Holmes "Missing" directions

[Blindbowman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Blindbowman wrote

i dont beleive dick holmes wrote anything

I believe the Holmes manuscript is generally attributed to Brownie, not Dick; Brownie denied having authored it however. Dr Glover presents a fair case that Brownie did write it. Like so many sources on the Dutchman in circulation, we are left with more questions than answers.

There are several interesting 'tidbits' in the Holmes manuscript that are easy to miss and may be important. One is a key landmark that has been debated since the days when Waltz was alive and others were trying to trail him. If the Holmes manuscript has this landmark identified correctly, the mine is definitely in the Superstitions. Actions speak louder than words as our amigo Gollum is fond of pointing out, and we know that Holmes did not run to First Water the moment Waltz was cold - he went to Hidden Water. Also remember that Holmes searched all over the Superstitions from Superstition mountain to Picket Post! Does that seem like the actions of a man who had a set of specific directions to find the mine, or like someone who really didn't have a good idea where to look in your opinion? Thank you in advance;

Blindbowman also wrote

this would a kick a** movie

Try "Lust for Gold" with Glenn Ford; the movie makers sought out Barry Storm as an adviser, and you will find much the same version of the Holmes manuscript in Storm's first book 'The Lost Dutchman'. It makes a good movie, however short on fact.

Oroblanco

i am glad you worded it that way Oro,
you said dr Glover presents a fair case that Brownie did write it. Like so many sources on the Dutchman in circulation, we are left with more questions than answers.

OK i beleive the confussion is under standable if dick holmes gave the account to browie and brownie knew it was waltz 's will ..

that would explain brownies reaction to the questions about the sorce of the manuscript.. and as i pointed the wording is word foword waltz's will .. how do i know .. no one else knew the real discription of the mine other then me and waltz i will out stand by my under standing of the realities of the mine and what waltz and i knew about the mine ,... no one and i do mean no one could have writen this will other then waltz him self .. and me ...

i may not have worded word for word the way he did .. but there is no dout what so ever waltz wrote that will .. i dont think brownie holmes had anbything to do with changeing the will dick had to have made those changes before the cort date with julia ...the question is was the account used in the cord hearing if so dick holmes would have used the account to win the case between him and julia .. the fact julia won .. tell us dick holmes did not used this account in cort ..
i think he was afrade to use it because he knew it was waltz's real will and he was afrade the judge would know it was waltz's will ,look how many years this has been known to the public and no one knew it was the missing will ... see i think dick holmes change the will and then felt he could not take the risk someone would figer out that it was the will .. and if i am correct .. the will is prove dick holmes lied about when waltz died .. dose anyone have a cort record from that case . it would be really interesting to see what took place and what dick holmes said about when waltz died and if he said anything about the accout in that cord case .. if so dick may have broke the law in cort as well as the night waltz died.. even the fact brownie said what he did about the account tells me he knew it was waltz 's will , that tells us most logically dick holmes told him about what he had done ... see i think browne holmes said he had nothing to do with writeing the account because brownie knew dick holmes had killed waltz and he did not want to be part of it at all ..he could still be arrested under the laws of mudder ...i think thats the real reason brownie said what he did ..

the point i am trying to make is if i was correct and the account was waltz will was there any reaction to this from the people that would have known or came in contact with those that did know .. and the answer is yes brownie did react as if he did infact know something about the account being waltz 's will .. his reactions were prodictable ...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Oroblanco]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Blindbowman wrote

See i think browne holmes said he had nothing to do with writeing the account because brownie knew dick holmes had killed waltz and he did not want to be part of it at all

You may well be convinced that this version is true, but I fail to see any motive for Dick Holmes to murder a dying man in his last moments of life. This makes no sense to me, and thus the remainder of this theory does not seem a logical course of events. The Holmes manuscript does not read like a will, if that was really what it was, nor is there any record that Waltz created such a will. If Holmes really stole the gold beneath the bed, and found a will then it would be logical for him to destroy it if it did not benefit him, but there is no proof that Holmes even stole the gold and in fact he insisted that it had been given him to use as a grubstake. Gideon Roberts was present with Holmes and the Roberts family has a different version of that fateful night, different from Holmes and Thomas in fact. According to this version, Thomas was charging money to spend a few moments with the dying Waltz, telling everyone that he was delirious and whispering clues about his mine so as to get more interest. Whether this version is true or not I cannot prove, but if it were wholly true we might expect Holmes to have confirmed it but this is not the case. Was Waltz simply delirious and ranting on his deathbed? If this were the case, we might expect that the set of clues obtained by Dick Holmes might well have almost no value whatsoever.

The version we get in the Holmes manuscript appears to be the recollections of a lucid and sane Waltz telling his old friend Holmes the story, which would hardly match the Roberts family version of Waltz ranting out of his fevered mind. Anyway that is an interesting theory you have there amigo BB but respectfully I have to say that it does not seem logical to me.
Oroblanco

 

[Cubfan64]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

DD, you stated:

Maybe Brownies "helper" with the manuscript took too many "liberties" with the story and "took" some things from Storms story and thats why Brownie didnt want to associate with it?

If I had to place a bet on any theory, that's the one I would tend to go with.

Whenever I read discussions about the Holme's manuscript and Brownie's involvement, a voice rings in my head. I've heard Clay Worst say it more than a handful of times and I'm paraphrasing when I say they not long before Brownie died he told Clay that his father never lied to him, and he never lied to Clay.

Out west especially, it seems a man's word (especially among the old timers) is his bond, and if Brownie told Clay he never lied to him and he told Clay he didn't write that manuscript, then I tend to believe it as well. Of course I suppose if someone else wrote it for him, technically he would be telling the truth if he stated that he never wrote the manuscript - or using semantics, he could have said he never wrote THAT manuscript implying that someone had indeed corrupted the one he HAD written.

As usual with all things dutcfhman, too many questions and WAYYYYYYY too few answers.

 

[Cubfan64]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Oro - I completely agree with you that the Holme's Manuscript reads exactly like a fictional story as written by a third party. It has no comparison to a will at all in my opinion.

BB's theory jumps to all sorts of conclusions based on a pretty flimsy theory imho.

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Cub,

Thats what i think happened as well. I believe Dick told Brownie and, Brownie told Clay. (The "version" that Clay tells)

I believe the the way Clay tells the story is pretty much all there should be to the manuscript. Someone else added the "fluff" and that is why i believe Brownie "disowned" it.

Now, i do stick to my other theory that Dick Holmes made it (Clays version) all up. (Based on my "confession" theory) I believe Dick lied to Brownie, as well as everyone else to cover his a$$.

Thanks,
Travis

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Hello,

I am not defending Double B by any means but i think SOME of his theory may be easier to swallow if he would have called it a "confession" instead of a "Will".

I dont believe thats how it happened no matter what you call it but, who knows?

Thanks,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Hello,

From Glovers "Part 2 The Holmes Manuscript"

In the Introduction it says:
"Interviews with Brownies family have revealed that not only did Brownie talk to them of the Manuscript and, not only does the family STILL HAVE Brownies copies of the Manuscript, they also remember Brownie walking around dictating PARTS of the manuscript to a typist at their kitchen table".

Joe pointed out in another post that the family may have said all of that because they were interested in any money that could have been made from it and that it may not be true. That very well could be true but, the part about the family still having Brownies copies makes it hard for me to believe that Brownie had nothing to do with it. If its pretty convincing that Clay, his friend, said he didnt write it, couldnt it be equally as convincing that his family said he did? (I dont know either way, just posing a question)

Then you can "throw in" the story from Barry Storm called "Bonanza of the Lost Dutchman", which has a few things matching the manuscript in my opinion.

Maybe Brownie "sold" the story to Storm at one time? Maybe Brownie had made a deal with Storm and COULDNT sell his account? Maybe he just didnt want to be associated with Storm for fear of ridicule? Maybe Brownies "helper" with the manuscript took too many "liberties" with the story and "took" some things from Storms story and thats why Brownie didnt want to associate with it?

Joe said he is friends with Glover. Maybe Glover has told Joe something thats not in his book that pertains to Brownies family knowing about the Manuscript?

Thanks,
Travis

Travis,

Dr. Glover and I have discussed many of these issues over the years. He knows my doubts about the Waltz deathbed "quotes". More than doubts, I believed them to be complete fiction. While I still believe they are fiction, for the most part, complete fiction does not fit the bill for me now.

Waltz sealing the mine, as described, was a huge obstacle for me. In the last few years, I learned that the pit mine was sealed when it was first located. It's possible that Waltz managed to say that he had sealed the mine. Holmes may have been pressuring the old man as he lay dying but that, along with just about everything else from the Jacob Waltz saga is conjecture.

I believe that all of you may be right, and your conclusions are very close to my own. It's possible that Brownie told the truth when he said he did not write the manuscript. It's possible he told the truth when he said he had never seen it. That does not mean that he didn't provide any input into the manuscript. I will go along with Thomas' conclusions in that regard.

There are many places in the manuscript where Thomas provides his personal feeling, doubts and strong beliefs. If you go with those passages, you will come to your own conclusion as to his leaving anything out
of the account......on purpose.

IMHO, his book remains at the top of the LDM food chain.

Joe

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,

Last night I pulled out Glovers "Part 2" and focused mainly on his "personal passages". I still wasnt able to come across anything that made me think Glover himself thought Brownie didnt have something to do with the Manuscript. (As Glover writes in his "Introduction")

I remember you (I think it was you) posting before about Glover leaving out the part where Brownie supposedly had found the "3 water tanks". Glovers book says Brownie never found them.

One thing that i had "missed" before was the part where Glover is talking about the "directions" and says something like "The Manuscript says to Go to First Water, and we know this isnt what Waltz said" (something like that)

Who's the "we" that Glover is referring to? I have never read anything about that other than his book. Is that "secret" information, or is it public knowledge that i just havent run across yet?

I dont disagree about Glovers book being valuable, and recommend it to anyone looking into the Lost Dutchman. For my own personal reasons though, I believe Corbins Bible is far above anything else i have come across on the subject. Sure there could have been a few more things in it that, in my opinion, would have made it the true "Bible" on the subject but, compared to anything else, i believe its far superior. Before i start any arguements I realize some people believe that some of the subject matter in the Bible is false (no fault of Helens) but, I personally dont believe this to be the case. I think the information is sound, it has just been misinterpreted. (That or the "sources" were questionable and this put people "off" to the information, which i still believe is "sound")

Thanks again,
Travis

 

[BILL96]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

I have mentioned this before on another thread but when your talking about "directions" this is how I read it.
That manuscript could have been written by Walter Noble Burns or Stewart Lake, it is just to "colorful". Here are just a couple of thing that do not make sence to me.
1. The incident of Holmes following Waltz into the mountains and being caught.
Page 38, conversation between Holmes and Mcfall.
"Jake Waltz has left", Mcfall answered. " gone about an hour" "which direction did he go?" Southeast toward the river". (To me this implies that he started out above Phoneix)
Page 39, The first night after the departure from Phoenix ,Waltz camped on the Verde River about two miles north of the place where Granite Reef diversion dam now stands.

This is still heading southeast and a good distance from the the Salt river and it wasn't until the next day that Waltz crossed onto the south side of the Salt river. The whole description makes it sould like Waltz did not leave from Phoneix but from some place much further north and followed the Verde river down to the Salt but the story "implies" that that Waltz left from Phoenix.

2. Waltz describes the killing of the Mexicans Page 53. "I watched them closely. One of them went up to the mine to put some tools away as they were ready to break camp and go to Ft McDowell".
Why would the three Mexican miners want to travel north all the way up to Ft McDowell?
Page 54, after he killed the miners he describes " I buried the bodies close to their camp,then took their outfit and went on to Ft Mcdowell. I stayed there a few days and then came down to Phoneix"
If you look on a map Ft McDowell is quite a ways north of Phoneix, does this sound like the mine really is on the north side of the Salt river? if not then it sure is a lot of out of the way traveling.
His descriptions all seem to be coming and going from the north, crossing the salt river and going down into Phoneix from the north.
Page 58, Waltz says "my last few trips were made by way of the Salt river, traveling up to Monroy's
ranch and taking one o the old government trails which crossed the river at that point and the following into the Superstitions".
Now once he is dead Julia and Rhiney head straight east?.

Bill

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Bill,

I had put in another post that i dont believe for one minute that the dying Waltz had enough time to tell Dick the entire story as it appears in the Manuscript. That is unless Julia went, on foot, to Wickenburg to get the Doctor!

But, if you take only the italicized words (In Corbins Bible) and write those words out on a piece of paper, then i could believe that Waltz told Dick THAT information in a short amount of time. If you should choose to do this, like i did, you will probably see that this information really wouldnt take to long to "get out" if you were dying.

I also have my own theory about Waltz giving the directions to Holmes with the stipulation that he would SHARE the mine with Julia, Rhiney, and Waltz' sister. If you care to read that, the post is called "Waltz confession to Holmes".

I believe Dick did follow Waltz into the Mountains but, i dont believe the "account" in the Manuscript is accurate. The main reason I believe Dick did follow Waltz is because of the area Holmes went to "search" right after Waltz died. It is my opinion that Dick tried to take a "short cut" by going to the spot he followed Waltz to and try to figure it out from there. This, in my opinion, is the main reason Holmes was never able to find the Mine. He didnt follow the directions. (That or the directions in the Manuscript are false, which i dont believe they are)

In my opinion, all of this could explain the "inaccuracies" you have pointed out in the Manuscript. All but the directions were simply "made up" either by Dick or someone else. (I believe Dick made it up)

Thanks,
Travis

 

[Oroblanco]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Just an observation, on an issue that may be causing some problems in the search.

I believe that Waltz knew more than one way to get to the mine. In fact it would make sense NOT to use the same route every time, so that in case anyone were trailing him, they could not make out a pattern of travel. If this belief is correct, <that Waltz knew and used several different ways to get to the mine> then the over 100 clues may not all apply to the same route. Thus, there could be a "cow barn" on one route, a "rock face" on another, a view of Four Peaks on another etc. For a searcher trying to fit all of the clues to one route, it becomes impossible since they were not intended to describe one route.

We could also note that Julia went to Hog canyon on the south side on her first attempt to go to the mine but later tried entering the Superstitions via the north side. This indicates (to me) that there must be more than one way to get to the mine, with a different set of directions to each.

Oroblanco

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Oro,

I disagree. I think Waltz had one MAIN way that he went to the mine. I believe he had several ways he LEFT the mine. If the story is true that Dick followed him, i believe Waltz knew this and lead him "astray" on purpose. (Which, in my opinion, is why Dick went straight to that area)

Speaking about my own "area", 97% of the "clues" match up. I believe one thing "missing" is if Waltz had a "second camp", a mile away from the mine. Finding this 2nd camp hasnt been a priority yet for obvious reasons. The other 2% i havent located yet are the "tunnel" and the "mine" itself. Weather is the only reason i havent proved or disproved my theory. I hope to very soon though.

I discussed this with Joe before and I dont believe Hog Canyon is where they went in first. Yes, Ely says its the first place HE saw them but, Tom K has an article that supposedly quotes Herman as saying they went in at the Northwestern end and, he (Herman) believed they camped that first night in Boulder Canyon. (Remember, Herman wasnt familiar with the mountains yet) That got some arguements but, I believe this is the "real" story. If it is, then they were "trying" to follow the directions. (At least the ones in Corbins Bible, in my opinion)

Thanks,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Oro,

I disagree. I think Waltz had one MAIN way that he went to the mine. I believe he had several ways he LEFT the mine. If the story is true that Dick followed him, i believe Waltz knew this and lead him "astray" on purpose. (Which, in my opinion, is why Dick went straight to that area)

Speaking about my own "area", 97% of the "clues" match up. I believe one thing "missing" is if Waltz had a "second camp", a mile away from the mine. Finding this 2nd camp hasnt been a priority yet for obvious reasons. The other 2% i havent located yet are the "tunnel" and the "mine" itself. Weather is the only reason i havent proved or disproved my theory. I hope to very soon though.

I discussed this with Joe before and I dont believe Hog Canyon is where they went in first. Yes, Ely says its the first place HE saw them but, Tom K has an article that supposedly quotes Herman as saying they went in at the Northwestern end and, he (Herman) believed they camped that first night in Boulder Canyon. (Remember, Herman wasnt familiar with the mountains yet) That got some arguements but, I believe this is the "real" story. If it is, then they were "trying" to follow the directions. (At least the ones in Corbins Bible, in my opinion)

Thanks,
Travis

Travis,

Herman, like Ely, didn't arrive in Arizona until later. It was Bark that found Julia and Rhiney camped at what must have surely been Hog Canyon. Most of us know this history by heart......excuse the pun.

There were only the two of them on that first trip.

Joe

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,

My mistake, it was Bark. (Told you i was a newbie!)

You may be correct but, that article sure says the story another way. Whether Tom was mistaken or not, i dont know. That article states that Herman said it was the first trip and, you are the one always saying to stick with the closest sources so, Herman would be one of them in my opinion, not Bark (Or Ely for that matter). Isnt it also true that Julia didnt "head out" to the mountains for quite awhile? Like Summer of 1892? Couldnt that have given Herman and Pete enough time to get to Phoenix? Maybe Julia was waiting for them?

I dont know if you missed it, or dont want to answer but, i asked some questions in an earlier post about Glover. If you get a chance, i would like to get some answers either way, if you are willing or know.

Thanks,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

Yes that's what I say. Herman was not there for their first trips. He said a number of things that wern't true. I call it the "Hell I Was There Syndrome".

If Herman's the source you want to use, no arguement from me.

Joe

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,

Fair enough. I didnt realize Herman was known for that and, I havent come across the information yet to "prove" it to me. Lucky for me, I dont like to discount any source, so there are more to go by. I guess in reality, it probably doesnt matter where they started, they didnt find it.

But...

Lets say that Julia and Rhiney did start in Hog Canyon by themselves. Then, Herman arrives, gets the "directions/Clues" left by Waltz, and THEN they go in from the Northwestern end. Would that be a reasonable theory? That would give some "substance" to the directions left in Corbins Bible wouldnt it? That would mean when Herman heard/read that Waltz went in from the Northwestern end, thats where he (Herman) decided they would go. That doesnt mean Herman was lying, he really did make HIS first trip in from the Northwest.

Still no word on the Glover questions huh?

Thanks,
Travis

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,

I guess my last post made too much sense huh? Obviously you dont want to answer the Glover questions i had either?

I thought we were back to being civil as long as we showed "respect"? The lack of a response isnt showing any, in my opinion.

Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

Thought I had answered your questions as best I could. Did you want me to contact Thomas for something specific? He has a web site, so you could just send your questions directly to him.

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Joe,

Actually no, you didnt answer my last question about Glover at all. If you dont know, thats fine, just say that. You wont "lose face" in my opinion if you actually dont know something. You know a lot more about the history than i do!

I thought when you "chimed" back in on this post you were wanting to discuss the topic but, after reading back over your post it seems you just came over to "correct" me on my mistake. Fair enough Dude.

thanks,
Travis

 

[cactusjumper]

Re: Holmes' "Missing" directions

Travis,

Sorry, I'm getting forgetful. As I recall, without going back and reading through your posts, you asked a number of questions. Give me the specific question you are interested in, and I will be happy to get in touch with Thomas, although you could just visit his website and ask him yourself.

Starting a dialog with Dr. Glover is a very smart thing for someone new to Dutch hunting to do. Why go through a third party?

If you are asking for an assumption on my part, I may not have a satisfactory answer. If you are asking about facts, I may have the answer. I would assume that when Thomas says "we", that he is talking about the general consensus of people he has talked to.

He has more sources than most people in the business, so he may be collectively bunching many of them in "we". He is the lone writer of his books, which is reflected in the title pages of his books. He also has those many sources who have contributed to his "facts".

I will do what I can to answer your questions, but if I have to go to Thomas, it may take some time to get your reply. He is working on another project right now.

Joe