In This Article
His Story
The surviving records of William Thomas present one of the more difficult problems in Revolutionary War biography: a remarkable account of a soldier who reportedly left British service near the Battle of Bunker Hill, joined the American army, and later settled in Ohio—but whose identity and military history were still being disputed long after his death.
In December 1855, a correspondent attempting to explain Thomas’s military background wrote that he had deserted the British camp, apparently at Bunker Hill, and subsequently enlisted as an American private. The writer believed that Thomas remained in American service until the peace settlement ending the Revolutionary War.
The account was offered decades after the events it described. It does not identify Thomas’s original British regiment, the American company he supposedly joined, or a contemporary enlistment record establishing the transition. The writer himself expressed uncertainty about the precise circumstances.
What makes the story especially significant is the accompanying pension dispute. Thomas had died before his widow’s efforts to secure financial support were resolved. By 1855, those acting on her behalf were trying to determine whether he had previously been granted a pension, whether the government had confused him with another veteran, and whether a different spelling of his name might explain the difficulty locating his service records.
The surviving file also contains a federal bounty-land record card for a William Thomas who served as a fifer in the Massachusetts Line. That card records a warrant for one hundred acres issued on March 25, 1790. Its presence offers an important research lead, but does not independently establish that the Massachusetts fifer and the Ohio pension claimant were the same person.
Thomas’s story is therefore both a possible account of an unusual Revolutionary War enlistment and a documented example of the problems veterans’ families encountered when seeking federal recognition many decades after the war.
The strongest historical conclusion is not that every detail of the Bunker Hill account has been proved, but that his surviving pension correspondence preserves a contested claim whose military, genealogical, and administrative questions remain open to further investigation.
Early Life
William Thomas’s date of birth, birthplace, parents, and childhood residence have not been established from the surviving documents examined for this biography.
The pension correspondence offers no reliable statement of his age during the Revolution. Consequently, it is not possible to calculate his birth year or determine whether he was a young recruit or an older soldier in 1775.
One later correspondent described Thomas as a deserter from the British camp. If that account is correct, his early military history may have involved service with British forces before he entered the American army. The surviving documents, however, do not establish his nationality or place of origin.
The spelling of his surname also became a subject of inquiry. A December 1855 letter stated that the family sometimes used a name transcribed as Tomsson or Thompson. The writer speculated that Thomas might have enlisted under an altered name.
That suggestion remains unverified. No alternate-name enlistment record has been identified that can confidently be assigned to this individual.
Revolutionary War Service
The Reported Change of Allegiance
The most striking account of William Thomas’s service appears in correspondence dated December 26, 1855. The writer distinguished the Ohio veteran from another man of the same name and described an alleged transition from British to American service during the opening months of the Revolutionary War.
According to that account, Thomas left the British camp around the time of the Battle of Bunker Hill and immediately entered the revolutionary army as a private.
The letter’s wording indicates that the writer was recalling or repeating information rather than presenting a contemporary military document. The account does not identify the person who witnessed Thomas’s departure from the British camp or the officer who accepted his American enlistment.
British soldiers sometimes deserted during the Revolution, and some individuals crossed military lines. Nevertheless, that general historical possibility cannot establish Thomas’s particular experience.
Reported American Service
The same 1855 correspondent believed that Thomas served in the American army until the peace settlement. The letter also alluded to several military engagements, but portions of the surviving transcription are illegible.
No verified sequence of companies, regiments, commanding officers, or military stations has been established for this claimant.
Accordingly, a continuous period of American service from 1775 until the end of the war should be understood as a later reported claim rather than a fully documented military career.
The Massachusetts Line Bounty-Land Record
A separate record in the archival file identifies a William Thomas as a fifer in the Massachusetts Line.
The record is a National Archives bounty-land warrant card, prepared from federal registers of warrants issued to Revolutionary War soldiers.
It identifies warrant number 5175, covering one hundred acres, and records an issue date of March 25, 1790.
This is direct documentary evidence that a man named William Thomas was recorded as a Massachusetts Line fifer and received a bounty-land warrant.
However, the card does not give sufficient biographical details to demonstrate that the fifer was the same William Thomas later associated with Ohio and the disputed pension claim R.10543.
The distinction is especially important because the 1855 correspondence describes service as a private, while the bounty-land card identifies a fifer. Those descriptions are not inherently incompatible—a soldier could perform different duties during a military career—but the records do not demonstrate such a progression in this case.
Unresolved Military Identity
The surviving evidence therefore presents two potentially related but unconnected military narratives: the Ohio claimant described in later correspondence, and the Massachusetts Line fifer documented in a bounty-land register.
Until contemporary muster rolls, enlistment records, discharge papers, or additional pension testimony establish a connection, these records must be treated separately.
Battles and Campaigns
The Battle of Bunker Hill
Date: June 17, 1775
Location: Charlestown, Massachusetts
The Battle of Bunker Hill was fought during the Siege of Boston, when colonial forces sought to strengthen their positions overlooking the British-occupied town.
During the night of June 16–17, American troops under Colonel William Prescott fortified Breed’s Hill on the Charlestown peninsula. British commanders determined to attack the position before the Americans could further strengthen their defenses.
British forces under Major General William Howe advanced against the American works. The defenders resisted repeated assaults before withdrawing after their ammunition became dangerously depleted and British troops reached the fortifications.
The British captured the position but suffered exceptionally heavy casualties. The battle demonstrated that colonial forces could resist regular British troops in sustained combat, even though they ultimately lost the ground.
William Thomas’s reported connection: A letter dated December 26, 1855, stated that Thomas had left the British camp, apparently at the Battle of Bunker Hill, before entering American service.
The writer used uncertain language and did not identify a unit, military roll, eyewitness, or specific event that would independently verify the account.
Participation classification: Reported by a later source; personal participation and the claimed desertion remain unverified.
Primary source: Pension claim R.10543, archival image 4171317_00267.jpg.
The Revolutionary War After Bunker Hill
Period: 1775–1783
Location: American Revolutionary War theater
Following Bunker Hill, the Continental Army continued the Siege of Boston until British forces evacuated the town in March 1776.
The war subsequently expanded through campaigns in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, the northern frontier, and the southern colonies. American forces fought both British regular troops and Loyalist units while also depending on French military assistance after the alliance of 1778.
The principal fighting culminated in the British surrender at Yorktown in October 1781, although the war formally continued until the peace settlement of 1783.
William Thomas’s reported connection: The 1855 letter asserted that Thomas continued in American service until peace and participated in several engagements. The surviving transcription does not reliably identify those battles.
It would therefore be inappropriate to assign him to Saratoga, Monmouth, Yorktown, or another named engagement without additional evidence.
Participation classification: Later reported general military service; specific battles unverified.
Primary source: Pension claim R.10543, archival images 4171317_00267–00268.jpg.
Military Honors and Recognition
The surviving file contains a bounty-land warrant card identifying a William Thomas who served as a fifer in the Massachusetts Line.
That card records a warrant for one hundred acres issued March 25, 1790. Bounty-land warrants were a form of compensation for qualifying military service, not a battlefield decoration.
Because the card’s connection to the Ohio pension claimant remains unproved, it cannot yet be presented as a confirmed award to the subject of the 1855 correspondence.
No authenticated individual medal, military promotion, battlefield commendation, or personal discharge certificate has been identified for the Ohio claimant.
His pension claim was recorded as rejected, although later correspondents disputed whether government officials had examined the correct veteran’s records.
Original Military Records
Rejected Pension Claim Record
File: R.10543
Archival images: 4171317_00263–00266.jpg
The file contains administrative cards and notations identifying William Thomas and recording a rejected claim.
Some entries refer to Ohio and Kentucky. These geographic references require additional investigation because the surviving cards do not fully explain the claimant’s residences or the administrative history of the file.
December 1855 Letter Concerning Military Service
Date: December 26, 1855
Archival images: 4171317_00267–00268.jpg
This correspondence presents the reported Bunker Hill connection, alleged American enlistment, later Ohio residence, and uncertainty concerning Thomas’s surname.
It is the central narrative source for the claimant’s purported Revolutionary War service.
November 1855 Pension Inquiry
Date: November 6, 1855
Archival image: 4171317_00269.jpg
A copied letter asked officials to investigate reports that Thomas had been allowed a pension but died before receiving payment.
The writer also described the widow’s financial hardship and uncertainty about the spelling of the family surname.
Correspondence of William G. Flood
Dates: November 14, 1855, and January 11, 1856
Archival images: 4171317_00270–00271.jpg
William G. Flood corresponded with pension officials regarding the widow’s claim.
In January 1856, he asserted that the William Thomas identified in an earlier official response was not the man about whom he had inquired.
Massachusetts Bounty-Land Warrant Card
Warrant: Number 5175
Issue date: March 25, 1790
Archival image: 4171317_00272.jpg
The card records a William Thomas, fifer, Massachusetts Line, associated with a one-hundred-acre bounty-land warrant.
The record provides a promising but not yet conclusive lead for identifying the pension claimant’s military service.
Revolutionary War Pension
The Disputed Pension Claim
The surviving file identifies William Thomas’s pension claim as R.10543 and records its rejection.
The precise date of the original application, the complete grounds for rejection, and the full administrative history cannot be established from the transcribed documents examined.
One administrative notation refers to correspondence in July 1836 and to Richard M. Johnson, but the underlying documents would need to be examined before their significance could be determined.
The Widow’s Attempt to Recover Benefits
By November 1855, Thomas was dead, and individuals acting on behalf of his widow were attempting to determine whether he had previously qualified for federal pension benefits.
A letter dated November 6, 1855, reported a belief that Thomas had been approved for a pension but died before receiving any money.
That assertion is important evidence of what the family or its representatives believed, but it is not equivalent to an official pension award.
The writer urged officials to investigate the records, explaining that the widow was elderly, physically weak, and in severe financial need.
The Question of Mistaken Identity
In January 1856, William G. Flood requested a renewed search of the pension records.
He argued that an earlier official response concerned a different William Thomas.
The existence of multiple veterans with the same name made identification particularly difficult when claimants lacked contemporary discharge papers or precise information about their original units.
Family uncertainty about the surname’s spelling added another complication.
What the Pension File Establishes
The file establishes that a claim associated with William Thomas was rejected and that subsequent correspondents disputed the identification and outcome.
It does not establish that the widow ultimately received a pension, that a previous award was confirmed, or that the Massachusetts Line fifer was the same man.
From the Historical Documents
No authenticated first-person Revolutionary War declaration by the Ohio William Thomas has been identified in the materials examined. The following short excerpts come from later correspondence and are attributed accordingly.
The Reported Bunker Hill Connection
“William Thomas of Ohio deserted the British Camp, I think, at the battle of Bunker Hill”
Source: Letter dated December 26, 1855, image 4171317_00267.jpg.
The words “I think” are significant: the correspondent did not claim certainty about the battle connection.
Confusion Over the Veteran’s Identity
“the William Thomas you refer to is not the man”
Source: Letter dated December 26, 1855, image 4171317_00267.jpg.
This statement demonstrates that mistaken identity was already a concern among those investigating the claim.
The Widow’s Financial Condition
“The old lady Thomas is very old and very feeble and in very needy circumstances.”
Source: Copied letter dated November 6, 1855, image 4171317_00269.jpg.
Renewed Inquiry to the Pension Bureau
On January 11, 1856, William G. Flood asked pension officials to reconsider their earlier response, asserting that the individual previously identified was not the veteran whose widow sought assistance.
Source: Letter of William G. Flood, image 4171317_00271.jpg. This paragraph is a paraphrase, not a direct quotation.
Military Service Record
| Conflict | American Revolutionary War — service alleged |
|---|---|
| Name | William Thomas |
| Pension File | R.10543 |
| Pension Status | Rejected |
| Reported Former Allegiance | British forces; unverified |
| Reported American Rank | Private; later correspondence |
| Reported Entry into American Service | About June 1775; unverified |
| Reported Service Ending | At peace settlement; unverified |
| Reported Engagement | Bunker Hill connection; unverified |
| Verified Company | Not established for claimant |
| Verified Regiment | Not established for claimant |
| Discharge | Not established |
| Later Residence | Ohio, according to correspondence |
| Separate Massachusetts Record | William Thomas, fifer, Massachusetts Line |
| Bounty-Land Warrant | 5175; 100 acres; March 25, 1790 |
| Identity Link | Not proven between fifer and pension claimant |
| National Archives ID | 196744682 |
Later Life and Burial
Life in Ohio
Later correspondence identifies William Thomas as a resident of Ohio.
A December 1855 letter stated that Thomas had received a bounty-land warrant and settled upon land believed to have been in Adams County, Ohio.
The writer was not certain of every detail. Another letter suggested that Thomas had applied for a pension from Brown County, Ohio.
These references provide possible locations for land, tax, court, and probate research, but they do not independently establish a complete residential history.
His Final Years
The 1855 correspondence indicates that Thomas had died before the widow’s pension inquiry.
One account alleged that he became ill and died around the time he was informed that a pension had been allowed.
The administrative file, however, records a rejected claim. The discrepancy has not been resolved.
His exact death date, death location, and age at death are unknown.
Burial
No cemetery, gravestone, or verified burial record has been identified for the Ohio claimant.
Any future identification must be supported by records distinguishing him from other men named William Thomas.
Family History
The Yost Post · Family DirectoryThe surviving correspondence refers to William Thomas’s widow and family members but provides very few names or relationships. Consequently, his immediate family cannot yet be reconstructed with confidence.
Family Name & Heritage Thomas Surname origins and alternate spellings
Meaning and Etymology
Thomas is a personal name derived ultimately from an Aramaic word meaning “twin.” It became widespread as a given name and surname in several European languages.
The surname Thomas is especially common in English- and Welsh-speaking communities, but the surname alone cannot establish this veteran’s ancestry or nationality.
Possible Alternate Name
A December 1855 correspondent stated that Thomas’s widow recalled an alternate name transcribed as Tomsson or Thompson.
The writer speculated that a changed name might have complicated the search for military records. No contemporary record establishing such a name change has been identified.
The alternate surname is a research lead, not a proven legal name or confirmed military alias.
His Parents
Neither parent has been identified in the documents examined.
His Grandparents
No grandparents have been established.
His Marriage
Thomas’s widow was the subject of pension inquiries in 1855 and 1856. Correspondents described her as elderly and in serious financial need.
View Additional Research
Pension Correspondence
Letters sought clarification of her late husband’s service and whether any federal pension benefits might be payable.
Unresolved Identity
Her given name, maiden name, marriage date, and place of residence have not been independently established.
Research Leads
Ohio marriage registers, probate records, and census schedules may help identify the widow and determine whether her husband lived in Adams or Brown County.
His Children
No children have been reliably identified by name in the surviving documents examined. References to the family do not establish a complete list of descendants.
His Siblings
No siblings have been established.
Family Research Update
The most promising next steps are to locate an original death or probate record for the Ohio William Thomas, identify his widow through local records, and trace the one-hundred-acre Massachusetts bounty-land warrant.
These investigations may establish whether the man in the Massachusetts military record was the same person described in the Ohio pension correspondence.
Original Sources
The principal evidence comes from a Revolutionary War pension file preserved by the National Archives. The descriptions below are based on the supplied archival transcriptions; ambiguous passages should be checked against the original manuscript images.
-
William Thomas, Revolutionary War Pension Claim R.10543
National Archives, catalog identifier 196744682. Administrative and supporting documents concerning a rejected pension claim.
View National Archives File -
Administrative Pension File Cards
Claim R.10543. Archival images 4171317_00263–00266.jpg. Includes Ohio and Kentucky references and rejection notations.
-
Correspondence Concerning William Thomas’s Military Service
December 26, 1855. Archival images 4171317_00267–00268.jpg. Contains the alleged Bunker Hill connection, reported American enlistment, and alternate-name discussion.
-
Copied Pension Inquiry
November 6, 1855. Archival image 4171317_00269.jpg. Concerns a reported earlier pension allowance and the widow’s financial condition.
-
William G. Flood, Pension Inquiry
November 14, 1855. Archival image 4171317_00270.jpg.
-
William G. Flood, Follow-up Letter
January 11, 1856. Archival image 4171317_00271.jpg. Requests renewed investigation because of a possible mistaken identity.
-
Massachusetts Line Bounty-Land Warrant Record Card
William Thomas, fifer. Warrant number 5175, one hundred acres, issued March 25, 1790. Archival image 4171317_00272.jpg. The relationship of this record to pension claimant R.10543 remains unproven.
-
Transcribed Revolutionary War Pension Index
William Thomas, R.10543. Additional reference: RevWarApps transcription. This separate transcription should not be substituted for the original archival documents without checking its contents.
Historical Research Note
Identity: This article focuses on William Thomas, associated with rejected pension claim R.10543 and later correspondence concerning an Ohio veteran. Multiple Revolutionary War veterans shared this name.
Massachusetts Connection: The archival file includes a bounty-land warrant card for William Thomas, fifer, Massachusetts Line. The card does not independently establish that he was the Ohio claimant. The identification remains provisional.
Bunker Hill: The claimed connection comes from a letter written approximately eighty years after the battle. The author expressed uncertainty, and no contemporary military document confirming the story has been identified.
British Service: The claim that Thomas deserted British forces is not independently verified. His original British unit, if any, remains unknown.
American Service: Later correspondence reports that he enlisted as a private and served until peace. The relevant American muster rolls and discharge documents have not been identified.
Rank: The Ohio account describes a private. The Massachusetts bounty-land card identifies a fifer. The discrepancy cannot be resolved without establishing whether the documents concern one man or two.
Bounty Land: Warrant 5175 is documented for a William Thomas of the Massachusetts Line. The claim that the Ohio veteran settled upon bounty land requires independent land-record verification.
Pension: The administrative file records rejection. Statements that a pension had previously been allowed are unverified and conflict with that notation.
Residence: Ohio is supported by later correspondence. Adams and Brown Counties are potential research locations, not a fully documented residential chronology.
Family: A widow is documented in the correspondence, but her given name and the identities of any children are unknown.
Death and Burial: Thomas died before the 1855 correspondence. His exact death date and burial location have not been established.
Source Limitations: This biography relies on archival transcriptions. Some passages are illegible or uncertain, and several assertions were recorded long after the Revolutionary War. Original images and related military registers should be examined before resolving those uncertainties.
Portrait Disclosure: The accompanying image is a modern AI-generated historical interpretation. It is not an authenticated portrait of William Thomas.
Genealogical Research Note
The most important outstanding question is whether the Ohio veteran named William Thomas can be connected through contemporary evidence to the Massachusetts Line fifer who received bounty-land warrant number 5175.
Researchers should compare federal warrant registers, Massachusetts military rolls, Ohio land patents, county deeds, probate files, and any surviving pension correspondence. Particular care should be taken with similarly named soldiers and the suggested alternate surname.
The Yost Post distinguishes documented facts from later recollections and unresolved identifications. Future discoveries may permit a more complete reconstruction of Thomas’s service, family, and final years.