A LOOK AT JAMES BEVERLY WARD, AGENT OF THE BEALE PAPERS

[ECS]

Adeline Eliza Risqué Ward, born September 18, 1801 was the daughter of James Beverly Risqué and Elizabeth Kennerly Risqué was the wife of Giles Ward and mother of James Beverly Ward, who inherited Hunters Hill from her father.
What became of Hunters Hill after her death?
Did Ward inherit the plantation?
If he did, did he work it or sell it?
...and what was Ward's financial situation in 1884?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[Rebel - KGC]

Adeline Eliza Risqué Ward, born September 18, 1801 was the daughter of James Beverly Risqué and Elizabeth Kennerly Risqué was the wife of Giles Ward and mother of James Beverly Ward, who inherited Hunters Hill from her father.
What became of Hunters Hill after her death?
Did Ward inherit the plantation?
If he did, did he work it or sell it?
...and what was Ward's financial situation in 1884?

"JB" Ward was their ONLY child; I reckon that he DID get "HH". I think he lived there for a while; in 1884, they weren't WEALTHY...

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Adeline Eliza Risqué Ward, born September 18, 1801 was the daughter of James Beverly Risqué and Elizabeth Kennerly Risqué was the wife of Giles Ward and mother of James Beverly Ward, who inherited Hunters Hill from her father.
What became of Hunters Hill after her death?
Did Ward inherit the plantation?
If he did, did he work it or sell it?
...and what was Ward's financial situation in 1884?

OK, thanks for clarifying...

 

[bigscoop]

Those claiming the story to be true is very conspicuous by its absence.
...and we have the remaining unsold copies destroyed in a fire after complaints of family names being used in that dime novel pamphlet.
That, in itself creates suspicion of the Beale Papers being a true story of adventure and treasure.

It does? OK, perhaps, for some, I suppose.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

OK, thanks for clarifying...

From several "sources", after "JB" Ward & family came back to Virginia from St. Louis... "he engaged in farming on his mother's plantation in Campbell County; she inherited it from her father, James Beverly Risque, who died in 1843". (One Letter, One Enclosure; Subject: The Beale Treasure). "Google it".... INTERESTING!

 

[ECS]

It has you looking for the story behind the story alternatives to the published Beale narrative with all those fantastic theories you have posted over the years...
...and still the Beale Papers remain an adventure/treasure dime novel with parlor entertainment ciphers.

 

[Garry]

From several "sources", after "JB" Ward & family came back to Virginia from St. Louis... "he engaged in farming on his mother's plantation in Campbell County; she inherited it from her father, James Beverly Risque, who died in 1843". (One Letter, One Enclosure; Subject: The Beale Treasure). "Google it".... INTERESTING!

Rebel,

I'm a babe in the woods here but do you know the author of the story above and have you been able to verify the elements of his story. (I looked for the marriage of Ward and Otey in St. Charles, Mo.) I didn't find anything. I could try loooking elsewhere but the author didn't leave any fuzz on when and where they were married.

SHOW ME, after all I am from Missouri!

You guys keep up the good work on the history of the individuals and story.

Garry

 

[bigscoop]

It has you looking for the story behind the story alternatives to the published Beale narrative with all those fantastic theories you have posted over the years...
...and still the Beale Papers remain an adventure/treasure dime novel with parlor entertainment ciphers.

Not here to continue bantering tail feathers with you as that could doubtless go on forever to no avail. I'm just here to debate the pros and cons of theories, share new thoughts, notions, and insights that might lead to someplace new in the continued search for verification and confirmation, whatever that might be, since nobody can manage to provide anything conclusive as it is. If you've got something conclusive then by all means share it. But if not......well, then maybe you should keep looking too so you might eventually have it.

 

[ECS]

As it is a dime novel job pamphlet work of fiction drawn and compiled from various real sources, there is no way anyone can provide the conclusive proof you seem to require.
The beguiling way in which the Beale narrative is presented keeps the unwary readers hopes alive that maybe, just maybe...
The Beale story as presented in the Beale Papers is either true or fiction.
It is not a cover story for something else, as some wish to believe.
After 130 years of many researching this story, no one has yet to prove the story true, while many have stated otherwise, quite conclusively.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Rebel,

I'm a babe in the woods here but do you know the author of the story above and have you been able to verify the elements of his story. (I looked for the marriage of Ward and Otey in St. Charles, Mo.) I didn't find anything. I could try loooking elsewhere but the author didn't leave any fuzz on when and where they were married.

SHOW ME, after all I am from Missouri!

You guys keep up the good work on the history of the individuals and story.

Garry

Yes, it is copy-righted for the Beale Ciphers Analysis "ppl". so it MUST be Richard H. Greaves, maybe under another "name". Page24 is a good place to start.
BTW, B & O were married in 1841, in St. Charles, MO, according to Peter Viemeister, in THE BEALE TREASURE: NEW History of a MYSTERY. I trust Greaves' R & I; I may disagree with some of his "conclusions". 'Nuff said...

 

[bigscoop]

As it is a dime novel job pamphlet work of fiction drawn and compiled from various real sources, there is no way anyone can provide the conclusive proof you seem to require.
The beguiling way in which the Beale narrative is presented keeps the unwary readers hopes alive that maybe, just maybe...
The Beale story as presented in the Beale Papers is either true or fiction.
It is not a cover story for something else, as some wish to believe.
After 130 years of many researching this story, no one has yet to prove the story true, while many have stated otherwise, quite conclusively.

If you say so. As previously noted, "many times" in fact, it is a very strong theory and possibly even the correct theory. But....as I still maintain, "it can't be proven as a matter of fact" and therefore it can't be claimed as such as a matter of fact. Want to turn theory into fact? Then find that confirmation as if the theory is indeed accurate that confirmation should be out there somewhere, just as with any other theory. Doesn't matter how strong the circumstantial evidence might be, the only thing that can turn speculation into fact is confirmation of the speculation. But without it, and to claim otherwise, is just more quacking echoing over the pond.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

If you say so. As previously noted, "many times" in fact, it is a very strong theory and possibly even the correct theory. But....as I still maintain, "it can't be proven as a matter of fact" and therefore it can't be claimed as such as a matter of fact. Want to turn theory into fact? Then find that confirmation as if the theory is indeed accurate that confirmation should be out there somewhere, just as with any other theory. Doesn't matter how strong the circumstantial evidence might be, the only thing that can turn speculation into fact is confirmation of the speculation. But without it, and to claim otherwise, is just more quacking echoing over the pond.

HA! It MAY take YEARS! Even after YOU are "dead & gone"; BE HERE NOW! OR...! YOU just wanna shoot at the critters quacking & honking in the pond... go to the TIKI BAR & RELAX, MAN! Do some Mud Rasseling with Snooky & Teeny Weeny Meanie! Rev. Billy could play a tune or two...

 

[ECS]

... As previously noted, "many times" in fact, it is a very strong theory and possibly even the correct theory. But....as I still maintain, "it can't be proven as a matter of fact" and therefore it can't be claimed as such as a matter of fact. Want to turn theory into fact? Then find that confirmation as if the theory is indeed accurate that confirmation should be out there somewhere, just as with any other theory. Doesn't matter how strong the circumstantial evidence might be, the only thing that can turn speculation into fact is confirmation of the speculation...

Well, I have confirmed "influences" that can be found in Ward's 1885 Beale Papers, many times over, and it strongly stands against the total lack of outside evidence that can that anything in the Beale narrative ever occurred.
...and I daresay, it is much stronger than the various theories that you have promoted.

 

[bigscoop]

Well, I have confirmed "influences" that can be found in Ward's 1885 Beale Papers, many times over, and it strongly stands against the total lack of outside evidence that can that anything in the Beale narrative ever occurred.
...and I daresay, it is much stronger than the various theories that you have promoted.

"Confirmed influences"...........now that's a first for me! You mean to tell me that you can confirm that Ward was indeed influenced by family history and that these influences lead "him to write" the narration? And you now claim that you can confirm/verify that all of these influences did in fact provide Ward with the details of "his" narration? What, you have his personal confession to all of this in writing somewhere?

You say, "it is much stronger than the various theories that you have promoted." And to this I can only ask, to the best of your apparent failing recollection, how many times I have even posted that the fiction theory is still the strongest theory on the table? It is starting to appear that you just like pursuing conflicts even when they aren't there. Nothing you have stated above is anything that I haven't stated numerous times myself. But this still doesn't change the cold hard fact that until you can can confirm/verify your absolute claim of remedy/solve then you are just another duck quaking in the same pond.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

"Confirmed influences"...........now that's a first for me! You mean to tell me that you can confirm that Ward was indeed influenced by family history and that these influences lead "him to write" the narration? And you now claim that you can confirm/verify that all of these influences did in fact provide Ward with the details of "his" narration? What, you have his personal confession to all of this in writing somewhere?

You say, "it is much stronger than the various theories that you have promoted." And to this I can only ask, to the best of your apparent failing recollection, how many times I have even posted that the fiction theory is still the strongest theory on the table? It is starting to appear that you just like pursuing conflicts even when they aren't there. Nothing you have stated above is anything that I haven't stated numerous times myself. But this still doesn't change the cold hard fact that until you can can confirm/verify your absolute claim of remedy/solve then you are just another duck quaking in the same pond.

Got a Bird dog in "the Hunt"...? Rev. Billy is doing songs about "The Beale"... TITLES, only. THE Hunt is one of 'em... & BEANS, BEANS, BEANS! NOTHING but BEANS! (to the tune Gypsies, Tramps, & Thieves), is another...

 

[Cryptography]

You believe in an expedition that never happened but not an actual news article from the 1930's that appeared in THE LYNCHBURG NEWS?
Its not my fault its existence doesn't fit with your obvious very limited philosophies.

I don't think you have ever seen the actual news article, have you?

 

[ECS]

I don't think you have ever seen the actual news article, have you?

Well, you think wrong.

 

[ECS]

"Confirmed influences"... You mean to tell me that you can confirm that Ward was indeed influenced by family history and that these influences lead "him to write" the narration? And you now claim that you can confirm/verify that all of these influences...

You say, "it is much stronger than the various theories that you have promoted." And to this I can only ask, to the best of your apparent failing recollection, how many times I have even posted that the fiction theory is still the strongest theory on the table? It is starting to appear that you just like pursuing conflicts even when they aren't there. Nothing you have stated above is anything that I haven't stated numerous times myself...

Bigscoop, how many times have you presented the "REAL" story behind the story theory only to change your mind?
When one analyzes literature, either looking for symbolism or sources, patterns do emerge, what I have presented are events in the that extended family that obviously influenced that Beale story text, and also explored those that were involved in the creation, copyrighting, printing, publishing, advertising, and sale of the job pamphlet.
With all your protests to this analysis of the Beale narrative, it appears that their exists a realization that this is closer to the truth than Champ 'd Asile, Bonapartism, Girard and opium, Lafitte, and the theory dejour, Alderman Beale.
The influences I have presented do exist, of which you haven't disproved the message with all your disparaging posts discrediting the messenger.
... and, my friend,I have never claimed an outright "remedy/solve" as you infer.

 

[bigscoop]

Bigscoop, how many times have you presented the "REAL" story behind the story theory only to change your mind?
When one analyzes literature, either looking for symbolism or sources, patterns do emerge, what I have presented are events in the that extended family that obviously influenced that Beale story text, and also explored those that were involved in the creation, copyrighting, printing, publishing, advertising, and sale of the job pamphlet.
With all your protests to this analysis of the Beale narrative, it appears that their exists a realization that this is closer to the truth than Champ 'd Asile, Bonapartism, Girard and opium, Lafitte, and the theory dejour, Alderman Beale.
The influences I have presented do exist, of which you haven't disproved the message with all your disparaging posts discrediting the messenger.
... and, my friend,I have never claimed an outright "remedy/solve" as you infer.

Is it a sin to maintain an open mind to the possibilities of something so unknown, or to continually reconsider the evidences that present themselves, or as you say, to change one's mind and position on the possibilities of something so completely unknown? If so, then yes, I am certainly guilty in this present search for a possible truth. If we don't allow ourselves to conduct our research in this exact manner then how can that research be anything else other then biased to a single theory or notion? It can't be. All that can ever come of this type of tunnel vision and unfounded pride is, well, blind conclusions.

And to say that you have never claimed outright "remedy/solve" as I refer, you should do your due-diligence before making such a statement as you have repeatedly made claim of nothing else. In these claims you have included just about everyone associated with Ward's family and even some of the people who sold the publication, repeatedly incriminating all of them in a family affair that you have absolutely zero evidence of their direct involvement in that narration. What did you call them, "confirmed influences." How, dare I ask, have you determined that Ward was indeed the actual author of the pamphlet and that his narration was, indeed, influenced by a multitude of family events that you proclaim? Have you discovered personal old letters to that effect? Perhaps an old diary or Ward's or a family member that outlines all of those details? Or, have you just assembled circumstantial evidence that fits into your personal pet theory like everyone else? Maybe you need to reflect on this a bit, really see if you have any type of true confirmation or verification at all. I'm betting you don't have anything more then anyone else in the way of verification or confirmation. If so please share it and you can end a 130 year mystery. I'll even applaud you when/if you ever do. But until then, "it's just another unfounded claim as to the true nature and source of the tale." Just like everyone else.

PS: I'm glad my humble pride isn't afraid to let me change my mind or to reconsider the possibilities of complete unknowns, even in public forums where I might have, at an earlier date and time, held different opinion.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Is it a sin to maintain an open mind to the possibilities of something so unknown, or to continually reconsider the evidences that present themselves, or as you say, to change one's mind and position on the possibilities of something so completely unknown? If so, then yes, I am certainly guilty in this present search for a possible truth. If we don't allow ourselves to conduct our research in this exact manner then how can that research be anything else other then biased to a single theory or notion? It can't be. All that can ever come of this type of tunnel vision and unfounded pride is, well, blind conclusions.

And to say that you have never claimed outright "remedy/solve" as I refer, you should do your due-diligence before making such a statement as you have repeatedly made claim of nothing else. In these claims you have included just about everyone associated with Ward's family and even some of the people who sold the publication, repeatedly incriminating all of them in a family affair that you have absolutely zero evidence of their direct involvement in that narration. What did you call them, "confirmed influences." How, dare I ask, have you determined that Ward was indeed the actual author of the pamphlet and that his narration was, indeed, influenced by a multitude of family events that you proclaim? Have you discovered personal old letters to that effect? Perhaps an old diary or Ward's or a family member that outlines all of those details? Or, have you just assembled circumstantial evidence that fits into your personal pet theory like everyone else? Maybe you need to reflect on this a bit, really see if you have any type of true confirmation or verification at all. I'm betting you don't have anything more then anyone else in the way of verification or confirmation. If so please share it and you can end a 130 year mystery. I'll even applaud you when/if you ever do. But until then, "it's just another unfounded claim as to the true nature and source of the tale." Just like everyone else.

PS: I'm glad my humble pride isn't afraid to let me change my mind or to reconsider the possibilities of complete unknowns, even in public forums where I might have, at an earlier date and time, held different opinion.

"SIN"...? !!! When did YOU get Religion...? LOL!