The names on this page are either full blood or half and others are white men with Indian wife’s. And they all had one thing in common they were asking for the Location of there land or asking for a reservation for land. There is a lot of good information here if your looking into your Indian ancestors. This information is in the form of letters and of testimony’s
Note. This information comes from Public Lands ( 1834-1835 ) Vol.,7., pages 1-139, 627-652, 659-665. This information is housed at the Library of Congress.
------------------------------------
IN RELATION TO THE LOCATION OF RESERVATIONS UNDER THE CHOCTAW TREATY OF THE SEPT. 27, 1830.
DEPARTMENT OF WAR, Office Indian Affairs, February 3, 1834.
SIR: Juba B. Hancock has transmitted to this office papers to establish his claim to reservations for himself and two children, under the 14th article of the treaty of September 21, 1830. He states that he is a white man, married to a Choctaw woman, the mother of these children. That his son, William Mitchell, was twelve years old on the 1st day of September, 1830, and his daughter, Mary Melinda, was ten years old on the 14th February, 1830. That his name and theirs were registered by Col. Ward, in August, 1831, but the leaf on which they were registered was lost. This statement is supported by the affidavit of Giles Thompson and David Fulsom, and P. P. Pitchlynn, certifying that the claimant was, for many years prior to the treaty a citizen, and entitled to all the privileges of a citizen. You are requested to inquire of Col. Ward whether these circumstances are truly stated, and if they are, you will locate a section for the father, and a half section for each of the children, and apprise the department of the result.
Very respectfully, &c., E. HERRING.
P. S. There is a third child, Caroline Delia, who is now about ten years of age, and of course entitled.
----------------------------
WASHINGTON City, February 10, 1834.
SIR Under the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek, George W. Harkins was entitled to two sections of land, the one to include his improvement, and the other to be a floating claim. A considerable time before the treaty Mr. Harkins had built and paid for a house on section 31 in township 16, range 1 east; and at that time said George W. Harkins had no other improvement in the nation, but resided with his mother.
But as he did not reside on that section at the time of making the treaty, it was denied to him, and given to Vaughn Brashears, who was also entitled under the treaty to his own improvement, which was situated on the section next adjoining, on the south, to wit: section 6 in township 15, range 1 east, to which latter section the said Brashears had a rightful and proper claim.
As the treaty provides that, in all cases of doubt, the construction shall be in favor of the Indian claims, it is thought that as Harking had no other residence or improvement of his own, that this must be the land to which, under the true meaning of the treaty, he is entitled. It is therefore respectfully asked that a patent shall not issue to said Brashears, but that the case may be considered, and the title to said section 31. awarded to George W. Harkins.
I have the honor to bet your obedient servant, GREENWOOD LEFLORE.
-----------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON CITY, February 19, 1834.
SIR: I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 18th instant, inquiring what knowledge, if any, Mr. Laud or myself has of the validity of the claim of John T. Harlan for reservation of land for himself and family, as members of the Choctaw tribe of Indians; and, in reply, I have to state for the information of your department, that at the date of the treaty of 1830, John T. Harlan was not a resident of the Choctaw country, having previously been ordered out of the nation by the United States agent., Col. William Ward, for the crime of murder; nor was he or his family ever recognized as members of the Choctaw nation. He is a white man, and his wife a Cherokee, from which nation he ran away for a crime similar to that committed in the Choctaw country.
I have therefore no hesitation in saying that his claim is altogether unjust, fraudulent, and unworthy of your consideration.
I am, respectfully, your obedient servant, GREENWOOD LEFLORE.
----------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF WAR, Office of Indian Affairs, December 17, 1833.
SIR: In answer to your letter of the 19th ult., to the Secretary of War, relative to the mode of locating the reservations for Delila and her children, Peggy Trahern and her children, and the widows of Pushmitaha and Puck-tshe-nubbee and their children, I am instructed to say that you will locate in one body those sections intended for Delila and her children; and in one other body those for Peggy Trahern and her children; and in. like manner with the other two widows. And in selecting the land for them, you will take neither the best nor the worst, but that which is of good average quality, fit for cultivation and improvement.
Very respectfully, ELBERT HERRING.
------------------------------------------
DUMFRIES, September 20, 1833.
SIR: Your attentive acknowledgment of my letter, enclosing Mushulatubbee’s conveyance to D. W. Wright, I duly received, but have deferred replying until now. In order to a fair and equitable adjustment of the numerous contracts for floating claims and reserves, I will submit a few facts analagous of the whole; and from which I hope the War Department will be able, in part, to reach the cunning land speculator in his strongest hold.
In a majority of cases, a small advance was made by the citizen to the Indian for his possession, say from one-fourth to one-tenth the amount on as the price, the balance Agreed to be paid when the President ratified the sale. Promissory notes were given to the Indians, to be paid when the title became perfect. A bona fide deed an and warranty, with acknowledgment of the receipt of the whole purchase money, is given by the Indian who emigrates forthwith to Arkansas. The purchaser, as soon as he can, sells the land to an emigrant settler, and he, perhaps, to some one else. Indeed, it may go through half a dozen transfers before the ratification; and, consequently, before the money is due to the Indian, the first purchaser, by a few successful operations, realizes a fortune, leaving the Indian to seek him where he can find him, and the last purchaser in danger of losing his land and improvements, honestly obtained and paid for.
Mushulatubbee’s two sons (full blooded Indians), James and Hiram King, were allowed a section each at the treaty (at their father’s old place), on the great military road leading to Lake Pontchartrain, a most valuable location. Messrs. Wright, Hatch, and Hand, of Columbus, had formed a sort of combination or connexion to speculate in claims. Old Mushulatubbee was with them a great bobba shela (a friend ), and, together with the two floating sections, they got Mushulatubbee’s Sons two sections before mentioned, for which they gave three young negroes. Pending this transaction, Messrs. Grabel, Grant, and Lincecum, of Columbus, informed me that squire Maglue, or Maclue, who knew that the said negroes were free, had colleagued with a lawyer Tucker, of Columbus, to extort money out of Colonel Townshend, who brought the negroes from Tennessee or Kentucky, and sold them to the said company. Wright, Hatch, and Hand. Of the six negroes sold Mushulatubbee, five of them were free the sixth purchased from Grabel Lincecum. The said free negroes were the offspring of a free woman that accompanied a family from near Hagerstown, Maryland, to Kentucky, many years ago.
But to return to Tucker and Maclue: they went to Towushend, and threatened to make the discovery unless he would give them five hundred dollars. He agreed to do it, and gave his note accordingly; but when it became due he refused to pay it, on the ground of bribery and extortion. They sued him in the court at Columbus; the trial came on before Judge Nichols, and, perhaps, few cases have occurred where the enormity of crime was received with less concern. It was said that Wright & Co. took back those negroes, and put others in their places; but not believed., James King having been hurried off with them to Arkansas long before the emigration commenced.
Mr. Lincecum, also Peter Pitchlynn, told me it was only a sham; that the negroes (excepting one of them, drowned in the river Poteau,) were eighteen miles from Fort Smith. Wright, a few days after the treaty, took a deed for Robert Nail’s claim for a half section. Robert was then about eighteen years old. It was to be paid for as soon as the sale was ratified by the President. Robert and his mother had great confidence in Wright, and of course would sign any paper he required of him. Supposing, therefore, as soon as the emigration commenced, that he could get his money, he applied for it, and was told he would not pay him, but would place the money in the hands of Major Pitchlynn. He continued to battle Robert with this as long as I remained in the nation.
Wright & Co. had taken, I understand, a conveyance bond from the old interpreter, Middleton Mackay, for his grant from Congress, given in lieu of his reserve, which was not valuable. Mackay told me he had never received anything from them, and merely promised to give them the refusal. Mackay and his wife died of cholera on. the road between Memphis and Little Rock. I have no doubt some one has set up a claim for Mackay’s donation, and I am as certainly sure he never sold it.
The claim of Captain Billy Hays (a Choctaw) came directly under my notice: Nored and McNutt agreed to give him seven hundred dollars, viz., three hundred dollars on the first September, 1831, and four hundred more first January, 1832. McNutt left for Arkansas with the emigrants; Nored remained, and paid Hays two hundred and seventy-six dollars. The agreement was left in my hands, and I gave it to Major Armstrong, who told me he had left it with Colonel Ward at the old agency. Nored refuses most positively to pay the balance, on the ground that Captain Hays was not allowed as much land as he expected. Nored lives on the place, eighteen miles N. E. of Doak’s stand. I hope he will be made to pay to Billy Hays heirs every cent before any title is given him. The land is richly worth the money: a good house on it, a large enclosure, and four hundred and eighty acres.
Col. James McDonald, an educated Choctaw, was provided for in the treaty, and subsequently drowned himself in Pearl river, near Jackson. Robert Jones, a relative of McDonald, told me that Judge Caldwell, of Clinton, had obtained from McDonald’s mother) (his rightful heir, ) the claim for a paltry, or, at least, a consideration far short of its value.
In reference to the latter part of your letter, I ought only to say, “ the account of my injuries and wrongs are rather long, and the particulars tedious.” But, in using this apology, I do not abandon the task of recounting, to those who feel interested for me, the whole subject-matter thereof; and by which, although not justifiable in any law, yet decidedly so by those who have heard and believed my statement of the transaction. It is a matter of astonishment to myself and friends how I have encountered so many difficulties; and what has been the cause of it ? My own impression is, that it has ever been my misfortune to meet with oppression, and to resist to a degree beyond the necessity of the case.
During my service in the army and elsewhere for the government I have disbursed near an hundred thousand dollars. I was among the first commissaries appointed after establishment of the commissarait I have letters in the archives of the War Department showing my promptitude as a volunteer in the time of the war, and of my general character for capacity and integrity through life. I can procure ample testimonials from an extensive acquaintance in the different parts of the country I have resided. I defy any one to bring a charge of fraud or peculation against me in more than twelve years public service. My misfortunes are, therefore, rightfully ascribed to an irresistible impulse of passion, almost as fatal to my peace and happiness as the worst of offenses. I did think I should never offend again when that best of men, Major Eaton, listened to my wrongs, and gave me employment; I did use and every precaution to avoid collision with any person. But I am growing tedious, and will only add as I am rather under the ban, that I hope you will look on my case with a more favorable view hereafter than the first impressions induced you to do; and that I may not despair, at some future period, of being restored to the confidence of al1 my friends.
I am sir, very respectfully, your most obedient servant, WM. S. COLQUHOUN.
As you may have noticed these letters can get very long, and for this reason, I will only give parts of the letters or the names within them. I will however give the page number, so if you wish to have a copy of the letter, it can be found and copied. Those whishing to have a copy of a letter, or some information on a name, please give the ( Title of this page) and the name and page No., for without them I may not be able to help you. My address can be found in my profile.
---------------------------------------------
NEAR JONES’ BLUFF, Sumpter County, Alabama, September 29, 1833.
Jacob Daniel, has been a citizen, for twelve years and more, he served three years and five months as a regular soldier in the United States army, and most of the time in active service in the last war. He entered his name in the books, wishing to become a citizen of the United States. At the time he entered his name and wife and his four children who were under ten yeas. He also had a first son who was away at the Choctaw academy, in Kentucky, and forgot to put his name down. Mr. Daniel is now asking the Secretary of War, if his son is entitled to a section of land, even though he was not under his roof at the time the names were entered. Mr. Daniel is also asking the Secretary to look and see if his brother-in-law, who was a brother soldier, who served with him in the last war is on the books. Jacob Daniel, asked that all letters be directed to him at; Daniel’s prairie, Green county, Alabama.
Page No. 16.
--------------------------------------------------
Names of person claiming sections of land.
1. Susan or Susannah Graham-p. 26, 30, 32, 33, 34, 36, 89, 133, 135.
2. John Hacha or Hachar?-p. 27.
3. William Prine-p. 27.
4. Stacy Collins-p. 27.
5. Levi Pickins-p. 28.
6. Captain Joseph Pickins-p. 28.
7. David W. Wall-p. 31, 32.
8. Thomas Wall-p. 31.
9. Amelia Trahern-p. 32.
10. Letha Trahern-p.35.
11. Peggy Trahern, second wife of Wesley Trahern-p.32.
12. James L. McDonald-p. 34.
13. Robert Jones-p.34.
14. Ann V. L. L. McEllyn or Ann L. Lewllyn, mother of Susan Graham-p. 33,34.
15. William Ott-p. 36.
16. Wesley Trahern, children, Anelia, Letha, Washington, First wife Delilah, Second wife Agnes now wife of James Foster. It was later stated that Peggy was not a wife?-p. 36.
17. Charles Frazier, Nelly Dyer, Rachel Davis, James Perry, Nancy Moore, Moses Perry, Molly Frazier, Moontubbi, Tishepia and Hala-p. 628, 632.
18. John T. Hammond-p. 632, 661.
19. John B. Hancock-p. 633.
20. Matthew Seabronch-p. 633.
21. Benjamin Bullock-p. 633.
22. Ho-pi-es-ka-re-ne, or “Little Leader.”-p. 633.
23. John Walker-p. 634.
24. Allen Jenkins-p. 637.
25. Lemuel George-p. 638.
26. Robert Turnbull-p. 639.
27. John T. Hammond-p. 639.
28. Moontubbee-p. 639.
29. Tis-ho-pia, -p. 639.
30. Rachel Davis-p. 639.
31. El-a-no-au-chi, -p. 639.
32. Och-in-chi-homa, -p. 639.
33. Tick-bafa-tubbee, -p. 639.
34. James Oxberry-p. 641.
35. Jacob Thompson-p. 644, 645, 659, 660.
36. John R. Contee-p. 645, 659, 660.
37. Thomas Stewart, mother Susan Graham-p. 646.
38. Benoni Taylor-p. 647.
39. Robert Hancock-p. 647.
40. Reuben H. Grant-p. 647.
41. Alexander Brashears-p. 648.
42. Allen Stanton-p. 648.
43. David W. Wall-p. 648.
44. Betsey Buckles-p. 648.
45. Imponah aka Billy-p. 649.
46. Cunneubee-p. 649.
47. Lucy McGilbry-p. 650.
48. John McGilbry-p. 651.
49. Thomas D. Wooldridge-p. 651.
50. Jesse Beams-p. 652.
51. Jesse A. Ivery-p. 652.
52. John T. Harlan-p. 662.
53. Edmond Jenkins-p. 638.
Note. To author more information in the Index.
Friday, December 18, 2009
Bounty Land Of Virginia 1834.
Land warrants granted by the State of Virginia to certain officers and soldiers in her navy, State and Continental line.
Now I won’t bother you with how much land he got as it is long gone, and the locality wasn’t stated anyways. But what is important is the names stated within the document, it gives the names of his heirs known at the time the document was written.
------------------------------------------
In whose name the scrip is prepared to be issued.
*William Roberts, Ensign of the State line.
Heirs: Ann Brown, Lucinda Brown, Henrietta Brown, Charles Gideon Brown, Sarah W. Brown, heirs of William Brown. One of the heirs of Elizabeth Brown, a sister of William Roberts.
*William Roberts had two Land warrants here are the heirs from the second Land warrant.
Heirs: James T. Brown, Catharine R. Crigler, EIiz. hughes, three of the children of Elizabeth Brown, sister of William Roberts.
------------------------------------------------
Thomas Bonwell, Master of the navy.
Heirs: Betsey Bull, Sally Bonwell, Betsey Wise, Clement, Harriet, Tabitha, Sally and Leah BonweIl, Betsey East, James, Robert and Elijah Bonwell, part of the heirs of Thomas Bonwell.
--------------------------------------------------
Stephen Bloxom, Seaman, navy.
Heirs: Betsey Bloxom, Rosey Bloxom and Rachel Bloxom.
--------------------------------------------------
James Upshaw, Captain of the State line.
Heirs: Jas. Upshaw, Mariah Hawkins, Lewis G. Upshaw, Harriet Coekrill, Eliza T. Harwood, Martha F. Edwards, Sarah M. Mason, T. B. Upshaw, Arthur M. M. Upshaw, Heirs James Upshaw.
--------------------------------------------------
Joseph Payne, Lieutenant of the Continental line.
Heirs: G. V. C. Payne, Richard Payne, Cornelius Payne, Jos. Payne, Eliz. Armstrong, Lavinia Howell, Robert Payne, Nancy Johnson, Mahala D. P. Williams, Marcos Williams, Robert P. Williams, Otho S. Williams and Mary E. Williams, heirs at law of Joseph Payne.
-----------------------------------------------
Ths. Hamilton, Captain of the State line.
Heirs: Hans Roulston, donee of William Hamilton, devisee of Hans Hamilton, the legal representative of Ths. Hamilton.
Note, meaning of donee; "A donee beneficiary of a contract is a third-party to whom the promised beneficial performance comes without cost as a donation or gift. . . [W]here the contract rights of a donee beneficiary have not yet vested and where the beneficiary has not detrimentally relied upon a promise contained in the contract, [the] Court will not subvert the intent of the contracting parties when it is clear that they desired to alter the terms of the contract."
Note , meaning of Devisee, somebody bequeathed property: somebody to whom property has been bequeathed in a will.
----------------------------------------------------
Ambrose Lewis, Sailor, plus Rodham Kenner.
Heirs: Phebe Dillon, Cinthia Lewis, Sal1y, Ely and Nancy Chow, heirs of Thomas Brown, the assignee of A. Lewis and R. Kenner.
-------------------------------------------------------
Nathaniel Wilkins, Lieurenant of the Continental line.
Heirs. George F. Wilkins and the other heirs, Cath. Wilkins, sister, and one of the heirs, Margaret S. Wilkins, one of the children of Robert Wilkins, Susan Ann Kendall and Thos. Kendall, Thomas K., Samuel L. and Eliz. A. Floyd, only children, &c., &c.
Now I won’t bother you with how much land he got as it is long gone, and the locality wasn’t stated anyways. But what is important is the names stated within the document, it gives the names of his heirs known at the time the document was written.
------------------------------------------
In whose name the scrip is prepared to be issued.
*William Roberts, Ensign of the State line.
Heirs: Ann Brown, Lucinda Brown, Henrietta Brown, Charles Gideon Brown, Sarah W. Brown, heirs of William Brown. One of the heirs of Elizabeth Brown, a sister of William Roberts.
*William Roberts had two Land warrants here are the heirs from the second Land warrant.
Heirs: James T. Brown, Catharine R. Crigler, EIiz. hughes, three of the children of Elizabeth Brown, sister of William Roberts.
------------------------------------------------
Thomas Bonwell, Master of the navy.
Heirs: Betsey Bull, Sally Bonwell, Betsey Wise, Clement, Harriet, Tabitha, Sally and Leah BonweIl, Betsey East, James, Robert and Elijah Bonwell, part of the heirs of Thomas Bonwell.
--------------------------------------------------
Stephen Bloxom, Seaman, navy.
Heirs: Betsey Bloxom, Rosey Bloxom and Rachel Bloxom.
--------------------------------------------------
James Upshaw, Captain of the State line.
Heirs: Jas. Upshaw, Mariah Hawkins, Lewis G. Upshaw, Harriet Coekrill, Eliza T. Harwood, Martha F. Edwards, Sarah M. Mason, T. B. Upshaw, Arthur M. M. Upshaw, Heirs James Upshaw.
--------------------------------------------------
Joseph Payne, Lieutenant of the Continental line.
Heirs: G. V. C. Payne, Richard Payne, Cornelius Payne, Jos. Payne, Eliz. Armstrong, Lavinia Howell, Robert Payne, Nancy Johnson, Mahala D. P. Williams, Marcos Williams, Robert P. Williams, Otho S. Williams and Mary E. Williams, heirs at law of Joseph Payne.
-----------------------------------------------
Ths. Hamilton, Captain of the State line.
Heirs: Hans Roulston, donee of William Hamilton, devisee of Hans Hamilton, the legal representative of Ths. Hamilton.
Note, meaning of donee; "A donee beneficiary of a contract is a third-party to whom the promised beneficial performance comes without cost as a donation or gift. . . [W]here the contract rights of a donee beneficiary have not yet vested and where the beneficiary has not detrimentally relied upon a promise contained in the contract, [the] Court will not subvert the intent of the contracting parties when it is clear that they desired to alter the terms of the contract."
Note , meaning of Devisee, somebody bequeathed property: somebody to whom property has been bequeathed in a will.
----------------------------------------------------
Ambrose Lewis, Sailor, plus Rodham Kenner.
Heirs: Phebe Dillon, Cinthia Lewis, Sal1y, Ely and Nancy Chow, heirs of Thomas Brown, the assignee of A. Lewis and R. Kenner.
-------------------------------------------------------
Nathaniel Wilkins, Lieurenant of the Continental line.
Heirs. George F. Wilkins and the other heirs, Cath. Wilkins, sister, and one of the heirs, Margaret S. Wilkins, one of the children of Robert Wilkins, Susan Ann Kendall and Thos. Kendall, Thomas K., Samuel L. and Eliz. A. Floyd, only children, &c., &c.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Gen. Andrew Jackson Smith & Gen. Abraham Buford
I got interested in these two gentlemen when I received a mail from Tom parson a park ranger of the Shiloh National Military Park, thanking me for having some of the information on one of the gentlemen he was looking into, which I will talk about at the end of this page. I found the information interesting and I hope you well too.
-----------------------
GENERAL ANDREW JACKSON SMITH.
GENERAL ANDREW JACKSON SMITH, has recently come prominently before the public as commander of the Red River Expedition, was born in Pennsylvania, and graduated at West Point in 1838, in the same class with BEAUREGARD and HARDEE, of the rebel army, and Generals BARRY, M'D0WELL, and other officers in the Federal service. For seven years he was Second Lieutenant in the First Dragoons, with whom he served during most of that time in the Territories.
In 1847 he was made Captain, and served against the Indians
in South Oregon. In 1861 he was appointed Colonel of the Second California Cavalry, and in March, 1862, was made Brigadier-General of Volunteers. In October of that year he was placed at the head of the First Division of General GRANGER'S army in Kentucky; but subsequently was attached to General GRANT'S army, as commander of the Tenth Division of the Thirteenth Corps. General SMITH led the right .division in the attack on Vicksburg in December of that year, and afterward commanded the Second Division of the Thirteenth Corps at the battle and capture of Fort Hindman, Arkansas Post, in January, 1863.
After the return of this part of the army to the vicinity of Vicksburg, General SMITH was placed in command of the district of Corinth, from which post he was removed to take charge of the post of Columbus, Kentucky, in order to keep open the communications along the Mississippi River with General GRANT'S command, near the rebel strong-hold. Having cleared that part of Kentucky of guerrillas, General SMITH was, on January 24, 1864, relieved of his post command, and ordered to lead the Third Division of the Sixteenth Corps in the Sherman expedition through Central Mississippi. After the return of the forces under General SHERMAN to the Mississippi River, General SMITH was placed in command of the Red River Expedition, which he has so far led to victory.
General Abraham Buford.
FIGHT AT CULPEPPER.
The details of the advance, the fight, and the victory of General Pleasanton's cavalry—under Generals Buford, Kilpatrick, and Gregg—at Culpepper, on Sunday, show that it was not only a brilliant but an important affair, and may probably be regarded as the advance movement of General Meade's army. The cavalry crossed the Rappahannock and reached the banks of the Rapidan; came into collision with Stuart's cavalry and the light artillery of the enemy, and, after a series of skirmishes, drove them from point to point until they reached Culpepper, through which town they charged, driving the rebels before them, and capturing over one hundred prisoners and three guns, two 12-pounders and one 6-pounder. A large quantity of ordnance stores were found in the railroad depot at Culpepper, the guns being of English make, with sabre bayonets attached. General Buford's division followed up the enemy beyond Cedar Mountain, and encamped on the banks of the Rapidan.
Abraham Buford. Ky. Ky. Cadet Military Academy, 1st. July 1837 (51) out of class; bvt 2nd. Lieutenant 1 Dragoons 1 July 1841;" 2nd. Lieutenant 12 Apr 1842; 1st. Lieutenant 6 Dec 1846; Captain 15 July 1853; bvt Captain 23 Feb 1847 for gallant and meritorious conduct in the battle of Buena Vista Mex; resigned 22 Oct 1854; Brig General C S A war 1861 to 1865; died 9 June 1884.
Birth: Jan. 18, 1820
Death: Jun. 9, 1884
Civil War Confederate Brigadier General. Graduated West Point in 1841. Veteran of the Mexican War. Appointed Brigadier General on September 2, 1862. General Buford took part in the Vicksburg campaign, and later assigned to General Nathan Beford Forrest Calvary corps until Forrest's surrender at Selma in April 1865. He served a term in the Kentucky legislature after the war.
-----------------------------
As I stated earlier Mr. Parson give me a thank you for my site and along with his thanks he stated what he was looking into. I found it interesting and got to looking around and the end result is this page, so it is my turn to say; “Thanks Tom.”
*********************
Dennis.
Thanks on an excellent site. I was in search of officers in the 1st U.S. Dragoons prior to the Civil War. I found everything I was looking for, on your site, Well done.
I am writing an account of the Campaign and Battle of Tupelo, Mississippi, July, 1864. The Federal commander was Major General Andrew J. Smith, a former officer in the 1st Dragoons who rose from 2nd Lieutenant to Captain in the Dragoons and then to Major in the 1st Cavalry. I was interested in finding which officers, Union and Confederate, who served with Smith in the pre war army. Of particular interest was Abraham Buford who later joined the Confederate army and commanded a division at the Battle of Tupelo. The 1st Dragoons was a virtual "Who's Who" of Civil War commanders.
Tom Parson Park Ranger.
Corinth Civil War Interpretive Center.
Shiloh National Military Park.
-----------------------
GENERAL ANDREW JACKSON SMITH.GENERAL ANDREW JACKSON SMITH, has recently come prominently before the public as commander of the Red River Expedition, was born in Pennsylvania, and graduated at West Point in 1838, in the same class with BEAUREGARD and HARDEE, of the rebel army, and Generals BARRY, M'D0WELL, and other officers in the Federal service. For seven years he was Second Lieutenant in the First Dragoons, with whom he served during most of that time in the Territories.
In 1847 he was made Captain, and served against the Indians
in South Oregon. In 1861 he was appointed Colonel of the Second California Cavalry, and in March, 1862, was made Brigadier-General of Volunteers. In October of that year he was placed at the head of the First Division of General GRANGER'S army in Kentucky; but subsequently was attached to General GRANT'S army, as commander of the Tenth Division of the Thirteenth Corps. General SMITH led the right .division in the attack on Vicksburg in December of that year, and afterward commanded the Second Division of the Thirteenth Corps at the battle and capture of Fort Hindman, Arkansas Post, in January, 1863.After the return of this part of the army to the vicinity of Vicksburg, General SMITH was placed in command of the district of Corinth, from which post he was removed to take charge of the post of Columbus, Kentucky, in order to keep open the communications along the Mississippi River with General GRANT'S command, near the rebel strong-hold. Having cleared that part of Kentucky of guerrillas, General SMITH was, on January 24, 1864, relieved of his post command, and ordered to lead the Third Division of the Sixteenth Corps in the Sherman expedition through Central Mississippi. After the return of the forces under General SHERMAN to the Mississippi River, General SMITH was placed in command of the Red River Expedition, which he has so far led to victory.
General Abraham Buford.FIGHT AT CULPEPPER.
The details of the advance, the fight, and the victory of General Pleasanton's cavalry—under Generals Buford, Kilpatrick, and Gregg—at Culpepper, on Sunday, show that it was not only a brilliant but an important affair, and may probably be regarded as the advance movement of General Meade's army. The cavalry crossed the Rappahannock and reached the banks of the Rapidan; came into collision with Stuart's cavalry and the light artillery of the enemy, and, after a series of skirmishes, drove them from point to point until they reached Culpepper, through which town they charged, driving the rebels before them, and capturing over one hundred prisoners and three guns, two 12-pounders and one 6-pounder. A large quantity of ordnance stores were found in the railroad depot at Culpepper, the guns being of English make, with sabre bayonets attached. General Buford's division followed up the enemy beyond Cedar Mountain, and encamped on the banks of the Rapidan.
Abraham Buford. Ky. Ky. Cadet Military Academy, 1st. July 1837 (51) out of class; bvt 2nd. Lieutenant 1 Dragoons 1 July 1841;" 2nd. Lieutenant 12 Apr 1842; 1st. Lieutenant 6 Dec 1846; Captain 15 July 1853; bvt Captain 23 Feb 1847 for gallant and meritorious conduct in the battle of Buena Vista Mex; resigned 22 Oct 1854; Brig General C S A war 1861 to 1865; died 9 June 1884.
Birth: Jan. 18, 1820
Death: Jun. 9, 1884
Civil War Confederate Brigadier General. Graduated West Point in 1841. Veteran of the Mexican War. Appointed Brigadier General on September 2, 1862. General Buford took part in the Vicksburg campaign, and later assigned to General Nathan Beford Forrest Calvary corps until Forrest's surrender at Selma in April 1865. He served a term in the Kentucky legislature after the war.
-----------------------------
As I stated earlier Mr. Parson give me a thank you for my site and along with his thanks he stated what he was looking into. I found it interesting and got to looking around and the end result is this page, so it is my turn to say; “Thanks Tom.”
*********************
Dennis.
Thanks on an excellent site. I was in search of officers in the 1st U.S. Dragoons prior to the Civil War. I found everything I was looking for, on your site, Well done.
I am writing an account of the Campaign and Battle of Tupelo, Mississippi, July, 1864. The Federal commander was Major General Andrew J. Smith, a former officer in the 1st Dragoons who rose from 2nd Lieutenant to Captain in the Dragoons and then to Major in the 1st Cavalry. I was interested in finding which officers, Union and Confederate, who served with Smith in the pre war army. Of particular interest was Abraham Buford who later joined the Confederate army and commanded a division at the Battle of Tupelo. The 1st Dragoons was a virtual "Who's Who" of Civil War commanders.
Tom Parson Park Ranger.
Corinth Civil War Interpretive Center.
Shiloh National Military Park.
William Conner Family Indiana 1828.
PRE-EMPTION RIGHT TO WILLIAM CONNER, THE HUSBAND OF AN INDIAN WOMAN OF THE DELAWARE TRIBE IN INDIANA.
The Committee on the Judiciary have taken into consideration the bill referred to them, “granting to William Conner the right of pre-emption to 648 acres of land ;“ and have examined the facts of the case so far as they are disclosed by the documents which accompany the same. The object of the bill is to vest in. William Conner a tract of laud in the State of Indiana, on his paying’ to the receiver of public moneys the sum of $810, in four equal annual installments, the same to be applied, (through the agent of the Delaware tribe of Indians,) to satisfy the claims on said land of Mekinges, (an Indian woman, wife of said William Conner,) and of Jack Conner, Nancy Conner, Harry Conner, James Conner, and William Conner, the children of the said William Conner; the said tract of land having, by an act of Congress of 7th May, 1822, been granted to said William Conner and wife, with remainder over to the said children.
The grounds on which this application rests are briefly these: It appears that in consequence of some services rendered by said William Conner, in negotiating and carrying into effect the treaty with the Delaware tribe of Indians, made at St. Mary’s, in October, 1818, (the proof of which was furnished by the certificates of Jonathan Jennings and Lewis Cass,) Congress passed the act of the 7th May, 1822, entitled “An act granting a tract of land to William Conner and wife, and to their children,” by which it is enacted, “that William Conner be, and he is hereby, authorized and empowered to enter, -with the register of the land office at Brookville, without payment, six hundred and forty acres of land, to include his improvements, at a place called the Delaware Towns, in the State of Indiana, which shall be bounded by sectional and divisional lines ; and a patent shall issue for the same to the said William Conner and his wife, (an Indian woman of the Delaware tribe,) for and during the natural lives of the said William Conner and wife, jointly, and to the-survivor of them during the natural life of such survivor, and to their children and legal representatives of any deceased child or children, as tenants in common, the representatives of any deceased child, taking, together, such portion of the land as such child would have been entitled to if he or she had survived the said William Conner and his said wife, and the said land to be vested in the said children and their lawful heirs, in fee simple.”
It appears from the certificate of Robert Hanna, jun., register of the land office at Brookville, that Willlam Conner did, on the 31st August, 1822, regularly enter the said land, under the aforesaid act, in behalf of himself his wife, and children, and has, it is believed, continued in possession of it to the present time, without having taken out a patent for the same.
It further appears that on the removal of the Delaware tribe of Indians to the west of the Mississippi, the wife and children of said Conner accompanied them, leaving him in possession of said laud. Under these circumstances the said William Conner now presents his petition, setting forth that the land can be of no value to the other parties to whom it was granted by the act of 7th May, 1822, inasmuch as they have all left the country, and that in consequence of the limitations contained in said act, it is of littk value to him. He therefore prays that the land may be vested in. him, and by the bill referred to this committee it is proposed to do so, he paying the usual government price for the same, to be distributed among the other parties having an interest therein.
In support of this claim, a petition purporting to be signed by the wife and children of said Conner, and by certain persons calling themselves chiefs of the Delaware tribe, is produced, and several reasons are urged in the petition of Conner himself; to which the Senate is respectfully referred. From the whole view of the case, it appears to the committee that, however just and reasonable the prayer of the petitioner may appear to be, it would not be proper for Congress now to pass an act repealing the act of 1822, and thus attempting to divest the wife and children of William Conner of rights which it was the object of that act to vest in them, more especially as the children of said Conner are still minors, and cannot therefore lawfully give their consent to such an act. If a case can be made out to the satisfaction of any court exercising chancery jurisdiction, showing that it will be for the advantage of miners that an interest held by them in land should be converted into other property, a sale might be ordered, and in such a case proper care would be taken by the court making such order, to protect the rights and interests of the minors; but the committee apprehend that Congress possesses no power to divest such persons of their vested interests, nor do they think that it would be desirable for them to undertake to exercise such power, if they possessed it. The committee are therefore of opinion that the bill “granting to William Conner the right of pre-emption to six hundred and forty-eight acres of laud,” and repealing the act of 7th May, 1822, granting the same tract of land to William Conner and wife, and to their children,” ought not to pass.
A BILL.
JANUARY 29, 1828.
Granting to William Conner the right of preemption to six hundred and forty-eight acres of Land.
Be it enacted, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United Sates of America, in Congress as, That William Conner be, and he is hereby, authorized and empow4 ered to enter with the Register of the Land Office at Indianapolis, in the State of Indiana, six hundred and forty-eight acres of land, to include his improvements, at a place called the Delaware Towns, in the said State of Indianá3 which shall be bounded by sectional and divisional lines;, and a patent shall issue for the same to. the said William Conner, upon his paying into the Receiver’s Office of Public Money & for Lands at Indianapolis, the sum of eight hundred and ten dollars, in four equal payments, as follows: The first on the fourth day of July next; and the second, third, and fourth, annually thereafter.
Sec. 2. And he it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the Receiver of Public Moneys at Indianapolis, so soon as the said William Conner shall have paid the said sum of eight hundred and ten dollars, to give him a final receipt for payment, as in other sales of the public lands, and a receipt in like manner for either of the payments, and report the same to the Commissioner of the General Land Office.
Sec. 3. And he it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the Commissioner of the General Land Office, as the paymeats are made, to inform the President of the United States. who is hereby authorized to cause the money to be paid by the Agent or SubAgent of the Delaware Tribe of Indians, to Mekings an Indian woman of the said tribe of Indians, wife of the said William Conner, and to their children, Jack Conner, Nancy Conner, Harry Conner, James Conner, and William Conner, in such proportions, and under such regulations, from time to time, as the President may direct.
Sec. 4. And be it further encictec4 That the act entitled “An act granting a tract of land to William Conner and wife, and to their children,” approved 7th May, 1 8Z2, be, and the
same is, hereby repealed.
William Conner family.
William Conner--father, Richard CONNOR--mother, Margaret BEYER
William Conner born 10 Dec 1777, Schoenbrunn, Tuscarawas, Ohio.
Died 28 Aug 1855, Indiana.
First wife-Mekinges ANDERSON,
Mekinges-father--William ANDERSON--mother Mr. William Anderson.
Married, 1801 Indian Village, Delaware, Ripley, Indiana.
Children: Harry Hamilton CONNER, William CONNER, John CONNER, James CONNER, Eliza CONNER Nancy CONNER.
Second wife. Elizabeth CHAPMAN
Married, 30 Nov 1820 Noblesville, Hamilton, Indiana
Father & Mother unknown.
Children: James CONNER, Elisha Harrington CONNER, Benjamin Franklin CONNER, Lavina (Winship) CONNER, Margaret Ellen (Crans) CONNER, George Franklin CONNER, John Fayette CONNER, Richard James CONNER, William Henry CONNER,
Catherine Russell CONNER, Alexander Hamilton CONNER.
The Committee on the Judiciary have taken into consideration the bill referred to them, “granting to William Conner the right of pre-emption to 648 acres of land ;“ and have examined the facts of the case so far as they are disclosed by the documents which accompany the same. The object of the bill is to vest in. William Conner a tract of laud in the State of Indiana, on his paying’ to the receiver of public moneys the sum of $810, in four equal annual installments, the same to be applied, (through the agent of the Delaware tribe of Indians,) to satisfy the claims on said land of Mekinges, (an Indian woman, wife of said William Conner,) and of Jack Conner, Nancy Conner, Harry Conner, James Conner, and William Conner, the children of the said William Conner; the said tract of land having, by an act of Congress of 7th May, 1822, been granted to said William Conner and wife, with remainder over to the said children.
The grounds on which this application rests are briefly these: It appears that in consequence of some services rendered by said William Conner, in negotiating and carrying into effect the treaty with the Delaware tribe of Indians, made at St. Mary’s, in October, 1818, (the proof of which was furnished by the certificates of Jonathan Jennings and Lewis Cass,) Congress passed the act of the 7th May, 1822, entitled “An act granting a tract of land to William Conner and wife, and to their children,” by which it is enacted, “that William Conner be, and he is hereby, authorized and empowered to enter, -with the register of the land office at Brookville, without payment, six hundred and forty acres of land, to include his improvements, at a place called the Delaware Towns, in the State of Indiana, which shall be bounded by sectional and divisional lines ; and a patent shall issue for the same to the said William Conner and his wife, (an Indian woman of the Delaware tribe,) for and during the natural lives of the said William Conner and wife, jointly, and to the-survivor of them during the natural life of such survivor, and to their children and legal representatives of any deceased child or children, as tenants in common, the representatives of any deceased child, taking, together, such portion of the land as such child would have been entitled to if he or she had survived the said William Conner and his said wife, and the said land to be vested in the said children and their lawful heirs, in fee simple.”
It appears from the certificate of Robert Hanna, jun., register of the land office at Brookville, that Willlam Conner did, on the 31st August, 1822, regularly enter the said land, under the aforesaid act, in behalf of himself his wife, and children, and has, it is believed, continued in possession of it to the present time, without having taken out a patent for the same.
It further appears that on the removal of the Delaware tribe of Indians to the west of the Mississippi, the wife and children of said Conner accompanied them, leaving him in possession of said laud. Under these circumstances the said William Conner now presents his petition, setting forth that the land can be of no value to the other parties to whom it was granted by the act of 7th May, 1822, inasmuch as they have all left the country, and that in consequence of the limitations contained in said act, it is of littk value to him. He therefore prays that the land may be vested in. him, and by the bill referred to this committee it is proposed to do so, he paying the usual government price for the same, to be distributed among the other parties having an interest therein.
In support of this claim, a petition purporting to be signed by the wife and children of said Conner, and by certain persons calling themselves chiefs of the Delaware tribe, is produced, and several reasons are urged in the petition of Conner himself; to which the Senate is respectfully referred. From the whole view of the case, it appears to the committee that, however just and reasonable the prayer of the petitioner may appear to be, it would not be proper for Congress now to pass an act repealing the act of 1822, and thus attempting to divest the wife and children of William Conner of rights which it was the object of that act to vest in them, more especially as the children of said Conner are still minors, and cannot therefore lawfully give their consent to such an act. If a case can be made out to the satisfaction of any court exercising chancery jurisdiction, showing that it will be for the advantage of miners that an interest held by them in land should be converted into other property, a sale might be ordered, and in such a case proper care would be taken by the court making such order, to protect the rights and interests of the minors; but the committee apprehend that Congress possesses no power to divest such persons of their vested interests, nor do they think that it would be desirable for them to undertake to exercise such power, if they possessed it. The committee are therefore of opinion that the bill “granting to William Conner the right of pre-emption to six hundred and forty-eight acres of laud,” and repealing the act of 7th May, 1822, granting the same tract of land to William Conner and wife, and to their children,” ought not to pass.
A BILL.
JANUARY 29, 1828.
Granting to William Conner the right of preemption to six hundred and forty-eight acres of Land.
Be it enacted, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United Sates of America, in Congress as, That William Conner be, and he is hereby, authorized and empow4 ered to enter with the Register of the Land Office at Indianapolis, in the State of Indiana, six hundred and forty-eight acres of land, to include his improvements, at a place called the Delaware Towns, in the said State of Indianá3 which shall be bounded by sectional and divisional lines;, and a patent shall issue for the same to. the said William Conner, upon his paying into the Receiver’s Office of Public Money & for Lands at Indianapolis, the sum of eight hundred and ten dollars, in four equal payments, as follows: The first on the fourth day of July next; and the second, third, and fourth, annually thereafter.
Sec. 2. And he it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the Receiver of Public Moneys at Indianapolis, so soon as the said William Conner shall have paid the said sum of eight hundred and ten dollars, to give him a final receipt for payment, as in other sales of the public lands, and a receipt in like manner for either of the payments, and report the same to the Commissioner of the General Land Office.
Sec. 3. And he it further enacted, That it shall be the duty of the Commissioner of the General Land Office, as the paymeats are made, to inform the President of the United States. who is hereby authorized to cause the money to be paid by the Agent or SubAgent of the Delaware Tribe of Indians, to Mekings an Indian woman of the said tribe of Indians, wife of the said William Conner, and to their children, Jack Conner, Nancy Conner, Harry Conner, James Conner, and William Conner, in such proportions, and under such regulations, from time to time, as the President may direct.
Sec. 4. And be it further encictec4 That the act entitled “An act granting a tract of land to William Conner and wife, and to their children,” approved 7th May, 1 8Z2, be, and the
same is, hereby repealed.
William Conner family.
William Conner--father, Richard CONNOR--mother, Margaret BEYER
William Conner born 10 Dec 1777, Schoenbrunn, Tuscarawas, Ohio.
Died 28 Aug 1855, Indiana.
First wife-Mekinges ANDERSON,
Mekinges-father--William ANDERSON--mother Mr. William Anderson.
Married, 1801 Indian Village, Delaware, Ripley, Indiana.
Children: Harry Hamilton CONNER, William CONNER, John CONNER, James CONNER, Eliza CONNER Nancy CONNER.
Second wife. Elizabeth CHAPMAN
Married, 30 Nov 1820 Noblesville, Hamilton, Indiana
Father & Mother unknown.
Children: James CONNER, Elisha Harrington CONNER, Benjamin Franklin CONNER, Lavina (Winship) CONNER, Margaret Ellen (Crans) CONNER, George Franklin CONNER, John Fayette CONNER, Richard James CONNER, William Henry CONNER,
Catherine Russell CONNER, Alexander Hamilton CONNER.
Abraham Cutter A Canadian Volunteer.
FRAUD IN THE LOCATION OF A CANADIAN BOUNTY LAND WARRANT.
Mr. JENNINGS, from the Committee on the Public Lands, to whom was referred a resolution of the 19th instant, instructing the Committee on Private Land Claims to inquire into the expediency of allowing Minor Thomas to locate four hundred and eighty acres of land, as the assignee of Abraham Cutter, late a second lieutenant in the corps of Canadian volunteers, reported:
That the said Cutter, who obtained for his services a bounty land warrant, No. 93, for the four hundred and eighty acres of land aforesaid, conveyed the same to James Hair, of Ohio, by a deed bearing date the 9th of October, 1817; that said Hair conveyed the said warrant to Abraham McCollock, of Virginia, by deed bearing date the 29th of June, 1818, and that the warrant aforesaid was again conveyed by deed on. the 22d day of May, 1821, by the said Abraham MeCollock to his sons, Ebenezer McCollock and William McCollock, jr., the latter of whom empowered his brother, Ebenezer, to locate the said warrant, which was accordingly done, and a patent thereon issued to the brothers, as assignees, on the 6th of October, 1823.
It likewise appears, from the documents referred to the committee, that the aforesaid Cutter, upon the allegation that the aforesaid land warrant, No. 93, was unlawfully withheld from him by his agent, obtained a certificate signed by Josiah Meigs, late a Commissioner of the General Land Office, dated the 1’lth of July, 1820, purporting to authorize the said Cutter to locate the aforesaid four hundred and eighty acres of land; that notwithstanding the said Gutter had conveyed his laud warrant for the said four hundred and eighty acres on the 9th of October, 1817, he assigned the certificate thus fraudulently obtained to Minor Thomas on the 16th of July, 1825, who now asks, as the assignee of said Cutter, to locate four hundred and eighty acres of land, by virtue of the certificate aforesaid.
The act of Congress approved March 5, 1816, granting bounties in. land and extra pay to certain Canadian volunteers, authorizes the location of such bounties in land only upon warrants issued by the Secretary for the Department of War. The said Minor Thomas asks to be allowed to locate the four hundred and eighty acres of land on the ground that the register of the local land office advised him that a location of the laud could be made upon the aforesaid certificate.
In the opinion of the committee, the unauthorized acts of its agents cannot render the United States government responsible for consequences resulting from individual contracts; nor does it appear that the said Thomas has made any legal exertion to obtain reparation for the fraud practiced upon him by said Cutter.
Mr. JENNINGS, from the Committee on the Public Lands, to whom was referred a resolution of the 19th instant, instructing the Committee on Private Land Claims to inquire into the expediency of allowing Minor Thomas to locate four hundred and eighty acres of land, as the assignee of Abraham Cutter, late a second lieutenant in the corps of Canadian volunteers, reported:
That the said Cutter, who obtained for his services a bounty land warrant, No. 93, for the four hundred and eighty acres of land aforesaid, conveyed the same to James Hair, of Ohio, by a deed bearing date the 9th of October, 1817; that said Hair conveyed the said warrant to Abraham McCollock, of Virginia, by deed bearing date the 29th of June, 1818, and that the warrant aforesaid was again conveyed by deed on. the 22d day of May, 1821, by the said Abraham MeCollock to his sons, Ebenezer McCollock and William McCollock, jr., the latter of whom empowered his brother, Ebenezer, to locate the said warrant, which was accordingly done, and a patent thereon issued to the brothers, as assignees, on the 6th of October, 1823.
It likewise appears, from the documents referred to the committee, that the aforesaid Cutter, upon the allegation that the aforesaid land warrant, No. 93, was unlawfully withheld from him by his agent, obtained a certificate signed by Josiah Meigs, late a Commissioner of the General Land Office, dated the 1’lth of July, 1820, purporting to authorize the said Cutter to locate the aforesaid four hundred and eighty acres of land; that notwithstanding the said Gutter had conveyed his laud warrant for the said four hundred and eighty acres on the 9th of October, 1817, he assigned the certificate thus fraudulently obtained to Minor Thomas on the 16th of July, 1825, who now asks, as the assignee of said Cutter, to locate four hundred and eighty acres of land, by virtue of the certificate aforesaid.
The act of Congress approved March 5, 1816, granting bounties in. land and extra pay to certain Canadian volunteers, authorizes the location of such bounties in land only upon warrants issued by the Secretary for the Department of War. The said Minor Thomas asks to be allowed to locate the four hundred and eighty acres of land on the ground that the register of the local land office advised him that a location of the laud could be made upon the aforesaid certificate.
In the opinion of the committee, the unauthorized acts of its agents cannot render the United States government responsible for consequences resulting from individual contracts; nor does it appear that the said Thomas has made any legal exertion to obtain reparation for the fraud practiced upon him by said Cutter.
Captain George P. Frost
CLAIM TO REVOLUTIONARY BOUNTY LAND.
George P. Frost, of Rochester, Ulster county, State of New York, states that he served in various military offices during our revolutionary war, and had been promoted to the command of a captain, towards its termination, in the first New Hampshire regiment, commanded by Colonel Cilley, or some person whose name was in sound similar. That, in virtue of the resolutions and laws of Congress, he was entitled to a bounty land warrant for three hundred acres; that he received said warrant, signed, as well as he recollects, by General Knox, then Secretary of War, and that, having placed it in the hands of a friend to make some inquiries and obtain information concerning the mode of its location, &o., it was by him lost in the city of New York, and has never been regained by the petitioner, who supposes it was destroyed. He states that he never made any disposition of it, and that it was his property. He further states that he has not received any patent for bounty land from the government to which statements he made oath before a justice of the peace, who certifies as to that fact. The petitioner prays that a patent may issue to him for the land to which he is entitled.
Upon application at the General Laud Office, it appears that warrant No. 693, for 300 acres of land, was issued, and which has never been presented for a patent. To whom it issued the record does not show. The record, however, proves that the petitioner was entitled to a warrant, and it does not show that one was ever issued to him.
The committee are of opinion that he is entitled to a warrant and patent, and have, therefore, reported a bill in his favor for that purpose.
George P. Frost, of Rochester, Ulster county, State of New York, states that he served in various military offices during our revolutionary war, and had been promoted to the command of a captain, towards its termination, in the first New Hampshire regiment, commanded by Colonel Cilley, or some person whose name was in sound similar. That, in virtue of the resolutions and laws of Congress, he was entitled to a bounty land warrant for three hundred acres; that he received said warrant, signed, as well as he recollects, by General Knox, then Secretary of War, and that, having placed it in the hands of a friend to make some inquiries and obtain information concerning the mode of its location, &o., it was by him lost in the city of New York, and has never been regained by the petitioner, who supposes it was destroyed. He states that he never made any disposition of it, and that it was his property. He further states that he has not received any patent for bounty land from the government to which statements he made oath before a justice of the peace, who certifies as to that fact. The petitioner prays that a patent may issue to him for the land to which he is entitled.
Upon application at the General Laud Office, it appears that warrant No. 693, for 300 acres of land, was issued, and which has never been presented for a patent. To whom it issued the record does not show. The record, however, proves that the petitioner was entitled to a warrant, and it does not show that one was ever issued to him.
The committee are of opinion that he is entitled to a warrant and patent, and have, therefore, reported a bill in his favor for that purpose.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
David And Samuel Hale & Other Creek Indians.
APPLICATION OF SUNDRY HALF-BREEDS OF THE CREEK NATION TO SELL THEIR RESERVATIONS OF LAND IN ALABAMA, AND LIST OF CLAIMS FOR SUCH RESERVATIONS.
David and Samuel Hale represents: That they are half-breeds of the Creek nation, and were entitled to have a reservation of land under the treaty of Fort Jackson; that they are still in possession of the lands reserved for them. They are competent to the management of their
own concerns, and are anxious to dispose of part of their lands to procure other property. This cannot be done without great loss, unless they could convey in fee simple their title. They therefore pray that the title may be vested in them, and that they may have authority to sell and make fee simple title. They refer to the act for the relief of Tate and others, and pray for a similar provision in their behalf. And, as in duty bound:, will ever pray.
Alabama, December14, 1826.
We, the undersigned, citizens of Monroe county, in the State of Alabama, do hereby certify that we have for several years last past been personally acquainted with Samuel Hale and David Hale, of said county, half-breed Creeks, to whom a patent has been granted from the General Land Office for fractional section twenty-one, of township six, in range five, on the west side of the Alabama river;’ that the said Samuel and David have been instructed to read and write; have some knowledge of common arithmetic; that their intellectual and moral faculties render them as competent to transact the common business of life as the ordinary class of mankind.
1. Wm. C. Vaugn. 2. Martin Marshall. 3. John I. Bradford. 4. Martin Fryes. 5. John Davis.
6. Alex. McRae.. 7. Jno. G. Abrams . 8. Isaac Lambert.. 9. Daniel McDaniel. 10. Andrew Ormand. 11. John Moore. 12. Isaac Thompson. 13. James Daniel 14. Geo. Tunstall.
15. Adam Carson.
CONGRESS Hall, December 18, 1826.
DEAR Sir.: Samuel and David Hale, who state themselves to be of the friendly Creek Indians who were provided for in the treaty of Fort Jackson of August 9, 18 14, have petitioned Congress to have the land set apart to them under the act of March 3, 1817, confirmed to or yested in them in fee simple. The Committee on Public Lands, to whom the subject was referred, are at a loss on some points, and have directed me to ask information of’ you:
1. Were Samuel and David Hale chiefs, headmen, or warriors, in their proper persons, or are they the representatives of any chief, headman, or warrior, &c.? And if so, of whom?
2. If they are the original claimants, to what quantity is each entitled, by the report of the agent under the act of March 3, 1817?
3. Why was but 638 acres set apart for the two, when the treaty secures to each a section?
4. If they are the representatives of a chieg headman, or warrior, &c., are they the only representatives or was there a widow or other heirs?
5. If they are representatives, has the department decided that the fee simple does not vest in them absolutely, under the act of 3d March, without; the aid of Congress?
6. Has the land they claim been patented to them; and when? An early reply will oblige the committee.
GENERAL LAND OFFICE, December 21, 1826.
Sir.: In answer to your letter of the 18th instant I have to state that Samuel and David Hale, who are the descendants of a Creek woman, entered their claim under the third section of the act of March 3, 1817, which grants to such descendants two quarter sections; and that, by the law, they have but a life estate in the same. The certificate in their favor for the land claimed was issued April 12, 1820.
GEO. GRAHAM.
Note. Here are two Bills they before Congress, it should be noted that this author could not find if this Bills passed.
A BILL
DECEMBER 29, 1826.
Relinquishing the right of the United Slates in a certain tract of land to David and Samuel Hale.
Be it enacted by the Senate anti House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all right, title, and interest, which the United States possess in the reservation made to David Hale and Samuel Hale, of lands within the tract of country ceded to the United States, by the treaty of Fort Jackson, on the ninth day of August, eighteen hundred and fourteen, with the Creek nation of Indians, be, and the same is hereby, vested in David Hale and Samuel Hale, the occupants and claimants of the same: Provided, That only six hundred and forty acres shall be granted in virtue of this act.
-------------------------------
A BILL
May 13, 1828.
Relinquishing the right of the United Slates to certain Indian reservations under the treaty of Fort Jackson.
Be it enacted by the Senate and house of.Representa1ices of the United State8 of America in Congress assembled, That all the right, title, or interest which might accrue or revert to the United States, in and to the reservations of land now claimed and possessed by George Stiggins, David and Samuel Hale, and. William Hardridge, or either of them, under the treaty made between the United States and the Creek Indians, at Fort Jackson, on the day of August, one thousand eight hundred and fourteen, lying in the State of Alabama, be, and the same is hereby, relinquished and vested in the said reservees and their heirs. respectively: Provided. That no greater quantity of land shall be granted by virtue of this act, than is reserved by the Said treaty.
---------------------------------
List of claims entered in pursuance of art act of Congress passed March 3, 1817, entitled “An act making provision for the location of the lands reserved by the first article of the treaty of August 9, 1814, between the United States and the Creek nation, to certain clziqfs and warriors of that nation, and for other purposes.”
1. David Tate.
2. Samuel Brashier.
3. George Stiggins.
4. James Earles.
5. The heirs of Josiah Fisher.
6. The widow of Josiah Fisher.
7. Margaret Rushen.
8. Arthur Sizemore.
9. Josiah Fletcher.
10. Heirs of James Bailey.
11. Heirs of Jn. Hinson.
12. Laughlin Durant.
13. Samuel Smith.
14. Zaclh McGirt.
15. Heirs of Win. Jones, deceased.
16. John Weatherford.
17. Michael Ehlert.
18. John E. Myles.
19. Charles Ehlert.
20. William Tuley.
21. Samuel and David Hale.
22. Peter Randon.
23. Heirs of John Randon, deceased.
24. John O’Riley.
25. James Gornells.
26. Josiah Brinton.
27. John Garr.
28. Tallassee Fixico.
29. Widow and heirs of Jack Ward.
30. Heirs of Stimauligee alias Talesee Haugo.
David and Samuel Hale represents: That they are half-breeds of the Creek nation, and were entitled to have a reservation of land under the treaty of Fort Jackson; that they are still in possession of the lands reserved for them. They are competent to the management of their
own concerns, and are anxious to dispose of part of their lands to procure other property. This cannot be done without great loss, unless they could convey in fee simple their title. They therefore pray that the title may be vested in them, and that they may have authority to sell and make fee simple title. They refer to the act for the relief of Tate and others, and pray for a similar provision in their behalf. And, as in duty bound:, will ever pray.
Alabama, December14, 1826.
We, the undersigned, citizens of Monroe county, in the State of Alabama, do hereby certify that we have for several years last past been personally acquainted with Samuel Hale and David Hale, of said county, half-breed Creeks, to whom a patent has been granted from the General Land Office for fractional section twenty-one, of township six, in range five, on the west side of the Alabama river;’ that the said Samuel and David have been instructed to read and write; have some knowledge of common arithmetic; that their intellectual and moral faculties render them as competent to transact the common business of life as the ordinary class of mankind.
1. Wm. C. Vaugn. 2. Martin Marshall. 3. John I. Bradford. 4. Martin Fryes. 5. John Davis.
6. Alex. McRae.. 7. Jno. G. Abrams . 8. Isaac Lambert.. 9. Daniel McDaniel. 10. Andrew Ormand. 11. John Moore. 12. Isaac Thompson. 13. James Daniel 14. Geo. Tunstall.
15. Adam Carson.
CONGRESS Hall, December 18, 1826.
DEAR Sir.: Samuel and David Hale, who state themselves to be of the friendly Creek Indians who were provided for in the treaty of Fort Jackson of August 9, 18 14, have petitioned Congress to have the land set apart to them under the act of March 3, 1817, confirmed to or yested in them in fee simple. The Committee on Public Lands, to whom the subject was referred, are at a loss on some points, and have directed me to ask information of’ you:
1. Were Samuel and David Hale chiefs, headmen, or warriors, in their proper persons, or are they the representatives of any chief, headman, or warrior, &c.? And if so, of whom?
2. If they are the original claimants, to what quantity is each entitled, by the report of the agent under the act of March 3, 1817?
3. Why was but 638 acres set apart for the two, when the treaty secures to each a section?
4. If they are the representatives of a chieg headman, or warrior, &c., are they the only representatives or was there a widow or other heirs?
5. If they are representatives, has the department decided that the fee simple does not vest in them absolutely, under the act of 3d March, without; the aid of Congress?
6. Has the land they claim been patented to them; and when? An early reply will oblige the committee.
GENERAL LAND OFFICE, December 21, 1826.
Sir.: In answer to your letter of the 18th instant I have to state that Samuel and David Hale, who are the descendants of a Creek woman, entered their claim under the third section of the act of March 3, 1817, which grants to such descendants two quarter sections; and that, by the law, they have but a life estate in the same. The certificate in their favor for the land claimed was issued April 12, 1820.
GEO. GRAHAM.
Note. Here are two Bills they before Congress, it should be noted that this author could not find if this Bills passed.
A BILL
DECEMBER 29, 1826.
Relinquishing the right of the United Slates in a certain tract of land to David and Samuel Hale.
Be it enacted by the Senate anti House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all right, title, and interest, which the United States possess in the reservation made to David Hale and Samuel Hale, of lands within the tract of country ceded to the United States, by the treaty of Fort Jackson, on the ninth day of August, eighteen hundred and fourteen, with the Creek nation of Indians, be, and the same is hereby, vested in David Hale and Samuel Hale, the occupants and claimants of the same: Provided, That only six hundred and forty acres shall be granted in virtue of this act.
-------------------------------
A BILL
May 13, 1828.
Relinquishing the right of the United Slates to certain Indian reservations under the treaty of Fort Jackson.
Be it enacted by the Senate and house of.Representa1ices of the United State8 of America in Congress assembled, That all the right, title, or interest which might accrue or revert to the United States, in and to the reservations of land now claimed and possessed by George Stiggins, David and Samuel Hale, and. William Hardridge, or either of them, under the treaty made between the United States and the Creek Indians, at Fort Jackson, on the day of August, one thousand eight hundred and fourteen, lying in the State of Alabama, be, and the same is hereby, relinquished and vested in the said reservees and their heirs. respectively: Provided. That no greater quantity of land shall be granted by virtue of this act, than is reserved by the Said treaty.
---------------------------------
List of claims entered in pursuance of art act of Congress passed March 3, 1817, entitled “An act making provision for the location of the lands reserved by the first article of the treaty of August 9, 1814, between the United States and the Creek nation, to certain clziqfs and warriors of that nation, and for other purposes.”
1. David Tate.
2. Samuel Brashier.
3. George Stiggins.
4. James Earles.
5. The heirs of Josiah Fisher.
6. The widow of Josiah Fisher.
7. Margaret Rushen.
8. Arthur Sizemore.
9. Josiah Fletcher.
10. Heirs of James Bailey.
11. Heirs of Jn. Hinson.
12. Laughlin Durant.
13. Samuel Smith.
14. Zaclh McGirt.
15. Heirs of Win. Jones, deceased.
16. John Weatherford.
17. Michael Ehlert.
18. John E. Myles.
19. Charles Ehlert.
20. William Tuley.
21. Samuel and David Hale.
22. Peter Randon.
23. Heirs of John Randon, deceased.
24. John O’Riley.
25. James Gornells.
26. Josiah Brinton.
27. John Garr.
28. Tallassee Fixico.
29. Widow and heirs of Jack Ward.
30. Heirs of Stimauligee alias Talesee Haugo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
