17 Tons of gold in New Mexico

[Oroblanco]

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Roadquest]

gollum--- Mike you said there were still depressions in the ground where the gold was burried previously, and then dug up.
Are you talking about the 17 Tons, or the two gold bars with the parts of maps
on them.
Either one, do you know where the depressions are located?

Clayton Ramey...Roadquest

window of time

 

[Roadquest]

Gary... I enjoy reading all the differant takes on this treasure. And I do my site search's on my own research. I thinks Mikes story on the three gold bar maps in interesting. And, even tho that's not the story I base my research on. I never discount any information someone puts out there.

I have found if Mike has something to say about a treasure, most of the time it would pay to check it out.

For whatever it may prove or not, I have photo copies from the inter-loan library of the trials on this treasure.

I believe you can't win the lottery if you don't buy a ticket.

Clayton Ramey...Roadquest

 

[Arizona Ed]

I think it would be interesting if we could get someone to take out
a add in the Chihualhua----Torreon---Ccoahuila news papers and
see if we could locate some of the people that were related to the
people that were involved in this vencher, mainly Leon Trabuco.
we would have to find someone that speaks the language.
Mike (gullum ) would be my choice to write the add.
I would be glad to pay my share.

Ed

 

[gollum]

gollum--- Mike you said there were still depressions in the ground where the gold was burried previously, and then dug up.
Are you talking about the 17 Tons, or the two gold bars with the parts of maps
on them.
Either one, do you know where the depressions are located?

Clayton Ramey...Roadquest

window of time

Hey Clayton,

The depressions are from the main load of gold. I will say that one of the gold bars was found under a boulder on the side of the mesa that had a rusty spike driven into the top. Underneath, was a bar wrapped in red canvas, and again in oilcloth.

Best-Mike

 

[Peerless67]

I think it would be interesting if we could get someone to take out
a add in the Chihualhua----Torreon---Ccoahuila news papers and
see if we could locate some of the people that were related to the
people that were involved in this vencher, mainly Leon Trabuco.
we would have to find someone that speaks the language.
Mike (gullum ) would be my choice to write the add.
I would be glad to pay my share.

Ed

I would to Ed, but it seems strange that out of all those seemingly rich cattle ranchers and a high profile investment banker none are documented, this could be because their names were changed to hide their real identities, but if this is the case who would you address such an ad to?

roadquest, take it from me I do not discount anything mike says and have let it be known he is one person on here who I hold in high regard, I just applied common sense to a story, its my belief that a 165 kilo gold bar map does not exist and for a man who moved 17 tons of gold because he felt the "feds were closing in" to keep 165 kilos of gold around the property with a map on to find the remainder of the 17 tons seems just to unlikely. I must admit though I would love to be proved wrong. as to your photo copies of the court papers I have no doubt they exist although I dont have copies yet. but as I said that only proves that a mexican claimed to have 17 tons of gold in the US and not that it existed, however I hope that when I get my copies it sheds some light on the true names of those involved as it seems impluasible that none of those people are able to be traced by normal methods. I have 1 more william C Elliott to check out that was given to me by someone on Tnet. il let you know how it goes.

 

[Roadquest]

Gary, I would like to know what you find out about the last Elliott on your list.
And , I did not mean to inply that you discounted what Mike said.
What I was saying was I would not discount what anyone says about
this treasure, or any other treasure. As, I would not discount what you have to say.
And, I think as you obtain more information on the "17 Tons of treasure" you will start to believe it is out there.
It's very interesting, I have found out a few things that I can't talk about.
From my own research. It's not kill dead proof, but it is enff to keep me searching.

Clayton Ramey...Roadquest

 

[gollum]

For my part, I will say that I am not personally involved with this search, but the people I know who are, are beyond reproach. If they tell me something, I take it as gospel.

Even though y'all may not know their history, I do, and it is enough for me.

I completely understand why a person would be very cynical about this story though, as it is quite fantastic.

Best-Mike

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI gollyum: I agree, too much factual data as a base to be a con-job or pure imagination.

Keep up the posting fascinating.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[gollum]

Too much factual data gives the house away!

What they have told me is the truth. There is a lot I have not been privvy to (because I am not part of the actual search). I don't know exactly how close or far they are along, except what I have been told.

Best-Mike

 

[Springfield]

For my part, I will say that I am not personally inTolved with this search [This indicates a critical degree of separation, which reduces reliability of data. Not good], but the people I know who are, are beyond reproach. If they tell me something, I take it as gospel. [This shows loyalty, which is good. It also assumes their infallibility, which is not so good.]

Even though y'all may not know their history, I do, and it is enough for me. [Enough to endorse their efforts, yes, but not enough to risk time and money, which you haven't.]

I completely understand why a person would be very cynical about this story though, as it is quite fantastic. [It is preposterous.]

Best-Mike

 

[gollum]

For my part, I will say that I am not personally involved with this search [This indicates a critical degree of separation, which reduces reliability of data. Not good], but the people I know who are, are beyond reproach. If they tell me something, I take it as gospel. [This shows loyalty, which is good. It also assumes their infallibility, which is not so good.]

Even though y'all may not know their history, I do, and it is enough for me. [Enough to endorse their efforts, yes, but not enough to risk time and money, which you haven't.]

I completely understand why a person would be very cynical about this story though, as it is quite fantastic. [It is preposterous.]

Best-Mike

Sorry SF,

You couldn't be more mistaken if you had tried your best!

First, I wouldn't have posted a word, if I did not know it to be the truth. If it were theory or postulation, I would state so (as I always do). what I say may not always be the full story of what I know or have seen (that depends on what level of secrecy I have agreed to with my sources).

"a critical degree of separation" is not what I was aiming to achieve. I was simply stating a fact. I have many projects more closely at hand that have been using my attention lately. As this is a multi-year project that requires someone constantly on site (year round). Unfortunately, my life does not afford me the luxury of living like that.

"preposterous" is a rather harsh word for something that has such documentation.

Before you embarrass yourself even further, maybe you should spend more time researching and less time talking about something about which you know little to nothing.

While I believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions about every subject, when a person begins to make personally offensive statements towards me, implying that something I might post would be less than honest, I have to take exception. I have a thick skin, and dont mind being ribbed (Jose ), I defy you (SF) to go through my over 2200 posts, and find ONE place where I have posted something untrue, or posted a theory and stated it was fact. Occasionally, I have posted information that I can't give the source due to agreements, or can't post all the details of certain information due to those same agreements (when that is the case, I ALWAYS state as much). See SF, when you have a lot of friends "in the know" about many different areas of the field, a verbal agreement is every bit as binding as a notarized one. The Treasure Hunting World (REAL treasure hunters), is not very big, and if a person were to betray another's trust, or break an agreement, the word would get around very quickly, and that person would find themselves without friends or information.

Best-Mike

 

[Roadquest]

Springfield, This forum is to talk about the "17 tons of gold in New Mexico"
Or any thing related to it. The type of reply you gave to Mikes post is not
welcome here. If you feel the need to analize someone. Take it somewhere else.

Clayton Ramey...Roadquest

 

[Old Dog]

Mike ,
Thanks , that was very well stated.
Your integrity is so far ... beyond reproach.

Clayton,
You beat me to it, so I deleted the rest.

We do not post (unless you are Blindbowman) to deceive each other,
Only to pool available info. The agreements of others regarding info are sacred. To a fault.
These things are not questioned.

OD

 

[Peerless67]

I think I may have got my first decent break through today.

Angus D McEachen: US justice dept attorney

Im sure I have found where he graduated in law and also that he has retired to the south with his wife, both appear to be involved in charity works.

Now to try and contact him

 

[Peerless67]

Gary, I would like to know what you find out about the last Elliott on your list.
And , I did not mean to inply that you discounted what Mike said.
What I was saying was I would not discount what anyone says about
this treasure, or any other treasure. As, I would not discount what you have to say.
And, I think as you obtain more information on the "17 Tons of treasure" you will start to believe it is out there.
It's very interesting, I have found out a few things that I can't talk about.
From my own research. It's not kill dead proof, but it is enff to keep me searching.

Clayton Ramey...Roadquest

The William C Elliott I was given is only 53 years old, I will still pursue it as he may be a son?

 

[Springfield]

Gee, boys, relax. I am not trashing Mike - far from it. In fact, he is a guy I'd like to compare notes with sometime because based on his postings here and elsewhere, I consider him to be a no-nonsense searcher of the truth. And, after all, it's the truth we seek. He is obviously a researcher par excellent, thorough and discriminating, and nobody is questioning his integrity. So, Mike, if you are offended - my apologies. I think you may have misunderstood what I was trying to say.

Be careful what you hang your hat on as 'truth'. Take it from someone who knows - you can be 100% committed to a wrong idea for years. Mike, I've got TH friends 'in the know' too, some of them experienced on a level way beyond what you or I will probably ever know. Unless you are elbow-to-elbow with them when the discoveries are actually made, don't expect the entire story from them, no matter how close you are. Yes, people in the know do tend to reveal quite a bit of information in order to fish for more, but they keep their mouths shut about the best things. Always ask yourself, 'What would I reveal?'

If you have a healthy curiosity, then the 17 Tons story can be a fun project trying to figure out why the story was revealed to the public and what was the motivation behind it. If you are a boots-on-the-ground searcher, find something to search for that you have a chance of finding. Life is short - use it wisely and remember, things are seldom as they seem.

 

[gollum]

Thanks for the kind words everybody.

SF,

Apologies accepted. No hard feelings.

Like I said, you are more than welcome to believe that the entire 17 tons story is bunk. I am not here to try and convince you of the opposite. A couple of the guys are longtime friends. I have not seen ALL their evidence (emphasis on ALL), but what I have seen leaves absolutely no room for debate about the truth of the story. I will leave it there. Read into it what you may!

I am ALWAYS careful what I hang my hat on as "truth".

Best-Mike

 

[gollum]

As far as questions about the "feds closing in" and why the caretaker would have moved the gold in the 1950, here is something from the story I can share:

In 1952, a second attempt by a lawyer was made to the Treasury Department. The Justice Department then turned the case over to a Federal Grand Jury in Los Angeles, California District. The Federal Grand Jury returned an indictment naming Trabuco as violating both United States smuggling laws, and cited other open laws that may be named at a later date.

Best-Mike

 

[Peerless67]

As far as questions about the "feds closing in" and why the caretaker would have moved the gold in the 1950, here is something from the story I can share:

In 1952, a second attempt by a lawyer was made to the Treasury Department. The Justice Department then turned the case over to a Federal Grand Jury in Los Angeles, California District. The Federal Grand Jury returned an indictment naming Trabuco as violating both United States smuggling laws, and cited other open laws that may be named at a later date.

Best-Mike

Mike that statement was not so much about why he would have moved it in the 50s, it was more about why would he have moved it but deposited 5 x 33 kilo bars of gold around his property with a map on them to find the remainder of the 17 tons. I really dont doubt that you believe there to be a 165 kilo gold bar map, I just personally can make no sense of such a thing, could this guy not afford a pen and paper? or if he really felt the need why not use a few rocks?

PS: more importantly why did he choose to do that when the main man "Trabuco" was still alive at that point. he should have told his "boss" where it was and that should have been that.