had been appointed by Doc t I Foster Dep y Director Gen l and asked of the Gov r & Council of Safety for a military guard to protect their Military Store, and 12 soldiers with an officer granted to them for the purpose and object asked for —
I have the impression that the Hon ble H. L. Ellsworth then of the Patent Office, by my suggestion, took some agency in the claim and presented some proof in support of it to your office, as he was a Native of the same town, and was well acquainted with the claimant & Hooker family —
I have now authorised and requested D. D. Addison Esq r of Washington City, to call up the claim, and ask your candid and impartial examination of the claim with the additional proof and arguments that he may exhibit before you —
You will find the entry in Hinmans Book Page 523 under the head of Feb. y 1778 —
I am Very respectfully
J. L. Edwards Esq r Comm r of Pensions
Y r ob t Servant
Ben n Colton

Hartford July 14 th 1846
Sir
I addressed you some weeks since in behalf of the widow of James Hooker whose application, under the act of 1838, for a pension, in right of her husband's services, as Hospital Store Keeper, is pending before you —
Permit again briefly to call your attention to some of the leading facts in the case —
1 st after the burning of Danbury in 1777, the principal Depot of Hospital Stores, from which supplies were constantly drawn for the American forces at West Point & vicinity was established at Windsor Connecticut, & continued there until the close of 1780.
2 d Although the position was so far interior, as not to be exposed to any sudden incursion of the enemy, yet so important was the Depot, that a guard of some twenty men was enlisted from year to year, & bounties paid on their enlistment, to guard the large amount of public property from incendiaries of the enemy who might be secretly sent to destroy it.

3 d It is probable that this Post was without a Military Commandant, and who was the Command if not Capt James Hooker? It is absolutely certain that there was no other - and that the stores were under his care & superintendence and the guard subject to his orders.
4 th So far as traditional evidence may be relied upon, no man in the vicinity who has any intelligence upon the subject entertains the slightest doubt that Capt James Hooker was Hospital or Military Store Keeper duly appointed & commissioned & that he served several years in that capacity - The Comm't has before him the affidavit of Col Richard Niles & others to that effect - the public men of the town of Winder - men of large possessions & great aggregate wealth - no way connected or associated with the applicant or his family. - men who would guard the public coffers against an unjust or inequitable claim as scrupulously as the Comm't himself or any other man connected with the administration of the government -
5 th In the absence of documentary evidence lost or destroyed without fault of the claimant

is nothing due to traditional evidence drawn from so high a quarter and so full to the point? 6 th But this traditional evidence is corroborated and supported by the direct & positive testimony of several living witnesses contemporary with the event and by every scrap of documentary evidence which has been found relating at all to the matter —
It is claimed that he was an officer in the General Hospital Department, and the principal of that Department designates him such, and disbursements are made to him as such and of such a character as clearly & unequivocally to establish the military character of the man to whom they are made —
And what is there to that comes up in the examination of this case to throw a shadow of doubt upon it? Nothing but that the name of the old mercantile firm, James & Horace Hooker appears in the correspondence —
Horace was the younger brother of James, without Capital or Credit, receiving for his services, some small share of the profits of the West India trade carried on before the war? Nothing was more

Common than a sort of perpetuity of the name of a commercial house once established,
It is perfectly apparent that the use of the name of James & Moran in the Correspondence was as unmeaning as any other "Monsieur" deguere .
But we find that whenever disbursements are made it is to James Hooker Hospital Storekeeper &c
As to the younger brother Moran, he never from first to last had one farthing's interest in the Concerns — through life he continued a dependant on his brother James — his name, as in many other cases, was introduced into the Concerns as a harmless gratification of the vanity of a favorite —
If this matter of the name of Moran coupled with James in the Correspondence is deemed material by the Commtee, I would refer him to Judge Niles of the U.S. Senate who was a townsman of the Hookers & who knows perfectly well that the use of the name of Moran was the mere matter of form. imaginable — But I have done & only add that I pray in behalf of my client an early review of his case Your obedient Servt
Hon d J. L. Edwards Commtee
I J Pease

Hartford Ct. May 26 th 1846
Sir
At my last interview with you at Washington I had the honor of addressing considerations appealing to your sympathy in favor of prompt action in the case of Mary Hooker widow of James Hooker late of Windsor deceased.
You will believe me incapable of appealing to your sympathies in behalf of Obadiah otherwise than as demanding prompt action. In this case the widow cannot survive many weeks, and although she has children to take the arrearage after her decease, yet her principal solicitude is to obtain the arrearage during her lifetime to make a small provision for an unfortunate daughter, her other children being well provided for.
I think on a full review of the case, with the new evidence filed on my last visit at Washington all doubt of the justice and propriety

of granting this application will be removed
You admit that James Hacker - the husband of the applicant was during the greater part of the war a Military & Hospital Store Keeper but seem to doubt his serving in a military capacity -
In the early part of the war I have no doubt that the superintendant of Military and Hospital Stores was committed to men acting under Civil Contracts, but on a thorough examination of the minute history of this branch of the service, it will be found that as early as the beginning of 1862 Military & Hospital Store Keepers, in order to secure a more perfect responsibility, had been duly appointed and commissioned at all the principal Depots - it having been found that the public interests could not be effectually subserved, without subjecting them to the law martial.
The Depot of Hospital Stores was established at Warden soon after the burning of Danbury - selected for greater security from sudden incursions of the enemy. - It was the principal Depot for Hospital Stores, where in addition

to drugs & medicines (Cherts of which were constantly being put up for the army) large quantities of groceries of every description were stored for security and transported to head quarters when needed for immediate consumption.
This depot was established if I rightly recollect in the early part of 1778 & continued untill after the surrender of Cornwallis in the Autumn of 1780. — for more than three years a Sergeant guard was kept there for the security of the public property. — Several persons are now in receipt of pensions for this service alone.
This was an independent post, that is to say, it was detached from, and not under the immediate supervision of any D. Q. M. G. or A. S. D. Q. M. G.
Who superintended & commanded here?
Most surely it was not left without a responsible and trustworthy officer in command.
Tradition says that Capt. James Hooker was military & Hospital Storekeeper here.
This whole community, of sufficient age to be acquainted with the reputation of said Hooker, will testify to an unqualified belief that

He was duly appointed a military and Hospital Store Keeper & that he served in that capacity for several years —
You have before you the affidavits of several citizens of the town of Winden, men of sixty years and upwards, selected as the public mind of the town, to that effect —
That there are men of high character who would not lend themselves to countenance countenance an unfounded claim — you have the Certificate of Judge Pyles of the Ullrichate who also expresses his concurrence with these men as far as his own knowledge extends. (He being a native of that town but having removed from it at the age of twenty one years or thereabouts)
You have before you also the deposition of several of the guards and others of an age to recollect the events, testifying to his service. In addition you have important documentary evidence fully recognizing him in service in that capacity — but I have done and submit the same
L. T. Pease
Atty for Applicant

Pension Office
September 23. 1841
Sir,
I have examined the claim of Mary Hooker, widow of James Hooker, dec d . and have placed her papers on our files. The widow claims for the services of her late husband as Hospital Store keeper at Windsor, Conn. An examination of the papers furnished as proof in support of the claim, presents the following facts. James and Horace Hooker were Merchants and partners, doing business under that style and name at Windsor, Conn. Dr. Isaac Foster, Depy. Director General, employed them in Dec r . 1777 to provide store room and to take charge of the Hospital stores then about to be removed from the East, and they continued as the Agents of Dr. Foster until Nov. 26. 1780, when they rendered their account for the expenses and services attending the same. This account was examined and approved by Dr. Foster and his certificate shows conclusively that the whole transactions were nothing more than the fulfillment of a private contract, and that Hooker never performed any military service whatever. The certificate alluded to is as follows: "This may certify that Mr. James & Horace Hooker, of Windsor, in the State of Conn. have this (day) rend d . their acct s which have been duly examined and find due them from the United States of America £ 626. 19. 2 lawful money of the new emission it being for Rent of Store , services done and sundries supplied the Hospital Depart t ." The claim is therefore disallowed.
I am respectfully
Your Ob dt . Serv t .
J L Edwar d
Mr. Jesse Ives Hitchcocksville Litchfield Co. Connecticut

Hitchcocks Ville Litchfield Co. Conn.
July 30 th 1841
Sir
herewith I enclose the Application of the Widow Mary Hooker, for a Pension, under the Act of Congress passed July 7 th 1838, with the evidence & Exhibits in support of the claim - when examined, you will please to notify me of the result - With much respect
James L Edwards Esq Commissioner of Pensions, Washington City
Your Obedt Servt Jesse Ives -

Washington March 21. 1845
Sir,
Since your letter to me of the 16 th Dec r 1841, in the case of Mary Hooker widow of James: I have received additional evidence in the case, which is respectfully submitted.
In your letter to Mr Ives of Connecticut of the 23 rd Sep r 1841, you quote a certificate given by D r Isaac Foster Deputy Director general, to shew that M rs James & Horace Hooker were only engaged as private contractors &c.
It is admitted that, before James & Horace Hooker took charge of the United States Hospital under D r Foster in Dec r 1777, they were Merchants as you allege, but it does not follow on that account, they were not subsequently appointed and performed the duties of Hospital Store Keeper from Dec r 1777 up to Nov r 1780. Nor does it appear to me, to be at all prejudicial to their claim, because as you reason, they "never performed any Military service whatever." Hospital Store Keepers were among the class in the Hospital Department that were not required to perform Military service, in the line, but like the Surgeon and Commissaries of the revolution, they had specific duty assigned them in the staff. It appears to me, therefore, your objection to the claim on that ground is in no wise conclusive. The claim then rests I conceive, upon the single point, whether James & Horace Hooker did, or did not, serve in a Military Capacity.
In regard to the item of Store Rent , charged in the Approved account. It is but reasonable to view it as a proper one, or it would not

not have been allowed by Dr Foster who was competent to decide at the time when the Act was approved. The United States required a place of deposit for the Military Stores, and as the Hospital Store Keepers furnished the necessary building, and were paid for the use of it, the fact goes far to establish - the Store Keepers were employed in a Military capacity by the U. States and paid for their service as well as for their Store : Had they have acted in a civil capacity a charge for rents of the Store would not have been admissible.
That they did not transact business in their private capacity, will be shown by the endorsed letter and orders, they severally shew, that returns were required, that money was advanced, that orders were given, not only by Dr Foster, Dep: Director General, but by other high Officers. Mch: Hubbard Dep: Q tr M tr General, Petercolt Dept y Com y : General, P. Turner, Surgeon Gen t , stating "Congress has of late ordered the Establishment of a Hospital at, or near New London which is immediately to be furnished &c, and ordering M rs Hooker to furnish certain goods to said Hospital, thus causing a transfer from one U.S. Hospital to another, and to ensure a strict compliance to all orders given. It was then, as it now is, essentially important that the Store Keeper should be under Military orders, to fulfil the object and intention of Congress in creating Hospital Departments. Among the papers is a receipt by Isaac Foster A. D. G. C. D. dated 26 th Nov r 1780 (when Hooker's service as Hospital Store Keeper seems to have terminated) for all the proper vouchers for Hospital Stores, which is conclusive he was the Hospital Store Keeper for the

for the government. Had their service been Civil there would have been no necessity for such a receipt: There are many other evidences in the form of Orders & Letters from different Military Officers, some of which, are enclosed all going to shew, that the Storekeepers were drawn upon for large supplies: which no Civil Co-partnership could with certainty have supplied. and it was not the policy of the government at that time, to have relied on contingencies for the necessary subsistence of the Army. I think moreover, it is conclusively shown their appointment was a Military one; from the Continental Book, accompanying this Communication, wherein it is shown, that large Amounts were paid out to Conductors of Teams for transportation, and the United States charged for the Amt. and for the receipt and delivery for large supplies of Provisions.
It is not necessary for me, to go further into the merits of the claim in this case. And in submitting the subject matter, the hope is entertained you will give it the due consideration; when I am sure you will be satisfied of the justice and propriety of allowing the widow a pension for two years; on account of her husband's Jas. Hooker's service as a Hospital Store Keeper.
Very respectfully Your mo: Oth: Servt. A. Ray
James S. Edwards Esq Comm te of Pensions
Note/the Book being a large one. will be presented, when the claim is heard. A. Ray

Comptroller's Office
Hartford July 29 1841
This may certify that I find on the Records of the Governor & Council of Safety - the following entry:
"At a meeting of the Governor & Council of Safety held at Hartford on the 28 th day February 1778 Voted - upon the application of James & Horace Hooker showing to this Board that they have been appointed by Isaac Foster Esq d Deputy S t G d & to receive and store a large quantity of Warbital stores for use of the United States, part of which has already arrived at Windsor and the rest daily expected and that they have orders from said Foster to apply to his Excellency for a Guard, praying for a proper Guard & as for application on file
Resolved, by this Board, that Col. Roger Sherman be and he is hereby directed to furnish on a supply from the Regiment under his Command in such manner as he shall judge most convenient to James Hooker and Horace Hooker a proper Guard of One Sergeant & Twelve Men for the present, and in case he shall judge necessary that he increase said guard to the number of Eighteen Men to Guard said stores till further order and that proper Pay Rolls be made up and presented to the Committee of Pay Table for Payment who are directed to liquidate the same and draw on the Treas ry for the same that shall appear to be due thereon and charge the same to account of the United States,
Henry Dillborne Compt r

Winsted March 17. 1846
I know all men by these presents that I Mary Hooker of Bloomfield in the County of Hartford, State of Connecticut have constituted & appointed and do by these presents constitute and appoint L. B. Pease of Hartford in said County and State My true and Lawful attorney for me and in My Name to prosecute My application for a pension under the Pension act of July 7 th 1838. now pending before the Commissioner of Pensions At Washington for and in right of the services of My husband James Hooker late of Windsor in said County and State deceased. as a Military Store Keeper in the Revolutionary war - and I hereby revoke all former powers by me granted in the premises -
In witness whereof I have hereunto set My hand this fourteenth day of March 1846. ~
Mary Hooker
In presence of Hannah A Yates Anna E. Yates

Know all Men by these presents that I Rachel Childs of Pittsfield in the County of Berkshire State of Massachusetts Widow of Timothy Childs deceased. have constituted & appointed & do by these presents constitute & appoint L. H. Rease of Hartford in the State of Connecticut My true and lawful Attorney, for Me and in My name to make application at the Pension Office at Washington City for an increase of My pension and also for arrearages due Me for the services of My deceased husband as a Lieutenant and Surgeon in the Army of the Revolution, hereby ratifying, and Confirming the acts of My s d Attorney done in pursuance of powers herein granted revoking all others
In witness whereof I have hereunto set My hand this 20 th day of March, 1846.
In presence of Rachel Childs Anne D Childs

Transcripts from a Book belonging to the Connecticut Historical Society.
Hartford State Connecticut, July 5th, 1780.
Commissary General Forage
Dr.
To paid James Hooker for bill and receipt
For forage for his horse from March 1, to June, 1, 1780, 92 days at the usual allowance.
11. 2. 0 Hay, @ £ 8. 0. 0. £ 92. 0. 0.
23 bushels Oats @ 4. 16. 0. 103. 10. 0
£ 195. 10. 0.
Quartermaster General
Dr.
To paid James Hooker, for bill and receipt.
For 12 cords wood for use of the Hospital, magazine and Guard-House, during the last winter £ 360. 0. 0
Daniel Jones Aft. D. Q. M. G.
To cash paid James Hooker for your certificate
Per receipt £ 205. 17. 6.
Commissary General Forage
Dr.
For sundry expenditures at the Post of Hartford, viz:
To paid James Hooker for horse keeping £ 205. 17. 6.
Pension Office, May 5, 1845.
I certify that the foregoing extracts are truly copied from and compared with a book, now in this office, belonging to the Connecticut Historical Society. E.W. Robinson, CLK.

[Copy.]
Hartford April 21 st /80
Commissary Genl. Forage Dr.
To Paid Danl. Jones A.D. C.S.A. pr. bill & rect.
1780 For sundry expenditures at the Post of Hartford, Vir t .
[Here follow sundry entries numbered from 1 to 33 inclusive, No. 33 being thus written.]
33 ditto James Hooker for horse keeping 205. 17. 6
[Copy.]
Hartford State Connecticut July 4 th 1780.
Commissary General Forage Dr.
To paid James Hooker Pr. bill & rect.
For forage for his horse from March 1 st to June 1. 1780 92 days at the usual allowance
11. 2. 0 hay 2 £ 8. 0. 0 £ 92. 0 23 bushels oats 7 4 10. 0 103. 10 £ 195. 10.
Quartermaster General Dr.
To paid James Hooker Pr. bill & rect.
For 12 cords wood for use of the Hospital Magazine & Guard House during the last winter } 360. 0
Daniel Jones Aft. D. 2. M. G. Dr.
To cash paid James Hooker for your certificate pr. rect. } £ 205. 17. 6

State of Connecticut } County of Middlesex } ss. Middletown.
I Henry S. Ward of said Middletown being duly sworn, depose and say, that I am administrator with the will annexed of Nehemiah Hubbard late of said Middletown, deceased, who was a Deputy Quarter Master General in the war of the Revolution, as I have understood and believe; that the foregoing copy is a true copy of entries in a Book purporting to have been kept, and I have no doubt was kept by said Hubbard while acting as such Deputy Quarter Master General; and that I have compared said copy with the original entries in said Book and found the same to be correct this 11 th day of June A. D. 1850.
Henry S. Ward
Sworn to and subscribed this 11 th day of June A. D. 1850, Before me,
Jonathan Barnes Justice of the Peace
I further certify that the said Henry S. Ward is a credible witness.
Jonathan Barnes Justice of the Peace

State of Connecticut
County of Middlesex } ss: I. Elihu Spencer, Clerk of the County Court in and for said County of Middlesex do hereby certify that Jonathan Barnes Esq. is a Justice of the Peace in and for the County aforesaid, duly commissioned and qualified (as by commission on file in my office): Also that I am well acquainted with the handwriting of said Barnes, and verily believe the two within written signatures of his name to be his genuine handwriting
In Testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said County Court this 11 th day of June A.D. 1850
Elihu Spencer
Clerk of said County Court.

Copy from the Original.
Hartford, July 1 st 1779.
Dear Sir,
I have this day receiv'd your several favors of the 27 th & 28 th Inst. The Letter from his Ex'y. to J. H. Hooker have. I have sent them by your Express, & requested them to make me a Return of the Rum they have in Store, that I might be able to write you with certainty on that head. — The 27 th inst. Capt. Force left this for Danbury, with 24 Hhd. s Rum & 2638 Gals. I shall send some back by way of Danbury, and order that Rum directly on to Fishkill. Mr. Hall has now in store about 12 hhd. that he will send forward immediately. Mr. Jones tells me he can procure a gang of teams from the East side to go on with the Rum from the Hospital Stores, if there is any there, — which we shall know this night. Mr. Jerk Platt has within a few days repeatedly offered me Rum — he has about 30 hhd. the best of St. Kitts Rum. — Yesterday he offered it at 27 Dolls. pr Gall. which I thought was too high — but shall now offer him that price in case we do not get 50 hhd. at least, at Windsor. I believe we have some Rum at Woodstock, or some where on the way from Boston. Shall write Miller & Tracy for more. — Your order respecting the Rum's being sent directly to West Point shall be punctually attended to. — By your manner of Expression I should suppose that Mr. Smithwick had been complaining to you of the want of Flour. We send it on as fast as teams can be had — about 700 bar s went forward in June, besides some corn — and I hear no complaints from that Quarter. From the Enemy's withdrawing their Troops from Rhode Island, I should suppose our consumption in that quarter would rather lessen than be augmented. Capt. Watson will write you particularly of the

Flour at Barrington. The Board of War at Boston pretend to claim the most of it, and I much fear the Com e will deliver it back again on that acct.
July 2 d . The Express is returned. They have in store at Windsor, exclusive of the 30 hh s ordered to be reserved 90 hh s , & 2 Tierces Jamaica Spirits & Rum. 41 hh s . 26 Tierces & 2 Barrels N E Rum, but as they have never been filled up since they came into the care of the Mr. Hookers, it will doubtless take several hh s . to fill them up - they will probably be able to deliver 135 or 140 hh s . which shall take measures for forwarding immediately.
Yours,
Peter Colt
S. & G. Gov. P.
Col. Mansworth.
I, Charles Hosmer Recording Secretary of the "Connecticut Historical Society" do certify that the foregoing is a true copy from the original document, now in the possession of said Society.
Chas. Hosmer, Rec. Secy. Connecticut Historical Society State of Connecticut, Hartford County, ss. Hartford May 30 th 1850
Personally appeared Charles Hosmer, of the City and County of Hartford, and made solemn oath that the foregoing Certificate is true, before me Geo. Robinson, Just. of Peace

Copy.
March 3 d 1779
The Hon ble Major Genl. Gates, Sir
I have recd yours - Letter to Mr. Cotts of the 27 th ultimo, and her inclose you a Letter from Mess rs . Hookers who keep the Hospital Magazine in Windsor, and I know of no Rice but what they report; if such quantities as Doctor Foster mentions are any where in New England, the Deputy Com ry . General of Issues for the Eastern Department, will be able to say where it is, but am very certain no such quantity is in New England, unless in the State of Massachusetts. Early last fall directed ten thousand Bask of Rice to be bought at South Carolina and shipped for Boston and other Eastern Ports, some of which I know has been long since shipped, and may be hourly expected - the most of it was bought by the first of this year, and waited for vessels to transport it. I have reason to fear a want of Bread for our armys, of which I long since informed Congress, and have taken every measure in my power to obtain sufficient quantities. Of other provisions I have no fear of wanting. I hope shortly to be in Boston, when I will do myself the Honor of writing on you, and give the fullest information respecting every matter that relates to the supplies of provision for the Army. In the int im I have the honor to be your Most obed t Humble Servant,
Jer eh Wadsworth, Com ry Genl. P.
Personally appeared Charles Hosmer Recording Secretary of the Ba n nectical Historical Society, and made solemn oath, that the foregoing is a true copy of the original Copy of the letter, as it appears in the letter book of the late Jeremiah Wadsworth, Commissary General of Purchases, and which Letter Book is now deposited with the said Historical Society, this 10 th day of May A D 1850, before me, J. H. Robinson, Justice of the Peace

Copy.
Camp, Smith's Cove, June 27 th 1779
Gentlemen,
The enclosed Letter from his Excellency directs your delivering all the Hospital Rum in your Stores to my order, except thirty Hogsheads. Please to deliver it to Mr. Peter Colt's order. Your assisting to despatch the Rum in good order will much oblige,
Gentlemen, your most Humble Servant,
Jere. Wadsworth
Mess rs . James Horace } Hooker, Windsor }
Copy.
Camp, Smith's Cove, June 27 th 1779.
Dear Sir,
The enclosed Letter is from his Excellency Gen t . Washington, containing an order on Mess rs James & Horace Hooker, for all the Rum in the Hospital Stores at Windsor, except thirty Hogsheads. I wish no time may be lost in sending on this Rum; let it come directly to Fish Kill. The casks should be filled up, and well coopered - it is designed for the Garrison at West Point, and must be directed to be immediately shipped from Fish Kill, - no time must be lost - we are really distressed for want of Rum - send on all you can.
I am, Dear Sir
your very Humble Serv t ,
Jere. Wadsworth.
Peter Colt, Esq. }
D. C. Gen t P. }
Personally appeared Charles Hoxie, Recording Secretary of the Connecticut Historical Society, and made solemn oath that the foregoing is a true copy of the original copy of the letter, as it appears in the letter book of the late Jeremiah Wadsworth, Commissary General of Purchases, and which Letter Book is now deposited with the said Historical Society, before me this 10 th day of May 1850.
Geo. Robinson Justice of the Peace

I Frederick Chapman of Windsor in Hartford County and State of Connecticut aged Eighty nine years depose and say That I enlisted as a member of the Guard raised and established to protect the Hospital Magazine located in said Windsor in the year of 1778 or 1779 and continued to serve as a member of said Guard one or two years That I was very well acquainted with James Hooker late of Windsor deceased That I was born and have ever since lived within half a mile of the place where the said Magazine was established and also within half a mile of the place of residence of the said James Hooker
That I was well acquainted with the mode and manner of receiving all the goods at the magazine and the delivering of them from the said magazine That said James Hooker was the assistant and the superintendent of the magazine and of the storage deposits his buildings were used for the goods and artillery deposited He was applied to as an assistant and did take charge and direction of the magazine The word storing was inserted before signing and further the deponent saith not
Frederick Chapman
State of Connecticut } County of Hartford } ss Windsor May 13 1850
Personally appeared Frederick Chapman the afore- deponent with whom I am well acquainted that he is considered a person of strict truth and integrity and for one of his age is possessed of a remarkable clear and distinct memory That he signed the above in my presence and made solemn oath to the truth of the facts contained in the above deposition Before me Henry Sill Justice of Peace

State of Connecticut
Hartford County> Hartford County ss
I William A. Matson Assistant Clerk of the County Court for Hartford County hereby certify that Henry Sill & George Robinson are Justices of the Peace within & for the County of Hartford aforesaid duly Commissioned & qualified that the signatures to the foregoing instruments purporting to be theirs are the genuine handwriting & signatures of s d Sill & Robinson respectively.
In Testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name & affixed the seal of s d County Court this 15 th day of May A.D. 1850
William A. Matson Assistant Clerk of the County Court for Hartford County

Washington Decemr 2 nd 1850
Hon: A. H. Stuart Secretary of the Interior
Sir,
I have the honor to submit, for your consideration and decision, the case of Mrs. Mary Hooker, Widow of James Hooker, late of Connecticut. - She claimed a pension under Act of July 7 th . 1838 for the alleged service of her husband as a staff officer in the Medical Department. - The period of his service is shown to have been for upwards of two years as a "Hospital Store Keeper," and the marriage must also be admitted. -
The claim was rejected on the ground that the employment was under civil contract, and that a commission was received upon the amount of his purchases. - It is upon these points an appeal is made, and I would beg Sir, your indulgent consideration while I shall endeavor to place the subject before you in the light which seems to me to be the only true one. -
I submit, in the first place, paper marked N o 1, being a copy of the Commissioners letter of Sept 23 rd 1841, disallowing the claim upon the presumed facts, as he states, that Hooker was "the agent of Doct Foster" - "that an account was rendered for expenses, services, and Store Rent for £629. 19. 2", and from these the Commissioner infers that "his certificate shows, conclusively, that the whole transactions were nothing more than the fulfilment of a private contract." - If he acted as a merchant why charge rent of store
To rightly understand the merits of this claim it may be proper to recur to the origin of it. -
On the 11 th April '77 the Continental Congress appointed Doct Isaac Foster a deputy director general of the Hospital of the Eastern Department, with full powers consequent upon so highly honorable

and responsible an office. - Doctor Foster, in his official character, addressed a communication to James and Horace Hooker (Merchants at Windsor, Connecticut) on the 22 d Decem r 77 informing them that a Hospital Magazine was to be established at Windsor, and, having been advised to place it under their care, asked if they would accept, and on what terms. - On the 28 th of the same month Doct Foster was informed they "concluded to accept," proposed to rent their store house , and further remarked - "as to compensation, whatever was given to others will satisfy us." - This reply certainly shews they were wholly uninformed in regard to the pay or allowance to Hospital Store keepers. - But, entering upon the duty, they received large amounts of money and Hospital Stores, as is shown by their account book; and this is not all, for it appears by a document (filed with the application among the original papers above referred to) that Doctor Foster "ordered Hooker to apply to the Governor and Council for "a guard to protect the public stores - a guard of one sergeant and "twelve men were ordered, with an increase to eighteen men if necessary. "that a proper pay roll be made out and presented to the pay table, "for payment at the Treasury, and charged to the United States."
Still further, there is an original and formal order on file, drawn by Doctor Foster upon Lieut Col Hubbard Ely, Dept t 2 d Master General, for forage for one horse for James Hooker, store keeper to the Hospital, Eastern Department, it being necessary for him to discharge his duty . - There are, also, other letters and orders on file going to the same result. -
Now I ask, if Hooker had acted (as is contended by the Commissioners of Pensions) under a civil contract - as an agent or merchant - would a military guard have been ordered out and paid , and a horse foraged at public expense, to aid a mere civilian to fulfil a private contract? I think not. - Indeed, to my mind, it cannot admit of a question, for it is shown, in connexion with other facts, that Hooker was in public

employ, and really under military orders. - This is acknowledged in his application for a guard in these words. "James and Horace Hooker "stated to the Governor and Council that they had been appointed by "Isaac Foster Esq, Deputy Director General &c, and had received orders "from said Foster to apply to the Governor and Council for a guard" &c. - This evidence is also filed. - Now can it be presumed that Hooker would have represented himself to be under orders if he had not been so?
Again - The Commissioner takes the ground (see his letter marked N o 2.) that James Hooker "having been allowed a commission of 2½ "per cent on the amount of his purchases, shows conclusively that he "acted as a merchant, and not as an officer of the line or staff." -
I will endeavor to show that this reasoning is not conclusive in matter of fact, nor in the spirit of the pension laws. - Under a resolution of Congress. July 19 th 1777 Joseph Trumbull was appointed a commissary General of stores and provisions, and, in the final settlement of his accounts with the United States, Congress resolved March 11 th 1779. That he be allowed a commission of 2½ per cent on such sums as may have been laid out by him in purchases &c. -
General Nath l Green, while acting as Quarter Master Genl, received a commission on his purchases, and resigned the office under the new regulation of the Quarter Masters Dept of July 15 th 1780 fixing pay per month. -
Col. Nehem a Hubbard, Quarter Master Genl, in the settlement of his accounts, was also allowed a commission. - Will it now be reasoned that these officers were not of the "line or staff of the Army" because they were allowed a commission for their service? one remark may settle that question. - Neh a Hubbard survived the passage of the Act of 7 th June 1832; made application, and was admitted to the benefit of that Act from Connecticut. -
The principle of the enactment of the pension

laws was not upon the abstract question of pay , but for Service . - The may suppose an officer served for two years, or any given time, during the War of the Revolution, and for his service he received no pay . - Would he be excluded from the benefit of the pension laws on that ground? - Certainly not, he would be pensioned for his services . - The same reason- ing should govern a Staff officer who may have received a commission or per centage for his services . -
The question may here arise, is a Hospital Store keeper recognized as a military appointment, and has a pension ever been granted for such service? - The answer is in the affirmative. - Andrew Kingsbury, late of Connecticut, deceased, during his life time, asserted a claim for his Revolutionary services as "Hospital Store keeper". His claim was examined and admitted at the rate of $480. per Annum. Act 7th June 1832. -
In a Summary view of the case, it is contended that James Hooker performed the service and duty of Hospital Store keeper for more than two years; that the official letter from Doctor Foster, deputy Director General, tendering the appointment as Hospital store-keeper at Windsor, Connecticut, was tantamount to an appoint- ment on Hooker's accepting the office and performing the duty under that instrument of writing . - That he was recognized and acknowledged to have been the "Continental Store keeper" is shown by many original letters and orders filed in the case. - With these facts in view, and the service having been performed , the allowance of a commission, or per centage on purchases, as pay , (which does not, however, in fact appear -) should not, in my judgment, militate against the claim, as the period of marriage brings it under the Act of July 7th. 1838. -
In Submitting the case with great deference, Abijah Collins I have the honor to be A. A. N. Ray Your Most Obedt atty. in fact

Boston, May 22, 1850.
This may certify, that I, the subscriber, am the Librarian of the Massachusetts Historical Society, and that the Letter, to which this certificate is annexed, is a true copy, verbatim et literatim, from the Original, contained in the 13 th volume, number 221, of the Trumbull Papers, in the Library of said Society, and that the said Papers were presented to the said Society by heirs of Governor Trumbull of Connecticut, by letter dated April 15, 1794.
Joseph B. Felt Librarian.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Suffolk ss. Boston, 22 May 1850. Then personally appeared Rev. Joseph B. Felt, Librarian of the Massachusetts Historical Society, well known to me individually and as a competent and credible witness, and made oath to the certificate above written and subscribed by him, —
Before me
Nathl. B. Shurtleff Justice of the Peace.

Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
Secretary's Office, Boston, May 22 d 1830.
I hereby Certify, That at the date of the annexed attestation Nathaniel B. Shurcliff was a Justice of the Peace for the County of Suffolk,
in the said Commonwealth, duly commissioned and qualified; and that to his acts and attestations, as such, full faith and credit are and ought to be given, in and out of Court. The attestation is in due form, and by the proper officer.
In Testimony whereof, I have hereunto affixed the Seal of the Commonwealth, the date above written.
W. B. Halcomb
Secretary of the Commonwealth.

Windsor Dec r 14 th 1780.
May it Please your Excellency.
Col d Newberry has shewn us a copy of a Resolve of Assembly desiring your Excellency with the Advice of your Councill of Safety to send to Congress a true Representation of the Stores at Windsor and the Conduct of the div th Gen l . Relative thereto to prevent any Imbezlements &c. — We Conclude the Representation from Col d Newberry is the grounds of sd Resolve, and as he had but a partial knowledge of the Matter, beg leave to State the Matter in its proper Light. Doct r Foster when he Established a Hosp t Magazine in this Town, put it under our Care, and Ordered us to deliver no Stores but by his Express Orders in Writing, and from time to time has given us Orders to deliver to the Orders of Sundry persons — but on finding in the New Arrangement of the Hosp t Def t himself intirely left out, Wrote us Revoking all his former Orders, and forbidding us to deliver Except to his Special Order. giving us for a Reason, that his Own private Credit was Largely Engaged for the payment of many of the Stores, & Likewise for a Large Quantity of Medicines, & that he was Determined to hold them as a Deposit untill he was Enabled to pay for them and a Settlement Made with him — and as it was Necessary for him to make a Settlement with those he had employ d for the publick desired us to have our Ac t Settled as Soon as we could, Accordingly we have done it, and given him proper Vouchers for all the Stores delivered from the Magazine, & taken his Rec t for the same — he then told us he had Rec d Orders to deliver over the Stores to Doct r Shiping who is (Turn Over)

at the Head of the Hosp t Dept t and Shewed us the Copy of a Letter to Congress, & One to Doct r Shiping, Representing that his Own Credit was a Stake for the Goods & informing them he should not Deliver them untill he was inabled to pay for them — he then said that as the Stores were Small & he intended to hold them as above would have us Discharge the Guard, Accordingly we apply d to Col l Newberry for that purpose — we think it our Duty Likewise to inform your Excellency that we had not the Least Reason to think by any thing he had Wrote us, or by any thing that ever passed between us, that he had any Design to imbezzle the Stores. We think ourselves bound in justice to the Doctors Character, to say, that in the Whole Course of our acquaintance with him in the publick Business he has ever Appeared to have the Publick Interest at Heart —
If your Excellency has any Desire to know any other particulars Relating to the Above shall be Happy to attend and give all the information in our power —
We are Your Excellencys
Most Obt e Humble Serv t
James & Horace Hooker.
6 Hogs d West India Rum, 12 Bar s Sugar, 2 Cask Barley 1 Bar s Ginger, 3 Bar s Oat Meal, About 3000 lb Coffee, 6 or 7 Cask Damaged Raisins 24 Cask Rice. The Above is as near the Amount as I can Remember of the Quantity of Stores now in the Magazine. Test James Hooker.

Endorsed, "Messrs. Hooker & Dorr Foster."
✓

Adolph Mary Hooker
L. J. Pease Preston
May 1 '46

Washington May 1 1846
Additional Evidence is herewith Submitted in support of the application of Mary Hooke widow of James Hooke late of Windsor in the state of Connecticut deceased.
This is a claim under the widow's act of 1838. It is alleged that the husband Capt James Hooke served as Military & Hospital Store in the town of Windsor Connecticut for several years during the revolutionary war perhaps from the early part of 1778 to sometime in 1781.
I have not as yet examined the evidence heretofore filed in this case - but I herewith submit evidence which seems to me to be of itself conclusive.
1 st The deposition of several persons who served as privates in the guard kept at "store" and who are now in the enjoyment of full pensions as privates for said service alone.
2 nd The deposition of the leading public men of said town of Windsor fully bearing witness to the reputation of said Hooke for that service.
3 rd The Certificate of Senator Niles to the high character of the witnesses &c.
4 th Documentary evidence though not full yet conclusive for the time the said Hooke was serving in a military capacity - This is contained in one of the Hubbard books and the

Original will be submitted to the Council with great respect Your most obedt Servt
L T Baur
Hon J L Edwards
Carmel Prison

Copy of the Accomptary's account referred to
1780 July 4
Commissary General of Forage Dr To paid James Hooker for bill & Receipt For Forage for his horses March 1 st to June 1 st 1780 92 days at the usual allowance
11: 2: 0 Hay at 8.00 £ 92.00 23 Bushels at £4:10 103 10
£ 195 10.0
Quartermaster General Dr
To paid James Hooker for bill & Receipt To 12 Cords of Wood for the use of the Hospital Magazine & guard house during the last winter — £ 360.00
Daniel Jones of S.2 m.g. Dr
To cash paid James Hooker for your certificate Receipt £ 205.17.
waars and the

United States of America State of Connecticut
I Daniel P. Tyler Secretary of the State of Connecticut and Keeper of the Seal thereof do hereby certify that Gideon Welles Esq was on the 27 th day of Feb 1846 and for a long time before that day had been a Justice of the Peace within & for the County of Hartford in said State and that Sidney Brown Esq was on the 13 th day of April 1846 and for a long time before that day had been a Justice of the Peace within & for said County of Hartford, both duly appointed Commissioners and sworn under the laws of this State authorized to administer oaths and that the signatures of the said Justices to the depositions hereto annexed are their genuine official signatures
In testimony whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the Seal of said State this 27 th day April 1846
Daniel P. Tyler Secretary of State

I Return S. Mathew of Hartford, Connecticut aged Seventy five years & upwards, do hereby say, that I was born and lived in Windsor in this state until I was thirty five years of age, a near neighbor of Capt James Hooker late of said Windsor deceased. I well recollect that Capt Hooker was a military store keeper in the Revolutionary war, and a guard of several soldiers was posted to guard said store. This guard was continued for four or five years.
I was at the time a school boy, attending school nearly opposite Hooker store. And further this deponent saith not. Return S. Mathew
Hartford Feb. 24 th , this 27 th day of February A.D. 1846, before me Gideon Welles Just. Commissioner
The above deponent Return S. Mathew is well known to me. He is a citizen of the first respectability and of unimpeachable veracity. Gideon Welles

I Roswell Miller of Windsor in the County of Hartford and State of Connecticut aged Eighty six years and upwards, being first duly sworn according to law depose & say, that I was born in the town Granby in the County & State, as I am informed, but came to Windsor with my to wit grand parents before I was two years of age & have ever since resided in said Windsor. I was well acquainted with Capt James Hooker late of said Windsor deceased from a period before the revolutionary war to the time of his death. For a period of several years, during the war of the revolution, said Hooker was Military and Hospital Storekeeper in said Windsor. I served as a private in the guard at the store for two years, - according to my best recollection I enlisted and first entered upon said service on the 4 th day of March 1778, - my enlistment was for one year and at the expiration of said year I again enlisted for a year & served until the 4 th of March 1780. During this period, three or four buildings in the neighborhood were used for the military stores, and the store which Capt James Hooker & his brother Horace had, before the war, used as a dry goods store, was at this time used for drugs & medicines belonging, as I understand, to the General Hospital Department for the army, as I then understood, were constantly being put up & carried away and further the deponent said not.
The words "to wit" "grand" & "of age" interlined before signing
Roswell Miller

State of Connecticut Hartford County 3/8
On this 13 th day of April 1841 personally appeared Roswell Miller who hath subscribed the foregoing deposition and made oath in due form of law that the same is true. Before me and I further certify that said Roswell Miller is well known to me. That his character for truth is above suspicion & his statements are entitled to full credit.
Sidney Bower Justice of the Peace

We the undersigned residents of the Town of Windsor in the County of Hartford & State of Connecticut, being first duly sworn according to law, depose and say, that we are well acquainted with the reputation of Capt. James Hooker late of said Windsor deceased, that said Hooker was & is reputed to have been a Military or Hospital Store Keeper during the War of the Revolution and from that reputation we entertain no doubt that said Hooker was duly appointed and served several years during the War of the Revolution as Military, or Hospital Store Keeper.
Richard Niles
James Loomis
Robt Drake
Wm Howard
Chester Hayden
W. Howard
Allin Ellsworth
Giles Ellsworth
Henry Sill
State of Connecticut } Hartford County } ss Windsor on this twelfth day of April A. D. 1846 Personally appeared Richard Niles James Loomis, Robt Drake, William Howard, Chester Hayden, George Howard, Allin Ellsworth, Giles Ellsworth, & Henry Sill, And made oath in due form of law that the foregoing affidavit by them subscribed is true.
Before me, Sidney Bower Justice of the Peace

I hereby certify that I am well acquainted with most of the persons who have signed & made oath to the foregoing statement in relation to the late James Hook, and know them to be men of the first standing and character in the town of Wadsworth, and who would not be likely to make any statement affecting the public interest which they did not know or believe to be true; I further certify that I have some recollection myself of the reputation of Captain James Hooker, & so far as that extends I concur in the statement made & sworn to by the aforesaid persons.
Washington May 1 st 1846
John M. Kelso

I Elijah Douslan of Windsor in the County of Hartford & State of Connecticut aged Eighty two years & upwards being first duly sworn according to law depose & say that I was born and have always resided in said town of Windsor - that I was well acquainted with Capt James Hooker late of said Windsor deceased from a period prior to Revolutionary War to the time of his death. - That I well recollect that said Hooker was a Military or Hospital Store Keeper for several years during the said War. That I served two years as a private in the guard at said store, for which service I am now in receipt of a pension and further the deponent said not
Elijah Douslan
State of Connecticut Hartford County 3/4
On this 13 th day of April 1846 personally appeared Elijah Douslan who hath subscribed the foregoing deposition & made oath in due form of law that the same is true. Before me and I further certify that I am well acquainted with said Douslan and that his character is good & his statements entitled to full credit
Sidney Bower Justice of the Peace

State of Connecticut
By the Governor of Connecticut, THOMAS H. SEAMANS, Secretary of State
TO ALL WHOM IT SHALL COME
May Hooker Con - das 38
May 1852
I A W. H. Burgh

I know all men by these presents that I Eliza Hooker of Bloomfield in the County of Hartford in the State of Connecticut daughter of Mary Hooker deceased who was the Widow of James Hooker of Windsor in said Hartford County do hereby constitute and Appoint Henry Fowler of Hartford my true and lawful Attorney and Agent to prosecute the Claim of the Children of Mary Hooker deceased for any amount of Revolutionary Pension that may be due, and I hereby authorize my said Agent to examine all the papers and documents in relation to said Claim on file in the Departments at Washington City or elsewhere, to file additional evidence or arguments, and to receive the Certificate which may be issued for said Claim, to appoint one or more Substitutes under him, for the purposes herein expressed, and to do all things that I might or could do were I personally present, hereby revoking all former powers made by me in relation to this Claim, and ratifying and Confirming all that my said Attorney and Agent shall lawfully do in the premises
Witness my hand and seal at Bloomfield
this 4 th day of May
AD 1852
Eliza Hooker
Signed & Sealed in presence of J. S. Robinson C. A. Robinson
State of Connecticut. Hartford County & ss.
On this 4 th day of May A.D. 1852 before me the Subscribers a Notary Public in & for the State aforesaid personally appeared Eliza Hooker above named & acknowledged the foregoing power of attorney to be her act & deed for the purposes therein mentioned
In testimony whereof I have hereunto signed my name and affixed my seal of Office
the day and year above written
J. S. Robinson Notary Public

State of Connecticut.
By his Excellency THOMAS H. SEYMOUR, Governor of said State.
TO ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Know ye, That George Robinson was at the time of subscribing the foregoing attestation, and now is, a Notary Public ,
in the said State, duly constituted and commissioned, and that to his acts and attestations as such, full faith and credit are and ought to be given in and out of Court;— that the within attestation is in due form and by the proper officer; and that I believe the signature of said George Robinson thereto, to be genuine.
In testimony whereof, I have caused the public Seal of the State to be hereunto affixed, this 6th day of May, A. D. 1852, and in the seventy sixth year of the Independence of the United States of America.
By his Excellency, the Governor,
Ins. P. C. Mather Secretary of State.

H. R. 532.
A BILL
For the relief of the heirs of Mary Hooker:
August 2, 1856.—Read twice, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

[Report No. 311.]
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
August 2, 1856.
Read twice, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.
Mr. WOODRUFF, from the Committee on Revolutionary Pensions, reported the following bill:
An BIL Act
For the relief of the heirs of Mary Hooker.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives 2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That 3 the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and required 4 to place the name of Mary Hooker, widow of James Hooker, 5 who was military or hospital storekeeper in the State of Con- 6 necticut, during the war of the Revolution, from February, 7 seventeen hundred and seventy-seven, to November, seventeen 8 hundred and eighty, on the pension roll of said State, under 9 act of seventh July, eighteen hundred and thirty-eight, and 10 subsequent acts, at the rate of pension due for said service; and 11 the amount so found due to be paid to the children of said Mary 12 Hooker, deceased, and their legal representatives.
Approved March 3, 1857
Dep. of State March 6, 1857
a true copy carefully collated with the original roll
E. H. Smith, Cluett bulk

945 Genesee Avenue, Saginaw, Michigan, February 25, 1914.
Gentlemen: —
If my inquiry should not be addressed to you, will you kindly send it to the right department, or notify of the place to send it.
I wish to secure the war records of the following people; —

1. Thomas Willet, Captain, neg 1 st Mayor of New York City. 2. Nathaniel Hooker, 1710-1763 Hartford, Conn. Captain of Militia. 3. James Hooker. 1742-1805 Windsor, Conn. Commissioned Captain.
Please address Mrs. W. S. Humphrey, 945 Genesee Avenue, Kalamazoo, Michigan.

March 28, 1917.
Gentlemen; —
Can I secure from your office records of the military service of the following men; —
Captain Thomas Willet (1st Plymouth, Mass. Mayor of New York- Captain Nathaniel Hooker 1710-1763-Hartford, Conn. Captain James Hooker 1742-1805-Windsor, Conn. Governor Joseph Talcott-Hartford, Conn. Ensign or Capt. Joseph F. Foster. N.H. War of 1812.
I very especially wish to learn the names of the father & mother of Joseph F. Foster.
Resp. &c.
Mrs. W. D. Humphrey.

V.L.M. Rev. War Section.
April 10, 1917.
Mrs. W. S. Humphrey, Battle Creek, Michigan.
Madam:
In response to your letter dated the 28 th ultimo, you are advised that the record of James Hooker W. File No. 25,800 Revolutionary War was forwarded you March 7, 1914, and it is not the practice of this Bureau to furnish the same statement more than once to the same person.
The records of this Bureau fail to afford any information in regard to Thomas Willet and Joseph Talcott in the War of the Revolution, or Joseph F. Foster in the War of 1812.
This Bureau has no records of services rendered prior to the Revolution.
Very respectfully,
Commissioner.