Summary: Gilbert's claim was disallowed by the Commissioners because his wartime experiences suggested neutrality rather than loyalty to the Union Government. Gilbert appealed this decision to the Congressional Court of Claims in 1895; his son filed a second appeal in 1898.
Items Claimed:
| Item Claimed: | Amount Claimed: | Amount Allowed: | Amount Disallowed: |
| 1 Sorrel Mare | 100.00 | 0 | 100.00 |
| 1 Saddle & bridle | 10.00 | 0 | 10.00 |
| 5 bushels of Corn | 5.00 | 0 | 5.00 |
| 2 bushels of Corn Meal | 2.00 | 0 | 2.00 |
| 7 bags at .20 | 1.40 | 0 | 1.40 |
| 1/2 barrel flour | 2.50 | 0 | 2.50 |
| Total | $120.90 | 0 | $120.90 |
Claims Summary:
Claim rejected.
Mr. Gilbert lived near or in Staunton. He had no property taken by rebels-was never molested or threatened. Had no relatives in either Army. Did not vote on secession. -In May 1864 he left Va. (probably to avoid conscription) & went to Maryland to work in the Coal mines. -He never did anything for either side.
All this indicates neutrality. -He says he was for the Union & he was willing to do all he could for the U.S. Govt. -That is all he says. -Jess Gilbert (probably a relative) says he regarded him as a Union Man & he was so regarded by the Union men.
The taking is not sastifactorily proved. No officer present. Looks like depredation. The testimony of Wm. R. Gilbert who was ten years old at the time of taking does not agree with Smith's & is not reliable.
We must reject the claim.
AO Aldis Commrs of Claims
Testimony: Thomas J. Gilbert
Deposition of Thos. J. Gilbert
I am 55 years. I reside in Augusta Co. I am a Farmer. Have lived in Augusta Co. 40 years.
Ques 2 Witness says: I lived in Augusta Co. until May 4th 1864. Went to Alleghany Co. Md. & remained until the war closed.
4 Witness says, I never took an oath of allegiance to the Confed. States.
5 Witness says: I took the oth of allegiance to the U.S. Govt. in May 1864 in West Va. New Creek & in May 1865 at Staunton Va. Have never been pardoned by the Presdt.
6 Witness Says: I never was directly nor indirectly in any manner connected with the civil service of the Confed. States.
7 Witness says, I never held any office or place of honor, profit or trust under the Confed. Govt.
9 Witness says: I never was in any capacity in the military or naval service of the Confed. Govt. I drove a wago to the army twice, for my employer, to whom I was hired by the year.
14 Witness says: I never was engaged in blockade running, or in illicit traffic between the lines.
15 Witness says, I left the Confederate Stats May 4th 1864 & went to Md. Stayed until May 1865. I was at work at the Coal mines
17 Witness says, I never was arrested by the Confed. or United States Govts.
18 Witness says, I don't know that I had any property taken by the Confed. Govt.
19 Witness says, I never was threatened on account of my union sentiments.
21 Witness says: I did nothing for the United States Govt. its Army or Navy
23 Witness says: I don't think I had any near relatives in either the union or Confed. armies.
24 Witness says, I have never owned any Confederate bonds, or done anything to support the credit of the Confed. Govt.
25 Witness says, I have never given aid & comfort to the rebellion or to aid it in any way. I never did anything to injure the U.S. or its cause.
29 Witness Says, I never was a paroled prisoner of the United States
30 Witness Says, I never held any office in either the Army or Navy of the U.S. was not educated either at West Point or the Naval Academy
31 Witness Says, I never rec'd any pass from the Confed. Govt.
32 Witness says: I am not & never have been under any disabilities imposed by the fourteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States
33 Witness says, At the beginning of the war I was for the Union, have been for the Union all the time & expect to remain so. Did not vote at all on the ordinance of cesession. After its adoption I went with the Union & not with my State.
34 Witness says: I was ready & willing to do all I could for the United States Govt. so far as I could, & further this deponent sayeth not. Sept. 19th 1871
Thomas J. Gilbert
Sworn to & subscribed before me this 19th day of Sept. 1871
Wm G Riley United States Commissioner and Special Com. for State of Va
Testimony: Overton Smith
Deposition of Overton Smith to prove taking of Property.
Ques 1 Witness Says: I am 63 years old. I reside in Augusta Co. Va. I am a shoemaker.
2 Witness Says: I saw the horse mentioned in the claimants petition taken from my lot, I saw nothing else taken.
4 Witness says: The property was taken by Genl. Hunters men in 1864.
6 Witness says, I do not know that any Officers were present
8 Witness says: The horse was ridden off by soldiers
10 Witness says: I think the horse was taken for the use of the army.
11 Witness says, There was no complaint made on account of such taking.
12 Witness says, There was no receipt asked for none given
13 Witness says, The property was taken in the day time.
14 Witness says, When the property was taken the Army was not encamped in the neighborhood.
15 Witness says, The horse was in good condition. About six years old, worth from One hundred & twenty, to one hundred & fifteen Dollars.
22 Witness Says: I think it was taken for the necessary use of the Govt. & should be paid for, & further this deponent sayeth not.
Sept. 19th 1871 Overton Smith
Sworn to & subscribed before me this 19th day of Sept. 1871
Wm G Riley United States Commissioner and Special Com. for State of Virginia
Testimony: William R. Gilbert
Deposition of Wm. R. Gilbert to prove taking of Property
Ques 1 Witness says: I am 18 years old. I reside in Augusta Co Va I am a Farmer
2 Witness says: I saw all the articles mentioned in the claimants petition taken
4 Witness says The property was taken by Genl. Hunters comd. in 1864 from claimants form. I think there was one officer present, did not know his rank, regt. or command.
7 Witness says: The horse was ridden off. the other property was carried off on horses.
9 Witness says: The property was taken in the direction of Staunton
10 Witness says: I suppose the property was taken for the use of the Govt. I saw the mare in possession of the soldiers of the United States Army
15 Witness says: The horse was in good order I think she was six years old. The saddle & bridle were worth seven Dollars. Five bus. corn was worth Two 50/100 Dollars. Two bus. corn meal One dollar & sixty cents. Seven bags were worth one dollar & twenty five cents. One half bbl. flour was worth Five Dollars.
19 Witness says, The property was taken for the actual use of the Union Army & not for private use
20 Witness says: I suppose the property was taken because the troops had not rec'd their regular supplies.
21 Witness says: I think the property was taken for the necessary use of the Govt. & that the Govt should pay for it
23 Witness says, I know the property was taken by comd. of the officer present & further this deponent sayeth not. Sept. 19th 1871 William R. Gilbert
Sworn to & subscribed before me this 19th day of Sept. 1871
Wm G Riley United States Commissioner and Special Com. for State of Virginia
Testimony: Jesse N. Gilbert
Deposition of Jesse N. Gilbert to prove loyalty
Ques 1 Witness Says: I am 58 years old. I reside in Augusta Co. I am a farmer Have lived in Augusta Co 52 years. Did not change my residence during the war. Have known the claimant all my life. Saw him frequently during the war, until he left this Co. & went to Md. Talked with him about the war, & I regarded him as loyal to the U.S. Govt. he was so regarded by the Union men. Never knew him to do anything for the US Govt. had no opportunity. I never knew him persecuted or threatened on account of his union sentiments. He was ordered to join the Confed. army & rather than do so, left his home & went to Md. I believe he was too loyal to the U. States to have been loyal to the Confed. Govt. had it succeeded. He could not have stayed here without torture on account of his union sentiments, & further this deponent sayeth not.
Sept 19th 1871 Jesse N. Gilbert
Sworn to & subscribed before me this 19 day of Sept. 1871
Wm G Riley United States Commissioner and Special Com. for State of Va
Testimony: Claimant's Brief on Loyalty
IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS. DECEMBER TERM 1894-95.
Thomas J. Gilbert, vs. The United States No. 8645 Cong.
STATEMENT
The claimant in this case resided in Augusta Co., Va
The Commissioners of Claims rejected his claim, and in their report to Congress state:--
"Mr. Gilbert lied near or in Staunton. He had no property taken by rebels. Was never molested or threatened. Had no relatives in either army. Did not vote on secession. In May '64 he left (probably to avoid conscription) and went to Maryland to work in the coal mines. He never did anything for either side. This indicates neutrality. He says he was for the Union and willing to do all he could for the U.S. govt. That is all he says.
Jesse Gilbert, (probably a relative) says he regarded him as a Union man and he was so regarded by the Union men.
The Commissioners proceed to comment upon the testimony as to merits, and in conclusion state: we must reject the claim."
The claim was transmitted to the Court by the Committee on War Claims March 3rd, 1892.
BRIEF ON LOYALTY
The following testimony was taken while the claim was pending before the Commissioners of Claims.
CLAIMANT testifies: Age 55; residence Augusta Co., Farmer Have lived in Augusta Co., 40 years. (P. 1). Lived in Augusta Co., till May 4th, '64, went to Alleghany Co., Md., and remained until war closed. I never took an oath of allegiance to the Confederate states.. Took the oath of allegiance to the U.S. in May '64, at New Creek, W. Va., and in May '65 at Staunton, Va., Have Never been pardoned.. Never connected with the civil service of the Confederacy. Never held any office or place of trust or profit under the Confederacy. Never in any capacity in the military or naval service of the Confederate Govt. Drove a wagon to the army twice for my employer to whom I was hired by the year. Never engaged in blockade running or elicit traffic between the lines. I left the Confederate states May 4th, '64 and went to Md. staid until May '65. Was at work at the coal mines. (P. 2). Never arrested by the Confederate or U.S. Govt. Don't know that I had any property taken by the Confederate Govt.. Never threatened on account of my Union sentiments. Did nothing for the U.S. Govt. its army or navy. I don't think I had any near relatives in either the Union or Confederate armies. Never owned any Confederate bonds, or did anything to support the credit of the Confederacy. I have never given aid or comfort to the rebellion. Never did anything to injure the U.S. or its cause.. Never a paroled prisoner of the U.S. Never held any office in either the army or navy of the U.S.. Was not educated either at West Point or the naval academy. Never received any pass from the Confederate Govt. (P. 3). I am not and never have been under any disabilities imposed by the 14th amendment. (P. 3). At the beginning of the war I was for the Union Have been for the Union all the time and expect to remain so. Did not vote at all on the ordinance of secession. After its adoption I went with the Union, and not with my state. I was ready and willing to do all I could for the U.S. Govt. so far as I could. (P. 4).
JESSE M. GILBERT testifies: Age 68; residence Augusta Co., Farmer: I have lived in Augusta Co. 62 years. Did not change my residence durig the war. Have known the claimant all my life. Saw him frequently during the war until he left this county and went to Md. and talked to him about the war, and I regarded him as loyal to the U.S. Govt. He was so regarded by the Union men. Never knew him to do anything for the Confederate Govt. He did nothing for the U.S. Govt. had no opportunity. I never knew him persecuted or threatened on account of his Union sentiments He was ordered to join the Confederate army, and rather than do so left his home, and went to Md. I believe he was too loyal to the U.S. to have been loyal to the Confederate Govt., had it succeeded, he could not have staid here without torture on account of his Union sentiments. (P. 9).
The following testimony has been taken since the reference of the claim to the Court, in Aug. 1895.
D.A. SNITEMAN testifies: Merchant; age 48; residence near Staunton, Va. Not related or interested. (P. 1). I have known the claimant all my life. Lived within a mile and a half of him and saw him off and on throughout the war. Saw him under ordinary circumstances as neighbors. I had no direct conversation with him on the subject of the war, but his reputation in the neighborhood was that of a strong Union man. I was an adherent of the Union cause, and claimant knew it. His public reputation was that of a Union man, opposed to secession. He was so regarded by his loyal neighbors. (P. 2). I don't know of anything the claimant did to aid the Union army. Or the Confederate Govt. I don't know how he voted on secession, but I am satisfied his influence was with the Union side. His views did not change so far as I know..
CROSS-EXAMINATION.
Claimant did not have any sons in the Confederate army. I am the claimant in case No. 8799. Haven't been called on to testify in that case. I was present when the case was examined this morning. (P. 3) I never was in the Confederate army, my oldest brother was. I did not own Confederate bonds. My father owned them, but they belonged to the estate of my grand father on my mother's side, of which my father was executor.
RE-DIRECT
I was ready and willing if called on to testify in my father's case. I came here with the expectation of being called upon. I had no objections to testifying. (P. 4).
O.E. CLEVELAND testifies; Farmer; age 72; residence Augusta Co., Va. Not related ar interested. (P. 5). My acquaintance with the claimant began in '57. Knew him well during the war and lived three or four hundred yards from him. Sometimes I saw him every day and sometimes not so often. He always expressed himself in opposition to the war in frequent conversations. I suppose I was an adherent of the Union cause, though I did not know it until the war came on, and I suppose I was known as such to him, as we had frequent conversations. Everybody knew that claimant was a loyal man, and I knew it too. Claimant did everything in his power to aid the Union army. Early in '64 he went through the lines to keep from aiding the Confederacy, and remained outside the Confederacy, and inside the Union lines until the war closed. (P. 6). He did not belong to any church so far as I know. He never contributed anything to aid the Confederate Govt. so far as I heard. I can't be positive, from his reputation I haven't the least Idea that he would under any circumstances. So far as he exerted his influences it was on the side of what he thought which was on the side of the Union. So far as I know he thought throughout the war that nothing ought to be done contrary to the cause of the U. S. Govt.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
I was born and raised in Va. My father was a bred and born yankee from Connecticut. During the war he was as good a secesh as any man in the state. I was the only Union man in the family, and suppose I am yet. (P. 7). I didn't particularly fancy seeing any body killed.. I didn't care who they whipped so they kept the U.S. in a solid situation. I don't know that the Confederates ever bought anything from the claimant except in the ordinary way, like they bought whenever they staid here. I don't know whether he ever got pay for anything or not. By the ordinary way, I mean whenever he had anything to sell he would sell it to any one who would buy it, but not with a view to help the army. Of course any man who raised anything had to sell it to help his family along He didn't have anything much to sell at that time, as he was most in general working by the day, or working sometimes by the day and sometimes by the month and sometimes by the year, as well as I can recollect. I don't think claimant worked for the army.. I couldn't positively say, because I did not see claimant tale a trip once or twice while working for Mr. Bell, and haul for about a week or so for the Confederate army.. (P. 8). I couldn't say positively whether Mr. Bell did or did not send Mr. Gilbert with his teams. While I heard Mr. Gilbert, the present claimant, make the statement that the claimant went with Bell's teams once or twice to haul for the Confederate army, I couldn't say I knew it. Robt. L. Lee was in the Confederate army. I saw him there, and he was one of the finest looking men I ever saw too, on his big horse. I saw Stonewall Jackson in the Confederate army. Never saw Jubal Early there. I don't know much about Gen. McClelland I don't think he was in the Confederate army, unless he was surrounded by rebels and was in the middle of it.. David Bell said he was the employer of Mr. Gilbert by the year. I did not hear Mr. Gilbert say that his father, the original claimant, was employed by the year as overseer by Mr. Bell I made some such observation as that myself. I heard him say it, of course. I just judge from Bell's conversations with me that he was on the Southern side. Their is no doubt about that. (P. 10). I reckon I stated he was a secesh and a good one. (P. 11).
SUMMARY.
The Commissioners rejected this claim partly on merits, as well as doubts as to loyalty. They found that he had no relatives in either army; that he did not vote on secession; that in May '64 he left Va. to avoid conscription, and went to Md., and they add "all this indicates neutrality." Whereas upon the finding of these facts the claimant should have been held loyal.
The claimant resided in Augusta Co., Va., during the war engaged in farming, until May 4th, '64 when he went to Md. and remained until the war closed. He never aided the Confederacy. Owned no Confederate bonds. He was for the Union at the commencement, and says he has been for the Union all the time and expects to remain so. Did not vote for the ordinance of secession. His witnesses testify to his loyal expressions during the war and his loyal reputation. Was regarded as loyal by his loyal neighbors.
Witness Cleveland states, that every body knew claimant was a loyal man. That early in '64 he went through the lines to keep from aiding the Confederacy, and remained inside the Union lines until the war closed.
This testimony is certainly conclusive as to claimants loyalty throughout the war and the Court should so find.
Respectfully Submitted, Gilbert Moyers ATTY FOR C'L'M'T.
Testimony: Claimant's Motion for a New Trial on Loyalty
COURT OF CLAIMS. DECEMBER TERM 1896-97.
David M. Kerr, Adm'r. Thos. J. Gilbert, dec., vs. The United States No. 8645 Cong.
MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL ON LOYALTY.
In this case petition and letters cf administration were filed on Jan. 15th, 1896.
On Dec. 10th, 1896 the case was submitted on briefs.
Jan. l8th, 1897 case dismissed, loyalty not found. This motion for a new trial is based upon error of fact.
Mr. Gilbert is shown to have been loyal throughout the war by the testimony.
The following are the facts in proof:
Claimant lived in Augusta Co., Va., during the war. up to May '64. Then he went to Md. and remained until the war closed. He never gave any aid to the rebellion. He was opposed to secession from the commencement to the close of the war. He was regarded in the community where he lived throughout the war as a Union man and loyal citizen. He was ordered to join the Confederate army, and rather than do so he left his home and went to Md. His expressions throughout the war were in favor of the U.S. Govt. The fact of his leaving home, and seeking protection inside the Union lines in connection with the fact that he never aided the rebellion should conclude the question of loyalty in his favor.
Upon the foregoing facts not controverted loyalty should have been found.
Affidavits are expected, and will be filed in support of this motion.
Respectfully Submitted, Gilbert Moyers ATTY FOR C'L'M'T.
Testimony: Claimant's Brief on Motion for a New Trial on Loyalty
COURT OF CLAIMS, DECEMBER TERM 1898-99.
THOMAS J. GILBERT, Executors, etc., vs. The United States No. 8645 Cong.
Claimant's Brief on Motion for a new trial on Loyalty.
In support of this motion there are filed affidavits of Robert W. Johnson and Thomas J. Gilbert. R.W. Johnson, himself a secessionist, deposes that he had frequent conversations with claimant during the war, and that claimant differed with him widely, steadily declaring himself for the Union; that deceased claimant bore the reputation in that community of a "loyal" Union man. This is the first the Court has heard of these peculiarparticular conversations with deceased claimant. If a new trial should be allowed, formal and full proof will be made of them, including all such particulars as the Attorney for the Government may choose to bring out.
The deponent Gilbert is a son of the deceased claimant and resided with him during the War. Like the former witnesses, he tells of his father's leaving his home and going within the Federal Lines in Maryland and remaining there until the end of the War; also, in general terms, of his consistent loyalty.
Such evidence as was before the Court on the submission of the case was all in claimant's favor. There was no conflict in it, no inconsistencies even. Evidently it failed to satisfy the Court merely because there was not thought to be enough of it. It appears now that on a new trial important new proof of new facts would clearly show that the deceased claimant was loyal.
On the former evidence, indeed, the loyalty of deceased claimant was not denied by the Attorney for the Government. All that he said was that the testimony was correctly presented in my brief.
Respectfully submitted, Gilbert Moyers Attorney for Claimant.
Testimony: Defendant's Brief on Claimant's Motion for a New Trial on Loyalty
IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF THE UNITED STATES. December Term, 1898.
Estate Thomas J. Gilbert v. The United States No. 8645, Congressional.
Defendants' Brief on Claimant's Motion for a New Trial on Loyalty
The claimiant in support of his motion files the affidavit of his local attorney to the effect that the evidence submitted in the affidavits accompanying could not have been obtained before the hearing of the case by the exercise of ordinary diligence.
Two other affidavits are filed, one by Robert W. Johnson who says that he had three conversations with the claimant on the subject of secession, but does not say when. From the fact, however, that affiant says he subsequently went into the Confederate army, it is presumed that the conversation took place before the war, or at least at its outbreak. No new fact is set forth in Johnson's affidavit.
The third affidavit is supplied by the son of the claimant who says his father was a Union man and that he went to Maryland to avoid conscription into the Confederate army. This alleged fact was fully presented when the case was heard before.
It is respectfully submitted that the evidence presented in support of the motion for a new trial is cumulative at best and that the motion should be denied.
George H. Walker, Assistant Attorney.
Bibliographic Information : Southern Claims Commission: Claim of Thomas J. Gilbert, September 19, 1871, Claim No. 7264, Source copy consulted: National Archives, Washington, D.C., RG 123, Congressional Jurisdiction #8645.
