The Committee on Pensions, to whom was referred the petition of John B. Barton, in behalf of himself and the other surviving children of the late General William Barton, submit the following report: The petitioner states, "that he is one of the surviving children of General William Barton, late of Rhode Island, deceased, who was an officer of the war of the revolution, and during an engagement with the enemy he received a most serious wound, in consequence of which his name was placed on the United States invalid pension roll, at the rate of thirty dollars per month, and which he continued to receive until he made application for the benefit of the act of Congress, passed May 15, 1828. Under the second section of this law his invalid pension was not only discontinued, but the amount withheld or deducted from March 3, 1826, to the time the act of May 15, 1828, took effect. That by the act of May 31, 1830, it was declared the second section of the act of May 15, 1828, shall not be construed to embrace invalid pensions, and that the pension of invalids shall not be deducted, &c. Had General W. Barton made application for the act of May 15, 1828, after the passage of the act of 1830, no deduction of invalid pension would have been made. It would, therefore, seem_but justice that the invalid pension so deducted in this case should be paid, as it was not contemplated by Congress that the invalid pension should be withheld." In a communication from the Commissioner of Pensions, hereto annexed as a part of this report, he says, "the statement contained in the petition is correct;" and he recommends a special act granting a pension to the petitioners, from March 3, 1826, to October 22, 1831, at the rate of thirty dollars per month. The committee are of opinion that the petitioner is entitled to relief, and accordingly report a bill. PENSION OFFICE, December 29, 1848. SIR: The petition of the heirs of William Barton is herewith returned. The statement contained in the petition is correct. If Congress should, by a special act, grant the relief asked for, viz: the pension of William Barton, as an invalid pensioner from March 3, 1826, to October 22, 1831, at the rate of $30 per month, it would be in accordance with the acts for the relief of the heirs of Anderson and Gibbs. The acts were passed June 15, 1836, and will be found in the 6th volume of Peters's edition Laws United States, page 637. I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant, Hon. HENRY JOHNSON, Chairman Committee on Pensions, U. S. Senate. 1st Session. No. 10. IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. JANUARY 16, 1850. Mr. JONES made the following REPORT: [To accompany bill S. No. 50.] The Committee on Pensions, to whom was referred the memorial of Nathan Worthen, praying for the payment to the heirs of Judith Worthen, deceased, of a pension, to which she was entitled as the widow of Isaac Worthen, deceased, respectfully report: That it appears, from the papers presented, that Judith Worthen, the widow of Isaac Worthen, a revolutionary pensioner, applied at the Pension Office for a pension, under the act of July 7, 1838. This act gave to the widows of certain revolutionary soldiers, for the term of five years from the 4th of March, 1836, the annuity or pension which might have been allowed to the husband, in virtue of a previous act, if living at the time it was passed. Her husband received his pension, under the previous act referred to, until his death, which occurred on the 1st day of March, 1841. On the 3d day of March, 1843, the widow made her declaration, under the act of 7th July, 1838, and the next month filed her papers with the Commissioner of Pensions. These papers were not finally acted on at the Pension Office, until after the 30th April, 1844. On that day an act was passed, providing that no pension should thereafter be granted to a widow for the same time for which her husband had received one. The five years for which the pension was granted to widows, by the act of July 7, 1838, extended from 4th of March, 1836, to March 4, 1841. The husband died on the 1st March, 1841, and, in consequence of the law last mentioned, the Commissioner granted her a pension for only three days, from his death on the 1st, until the 4th March, 1841. If the case had been decided at the time the papers were presented, she would have received, as she was entitled under the law, the whole five years' pension at $48 per annum. It is claimed by her heirs, that the delay in deciding the case at the office, upon proofs found amply sufficient, should not prejudice her rights, and that the money withheld should be paid to her legal representatives. It is not the policy of the pension laws to grant pensions, or the arrearages of pensions, to the heirs of the pensioners. When, however, money has actually become due, and payable to a pensioner, and all the papers to obtain its payment are filed with the proper officer, and the payment delayed on account of a press of business which prevents the examination at an early day, the committee see much reason in regarding the money due as the property of the pensioner, to which his heirs may be justly entitled. In this case, nothing but the delay in examining the papers filed, until after the act of April 30, 1844, prevented her receiving the money. Her right to it was perfect under the law of 1838, until long after she had done all that was required of her to obtain it. To avoid the injustice of the restrictive act of April 30, 1844, in cases like that here presented, a joint resolution was passed on the 23d January, 1845, providing that the restriction should not be construed to affect the claims of those widows whose applications for a pension, or an arrear of pension, at the passage of the resolution, shall have been made and filed. in the Pension Office, awaiting the decision of the Commissioner of Pensions thereon. The restriction was re-enacted in February, 1845, but cases in which (like that under consideration) the declaration was made on or before April 30, 1844, and filed in the Pension Office on or before the 23d January, 1845, were expressly excepted from its operation. Under these provisions the widow, if living, would be entitled to receive the pension for five years, ending March 4, 1841, and that, too, on the same papers which were filed by her in the Pension Office in 1843. Her death has prevented the drawing of the money. Under the facts of this case, and the legislation on the subject above cited, the committee are of opinion that the amount of the five years' pension ought to be regarded as belonging to the widow, and, after her application was made in due form to obtain it, should be considered as money in the treasury for her use, to which her heirs are justly entitled. They therefore report a bill to that effect. 1st Session. No. 11. IN SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES. JANUARY 16, 1850. Mr. GREENE made the following REPORT: [To accompany bill S. No. 52.] The Committee on Military Affairs, to whom was referred the memorial of Roger Jones, having had the same under consideration, have concluded to adopt the report made thereon at the last session of Congress. They accordingly report a bill similar to that reported at the last session, and recommend its passage. JANUARY 4, 1849. The committee have carefully examined all the evidence in this case, and are of opinion that Adjutant General Jones is entitled, both in law and equity, to the relief he asks for, his claim being fully sustained by former and repeated dicisions of the Senate; and the committee report a bill accordingly, believing it the only mode now practicable by which justice long deferred can be rendered to a meritorious officer, whose life has been devoted to the public service; and in consideration of the undeniable justice of the claim, and the previous decisions in the Senate, upon the fullest examination, the committee recommend that the bill receive its third reading and be passed. MEMORIAL OF ROGER JONES. To the Senate of the United States: The memorial of Roger Jones respectfully showeth: That Colonel Robert Butler and this memorialist were the adjutant generals of the army at the reduction by law in 1821, which law provided, among other reductions, that there should be only one adjutant general; that the President considered himself authorized, under this law, to dismiss both Colonel Butler and this memorialist from their commissions as adjutant generals, and to appoint General Atkinson to be retained adjutant general under the law; that on Atkinson's declining the appointment, the President appointed Colonel Gadsden; that the Senate considered this whole |