IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. APRIL 7, 1858.-Ordered to be printed. Mr. EVANS Submitted the following REPORT. The Committee on Revolutionary Claims, to whom were referred the papers in support of the claim of Catharine Kellar to a pension, on account of the services of her husband, Conrad Kellar, having examined the same, beg leave to report: The petitioner is the widow of one Conrad Kellar, who, she alleges, was a soldier in the Pennsylvania line, in a regiment commanded by Colonel Broadhead. But, unfortunately, she is able to produce no evidence of the fact, except her own testimony. She says she lived in the same neighborhood, and was cognizant of the fact of her husband's enlistment, but knows nothing of his service, except the information which she received from him. Said Conrad lived until 1825, but never applied for a pension under the act of 1818. She was married to him in 1793. The prayer of the petition is, that she may be allowed a pension under the act of 7th of July, 1837. To entitle her to a pension under this act it is necessary to prove that her husband performed at least six months' service during the war of the revolution, and that her marriage took place before the year 1794 The main difficulty of the case arises from the defect of the proof of service. Under a recent act, the time of marriage is extended to 1800, and the evidence of her marriage before that time is pretty clearly established by her daughter. The only evidence of enlistment is, as before stated, that of the petitioner herself, who says her husband enlisted in 1777. At that time she was only eight years old, according to the account which she gives of her birth. Broadhead's regiment was a well known regiment in the Pennsylvania line; and if the husband of the petitioner was a soldier in it, there should be some record evidence existing in the revolutionary records in the public offices of Pennsylvania, or in the War Department. If such evidence exists, the petitioner will be entitled to a pension on establishing her claim at the Pension Office. Your committee are of opinion that the evidence is too unsatisfactory to authorize any favorable action by Congress. They, therefore, recommend that the petition be refused." IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. APRIL 7, 1858.-Ordered to be printed. Mr. EVANS submitted the following REPORT. The Committee on Revolutionary Claims, to whom was referred the petition of John Mason and others, heirs of Jeremiah Gilman, having had the same under consideration, submit the following report: It may be assumed that the facts set out in the petition are true; that Colonel Gilman served in the army of the revolution with distinction, and that he was a meritorious officer, and was compelled, by inability for active field duty, to resign; yet this case does, not come within any of the resolutions or acts of Congress in relation to the officers of the continental army. He resigned in March, 1780, which was before the passage of the resolution by which half-pay was promised to the officers who served to the end of the war. Whilst your committee think that Congress should fully perform all the promises made to the officers and soldiers of the revolutionary army, they do not feel that there would be any propriety in paying to the grandchildren of an officer, who resigned three years before the end. of the war, the same as to those who bore the privations and hazards of the campaign of 1780 and 1781, by which mainly the independence of the colonies was achieved. They therefore recommend that the prayer of the petitioners be refused. |