^J2 55 
 
 1-137 
 
tJ'ld t '( < n :. (-Ct< (du (On. 
 'U.S. f:nt£ 
 
 To the Honorable Senate, House of Representatives, and 
 Court of Claims, of the United States. 
 
 CLAIMS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 OFFICERS OF THE REVOLUTION, 
 
 TNDER THE RESOLVE OF OCTOBER 21, 1780. 
 
 ALSO, 
 
 Claims for Seven Years Half Pay to the 
 Widows and Children, 
 
 UNDER THE RESOLVE OF AUGUST 24, 1780. 
 
 FROM A "BOOK ON PRIVATE CLAIMS." 
 
 BY NATHANIEL HATCH, 
 Counsellor at Law, 514 Twelfth street. 
 
 WASHINGTON, D. C. 
 1857. 
 

tt'37 
 
 To the Honorable Senate, House of Representatives, and 
 Court of Claims, of the United States. 
 
 CLAIMS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 OFFICERS OF THE REVOLUTION, 
 
 ODER THE RESOLVE OF OCTOBER 21, 1780. 
 
 ALSO, 
 
 Claims for Seven Tears Half Pay to the 
 Widows and Children, 
 
 UNDER THE RESOLVE OF AUGUST 24, 1780. 
 
 FROM A "BOOK ON PRIVATE CLAIMS." 
 
 BY NATHANIEL HATCH, 
 Counsellor at Law, 514 Twelfth street. 
 
 WASHINGTON, D. C. 
 
 1857. 
 
F~ 
 
 
 "06 
 
BRIEF 
 
 OF THE 
 
 LAWS AND ARGUMENT 
 
 IN BEHALF OF 
 
 THE HALF-PAY CLAIMS, 
 
 UNDER THE RESOLVE OF OCTOBER 21, 1780. 
 
 These claims consist of three several and continuous considerations, 
 which were finally, by the act of October 21, 1780, blended in one 
 entire contract : 
 
 1. Grants of land by the resolves of September 16 and 18, 1776 ; 
 
 2. Seven years half pay by the resolve of May 15, 1778 ; 
 
 3. Seven years half pay in specie or current money, October 3, 1780 ; 
 All, in addition to the land, to induce the officers and soldiers to serve 
 
 during the war, and the promise of seven years half pay made to the 
 supernumerary officers. 
 
 The act of October 21, 1780, was passed after the Government hnd 
 become utterly insolvent ; after it had repudiated and scaled all of its 
 most sacred debts; after it had, by the acts of March and April lc v , 
 and June 28, 1780, declared that all of the Government paper which 
 had issued, or should thereafter issue, to be of the value of two dollars 
 and fifty cents to the hundred. 
 
 That the resolve of October 21, 1780, constituted a solemn contract 
 with each officer for grants of land and half pay during life. The prom- 
 ise of land was blended with and made a part of the same entire con- 
 sideration with the half-pay portion of the contract. The acknowledg- 
 ment, presentation, or record, of the one, was the presentation, prom,' 
 ise, and record, of the other. The suspension of the acts of limitation 
 of one portion would equally affect the other. These were vested rights, 
 and the contract could not be varied, rescinded, or impaired, by any 
 subsequent acts of legislation, without the consent of each officer, indi- 
 
IV 
 
 vidually. Their rights were not affected by substituting the act of 
 March 22, 1783, for five years full pay — 1. Because that resolve was 
 not passed until after the peace, after the contract had been fulfilled 
 on the part of the officers ; 2. Because the officers were expressly pro- 
 hibited from expressing their dissent to the same; 3. Because it was 
 passed at a time when it was well known to Congress that the Govern- 
 ment were hopelessly insolvent, and had no power to comply with the 
 conditions of that resolve, and ought not to have any binding force upon 
 them. That it was merely a proposition to compromise a debt which 
 had already accrued, which utterly failed, andtherefore should make no 
 difference whether they assented to it or not. It could not impair their 
 rights under the original contract. 
 
 The depreciated certificates sent to the officers were a part of the 
 resolve of 1783, as much so as if it had been attached ; and as the 
 interest was payable at the end of each year, the omission to pay the 
 interest for a single year was not only a repudiation of the certificate, 
 but also of the terms and conditions of the resolve itself, and did not 
 repeal or affect the resolve of 1780. 
 
 The certificates sent to a captain, purporting to be of the value of 
 $2,400, at the time it was sent, was, by the laws of April and June, 1780, 
 of the value of only $60, and could not be an accord and satisfaction 
 of only that amount. 
 
 3. Notwithstanding the Government continued during all the period 
 of its existence hopelessly insolvent, and unable to pay even a single 
 year's interest, refused to permit the officers to return their commuta- 
 tion in their own or other certificates, but confined that privilege to the 
 invalid corps, they were worth no more to the officers than any cer- 
 tificates, and the detention or disposition of those certificates at their 
 legal value could not have been of any injury to the Government, inas- 
 much as by law they were worth only two and a half dollars to the 
 hundred ; and if the Government allowed any more to strangers, it was 
 to benefit holders and speculators, and in violation of the duty of 
 Congress. 
 
 4. The rights of the claimants who survived were fully discussed by 
 Congress, upon the report of the committee; for the act of May 15, 
 1828, restoring the surviving officers to their original rights as payeos, 
 not pensioners, but creditors of this Government ; and the act of May 15, 
 1828, and the many subsequent acts of Congress, are some of the laws 
 of the United States made by Congress, in pursuance of the Constitu- 
 tion, which are the legislative construction and declaration of the rights 
 of these claimants, which that Constitution declares "shall be the 
 
supreme law of the land," and restored the heirs of those officers who 
 had deceased, as well as the living, to their original rights. This act 
 made no deduction of the amount of commutation which had been or 
 or which might thereafter be paid to any of said officers or their heirs, 
 nor that payments made under said act of 1828 should be in full of 
 said claims. The words of the act did not make the money payable to 
 such officers as were entitled to commutation, but to those officers who 
 were "entitled to half pay under the resolve of October 21, 1780." 
 No language could be more express in the recognition of the original 
 contract of 1780 than the act of May 15, 1828. 
 
 In addition to this act, are the many subsequent acts of Congress 
 giving to the same officers who received the amount of fourteen years 
 half pay under this act, an additional amount of five years full pay in 
 specie, together with interest, and this at intervals between 1828 and 
 1838. That a special act or general act of Congress in behalf of a large 
 number of the same class of claimants, resting upon the same contract, 
 is a legislative construction and declaration of the rights of all the oth- 
 ers. That the renewal of a promise or the acknowledgment of a debt 
 to one of ever so many obligees or payees, is an acknowledgment and 
 promise to all named in the same contract ; equal and impartial justice 
 being one of the great fundamental principles of the Constitution and 
 the laws of our Government. 
 
 Grants of land were an addition to the money portiou of the contract 
 of 1780. The issuing of warrants and patents, and the record of the 
 same, to the officers, are a presentation and acknowledgment and 
 renewal of the promise of the money half-pay portion of the contract, 
 and coextensive in all its relations between the officer and the Govern- 
 ment, and cannot be separated. The time for receiving the land portion 
 of the contract having been extended to the 26th of June, 1858, also 
 extends to the half-pay portion, at least up to that time. 
 
 The claimants further urge, that the substitution of the act of 1788 
 instead of that of 1780, by the old Confederacy, and the act of the new 
 Government prohibiting any suit against the United States in behalf 
 of any of its creditors, was an entire suspension of the half-pay contract. 
 And the old Confederacy having terminated without having paid any 
 portion of said commutation certificates, was a full repudiation of the 
 certificates and the resolve of 1783. The record of those certificates, 
 land warrants, and patents, were the presentation, record, and evidence, 
 of the original claim, and a bar against all limitation acts. 
 
 A law which confers a benefit or gratuity may impose conditions as 
 a part of that consideration ; but contracts already existing, which 
 
VI 
 
 become vested rights, are not subject to be impaired or rescinded by 
 subsequent legislation, statute of limitation, or otherwise. The Gov- 
 ernment of the United States having established a court " to hear and 
 determine all claims founded upon any law of Congress, or upon any 
 contract, express or implied, with the Government of the United States," 
 virtually by that act itself admits the parties for the Jirst time to their 
 rights as creditors, and cannot, after having declined the payment of 
 claims for so many years, set up any statute of limitation as a bar to 
 the claims. This act is virtually a suspension of all acts of limitation 
 to all claims which existed against the Government before its passage. 
 
 The act does not authorize the court to consider any claim paid by 
 any acts of limitation. The resolve of 1783 was founded entirely on 
 the imperative necessity and exigency of the Government — a mere 
 proposition and an attempt to compromise a debt, by substituting a new 
 promise for a less amount, without security for the pledged faith of the 
 nation for a much larger sum ; which having utterly failed, and to the 
 great injury of the claimants, left them to resort to their original 
 contract. 
 
 It should not be forgotten, that Congress created, by positive law, 
 two several and distinct classes of currency, which existed at the time 
 these contracts with the officers were made. And the important dis- 
 tinction between them was then recognised by both parties. 
 
 One consisted of specie, the other of the bills or certificates of the 
 Government, worth, at the time the contracts were made, on the 
 third and twenty-first days of October, 1780, only two and a half dol- 
 lars to the hundred. These contracts were expressly made payable in 
 specie or current money, and not in the valueless certificates of the 
 Government ; and this just distinction is recognised in the act of March 
 22, 1783. 
 
 Keeping this fact in view, as the basis of the contract, it is impossi- 
 ble to imagine that these valueless certificates, sent to the officers, could 
 have been intended as a compliance with the expressed requirements of 
 either act. The amount of the specie consideration of the seven years 
 half pay named in the resolve of October 3, 1780, and which was in- 
 cluded in that of the contract of October 21, 1780, being $1,680, 
 would, of itself, purchase, for each Captain, over sixty-seven thousand 
 dollars of these Government certificates ; and be it remembered, that 
 this valuation was made by Congress itself. Who, then, can say that 
 where the contracts were originally founded upon the specie basis, made 
 payable in specie, or its equivalent, that the certificates of the Govern- 
 ment, sent to the officers, could have been an accord and satisfaction 
 
toward this specie consideration, for any greater amount than they 
 were worth by law, and for which they passed as currency 1 And the 
 claimants say, Congress having pledged the public faith to these 
 officers to preserve and -protect this preferred specie consideration, 
 they were in duty bound to have excluded all these commutation cer- 
 tificates, while in the hands of strangers, from the funding act of August 
 4, 1790. 
 
Washington, D. C, 
 514 Twelfth street, November, 1857. 
 The Government of the United States having established a Court " to hear and de- 
 1 termine all claims founded upon any law of Gongress, or upon any regulation of an 
 ' Executive Department, or upon any contract, express or implied, with the Govern- 
 • ment of the United States, which may be suggested to it by a petition filed therein, 
 1 and also all claims which may be referred to said Court by either House of Congress," 
 has induced the author to compile and publish a work, entitled 
 
 "BOOK OF PRIVATE CLAIMS, 
 
 UNSETTLED AND UNPAID BY THE UNITED STATES." 
 
 The Court of Claims have endeavored to limit the powers of their 
 
 jurisdiction as much as possible, • and have decided that in order to 
 
 justify a decision in favor of a claimant, his claim must in all cases be 
 
 founded upon some legal right. This principle, the court say, has 
 
 been adopted in cases of Todd vs. the United States, and Lindsay vs. 
 
 the same : " The court has not regarded itself as a council, to advise 
 
 Congress what was just and equitable; nor as a jury, to exercise a 
 
 merely discretionary authority." " When a claim has been referred 
 
 to them by either House of Congress, they have not supposed that the 
 
 whole power of Congress over the matter was thereby delegated, but 
 
 that they were to report their decision whether the claim was founded 
 
 upon any legal right.'" Their opinion has been, that what was 
 
 required by general principles " of justice, irrespective of law, was a 
 
 matter, the decision of which was not intended to be conferred upon 
 
 the court. " 
 
 One object of the compilation of this work on. Private Claims has 
 been, to elicit the attention of Congress to the importance of first dis- 
 posing of those claims which are founded upon express contracts of 
 the Government, especially where one contract may embrace a large 
 class of claimants, of which each one is equally entitled ; and in many 
 cases where Congress may have admitted and paid claims to individ- 
 uals of the same class, founded upon the same contract, but leaving a 
 large majority of them unprovided for. Where the delay has been 
 such, on the part of Congress, that the original parties to whom the 
 same was due have deceased, Congress, being the law-making power, 
 have always exercised the right of saying to whom the same shall be 
 paid. If the consideration of the contract was such, that public policy 
 and humanity induced Congress to protect it to the payee — as in the 
 
acts of May 15, 1828 ; June 7, 1832 — by the same right they could 
 extend that protection, and order of priority of payment, to the heirs 
 of the original grantees or payees. 
 
 The most important claims — those which have remained the greatest 
 period of time unpaid, for which Congress declared the " faith of the 
 nation hath been pledged," and the most numerous — are those of the 
 officers of the Revolution, embraced in the resolves of Congress of 
 October 21, 1780, which constituted a solemn contract with those 
 officers for half pay during life, whose services, sufferings, and for- 
 tunes, gave to the people their liberty and a republican Government, 
 enjoyed as much now as then, and which is descending with all its 
 greatness and blessings to all future generations, embracing considera- 
 tions of too great magnitude to be described or disregarded. 
 
 As those claims were viewed by Washington, and regarded by Con- 
 gress, as having been founded upon considerations which were to give 
 them a precedence over all other claims of the Government, contracted 
 at a time after the Government had utterly failed, and the contract 
 resting entirely upon the good faith of the nation for a prospective 
 reward, I have thought it best to subjoin a concise history of the events 
 which terminated in a basis of the contract for " half pay during 
 life." 
 
 Although, even at this late period of time, the justice, expediency r , 
 and policy, of the laws on which those claims are founded, are denied 
 by some, yet we are bound to regard them as laws, and binding upon 
 the Government ; and more especially, since they have been so pro- 
 nounced and confirmed by many hundred of subsequent acts of Con- 
 gress. 
 
 Congress, by their resolve of June 15, 1775, after the Lexington 
 affair, April 19, 1775, adopted the army raised in the Northern States, 
 and elected George Washington Commander-in-chief. On the 21st of 
 July, 1775, he was authorized to keep a force in Massachusetts, as 
 he may deem necessary, not to exceed 22,000 men. 
 
 The army was increased from time to time, by the enlistment of 
 soldiers for short terms. 
 
 It became necessary that the army should be increased, and Con- 
 gress resolved to raise eighty-eight battalions, to be enlisted for the 
 war, as soon as possible. 
 
 In order to induce officers and soldiers to make such an important 
 engagement, Congress proposed to make them grants of lands, and did 
 so, bv their resolves of September 16, 1776; September 18, 1776; 
 August 12, 1780; September 22, 1780. 
 
 BOUNTY LAND ACTS IN BEHALF OF OFFICERS AND SOLDIERS OF THE 
 REVOLUTION, WHO ENGAGED FOK THE WAR. 
 
 To provide for the raising of eighty-eight battalions, to serve for the war. 
 
 " Resolved, That, in addition to a money bounty of twenty dollars 
 ' to each non-commissioned officer and private soldier, Congress make 
 ' provision for granting lands, in the following proportions, to the 
 ' officers and soldiers who shall engage in the service, and continue 
 
therein to the close of the war, or until discharged by Congress, 
 and to the representatives of such officers and soldiers as shall be 
 slain by the enemy. Such lands to be provided by the United States ; 
 and whatever expense shall be necessary to procure such land, the 
 said expense shall be paid and borne hy the States, in the same pro- 
 portion as the other expenses of the war, viz : to a colonel, five hun- 
 dred acres ; to a lieutenant colonel, four hundred and fifty acres ; to 
 a major, four hundred acres ; to a captain, three hundred acres ; to a 
 lieutenant, two hundred acres; to an ensign, one hundred and fifty 
 acres; each non-commissioned officer and soldier, one hundred acres. 
 
 [Resolution — In Congress, September 16, 1776.] 
 
 " Resolved, That the bounty and grants of land offered by Congress, 
 by a resolution of the 16th instant, as an encouragement to the officers 
 and soldiers to engage to serve in the army of the United States 
 during the war, shall extend to all who are, or shall be, enlisted for 
 that term ; the bounty of ten dollars, which any of the soldiers have 
 received from the continent, on account of a former enlistment, to be 
 reckoned in part payment of the twenty dollars offered by the said 
 resolution : That no officer in the continental army be allowed to hold 
 more than one commission, or to receive pay but in one capacity, at 
 the same time. [Resolution — In Congress, September 18, 1776.] 
 
 " Resolved, That the provision for granting lands, by the resolution 
 of September sixteenth, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-six, 
 be and is hereby extended to the general officers, in the following 
 proportion: to a major general, one thousand one hundred acres; to 
 a brigadier general, eight hundred and fifty acres. 
 
 [Resolution — In Congress, August 12, 1780.] 
 
 11 Congress resumed the consideration of the report of the Committee 
 on the Medical Department; and, on the consideration of the follow- 
 ing, it was 
 
 " Resolved, That the several officers of the medical department, 
 except the clerks and stewards, shall, at the end of the war, be enti- 
 tled to a certain provision of land, in the proportion following, to 
 wit : the director to have the same quantity as a brigadier general ; 
 chief physicians and purveyor, the same as a colonel ; physicians and 
 surgeons, and apothecary, the same as a lieutenant colonel ; regi- 
 mental surgeons, and assistants to the purveyor and apothecary, the 
 same as a major ; hospital and regimental surgeon's mate, the same 
 
 as a captain." [Resolution — In Congress, September 22, 1780.] 
 
 On the 3d of October, 1780, Congress reorganized the army, and 
 extended the grants of land to those officers who became supernu- 
 meraries. 
 
 Grants of land was the first inducement embraced in the engagement 
 to serve during the war. 
 
 This was declared by the act of September 16, 1776, to be, " in 
 addition " to the promise of their monthly pay and bounty money. 
 
 In order to defray the expenses of the war, Congress, by their re- 
 solve of 3d October, 1776, established a loan office in each State, and 
 
for continental money or specie paid in, certificates were ordered to be 
 given for the amount, promising the payment of the principal at future 
 periods, and that the interest should be paid annually where the money 
 was loaned. This system went into full operation, loans were made 
 and largely increased by two emissions of the continental money of May 
 20, 1777, and April 11, 1778. 
 
 THE NECESSITY OF A HAL-FPAY ESTABLISHMENT AS AN INDUCEMENT 
 TO SERVE DURING THE WAR. 
 
 A further consideration and still stronger inducement to serve during 
 the war, appear from the following : 
 
 Extract of a representation made by General Washington to a Committee of Congressj 
 
 January 29, 17*8. 
 
 " Gentlemen : The numerous defects in our present military estab- 
 
 * lisments rendering many reformations and many new arrangements 
 i absolutely necessary, and Congress having been pleased to appoint 
 i you a committee, in concert with me, to make and recommend such 
 
 * as shall appear eligible, in pursuance of the various objects in their 
 
 * resolution for that purpose, I have, in the following sheets, briefly 
 ' delivered my sentiments upon such of them as seemed to me most 
 i essential, so far as observation has suggested and leisure permitted. 
 
 * These are submitted, and 1 shall be happy if they are found con- 
 
 * ducive to remedying the evils and inconveniences we are now subject 
 ' to, and putting the army upon a more respectable footing. Something 
 i must be done — important alterations must be made — necessity requires 
 i that our resources should be enlarged and our system improved ; for 
 4 without it, if the dissolution of the army should not be the conse- 
 6 quence, at least its operations must infallibly be feeble, languid, and 
 
 * ineffectual. 
 
 " As I consider a proper and satisfactory provision for officers, in a 
 
 * manner, as the basis of every other regulation and arrangement neces- 
 
 * sary to be made, since without officers no army can exist ; and unless 
 ' some measure be devised to place those of ours in a more desirable 
 
 * situation, few of them would be able, if willing, to continue in it. 
 
 " I shall begin with a few reflections, tending to prove the necessity 
 ' of a 'Half-Pay Establishment.' » 
 
 M A small knowledge of human nature will convince us, that, with 
 
 * far the greatest part of mankind, interest is the governing principle, 
 
 * and that almost every man is more or less under its influences. Motives- 
 
 * of public virtue may for a time, or in particular instances, actuate 
 4 men to the observance of a conduct purely disinterested 5 but they 
 
 * are not of themselves sufficient to produce a persevering conformity 
 
 * to the refined dictates and obligations of social duty. 
 
 " Few men are capable of making a continual sacrifice of all views 
 
 * of private interest or advantage to common good. It is in vain to 
 6 exclaim against the depravity of human nature on this account ; the 
 
 * fact is so ; the experience of every age and nation has proved it ; and 
 ' we must in a great measure change the constitution of man, before 
 
 * we can make it otherwise. No institution not built on the presump- 
 ' tive truth of these maxims can succeed. 
 
" We find these exemplified in the American officers, as well as in 
 all other men. At the commencement of the dispute, in the first 
 effusions of their zeal, and looking upon the service to be only tempo- 
 rary, they entered into it without paying any regard to pecuniary or 
 selfish considerations. But finding its duration to be much longer than 
 they at first suspected, and that, instead of deriving any advantage 
 from the hardships and dangers to which they were exposed, they on 
 the contrary were losers by their patriotism, and fell far short even 
 of a competency to supply their wants, they have gradually abated in 
 their ardor ; and, with many, an entire disinclination to the service, 
 under its present circumstances, has taken place. To this, in an 
 eminent degree, must be ascribed the frequent resignations daily hap- 
 pening, and the more frequent importunities for permission to resign, 
 and from some officers of the greatest merit. To this, also, may we 
 ascribe the apathy, inattention, and neglect of duty, which pervade all 
 ranks, and which will necessarily continue and increase, while an 
 officer, instead of gaining everything, is impoverished by his commis- 
 sion, and conceives he is conferring, not receiving, a favor, in holding 
 it. There can be no sufficient tie upon men possessing such senti- 
 ments. Nor can any method be adopted to oblige those to a punctual 
 discharge of duty who are indifferent about their continuance in the 
 service, and are often seeking a pretext to disengage themselves from 
 it. Punishment in this case will be unavailing ; but when an officer's 
 commission is made valuable to him, and he fears to lose it, you may 
 then exact obedience from him. It is not, indeed, consistent with 
 reason or justice to expect that one set of men should make a sacri- 
 fice of property, domestic ease, and happiness, encounter the rigors 
 of the field, the perils and vicissitudes of war, to obtain those bless- 
 ings which every citizen will enjoy in common with them, without some 
 adequate compensation. It must also be a comfortless reflection to 
 any man, that after he may have contributed to securing the rights of 
 his country, at the risk of his life and the ruin of his fortune there 
 would be no provision made to prevent himself and family from sink- 
 ing into indigence and wretchedness. Besides adopting some method 
 to make the provision for officers equal to their present exigencies, a 
 due regard should be paid to futurity. Nothing, in my opinion, would 
 serve more promptly to reanimate their languishing zeal, and interest 
 them thoroughly in the service, than a half-pay establishment. 
 This would not only dispel the apprehension of personal distress at 
 the termination of the war, from having thrown themselves out of 
 professions and employments they might not have it in their power to 
 resume, but would in a great degree relieve the painful anticipation 
 of leaving their widows and orphans a burden on the charity of their 
 country, should it be their lot to fall in its service. 
 
 11 1 am earnest in recommending this measure, because I know it 
 is the general wish and expectation; and that many officers, whom, 
 upon every principle, we should wish to retain in the service, are only 
 waiting to see whether something of the kind will or will not take 
 place, to be determined in their resolutions either of staying in or 
 quitting it immediately ; and I urge my sentiments with the greater 
 
freedom because I cannot, and shall not, receive the smallest benefit 
 from the establishment, and can have no other inducement for pro- 
 posing it than a full conviction of its utility and propriety. 
 " I am sensible the expense will be a capital objection to it ; but to 
 this I oppose the necessity. The officers are now discontented with 
 their situation. If some generous expedient is not embraced to remove 
 this discontent, so extensive a desertion of the service will ensue, and 
 so much discouragement be cast upon those who remain, as must 
 wound it in a very essential manner. Everything that has this effect 
 has a tendency, at least, to protract the war, and,, though dictated 
 by a well-intended frugality, will, I fear, in the end, prove erroneous 
 economy." 
 Congress, being fully convinced of the propriety and necessity of 
 
 making some further provision for the army, were pleased to pass the 
 
 following resolutions : 
 
 IN CONGRESS, MAY 15, 1118. 
 
 " Resolved, unanimously, That all military officers commissioned by 
 ' Congress, who are now or hereafter may be in the service of the 
 ' United States, and shall continue therein during the war, and not 
 ' hold any office of profit under these States, or any of them, shall, 
 ' after the conclusion of the war be entitled to receive annually for the 
 ' term of seven years, if they live so long, one half of the present pay 
 ' of such officers : Provided, That no general officer of the cavalry, 
 ' artillery, or infantry, shall be entitled to receive more than the one 
 ' half part of the pay of a colonel of such corps, respectively : And 
 1 provided, That this resolution shall not extend to any officer in the 
 ' service of the United States, unless he shall have taken an oath of 
 1 obligation to, and shall actually reside within, some one of the United 
 1 States. 
 
 u Resolved, unanimously, That every non-commissioned military 
 L officer and soldier who hath enlisted or shall enlist into the service of 
 6 these States for during the war, and shall continue therein to the end 
 ' thereof, shall be entitled to receive a further reward of eighty dollars 
 ' at the expiration of the war." 
 
 In addition to the foregoing resolutions, Congress was pleased to make 
 the following resolve, calculated to afford that relief to the unfortuuate 
 and distressed which humanity and gratitude demanded : 
 IN CONGRESS, AUGUST 24, 1780. 
 
 " Resolved, That the resolution of the 15th May, 1778, granting 
 half-pay for seven years to the officers of the army who should con- 
 tinue in service to the end of the war, be extended to the widows of 
 those officers who have died or shall hereafter die in the service ; to 
 commence from the time of such officer's death, and continue for the 
 term of seven years ; or if there be no widow, or in case of her death 
 or intermarriage, the said half pay be given to the orphan children of 
 the officer dying as aforesaid, if he shall have left any." 
 All the schemes of the Government to carry on the war by the aid of 
 loan offices utterly failed; and hence, as early as March 18, 1780, 
 Congress was obliged to relinquish the hope of redeeming the Govern- 
 
ment paper, (much of it then being in the hands of the officers,) and on 
 the 18th of April, 1780, passed a resolution " that the principal of all 
 
 * certificates taken out since the 18th of March, 1780, should be dis- 
 
 * charged at the rate of one Spanish milled dollar, or the current ex- 
 
 * change thereof in other money at the time of payment, for forty dol- 
 
 * lars of the said bills of credit secured on loan ; and that the principal 
 
 * of all certificates that should thereafter be taken out, until the further 
 
 * order of Congress, be discharged at the same rate and in the same 
 4 manner as those that had been taken out since the 18th of March, 
 1 1780." 
 
 Here, then, was the public declaration of the utter insolvency of the 
 Government, as early as the 18th of March, 1780. The army being 
 unpaid for past services, the relation of creditor and debtor had thus 
 become entirely changed. 
 
 In this desponding state of public affairs, it was found necessary to 
 present some still greater inducement, if possible, which might influence 
 the officers to continue in the service, and often to supply themselves 
 and corps the best manner they could, Congress resolved that the re- 
 stricting clause in the resolution of 15th May, 1778, granting half pay 
 to the officers for seven years, expressed in these words, viz : " and not 
 to hold office of profit under these States, or any of them," be, and is 
 hereby, repealed. 
 
 These resolutions for a short time produced the desired effect ; but 
 the increasing distress of the army in the subsequent years, arising 
 from the inability of the public to perform their engagements, caused 
 such discontents and uneasiness, that alarming consequences were feared. 
 At the same time, the reform of the army, which was proposed to take 
 place by the resolution of Congress of the 3d October, 1780, not a little 
 irritated the officers. 
 
 On the 3d of October, 1780, Congress reorganized the army, to take 
 effect on the 1st of January, 1781, the effect of which was to throw 
 many of the officers out of service. They therefore at the same time 
 adopted the following resolution : 
 
 " And whereas, by the foregoing arrangement, many deserving officers 
 6 must become supernumerary , and it is proper that regard be had to 
 
 * them : 
 
 " Resolved, That from the time the reform of the army takes place, 
 
 * they be entitled to half pay for seven years, in specie, or other current 
 
 * money equivalent, and also grants of land at the close of the war, 
 
 * agreeably to the resolution of the 16th of September, 1776." 
 
 It will be observed, by the following letter of General Washington, 
 that it became necessary, inasmuch as there were no funds in the 
 Treasury, to offer some strong inducement by pledging the honor of the 
 nation for some prospective reward, and all were embraced in the re- 
 solve of October 21, 1780. 
 
 Transcript of a letter from General Washington to the President of Congress, dated near 
 Passaic Falls, October, 11, 1780. 
 
 " That there are the most conclusive reasons for reducing the number 
 i of the regiments, no person acquainted with the situation of our affairs 
 
8 
 
 1 and the state of the army will deny. A want of officers, independent 
 ' of other considerations, were sufficient to compel us. But that the 
 
 * temper of the army, produced by its sufferings, requires great caution 
 c in any reforms that are attempted, is a position no less evident than 
 ' the former. In services the best established, where the hands of 
 ' Government are strengthened by the strongest interests of the army 
 1 to submission, the reducing its regiments and dismissing great part of 
 1 its officers is always a measure of delicacy and difficulty. In ours, 
 ' where the officers are held by the feeblest ties, and are mouldering 
 ' away by daily resignations, it is peculiarly so. The last reduction 
 ' occasioned many to quit the service, besides those who were reformed, 
 1 and left durable seeds of discontent among those who remained. 
 
 " The general topic of declamation was, that it was as hard as dis- 
 ' honorable for men who had made every sacrifice to the service, to be 
 ( turned out of it at the pleasure of those in power, without an adequate 
 ' compensation. In the maturity to which their uneasinesses have now 
 ' arisen, from a continuance in misery, they will be still more impatient 
 ' under an attempt of a similar nature. How far these dispositions 
 ' may be reasonable, I pretend not to decide ; but in the extremity to 
 1 which we are arrived, policy forbids us to add new irritations. Too 
 ' many of the officers wish to get rid of their commissions, but they are 
 ' not willing to be forced to it. It is not the intention of these remarks 
 ' to discourage a reform, but show the necessity to guard against the 
 ' ill effects, by an ample provision both for the officers who stay and 
 1 for those who are reduced. This should be the basis of the plan, and 
 ' without it, I apprehend the most mischievous consequences. This 
 ' would obviate many scruples that will otherwise be found prejudicial 
 ' in the extreme. I am convinced Congress are not a little straitened 
 1 in the means of a present provision so ample as to give satisfaction ; 
 ' but this proves the expediency of & future one, and brings me to that 
 ' which I have so frequently recommended as the most economical, the 
 ' most politic, and the most effectual, that could be devised — a half 
 ' pay for life. Supported by the prospect of a permanent depend- 
 ' ence, the officers would .be tied to the service, and would submit to 
 ' many momentary privations, and to inconveniences which the situation 
 
 * of public affairs make unavoidable. This is exemplified in the Penn- 
 ' sylvania, who, being upon this establishment, are so much interested 
 c in the service that, in the course of many months, there has been only 
 ' one resignation in that line," [the Pennsylvania line.] 
 
 Soon after the reception of the foregoing letter, Congress were pleased 
 to pass the resolutions of October 21, 1780, hereto annexed. 
 
 Congress had no means to comply with the resolve of October 3, 
 1780, by which the Government promised to pay the supernumerary 
 officers an amount of seven years half pay, in specie or current money, 
 from 1st day of January, 1781. This promise was made after the Gov- 
 ernment had utterly failed. Hence the wisdom of Washington, and 
 the policy of the Government, in blending these officers who were on the 
 retired list in the contract of half pay for life of October 21, 1780. 
 
HALF PAY FOR LIFE TO SUPERNUMERARY OFFICERS, UNDER THE RE- 
 FORM OF THE ARMY, TO TAKE EFFECT ON THE 1st JANUARY, 1781. 
 
 " [1780, October 21.] — Resolved, That the Commander-in-chief, and 
 commanding officer in the Southern department, direct the officers of 
 each State to meet and agree upon the officers for the regiments to be 
 raised by their respective States, from those who incline to continue 
 in service ; and where it cannot be done by agreement, to be deter- 
 mined by seniority, and make return of those who are to remain ; which 
 is to transmitted to Congress, together with the names of the officers 
 reduced, who are to be allowed half pay for life. 
 
 " That the officers who shall continue in" the service to the end of the 
 war shall also be entitled to half pay during life, to commence from 
 the time of their reduction. 
 
 " [1780, November 28.] — Some doubts having arisen in the minds of 
 the general officers, whether the resolution of the 21st October last, 
 granting half pay for life to the officers who shall remain in service to 
 the end of the war, was meant to extend to them : 
 
 " Resolved, That the said half pay for life be extended to all major 
 generals and brigadier generals who shall continue in service to the 
 end of the war. 
 
 " That the resolution of the 21st October was so meant and in- 
 < tended." 
 
 ALLOWANCE DURING LIFE IN LIEU OF HALF PAY TO THE OFFICERS OF 
 THE HOSPITAL DEPARTMENT AND MEDICAL STAFF. 
 
 " [1781, January 17.] — Whereas, by the plan for conducting the 
 hospital department, passed in Congress the 30th day of September 
 last, no proper establishment is provided for the officers of the medi- 
 cal staff, after their dismission from public service ; which, consider- 
 ing the custom of other nations, and the late provision made for the 
 officers of the army after the conclusion of the war, they appear to 
 have a just claim to ; for remedy whereof, and also for amending sev- 
 eral parts of the above-mentioned plan — 
 
 " Resolved, That all officers in the hospital department and medi- 
 cal staff hereinafter mentioned, who shall continue in service to the 
 end of the war, or be reduced before that time as supernumeraries, 
 shall be entitled to and receive during life, in lieu of half pay, the 
 following allowance, viz : 
 
 '' The director of the hospital, equal to the half pay of a lieutenant 
 colonel. 
 
 " Chief physicians and surgeons of the army and hospital, and hos- 
 pital physicians and surgeons, purveyor, apothecary, and regimental 
 surgeons, each equal to the half pay of a captain." 
 
 HALF PAY FOR LIFE TO CHAPLAINS. 
 
 " [1781, May 8.] — Resolved, That the Commander-in-chief be and 
 he is hereby authorized and directed to arrange the brigade chaplains 
 of the several State lines serving with the army, and the commanding 
 general of the Southern army those of the line serving with that army, 
 so as to retain in service no more chaplains of each line than are equal 
 to the number of brigades. 
 
10 
 
 " That every chaplain deemed and certified to the Board of War to 
 i be supernumerary be no longer continued in service, and be entitled 
 ' to have their depreciation made good, and to the half pay of captains 
 ' for life." 
 
 RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, DECEMBER 31, 1781. 
 
 " Resolved, That all officers of the line of the army, below the rank 
 of brigadier general, who do not belong to the line of any particular 
 State or separate corps of the army, and are entitled by acts of Con- 
 gress to pay and subsistence, shall have the same, with the deprecia- 
 tion of their pay, made good to the first day of January, 1782. 
 
 " Resolved, That the Secretary of War be and he is hereby directed 
 to make returns to Congress, on or before the 20th day of January, 
 1782, of the names and rank of all the oflicers necessary to be retained 
 in service, that are included in the preceding resolution. 
 
 " Resolved, That all oflicers included in the foregoing description, 
 and whose names shall not be inserted in the returns directed to be 
 made by the preceding resolution, shall be considered as retiring from 
 service on the first day of January, 1782 ; provided, always, that 
 nothing contained in these resolutions shall be construed so as to pre- 
 vent or hinder any officer that shall retire as aforesaid from enjoying 
 all the emoluments that he may, upon retiring, be entitled to by any 
 former acts of Congress." 
 
 RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, MARCH 8, 1785. 
 
 " Resolved, That the oflicers who retired under the resolve of the 
 ' 31st of December, 1781, are equally entitled to the half pay or com- 
 ' mutation, with those officers who retired under the resolves of the 3d 
 ' and 21st October, 1780." 
 
 The good results which this contract produced may be seen from an 
 extract of a letter from General Washington in 1783, showing the happy 
 consequences resulting from the passage of the resolution of 21st Octo- 
 ber, 1780, granting half pay, and contrasting the state of the army 
 between the two periods : 
 
 " That, in the critical and perilous moment when the last-mentioned 
 ' communication was made, there was the utmost danger a dissolution 
 1 of the army would have taken place, unless measures similar to those 
 ' recommended had been adopted, will not admit of a doubt. That the 
 t adoption of the resolution granting half pay for life has been attended 
 ' with all the happy consequences I had foretold, so far as respected 
 ' the good of the service, let the astonishing contrast between the state 
 ' of the army at this instant and at the former period determine. 
 
 11 And that the establishment of funds, and security for the payment 
 ' of all the just demands of the army, will be the most certain means 
 i of preserving the national faith and future tranquillity of this exten- 
 ' sive continent, is my decided opinion. 
 
 " By the preceding remarks, it will readily be imagined, that, instead 
 i of retracting and reprehending (from further experience and reflec- 
 ' tion) the mode of compensation so strenuously urged in the enclosures, 
 * I am more and more confirmed in the sentiment ; and if in the wrong, 
 
11 
 
 suffer me to please myself with the grateful delusion. For if, beside 
 the simple payment of their wages, a further compensation is not due 
 to the sufferings and sacrifices of the officers, then have I been mista- 
 ken indeed. 
 
 " If the whole army have not merited what a grateful people can 
 bestow, then have I been beguiled by prejudice, and built opinion on 
 the basis of error. 
 
 " If the country should not in the event perform everything which 
 has been requested in the late memorials to Congress, then will my 
 belief become vain, and the hope that has been excited void of found- 
 ation. 
 
 " And if (as has been suggested, for the purpose of inflaming their 
 passions) the officers of the army are to be the only sufferers by this 
 resolution ; if, retiring from the field, they are to grow old in poverty, 
 wretchedness, and contempt ; if they are to wade through the vile mire 
 of dependency, and owe the miserable remnant of that life to charity 
 which has hitherto been spent in honor, then shall I have learned what 
 ingratitude is ; then shall I have realized a tale which will embitter 
 every moment of my future life. But I am under no such apprehen- 
 sions. A country rescued by their arms from impending ruin; will 
 never leave unpaid the debt of gratitude. 
 
 "G. WASHINGTON." 
 
 Thus it appears that the half pay for life was not only promised to 
 those officers by one resolve of Congress, of October 21, 1780, but the 
 same was repeated four times subsequently. 
 
 Those resolves have never been repealed, but are, in point of con- 
 tracts under them, in full force. 
 
 There being no positive repeal of the provisions of the act of 1780, 
 a virtual or implicative repeal of an act is only permitted where there 
 is some repugnance to the last act and the former. (Attorney General, 
 Nov. 17, 1828.) Both acts of 1780 and 1783 recognise the obliga- 
 tion ; the latter is only a proposition in relation to the mode of pay- 
 ment. 
 
 This position is sustained by the resolve of January 26, 1784. In 
 answer to applications for half pay, Congress resolved " that half pay 
 * cannot be allowed to any officer, or to any class or denemination of 
 ' officers, to whom it has not heretofore been expressly promised" — 
 still receiving applications under the law of October 21, 1780, and 
 recognising the law, but rejecting the claims only because they did not 
 come within the provisions of the law of 1780. The law is again 
 recognised as such by the act of the 8th of March, 1785. 
 
 Many of the officers, up to that time, had already given five years 
 service, and expended their fortunes, to carry on the war. It was after 
 the Government had become so utterly bankrupt, at the earnest request 
 of Washington, that the promise of seven years half pay was increased 
 to that of half pay during life ; and such had become the depreciation 
 of the credit of the Government, that a promise of full pay would have 
 appeared more compatible with the condition of the public finances, than 
 that of half pay for life. 
 
12 
 
 It is admitted that Congress had the power to make contracts ; that 
 the contract, guarantying to each officer half pay during life, was made 
 during the time the Government was utterly insolvent. After it had 
 failed — at a time when no promises of the Government were worth 
 more than two and half dollars to the hundred, when Congress could 
 not, upon any principles of honor, promise the officers any considerable 
 amount in gross — it could only, during that great exigency, pledge the 
 honor of the nation, that if they would serve to the end of the war, 
 conquer a peace, each of them should be entitled to half pay during 
 life — not to pay them in the same depreciated paper in which they 
 had been paid. And this became a vested right, which could not be 
 varied, rescinded, or impaired, by any subsequent act of legislation ; 
 nor could any other act of Congress be substituted in its place, without 
 the assent of the officers individually. 
 
 In discussing the merits of these claims, it is well to consider their 
 progress, and the many considerations they contained. They were the 
 deliberate and voluntary acts of Government, founded in justice, equity, 
 public policy, and public exigency. They embraced the results of three 
 previous promises, which constituted one continuous consideration : 
 1st. Grants of land, before the failure of the Government, September 
 16, 1776. 2d. Seven years half pay, May 15, 1778. 3d. Seven 
 years half pay, in specie or current money, October 3d, 1780, pay- 
 able to the supernumerary officers, which was after the Government 
 had failed. 4th. While the Government was thus hopelessly insolvent, 
 and could not discharge the seven years half pay, it was during this 
 insolvency of the Government, while the promises of the Government 
 were by a permanent law worth only two and a half dollars to the hun- 
 dred, that all these unredeemed promises were all blended in the con- 
 tract of October 21, 1780 — all finally resting upon the faith of the 
 nation, and the success of the efforts and perseverance of the officers. 
 This contract, therefore, was not founded on the depreciated currency. 
 It was virtually the first mortgage of the real and personal effects of 
 the Government, and therefore has, or should have, a preference to all 
 other claims. 
 
 The claimants say, and the facts find, that the Government continued 
 to remain insolvent during the whole period of the war, and failed to 
 supply the officers with good and sufficient food, whereby they were 
 obliged to expend their own private fortunes ; that neither the old nor 
 the new Confederacy has ever paid the large sums advanced, arrears of 
 pay, or their half pay, promised under the resolve of October 21, 1780 ; 
 that the provisional articles of peace between the United States and 
 Great Britain were signed November 30, 1782 ; the treaty between 
 France and Great Britain, on which the efficacy of those articles were 
 conditioned, was executed on the 20th January, 1783 ; and the defini- 
 tive treaty of peace was signed at Paris, September 3, 1783, and rati 
 fied by Congress, January 14, 1784. 
 
 That notwithstanding it was well known to Congress that a peace 
 had been obtained, the Government being unable to pay to the soldiers 
 and officers specie or current money, sufficient to defray their expenses 
 to their destitute homes, for that reason could not disband the army ; 
 
13 
 
 that they postponed their declaration of the cessation of hostilities until 
 the 11th day of April, and on the 23d of April, 1783, Congress 
 declared that the time the men engaged to serve, " during the war," 
 did not expire until the ratification of the treaty of peace, but author- 
 ized the Commander-in-chief to grant furloughs or discharges, which 
 Was a mere expedient, founded on that necessity, and postponed until 
 the 14th of January, 1784 ; that Congress, by resolves of May 25, 
 June 11, and September 26, 1783, directed parts of the army to be 
 furloughed, and, by their proclamation of the 18th of October following, 
 discharged absolutely, after the 3d November, 1783, such parts of the 
 Federal army as had been furloughed by the several previous acts ; 
 that in this manner this patriotic army was disbanded, and, for the 
 want of means, sent penniless to their homes, without the certificates 
 of service. 
 
 There is, however, conclusive evidence that the officers and soldiers 
 discharged their duty nobly, and during all that long struggle submitted 
 to sufferings and deprivations with a patience and patriotism never be- 
 fore exhibited by any race of people. They performed their part of 
 the contract, almost without their pay, and often without food. 
 
 Their names were duly returned to the War Department. The 
 amount of their annual pay was a fixed sum; they had nothing further 
 to do ; they became entitled to grants of land, and their annual half 
 pay during life. 
 
 Their claim became a matter of record. It required no further 
 presentation. It was, in law, always presented ; and there it stands, 
 a life estate — a vested right — that could not be affected by any subse- 
 quent legislation. 
 
 In order to encourage their disappointed hopes, and offer some com- 
 pensation for the inevitable delay of payment, which the impoverished 
 treasury could not fail to predict, on the 3d of June, 1784, Congress 
 passed the following resolution : 
 
 " That an interest of six per cent, per annum shall be allowed to all 
 * creditors of the United States, for supplies furnished, or services 
 i done, from the time the payment became due." 
 
 This extended to all their arrears of pay long due, as well as to 
 their half pay. Chief Justice Gilchrist, in a recent decision, in allu- 
 ding to this resolve, says : 
 
 " No language could be more express or free from doubt than this. 
 The resolution was passed, from a feeling that it was just and right 
 that interest should be paid from the time the half pay became due ; 
 and it was a volunflltry contract on the part of the United States, 
 constituting a legal claim against them, which no subsequent legisla- 
 tion could release, without the consent of the other party." "It 
 may be added, that up to the year 1837, there was paid interest on 
 1,510 claims of widows and orphans, and claims of officers for per- 
 sonal services — the statute of limitation as to such claims having 
 been suspended." 
 
 The claimants further say, that section 1 of the 6th article of the 
 Constitution provides, " That all debts contracted and engagements 
 i entered into before the adoption of this Constitution shall be as valid 
 
14 
 
 { against the United States, under this Constitution, as under the Con- 
 ' federation." 
 
 2. " This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall 
 
 * be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall 
 4 be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme 
 1 law of the land ; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, 
 ' anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary not- 
 
 * withstanding." 
 
 3. " The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the 
 ' members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judi- 
 ' cial officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall 
 ' be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution." 
 
 The act of Congress of March 22, 1783, admits the claim of the 
 officers which accrued under the resolve of October 21, 1780, for half 
 pay, to have been such a debt and engagement as is contemplated by 
 the Constitution ; " for which (says the resolve) the faith of the Uni- 
 ' ted States hath been pledged ; " " whose services and sufferings have 
 
 * so just a title to the approbation and rewards of their country." 
 
 Here, then, as early as 1783, Congress declared those claims to be 
 founded, not upon a gratuity, but on a solemn contract, made between 
 the Government and the officers, wherein they are declared as legal 
 creditors of the Government. Therefore, as the honor of the country 
 was "pledged" for the fulfilment of the contract, justice would seem 
 to demand the inquiry. 
 
 At what time and in what way were these debts paid 1 When and in 
 what way has the i public faith, thus "pledged," ever been " redeemed 1 " 
 
 It is sometimes alleged that the contract for half pay for life was 
 changed to that oijive years' full pay. by the following resolve of 22d 
 March, 1783 : 
 
 RESOLUTION OF MARCH 22, 1783. 
 
 " On the report of a committee, consisting of Mr. Hamilton, Mr. 
 Dyer, and Mr. Bedford, to whom was referred a motion of Mr. Dyer, 
 together with the memorial of the officers of the army, and the report 
 of the committee thereon, Congress came to the following resolutions : 
 
 " 1. Whereas the officers of the several lines under the immediate 
 command of his Excellency General Washington, did, by their late 
 memorial, transmitted by their committee, represent to Congress that 
 the half pay granted by sundry resolutions was regarded in an unfa- 
 vorable light by the citizens of some of these States, who would pre- 
 fer a compensation for a limited term of years, or by a sum in gross, 
 to an establishment for life ; and did, on that account, solicit a com- 
 mutation of their half pay for an equivalent in one of the two modes 
 above mentioned, in order to remove all subject of dissatisfaction from 
 the minds of their fellow -citizens : And whereas Congress are desirous 
 as well of gratifying the reasonable expectations of the officers of the 
 army as removing all objections which may exist in any part of the Uni- 
 ted States to the principle of the half pay establishment, for which the 
 faith of the United States hath been pledged ; persuaded that those 
 objections can only arise from the nature of the compensation, not 
 
15 
 
 from any indisposition to compensate those whose services, sacrifices, 
 and sufferings, have so just a title to the approbation and rewards of 
 their country : 
 
 " 2. Therefore, resolved. That such officers as are now in service, 
 and shall continue therein to the end of the war, shall be entitled to 
 receive the amount of five years' full pay in money or securities on 
 interest at six per cent, per annum, as Congress shall find most con- 
 venient, instead of the half pay promised for life by the resolution of 
 the 21st day of October, 1780 ; the said securities to be such as shall 
 be given to other creditors of the United States ; provided it be at the 
 option of the lines of the respective States, and not of officers, indi- 
 vidually, in those lines, to accept or refuse the same; and provided, 
 also, that their election shall be signified to Congress, through the 
 Commander-in-chief, from the lines under his immediate command, 
 within two months, and through the commanding officer of the South- 
 ern army, from those under his command, within six months from the 
 date of this resolution : 
 
 " 3. The same commutation shall extend to the corps not belonging 
 to the lines of particular States, and who are entitled to half pay 
 for life, as aforesaid ; the acceptance or refusal to be determined by 
 corps, and to be signified in the same manner, and within the same 
 time, as above mentioned : 
 
 " 4. That all officers belonging to the hospital department, who are 
 entitled to half pay by the resolution of the 17th day of January, 1781, 
 may collectively agree to accept or refuse the aforesaid commutation, 
 signifying the same through the Commander-in-chief, within six months 
 from this time ; that such officers as have retired at different periods, 
 entitled to half pay for life, may, collectively, in each State of which 
 they are inhabitants, accept or refuse the same ; their acceptance or 
 refusal to be signified by agents authorized for that purpose, within 
 six months from this period ; that, with respect to such retiring offi- 
 cers, the commutation, if accepted by them, shall be in lieu of what- 
 ever may be now due to them since the time of their retiring from 
 service, as well as of what might hereafter become due ; and that so soon 
 as their accceptance shall be signified, the superintendent of finance 
 be and he is hereb} r directed to take measures for the settlement of 
 their accounts accordingly, and to issue to them certificates, bearing 
 interest at six per cent. ; that all officers entitled to half pay for life, 
 not included in the preceding resolution, may also collectively agree 
 to accept or refuse the aforesaid commutation, signifying the same 
 within six months from this time." 
 
 Half pay forbidden, except to those officers to whom it is heretofore promised. 
 RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, JANUARY 26, 1784. 
 
 " On the report of a committee, consisting of Mr. Williamson, Mr. 
 Tilton, and Mr. Monroe, to whom were referred a memorial of Joseph 
 Ward, and a petition of R. Forthingham, 
 
 " Resolved, That half pay cannot be allowed to any officer, or to any 
 class or denomination of officers, to whom it has not heretofore been 
 expressly promised." 
 
16 
 
 Certain officers entitled to half pay or commutation. 
 RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, MARCH 8, 1785. 
 C{ Resolved, That the officers who retired under the resolve of the 
 
 * 31st of December, 1781, are equally entitled to the half pay or com- 
 
 * mutation with those officers who retired under the resolves of the 3d 
 ' and 21st October, 1780." 
 
 It is also alleged that certain commutation certificates of the Pay- 
 master General, which were sent to the officers, were a valid accord and 
 satisfaction that they were a fair equivalent for the half pay for life. 
 
 But the claimants say that the resolve of 1783 was passed after the 
 peace — after the contract of 1780 had been fulfilled on the part of the 
 officers ; that it was a mere proposition to compromise a debt which al- 
 ready existed, that they never gave their assent to the proposition, and 
 that it did not repeal the act of 1780, is admitted by the subsequent re- 
 solve of March 8, 1785, in which the right to half pay is expressly de- 
 clared to be due to certain other officers ; and they say that the resolve 
 of 1783, or any acts under it, ought not to have any binding force upon 
 them — 
 
 1. Because the resolve of 1783 expressly excludes the officers indi- 
 vidually from expressing their dissent to the same ; that it was a prop- 
 osition of expediency, founded entirely upon the imperative necessities 
 of the Government, it being well known to Congress that the Govern- 
 ment had no power to comply with either of its conditions, viz : to pay 
 specie or give security, and was finally repudiated by the old and new 
 Government, and therefore could not be of any binding force on the 
 officers, even if they had assented to all of the propositions. That 
 those commutation certificates were payable with interest annually. 
 The omission to pay the interest annually was a repudiation of the 
 conditions, not only of the certificates, but also of the resolve of 1783, 
 upon which they were issued. 
 
 2. That the certificates sent to the officers were a part of the resolve 
 of 1783, as much so as if a copy of the same had been attached to each 
 of them ; that they were not money or security which would command 
 "six per cent, per annum," and of no more value than the depreciated 
 certificates which they then held. 
 
 3. That the resolves of 18th March, 18th April, and 28th of June, 
 1780, were in full force, by which all the certificates of the Government, 
 which had issued, or which should thereafter issue, are declared to be 
 of no more value, and to be discharged at the rate of forty dollars for 
 one dollar in specie. That the certificates of the Government consti- 
 tuted the principal currency of the whole country, and passed from 
 hand to hand at the rate of $40 for one in specie, and continued so 
 during all the period of the old Confederacy. That the new Govern- 
 ment could not in justice to the officers allow to strangers, who had 
 taken them at their market value, any more or greater per cent, than 
 the law had prescribed, viz : two and a half dollars to the hundred. 
 The certificates sent for a captain's pay for twenty-four hundred dol- 
 lars, was, in fact, by positive law, a certificate for only sixty dollars, 
 just as much so as if a copy of the laws of March, April, or June, 
 1780, had been attached to each certificate. 
 
17 
 
 It can be no defence of the Government to assign as a reason for im- 
 posing those certificates as payment to the officers, that the Govern- 
 ment paid to other creditors in the same valueless certificates. Those 
 certificates can be plead in satisfaction of the half-pay claim for only so 
 much and no more than they were actually worth at the time they 
 issued, aside from any of the inducements, by necessities or otherwise, 
 of the officers. No individual can set up his own poverty, negligence, 
 or wrong, as an excuse for the non-payment of his legal obligations ; 
 much less can the Government, who is bound to protect its citizens 
 against wrong and injustice. 
 
 4. The petition of the small number of officers, being less than thirty, 
 could not in any way impair the rights of the others who did not give 
 their assent to it. 
 
 5. That the resolve itself is utterly at variance with the spirit and 
 object of the request even of those who signed it. They never intended 
 to release a larger claim for a smaller one, and receive the same depre- 
 ciated paper of the Government as money or security which they then 
 held for the full amount. 
 
 6. That the certificates issued by the Paymaster General, and sent 
 to the officers, were utterly inconsistent with, and directly opposed to, 
 the terms and conditions of the resolve itself, and therefore ought not 
 to impair the rights of the officers under the resolve of 1780. 
 
 7. By thus increasing the amount of this repudiated, depreciated 
 paper, it caused the certificates which they then already held to be de- 
 pressed in value still more, and thereby to have been a loss to the offi- 
 cers, instead of any benefit ; and although the Government continued 
 hopelessly insolvent, it would not permit the officers to send back these 
 depreciated certificates, and confined that right to the invalid corps of 
 officers. 
 
 8. Congress resolved, as late as September 14, 1788, " That the 
 f invalid officers be permitted to return the amount of their commuta- 
 1 tion in other securities of the United States, where they have parted 
 ' with their own, provided the same shall be of the same amount and 
 ' bearing the same interest." Thus proving that those which issued 
 to the officers were of no more value than any other of the Government 
 securities after a period of five years. This law was unjust, in not ex- 
 tending to all the officers the same privilege. 
 
 9. That the rights of the officers ought not to be impaired by the 
 reception or detention of those certificates which were sent to them by 
 the Paymaster General, because they were also given for arrears of pay, 
 and especially because they embraced the evidence of their service and 
 the completion of their part of the contract. So far they were of some 
 value to the officers ; but whether they had been secured and brought 
 within the resolve, could not at that time have been known to the offi- 
 cers ; they could only know that the resolve upon which they were 
 founded required specie or security; and if by the implication of law 
 the Government was entitled to a reasonable time to make that security, 
 it was given. It was not in the power of the officers to have compelled 
 the Government to have received them, if they had proposed to return 
 them. The presumption is, that they were not permitted to return 
 
 2 
 
18 
 
 them, as those of the invalid corps were obliged to obtain a special law 
 for that object. That their retention was not and could not have been 
 any injury to the Government, inasmuch as their value was fixed by 
 law at two dollars and fifty cents to the hundred. By this law, the cer- 
 tificates to a captain were of the value of sixty dollars only. 
 
 It will be seen by the Funding Act of August 4, 1790, that the new 
 Government claimed the right of paying only about sixty per cent, of 
 the amount of these certificates, by instalments, during a space of time 
 of about forty years, in order, says the act, to conform " to the (then) 
 present circumstances of the United States." 
 
 FUNDING ACT OF AUGUST 4, 1790. 
 
 The first section of the act reserves out of the proceeds of the reve- 
 nue from customs, &c, $600,000 a year for the support of Government, 
 and appropriates the residue for the payment of interest on debts and 
 loans. The act then proceeds thus : 
 
 " And as new loans are and will be necessary for the payment of the 
 
 * aforesaid arrears of interest and the instalments of the principal of 
 ' said foreign debt, due and growing due, and may also be found expe- 
 
 * dient in effecting an entire alteration in the state of the same." 
 
 Wherefore, the second section authorizes the President to cause 
 $12,000,000 to be borrowed, part to pay arrears and instalments of 
 the foreign debt, and to make other contracts relating to the foreign 
 debt. The act then proceeds in relation to the domestic debt thus : 
 
 " And whereas it is desirable to adapt the nature of the provision to 
 1 be made for the domestic debt to the present circumstances of the 
 ' United States, as far as it shall be found practicable, consistently with 
 ' good faith and the rights of the creditors, which can only be done by 
 1 a voluntary loan on their part." 
 
 The third section then authorizes a loan to be proposed to the full 
 amount of the " domestic debt," by opening books for receiving sub- 
 scriptions, by a commissioner of loans, to be appointed in each of the 
 States ; and that the sums which shall be subscribed thereto be pay- 
 able in " certificates," issued for the said debt according to their specie 
 value; which said certificates are designated and described as follows : 
 
 Description of certificates receivable for sums described. 
 
 " 1. The ' certificates ' issued by the Register of the Treasury. 
 
 " 2. Those issued by the Commissioners of Loans in the several States, 
 ' including ' certificates ' given pursuant to the act of Congress of the 
 ' 2d January, 1779, for bills of credit of the several emissions of the 
 < 20th May, 1777, and of the 11th April, 1778. 
 
 " 3. Those issued by the Commissioners for the adjustment of the 
 ' accounts of the quartermaster, commissary, hospital, clothing, and 
 ' marine departments. 
 
 "4. Those issued by the Commissioners for the adjustment of ac- 
 1 counts in the respective States. 
 
 " 5. Those issued by the late and present Paymaster General, or 
 
 * Commissioner of army accounts. 
 
19 
 
 " 6. Those issued for the payment of interest, commonly called in- 
 ' dents of interest. 
 
 " 7. And the ' bills of credit ' issued by the authority of the United 
 ' States in Congress assembled, at the rate of one hundred dollars in 
 1 the said bills for one dollar in specie." 
 
 The fourth section designates and describes the three new certificates 
 which the subscribers to the said loans shall be entitled to receive — 
 upon all certificates bearing interest the same is to be received up to 
 the last day of December, 1790. 
 
 That for the whole or any part of any sum subscribed to the said 
 loan, by any person or persons, or body politic, which shall be paid in 
 the principal of the said domestic debt, the subscriber or subscribers 
 shall be entitled to a certificate, purporting that the United States owe 
 to the holder or holders thereof, his, her, or their assigns, a sum to be 
 expressed therein, equal to two-thirds of the sum so paid, bearing an 
 interest of six per centum per annum, payable quarter yearly, and sub- 
 ject to redemption by payments not exceeding in one year in amount of 
 principal and interest the proportion of eight dollars upon a hundred of 
 the sum mentioned in said certificate. A second certificate for one- 
 third, payable as aforesaid, bearing interest after 1800. A third cer- 
 tificate for the amount of the interest, bearing an interest at three per 
 centum per annum, payable quarter yearly ; provided it shall not be 
 understood that the United States shall be bound or obliged to redeem 
 in the proportion aforesaid ; but it shall be understood only that they 
 have a right to do so. 
 
 Thus, after this second proposition made to the officers had remained 
 entirely unprovided for during eight years, and no portion of the prin- 
 cipal or interest, which was payable annually, had been paid, these 
 certificates were finally scaled again, and given up, by a subscription 
 to a loan for the funding of the domestic debt, at the rate of one hun- 
 dred dollars for one, and a new proposition was made for the issuing 
 of new certificates to the holders, (as few of them were in the hands of 
 the officers at that time,) payable by annual instalments of eight dol- 
 lars to the hundred, making a deduction of interest nearly equal to the 
 principal. In this last proposition, Congress was more cautious, and 
 reserved the right of paying this proportion of the debt or not. 
 
 Therefore the claimants urge that, inasmuch as the records and acts 
 of Congress show that none of the terms and conditions of the resolve 
 of March 22, 1783 were ever complied with, but repudiated, and the 
 certificates scaled by the new Government, it is not necessary to inquire 
 whether the officers ever assented to the same or not ; that the reception 
 and detention of those certificates did not affect or in any way impair 
 the rights of the officers under the original contract. 
 
 The only question remaining for the consideration of Congress would 
 appear to be, what amount, if anything, ought the claimants to allow to 
 the Government for those repudiated and depreciated certificates 1 The 
 laws of March, April, and June, of 1780, established their value to be 
 two and a half dollars to the hundred. Seven years afterward, they 
 were funded at one hundred for one. In order, however, to relieve these 
 
20 
 
 claims from any misapprehension, the claimants do not ask for the 
 redemption of those certificates, nor the losses they sustained on the 
 money of the Government for arrears of pay and supplies furnished — 
 all these amounting to much more than their claim for half pay, which 
 are all suspended. As it would be impossible, in the attempt to redeem 
 the public money, to do justice to the original payees, while the public 
 currency was one hundred for one, the merchant received it and passed 
 it at that rate, and could not lose on the transaction. 
 
 But the claimants say, the contract for half pay was made with the 
 Government after it had utterly failed, and after it had long been una- 
 ble to meet its engagements ; after its most sacred debts had been scaled 
 by the Government, and after a permanent law had made the certifi- 
 cates of the Government the currency of the country at two dollars 
 and fifty cents to the hundred. It was at this dark time in the history 
 of the Government, when the contract of 1780 was made with the offi- 
 cers. They did not expect any pay for many years ; they looked to 
 the result of the experiment of a republican form of government ; they 
 staked their services, and all the money, provisions, and clothing, they 
 could raise, to sustain and keep on the field the soldiers of their respect- 
 ive corps ; they looked to the honor of the country even for their half 
 pay. This contract was viewed to be entitled to a higher consideration 
 of the Government to those of any other claims whatever. It really 
 was, as the resolve of March 22, 1783 declared them to have been, an 
 obligation " for which the faith of the nation hath been pledged " — 
 presenting a just distinction over all the claims, which runs through all 
 the subsequent acts of Congress. Therefore, a payment of two and a 
 half dollars on the hundred could not be an accord and satisfaction for 
 a hundred dollars. Payment of sixty dollars in this paper was not a 
 payment of $2,400 — that being the value of captain's certificate by law. 
 The contract was founded upon past services, as well as those rendered 
 subsequently. Fortunes of the officers were given to the country ; their 
 children deprived of an education, as well as their inheritance. The 
 patience with which the officers submitted to all the delay on the part 
 of the Government, in the omission and inability to respond to this 
 solemn obligation, and especially the readiness with which they again 
 entered the service of the army, makes still more brilliant every page 
 of their history, and renders their memory still more dear to every 
 American heart. Many of the survivors were on every battle field 
 during all the subsequent wars ; a large number of them were killed 
 at that destructive battle under General St. Clair at the sources of the 
 Maumee, on the 6th November, 1792, where of our army 682 were killed, 
 and 264 were wounded, at that single battle. They not only gave more 
 than seven years' service to establish this Government, but many of 
 them afterwards gave their lives in its defence and support. Why 
 then, it may be asked, if these claims embraced such important consid- 
 erations, have they been suffered to remain so long unpaid? 
 
 There have been many circumstances attending the progress of the 
 Government which have contributed to this result. A war threatened 
 with France in 1793 ; the entire inability of the Government to pay its 
 debts up to 1800 ; after that time came the non-intercourse act, which 
 
21 
 
 destroyed our commerce ; then came the war with England, which con- 
 tinued from 1812 to 1815, creating a very heavy additional indebted- 
 ness of the Government. The war of 1812 brought into the field a new 
 and large number of claimants. These, added to a vast number of 
 older claims, were sufficient to deter Congress, and almost to defy invest- 
 igation, and rendered applications of claimants, with any prospect of a 
 decision, a most forlorn hope. All of the committees of Congress have 
 united in reporting that nothing which was done under the resolve of 
 1783 impaired the rights of those officers to half pay under the resolve 
 of October 21, 1780. In 1810, 1818, 1819, 1826, 1828, and 1838, 
 reports were made recommending their payment ; but no general pro- 
 vision was made on behalf of those claims until the passage of the act 
 of May 15, 1828 : 
 
 ** AN ACT for the relief of certain surviving officers and soldiers of the Army of the 
 
 Revolution. 
 
 " Sec. 1. Be it enacted, fyc, That each of the surviving officers of 
 the army of the Revolution, in the continental line, who was entitled 
 to half pay by the resolve of October twenty-first, seventeen hundred 
 and eighty, be authorized to receive, out of any money in the Treasury 
 not otherwise appropriated, the amount of his full pay in said line, 
 according to his rank in the line, to begin on the third of March, one 
 thousand eight hundred and twenty-six, and to continue during his 
 natural life : Provided, That, under this act, no officer shall be enti- 
 tled to receive a larger sum than the full pay of a captain in said line. 
 
 " Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That, whenever any of said 
 officers has received money of the United States, as a pensioner, since 
 the third day of March, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-six, 
 aforesaid, the sum so received shall be deducted from what said offi- 
 cer would otherwise be entitled to under the first section of this act ; 
 and every pension to which said officer is now entitled shall cease after 
 the passage of this act. 
 
 " Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That every surviving non- 
 commissioned officer, musician, or private, in said army, who enlisted 
 therein for and during the war, and continued in service until its ter- 
 mination, and thereby became entitled to receive a reward of eighty 
 dollars, under a resolve of Congress passed May fifteenth, seventeen 
 hundred and eighty-eight, shall be entitled to receive his full monthly 
 pay in said service, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise 
 appropriated ; to begin on the third day of March, one thousand eight 
 hundred and twenty-six, and to continue during his natural life : 
 Provided, That no non-commissioned officer, musician, or private, in 
 said army, who is now on the pension list of the United States, shall 
 be entitled to the benefits of this act. 
 
 " Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, That the pay allowed by this 
 act shall, under the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury, be paid 
 to the officer or soldier entitled thereto, or to their authorized attor- 
 ney, at such places and days as said Secretary may direct ; and that 
 no foreign officer shall be entitled to said pay, nor shall any officer or 
 soldier receive the same, until he furnish to said Secretary satisfac- 
 
22 
 
 tory evidence that he is entitled to the same in conformity to the pro- 
 visions of this act ; and pay allowed by this act shall not in any way 
 be transferable, or liable to attachment, levy, or seizure, by any legal 
 process whatever, but shall inure wholly to the personal benefit of the 
 officer or soldier entitled to the same by this act. 
 " Sec. 5. Jind be it further enacted, That so much of said pay as 
 accrued by the provisions of this act before the third day of March, 
 eighteen hundred and twenty-eight, shall be paid to the officers and 
 soldiers entitled to the same, as soon as may be, in the manner and 
 under the provisions before mentioned ; and the pay which shall accrue 
 after said day shall be paid semi-annually, in like manner, and under 
 the same provisions." [Approved May 15, 1828.] 
 
 Attorney General Butler, in a very able and very elaborate opinion 
 of February 3, 1834, shows very conclusively that the act of 1828 was 
 to be regarded as an acknowledgment of a debt equitably due, than as 
 conferring gratuitous pensions. 
 
 By this act, the claimants, or those who had survived, were acknowl- 
 edged as creditors of the Government ', and the second section declares, 
 that any pension to which said officer was entitled was to cease after 
 the passage of this act. 
 
 It will be seen that the act allows full pay to all the officers, not to 
 exceed that of captain, during life, and also extends back to March 3 7 
 1826. While it admits the efficacy of the contract of 1780, by allow- 
 ing full pay instead of half pay, and also extending back over two years, 
 (equal to four years of half pay,) at the same time, in honor to that 
 Congress, it imposes no condition that such payment shall be in full for 
 said contract ; and the words of this act make the sum payable only 
 to such as " was entitled to half pay by the resolve of October 21, 1780." 
 The presumption is, that it was designed, by full pay instead of half 
 pay, gradually to extinguish the claim. More especially are we led to 
 this conclusion, from the fact, that the committees of Congress have 
 recommended their annual pay for the future, and the issues of Gov- 
 ernment scrip for the past. 
 
 This view is further confirmed by the act of Congress of the 2d of 
 March, 1853, which expressly declares that any applicant " for a pen- 
 sion, under the act of 7th" January, 1832, in pursuance of contracts 
 with the Government, made previous to the 11th day of April, 1783, 
 and continued in service until after that, it shall be the duty of the 
 Secretary of War to compute the period of any such service from the 
 time he entered the army until the date of the definitive treaty of 
 peace, and to allow him a pension accordingly." This is an act and 
 a legislative construction, which was made subsequent to either that of 
 1828 or 1832 — each of which recognises the contract of 1780, and 
 neither asks for any deduction for the commutation certificates, or 
 ■otherwise. The act of 1828 was evidently intended to restore the sur- 
 vivors of those officers to their original rights, and to become a 
 .gradual draft on the treasury for so much of their claim, leaving to the 
 future action of Congress to provide, as had been recommended by 
 many of ■the committees, for the arreras. If, however, any doubt 
 
23 
 
 could remain of the correctness of this exposition, the)' all disappear, 
 and the principle is established beyond all question, in the passage of 
 the many subsequent acts of Congress to that of 1828, all of which 
 were in behalf of the same officers who had already received up to that 
 time equal to fourteen years of half pay, by seven years full pay, under 
 the act of 1828, in the name of Alexander Garden, Caleb Starke, 
 Mountjoy Bailey, James Bennett, Edward Brooke, Thomas Triplett, 
 James Gibbon, Ephraim Whiteacher, Isaac Lay, and many others, by 
 several acts. Each received the full amount of five years commutation 
 full pay in specie, with interest. Having admitted the claim, and 
 restored them to the position of payees and creditors of the Govern- 
 ment, it made no difference whether it was received as commutation or 
 otherwise. 
 
 In further confirmation of this view for half pay, reference may be 
 had to the action of Congress in behalf of the officers of the State line 
 of Virginia. The promises of half pay by Virginia to her State line are 
 in the same words as those of the United States to the Continental line. 
 
 The United States assumed the payment of those military claims for 
 which Virginia was liable, but not otherwise. 
 
 The act of Congress of July 5, 1832, provided for the settlement and 
 payment of the same. The Secretary of the Treasury of the United 
 States paid the principal and interest upon each year's half pay, as the 
 same became due, on all those claims which were unsettled, as well as 
 those on which judgments had been rendered against Virginia by her 
 own courts — thus giving another legislative construction and declaration 
 of the extent of the half-pay claims of the United States, as well as 
 those of Virginia. 
 
 Congress has often recognised the claim in the name of the heirs of 
 the deceased officer, and paid the full amount, with interest, to them, 
 in the form of commutation, after the father had received full pay for 
 many years, under the act of 1828. James Withers, after receiving 
 twelve years full pay under this act, then received the full amount of 
 his commutation of five years half pay. 
 
 The claimants say that the act of 1828, and the passage of numer- 
 ous special acts of Congress in behalf of a large number of individual 
 ofiicers of the same class of creditors, are a legislative construction and 
 declaration, and sufficient admission in behalf of all the other claimants 
 under the same contract, and binding upon Congress, according to the 
 decisions of the Supreme Court and Secretaries of War. 
 
 The act of 1828, and the many subsequent special acts of Congress, 
 being subsequent to any of the acts of limitations, established the claim 
 of the heirs of the deceased officer, as much as it secured it to those 
 who survived. 
 
 If, however, there could have been any doubt remaining in relation 
 to the legality and equity of those claims, the more recent decision of 
 the Court of Claims, confirmed by the passage of an act for payment 
 of the half pay for life, together with the interest, would seem to settle 
 the question beyond all controversy. It being the judicial and legisla- 
 tive construction and declaration of the law-making and law-expound- 
 ing power, should be considered as binding on all parties. 
 
24 
 
 THOMAS H. BAIRD vs. THE UNITED STATES. 
 
 The case referred to is that of Thomas H. Baird, as a son of Absa- 
 lom Baird, who was a commissioned surgeon in the army of the Revo- 
 lution, and in that capacity was entitled by law to half pay for life 
 and other emoluments. 
 
 " The proceedings (says Chief Justice Gilchrist) in relation to the 
 claim for commutation do not appear to be very material in relation to 
 the case in the present position. On the 23d March, 1783, a resolu- 
 tion was passed, providing that the officers and others entitled to half 
 pay for life ' shall be entitled to receive at the end of the war their five 
 years full pay, in lieu of half pay for life, in money — that is, specie — 
 or in securities on interest, as Congress shall find most convenient.' 
 On the 28th of January, 1794, Dr. Baird applied for the benefit of 
 this provision, but died in the year 1806 — having, as is said in the 
 report of the Committee of Claims of the 5th February, 1855, ' be- 
 come wearied and disheartened with delay.' In the year 1818, his 
 son, Thomas H. Baird, having become of age, petitioned Congress 
 for relief; and on the 3d of March, 1855, the committee reported 
 that ' Dr. Absalom Baird was entitled to the benefit of the act of the 
 17th of January, 1781, extending the grant of half pay for life to the 
 officers of the hospital department and medical staff.' No action was 
 had upon the resolution until the 22d of June, 1836, when an act 
 was passed, granting five years full pay as commutation, under the 
 resolution of 1783, but without interest.'''' 
 
 " Now, this claim does not depend for its validity upon any admission 
 contained in the act of 1836. But the Congress which passed that act 
 must have considered that Dr. Baird had a legal claim of some 
 kind, otherwise their conduct in granting him five years full pay was 
 wholly indefensible. It is, however, relied upon as a final settlement 
 of the claim. Upon any principle known to the law, this position is 
 wholly untenable. It is easy enough to declare, ex cathedra, that it 
 was a final settlement. But it is extremely difficult to imagine, in 
 the absence of all evidence, what reasons can be urged for holding 
 that the payment of a sum of money is of itself a discharge of a debt 
 for a larger amount. A plea of payment of a small sum in satisfac- 
 tion of a larger is bad, even after verdict. (2 Parsons on Contracts, 
 130, and notes.) This principle is familiar to every lawyer. A debt 
 may be paid by a fair and well-understood compromise, carried faith- 
 fully into effect. But here there was no compromise. If it were a 
 case between individuals, no one would dream of applying such a term 
 to it. The United States are either bound by principles of law ap- 
 plicable to them, or they are not so bound. If they are not bound, 
 there is an end of the discussion, for then all reasoning is fruitless. 
 If they are bound by the principles of law, it is impossible to regard 
 the payment of five years full pay, without interest, as a satisfaction 
 of this claim. There is no evidence that either party so regarded it ; 
 and unless we set at defiance every principle of law, we cannot hold 
 that one party to a contract, without the consent of the other, can dis- 
 charge his debt by the payment of a smaller sum than the amount 
 
25 
 
 due." " The amount of Dr. Baird's half pay was two hundred 
 and forty dollars per annum, payable at the end of every year. He 
 was entitled to this sum up to the 27th day of October, 1805, the day 
 of his death, and interest on the payments as they became due, ac- 
 cording to the express provisions of the resolutions of June 3, 1784." 
 The Court of Claims therefore reported a bill for the relief of Thomas 
 H. Baird. 
 
 " Be it enacted, fyc, That the Secretary of the Treasury be and 
 hereby is directed, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise 
 appropriated, to pay to Thomas H. Baird, administrator of the estate 
 of Absalom Baird, a commissioned surgeon in the army of the Revo- 
 lution, the sum of ten thousand and seventy-four dollars and eighty- 
 four cents, with interest thereon from the 27th day of October, 1805, 
 to the 1st day of June, 1856, deducting therefrom the sum of twenty- 
 four hundred dollars, paid under the act of June 23, 1836." 
 This bill, as presented by the Court of Claims, was reported, and 
 passed both Houses by large majorities, without amendment. The act 
 was duly approved, and the amount paid at the Treasury. 
 
 This case embraced all the principles which are involved in all of the 
 same class of claims, and, by all the rules of justice which are known 
 to the highest judicial tribunals, must be applicable, and is a judicial 
 and legislative construction and declaration of the rights of all the other 
 claimants, founded upon the same contract, and governed by the same 
 rules of evidence. Here is the decision of an able court of the Govern- 
 ment in behalf of the half-pay claims, and this decision has been con- 
 firmed by a solemn act of the 34th Congress. This decision and act 
 of Congress is one of " the laws of the United States, made in pursuance 
 of the Constitution, under the authority of the United States," which 
 is declared by that Constitution " shall be the supreme law of the land ; " 
 and the suspension of the acts of limitation of the land also extends to 
 the half-pay portion of the contract of October 21, 1780. 
 
 In addition to this case and those before referred to, are the many 
 laws of Congress in behalf of those officers in the grants of land; for 
 it will be remembered that the contract to the officers who served to the 
 end of the war embraced not only the promise of money to the amount 
 of half of their annual pay, but also grants of land, which was equally 
 binding on the Government and connected with the payment of money, 
 in the same manner as the bond of one individual to another, for the 
 payment of one hundred dollars in money, and to convey him one hun- 
 dred acres of land, the tender or payment of the one would not be a 
 discharge of the other condition ; any act of limitation in relation to the 
 one, or renewal of the promise of the one, would equally affect the other. 
 If, then, the treasury was empty, and the Government could not pay 
 the money portion of the contract, having large tracts of land, it be- 
 comes interesting to know how far the Government has complied with 
 this portion of the contract ; for it is a well-settled principle of law, 
 that where no time is named for the conveyance of land, the law will 
 give the party only a reasonable time to make the conveyance. 
 
 The delay on the part of the Government must in this particular 
 strike every one with surprise. 
 
26 
 
 The ordinance of Congress for ascertaining the mode of disposing of 
 the public lands in the Western territory ; the resolve of May 20, 1785, 
 refers to the promises of land by the resolves of September 16, 1776, 
 12th August, 1780, 30th September, 1780, and ordained that the Sec- 
 retary of War ascertain who are the objects of said resolutions and en- 
 gagements, and the quantity of land to which such person or their 
 representatives are respectively entitled; and to cause townships, &c, 
 in such manner as shall be deemed impartial distribution, &c. 
 
 A supplementary ordinance of Congress of July 9, 1788, by which 
 it was further ordained that the Secretary of War issue warrants for 
 bounties of land to the several officers and soldiers who may be entitled, 
 &c, their respective assigns, or their legal representatives, certifying 
 therein the rank or station of each officer, and the line, regiment, corps, 
 and company, in which the officer or soldier served. 
 
 But, strange as it may seem, prior to the act of Congress of the first 
 day of March, 1800, no locations of military land warrants granted by 
 the United States could be made, unless such location embraced an 
 entire quarter township of four thousand acres ; consequently, no officer 
 or soldier .of the continental army could effect a location of the quantity 
 of land embraced by the warrant he received for his services, unless he 
 united with other officers and soldiers, or the holders of such warrants. 
 These evils continued until the act of March 1, 1800. 
 
 What appears still more strange is, that the Government, after 
 having taken seventeen years before being ready to deliver to each offi- 
 cer his separate portion of land, gave to the claimants only from the 
 16th of March, 1800, to the 1st day of January, 1802, in which to 
 apply for their warrant ; establishing a ratio between power and right 
 of seventeen to two. 
 
 Subsequently, however, to the limitation fixed by the act of 1802, 
 Congress, by successive acts, passed at intervals from two to five years, 
 continued to authorize the issuing of military land warrants to the 
 officers and soldiers of the Continental lines, whose claims for bounty 
 land remained unsatisfied — the last of which acts of extension was 
 passed February 8, 1854, which extended the time for discharging this 
 portion of the contract, up to the 26th of June, 1858. 
 
 The claimants therefore urge, that the half pay was only an enlarge- 
 ment of the money portion of the contract, in " addition " to the land. 
 By the act of October 3, 1780, the land is declared to be in " addition" 
 to the seven years half pay in specie or current money; that the two 
 considerations were blended in one and the same entire contract ; that 
 the many laws of Congress, on the suspension of acts of limitation, the 
 renewal, acknowledgment, promise, or extension of time of one portion 
 of the contract, applies with equal force to all the others, including the 
 half pay as well as the land. If this position be correct, the whole and 
 entire contract is carried forward to the 26th of June, 1858. 
 
 The promise of the land was also a vested right, and could not be 
 abrogated or impaired by any subsequent legislation. 
 
 They further urge, that in all cases between individuals, an acknowl- 
 edgment and promise to pay to one of ever so many joint and several 
 payees to a note or contract, is an acknowledgment, renewal, and 
 
27 
 
 promise to pay, to each and all the other payees their proportion, and 
 will take the claim out of the statute of limitations ; that the general 
 act of May 15, 1828, took all the claims out of the statute of limita- 
 tions. 
 
 It is admitted the resolves of October 21, 1780, October 3, 1780, 
 September 16, 1776, constituted a solemn contract between the Gov- 
 ernment and the several officers, for land and half pay due to each and 
 all of them (the act of October 3, 1780, declares the land to be " in 
 addition" to the half pay) whose claim was once brought within the 
 resolve, by having perfected the evidence of service, and thereby con- 
 summated the contract. This was done, in most of the cases, by the 
 ordinances of May 20, 1785, and July 9, 1788, where the Secretary of 
 War was to determine who are entitled to land, " certifying therein 
 the rank or station of each officer, and the line, regiment, corps, and 
 company, in which the officer and soldier served." The evidence of 
 service would also appear in the record of the commutation certificates. 
 In the absence of the record of the evidence of service, as prescribed 
 for the land portion of the consideration, and also the record of the 
 commutation certificates, the Court of Claims, it would seem, decided, 
 in the case of E. B. Chamberlain and others vs. the United States, 
 hereto annexed, that it came within and was barred by the statute of 
 limitations of November 2, 1785, July 23, 1787, and February 12, 
 1793 ; also, administrator of Armabel Chandolet vs. the United States; 
 also, administrator of Louis Marnay vs. the United States. 
 
 Joseph Stohely et al. vs. the United States; Jeremiah M. Williams 
 vs. the same. The Court, it would seem, did not consider in this case 
 the important connection of the land and the money portions of the 
 contract for half pay, as the several considerations are blended, and 
 constitute one entire contract. 
 
 The act of October 3, 1780, expressly declares, that from the time 
 the reform of the army takes place, they be entitled to half pay for 
 seven years, in specie, or current money equivalent, and also grants of 
 land at the close of the war, agreeably to the resolution of September 
 16, 1776 ; and the act of September 18, 1776, provides for the grants of 
 land, "in addition " to money bounty of twenty dollars. 
 
 But the court say that " if Joshua Chamberlain was a captain in the 
 ' Revolutionary war, as alleged in the petition, the same evidence 
 1 which would be sufficient to substantiate the claim for half pay for 
 i life, would establish also the right to the bounty land." 
 
 The evidence and record of the one would be the evidence and record 
 of the other. There could have been no other presentation of the 
 claim of an officer to half pay during life, which could have been of any 
 binding force, other than the return and record that the officer claiming 
 had served to the end of the war, and was in service on the 21st of 
 October, 1780. The extent of the claim depended entirely upon the 
 duration of life. If he was bound to file his claim for one year's 
 annuity, he would have been equally bound to have filed it every year. 
 These claims for half pay for life were a vested right, and, by their 
 very nature, could not come within any of the statutes of limitation. 
 Jf they existed, they existed by virtue of a commission, duly recorded ; 
 
28 
 
 and if they were brought within the act of October 21, 1780, and were 
 entitled to half pay, their claim was already recorded. In the absence 
 of that presentation and record of service, they could not claim their 
 land and half pay; and the Court of Claims, it would seem, has so 
 decided. 
 
 But it may well be urged, inasmuch as the United States, by their 
 judiciary act, expressly excludes all individuals from instituting any 
 suit against the Government, thereby deprived itself of the right there- 
 after of passing any acts of limitation for the presentation of claims 
 due from the Government to any of its creditors. That the acts of 
 February 2, 1785, and July 23, 1787, were only designed to enable 
 Congress to adjust the claims which existed between the several States 
 and the General Government, and were virtually repealed by the ninth 
 section of the funding act of August 4, 1790 ; and the act of February 
 3, 1793, was only designed to induce the perfection of the evidence of 
 claims which were contracted previous to that time, and not to affect 
 the record evidence of the Government in behalf of any claims of its 
 citizens, no more than it could annul or impair the record of the Gov- 
 ernment against the debtors of the United States. The Government 
 could not, by any principles of law, repudiate all claims against it for 
 many years, and then set up its own acts of limitations against their 
 payment. The Government of the United States having established a 
 Court " to hear and determine all claims founded upon any law of Con- 
 1 gress, or upon any contract, express or implied, with the Govern- 
 ' ment of the United States," and virtually by this act itself admits 
 the parties, for the first time by a public law, to their rights lis credit- 
 ors, and have thereby waived all acts of limitation to all claims where 
 they are debtors, the Court is not authorized to consider any vested 
 rights as barred by any act of limitation. 
 
 It will be remembered that the statutes of limitations were urged in 
 discussing the report of the committee of the Senate of the United 
 States, for the act of May 15, 1828, when these claims were fully 
 considered, and advocated on strict common-law principles as well as 
 equity ; and the acts of limitation were by implication repealed, so far 
 as regarded these claims, as will be seen by this short extract from the 
 closing remarks of the chairman of that committee, Judge Woodbury, 
 and also of Mr. Tucker, by which it will be seen the amount excluded 
 by the funding act, and the loss to the officer, and the objections to 
 commutation, as assigned by a Mr. Jackson, an attorney before the 
 Court of Claims. 
 
 Extract from the closing remarks of Judge Woodbury, Annals of 
 Congress, Vol. 4, part 1, for 1827-'8, page 441-'2. 
 
 " Mr. Woodbury said: But very far was it from the intention of 
 1 himself, or his able friend from Georgia, (Mr. Berrien,) in advocating 
 ' the claim on strict common-law principles, to admit that it could not 
 ' be supported also on principles the most liberal and equitable; while 
 c it was equally far, as he believed, from the views of the other mem- 
 ' bers of the committee, (Mr. Van Buren and Mr. Harrison,) who had 
 
29 
 
 so eloquently pressed the mere equity of the claim, to admit that it 
 was not also well based on strict common-law principles." * * * 
 
 " But they have averred, and it is again repeated, that these officers 
 are seeking a right, and that is a right both on common-law and on 
 chancery principles. But if on only one, whether it be a right on 
 strict common-law principles, or on chancery principles, it is equally 
 a right, and the claim is equally a legal claim. The forum in which 
 it becomes a right does not alter its legality. Hence, if every gentle- 
 man would agree with him from Virginia, (Mr. Tyler,) that the 
 statute of limitation should be scorned, and that the pretended pay- 
 ments made to these officers was 'mere wind, mere trash,' I aver, 
 that in any forum, before any court or jury in Christendom, this right, 
 as between individuals, could now be unanswerably established. Let 
 the issue be formed and the cause tried to-morrow, and no three or 
 five judges, no twelve ' good men and true,' as jurors, could say that 
 the wages of toil and blood, the solemn promises for sacrifices and 
 sufferings, to secure the liberties of America, had ever been discharged 
 by only ' wind and trash.' " 
 
 * * * « Without dwelling a moment on considerations before 
 urged in the argument, in favor of the legality of this claim, let me 
 ask, what has been the reply to the position of the committee, that, 
 on strict legal principles the promise of half pay for life has ever 
 been fulfilled 1 Has any one shown that the half pay, in the form of 
 half pay, has ever been paid 1 ? No pretence for it. Has any one 
 shown that the half pay has ever been technically released 1 No 
 pretence for it." * * * 
 
 " How, then, has the promise of October, 1780, been fulfilled 1 In no 
 way, except by the act of commutation. But it could not be fulfilled 
 by that act, unless all things were transacted in conformity to the pro- 
 visions of that act. Yet none can deny that, in conformity to these 
 provisions, the commutation must have been accepted by majorities in 
 each of the lines. Such is the express, unequivocal language of the act. 
 Whereas, all must admit, it now appears never to have been accepted 
 by even majorities in over nine linos of the army. Again, to conform 
 to the act, the acceptance must have been in six months, when no 
 acceptance by a single line appears to have taken place till some time 
 after six months. Everybody feels and knows, likewise, that the pay- 
 ment, to be in conformity to the act, was to have been money, or at 
 least securities equivalent to money, when, in truth, it was neither; 
 and even under the most favorable view, if the certificates were kept 
 till the funding, fell short of what was due, from one-fourth to one- 
 third. So the certificates, or the payment, should have been made in 
 September, 1783, but were not, in fact, made until some time in 
 1784— '5, when worth much less. But, break through the forms of 
 measures, and every lawyer, every constitutional statesman, must 
 admit that, on strict legal principles, there should not only have been 
 a conformity to the commutation act, but, in the act itself, to make it 
 binding, there should have been a regard to private vested rights." 
 
 I propose to submit one other extract from the same book, which 
 shows how the second agreement of the Government was executed. 
 
30 
 
 The records in the Register's office will show that Mr. Tucker is right 
 in his figures, and as to the principle of settling or redeeming these 
 certificates under the funding act : 
 
 " Mr. Tucker, of N. J. It is ascertained, Mr. Chairman, that each 
 captain, for his five years full pay, received a certificate for $2,400, 
 hearing interest at six per cent., payable annually, and such a cer- 
 tificate Captain Dehart received in lieu of his half pay for life, which 
 ran eight years without payment of interest, as before stated, viz : from 
 the 1st of January, 1783, to the 1st of January, 1791, the interest 
 amounting on the latter day to $1,152; making in the aggregate 
 $3,552. It will be recollected that in March, 1788, the present 
 Government went into operation, and in the year 1790 made provision 
 for and funded the public debt. 
 
 " Well, sir, how did they provide for the payment of Captain De- 
 hart's $2,400 principal, and $1,152 interest, due on the 1st of Jan- 
 uary, 1791? Why, sir, they gave him three certificates. One for 
 $1,600, being two-thirds his principal, with intei'est at six per cent., 
 and one for $800, the other third of his debt, but deferred ten years 
 without interest, and, instead of paying his $1,152 down, or giving 
 him paper at six per cent., they gave him a certificate for his $1,152 
 interest, redeemable at the pleasure of the United States, at three 
 per cent. Let us now examine how this funding system operated. 
 
 '1. Loss of interest on $800, deferred from 1st January, 
 1791, to 1st January, 1801, (ten years,) at six per cent. - $480.00 
 
 ' 2. Interest on the above sum from the 1st January, 1801, 
 to the 1st January, 1828, (twenty-seven years,) at six per 
 cent. ----------------- 777.60 
 
 ' 3. Loss of interest on the $1,152 of the three per cent., 
 from 1st January, 1791, to 1st January, 1828, (thirty-seven 
 years,) at three per cent. ----------- 1,278.72 
 
 " Total loss on Captain Dehart's, down to this time - - 2,536.32 
 
 " And, in the same proportion, every officer's pay or commutation, 
 according to his rank. (lb., p. 2,599.) 
 
 " The commutation, then, is clearly liable to the following objections: 
 
 " 1. That the commutation was not a valid accord and satisfaction 
 for half pay for life. 
 
 " 2. That it was so construed as to take away the rights of these 
 officers, under the resolve of October, 1780. 
 
 " 3. Of not being an equivalent for the half pay. 
 
 " 4. Of having been effected under circumstances, and by the opera- 
 tion of motives, which deprive it of all obligatory force. 
 
 " 5. That according to strict legal construction, these officers did not 
 commute their promised half pay for life by accepting the so-called 
 commutation certificates ; they in no respect having been in conformity 
 to the act. 
 
 " 6. Of partial and defective execution." 
 
31 
 
 SOME OF THE OBJECTIONS URGFD IN CONGRESS AGAINST THE BILL NOW 
 BEFORE THE SENATE, AS REPORTED BY SENATOR EVANS. 
 
 Because this report (which was made February 4, 1854) admitted 
 " the legal obligation, in most of the cases, had been discharged by the 
 payment of commutation." And although the report professes to admit 
 the claimants to their original rights, yet the report adds, that the 
 allowance of those claims is more in nature of a " benevolence, given in 
 discharge of a great moral obligation;" and therefore it is contended 
 that Congress could not constitutionally appropriate money for benevo- 
 lent purposes. Yet, in another portion of this report, it is said : " The 
 ' committee are of the opinion they should be admitted to their original 
 ' rights, and have accordingly provided in the bill that they shall be 
 * paid the half pay for life, deducting the amount of their commutation 
 ' certificates. No interest to be allowed." 
 
 This report of Senator Evans was made 4th February, 1854. Since 
 that time, however, while the present bill was under discussion, and call- 
 ing forth some of the ablest minds in opposition, one of the same class 
 of claims was undergoing a legal investigation in the Court of Claims. 
 That court decided that these claims were founded upon a solemn con- 
 tract — that their half pay was a vested right — and could not be rescinded 
 or impaired by any subsequent legislation; and that the commutation, 
 although paid in specie, without interest, was the compromise for the 
 half pay, and allowe'd the claimant the full amount of half pay, together 
 with the interest on each year. The report of the court was made to 
 the 84th Congress, while this bill was pending in the Senate, and this 
 report passed both Houses by a large majoritjr, which would seem to 
 have settled the question of the claims being founded upon a legal 
 consideration. 
 
 The question now before the Senate would seem to be, not whether 
 Congress made on the 21st October, 1780, a judicious contract or not, 
 but whether, having adopted the report of the court, and thereby admit- 
 ted these parties to their original contract, by a positive law, in pursu- 
 ance of the Constitution — whether Congress, with honor to itself, can 
 repudiate the deliberate action of the 34th Congress. 
 
 The objection which excited much opposition to the present bill, viz : 
 That those officers who lived long " enough, and received their commu- 
 ' tation, and also those who received full pay for many years under the 
 1 act of May 15, 1828, would still receive the same amount, and much 
 1 more than those who died early." This at first view would seem to 
 have some weight, but upon further consideration will be found to be 
 quite the reverse, when taken in connection with the principles of this 
 decision. 
 
 The extent of the claim depended entirely upon the duration of life. 
 Therefore, if all the officers are legally and equitably entitled to prin- 
 cipal and interest, and by the principles of law, well established, all pay- 
 ments made on a contract pa) r able with interest are first to be applied 
 toward the interest, those officers who lived the longest, and to whom 
 therefore the largest amount was due, on the suspension of interest, 
 must lose more than those who died early; and the person whose claim, 
 in consequence of his early death, was the least, would lose the least ; 
 
32 
 
 whicli objection makes more apparent the injustice committed to the 
 officers by the act of 1783. 
 
 Some objected to the bill, because it embraced only those officers 
 named in the resolves, and did not extend to the soldiers of the army, 
 although they were not embraced in the resolves, who held certificates 
 to the amount of eighty dollars each. Yet it will be seen that each of 
 the surviving soldiers received, under the act of May 15, 1828, over 
 two hundred dollars in specie, and full pay during the remainder of life, 
 although they were not entitled to half pay by the resolve of 1780. 
 
 Others objected to the original contract, because some of the officers 
 who served a shorter time would receive the same amount as those who 
 served the longest term under the resolve of October 21, 1780. The 
 act of 1780 only embraced those who were then in service, and contin- 
 ued during the war, and allowed those officers to be supernumeraries 
 who retired, to whom had been promised seven years half pay in specie 
 or current money, or an equivalent, payable on the first day of Janu- 
 ar}^, 1781. There were but few who retired. In looking over twelve 
 regiments of Virginia, I observe but five whose commissions were sub- 
 sequent to 1778 — averaging from 1775 to 1778. 
 
 The old Confederacy repudiated, during all the period of its existence, 
 the payment of even the interest of those certificates, which it should 
 be remembered was payable at the end of each year, which was in express 
 violation of the terms of the certificates, and also the conditions of the 
 resolve itself of 1783. The ninth section of the funding act provides, 
 " That nothing in this act contained shall be construed in any w r ise to 
 ' alter, abridge, or impair, the rights of those creditors of the United 
 ' States who shall not subscribe to the said loan, or the contracts upon 
 c which their respective claims are founded, but the contracts and rights 
 ' shall remain in full force and virtue." 
 
 The funding act made no distinction between the certificates which 
 were virtually discharged or scaled by the acts of jthe 18th March, 18th 
 April, and 28th June, 1780 ; and those certificates which were sent to 
 the officers, any person who had taken them at the price fixed by law, 
 or at a still lower rate — at one hundred for one — received the same as 
 those which represented the pledged faith of the nation for an estate of 
 half pay for life ; which is an admission by the Government of the entire 
 absence of all security, and therefore the repudiation of the resolve of 
 1783. The claims of the officers to half pay were by the express words 
 of the ninth section of the act of August 4, 1790, not in any way altered, 
 abridged, or impaired ; but the contract was thereby designedly left in 
 full force, or, as the act declares, " shall remain in full force and virtue." 
 The officers did not subscribe to the loan, nor did they ever authorize 
 any person to subscribe for them ; but if any of them had subscribed 
 to the loan, the original contract upon which they were founded was 
 not thereby altered, abridged, or impaired, because the funding act 
 expressly provided that the United States were not bound to pay even 
 that proportion of the claim, but simply reserved the right of doing so. 
 It could not have been expected that the officers should have waited 
 forty years to test this provision of the funding act. The Government 
 therefore could not have suspended only the value of the certificates at 
 
oo 
 
 the time they were issued, which would haye been to a captain sixty 
 dollars, and no more. If the Government redeemed at a greater per 
 cent., it was to accommodate speculators, and in violation of the rights 
 of the officers and duty of Congress. 
 
 In confirmation of this construction of the contract of October 21, 
 1780, it will be remembered that the seven years half pay promised 
 under the resolve of October 3, 1780, was evidently made with reference 
 to the depreciated state of all public paper, and was expressly made 
 payable in specie, or an equivalent, and the contract of October, 21, 
 1780, being only an extension, and also embracing this promise of 
 seven years half pay, is conclusive evidence that the half pay for life 
 was to have been held sacred, and could not by any rules of justice 
 come within the principles of the funding law, and subject to the same 
 rules which applied to all the depreciated paper held by purchasers, at 
 the rate of one dollar to the hundred. 
 
 It cannot be urged by the Government, that if the certificates were 
 of little value, so must have been the half-pay contract. One which 
 was classed with the floating, valueless paper, constituting the cur- 
 rency of the country, should not be classed with specie, secured by the 
 honor and all the property of the Government. 
 
 The half pay was virtually secured by the pledge of the public faith 
 for its payment, presenting at the time the contract was made a wide 
 distinction between the valueless paper of the Government which the 
 officers then held, which was known to be worth at that time, by the law 
 of the land, only the rate of forty dollars for one. 
 
 It is said, the officers did not remonstrate to Congress against the 
 injustice and inequality of the act of 1783. It is said, in answer, that 
 the petition of the few officers asked to have paid in advance to them 
 (not a new promise) an equivalent to their half pay for life. What would 
 have been an equivalent to the officer of eighty years, could not have 
 been an equivalent for the half pay for life of the officer of thirty-seven 
 years of age. 
 
 But the officers say, that the resolve of 1783 ought to have no effect, 
 because it was well known to Congress that the Government had no 
 power to comply with its terms, even if the officers had assented to it. 
 
 It ought not to be forgotten, in connection with the contract for half 
 pay for life, that the Government was driven from one expedient to an- 
 other, which the imperative necessities of the moment required : 
 
 1. Promising grants of land — September 16, 1776. 
 
 2. Seven years half pay to those who should serve to the end of the 
 war— May 18, 1778. 
 
 3. Seven years half pay, in specie or current money, to the supernu- 
 merary officers, to commence January 1, 1781 ; as also grants of land — 
 October 3, 1780. 
 
 4. Not being able to meet the half pay of a single year, in specie or 
 current money, they increase the seven years half pay to half pay 
 during life— October 21, 1780. 
 
 5. As peace had been conquered, and the Government were unable 
 to pay the officers their arrears for monthly pay, or to make any pro- 
 vision for their half pay during life, they then resorted to another expe- 
 
 3 
 
34 
 
 dient, of promising the officers five years full pay, in specie or securities, 
 with interest, payable annually — March 22, 1783. 
 
 6. Not being able to pay or secure this small amount of their claim, 
 resorted to another desperate expedient, and caused the Paymaster 
 General to issue and send to the officers more of these repudiated cer- 
 tificates, as specie and securities. 
 
 7. Not being able to pay the interest of a single year, repudiate them. 
 Finally, resorted to a funding act, by which the new Government 
 
 propose an arrangement by which there is to be no distinction between 
 the officer who has been charged twenty-four hundred dollars in com- 
 mutation, and the person to whom he has sold them at the value fixed 
 by law — for sixty dollars. And the new Government does not agree to 
 pay the proportion named, but only obtained the right to do so, if the 
 Government thought proper ; requiring about forty years to test the 
 ability and inclination of the Government, from the time they were 
 funded. 
 
 Having waited seventeen years after the peace for warrants of their 
 lands, many of them were compelled to take them while claimed by 
 hostile savages, and defend their possession by arms. 
 
 But, as it has already been remarked, all these considerations have 
 been fully considered by Congress, and the principles adopted will apply 
 all the payments made under the act of 1828 to the payment of the 
 interest ; and if any balance of interest remains, Congress may think 
 proper the present time to suspend the same, without imposing any 
 forced condition that it shall be in full of all claims. 
 
 But, strange as it may appear, while the present bill deducts these 
 valueless certificates, not at the value they were forced upon them, 
 (at two dollars and fifty cents to the hundred,) but at their face, the 
 bill contemplates the payment of nothing, except the half pay which 
 accrued beyond the amount of those certificates ; and yet, during the 
 same Congress in which the report of the Court of Claims was adopted, 
 giving principal and interest to one of the claimants, the bill which had 
 once passed the Senate, and afterwards the House, was postponed, 
 although allowing so small a portion of the claim, and containing'a pro- 
 vision that it should be in full of all claims. 
 
 The present bill will give the claimants included the following sums, 
 assuming the whole number entitled to half pay to be 2,220. The cal- 
 culations of human life and statistics of the country give the following 
 results : 
 
 EXCLUDED BY THE PRESENT BILL. 
 
 Of the whole number died before 1794 ----- 375 
 
 Of whom were never married ______ 300 
 
 Of those who were married, and died without issue - 300 
 Of those who were married, leaving issue, where children and 
 
 grandchildren are also dead - - - - - - 275 
 
 Total . _ _ - 1,250 
 
 This number deducted from 2,220, leaves 1,070 who would be enti- 
 
35 
 
 tied, not excluding those who have received their half pay by private 
 acts. Allowing the pay of captain to be the average, it would amount 
 to $245,200 per annum, and allowing the aggregate of life over the 
 ten years to have been seven years. 
 
 There is now due this class of claimants, which are embraced in this 
 bill, one million six hundred and seventy -six thousand four hundred 
 dollars, not including interest, which the present bill excludes, and this 
 would operate as a very gradual call upon the Treasury for that amount — 
 first six months, $500,000; second six months, $500,000; third six 
 months, $200,000 — and so on. 
 
 Strange to relate, the present bill before the Senate, embracing so 
 small a pittance of these just claims, excluding and suspending all the 
 balance of the claims, was reported in February, 1854, and passed the 
 Senate. A similar bill passed the House the last Congress, but was 
 postponed in the Senate to the next Congress. 
 
 It seems a strange way to avoid the payment of just claims, to delay 
 from year to year until the claimants become disheartened and die, and 
 then restrict the proposition to pay a pittance of the claims to the few 
 who may have survived. 
 
 There was a time when that just maxim of law prevailed, " That no 
 party should take any advantage of his own wrong;" which was con- 
 sidered as much binding upon Governments as upon the people. 
 
 It would seem those claims commended themselves to Congress and 
 to General Washington, by the highest considerations which a sense of 
 justice and gratitude could inspire, as appears by an — 
 
 i XTRACT FROM A CIRCULAR LETTER FROM HIS EXCELLENCY GEORGE 
 WASHINGTON, COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF THE ARMIES OF THE UNITED 
 STATES OF AMERICA, TO THE GOVERNORS OF THE SEVERAL STATES. 
 
 " Headquarters, Newburgh, June 18, 1783. 
 
 il The ability of the country to discharge the debts which have been 
 incurred in its defence is not to be doubted. An inclination, I flatter 
 myself, will not be wanting. The path of our duty is plain before us ; 
 honesty will be found, on every experiment, to be the best and only 
 true policy. Let us, then, as a nation, be just ; let us fulfil the public 
 contracts which Congress had undoubtedly a right to make, for the pur- 
 pose of carrying on the war, with the same good faith we suppose our- 
 selves bound to perform private engagements. 
 
 " In this state of absolute freedom and perfect security, who will 
 grudge to yield a very little of his property to support the common 
 interests of society, and to insure the protection of Government 1 
 Who does not remember the frequent declarations, at the commence- 
 ment of the war, that we should be completely satisfied, if, at the ex- 
 pense of one half, we could defend the remainder of our possessions 1 
 
 " Where is the man to be found who wishes to remain indebted for 
 the defence of his own person and property, to the exertions, the 
 bravery, and the blood of others, without making the generous effort 
 to pay the debt of honor and gratitude? In what part of the conti- 
 nent shall we find a man, or body of men, who would not blush to 
 stand up and propose measures, purposely calculated to rob the sol- 
 
36 
 
 dier of his stipend, and the public creditor of his due 1 And were it 
 possible that such a flagrant instance of injustice could ever happen, 
 would it not excite the general indignation, and tend to bring down 
 upon the authors of such measures the aggravated vengeance of Heaven 1 
 " For my own part, conscious of having acted, while a servant of the 
 public, in the manner I conceived best suited to promote the interests 
 of my country ; having, in consequence of my fixed belief, in some 
 measure pledged myself to the army that their country would finally 
 do them complete and ample justice, and not willing to conceal any 
 instance of my official conduct from the eyes of the world, I have 
 thought proper to transmit to your Excellency the enclosed collection 
 of papers, relative to the half pay and commutation granted by Con- 
 gress to the officers of the army. 
 
 " From those communications my decided sentiment will be clearly 
 comprehended, together with the conclusive reasons which induced 
 me at an early period to recommend the adoption of this measure in 
 the most earnest and serious manner. 
 
 " As the proceedings of Congress, the army, and myself, are open to 
 all, and contain, in my opinion, sufficient information to remove the 
 prejudice and errors which have been entertained by any, I think it 
 unnecessary to say anything more than just to observe, that the res- 
 olutions of Congress now alluded to are undoubtedly as absolutely 
 binding upon the United States as the most solemn acts of confedera- 
 tion or legislation. 
 
 "As to the idea which I am informed has in some instances pre- 
 vailed, that the half pay and commutation are to be regarded merely 
 in the odious light of a pension, it ought to be exploded forever. 
 
 " That provision should be viewed as it really was, a reasonable 
 compensation offered by Congress, at a time when they had nothing 
 else to give to officers of the army for services then to be performed. 
 
 " It was the only means to prevent a total dereliction of the service; 
 it was a part of their hire. 
 
 " I may be allowed to say, it was the price of their blood and of 
 your independency. 
 
 "It is therefore more than a common debt ; it is a debt of honor ; it 
 can never be considered as a pension or gratuity, nor cancelled until 
 it is fairly discharged." 
 
 The action of Congress in relation to the claims of the officers may 
 not be found uninteresting. 
 
 As early as 1810, while the country was suffering great depression 
 from the effects of the debt of the Revolution, an embargo of many 
 years, and a war threatened with England, then, even then, they were 
 admitted to be justly due. Forty-seven years ago, the officers then, in 
 view of the impoverished state of the treasury at that time, proposed 
 to deduct the whole amount of those repudiated commutation certifi- 
 cates, and receive their half pay from the time of the peace to the time 
 of their death, (being the same terms which are contemplated in the 
 bill of Senator Evans.) The committee to whom was referred their 
 petition for half pay reported that the contract of 1780 had not been 
 
37 
 
 substantially complied with, and recommended the following resolution : 
 
 " Resolved, That the prayer of the petitioner is reasonable, and 
 ' ought to be granted." 
 
 The gloomy anticipations of a long, expensive war with England, post- 
 poned any further action until after the close of that war. 
 
 The claims of the officers for half pay were again presented soon 
 after the war, even while the impoverished state of the treasury still 
 continued ; and that, too, after the passage of the indigent pension act of 
 March 18, 1818, which act was not confined to those officers and sol- 
 diers who served to the end of the war. All who had served nine months 
 were entitled to its benefits. Yet, after the passage of this act of 
 March 18, 1818, on the 7th of December, 1818, the committee of the 
 House reported, and proposed to deduct one-eighth from the commuta- 
 tion certificates, and pay all the officers the balance. 
 
 President Monroe, in his message of 1819, again called the attention 
 of Congress to the claims of these officers, and Mr. Sargent, of the 
 House, made a very able report, and proved, beyond all question, the 
 justice and legality of these claims, and recommended to allow all the 
 officers entitled to half pay from the time of peace, in 1783, to their 
 death, deducting the amount of the certificates, agreeably to the terms 
 of the petition. 
 
 This claim for half pay was again admitted in the report of Mr. 
 Hemphill, of the committee of the House, of January 3, 182b, in which 
 he says " that, by virtue of those resolves, a solemn contract between 
 the Government and the officers was made, that ought to be observed 
 on the part of the Government with the most profound sanctity. That 
 when the power of rescision resides exclusively in the bosom of one of 
 the parties, it should be exceedingly cautious that justice should be 
 done to the other ; that the claims are founded on a contract which 
 has not been fairly rescinded, and if it has, there cannot possibly be 
 a doubt that the commutation contract has not been fulfilled ; " and 
 ecommended allowing the officers their half pay, deducting their com- 
 mutation certificates, without any reference to what may have been re- 
 covered under the pauper acts of 1818 and 1823. 
 
 Mr. Burges made a very able report to the House, February 11, 
 1828, in which the committee say " that, in their opinion, the deliv- 
 1 ery of those certificates, as well on general principles as on those 
 1 which govern courts of law or equity, did not annul the right of half 
 ' pay or exonerate the Government from the obligations of the original 
 1 contract. Such of those officers as had survived the war, and contin- 
 1 ued in the service until the peace, became severally and individually 
 ' vested with a complete right to the reward of half pay for the residue 
 1 of their lives. 
 
 " The reward was gallantly won at the point of the sword ; it was 
 i the price of our independence, purchased with blood and sanctioned by 
 1 public faith." 
 
 The committee say : " In regard to commissioned officers, Congress, 
 < by a resolve of the 22d of March, 1783, offered to those then in the 
 ' service, as a substitute for this stipulated half pay, the amount of five 
 
38 • 
 
 years full pay in money or securities, bearing an interest of six per 
 cent, per annum, at the option of Congress. These securities were 
 to be such as should be given to the other creditors of the United 
 States. In the same resolve, there were offered to the officers entitled, 
 who had retired from the service on the reform of the army as such, 
 substitute certificates to the like amount. To these offers were an- 
 nexed two express conditions, viz : First, that they should be accepted 
 or refused by lines and corps, and not individually ; and, second, that 
 such acceptance or refusal should be signified to Congress by the 
 Commander-in-chief, as to the army under his immediate command, 
 within two months ; and by the commanding officer of the Southern 
 army, as to those under his command, within six months from the date 
 of the above resolve of the 22d of March, 1783. At the time these 
 offers were made, it is evident, from all the calculations on the prob- 
 abilities of human life, that seven years full pay, in advance, would 
 have been somewhat less than an equivalent to the half pay for life 
 to the younger class of officers, who naturally are the present memo- 
 rialists. And your committee are compelled to say, that they have 
 discovered no reason why the Government should have denied an indi- 
 vidual right of refusing a disadvantageous offer, when the right was 
 individual, and considering the Government under the obligation of an 
 express, solemn contract. Your committee do not perceive why it 
 might not as well have annulled the original right, as to have enforced 
 the memorialists to abide by the vote of others, who were interested, 
 to put the value of the lives of all upon one equal footing. If, how- 
 ever, it should be considered by the House that an assent given in the 
 manner prescribed by the resolve is binding upon each individual, 
 then your committee beg leave further to observe, that such assent, 
 which is to work so much injury and injustice, ought to appear to have 
 been given and signified strictly according to the conditions of the 
 offer. In examining this part of the subject, your committee do not 
 find any signification to Congress of any acceptance, other than a 
 notice in the Journals of a report made by the Secretary of War, on 
 the 31st of October, 1783, and long after the officers had dispersed, 
 that certain lines from New Hampshire to Virginia, inclusive, had 
 agreed to accept. This report itself is not to be found, but certain 
 it is, that no signification was made to Congress, either by the Com- 
 mander-in-chief or the commanding officer of the Southern army, or 
 within the times prescribed in the offer ; neither was there ever any resolve 
 of Congress specifying such assent, or declaring their option whether 
 to pay in money the amount offered, or to give securities for the same, 
 on interest. If the offer had been cemplied with, according to its 
 sense, your committee are of opinion that the loss of two years full 
 pay would have been submitted to, as a new sacrifice, with that pa- 
 tience and disinterestedness which were the distinguishing characteris- 
 tics of an American officer. But, on a careful examination of this 
 matter, 3^our committee have been forced to the conclusion, that the 
 offer was not so complied with ; which conclusion results from the 
 following considerations, which are most respectfully submitted to the 
 House : From the manner of calculating life-annuities, which is by 
 
♦ 39 
 
 estimating on the one hand the purchase-money with compound inter- 
 est, and on the other the probable duration of the life ; from the press- 
 ing pecuniary necessities of the officers, and their want of capital to • 
 set up, with advantage, in some of the profitable pursuits of civil life ; 
 and from the absence of any specification in the resolve as to time — 
 it is manifest that it was as well the common understanding of the 
 parties, as the legal conclusion, that the offer was to be complied with 
 in advance, or in anticipation of the growing annuities. After the 
 peace, and after the officers had dispersed, a certificate was sent to 
 each individual, indiscriminately, whether he had retired on the reform 
 of the army or had continued in the service, that an amount equal to 
 five years full pay was due to him, and that such amount, with inter- 
 est, was payable to him or bearer. The certificates had no funds 
 whereon to rest, and their market value was not equal to one year's 
 pay. And it appears to your committee too much to say, that the 
 delivery of this almost valueless paper was a payment in money, 
 according to the sense of the offer, or that these certificates were the 
 securities intended thereby, either according to the common under- 
 standing of the term, or the distinction expressly made in the resolve 
 itself, between securities and certificates. And these certificates of 
 the Paymaster General, or of the commissioners for settling army ac- 
 counts, were not securities to any creditor of the United States, until 
 registered or funded, more than the other floating certificates of the 
 Quartermaster General or the Commissary General, which were issued 
 and made payable with interest under the express resolves of Congress 
 during the period of the war. Under these considerations, your com- 
 mittee, in the choice of the alternative, are obliged to say that in their 
 opinion the delivery of these certificates, as well on general principles 
 as on those which govern in courts of law or equity, did not annulthe 
 right to half pay, or exonerate the Government from the obligations 
 of the original contract in this regard." 
 
 It may be well to remember, in connection with these claims, that 
 long after the passage of the acts of May 15, 1828, and June 7, 1832, 
 and after the act of July 6, 1836, in behalf of the widows, the Senate 
 Committee on Revolutionary Claims, May 11, 1838, reported that, 
 
 " After an assiduous investigation, the committee conclude that no 
 legislation subsequent to the 21st October, 1780, could, or that by a 
 fair construction did, contravene or in any manner impair the claim 
 of the officers of the army, or any class of such officers, to the half 
 pay promised them by the act of October 21, 1780. The half pay 
 for life contracted by the act of October, 1780, to be paid to the offi- 
 cers of the army for certain services to be performed by them, instanta 
 became a vested right, of which subsequent legislation nor nothing 
 whatever could divest the officer, save a failure on his part to perform 
 the prescribed service. And it would be a libel on the good sense 
 and justice of the distinguished statesmen and patriots of that period, 
 to imagine, even, that any legislation subsequent to the 21st of Octo- 
 ber, 1780, had for its object to impair the deliberate engagement made 
 by that act to allow half pay for life to the officers of the army." 
 
40 
 
 It ought not to be forgotten that all of the committees of Congress 
 to whom these claims have been referred have all united in the con- 
 clusion, that those commutation certificates sent to the officers were 
 not at that time of the value of one-eighth their nominal amount, and 
 that each and all of them have recommended their payment. 
 
 Senator Evans, of South Carolina, on the 6th February, 1854, 
 reported a bill in behalf of those claims, which passed the Senate, but 
 was not reached in the House the 33d Congress. The House, of the 
 34th Congress, passed a similar bill, which placed the claims upon legal 
 grounds. This bill was postponed in the Senate. 
 
 The bill was advocated by Senators Evans of South Carolina, Bell 
 of New Hampshire, Foster of Connecticut, Seward of New York, Crit- 
 tenden of Kentucky, and many others. 
 
SEVEN YEARS HALF PAY, 
 
 PROMISED UNDER THE RESOLVE OF AUGUST 24, 1T80. 
 
 The next contract for our consideration, which is also embraced in 
 the present bill, is that of seven years half pay, promised under the 
 resolve of August 24, 1780. 
 
 In order that they may be fully comprehended, I subjoin the several 
 acts of Congress upon which they are based. 
 The first act is that of August 26, 1776. 
 
 The second act is the following resolution of September 16, 1776 : 
 " Resolved, That in addition to money bounty of twenty dollars to 
 each non-commissioned and private soldier, Congress make provision 
 for granting land, in the following proportions, to the officers and sol- 
 diers who shall engage in the service, and continue therein to the 
 close of the war, or until discharged by Congress, and to the repre- 
 sentatives of such officers and soldiers as shall be slain by the enemy, 
 viz : to a colonel, 500 acres ; lieutenant colonel, 450 ; major, 400 ; 
 captain, 300 ; lieutenant, 200 ; ensign, 150 ; each non-commissioned 
 officer and soldier, 150 acres." 
 
 This was extended, by resolve of September 18, 1776, " to all who 
 are or shall be enlisted for that term." This was " extended to the 
 general officers," in the following proportions : major general, 1,100 
 acres ; brigadier general, 850 acres — August 12, 1780. September 22, 
 1780, it was extended " to the several officers of the medical depart- 
 ment, except the clerks and stewards." 
 
 It will be seen that the act of August 26, 1776, was very full in all 
 its provisions for pensions for wounds received anterior to that date, 
 which was further extended by the act of September 25, 1778. 
 
 RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, AUGUST 26, 1776. 
 
 " 1. Military officers, non-commissioned officers, and private soldiers, 
 who shall lose a limb, or be otherwise totally disabled, in the line of 
 their duty, to receive a pension per month equal to half their monthly 
 pay as officers or soldiers of the United States. 
 
 " 2. Commanders of ships, officers, marines, or seamen, belonging to 
 the United States, who shall lose a limb, or be otherwise totally dis- 
 abled, in engagements in which no prize is taken, to receive a monthly 
 pension equal to one-half their monthly pay as officers, seamen, or 
 marines ; but in case a prize be taken, their respective profits thereof 
 shall be computed as part of their pension, and deducted accordingly. 
 
 " 3. Officers, seamen, and soldiers, in the army or navy of the United 
 States, who shall be wounded in an engagement, and rendered incapa- 
 
42 
 
 ble of serving in the army or navy, but not totally disabled, to receive 
 an adequate monthly pension, not to exceed their half pay. 
 
 "4. Provided, respectively, that in every such case of wound or 
 disability, such officer, soldier, seaman, or marine, shall produce the 
 evidence required to substantiate the facts of his wound or other dis- 
 ability in such engagement. 
 
 " 5. The Legislatures of the several States recommended to appoint 
 proper persons to receive and examine such evidence, and to register 
 the same ; also, what support is adjudged by the Legislature of their 
 State ; and the pa) 7 ments made from time to time to be reported to 
 Congress, or to the ' Board of War.' 
 
 " 6. And that the Legislatures cause such payments to be made on 
 account of the United States. 
 
 " 7. Provided that all such officers and soldiers, capable of guard or 
 garrison dntj, be formed into a corps of invalids ; and also said naval 
 officers, marines, and seamen, capable of doing any duty in the navy, 
 be so employed." 
 
 " Relief is extended to officers and non-commissioned officers of the 
 army and navy, and to soldiers, seamen, and marines, who had, ante- 
 rior to the resolve of the 26th of August, 1777, lost a limb, or been 
 otherwise disabled, such as that granted by said resolution." 
 
 RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, SEPTEMBER 25, 1778. 
 
 a The Board of War brought in a report, which was taken into 
 consideration. Whereupon, Congress came to the following reso- 
 lution : 
 
 " 1. Whereas Congress, by a resolve passed on the 26th of August, 
 1776, made provision for commissioned and non-commissioned officers, 
 officers of the army and navy, as also for the private soldiers, marines, 
 and seamen, who should thereafter lose a limb in any engagement, or 
 be otherwise so disabled in the service of the United States of Amer- 
 ica as to render them incapable afterwards of getting a livelihood ; 
 and whereas divers officers and others have lost limbs, or been other- 
 wise disabled as aforesaid,, before the said 26th of August, to whom 
 the like relief ought, equitably, equally to be extended — 
 
 " Resolved, That all provisions and regulations contained in the said 
 resolve of August 26, 1776, shall extend to all persons who lost a 
 limb, or are otherwise disabled as aforesaid, in the service of the 
 United Colonies or States of America, before the said 26th of August 
 and since the commencement of hostilities, on the 19th of April, 1775. 
 
 " 2. And whereas doubts may arise, in some cases, whether certain 
 persons, maimed or disabled, and claiming pensions, were at the time 
 in the service of the said Colonies or States : for removing the same." 
 
 " Resolved, That every commissioned and non-commissioned officer, 
 and private man, who, since the commencement of hostilities, as afore- 
 said, has been, or hereafter shall be, drawn forth for the common de- 
 fence, (and not for the service of any particular State,) or who has 
 turned out, or shall hereafter turn out, voluntarily, to oppose the 
 enemies of the said United Colonies or States, upon any sudden attack 
 or invasion, or upon any enterprise carried on under their authority, 
 
43 
 
 and in such service has lost or shall lose a limb, or has been or 
 shall be otherwise disabled, as aforesaid, shall be entitled to the 
 pension allowed in said resolve of August 26th, 1776 ; provided that 
 any such commissioned or non-commissioned officer, or private man, 
 being found capable of doing guard or garrison duty, shall be subject 
 thereto, and serve in the corps of invalids when required, or, on re- 
 fusing so to do, shall be struck off the list of pensioners ; unless the 
 person so refusing have a family, or be otherwise peculiarly circum- 
 stanced, and the Governor or President and Council of the State he 
 belongs to, or in which he resides, are of opinion an exception should 
 be made in his favor, and an exemption granted him from such ser- 
 vice, a certificate of which opinion he shall produce, previous to his 
 receiving his pension. 
 
 " And whereas it may happen that many persons, maimed or disa- 
 bled, as aforesaid, by reason of their falling into the hands of the 
 enemy, the deaths of their officers and surgeons, or other accidents, 
 may not have it in their power to procure the certificates required by 
 the afore-mentioned resolve, to entitle them to their pensions : 
 
 " Resolved, That in such cases application be made to the Governor 
 or President and Council of the State to which any person maimed or 
 disabled, as aforesaid, belongs, or in which he resides, and upon 
 showing to him or them satisfactory proof that he was maimed or dis- 
 abled in the manner before mentioned, and producing his or their cer- 
 tificate thereof, he shall be entitled to and receive a pension, in like 
 manner as if he produced the certificate required by the said resolve." 
 
 Then follows the resolve of August 24, 1780, referred to in the bill 
 
 now before the Senate. 
 
 RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, AUGUST 24, 1780. 
 
 Half pay for seven years granted to officers, &c, extended to widows and orphans of 
 
 those officers, &c. 
 
 " Resolved, That the resolution of the 15th day of May, 1778, 
 granting half pay for seven years to the officers of the army who 
 should continue in service to the end of the war, be extended to the 
 widows of those officers who have died or shall hereafter die in the 
 service, to commence from the time of such officer's death, and con- 
 tinue for the term of seven years ; or if there be no widow, or in case 
 of her death or intermarriage, the said half pay be given to the orphan 
 children of the officer, dying as aforesaid, if he shall have left any ; 
 and that it be recommended to the Legislatures of the respective 
 States to which such officers belong, to make provision for paying the 
 same, on account of the United States." 
 The next resolve is that of October 3, 1780, when the army was 
 
 reorganized, to take effect the 1st of January, 1781 : 
 
 " Resolved, That from the time the reform of the army takes place, 
 
 ' they be entitled to half pay for seven years, in specie or other current 
 
 1 money equivalent, and also grants of land at the close of the war, 
 
 ' agreeably to the resolution of September, 1776." 
 
 The first act of Congress to induce service in the army was that of 
 
 August 26, 1776. It provided a reward not exceeding half pay to all 
 
44 
 
 who should be wounded in the service, in proportion to the injury and 
 disability, during life, or the end of said disability. The next is the 
 act of September 16, 1776, which made each of the officers and soldiers 
 who were then in service, and continued therein during the war, and 
 the representatives of those who were slain by the enemy, in addition 
 to bounty money, to grants of land, in the proportions therein named. 
 
 The next act as a further inducement to serve is that of May 15, 1778. 
 This act was additional and supplementary to the act of September 16, 
 1776, granting seven years half pay to those officers who were commis- 
 sioned by Congress, who then were or thereafter should be in the ser- 
 vice of the United States, and continue therein during the war. 
 
 The next act of Congress was that of September 25, 1778, which is 
 additional to and explanatory of the act of August 26, 1776 ; and as it 
 is subsequent to the act of May 15, 1778, may also be considered ex- 
 planatory of that act, and thereby extending the same. 
 
 The next act is that of August 24, 1780, which provides that the 
 provisions of the resolve of May 15, 1778, for seven years half pay, 
 promised to those officers who shall serve to the end of the war, should 
 extend to the widows of those officers " who have died or shall hereafter 
 * die, or in case of their death or intermarriage , that the said half pay 
 ' to be given to the orphan children of the officer, if he shall have left 
 ' any." This act is additional to the bounty-land act of September 
 16, 1776, and applies the continued service of the act of May 15, 
 1778, to that of the death service, but did not thereby intend to make 
 the grant less certain or less extensive, but it only sought to secure it 
 in the officer's family, up to a certain point, by priority of right in the 
 application of payment. 
 
 The several resolves constitute a solemn contract for land and seven 
 years half pay. It cannot be considered in the light of a gratuity, 
 wherein the grant may be intentionally restricted, as in cases where the 
 party may have received the consideration promised under the contract 
 for the full term of the time named in the contract ; in that case, of an 
 extension of the seven years in addition, may be viewed as a gratuity. 
 But if the officer was killed, or died within the service, and comes 
 within the provision of the act, the seven years half pay, it would seem, 
 became due immediately, together with the land. If the widow and 
 children are dead, it would by law descend to the grandchildren. The 
 grant will not for that reason be lost. The resolve of October 3, 1780, 
 was passed subsequeiit to either of the other acts, which promises seven 
 years half pay to each of the supernumerary officers, in specie or current 
 money ; " also, grants of land at the close of the war, agreeably to the 
 resolution of 16th September, 1776." It does not make any priority 
 of payees, because it was in all probability to be paid to those officers 
 themselves ; but the practice of Congress has been to protect its pay- 
 ment, for the benefit of the children, in all cases of the seven years half 
 pay, where the widow had deceased or intermarried. 
 
 It will be observed that Congress adopted measures with reference 
 to invalids by 
 
 
45 
 
 RESOLUTION— IN CONGRESS, JUNE 7, 1785. 
 
 u Resolved, That it be, and it is hereby, recommended to the several 
 1 States, to make provision for officers, soldiers, or seamen, who have 
 * been disabled in the service of the United States, in the following 
 ' manner : 
 
 The recommendation of Congress to the States to provide for invalids of the army and navy, 
 resident in the States, respectively . 
 
 " Section 1. List to be made out. 2. Certificate necessary. 3. 
 Pensions to disabled officers equal to half pay, and rateable allowance 
 to non-commissioned officers and privates. 4. Each State to appoint 
 persons to examine claimants. 5. Each State authorized to pay. 6. 
 Any State may form invalid corps. 7. Quarterly returns of invalid 
 corps. 8. Invalids to take an oath. 9. Magistrates to send affi- 
 davits." 
 
 Many of these pensions were paid by the individual States ; hence 
 the necessity of limiting the time of presentation of many claims, wher- 
 ever the order of priority of payees existed. By the act of June 11, 
 1788, each State shall have credit with the United States for invalid 
 pensions. The act of September 29, 1789, the military pensions 
 granted and paid by the States to be paid by the United States, for the 
 space of one year, under such regulations as the President of the United 
 States may direct, and the act of July 16, 1790, carried the provisions 
 forward another year. Up to this time, " no provision had been made 
 for the discharging of the arrears of pensions due to officers, non-com- 
 missioned officers, and soldiers, who were wounded and disabled 
 whilst in the service of the United States ; " and the third section of 
 the act provides that a certificate shall issue for the amount, " and in 
 case of the death of any person so entitled, the certificate shall pass 
 to his heirs -or legal representatives, or representatives." The fourth 
 section, which applies to the widow or orphan of each officer, &c, &c. : 
 shall receive a certificate therefor, in like manner and on the same 
 principles as certificates are by this act directed to be given to officers, 
 non-commissioned officers, and soldiers who were wounded or disabled 
 as aforesaid." Under those and many subsequent acts of Congress, 
 a large number of the seven years half pay claims originally due to the 
 widows and orphans have been paid, and many of them have been paid 
 with the interest. Priority of payees was made to secure it against 
 the liabilities of debts, and not to exclude it from the children or grand- 
 children. If the payment has been delayed by the Government for 
 many years after the peace, until the widow and children may have de- 
 ceased, Congress it would seem would consider the grandchildren 
 equally entitled to the amount of the seven years half pay, and have 
 often paid the same to the grandchildren. If the claim ever vested in 
 the officer, it cannot be lost for want of continuance of priority of 
 payees, it will follow the land portion of the consideration, and become 
 payable to the representatives of the officer. But if Congress had the 
 power to insert in the resolve the right of priority of payees, as far as 
 the widow and orphan, it would have the same right to extend it to the 
 grandchildren. Contracts are always construed with the most strict- 
 
46 
 
 ness against the grantor ; and a forfeiture of consideration is never re- 
 garded with favor, especially in behalf of the State. A contract of A with 
 B, wherein A agrees to pay B a sum, this is payable to B and his heirs. 
 Here the consideration of the contract itself contemplates the price of life 
 and death of the grantee ; and the 'presumption of law is, that so far he 
 has agreed, and that it is his nearest choice ; that it should be secured 
 to his widow and children first, and then the law would add his grand- 
 children, as he would wish to have it. Equity, justice, and the princi- 
 of humanity, would seem to dictate that it should be protected to the 
 grandchildren. 
 
 But the claimants urge that the claim for seven years half pay does 
 not depend entirely upon the resolve of August 24, 1780 ; that the 
 land portion of the contract, being a part of the consideration, and that 
 the renewal of the seven years half pay for the continued service was 
 the same, in all its relations to the Government, as the death service ; 
 and as the continued service has no priority of payees, and that the act 
 of 3d October, 1780, gave the seven years half pay, " and also the land, 
 agreeably to the resolve of September 16, 1776 ; " that all the consid- 
 erations were blended, and wherever the seven years half pay was 
 added, it became subject to the same disposition with that of the land 
 portion of the contract, beyond the termination of priority of the payees 
 named by Congress. 
 
 The claimants urge that, in many eases, the mother and orphan 
 children died while waiting for the suspension of limitation acts and 
 readiness on the part of the Government. They further urge that they 
 ought not to be estopped from receiving said seven years half pay, 
 because the time for granting the land portion of the contract has been 
 extended from 1802, by many acts of Congress since 1802, up to June, 
 1858, which has renewed all portions of the contract up to the present 
 time. 
 
 The construction of the acts of May and August, as expressly set 
 forth by the acts of Congress, have established — 
 
 1. That they apply to those widows and orphans of those officers 
 who were killed or died previous to May 15, 1775, as well as those 
 who died subsequently. 
 
 2. That the act of August 24, 1780, extends as well to the widows 
 and orphans of those officers who were killed after the adoption of the 
 army by Congress, on the 15th of June, 1775, and more especially of 
 those who were killed after the 27th of June, 1775, when Washington 
 took command of the army, as those who were killed after that time. 
 
 3. That Congress luive, by public and private acts, made the claim 
 of the heirs and payees of the seven years half pay coextensive with that 
 of the land portion of the contract, and have paid the same to the 
 representative of the grandchildren of the officer, (who was killed.) 
 
 Many cases may be found to sustain this position. I will only refer 
 to that of John M. Gregory, grandson of Lieutenant John Gregory, of 
 the army of the Revolution, June 3, 1834. (Session acts, page 143.) 
 
 4. That the claim for seven years half pay is in addition to, and a 
 part of, the same contract, granting land under the resolve of Septem- 
 ber 16, 1776 — the consideration of each being founded upon the death 
 
47 
 
 of the officer ; and as the land portion of the contract is declared by 
 the act itself to go to the representatives of the deceased officer, so must 
 the half pay, after the order of priority of payees, declared in the act, 
 have terminated — that is, after the death of the widow and children, it 
 shall descend in the same manner as though no priority of payees had 
 been named ; and if Congress saw fit to secure it against debts thus far, 
 it was done for the benefit of the payees. That the several acts created 
 a solemn contract on the part of the Government with those officers, 
 that, in case of the death of the officer, it gave to the widow and chil- 
 dren a vested right to seven years half pay, as soon as death occurred ; 
 and in case of the death of the widow and children before Congress 
 paid the same, then by law, as well as by the act of 1776, it became 
 payable to the legal representatives of the children, unless Congress 
 think proper to secure the same to the grandchildren. (Secretary's 
 decision in case of McKenny.) If this was not so, the delay of pay- 
 ment on the part of the Government would defeat the rights of many 
 claimants. 
 
 The half pay is made by the express words of the act to commence 
 at the death of the officer. Many of those officers were killed or died 
 in service in 1776, and yet Congress made no provision for giving to 
 each officer his portion of the land until after 1800, (twenty-four years 
 after the death,) and none for the half pay until 1790, (fourteen years 
 after the decease of the officer.) 
 
 A party cannot, by any rules known to law or equity, delay the pay- 
 ment until the original party to whom the same was payable is dead, 
 and then refuse to pay it to his representative. 
 
 5. The claimants further urge, that the laws of Congress in behalf 
 of the heirs of many of those officers of the same class of claimants whose 
 right is founded exclusively on the same law, established by the same 
 rules of evidence, is a legislative construction and a public declaration 
 of the rights of all the heirs of the other officers. They are some of 
 the laws made by the authority of Congress, and some of the laws which 
 the Constitution declares " shall be the supreme law of the land." 
 
 It is only by those principles by which all the highest tribunals of 
 justice are governed. A law which they may establish in relation to 
 one individual claimant shall be equally binding upon all others whose 
 claims are founded upon the same contract, and governed by the same 
 rules of evidence. The Constitution and the most sacred principles 
 which are known to the administration of all law, is impartial and equal 
 justice ; and as no individual can avail himself of his own negligence 
 or his own wrong in the suspension of a contract, the rule should be 
 applied with still more force to the administration of the Government, 
 which is always bound to insure to its citizens impartial and equal 
 justice. 
 
 In relation to interest, the action of Congress has been somewhat 
 fluctuating during an intermediate space of time. The more recent 
 action of Congress and the Court of Claims has been to admit the resolve 
 of June 3, 1784, as binding on the Government, and both concurred in 
 allowing interest on the half-pay claims ; which was admitted last (the 
 34th) Congress, in the name of the son of Dr. Absalom Baird, claimed 
 
48 
 
 by the son, and fully referred to in the consideration of half-pay claims 
 under the resolution of October 21, 1780. 
 
 The Court of Claims, it would seem, decided, in the case of Joshua 
 R. Jewett vs. the United States, that only those officers who were 
 commissioned by Congress, in the continental line, were entitled to 
 bounty land* 
 
 2. That it must be shown that an application has been made to the 
 proper executive departments for the bounty land, before that Court 
 can take jurisdiction of the claim. 
 
 3. That unless there had been some record of the allowance of the 
 land, and that of the service, these claims would be barred by the 
 statute of limitations of November 2, 1785, and February 12, 1793. 
 
 Also, David Noble vs. United States. 
 
 As the promise of the land was in " addition " to, and a portion of 
 the reward of seven years half pay, founded upon the consideration of 
 the same service, and depending upon the same rules of evidence, the 
 suspension of the acts of limitation in behalf of the one, would apply 
 with equal force to the other ; and as the land portion of the contract 
 has been extended to the 26th of June, 1858, the seven years half pay 
 portion has also been extended by the same acts. Each being a part 
 of the same contract, one must be coextensive with the other in all its 
 relations. 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 011 800 525 9 
 
 \ 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 011 800 525 9