Where did this Thomas J. Beale of Richmond come from?
Why, after endless gemological searches regarding the name/families Beale is there never any references to him?
He didn't just hatch to become a familiar and respected resident and alderman within a certain district in the city of Richmond who apparently had no brothers, sisters, ants, uncles, cousins, grandparents, parents, mother in laws, father in laws, etc., etc. So where did he come from in the families Beale?
A while back I posed the question; “When Thomas Beale removed to New Orleans did he take his wife?” And to this same question let's apply it to Jr. as well? The Thomas J. Beale of Richmond, as best we can determine, was born in 1823 with no record of who his parents were, there is no route to any reference of him in any Beale family tree. So, how can this be? Are we to assume with all of the research that has ever been conducting into this family name that an entire branch of Beales has been completely missed and undiscovered? At this present date I'd say it's not very likely at all, if there is even any chance of that at all. So how could he still exist, as we can verify and confirm that he did “without a single trace?”
During the era it was quite common for children to be born out of wedlock, many of these children even being cared for by their biological fathers even though they were never entered into the existing family. The adopting of the biological father's name was also quite common, and something else that was also quite common, the adopting of a middle initial so that this individual's identity would be distinguishable from those of the same first and last name. Many, many, of these children were never entered into or traditionally accepted into their biological father's family linage. This isn't anything new to any of us as we can all easily reference many examples of this same type thing.
Our author claims that it was during the second year of the Civil War that he first learned of the details that was destined to make someone rich. It is also told in the narration that Morriss and his wife had allowed an unnamed individual to live in their domicile for a number of years without any recuperation at all. Why was this detail important to the narration? Why was the referencing of the second year of the civil war important to the narration? Why do the details of the adventure end in 1823?
Thomas J. Beale of Richmond was born in 1823, the narration was published in 1885, the difference being 62, or the exact same year of the second year of the civil war. Coincidence? Perhaps. Perhaps not? And “if” the Thomas J. Beale of Richmond was that man that Morriss and his wife had allowed to live in their domicile for a number of years, and “if” this same T.J. Beale of Richmond had been the source of the narration, as I suspect he possibly was, then how might this equate to the statement that the secret had been confined to” immediate family and one close and trusted friend?” Was “the family” actually Beale and the close and trusted friend Morriss, and the real secret being that of the illegitimate son T.J. Beale of Richmond? Is this the “important business affairs in Richmond” that the author made sure to reference just as he is allegedly learning the T.J. Beale secret from Morriss?
And yes, there is more, but I'm holding onto that for now until I can actually verify a few things.One thing I will add, however, is this; destined to make someone rich, in 1885, if there was any fortune in the Beale estate still remaining then who stood to gain if only that fortune could be found? Something to consider, for sure.
This is what I do. I pick things apart piece by piece in search of "reasonable possibilities" and then I present them for those who may wish to investigate these possibilities further for themselves.
However, and since you asked, just keep in mind that research provides that such a scenario is possible. 
