Here is a list of men and women? Who are claiming land. These names come from all over the United States. Although there is little or no family information in the reports. However the reports give a interesting insight on what was happening to them at this time in history and would be worth adding to your family history. I will give a example on the kind of information you may receive.
This information comes from, Public Land Volume 8., 1835-1838., which is housed at the Library of Congress.
Important note. If you find a name of interests and would like a report, please give the title of this page and the name and page No., for without it I may not be able to help you. My address can be found in my profile.
Example.
John Jeffers, Alabama.
That the petitioner represents, that, in the year 1830, not long before the day on which lands sold under the credit system and not paid for became forfeited, by the act of Congress provided in such cases, he purchased from one Dixon Stanback, as the administrator, of Stephen Heard, deceased, a certificated of further credit, for the northwest quarter of section twenty-eight, township six, range two, west, of the lands sold at the Huntsville land district, in Alabama; that he paid to said administrator a full consideration in cash for said certificate, and said administrator duly assigned it over. Petitioner states further, that alter said assignment, he applied to the register and receiver of said, land office, to pay the balance due by the terms of purchase for said land, but that said register and receiver refused to receive it, on the grounds that the transfer had not been made to petitioner in conformity with the provisions of the law of Alabama, regulating the sale of real estate of deceased persons; that the purchase of this certificate was made so lately before the day of forfeiture, that the time was not sufficient to observe the forms required to effect a legal transfer. Petitioner also states, that the land became forfeited, and was afterward sold by the government. He also asserts, that the full consideration paid by him to said administrator, was accounted for by him in his settlement of the estate of Heard; and that the widow and heirs of Heard have all removed out of the United States. Petitioner also sets forth, that he applied at the land office at Huntsville after said land became forfeited and was sold, to procure scrip, to the amount actually paid on the said tract of land, under the provisions of the act of Congress in such cases provided; but that this was also refused on the same grounds.
Under this state of facts, of the truth of which your committee are sufficiently satisfied, they believe the petitioner was prevented, without any fault of his own, from availing himself, not only of the benefits of the original contract for the said land, but also of the advantages granted to the legal holders of forfeited certificates, to the amount paid thereon; that he comes within the reason and spirit of the law, and has been only deprived of the benefits by a want of some formalities in the transfer of the certificate. They therefore report a bill for his relief.
---------------------------------------
Alabama.
1. Lewis Durett ...p. 429.
2. Poas Hadgo ...p. 581.
3. Joel Chandler ...p. 586.
4. Etienne La Lande ...p. 589.
5. James Innerarity ...p. 888.
6. Jas. A. Williams ...p. 910.
7. John Hollinsworth ...p. 912.
8. Wm. Jas. Aarons ...p. 912
9. Samuel Smith ..p.. 924.
10. E. Moreland, W. M. Kennedy, R. J. Kennedy, and Mason E. Lewis ...p. 931.
Arkansas.
1. T. P. Eskridge and A. Fisk. ...p. 329.
2. Mary Tucker ...p. 426.
3. C. de Villemont ...p. 543.
Bounty land.
1. Simon Wright, New York ...p. 428.
2. W. C. Hazard, Rhode Island ...p. 531.
3. Benjamin Oden ...p. 532.
4. Daniel Warner ...p. 533.
5. John H. Stone ...p. 542.
6. H. B. Tyler, Virginia ...p. 591.
7. Samuel and John Rowe ...p. 592.
8. Aaron Stout ...p. 664.
9. Thomas Todd ...p. 702.
10. Levi Chadwick ...p. 707.
11. William Clark ...p. 708.
12. Francis Jarvis ...p. 914.
13. S. Burton, jr. ...p. 936.
14. Fras. Jarvis ...p. 914.
Florida.
1. Duncan L. Clinch ...p. 433.
2. Wm. Baker ...p. 493.
3. Louis Le Gras de Vobeceye ...p. 494.
4. Peter Alba ...p. 531.
5. Joseph E. Padro ...p. 709.
6. Jos. Hernandez ...p. 912.
7. Jennett Willis ...p. 925.
Illinois.
1. Samuel Dickerson ...p. 440.
2. Gideon Blackburn ...p. 577.
3. Daniel Malone ..p.. 581..
4. James Dutton ...p. 928.
5. Margaret Nation ...p. 451.
6. Zebulon Sheets ...p. 455.
Indian Land.
1. J. B. Hancock ...p. 557.
2. Allen Yates ...p. 563.
3. Poas Hadgo ...p. 581.
4. Jane Scammakon and Susan Hazleton ...p. 455.
Indiana.
1. Zebulon Sheets, Indiana, ...p. 455
2. William Bowman, Indiana ...p. 327.
3. Margaret Nation ...p. 451.
Louisiana.
1.John Fletcher, of Louisiana ...p. 976.
2. Eloy Segura, of Louisiana ..p.. 452.
3. Robert Bell, Louisiana ...p. 702.
4. Thomas M. Burland, Louisiana ...p. 706.
5. Polly Lemon ... 913.
6. Wm. Conway's heirs ...p. 497.
Michigan.
1. Chas. A. Grignon, Michigan ...p. 595.
2. George C. Willard , Michigan ...p. 601.
3. Thos. Reddock, Michigan ..p.. 915.
Mississippi.
1, Green Pryor, Mississippi ...p. 436.
Missouri.
1. D. Browning, Missouri ...p. 332.
2. J. Boone, Missouri ...p. 333.
3. August Brazeau , Missouri...p. 334.
4. John Wiley and Jefferson Greer, Missouri ...p. 454.
5. John Whitsitt, Missouri ...p. 495.
Ohio.
1. Solomon Sturges, Ohio ...p.560.
2. James Brewer, Ohio ...p. 578.
3. Mary Sroufe, Ohio ...p. 932.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Settlers On Choctaw Land.
Before the Choctaw treaty of 1830, the Choctaw give the rights to the settlers, to settle on their land, then when the removal came the new settlers were told they too would be removed. The settlers argued that the Choctaw, had given them the rights before the treaty and that they had made their improvements and built their homes before the removal dead line of May 1832. The government stated that in the treaty they bought all the land and all on it, and they too would be removed and if they refused to go, the United States Army would come and remove them by force. After many arguments between the Settlers and the government the settlers would win out.
Note. There are some of you who maybe interested in just where your ancestors land was and what may be on it to day. This can be easily be done by taken the information here and going to either the land office of register of deeds office in the county set of the county stated here and ask to see a section map of the county.
--------------------------------------
Part of a letter, To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled:
Your petitioners, citizens of that portion of the State of Mississippi ceded to the United States by the Choctaw Indians, at the treaty of 1830, most respectfully represent: That they settled within that district of country prior to the 1st flay of May, 1832, by the permission of the Choctaws, and with the approbation, as was generally understood, of the agent of the government, and made valuable improvements. During the spring of 1832, a portion of the United States troops were ordered into the country, for the purpose of removing them from the public lands as intruders and trespassers, in violation of the stipulations of the treaty. On a proper representation of the subject to the Secretary of War the orders were countermanded, and they were permitted to remain with their families in the peaceable and quiet possession of their homes. (A copy of the correspondence with the War Department is made an accompanying document, marked A.) By their industry and labor, your petitioners opened valuable improvements, and erected comfortable cabins for the shelter of their families, cheered with the hope that Congress would, in their wisdom and liberality, extend to them the same privileges extended to other pioneers and settlers on the public lands, the right of pre-emption to a little spot of ground, sufficient to cover their labor, at the minimum price of $1.25 per acre. In their reasonable hope and expectations they were not disappointed.
List of the petitioners.
John Smith---Nathan Edwards---Baylis Nations---Robert Belshar---Josiah Edwards---Wm. Ormond---John H. Byres---Wm. B. Edwards---Woodard Roan---Wm. W. Byres---John H. McKennie---William Sillivent---William Blanton---A. McCarslin---Stephen Smith.
-------------------------------
WASHINGTON City, July 21, 1834.
Here is part of that. Letter.
SIR: Daniel Richmond, Conway Oldham, Josiah White, George Simmons, Jefferson Clay, Isaac Richmond, Samuel Hackenbury, David Clay, and Ignatius Baukston, claim a right of preemption, each, to eighty acres of land, situate within that district of country ceded to the United States by the treaty of Dancing Rabbit creek, under azid by virtue of the provisions of the act of Congress passed on the 3d day of March, 1833. They adduced to the register and receiver of the land office at Chocehuma, Mississippi, satisfactory evidence of their right to the lands which they claimed as aforesaid; but their applications were refused by them, because, in their opinion, the lands ceded by the treaty aforesaid were not public lands on the first day of May, 1832, within the meaning of the act.
TREASURY DEPARTMENT, July 25, 1834.
Upon examination, I find that the parties were all actual settlers and housekeepers on the public lands prior to 1st May, 1832; that the entry and proof were made within the time limited by the act of 2d March, 1833, and thus the evidence of these facts in all the cases, the evidence is given according to the form prescribed by the instructions of the department. Thus sustained, it is my opinion that their right to the pre-emption claimed is authorized by the act of 2d March, 1833.
----------------------------
THE STATE OF Mississippi, Holmes County:
I, Samuel B. Parrish, do solemnly swear, that I am an actual settler and a housekeeper on a tract of public land, viz., the northwest quarter of section number eight, in township number fifteen, of range number one east, and hereby apply to enter the west half of the northwest quarter of said section, under the provisions of an act of Congress approved on. The 2d day of March, 1833.
-------------------------------
THE STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
Thomas C. McMackin, has made oath that he was an actual settler on the east half of southwest quarter, and also had an improvement on the west half of east quarter, section 19, township 24, range 6 east, (on which the town of Henderson is situated,) in the early part of the year 1832.
-------------------------------
THE STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
David Mabray, has made oath that he settled and improved on the west half of the northwest quarter section 29, township 24, range 6 east, in the month of February, 1832, and that he, the said Mabray, believes that he was embraced under the act of the March, 1833.
---------------------------
THE STATE OF Mississippi, Tallahatchie County:
I John Balfour solemnly swear that I was an actual settler and a housekeeper on a tract of public land, viz., lots six and ten of township number twenty-two, in range five east and intended to apply to the register and receiver at Chocehuma, prior to the public sale of said lands, and prior to any appropriation of the same, in October last, under the provisions of an act of Congress, approved on the 2d day of March, 1833.
---------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Choctaw District:
I Robert Belsha, solemnly swear that I am an actual settler and a housekeeper on a tract of public land, viz., the west half of the southeast quarter of section four, township twenty-three, range live east, and hereby apply to enter the west half of the southeast quarter of said section, under the provisions of an act of Congress, approved on the 2d day of March, 1833.
---------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
John H. Byers, and made oath, in due form of law, that he was an actual settler on public land of the United States, in the limits of the Choctaw nation, in the year 1833, that a float was laid on the land upon which he settled, and that he has been debarred from entering his improvement. The land on. which he settled is designated as follows: Section No. 19, township 24, of range 6 east He now requests that he may have a float granted to him, (by virtue of the act of Congress granting pre-emption rights to settlers of 1833,) to be laid on vacant and unoccupied lots.
----------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
Wm. W. Byers, and made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public land and cultivated the same in 1833; that he was deprived of the right of pre-emption by a float being entered on his improvements, and that he has been wholly deprived of the privileges granted to other occupants on public lands of the United States: he craves the general government to grant him a float of 160 acres, to the end that he may locate it on lands not otherwise appropriated. His residence was on the 19th section, range 6 east, township 24.
-----------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
William Blanton, has made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public land of the United States in 1833, made improvements, and cultivated the same. He was deprived of the privilege of taking his land by pre-emption, in consequence of the land sales, which were commenced at Choechuma on the 21st day of October, 1833, and continued 12 days. He does not ask or expect the land was sold; but prays that he may be permitted to take 160 acres on any vacant and inappropriate land of the United States. His improvement was on the 17th section, township 23, range 5 east.
------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
Nathan Edwards, has made oath, in due form of law, that he was an actual settler on public lands of the United States, in the limits of the Choctaw nation, in the year 1833; that other persons resided on the same quarter section, and that he has been debarred from obtaining his improvement. The land on which he settled is designated as follows: Section seven, township number twenty-four, range six east. He has been prevented from the advantages of the pre-emption law, and now asks the privilege that has been extended to other early settlers, of taking a float or un-appropriated lands of the United States.
---------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
Isaiah Edwards, has made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public lands of the United States in 1833 that the laud on which he lived was sold at the land sales at Choechuma; that he was not permitted to take his farm by pre-emption, in consequence of instructions not having been given to the register in such cases made and provided: and it also having been made known to him that he can get relief by memorial to Congress, he asks the privilege of having granted to him a float for one quarter section on any lands not otherwise appropriated. He resided and improved the northwest quarter of section 17, township twenty-four, range six east. The said land was purchased at Ohocchuma, by T. W. Winter, which appears on the record.
---------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
John H. McKennie, has made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public lands of the United States (agreeably to his interpretation of the treaty of Dancing Rabbit creek) in the years 1832 and 1833, and proved his claim up before Thomas B. Ives, before the land sales at Chocchuma, which commenced the 21st October, 1833, and requested the register to reserve his land under previous acts of Congress, but was informed he did not think that he was authorized to do so. Further, that the quarter section on which he resided was taken by another claim. He made considerable improvements, which enhanced the value of the land considerably. He further says, he was the first settler on the said land, to wit: the S. E. quarter of section 19, township 24, range 6 east, and that he had not entered any lands under the pre-emption laws of the United States, either in quarters or eighths. He now prays that he may have the privilege of taking 160 acres of vacant and un-appropriated lands belonging to the government, at the minimum price, and have the usual time of two years to pay for the same. He believes that his early settlement greatly enhanced the value of the government land in the part of the country he lives in. He yet lives where he first settled, but is compelled to pay rent for the improvements he made.
--------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
Alfred McCaslin, has made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public lands of the United States in 1832, and yet resides at the same place; and further says that his residence was floated by an orphan claim, and that he was prevented thereby from obtaining’ the said land o which he settled. The number of section on which he lives is 19, township 24, range 6, east, on. the west half of the southeast quarter of said section 19. He does not request that said land should be granted to him by pre-emption, but that he may have a float granted to him for one quarter section of land on that which is now vacant and un-appropriated.
-------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
Baylis Nations, has made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public land of the United States in 1832 and 1833, and cultivated, the same, but was not permitted to enter under the act of 1832, in consequence of no instructions having been received by the register at Chocchuma. The land was sold at the sales in 1833, and I have been deprived of my right of pre-emption. The land on which I resided at the time of the land sales was on the 27th section, township 24, range 6 east.
-------------------------
Note. As most of the following oaths are the same as those above I will only give the names and the section numbers.
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
WILLIAM ORMON, His residence and cultivation were in township 23, section 10, range 5 east.
-------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
WOODARD ROAN, His residence and cultivation were in town ship 24, range 5 east, section 24.
-------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
WILLIAM SILLIVENT, The land which he improved was the 34th section, township 24, range 5 east.
--------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
STEPHEN SMITH, his residence was on the nineteenth section, S. E. quarter, township twenty-four, range six east.
---------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
WILLIAM STONE, the west half of the southwest quarter of section twenty, of township twenty-four, range six, east.
------------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Choctaw District:
JOHN W. McLEMORE.
East half of the southeast quarter of section 33, township 23, range 4 east.
Note. There are some of you who maybe interested in just where your ancestors land was and what may be on it to day. This can be easily be done by taken the information here and going to either the land office of register of deeds office in the county set of the county stated here and ask to see a section map of the county.
--------------------------------------
Part of a letter, To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled:
Your petitioners, citizens of that portion of the State of Mississippi ceded to the United States by the Choctaw Indians, at the treaty of 1830, most respectfully represent: That they settled within that district of country prior to the 1st flay of May, 1832, by the permission of the Choctaws, and with the approbation, as was generally understood, of the agent of the government, and made valuable improvements. During the spring of 1832, a portion of the United States troops were ordered into the country, for the purpose of removing them from the public lands as intruders and trespassers, in violation of the stipulations of the treaty. On a proper representation of the subject to the Secretary of War the orders were countermanded, and they were permitted to remain with their families in the peaceable and quiet possession of their homes. (A copy of the correspondence with the War Department is made an accompanying document, marked A.) By their industry and labor, your petitioners opened valuable improvements, and erected comfortable cabins for the shelter of their families, cheered with the hope that Congress would, in their wisdom and liberality, extend to them the same privileges extended to other pioneers and settlers on the public lands, the right of pre-emption to a little spot of ground, sufficient to cover their labor, at the minimum price of $1.25 per acre. In their reasonable hope and expectations they were not disappointed.
List of the petitioners.
John Smith---Nathan Edwards---Baylis Nations---Robert Belshar---Josiah Edwards---Wm. Ormond---John H. Byres---Wm. B. Edwards---Woodard Roan---Wm. W. Byres---John H. McKennie---William Sillivent---William Blanton---A. McCarslin---Stephen Smith.
-------------------------------
WASHINGTON City, July 21, 1834.
Here is part of that. Letter.
SIR: Daniel Richmond, Conway Oldham, Josiah White, George Simmons, Jefferson Clay, Isaac Richmond, Samuel Hackenbury, David Clay, and Ignatius Baukston, claim a right of preemption, each, to eighty acres of land, situate within that district of country ceded to the United States by the treaty of Dancing Rabbit creek, under azid by virtue of the provisions of the act of Congress passed on the 3d day of March, 1833. They adduced to the register and receiver of the land office at Chocehuma, Mississippi, satisfactory evidence of their right to the lands which they claimed as aforesaid; but their applications were refused by them, because, in their opinion, the lands ceded by the treaty aforesaid were not public lands on the first day of May, 1832, within the meaning of the act.
TREASURY DEPARTMENT, July 25, 1834.
Upon examination, I find that the parties were all actual settlers and housekeepers on the public lands prior to 1st May, 1832; that the entry and proof were made within the time limited by the act of 2d March, 1833, and thus the evidence of these facts in all the cases, the evidence is given according to the form prescribed by the instructions of the department. Thus sustained, it is my opinion that their right to the pre-emption claimed is authorized by the act of 2d March, 1833.
----------------------------
THE STATE OF Mississippi, Holmes County:
I, Samuel B. Parrish, do solemnly swear, that I am an actual settler and a housekeeper on a tract of public land, viz., the northwest quarter of section number eight, in township number fifteen, of range number one east, and hereby apply to enter the west half of the northwest quarter of said section, under the provisions of an act of Congress approved on. The 2d day of March, 1833.
-------------------------------
THE STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
Thomas C. McMackin, has made oath that he was an actual settler on the east half of southwest quarter, and also had an improvement on the west half of east quarter, section 19, township 24, range 6 east, (on which the town of Henderson is situated,) in the early part of the year 1832.
-------------------------------
THE STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
David Mabray, has made oath that he settled and improved on the west half of the northwest quarter section 29, township 24, range 6 east, in the month of February, 1832, and that he, the said Mabray, believes that he was embraced under the act of the March, 1833.
---------------------------
THE STATE OF Mississippi, Tallahatchie County:
I John Balfour solemnly swear that I was an actual settler and a housekeeper on a tract of public land, viz., lots six and ten of township number twenty-two, in range five east and intended to apply to the register and receiver at Chocehuma, prior to the public sale of said lands, and prior to any appropriation of the same, in October last, under the provisions of an act of Congress, approved on the 2d day of March, 1833.
---------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Choctaw District:
I Robert Belsha, solemnly swear that I am an actual settler and a housekeeper on a tract of public land, viz., the west half of the southeast quarter of section four, township twenty-three, range live east, and hereby apply to enter the west half of the southeast quarter of said section, under the provisions of an act of Congress, approved on the 2d day of March, 1833.
---------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
John H. Byers, and made oath, in due form of law, that he was an actual settler on public land of the United States, in the limits of the Choctaw nation, in the year 1833, that a float was laid on the land upon which he settled, and that he has been debarred from entering his improvement. The land on. which he settled is designated as follows: Section No. 19, township 24, of range 6 east He now requests that he may have a float granted to him, (by virtue of the act of Congress granting pre-emption rights to settlers of 1833,) to be laid on vacant and unoccupied lots.
----------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
Wm. W. Byers, and made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public land and cultivated the same in 1833; that he was deprived of the right of pre-emption by a float being entered on his improvements, and that he has been wholly deprived of the privileges granted to other occupants on public lands of the United States: he craves the general government to grant him a float of 160 acres, to the end that he may locate it on lands not otherwise appropriated. His residence was on the 19th section, range 6 east, township 24.
-----------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
William Blanton, has made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public land of the United States in 1833, made improvements, and cultivated the same. He was deprived of the privilege of taking his land by pre-emption, in consequence of the land sales, which were commenced at Choechuma on the 21st day of October, 1833, and continued 12 days. He does not ask or expect the land was sold; but prays that he may be permitted to take 160 acres on any vacant and inappropriate land of the United States. His improvement was on the 17th section, township 23, range 5 east.
------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
Nathan Edwards, has made oath, in due form of law, that he was an actual settler on public lands of the United States, in the limits of the Choctaw nation, in the year 1833; that other persons resided on the same quarter section, and that he has been debarred from obtaining his improvement. The land on which he settled is designated as follows: Section seven, township number twenty-four, range six east. He has been prevented from the advantages of the pre-emption law, and now asks the privilege that has been extended to other early settlers, of taking a float or un-appropriated lands of the United States.
---------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabusha County:
Isaiah Edwards, has made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public lands of the United States in 1833 that the laud on which he lived was sold at the land sales at Choechuma; that he was not permitted to take his farm by pre-emption, in consequence of instructions not having been given to the register in such cases made and provided: and it also having been made known to him that he can get relief by memorial to Congress, he asks the privilege of having granted to him a float for one quarter section on any lands not otherwise appropriated. He resided and improved the northwest quarter of section 17, township twenty-four, range six east. The said land was purchased at Ohocchuma, by T. W. Winter, which appears on the record.
---------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
John H. McKennie, has made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public lands of the United States (agreeably to his interpretation of the treaty of Dancing Rabbit creek) in the years 1832 and 1833, and proved his claim up before Thomas B. Ives, before the land sales at Chocchuma, which commenced the 21st October, 1833, and requested the register to reserve his land under previous acts of Congress, but was informed he did not think that he was authorized to do so. Further, that the quarter section on which he resided was taken by another claim. He made considerable improvements, which enhanced the value of the land considerably. He further says, he was the first settler on the said land, to wit: the S. E. quarter of section 19, township 24, range 6 east, and that he had not entered any lands under the pre-emption laws of the United States, either in quarters or eighths. He now prays that he may have the privilege of taking 160 acres of vacant and un-appropriated lands belonging to the government, at the minimum price, and have the usual time of two years to pay for the same. He believes that his early settlement greatly enhanced the value of the government land in the part of the country he lives in. He yet lives where he first settled, but is compelled to pay rent for the improvements he made.
--------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
Alfred McCaslin, has made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public lands of the United States in 1832, and yet resides at the same place; and further says that his residence was floated by an orphan claim, and that he was prevented thereby from obtaining’ the said land o which he settled. The number of section on which he lives is 19, township 24, range 6, east, on. the west half of the southeast quarter of said section 19. He does not request that said land should be granted to him by pre-emption, but that he may have a float granted to him for one quarter section of land on that which is now vacant and un-appropriated.
-------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
Baylis Nations, has made oath, in due form of law, that he resided on public land of the United States in 1832 and 1833, and cultivated, the same, but was not permitted to enter under the act of 1832, in consequence of no instructions having been received by the register at Chocchuma. The land was sold at the sales in 1833, and I have been deprived of my right of pre-emption. The land on which I resided at the time of the land sales was on the 27th section, township 24, range 6 east.
-------------------------
Note. As most of the following oaths are the same as those above I will only give the names and the section numbers.
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
WILLIAM ORMON, His residence and cultivation were in township 23, section 10, range 5 east.
-------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
WOODARD ROAN, His residence and cultivation were in town ship 24, range 5 east, section 24.
-------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
WILLIAM SILLIVENT, The land which he improved was the 34th section, township 24, range 5 east.
--------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
STEPHEN SMITH, his residence was on the nineteenth section, S. E. quarter, township twenty-four, range six east.
---------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Yallabuslia County:
WILLIAM STONE, the west half of the southwest quarter of section twenty, of township twenty-four, range six, east.
------------------------------
STATE OF Mississippi, Choctaw District:
JOHN W. McLEMORE.
East half of the southeast quarter of section 33, township 23, range 4 east.
Friday, December 18, 2009
NAMES UNDER THE CHOCTAW TREATY 1830.
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.
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.
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.
Friday, December 11, 2009
KasKasKia. Illinois Land Claims 1788-1791
A Statement of Claims coming within the provisions of the several acts of Congress of the twentieth of June, 1788, granting donations of four hundred acres to heads of families in the Illinois country; of the 3d of March 1791, granting donations to persons enrolled in the militia, and doing militia duty on 1st August, 1790; and donations of four hundred acres to such a had actually cultivated and improved land under any supposed grant from any court or commandant claiming the right to grant, &c., some of which were not entered within the time limited by law; but as those which have been approved by us are thought to be just and equitable claim they are submitted for the approbation of congress.
--------------------------
Original claimant-------Present claimant.
Antoine St. Francois-----Pierre Troge, (heir)
Names of witnesses
Louis Pillett, ancient inhabitant of Cahokia.
Witness well knew Antoine St. Francois, of Peoria, a head of family, and cultivating the land; having a small field in which he sowed corn, in the year 1765, and remained there for several years after; and. came down and died in the country, (Illinois) That Pierre Troge was married to one of his daughters.
---------------------
Original claimant------Present claimant.
James Moore.----------Heirs of Moore.
Names of witnesses.
James Garretson, Esq., of St. Clair county.
That James Moore, deceased, was the head of a family, and living with his family in the Illinois country, (St. Clair county,) from some time in May, 1781, until the year 1786.
----------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Henry Golding, deceased-----Heirs of Josiah Ryan,
Names of witnesses.
James McRoberts, Esq. and William Robins.
That, in 1786 and 1787, said Golding cultivated in corn. about six acres of land, which he had. cleared and. fenced. Robins states, that in the spring of 1787, deponent was at the house of said Golding, called Golding’s block-house, at a spring under the bluff, in the American bottom, called Golding’s spring’s where he had, under fence and. cultivated out from four to six acres. That said Golding continued in the country until he died, which happened, he thinks, in 1791. In the transcript of claims confirmed by the Governor, we find in page 11. the following entry, to wit “Josiah Ryan claims land adjoining Katy Ryan.” “Likewise land bequeathed to him by Henry Golding, deceased.”
---------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Ephraim Story----------------------------------
Names of witnesses.
William Robins and Daniel Raper.
William Robins states, that he knew Story to keep house, and live in the county of St. Clair, in 1787. Raper, that he knew said Story to keep house in said county, Illinois Territory, in 1788.
---------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
John Slaughter---------------------------------
Names of witnesses.
John Moore and James Lemon.
Moore states, that he was well acquainted with said Slaughter, and knew him to keep a house in St. Clair county, Illinois Territory, in the years 1787 and. 1788. Lemon, that he knew the said Slaughter to keep a house in said county in 1787.
---------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
John Berks------------------------------------
Names of witnesses.
William Murray and John Moore.
That they were well acquainted with, and knew, John Berks to be a head of family, and to keep house in St. Clair county, Illinois Territory, in the year 1783.
----------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
James Whitley----------------------------------
Names of witnesses.
William Murray and John Moore.
That they were personally acquainted with James Whitley, and knew him to be head of a family, and to keep a house in St. Clair county, Illinois Territory, in the year 1788.
---------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Reuben Miller------------------Reuben Miller.
Names of witnesses.
John Murdock, James McRoberts, Esq., and John Edgar.
Murdock states, that said Miller was in the country in 1790, and done militia duty as other militiamen, and now resides in the country. McRoberts, that he knew him, said Miller, in the country in. 1787 and 1790. Edgar, that lie knew him in the country, (Illinois,) in May or June, 1790, and sometime after.
--------------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Jean Baptiste Chevery--------Nicholas Jarrot.
Names of witnesses.
Louis Leperche, Nicholas Boismenue, and Louis Bihore.
Leperche states that he knew Jean Baptiste Chevery as an inhabitant, and planted corn for thirty years and upwards from this time, (1809.) Boismenue, that he knew said Chevcry, a settler in Peoria, near 30 years, (1809.) Bihore states that he, said Chevery, inhabited and resided Peoria with his family in 1783.
---------------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Jean Baptiste Poinstable------Jean Baptiste Poinstable.
Names of witnesses.
Jacque Ducharme, Louis Brunette, and Francois Vailett.
That said Jean B. Poinstable was head of a family at Peoria in the year 1783, and before and after that year. Had a house built, and cultivated land between the old fort and new settlement in the year 1780.
---------------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Francois Arcoit----------------Francois Arcoit,
Names of witnesses.
Baptiste Peltier, Pierre Verbois, and Sean B. Parant.
That said Arcoit was head of a family at Peoria in 1783; and that lie made an improvement near said village at tile same time. J. B. Parant states that he well knew the said Arcoit, an inhabitant of Peoria, in 1782; having a house of his own, cultivating the ground and planting corn; and that he had to leave the place on account of the Indians.
----------------------------
Original claimant--------Present claimant.
Louis Brunette-----------Louis Brunette.
Names of witnesses.
Jacque Ducharme and Francois Vailett.
That said Brunette was head of a family at Peoria in 1783, before and after, and continued to live in said village.
------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Widow Isabella Bond-----I. Bond, widow,
Names of witnesses.
Sarah Kinney and John Moore.
That the said. Isabella was a widow, and kept house, and was the head of a family in the Illinois country in 1783, and resided in the country ever since.
--------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Martha Ellison-------------M. Ellison.
Names of witnesses.
James Garretson and Isabella Bond.
That she, the said Martha, was a widow, and the head of a family, in the Illinois, in the year 1783, and continued some years afterwards.
---------------------------------
Original claimant---------------Present claimant.
Antoine Gerardin,
(son of August. Gerardin.)----Antoine Gerardin.
Names of witnesses.
Louis Perio, Julian Merceir, Francois Arnouse.
Pei1o knew said Gerardin to be the head of a family in Prairie du Pont in the year 1787. Arnouse and Merceir knew him to be head of a family, residing in Prairie du Pont, ever since the year 1787, until about three or four years past.
-----------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Rene Locat’s heirs---------Heirs of Bone Locat,
Names of witnesses.
-------------------------
The heirs of Rene Locat are found on the list of governors confirmations as entitled to a donation of 400 acres; and from testimony on record, page 75; relative to Pierre Locat’s donation claim, it is incidentally proven that Rene Locat died in Cahokia, in. the Illinois, before 1779, and that his widow continued to be head of a family until she died in the year 1786.
------------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Pierre Verbois-------------Nicholas Jarrot,
(alias Blondeaux.)
Names of witnesses.
-------------------------
The donation claim of Pierre Verbois stands confirmed to Nicholas Jarrot, on the records of decisions made by Jones and Backus, (commissioners,) under No. 143; but it is not found on the abstract of confirmations forwarded by them to the Secretary of the Treasury, nor on the one transmitted by him to this office. This was an omission; the claim remains unsatisfied, and ought to receive a legislative sanction. But, as a militia right of 100 acres has been confirmed to P. Verbois, (alias Blondeaux,) the same man, under claim No. 898, only 300 acres ought to be confirmed.
-----------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
John Dumoulin------------John Duinoulin’s heirs.
Names of witnesses.
------------------------
The case of John Dumoulin is precisely similar to the preceding. He is, by the records of decision under No. 1773, entitled to 300 acres, having received a militia right.
-------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Isaac Levy------------------John Hays and heirs of said Levy.
Names of witnesses.
Joseph Poupard, Sen., and Sean Beauliew.
That both knew him, the said Isaac Levy, as head of a family before, in, and after, the year 1783, at Cahokia, in the Illinois country. That Maria Louisa, wife of Joseph Cecel, was the daughter of said Levy, one of his three children. That Emil Cecel, the wife of Francois Demit, is the daughter, and only heir now living, of the said Maria Louisa, deceased.
----------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Jean B. Parant--------------Nicholas Parrot
Names of witnesses.
Sean B. Poinstable, Jacque Ducharme, Louis Bihore, Pierre Verbois.
That Jean B. Parant was head of a family in Peoria in 1783, before and after that year. That he had a house built, and cultivated lands, near the old fort of Peoria, in the year 1780. Bihore and Varbois state that the said Parant was the head of a family in 1780 and 1783; and, at that time, had a farm, and raised crops. This man has been confirmed in a militia donation of 100 acres, under No. 1I, and is, therefore, entitled to only 300 acres
as head of a family.
It must be remarked that, in the transcript forwarded to the Secretary of the Treasury, 18th January, 1813, J. B. Periault, Sen. was represented as entitled to a donation as head of a family under No. 2661; but it is since ascertained that this J. B. Periault is the same with J. B. Perio, who had also obtained a confirmation of 400 acres as head of a family, under No. 1468. Now, as the certificate of confirmation to J. B. Periault under No. 2661, has not been issued, as J. B. Perlo, who is in fact the same man, has obtained his donation, the confirmation to Jean B. Periault, Sen. of 400 acres, under No. 2661,must be annulled, and this to Jean B. Parant, of 300 acres as head of a family, confirmed.
--------------------------
Original claimant-------Present claimant.
Antoine St. Francois-----Pierre Troge, (heir)
Names of witnesses
Louis Pillett, ancient inhabitant of Cahokia.
Witness well knew Antoine St. Francois, of Peoria, a head of family, and cultivating the land; having a small field in which he sowed corn, in the year 1765, and remained there for several years after; and. came down and died in the country, (Illinois) That Pierre Troge was married to one of his daughters.
---------------------
Original claimant------Present claimant.
James Moore.----------Heirs of Moore.
Names of witnesses.
James Garretson, Esq., of St. Clair county.
That James Moore, deceased, was the head of a family, and living with his family in the Illinois country, (St. Clair county,) from some time in May, 1781, until the year 1786.
----------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Henry Golding, deceased-----Heirs of Josiah Ryan,
Names of witnesses.
James McRoberts, Esq. and William Robins.
That, in 1786 and 1787, said Golding cultivated in corn. about six acres of land, which he had. cleared and. fenced. Robins states, that in the spring of 1787, deponent was at the house of said Golding, called Golding’s block-house, at a spring under the bluff, in the American bottom, called Golding’s spring’s where he had, under fence and. cultivated out from four to six acres. That said Golding continued in the country until he died, which happened, he thinks, in 1791. In the transcript of claims confirmed by the Governor, we find in page 11. the following entry, to wit “Josiah Ryan claims land adjoining Katy Ryan.” “Likewise land bequeathed to him by Henry Golding, deceased.”
---------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Ephraim Story----------------------------------
Names of witnesses.
William Robins and Daniel Raper.
William Robins states, that he knew Story to keep house, and live in the county of St. Clair, in 1787. Raper, that he knew said Story to keep house in said county, Illinois Territory, in 1788.
---------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
John Slaughter---------------------------------
Names of witnesses.
John Moore and James Lemon.
Moore states, that he was well acquainted with said Slaughter, and knew him to keep a house in St. Clair county, Illinois Territory, in the years 1787 and. 1788. Lemon, that he knew the said Slaughter to keep a house in said county in 1787.
---------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
John Berks------------------------------------
Names of witnesses.
William Murray and John Moore.
That they were well acquainted with, and knew, John Berks to be a head of family, and to keep house in St. Clair county, Illinois Territory, in the year 1783.
----------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
James Whitley----------------------------------
Names of witnesses.
William Murray and John Moore.
That they were personally acquainted with James Whitley, and knew him to be head of a family, and to keep a house in St. Clair county, Illinois Territory, in the year 1788.
---------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Reuben Miller------------------Reuben Miller.
Names of witnesses.
John Murdock, James McRoberts, Esq., and John Edgar.
Murdock states, that said Miller was in the country in 1790, and done militia duty as other militiamen, and now resides in the country. McRoberts, that he knew him, said Miller, in the country in. 1787 and 1790. Edgar, that lie knew him in the country, (Illinois,) in May or June, 1790, and sometime after.
--------------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Jean Baptiste Chevery--------Nicholas Jarrot.
Names of witnesses.
Louis Leperche, Nicholas Boismenue, and Louis Bihore.
Leperche states that he knew Jean Baptiste Chevery as an inhabitant, and planted corn for thirty years and upwards from this time, (1809.) Boismenue, that he knew said Chevcry, a settler in Peoria, near 30 years, (1809.) Bihore states that he, said Chevery, inhabited and resided Peoria with his family in 1783.
---------------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Jean Baptiste Poinstable------Jean Baptiste Poinstable.
Names of witnesses.
Jacque Ducharme, Louis Brunette, and Francois Vailett.
That said Jean B. Poinstable was head of a family at Peoria in the year 1783, and before and after that year. Had a house built, and cultivated land between the old fort and new settlement in the year 1780.
---------------------------
Original claimant--------------Present claimant.
Francois Arcoit----------------Francois Arcoit,
Names of witnesses.
Baptiste Peltier, Pierre Verbois, and Sean B. Parant.
That said Arcoit was head of a family at Peoria in 1783; and that lie made an improvement near said village at tile same time. J. B. Parant states that he well knew the said Arcoit, an inhabitant of Peoria, in 1782; having a house of his own, cultivating the ground and planting corn; and that he had to leave the place on account of the Indians.
----------------------------
Original claimant--------Present claimant.
Louis Brunette-----------Louis Brunette.
Names of witnesses.
Jacque Ducharme and Francois Vailett.
That said Brunette was head of a family at Peoria in 1783, before and after, and continued to live in said village.
------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Widow Isabella Bond-----I. Bond, widow,
Names of witnesses.
Sarah Kinney and John Moore.
That the said. Isabella was a widow, and kept house, and was the head of a family in the Illinois country in 1783, and resided in the country ever since.
--------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Martha Ellison-------------M. Ellison.
Names of witnesses.
James Garretson and Isabella Bond.
That she, the said Martha, was a widow, and the head of a family, in the Illinois, in the year 1783, and continued some years afterwards.
---------------------------------
Original claimant---------------Present claimant.
Antoine Gerardin,
(son of August. Gerardin.)----Antoine Gerardin.
Names of witnesses.
Louis Perio, Julian Merceir, Francois Arnouse.
Pei1o knew said Gerardin to be the head of a family in Prairie du Pont in the year 1787. Arnouse and Merceir knew him to be head of a family, residing in Prairie du Pont, ever since the year 1787, until about three or four years past.
-----------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Rene Locat’s heirs---------Heirs of Bone Locat,
Names of witnesses.
-------------------------
The heirs of Rene Locat are found on the list of governors confirmations as entitled to a donation of 400 acres; and from testimony on record, page 75; relative to Pierre Locat’s donation claim, it is incidentally proven that Rene Locat died in Cahokia, in. the Illinois, before 1779, and that his widow continued to be head of a family until she died in the year 1786.
------------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Pierre Verbois-------------Nicholas Jarrot,
(alias Blondeaux.)
Names of witnesses.
-------------------------
The donation claim of Pierre Verbois stands confirmed to Nicholas Jarrot, on the records of decisions made by Jones and Backus, (commissioners,) under No. 143; but it is not found on the abstract of confirmations forwarded by them to the Secretary of the Treasury, nor on the one transmitted by him to this office. This was an omission; the claim remains unsatisfied, and ought to receive a legislative sanction. But, as a militia right of 100 acres has been confirmed to P. Verbois, (alias Blondeaux,) the same man, under claim No. 898, only 300 acres ought to be confirmed.
-----------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
John Dumoulin------------John Duinoulin’s heirs.
Names of witnesses.
------------------------
The case of John Dumoulin is precisely similar to the preceding. He is, by the records of decision under No. 1773, entitled to 300 acres, having received a militia right.
-------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Isaac Levy------------------John Hays and heirs of said Levy.
Names of witnesses.
Joseph Poupard, Sen., and Sean Beauliew.
That both knew him, the said Isaac Levy, as head of a family before, in, and after, the year 1783, at Cahokia, in the Illinois country. That Maria Louisa, wife of Joseph Cecel, was the daughter of said Levy, one of his three children. That Emil Cecel, the wife of Francois Demit, is the daughter, and only heir now living, of the said Maria Louisa, deceased.
----------------------------------
Original claimant----------Present claimant.
Jean B. Parant--------------Nicholas Parrot
Names of witnesses.
Sean B. Poinstable, Jacque Ducharme, Louis Bihore, Pierre Verbois.
That Jean B. Parant was head of a family in Peoria in 1783, before and after that year. That he had a house built, and cultivated lands, near the old fort of Peoria, in the year 1780. Bihore and Varbois state that the said Parant was the head of a family in 1780 and 1783; and, at that time, had a farm, and raised crops. This man has been confirmed in a militia donation of 100 acres, under No. 1I, and is, therefore, entitled to only 300 acres
as head of a family.
It must be remarked that, in the transcript forwarded to the Secretary of the Treasury, 18th January, 1813, J. B. Periault, Sen. was represented as entitled to a donation as head of a family under No. 2661; but it is since ascertained that this J. B. Periault is the same with J. B. Perio, who had also obtained a confirmation of 400 acres as head of a family, under No. 1468. Now, as the certificate of confirmation to J. B. Periault under No. 2661, has not been issued, as J. B. Perlo, who is in fact the same man, has obtained his donation, the confirmation to Jean B. Periault, Sen. of 400 acres, under No. 2661,must be annulled, and this to Jean B. Parant, of 300 acres as head of a family, confirmed.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Militia Land Donations In Vincennes 1780's-1790's
The following men and the heirs of said men, were trying to claim their militia donation land in Vincennes, but because of lack of proof and other seasons all the claims were rejected, but for the last ( five cases which were special cases. ) Because these claims were rejected there is no need to state anything about the land as it is not important now, and there was so little information in any case. But the information given by testimony and witness’s in these cases is very important, as it may fill some holes in your ancestors history, and you may find something out about your ancestor you never know before.
Note. This information came from the department of public Land, Volume 7., 1834-1835, which is housed at the Library of Congress.
Important note. I have thousands of names at this site, when asking about a name from this page or any other pages at this site, please give the ( Title of this page ), for without it I may not be able to help you. My address can be found in my profile.
---------------------------
Pierre Pettier .
François Pettier, father of Pierre Pettier lived at Vincennes before and after the country was taken possession of by the Americans; that he kept house, and died about 20 years ago; that Pierre Pettier is the only surviving child, and has always lived at Vincennes. By reference to the records of the Catholic church, it further appears, that Pierre, the only surviving child and heir, was born in February, 1783.
Rene Campeau.
Rene Campeau was on the militia roll at Vincennes, from the year 1786, until the year 1795..
Francois Cardinal.
Francois Cardinal did militia duty at Vincennes under deponent for two years previous to the marching of Col. Hamtramck up the Wabash, (that is to say the fall of the year 1790,) and that he was ordered to march with said expedition.
Bernice Lefevre.
Bernice Lefevre was married and kept at Vincennes when Captain Helms took possession of the country, that he died in the year 1779, or 1780, that he left no children, but left two nieces and one nephew living in Vincennes.
Jean Baptiste Valcour.
Jean Baptiste Valcour was at Vincennes when the Americans took possession of the country, that he had a family, lived and kept house therein, until about twenty-seven years ago, when he died; that his eldest son, who is now the only heir, according to one witness, is twenty-six or twenty-seven years old, and according to another witness forty-two years old, and has always lived in Vincennes.
Pierre Borgne, alias Belfin.
Pierre Borgne came to Vincennes a soldier under Gen. Clark in the year l’179, that he was a single man, rented deponent’s house for a year, wherein he worked at his trade in partnership with one Cantara, for about nine months, after which, he went and lived with one Lavislitte, about three months, at the end of which, he left the country, and has never lived in it since.
Charles Bonneau.
came to Vincennes before the Americans took possession of the country; that he kept house; but no evidence being adduced to establish the precise time of his death, whether before or since the expedition of Gen. Clark.
Samuel Bradley.
Samuel Bradley came to Vincennes, in the year 1785, lived and did militia duty therein until 1788, went to Illinois and returned in. 1789, that he then went to Kentucky to join his family, whom he moved to Vienna on Grand river. That he came to Vincennes on business, in July or August 1790, when he was detained until October waiting for company to return home with; it is further proved that he was ordered to go on Col. Hamtramok’s expedition, (in that year) was seen on the parade with a gun on his shoulder, but did not go. From the circumstances stated it appears that claimant was not a settled inhabitant of Vincennes, but a traveler, whose place of residence was Kentucky, that he was accidentally detained by apprehension of the Indians, and waited for company.
John Balis or Bayless.
John Balis or Bayless came to Vincennes as an officer under general Clark; that he married in the winter of 1780, or 1786, and vent to live in a house with his wife in the back part of the town, but whether he resigned his commission is not known; that he went away about the time the troops of general Clark left Vincennes, but did not go with them; they went by water and claimant by land. From the above statement it appears that claimant can be viewed in no other light than that of an officer of general Clark’s, to whom, no more than the privates, the act of 1791, in relation to heads of families, can by any means apply; it may also be observed, that the officers and privates of the Illinois regiment have been provided for elsewhere.
Pierre Beaupre.
Pierre Beaupre came to Vincennes about 20 years ago; (that is, 1785) kept house therein by himself for two years, when he went away; claimant having come two years subsequent to the year 1783.
Jean Baptiste Chicotte.
Jean Baptiste Chicotte lived in Vincennes before and after the Americans took possession of the country, was a single man and lived with his brother; claimant cannot be considered as the head of a family.
Victal Caron.
Victal Caron lived at Vincennes and kept house, but died before the Americans took possession of the country.
Francois Dumay.
Francois Dumay lived in Vincennes and was about twelve years old when the country was taken possession of by the Americans.
Pierre Dumay.
Pierre Dumay was on the militia roll, and did militia duty at Vincennes, but it is uncertain at what time that he left Vincennes four or five years before colonel Hamtramck’s expedition against the Indians (in the year 1790.)
Joseph Dumay.
Joseph Dumay came to Vincennes about thirty-eight years ago, and lived there until about nine years ago, when he died; that he acted as an interpreter at the United States garrison at Vincennes, and at Greenville in 1795, but it is not known whether he was enrolled in the militia, and it is believed by deponent that he was exempted by being interpreter.
Isaac T. Decker.
Isaac T. Decker did militia duty, in the summer of 1790, at the river Duchis station, about six miles from Vincennes; that claimant is older than deponent’s son Moses, who was born in the year 1780, and who has received a militia donation, (from the governor when acting as commissioner.) It does not appear that claimant was enrolled on the first of August, 1790, but on the contrary was not of sufficient age to be enrolled, or to do militia duty.
Josette Fauvelle.
Josette Fauvelle was the wife of Jean Baptiste Ravelet, who left Vincennes about the year 1777, leaving his wife and family behind, and has never returned; that she left Vincennes before captain Holmes took possession of the country, (that is, June, 1778.)
Charles Finley.
Charles Finley came to Vincennes in the year 1786, staid about six months and went away, returned to Vincennes with the Kentucky militia who went with colonel Hamtramck against the Indians up the Wabash, n the year 1790, from which facts it appears that claimant was not a resident at Vincennes.
Jean Baptiste Frizy.
Jean Baptiste Filzy lived in Vincennes, in the year 1786, did militia duty therein, went with general Clark against the Indians in the same year; that he left the country in the year 1787, and has never returned.
Vital Goyoux.
Vital Goyoux lived at Vincennes when the country was taken possession of by Americans; that he was a single man, is not known (to deponent) that he kept house, or when he went away.
Antoine Goyoux.
Antoine Goyoux lived in Vincennes when the country was taken possession of by the
Americans; that he was a single man; that about thirty-three years ago, he, deponent, and a certain Mr. Larsh, lived together and kept house for one year.
Charles Lognon.
Charles Lognon was a trader and kept store at Vincennes when the country was taken possession of by the Americans; was a single man and lived with his brother; that he married about twenty years ago, and remained at Vincennes until about ten years ago, when he went away; he cannot be viewed as the head of a family between the years of 1779 or 1783.
Vincent Lafoy.
Vincent Lafoy lived at Vincennes, before and after the Americans took possession of the country, was a single man, had cattle, and kept house in company with a certain doctor Oliver, who was also a single man, but whether before or after the country was taken, deponent does not recollect; that after leaving Oliver, he lived with Angelique Mallet and a Mr. Cartier.
Jean Baptiste Langlois.
Jean Baptiste Langlois did militia duty at Vincennes, twenty-one years ago next September (to wit September, 1790), in captain Edelin’s company, wherein he remained as a private until about fourteen or fifteen years ago; that he has continued in the country ever since. It not appearing by any testimony adduced, that claimant did militia duty previous to and on the first of August, 1790.
Luke Matson.
Luke Matson did militia duty in the summer of the year 1790, at the river Duchis station (about six miles from Vincennes); that he is perhaps two years older than deponent’s son Moses (who was born in the year 1780.) At such a tender age the claimant’s services as a militiaman could not be of any real importance, and the act of 1791, cannot be understood to apply to children, but to effective militiamen.
Alexis Roubaux.
Alexis Roubaux lived at Vincennes before and after the Americans took possession of the country; that he was a blacksmith and kept a shop of his own; was a single man, and lived with one Cornoyer.
Jacob Pea.
Jacob Pea did militia duty at Vincennes, in the years 1785, 1786 and 1787, and then went away; that it is not known whether he was at Vincennes in the year 1790.
Joseph Patterson.
Joseph Patterson was an effective militiaman at Vincennes in the year 1.786, was wounded by the Indians at the battle on Embarras creek, in the same year, staid at Vincennes some time, and went away to have his wounds cured, and has since died.
John Richardson.
John Richardson lived in and did militia duty at Vincennes in the years 1785 and 1786, and went away in 1787.
Edmund Hogen.
Edmund Hogen came to Vincennes in the year 1780, did militia duty thereinn for about a year, and then went away.
John Glass.
John Glass came to Vincennes in the year 1785; that he was in the battle on Embarras creek with the Indians; that he piloted general Harmer from the mouth of Pidgeon on the Ohio to Vincennes, and died in the latter end of the year 1788.
Joel Baker.
Joel Baker came to Vincennes in the year 1785, and did militia duty therein; was in the battle of Embarras in l786; sometime afterwards he went on a hunting party with some Indians, and was heard of no more.
Antoine Rimbeault.
Antoine Rimbeault was living with his father in Vincennes when the Americans took possession of the country; that his said father left Vincennes before that event; that he continued to live with the rest of the children in the father’s house after the said father had went away; that Pierre, the eldest brother, was married, but whether he lived with Antoine is not known; that Pierre was killed by the Indians; that Antoine afterwards went on La Balmis expedition against Detroit (in the fall of the year 1789), and was also killed by the Indians.
Jean Baptiste Trudell.
Jean Baptiste Trudell came to Vincennes with general Clark, from the Illinois, when he came to take possession of the country, but had lived there before; that he remained in Vincermes many years after the country was taken; that he was not married, nor did he own a house of his own, though sometimes he lived by himself and sometimes boarded with others.
James Talbert.
James Talbert did militia duty at the river Duchis station, (about six miles from Vincennes in the year 1790, but whether he was enrolled is not known; that he stood his draft when colonel Hamtramck marched up the Wabash in the fall of that year. No evidence is adduced to prove that claimant did militia duty before or on the 1st of August, 1790.
Jean Marie Barrois.
Jean K Barrois lived at Vincennes before and after the Americans took possession of the country; was a single man and kept house by himself; the same witness being re-examined, said that he sometimes lived by himself and sometimes with his brother; that he never had a family.
Jean Moise Malbouef.
Jean Moise Malbouef was in Vincennes 36 or 37 years ago, that he had a house and lot, and was the head a family and lived therein, until about the year 1787 or 1788, when he went away and has never returned; another witness proves that he married in the year 1785 and was a hunter; another that he was a day laborer and sometimes hunted; that he had a house and lot of his own, on and before the year 1783, wherein he lived by himself; but had no family until the year 1785, when he married at the falls of the Ohio.
Joseph St. Marie Racine.
Joseph St. Marie Racine lived at Vincennes before the Americans took possession of the country; but he does not know whether he was alive when that event took place; that he was never married but kept house; another states the same circumstance with this difference only, that he believes he was alive when the country was taken by the Americans. The want of positive proof that Joseph Marie Racine was living when the country came unto the possession of the Americans, for the vague expression fact, of one of the witnesses that he believes he was, is far from establishing that fact, would be a reasonable ground of rejection; but the fact well established, that he was a single man and the total want of evidence of every circumstance which would induce a belief that he lived at the head of working people or other dependents, forbids the liberal extension of the law to this case.
Special cases.
*Joseph Pancake.
Joseph Pancake was an effective militiaman at Vincennes in, the year 1786; that he was with and under deponent’s (John Small,) command in the same year the engagement with the Indians on Embarras, where he was killed.
*Jacob Howell.
*Jacob Howell was an effective militiaman at Vincennes, in the year 1786; that he commanded a party at the engagement with the Indians on Embarras, wherein he was killed.
*Alexander Wilson.
Alexander Wilson came to Vincennes in the year 1784; that he lived and did militia duty therein, until the year 1786, when he was killed by the Indians in the Embarras engagement.
*Daniel Sullivan.
Daniel Sullivan came to Vincennes in the year 1785, when he did militia duty until 1790, in the month of April of which year he was killed by the Indians.
*Jacob Tevebaugh.
Jacob Tevebaugh came to Vincennes in the year 1785, did militia duty therein until the year 1)190, and that in the month of April of the same year he was killed by the Indians, with Daniel Sullivan.
* Preceding commissioners have construed the provision of the act of 1791, relating to militia grants, strictly, rejecting the claim of those who had left the country before the first of August, 1790, and although they had. done militia duty for years before, and granted one hundred acres to such as, however recently arrived in the country, happened to be on the militia roll on that day. The present commissioners entertained some doubts on the correctness of that coutruction, and were inclined to believe that more liberality would accord better with the intentions of Congress; they could not entirely reject the idea, that the clause of the act of 1791, in favor of militiamen, went to provide a reward of one hundred acres of land for every man who, having not received the donation allotted to the heads of families, had done militia duty during their residence in the country, since it had come under the American government, and that the enrollment, on the first day of August 1790, was required as evidence of the performance of that duty rather than a condition indispensable for obtaining the bounty.
Fully sensible, however, of the importance and necessity of an uniform system of decisions, they have hitherto made no innovations therein in relation to militia claims, and rejected those which were predicated upon performance of militia duty not extending to the first of August, 1790. But the foregoing claims present themselves under a very different aspect. The several persons in whose right the bounty of one hundred acres is demanded by their representatives, not only did militia duty, but lost their lives, some in the actual performance of that duty, and all by the hands of the common enemy.
To have peremptorily rejected them, would have savored of injustice; to have confirmed them, would have been perhaps too great a deviation from the letter if not the spirit of the law and mode hitherto adopted in the decision of land claims. Under these circumstances, the commissioners, under a strong impression of the equity of the claims alluded to, have deemed it proper to lay the whole in the form of a special report, under the view of Congress, who akne can grant the relief which the law puts, (perhaps,) out of the power of the commissioners to award; and feel no hesitation in expressing their opinion, that the respective claimants ought to receive the bounty of one hundred acres earned at the expense of the blood of their fathers and relatives.
Note. This information came from the department of public Land, Volume 7., 1834-1835, which is housed at the Library of Congress.
Important note. I have thousands of names at this site, when asking about a name from this page or any other pages at this site, please give the ( Title of this page ), for without it I may not be able to help you. My address can be found in my profile.
---------------------------
Pierre Pettier .
François Pettier, father of Pierre Pettier lived at Vincennes before and after the country was taken possession of by the Americans; that he kept house, and died about 20 years ago; that Pierre Pettier is the only surviving child, and has always lived at Vincennes. By reference to the records of the Catholic church, it further appears, that Pierre, the only surviving child and heir, was born in February, 1783.
Rene Campeau.
Rene Campeau was on the militia roll at Vincennes, from the year 1786, until the year 1795..
Francois Cardinal.
Francois Cardinal did militia duty at Vincennes under deponent for two years previous to the marching of Col. Hamtramck up the Wabash, (that is to say the fall of the year 1790,) and that he was ordered to march with said expedition.
Bernice Lefevre.
Bernice Lefevre was married and kept at Vincennes when Captain Helms took possession of the country, that he died in the year 1779, or 1780, that he left no children, but left two nieces and one nephew living in Vincennes.
Jean Baptiste Valcour.
Jean Baptiste Valcour was at Vincennes when the Americans took possession of the country, that he had a family, lived and kept house therein, until about twenty-seven years ago, when he died; that his eldest son, who is now the only heir, according to one witness, is twenty-six or twenty-seven years old, and according to another witness forty-two years old, and has always lived in Vincennes.
Pierre Borgne, alias Belfin.
Pierre Borgne came to Vincennes a soldier under Gen. Clark in the year l’179, that he was a single man, rented deponent’s house for a year, wherein he worked at his trade in partnership with one Cantara, for about nine months, after which, he went and lived with one Lavislitte, about three months, at the end of which, he left the country, and has never lived in it since.
Charles Bonneau.
came to Vincennes before the Americans took possession of the country; that he kept house; but no evidence being adduced to establish the precise time of his death, whether before or since the expedition of Gen. Clark.
Samuel Bradley.
Samuel Bradley came to Vincennes, in the year 1785, lived and did militia duty therein until 1788, went to Illinois and returned in. 1789, that he then went to Kentucky to join his family, whom he moved to Vienna on Grand river. That he came to Vincennes on business, in July or August 1790, when he was detained until October waiting for company to return home with; it is further proved that he was ordered to go on Col. Hamtramok’s expedition, (in that year) was seen on the parade with a gun on his shoulder, but did not go. From the circumstances stated it appears that claimant was not a settled inhabitant of Vincennes, but a traveler, whose place of residence was Kentucky, that he was accidentally detained by apprehension of the Indians, and waited for company.
John Balis or Bayless.
John Balis or Bayless came to Vincennes as an officer under general Clark; that he married in the winter of 1780, or 1786, and vent to live in a house with his wife in the back part of the town, but whether he resigned his commission is not known; that he went away about the time the troops of general Clark left Vincennes, but did not go with them; they went by water and claimant by land. From the above statement it appears that claimant can be viewed in no other light than that of an officer of general Clark’s, to whom, no more than the privates, the act of 1791, in relation to heads of families, can by any means apply; it may also be observed, that the officers and privates of the Illinois regiment have been provided for elsewhere.
Pierre Beaupre.
Pierre Beaupre came to Vincennes about 20 years ago; (that is, 1785) kept house therein by himself for two years, when he went away; claimant having come two years subsequent to the year 1783.
Jean Baptiste Chicotte.
Jean Baptiste Chicotte lived in Vincennes before and after the Americans took possession of the country, was a single man and lived with his brother; claimant cannot be considered as the head of a family.
Victal Caron.
Victal Caron lived at Vincennes and kept house, but died before the Americans took possession of the country.
Francois Dumay.
Francois Dumay lived in Vincennes and was about twelve years old when the country was taken possession of by the Americans.
Pierre Dumay.
Pierre Dumay was on the militia roll, and did militia duty at Vincennes, but it is uncertain at what time that he left Vincennes four or five years before colonel Hamtramck’s expedition against the Indians (in the year 1790.)
Joseph Dumay.
Joseph Dumay came to Vincennes about thirty-eight years ago, and lived there until about nine years ago, when he died; that he acted as an interpreter at the United States garrison at Vincennes, and at Greenville in 1795, but it is not known whether he was enrolled in the militia, and it is believed by deponent that he was exempted by being interpreter.
Isaac T. Decker.
Isaac T. Decker did militia duty, in the summer of 1790, at the river Duchis station, about six miles from Vincennes; that claimant is older than deponent’s son Moses, who was born in the year 1780, and who has received a militia donation, (from the governor when acting as commissioner.) It does not appear that claimant was enrolled on the first of August, 1790, but on the contrary was not of sufficient age to be enrolled, or to do militia duty.
Josette Fauvelle.
Josette Fauvelle was the wife of Jean Baptiste Ravelet, who left Vincennes about the year 1777, leaving his wife and family behind, and has never returned; that she left Vincennes before captain Holmes took possession of the country, (that is, June, 1778.)
Charles Finley.
Charles Finley came to Vincennes in the year 1786, staid about six months and went away, returned to Vincennes with the Kentucky militia who went with colonel Hamtramck against the Indians up the Wabash, n the year 1790, from which facts it appears that claimant was not a resident at Vincennes.
Jean Baptiste Frizy.
Jean Baptiste Filzy lived in Vincennes, in the year 1786, did militia duty therein, went with general Clark against the Indians in the same year; that he left the country in the year 1787, and has never returned.
Vital Goyoux.
Vital Goyoux lived at Vincennes when the country was taken possession of by Americans; that he was a single man, is not known (to deponent) that he kept house, or when he went away.
Antoine Goyoux.
Antoine Goyoux lived in Vincennes when the country was taken possession of by the
Americans; that he was a single man; that about thirty-three years ago, he, deponent, and a certain Mr. Larsh, lived together and kept house for one year.
Charles Lognon.
Charles Lognon was a trader and kept store at Vincennes when the country was taken possession of by the Americans; was a single man and lived with his brother; that he married about twenty years ago, and remained at Vincennes until about ten years ago, when he went away; he cannot be viewed as the head of a family between the years of 1779 or 1783.
Vincent Lafoy.
Vincent Lafoy lived at Vincennes, before and after the Americans took possession of the country, was a single man, had cattle, and kept house in company with a certain doctor Oliver, who was also a single man, but whether before or after the country was taken, deponent does not recollect; that after leaving Oliver, he lived with Angelique Mallet and a Mr. Cartier.
Jean Baptiste Langlois.
Jean Baptiste Langlois did militia duty at Vincennes, twenty-one years ago next September (to wit September, 1790), in captain Edelin’s company, wherein he remained as a private until about fourteen or fifteen years ago; that he has continued in the country ever since. It not appearing by any testimony adduced, that claimant did militia duty previous to and on the first of August, 1790.
Luke Matson.
Luke Matson did militia duty in the summer of the year 1790, at the river Duchis station (about six miles from Vincennes); that he is perhaps two years older than deponent’s son Moses (who was born in the year 1780.) At such a tender age the claimant’s services as a militiaman could not be of any real importance, and the act of 1791, cannot be understood to apply to children, but to effective militiamen.
Alexis Roubaux.
Alexis Roubaux lived at Vincennes before and after the Americans took possession of the country; that he was a blacksmith and kept a shop of his own; was a single man, and lived with one Cornoyer.
Jacob Pea.
Jacob Pea did militia duty at Vincennes, in the years 1785, 1786 and 1787, and then went away; that it is not known whether he was at Vincennes in the year 1790.
Joseph Patterson.
Joseph Patterson was an effective militiaman at Vincennes in the year 1.786, was wounded by the Indians at the battle on Embarras creek, in the same year, staid at Vincennes some time, and went away to have his wounds cured, and has since died.
John Richardson.
John Richardson lived in and did militia duty at Vincennes in the years 1785 and 1786, and went away in 1787.
Edmund Hogen.
Edmund Hogen came to Vincennes in the year 1780, did militia duty thereinn for about a year, and then went away.
John Glass.
John Glass came to Vincennes in the year 1785; that he was in the battle on Embarras creek with the Indians; that he piloted general Harmer from the mouth of Pidgeon on the Ohio to Vincennes, and died in the latter end of the year 1788.
Joel Baker.
Joel Baker came to Vincennes in the year 1785, and did militia duty therein; was in the battle of Embarras in l786; sometime afterwards he went on a hunting party with some Indians, and was heard of no more.
Antoine Rimbeault.
Antoine Rimbeault was living with his father in Vincennes when the Americans took possession of the country; that his said father left Vincennes before that event; that he continued to live with the rest of the children in the father’s house after the said father had went away; that Pierre, the eldest brother, was married, but whether he lived with Antoine is not known; that Pierre was killed by the Indians; that Antoine afterwards went on La Balmis expedition against Detroit (in the fall of the year 1789), and was also killed by the Indians.
Jean Baptiste Trudell.
Jean Baptiste Trudell came to Vincennes with general Clark, from the Illinois, when he came to take possession of the country, but had lived there before; that he remained in Vincermes many years after the country was taken; that he was not married, nor did he own a house of his own, though sometimes he lived by himself and sometimes boarded with others.
James Talbert.
James Talbert did militia duty at the river Duchis station, (about six miles from Vincennes in the year 1790, but whether he was enrolled is not known; that he stood his draft when colonel Hamtramck marched up the Wabash in the fall of that year. No evidence is adduced to prove that claimant did militia duty before or on the 1st of August, 1790.
Jean Marie Barrois.
Jean K Barrois lived at Vincennes before and after the Americans took possession of the country; was a single man and kept house by himself; the same witness being re-examined, said that he sometimes lived by himself and sometimes with his brother; that he never had a family.
Jean Moise Malbouef.
Jean Moise Malbouef was in Vincennes 36 or 37 years ago, that he had a house and lot, and was the head a family and lived therein, until about the year 1787 or 1788, when he went away and has never returned; another witness proves that he married in the year 1785 and was a hunter; another that he was a day laborer and sometimes hunted; that he had a house and lot of his own, on and before the year 1783, wherein he lived by himself; but had no family until the year 1785, when he married at the falls of the Ohio.
Joseph St. Marie Racine.
Joseph St. Marie Racine lived at Vincennes before the Americans took possession of the country; but he does not know whether he was alive when that event took place; that he was never married but kept house; another states the same circumstance with this difference only, that he believes he was alive when the country was taken by the Americans. The want of positive proof that Joseph Marie Racine was living when the country came unto the possession of the Americans, for the vague expression fact, of one of the witnesses that he believes he was, is far from establishing that fact, would be a reasonable ground of rejection; but the fact well established, that he was a single man and the total want of evidence of every circumstance which would induce a belief that he lived at the head of working people or other dependents, forbids the liberal extension of the law to this case.
Special cases.
*Joseph Pancake.
Joseph Pancake was an effective militiaman at Vincennes in, the year 1786; that he was with and under deponent’s (John Small,) command in the same year the engagement with the Indians on Embarras, where he was killed.
*Jacob Howell.
*Jacob Howell was an effective militiaman at Vincennes, in the year 1786; that he commanded a party at the engagement with the Indians on Embarras, wherein he was killed.
*Alexander Wilson.
Alexander Wilson came to Vincennes in the year 1784; that he lived and did militia duty therein, until the year 1786, when he was killed by the Indians in the Embarras engagement.
*Daniel Sullivan.
Daniel Sullivan came to Vincennes in the year 1785, when he did militia duty until 1790, in the month of April of which year he was killed by the Indians.
*Jacob Tevebaugh.
Jacob Tevebaugh came to Vincennes in the year 1785, did militia duty therein until the year 1)190, and that in the month of April of the same year he was killed by the Indians, with Daniel Sullivan.
* Preceding commissioners have construed the provision of the act of 1791, relating to militia grants, strictly, rejecting the claim of those who had left the country before the first of August, 1790, and although they had. done militia duty for years before, and granted one hundred acres to such as, however recently arrived in the country, happened to be on the militia roll on that day. The present commissioners entertained some doubts on the correctness of that coutruction, and were inclined to believe that more liberality would accord better with the intentions of Congress; they could not entirely reject the idea, that the clause of the act of 1791, in favor of militiamen, went to provide a reward of one hundred acres of land for every man who, having not received the donation allotted to the heads of families, had done militia duty during their residence in the country, since it had come under the American government, and that the enrollment, on the first day of August 1790, was required as evidence of the performance of that duty rather than a condition indispensable for obtaining the bounty.
Fully sensible, however, of the importance and necessity of an uniform system of decisions, they have hitherto made no innovations therein in relation to militia claims, and rejected those which were predicated upon performance of militia duty not extending to the first of August, 1790. But the foregoing claims present themselves under a very different aspect. The several persons in whose right the bounty of one hundred acres is demanded by their representatives, not only did militia duty, but lost their lives, some in the actual performance of that duty, and all by the hands of the common enemy.
To have peremptorily rejected them, would have savored of injustice; to have confirmed them, would have been perhaps too great a deviation from the letter if not the spirit of the law and mode hitherto adopted in the decision of land claims. Under these circumstances, the commissioners, under a strong impression of the equity of the claims alluded to, have deemed it proper to lay the whole in the form of a special report, under the view of Congress, who akne can grant the relief which the law puts, (perhaps,) out of the power of the commissioners to award; and feel no hesitation in expressing their opinion, that the respective claimants ought to receive the bounty of one hundred acres earned at the expense of the blood of their fathers and relatives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
