2d Session. MAGDALENA MOORE. JANUARY 9, 1847. Read, and laid upon the table. Mr. SEAMAN, from the Committee on Revolutionary Pensions, made the following REPORT: The Committee on Revolutionary Pensions, to whom was referred the tition of Magdalena Moore for a pension, report: pe The petitioner represents that she is the widow of Benjamin Moore, who was a soldier of the Revolution, and prays for a pension in consideration of the services of her said husband. The committee have referred her petition and the accompanying papers to the Commissioner of Pensions, and adopt his reply as a part of their report. The committee concur with the Commissioner in his decision, and recommend the adoption of the following resolution: Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioner ought not to be granted. PENSION OFFICE, May 2, 1846. SIR: I have the honor to enclose you the papers in the case of Magdalena Moore, and to inform you that her claim has not been allowed; first, because she has not, according to the rules of this department, made six months' military service of her husband; and, secondly, because her parol proof does not establish, with the requisite certainty, the date of her marriage before January, 1794. The Pennsylvania militia terms were limited to two months, and consequently the term of six months, which she asserts upon tradition and information, has been resisted as inconsistent with the course of that service. The service in the flying camp, if really rendered, should be verified by the records at Harrisburg. The granting a pension by the legislature of a State is an act of bounty, construed by no rules; but the pension asserted in this office is a pro rata stipend, to be definitely adjusted by the data which the proof filed may afford. No satisfactory data are furnished in this case, for the ascertainment of the amount of service rendered by her husband, by which her pension, if allowed, is to be computed. The ex parte parol testimony does not disclose the means by which a knowledge of the date of a distant and common occurrence has been re tained or recovered, and which a cross examination of the witnesses in a court would draw out. If the facts set forth were duly sustained, her claim would be allowed under the act of 7th July, 1838, and its supplements of 3d Maach, 1843, and 17th June, 1844. I have the honor to be, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, J. L. EDWARDS. Hon. H. J. SEAMAN, House of Representatives. 2d Session. Mr. SEAMAN, from the Committee on Revolutionary Pensions, made the following REPORT: The Committee on Revolutionary Pensions, to whom was referred the petition of David Pugh, administrator of Hannah Warkins, deceased, report: The petitioner represents himself to be the administrator of Hannah Watkins, and prays that the pension which was due her as the widow of Robert Watkins, who was a pensioner of the United States at the time of his death, in 1833, may be paid to the children of the said Hannah. The committee have referred the petition to the Commissioner of Pensions, and adopt his decision as a part of their report. It is as follows: PENSION OFFICE, May 4, 1846. SIR: I have the honor to return you the memorial of the administrator of Hannah Watkins, (praying that the children may be allowed the pension which might have been allowed their mother from 4th March, 1836, to the day of her death, in 1839, if the resolution of 16th August, 1843, had been in operation when she died,) and to remark that children are not, in their own right, beneficial objects of the pension laws, although they may, under certain circumstances, become the recipients of arrears of pensions due a deceased parent at his or her death. As the law stood in 1839, a widow whose husband had received or was entitled to a pension under the act of 7th of June, 1832, could not be allowed a pension under the act of 7th July, 1838; that limitation was removed by the joint resolution of 16th August, 1842, more than three years after claimant's death. Her husband was allowed a pension of $46 66 per annum, from 4th of March, 1831, to 7th day of October, 1832, which was paid to the widow. I have the honor to be, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant, J. L. EDWARDS. Hon. H. J. SEAMAN, House of Representatives. The committee are not disposed to extend the provisions of any of the existing pension laws to this class of cases; and, adopting the views of Mr.. Edwards in the above communication, recommend the adoption of the following resolution: Resolved, That the petitioner is not entitled to relief. 2d Session. ROBERT ALLISON-HEIRS OF. JANUARY 9, 1847. Read, and laid upon the table. Mr. SEAMAN, from the Committee on Revolutionary Pensions, made the following REPORT: The Committee on Revolutionary Pensions, to whom was referred the petition of the children and heirs of Robert Allison, deceased, report: That the petitioners represent themselves to be the children of Robert Allison, deceased, who was a pensioner of the United States under the act of the 18th March, 1818, at $240 per annum, the pay of a lieutenant; that he died on the 24th April, 1836. They claim that while he held the rank of lieutenant he performed the duties of adjutant. They now ask that the benefit of the act of the 7th June, 1832, which provides for additional allowance to adjutants, may be extended to them for the service which their father rendered in that grade. The committee recommend the adoption of the following resolution : Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioners ought not to be granted. |