Blowing The Cast Iron Lids Off Of Beale

[bigscoop]

So, Bigscoop, are you referring to a member of the Otey family?
In addition to the Otey connection I mention in a previous post, Robert Morris and James Beverly Ward both had business interests with a member of the Otey family, and, an Otey WAS the manager of Lynchburg's Washington Hotel, where one Thomas J Beale was alleged to have stayed.

I'm not suggesting anyone in particular.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[bigscoop]

ECS, since you introduced the memoirs and mr. Sherman into this thread I prepared a little something for you;

During the period Galveston Island was in Mexico, in the region of Texas, that was under Spanish occupation and control, Mexico struggling for its independence.


While in Mexico, at Galveston Island, and in this same exact period, Laffite recommends to Mr. Sherman that they “stick to their promise and distribute the gold to the indicated places.”


At this same time, during this same period, the uncle of the narration's editor/publisher, a ship captain, earns the moniker, Mathew “Mexico” Sherman. Mexico isn't on the continent of South America, it is in North America, and the only port in Mexico during the period where an American privateering vessel or a vessel supporting Mexican Independence could find safe harbor in Mexico is Galveston Island.


Mr. Sherman. Mexico. Galveston Island of Mexico. Ship Captain Mathew “Mexico” Sherman. Conclusive proof? No. Pretty darn obvious, yes. And with this now you have Risque, a Sherman, and a Beale, all of the same Virginia region, all connected to the events surrounding the Adams Onis Treaty. In this same Virginia region you also have two alleged deposits that fall in perfect chronological order to these same events and noted claims.

 

[bigscoop]

I'm not suggesting anyone in particular.

What I'm suggesting to you is this. If I were a local historian having been exposed to the current theory then I would focus my attention for "anything" else that I might be able to find in all that local history. Per example, were there any more ship captains in the region and if so what were their ship's names, etc. Was anyone in the region involved in the slave trade? And so on and so on, all this sort of stuff. There simply has to be more out there to be found if only it is sought.

 

[ECS]

When was that quote dated and where did it originate?
January 4, 1847 from the Memoirs of Jean Lafitte forgery by John Laflin.
William Cochrane, Lt Kearney, Mr Hall , Mr Campbell and those of Bolivar are also mentioned in that quote, which refers to the date of this as February 24, 1821. Why did you leave these names out of your reference?
What is pretty darn obvious is that Lafitte died in 1823 and could not write this quote in 1847, just like Beale who died in 1820 couldn't write letters in 1823.
Well at least you finally admitting John William Sherman's involvement goes beyond just being the printer of the Beale Papers job pamphlet as being the editor. What became of the manuscript from which he worked?
Now when you give a hard realistic look at Harriet Otey Buford Ward, James Beverly Ward's wife, his cousin F C Hutter, Max Guggenheimer and Charles W Button, you will discover there is NO Mathew "Mexico" Sherman, Galveston, New Orleans, or Lafitte involvement in the creation, publishing, and marketing of Ward's copyrighted Beale Papers dime novel job pamphlet.
As for Adams-Onis Treaty, we have discussed Major James Beverly Risque's involvement with Andrew Jackson's "patriots" and the damage claims payouts, but that is not mentioned in the Beale story, except for the deposit dates in the tale, which may be a clever "red herring".

 

[bigscoop]

When was that quote dated and where did it originate?
January 4, 1847 from the Memoirs of Jean Lafitte forgery by John Laflin.
William Cochrane, Lt Kearney, Mr Hall , Mr Campbell and those of Bolivar are also mentioned in that quote, which refers to the date of this as February 24, 1821. Why did you leave these names out of your reference?
What is pretty darn obvious is that Lafitte died in 1823 and could not write this quote in 1847, just like Beale who died in 1820 couldn't write letters in 1823.
Well at least you finally admitting John William Sherman's involvement goes beyond just being the printer of the Beale Papers job pamphlet as being the editor. What became of the manuscript from which he worked?
Now when you give a hard realistic look at Harriet Otey Buford Ward, James Beverly Ward's wife, his cousin F C Hutter, Max Guggenheimer and Charles W Button, you will discover there is NO Mathew "Mexico" Sherman, Galveston, New Orleans, or Lafitte involvement in the creation, publishing, and marketing of Ward's copyrighted Beale Papers dime novel job pamphlet.
As for Adams-Onis Treaty, we have discussed Major James Beverly Risque's involvement with Andrew Jackson's "patriots" and the damage claims payouts, but that is not mentioned in the Beale story, except for the deposit dates in the tale, which may be a clever "red herring".

Here you go again, in one breath you spew in denial of some of the names I have referenced and some of those I've not, your private agenda and speculations as to why. Then, in the next breath, after attempting to condemn me for making some of those references "that are never referenced in the narration" you begin to spew out an entire regiment of names in defense of your own rapidly declining theory that aren't referenced in the narration. Your like a duck in a pond with a broken wing and leg trying his best to swim in a straight line and fly at the same time. You're obviously confused by all of your posting in far too many threads and also at a complete and utter loss as to how to proceed even though I've suggested how.

"Relay on your own in-depth research and not the research and opinions of others. This will only lead you to uncertainty and the conflicts in opinions and perspectives every time." Do what you know best, and you know the local stuff best.

 

[ECS]

Well, something is blowing on this thread but its not cast iron pot lids!
You need to spend a little more effort on legitimate sources for your research if want to retain credibility for this current all in one pet theory- Laflin's forged Lafitte memoirs is not an accepted reliable source for real facts by any means.
So far all you have produced is historical babble formed from that forged memoir and documents that are totally unrelated to the presented Beale story in Ward's copyrighted dime novel, and then state that the connections to Beale are there, but some reason no one else has been able to discern these "connexions" that you claim.
Bigscoop's boldly bragged bombshell has bombed once again.

 

[bigscoop]

As I recall, and from one local historian, Buford even rented slaves.....of course, I suppose I could be wrong on that since it's just from memory. Maybe some local historian needs to check me on that.
Weren't the alleged deposits made four miles from Buford's, as the narration goes? I suppose I could be wrong about that too.....

 

[bigscoop]

Hu....another recollection that probably needs to be checked by those with all the local history, but didn't Mathew "Mexico" Sherman relocate to the same area where the French refuges had an olive vineyard prior to their relocating to..........the Texas Region of Mexico with Laffite's assistance? I don't know, maybe I'm just confused and needing correction by all the local experts. Probably going to learn from them that Mexico isn't even in Mexico.

 

[ECS]

John Laflin's wonderfully forged Memoirs of Jean Lafitte contained "facts" he borrowed from two previous works:
"The Memoirs of Lafitte, or the Baratarian Pirate; A Narrative Founded On Fact" by William S Spear 1826.
Most of the "facts" in this work were based on lore and legend with occasional facts blended into the story.
"Historical Sketch of Pierre and Jean Lafitte, The Famous Smugglers of Louisiana" by Charles Gayarre 1883
Gayarre built upon the Spear work with some facts and additional lore and legend.
Neither work is considered as a completely true account, and both were utilized by Laflin from the "known" period of Lafitte's life, every entry made after 1823 was from Laflin's imagination.
John Laflin is considered as the king of forged American historical documents because of their "believability" with use known facts mixed with plausible fiction, which as a con man, was designed by Laflin along with period paper and ink to lure the unwary reader.
Only an unwary reader would accept anything in Laflin's work as a source of real evidence of anything concerning Lafitte.
As for a connection to the Beale story...
Just sayin'.

 

[bigscoop]

John Laflin's wonderfully forged Memoirs of Jean Lafitte contained "facts" he borrowed from two previous works:
"The Memoirs of Lafitte, or the Baratarian Pirate; A Narrative Founded On Fact" by William S Spear 1826.
Most of the "facts" in this work were based on lore and legend with occasional facts blended into the story.
"Historical Sketch of Pierre and Jean Lafitte, The Famous Smugglers of Louisiana" by Charles Gayarre 1883
Gayarre built upon the Spear work with some facts and additional lore and legend.
Neither work is considered as a completely true account, and both were utilized by Laflin from the "known" period of Lafitte's life, every entry made after 1823 was from Laflin's imagination.
John Laflin is considered as the king of forged American historical documents because of their "believability" with use known facts mixed with plausible fiction, which as a con man, was designed by Laflin along with period paper and ink to lure the unwary reader.
Only an unwary reader would accept anything in Laflin's work as a source of real evidence of anything concerning Lafitte.
As for a connection to the Beale story...
Just sayin'.

There you go again.....quoting the opinions of others and blindly accepting all of it as gospel. I've not asked you to do that, I've asked you to conduct your own research and to form your own opinions. Yes, it is very time consuming and tasking and it requires access to considerable materials and resources, but this is the only way in which one can form personal and educated opinion. Which brings me to my next subject.....your local research into this mystery.

Now armed with enough of the details concerning my current summations, are you not in the least bit curious if there might not be more of the same out there to be discovered? I can't make you do it and if I present it you'll just quickly shoot it down in typical fashion. However, have you noticed that when you find things like the Risque information and the Mexico Sherman information, etc., etc., how those things become harder for you to dismiss so quickly. So there is my suggestion to you again, use what you know, what you do best, and allow your curiosity to explore the possibilities. Might be that you'll come away with differing opinion based on personal effort instead of the opinions of others.

Or do you fear what you might find? Up to you where you choose to go from here. I'm in no rush......

 

[bigscoop]

From 1810 to 1820 40% of Virginia's "total population" is attributed to slaves, so 4 out of every ten people were slaves, Lynchburg and Richmond being major slave centers. So if Virginia averaged 1.5 million total population through this period this means that there were roughly 600'000 slaves in Virginia, and this is just Virginia. Where did they all come from and how many of them were the product of smuggling?

 

[ECS]

There you go again.....quoting the opinions of others and blindly accepting all of it as gospel. I've not asked you to do that, I've asked you to conduct your own research and to form your own opinions...

Big talk, Bigscoop , from one who quotes a forged memoir and expects the unwary reader to accept it as gospel to provide a "manufactured evidence" to support this current theory of yours, because you refuse to believe that Ward's 1885 Beale Papers is nothing more than a dime novel with play along ciphers, and in US codebreaker Elizabeth Smith Friedman's words, " printed for the express purpose of selling copies of it for profit".
It is time to stop quoting excerpts from a forged memoir, and read the works of Spear and Gayarre that Lafilin "borrowed" his "facts" that you keep quoting, and go to the original source.
Might be that you might come away with a differing opinion and knowing you, a new improved theory on the story behind the Beale Papers story, based on the works Laflin utilized instead of what you consider fact,
Or do you fear what you may find?
Up to you where you choose to go from here.
But quoting the forger Laflin is not helping you credibility, its like claiming the Peralta stones are the key to the Beale ciphers.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

LOL!

 

[bigscoop]

Big talk, Bigscoop , from one who quotes a forged memoir and expects the unwary reader to accept it as gospel to provide a "manufactured evidence" to support this current theory of yours, because you refuse to believe that Ward's 1885 Beale Papers is nothing more than a dime novel with play along ciphers, and in US codebreaker Elizabeth Smith Friedman's words, " printed for the express purpose of selling copies of it for profit".
It is time to stop quoting excerpts from a forged memoir, and read the works of Spear and Gayarre that Lafilin "borrowed" his "facts" that you keep quoting, and go to the original source.
Might be that you might come away with a differing opinion and knowing you, a new improved theory on the story behind the Beale Papers story, based on the works Laflin utilized instead of what you consider fact,
Or do you fear what you may find?
Up to you where you choose to go from here.
But quoting the forger Laflin is not helping you credibility, its like claiming the Peralta stones are the key to the Beale ciphers.

There you go again, referencing the opinions and works of others. So again, as you continue to paint yourself deeper into that corner that you're just not understanding, "Have YOU read the memoirs and have YOU personally researched that publication's contents?" It's a simple yes or no answer. Each time you continue to try to defend your position you do it by referencing the opinions and works of others. So you keep painting away, and again, "I don't care who actually penned them, I only care as to the accuracy of the information." Something I have said several times over now. You're well over 200 post in just a couple of my recent threads, not a single point of directly conflicting information to anything I have presented, just more opinions and works of others. "If I'm going to be wrong let me be wrong by my own research and opinions and not by the opinions of others."



PS: Did you know Mexico is in Mexico?

 

[ECS]

There you go again, referencing the opinions and works of others... "I don't care who actually penned them, I only care as to the accuracy of the information." Something I have said several times over now...
PS: Did you know Mexico is in Mexico?
[/B]

Is not your constant dependence on quotes from the forger Laflin's Lafitte memoirs referencing the opinion and work of another?
Why , YES, it is!
And in his endeavor to produce a highly believable Lafitte memoir forgery that he could pass off as REAL for profit, John Andrechyne Laflin referenced the opinions and works of Spear(1826) and Gayarre(1883).
Why don't you research the same works that Laflin utilized in his forged work based on second hand hearsay of others, instead of passing off these memoirs entries that are date 20 years after the reported death of Jean Lafitte as "FACTS" that you claim are part of the Beale story?
An unwary reader would become wary over these unsupported fairy tales for profit perpetuated by Laflin's forgery, but, as you have clearly stated," I don't care who actually penned them, I only care as to the accuracy of the information".
Please share with all who read these Beale threads, how have you determined that the information in Laflin's work is accurate?
Especially those entries dated long after Lafitte's reported death that you constantly use as proof of this current pet theory of the true story behind the Beale story in the job pamphlet.

 

[ECS]

... Did you know Mexico is in Mexico?
[/B]

Was it mentioned in Laflin's forgery that Lafitte and Beale were going to built a wall, and it would be HUGE!
...or was that in the Reavis forgery that was written on the backside of a Peralta stone?
So many theories based on so little facts.

 

[bigscoop]

Was it mentioned in Laflin's forgery that Lafitte and Beale were going to built a wall, and it would be HUGE!
...or was that in the Reavis forgery that was written on the backside of a Peralta stone?
So many theories based on so little facts.

Well I don't know. Maybe, "if you would actually read the memoirs and research many of those details yourself you could arrive at your own opinions on such matters." Really Dude, go back and review your post in this thread......"what have you personally offered up in regards to your own research into the subject matter being discussed?" ZERO! ZIP! NOTHING! All of your replies have just been aimed towards the opinions of others and I'm here to tell you, "that's a mistake!" How can you possibly hope to hold debate on matters that you've not even personally educated yourself on?

Per yet another example, are you even aware that well known slave routes from the region in question to Saint Louis had been established even before the events that are the subject of this thread? I'm guessing the answer is, no, even though I have posted that information before. Per another example, prior to my introducing all of the Adams Onis Treaty information would you have even looked for, or found curiosity, in the Risque information? Again, my guess is probably, no. And what about Mexico Sherman? As I recall when I first brought him up a long while back you quickly found and posted more information about him and his ship, Torpedo. Would you have even looked for that information if I hadn't introduced it? Again, my guess is, no. I wonder now if you'll look for the slave route information I just referenced, as well as other things I have referenced? I can't make you do it, but on occasions when you have......

 

[ECS]

AS most of your assumptions , those concerning what I have read and researched, are wrong.
With your "There you go again" channeling of Ronald Reagan during his debate with Carter to discredit my posts, it is time for you to explain to all the TN Beale readers, where in the 1885 Beale Papers is there a mention of:
New Orleans
Galveston
Jean Lafitte
the slave trade
Adams- Onis Treaty
Oh, my, there is no mention.
So, my august friend, it is time to present real facts with real documented sources instead of pushing the work of one who has been deemed America's greatest master forger, because no matter how hard you try to believe otherwise, a forged work, even "IF" it contains a portion of borrowed truth as is the case with Laflin's Lafitte memoir, it is still considered "FALSE", and not suitable as evidence.

 

[bigscoop]

AS most of your assumptions , those concerning what I have read and researched, are wrong.
With your "There you go again" channeling of Ronald Reagan during his debate with Carter to discredit my posts, it is time for you to explain to all the TN Beale readers, where in the 1885 Beale Papers is there a mention of:
New Orleans
Galveston
Jean Lafitte
the slave trade
Adams- Onis Treaty
Oh, my, there is no mention.
So, my august friend, it is time to present real facts with real documented sources instead of pushing the work of one who has been deemed America's greatest master forger, because no matter how hard you try to believe otherwise, a forged work, even "IF" it contains a portion of borrowed truth as is the case with Laflin's Lafitte memoir, it is still considered "FALSE", and not suitable as evidence.

OK. Tossing the same old same old rhetoric without even a hint to anything YOU have personally researched in regards "to not only the memoirs" but also everything else I have presented up to allowing introduction/debate of the memoirs. And in this last effort to shy away from this fact, you again continue to slice the throat of your theory by suggesting "that if it ain't directly referenced in the narration then it can't count." Good lord, man, your entire fiction theory is based on things and events and people not directly referenced in the narration. Everybody from Hutter, Risque, Oteys, to this relative, that relative, and all manner of folks and unfounded notions in between, such as fabulous libraries containing the works of just about every material source you believe was in it. Think before you apply your sense of reasoning, ask yourself just exactly who your really exposing?

 

[bigscoop]

AS most of your assumptions , those concerning what I have read and researched, are wrong.

Glad to hear it as now we can maybe debate in more detail. So tell me, what is "your opinion" of the works of noted historians in this area such and Davis and a few of the French, British, and Spanish scholars? I'm very interested in hearing your summations in regards to their work. Finally this thread is going to start addressing some of the more intimate details, materials, etc. Can't wait to hear "your personal take" on all of this! I'll be anxiously waiting your reply.....take your pick and let's get started.