--part1_9e.1e0a9f6e.2935a857_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This response came to me directly after my query on the list about a Rev. soldier with no pension and no land bounty. It was very helpful to me and I thought others on the list might find it useful to them. I trust that Bob Brooks will approve of me sending in along. thanx to all for their responses. I am relatively new to this list. It is a GOOD ONE! Don Dickason Genealogy interest in: Dickason, Hamilton, Cadwallader, Himes, Garrett, Wisely, Steinberg, Blair, Lindsay, Zahn, Borchward(t), Biesterfeldt, Brand(t) --part1_9e.1e0a9f6e.2935a857_boundary Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: <rcbrooks@acadia.net> Received: from rly-za01.mx.aol.com (rly-za01.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.97]) by air-za03.mail.aol.com (v82.22) with ESMTP id MAILINZA36-1127095142; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:51:42 -0500 Received: from anvil.prexar.com (anvil.prexar.com [142.167.5.3]) by rly-za01.mx.aol.com (v82.22) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINZA17-1127095047; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:50:47 -0500 Received: from rcbrooks ([142.167.32.110]) by anvil.prexar.com (InterMail vK.4.03.02.00 201-232-124 license e80ad4300c78461dee1883b377c18f00) with SMTP id <20011127145045.EVFH28031.anvil@rcbrooks> for <Dickason31@aol.com>; Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:50:45 -0500 Message-ID: <004401c17752$f3037c00$6e20a78e@rcbrooks> From: "RC Brooks" <rcbrooks@acadia.net> To: <Dickason31@aol.com> References: <49.1498a993.2934f0da@aol.com> Subject: Re: [A-REV] Sol. w/ no Pension and no land bounty Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 09:49:36 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 > Can some one help me understand why a soldier in the Rev. > (or spouse) would NOT have applied for or gotten either a > pension or a land bounty warrant. I can not claim expertise in the pension process; however, I can offer a few observations. 1) Timing: There were several pension laws passed at various times. Prior to the establishment of the Federal Government in 1789, the pensions granted by the Continental Congress were very focused. Two catgories immediately come to mind -- Amputees who had lost a limb during service and Officers who had not been paid for there services. The 1818 Act required that the petitioner's need be established. I think it was in 1832 when all qualified veterans and widows of veterans who had not remarried became eligible for a pension regardless of need. 2) Qualification: As a rule, cumulative total of six months state or Continental military or naval service was the minimum acceptable to qualify for a pension. Most of the soldiers received a written discharge but many of these discharges were lost or destroyed in the interim. 3) Process: As a result of the 1818 Act an Agent of Pensions "held court" at the various county seats were the soldiers were expected to appear and "prove" their service. As the 1818 Act was for the "needy" only, I don't think the soldiers were expected to retain a lawyer and either a clerk of the court or a clerk of the Agent of Pensions (or perhaps the Agent himself) prepared the necessary paperwork. In lieu of presenting a discharge showing service in excess of the required minimum of six months, the soldiers were required to provide depositions and testimony from persons in a position to testify to the petitioners service. This was sometimes difficult to do; however, one "legal trick" commonly used was for three persons who served together to petition at the same session of court thereby mutually supporting each other's petitions while minimizing witness travel expenses. I believe many people failed to apply simply because of the difficulty of getting to court. If memory serves, the 1818 Act provided a qualifying soldier $8 per month (regardless of whether he served 6 months or over 8 years) or $96 per year. While this was below the "poverty line" of 1818, it helped people survive. As for bounty land, there was very little land awarded locally here in Maine simply because there was little federally-owned land available for grants. Although a land grant might be available in the west, of what good is 100 acres in the "northwest Territory" or "Ohio" or whatever it was called at the time. About the only thing for a 75 year old man to do was to sell it in a depressed market glutted with cheap bounty land. His neighbor grantees were no better off than he was. One man's opinion. Bob Brooks, retired downeast on the coast of Maine. --part1_9e.1e0a9f6e.2935a857_boundary--