Revolutionary War Pension and Bounty Land Warrant Application File B.L.Wt. 1915-100, Christian Guthrie, New York

SERVICE
NUMBER
New York
Guthrie, Christian or Guttrick
B.L. Wt 1915-100
CONTENTS

Christian Guthrie e 8 o 1915

Ho: of Reps July 11 th 1893.
Yrs Since the last it shows all that is required in the future - left before in which were sent to you by me some time since
Yours H. A. Beard
Mr Gordon

I Abel Guthrie of Augusta in the County of Oneida & State of New-York, aged sixty seven, do testify & say; That I had a Brother, by the name of Christian Guthrie, who at an early period enlisted into the Revolutionary army & in Capt. Capps' Company, 1 st New York Regiment, who was always up and believed to have been killed in the battle of Monmouth; that the said Christian had no issue: that his only surviving heirs, known to be so, are this Deponent, and two brothers, Abraham & James - these having been then all deceased; one without issue, & the issue of the other not having been heard from for more than twenty years. And I do further testify & verily believe, that the person, who is returned in said Company as having died July 1. 1778, by the name of Christian Guthrie , is my brother aforesaid. It has always been so understood by all the connections. Also in an application to the Legislature of the State of New York for his Bounty Bonds promised by that State to the heirs of the line of that State, in the army of the United States, it was testified by John Mc- Lean, who is since deceased & his testimony can not now be had, that he was Ordally present in said Capps' Com- pany in the war, & himself kept the Roll of the same, and wrote & spelled the name Guthrie , as the name was sometimes called, and as he, being a Scotchman, & speaking bad English, supposed he pronounced it - that said Christian was known in the army as the brother of Abraham Guthrie, who was then present before said Committee & fully recognized by him as the same Abraham Guthrie , whom he knew in the army as the brother of said Christian. It was also proved before said Committee by the testimony of Asahel Gage, or Jahway (a name similar in sound) that he was one of the Sergeants in said Company, so understood the relationship of said Abraham & Christian; that said Christian was killed in Monmouth battle - but the left mentioned witness is also deceased, & his testimony can not be had. I further testify, that the said Abraham Guthrie is my brother & testified before said Committee to the same effect, he being also a soldier in the Revolution, in the Connecticut line.

I do further testify, that the affidavits of the above witnesses & others were taken, filed, & used before said Com- -mittee & other succession committees of New York Le- -gislature, & also in the Legislative Body, all pre- -ving conformity to that Body, both the relation- -ship of your Petitioner to said Christian, & that the said Christian was killed in the Battle of Monmouth. All which are, by some cabinet or out of care in the proper offices of the Legislature, now mislaid & can not be found; & that the said Abraham, my brother, has had two strokes of the Palsy, & has nearly lost all his reason as well as become helpless, so that his affidavit can not now be had. I further testify, that our family name has been differently pronounced & spelled, in different places & by different persons, sometimes, spoken Goodrich , some times Goodrick , & some times, Goodwin as the true name should be - I further testify, that no county bonds have ever been found to said Christian, or his heirs.
Subscribed & sworn this 18 th day of Sept r 1832
Abel G. Merrill
before me
Ebenezer D. Darrow Justice of the Peace
State of New York
Clerk's Office Niida County ss. C. G. Brown
Clerk of said County do hereby certify that C. G. Brown Esq. before whom the within affidavit purports to have been taken & sworn was at the date of the same one of the Justices of the Peace in and for said County, and duly authorized by Law to act as such, and that I am well acquainted with his hand-wri- ting and hereby believe his name subscribed to the P. Affidavit to be genuine.
Witness my hand & seal of office this C. G. Brown Clerk 18 th day of September A.D. 1832

Hon. Samuel Beardsley Member of Congress Washington.

State of New York } Onondaga County }
Subrogate office February 6 th 1833.
I certify that satisfactory evidence was adduced to me to prove that Abiel Guthrie James Guthrie & Abraham Guthrie were brothers that Abraham Guthrie died leaving the following children and no others Simon 3 Guthrie Esther wife of Frederick Kellogg Sally wife of Oliver Combs, Polly wife of Erastus Madams Ma- ry 4 wife of Stephen Mix and Eliza wife of Robert F Williams that the before nam- ed persons are the only heirs at law in fee to Christian Guthrie late a soldier in the revolutionary war.
Given under my hand and seal office this fifth day of February in the year of our Lord one thousand and eight hundred and thirty three
Abraham Bennett Subrogate of Onondaga County New York

Christian Guthrie
Claim admitted - Sent Regulations - Returned two affidavits for authentication - Dec 15 1831
J. Woodley
Waiting for proof of housewife
Dec 11 1832
Many thanks Yours truly yours
Pension Min.

Christian Guthrie - deceased - killed in the battle of Monmouth - He belonged to the New York line Van Schaick's Regt. - a lot of land was drawn for him in state of N.Y. (lot 90 in Milton, Tompkins Co.) - that his heirs did not get but New York gave 200 acres to his heirs in lieu of it - for
The state sold 100 from the 90 & which was called the U.S. hundred and for which the U.S. gave 100. in Ohio or elsewhere.
That 100 is what is wanted. Deed to be given to Abel Guthrie , brother of Christian & who has bought of the other heirs.
write to Abel at Augusta Post Office N.Y.

Christian Guthrie Asahel Jaqua. Papers

War Dep t Bounty Land Office Decem r 15 th 1831
Sir
The papers left by you at this Office relative to the claim for bounty land from the U. States by the heirs of Christian Guthrie, have been duly examined, and the claimants found to be entitled; I therefore herewith send "Regulations" necessary to be complied with by the heirs, which when duly authenticated and returned to this office, a Warrant will issue. — The affidavits of Abel Guthrie, and Asahel Saqua, are herewith returned, the first to be signed & sworn to before a Magistrate, and the authority of the Magistrate in both affidavits, attested by the Certificate and seal of the Clerk of the Court. — If the Magistrate, before whom the affidavit of Asahel Saqua, was made, is employed to attest the other papers sent, the Certificate of the Clerk of the Court in relation to the authority of the Magistrate need not be attached to more than one of the documents (that which contains the printed declaration of the heir and the power of attorney would be best) The declaration and power of attorney may be made by one of the heirs only — the Surrogates Certificate will show who are the other heirs.
I have the honor to be Very Respectfully Yours
W m Gordon
The Hon ble
Jam s Beardsey Ho: of Rep s

Copy of Epistle to Timothy
Epistle to Timothy

State of New York Columbia County
Isahel Jagua of Gallatin in said County now a prisoner of the Revolutionary Army But of sound mind & memory personally ap- peared before the undersigned Justice of the Peace of said County and being duly sworn says that this Deponent was a soldier of the American army in the revolutionary war that this Deponent was a corporal in Col. Van Schaick's Regiment in the New York line And this Deponent further states that he was well- acquainted with Christian Guthrie who this Deponent says was from the State Connecticut was a soldier of the American revolutionary army & belonged to the New York line that this Deponent was engaged in the Battle of Monmouth in the State of New Jersey which took place on the 27th day of June A.D. 1778 And that after the Battle was over this Deponent with other soldiers were ordered to bury the dead that then this Deponent found the said Christian Guthrie amongst the slain who were killed in Battle as this Deponent knew him perfect- ly well this Deponent further saith that he was person- ally acquainted with Abraham Guthrie who was a soldier of said Army in the Connecticut line and this Deponent further saith not
Subscribed & sworn this 19th day of Jan'y A.D. 1881 Before me
John Coons Justice of Peace
Isahel Jagua

State of New York Columbia County } ss. J. Joseph D Monell Clerk of the said County do certify that John Coons Esq. before him the within Affidavit purports to have been sworn, was at the date of the same one of the Justices of the Peace, in and for the said County, and that I am ac- quainted with his hand writing and verily believe his name sub- scribed to the said Affidavit to be his proper hand writing and Signature. Witness my hand and Seal of Office this 26 th day of September 1832.
J. D. Monell

Mr. Barstow from the committee of Claims, to whom was referred the petition of Abel Guthrie, together with the report of the Attorney-general: Reported.
That the petitioner represents, that he had a brother who entered as a soldier, in the revolutionary war, in Captain Capps' company in the first New York regiment, and died in the year 1778, and was returned as a dead soldier, by the name of Christian Guttrick, whereas his real name was Christian Guthrie.
That lot No. 90. in the town of Milton, was ballotted to the name of the said Christian Guttrick. That he believes the said soldier was his brother. That the said lot has escheated to the people of this State.
He therefore prays for a law vesting the right to said land, in the heirs of the said dead soldier.
The committee have examined the documents accompanying the petition. They have also examined John M c Lean, who was an orderly sergeant in Capt. Capps' company at the time, and previous to the death of said soldier; and have also examined Abraham Guthrie, a brother of the petitioner, who was also a soldier in the revolutionary army, in the Connecticut line, at the same time.
The testimony of M c Lean and Abraham Guthrie, is in writing, and will be found with the documents accompanying this report.
It clearly appears by the proof examined, that the real name of the soldier was Christian Guthrie, and that the petitioner is a brother of said soldier. The lot in question, was ballotted to the name of Christian Guttrick. The soldier herein mentioned, and has escheated to this State.
By the act to change the fund for the support of common schools, passed 13 th April. 1819. all escheated lands in the military tract, are appropriated for the support of common schools. The new constitution has confirmed inviolably this appropriation.
It has, therefore, become a constitutional question, as well as a question of expediency, how far the Legislature can or ought to go, in relinquishing the title of the State to any lands of this description, in whatever manner the State might have acquired the title. On this subject, the committee beg leave to refer this honorable house, to a report of the commissioners of

the land office, to be found upon the journals of the Senate, for the year 1823. page 300. and also to a report of the attorney general, upon the petition of Ebenezer Morris, in the Assembly journals of 1823, page 1052. In the reports referred to, this subject is fully examined.
Setting aside the question of the constitutionality of relinquishing the right of the State, to escheated lands, the committee doubts the propriety of vacating the judgement, obtained by the State, in this or any other similar case. It is probable that there are occupants upon this lot, who have gone on under a supposed good title, and have made valuable improvements thereon.
The State would by the existing laws, be able to show more favor to these settlers, than individuals would be likely to do.
Whatever might have been the cause of the great delay of the petitioner, in not asserting his claims, the committee think he ought not at this late day, to be allowed to come in and contest the title, with the present occupants.
The claims of an old soldier, who might appear in proper person and ask for that bounty to which he had been entitled, and which he might by any means have failed of receiving would be a case which would call most peculiarly for full relief. The applicants who appear before us, at this late day are in most instances either remote relations of the soldier under whom they claim or they are speculators who have received assignments of the right. These persons have never performed any services for the country, in their own persons, and not therefore equally entitled to our sympathy with the war-worn soldier who exposed his life in the imminently deadly breach.
The heirs of dead soldiers, are undoubtedly in some instances entitled to relief; and the committee being fully satisfied that Abel Guthrie the petitioner is one of the heirs at law of the deceased soldier they think the said heirs are entitled to some relief. As there is still a small portion of the lands originally set apart for military purposes yet remaining subject to be applied by the legislature to claims of this nature it is therefore advisable to give the petitioner and the other heirs of the soldier named in the petition a part of such lands.

They have therefore prepared a bill and ask leave to bring in the same.
Ordered.
That leave be given to bring in such bill.
Mr. Barstow according to leave brought in the said bill entitled "An act for the relief of the heirs of Christian Guthrie otherwise called Christian Guttrick deceased." which was read the first time and by unanimous consent was also read a second time, and committed to a committee of the whole house.
State of New York Assembly Chamber in the city of Albany January 14. 1831
I certify the preceding to be a true copy from the Journal of the Assembly of the State of New York of the 12th March 1824 And I do further certify that I have made diligent search for the papers referred to in the foregoing report and that they cannot be found among the papers and documents of the Assembly
H. Seder Clerk of Assembly

IN ASSEMBLY,
February 8, 1831.
REPORT
Of the committee of claims, on the bill entitled "An act amendatory of the 'Act for the relief of the heirs of Christian Guthrie,'" with the amendments of the Senate thereto.
The committee on claims, to which was referred the bill entitled "An act amendatory of the 'Act for the relief of the heirs of Christian Guthrie,'" with the amendments of the Senate thereto,
REPORTED:—
The Senate propose to strike out the first and only section of the bill, as it passed this House, and to substitute two sections, the first of which adopts the principle sanctioned by this house, and applies it to three of the persons claiming to be heirs, instead of all the heirs. Your committee prefer the provision made by this House, as more general in its terms, and in their view more clear and explicit, and better calculated to make a final disposition of this claim. The second section proposed by the Senate, provides that Abel Guthrie, one of the claimants, shall receive a patent for the residue of the land not granted, pursuant to the first section, and shall hold the same in trust for the heirs not yet discovered. This question was considered by your committee, when this claim was originally referred to them, and they could not then perceive, nor have they been able since to discover any reason, why the State of New-York would not be as safe a trustee for the unknown heirs, as Abel Guthrie or any other individual. Whether he would have a right to dispose of the property so held in trust, and if he should do so, whether the persons interested in the execution of the trust, would have a claim upon the State for the consequences of an abuse of the authority

granted, are questions which obviously suggest themselves, but which your committee do not deem it necessary to discuss.
Your committee therefore recommend to the House, not to concur in the amendments proposed by the Senate.
There is another question presented, which the committee suppose it their duty to notice. The amendments proposed by the Senate purport to have been passed by a majority of that body. It seems to your committee, that the facts of this case, as it is now presented, have not been adverted to. The claim now is not for a remuneration in bounty lands for services in the revolutionary war. The land was granted by the land-office, to Christian Guthrie, and consisted of lot ninety, in Milton. The claim for bounty lands has therefore been satisfied. But the land has been escheated to the State, by regular proceedings for that purpose, and the petitioners now ask for relief from the escheat. It is wholly immaterial in what manner the original title was acquired, whether by grant from the State or from an individual ; that title has been legally escheated, and relief is asked on the ground that the heirs of Guthrie were ignorant of the provision made in their favor, and, of course, ignorant of the proceedings in escheat. It seems to your committee, that a knowledge of the nature of the application, is all that is necessary to satisfy any one, that the original act for the relief of the heirs of Guthrie, and the amendatory bill under consideration, both provide a gratuity for these heirs, to remunerate them for the loss sustained by the escheat, and are therefore bills for private purposes, within the meaning of the constitution.
Your committee recommend to the House the adoption of the following resolutions :
Resolved , That in the opinion of this House, the bill entitled "An act amendatory of the 'Act for the relief of the heirs of Christian Guthrie,'" is a bill for a private purpose, and requires the votes of two-thirds of the members elected to each branch of the Legislature, to pass the same, and that the amendments of the honorable the Senate to the said bill, are of the same character, and require the same vote to pass them.
Resolved , That the said bill, with the amendments thereto, be returned to the honorable the Senate, with the foregoing resolution.

IN ASSEMBLY,
February 10, 1831.
REPORT
Of the Committee on two-third bills on the bill entitled, "An act amendatory of the 'Act for the relief of the heirs of Christian Guthrie,'" with the amendments of the Senate thereto.
Mr. Fillmore, from the committee on two-third bills, to whom was referred the bill entitled, "An act amendatory of the 'Act for the relief of the heirs of Christian Guthrie,'" with the amendments of the Senate thereto,
REPORTED :
That they have had said bill under consideration, and that the facts, so far as your committee deem them necessary to a right understanding of the question, are briefly as follows: Christian Guthrie was a soldier in the New-York line in the revolutionary war, and was killed in battle in July, 1778. He was returned as a dead soldier by the name of Christian Gutrick ; and a patent was issued to him by the name of Gutrick , for lot No. 90, in Milton. That, in the year 1820, said lot of land escheated to the people of this state; but whether such escheat was occasioned by the mistake in the name of the patentee, the inability of the heirs of Guthrie to show that he was the person intended in the patent, or an entire ignorance that any patent had ever been issued, your committee have no means of determining. But from the papers before them, they are induced to believe that they had no knowledge that a patent had ever been issued until after the land had escheated. In the year 1829, an act was passed directing the Commissioners of the Land-Office to cause letters patent to be issued to the heirs of Christian

Guthrie for two hundred acres of land, on condition that they released to the state all their interest to lot No. 90, in Milton. (See sess. 1829, p. 104.)
This act, it appears, has been inoperative, on account of the inability of those heirs to establish the fact of sole and exclusive heirship; and although the act itself is indefinite as to the time when this shall be done, yet, by a provision of the Revised Statutes, (vol. 1. p. 205, sections 44 and 45,) this must be done within one year, or the authority of the commissioners expires, and the act becomes a dead letter. The act now under consideration proposes to extend the time for complying with the provisions of the act of 1829, or in other words, proposes to revive that act and continue it in force, with some slight modifications, for one year from the passage of this act. It is also conceived, that the proposed amendments from the Senate, so far as they involve the question as to whether this bill requires two-thirds of all the members elected to each branch of the Legislature to concur in its final passage, in order that it may become a law, are substantially the same as the original bill.
This bill having the effect to revive the act of 1829, so far as that act appropriates the property of this State, it must be clear that if the passage of that act required the constitutional vote of two-thirds of each House, then this does; but if that did not, then it is equally clear that this does not.
The words of the constitution are, (art. 7, sec. 9,) that "the assent of two-thirds, &c. shall be requisite to every bill appropriating the public monies or property for local or private purposes."
In the construction of this clause of the constitution, it appears to have been settled, by repeated decisions of the Legislature, that the payment of a claim, or the fulfilment of an obligation or contract on the part of the state, which if the state had been liable to prosecution, might have been enforced in a court of law or equity, is not an appropriation to private purposes within the meaning of this clause of the constitution.
This rule being established, the next inquiry is, whether the act of 1829, authorizing the conveyance of two hundred acres of land to the heirs of Christian Guthrie, is the mere bounty of the state, which they are morally, but not legally, bound to bestow; or wheth-

er it is the fulfilment of a contract or the performance of an obligation, which they were legally bound to perform.
In the first place, this act authorises this conveyance, on condition that the heirs of Guthrie, to whom this conveyance is to be made, release all "their estate and interest in lot No. 90, Milton, to this state." Now these heirs either have, or have not, an interest in that lot. If they have an interest, (and it would seem from a release being required, that they have,) then it is but passing a law, authorising the exchange of lands in Stirling for lands in Milton. A law to effect this cannot be within this clause of the constitution. It is no more an appropriation to private purposes, than the payment of money for the purchase of land on which the capitol is erected, or for the materials or labor for the state penitentiaries. But admitting that they never had any title to lot No. 90, it would be very questionable, in the minds of your committee, whether an agreement on the part of the state to convey, if these heirs would procure these releases to be executed, would not be an agreement founded on a sufficient consideration to be enforced in a court of law against an individual standing in the same situation.
It is never considered essential to the sufficiency of a consideration in law, to render a contract binding, that the act to be performed should be beneficial to the contractor ; it is sufficient that it occasions some damage or expense to the party performing it. The procuring of these releases must put these heirs to some expense and inconvenience, and though the procuring them to be executed, should result in no benefit to the State, yet your committee can see no reason why it is not a fair and obligatory contract on the part of the State, to convey these 200 acres of land, if these releases are procured for lot No. 90, in Milton. It will be recollected that the amount of the consideration cannot vary the principle, as to the validity of the contract, or the vote that it will require to pass the bill. It can hardly, however, be conceived that the State would require these releases unless they expected to derive some advantage from them. It is not to be presumed that they would wantonly impose this burthen upon the heirs of this object of their bounty, merely for the purpose of injuring them without benefitting the state. But without giving a definite opinion, whether these considerations would render the bill a majority bill or not, your committee deem it necessary to take a view of the original obligation, on the part of the State, to Guthrie, and inquire whether that has ever been discharg-

ed. If it has not, then this is but the performance of an obligation too long delayed ; if it has, then this bill is but to dispense the charities of the State, and will require a vote of two-thirds to pass it.
That there was a legal and just obligation on the part of the State, to give to the heirs of Guthrie, 500 acres of land, is fully established by the reports of several committees, and is further evidenced by an attempt, on the part of the State, to perform that obligation. But did they ever perform it ? They patented 500 acres of land to Christian Gutrick . They were under obligation to convey it to Guthrie . This was most clearly not a performance of that obligation. Neither Guthrie nor his heirs could make out a title to this land under that patent, without resorting to other proof than such as was contained in the patent. It might be questionable whether he would even have been permitted to prove by parol, that Gutrick in the patent, was intended for Guthrie . The effect of this evidence, if admitted, would again depend on other circumstances. For, by a decision of the Supreme Court, if there was in fact a person by the name of Gutrick , who was capable of taking this land, they would not hear evidence to show that Guthrie , and not Gutrick , was the man intended.
In a case decided in the 12th Johnson's Reports, where a patent for military bounty lands was issued to a man by the name of Houseman , when it ought to have issued to Hosmer , and persons claiming under Hosmer offered to shew that he was the person intended, and that Houseman was never entitled to any bounty lands, the court refused to hear the evidence. But without attempting to decide how far this patent to Gutrick was capable of explanation by other proof, or what effect such proof might have in a court of justice on the question as to the title to said lot, your committee are decidedly of opinion, that as between Guthrie and the State, the State had not discharged its obligation to him, by conveying his quota of land to Gutrick . That he had a right to insist on a conveyance that should vest in him and his heirs the title, without the risk and expense of proving by parol testimony, that a patent in which Christian Gutrick was named as grantee, was in fact intended for Christian Guthrie . That he has done no act, waiving this right to insist on the State's performing its contract according to the spirit and meaning of that contract ; and as it is not pretended that this contract has been subsequently discharged, it therefore follows

that the passage of the bill in question would be but another attempt to perform that same contract, and could only require the vote of a majority of this House to pass said bill.
It is not without some diffidence that your committee have come to this conclusion, after hearing the opinion of so able a committee as the committee on claims, expressed to the contrary. But it is believed by your committee, that the committee on claims would probably have come to the same conclusion, had they reasoned from the same facts.
Your committee, however, are confirmed in the conclusion at which they have arrived, by observing that the act of 1829 underwent a discussion on this subject, and was decided to be a majority bill only, and passed this House as such. (See Assembly Journals, 1829, p. 301.)
Your committee therefore beg leave to recommend the adoption of the following resolution :
Resolved , That the assent of two-thirds of all the members elected to each Branch of the Legislature is not necessary for the passage of the bill entitled "An act amendatory of the 'Act for the relief of the heirs of Christian Guthrie.' "

I Isaac Gurn of Galway in the County of Saratoga in the State of New-York, Esquire, of lawful age, testify & say; that I was a Member of the Assembly in this State in the year eighteen hundred & twenty four, & one of the Committee of Claims, making the Report, of which the foregoing is a copy; that I well remember, that John M c Lean was produced as a witness, before said Committee, & testified that he was the duly Sergeant in the Company, of which Christian Guthrie, otherwise called Christian Guthrie was a private; that he wrote the name of said Christian himself on the Roll of the Company, & wrote it as it was spoken, & as he thought it ought to be spelled; viz, Christian Guthrie ; his name being in the army differently pronounced; that he well remembered, that he had a brother, in the Connecticut-line, by the name of Abraham , who visited and acknowledged each other as brothers; and that he had no doubt, by their appearance & habits, that they were brothers; he also testified, as above, that the man, then present also before the Committee as a witness, by the name of Abraham Guthrie , was the same Abraham Guthrie , whom he so knew in the army, he well remembering him. A daughter also of the said John M c Lean also testified before said Committee,

that she with her Mother & family accompanied her Father in the army, they being Scotch in their descent, & that she well remembered that Macken- zie then present before said Committee, was the same person, whom she knew in the army as the brother of Christian Guthrie . She said Mackenzie also testified before said Committee that he was the brother of said Christian & also of Abel Guthrie , then also present. She said John also testified, that he was a hotel man, & he supposed that he wrote the name as he did, because he did not speak English, so well - he wrote & spelled it, as he was accustomed to speak it. This Deponent does not distinctly remember all that was testified; but he does remember, that the testimony was fully satisfactory to him to prove all the facts contained & asserted in said Report. This Deponent is now a Member of the bar of the State of New- York - & further saith not - Isaac Gore
Sworn to this 12 th day of 3 January 1831 before me 3
6. A True Copy Clerk of Albany County