I didn't proof read any of this, but.....here you go;
There are many elements to the story that project a certain amount of unspoken knowledge in regards to the presented details in the narration. Many of these elements have been posted and discussed in these forums, often in great length. But let us focus on just one of these elements for the time being, this being the fact that the author claims he that was making his story public with hope of, “bringing to light the missing paper.”
Now obviously this begs the question, “what missing paper?” I mean according to the alleged letters and such the was to be “a key” delivered to Morriss that would be required to gain full meaning of the coded ciphers , yet in his narration the author already presents a key, a key he claims that unlocked the meaning to C2.
As the story progresses we are told of the other two still unsolved ciphers, one offering the location of a fabulous treasure and the other providing the names of the certain parties, etc. But wait, the author already has the key so why doesn't said key work for the other two ciphers? The alleged Beale letter specifically says “key” in singular form, and not “keys” in a plural form. Also, according to the alleged details offered in the narration, there were only to be three ciphers, one detailing the contents of the alleged vault, one detailing the location of the alleged vault, and one offering the location of the parties. So if the author already has the key and all of the ciphers then what is this other “missing piece of paper” all about and how does he know that it will appear as an “unintelligible” writing? Where, in the letters and the narration is all of this a part of the tale? Quite clearly, it isn't. So, how did the author know about this still missing piece of paper? Obviously he knew a lot more about these subjects then he entered in his “not so honest” narration.
Ok, if the author already possessed a certain amount of unspoken knowledge in regards to the ciphers and the missing paper that he is desiring to bring to light then obviously he must still require that missing piece of paper. Now here comes the really BIG question.....
Do you really think that this author, the holder of the only keys to an all-to promising fortune, is going to put into print the only thing that can hopefully draw that missing piece paper to him? I mean, if does this then he runs the risk of handing those original ciphers over to some unknown person who might possess that vital missing piece of paper that he still requires, thus completely cutting himself out of the picture altogether. On the other hand, if he truly possess the only copies of those ciphers then perhaps all he needs to do is to publish a closely related narration to the true events with the hope of drawing that unknown person with that missing paper to him, the ciphers in that publication being altered in such a way that said person could never apply them anyway.
Basically what you have here is exactly the same situation Beale had allegedly placed Morriss in, Morriss holding the ciphers and another person holding the required key, the only way the ciphers can be decoded is if both are eventually brought together in one place. This is “exactly” the same scenario that the author has described himself as being in, he has the ciphers and someone else completely unknown to him has the other required, “missing piece of paper.”
And if you were the only person planet who possessed the ciphers that promised the location of an immense amount of wealth then the last thing you would want to do is to attach your name and identity to those secret ciphers, this no doubt quite possibly being the equivalent of putting out a contract on your own life. Hence, if any of the above is accurate, this being the reason why the author elected to remove his name from the publication in favor of a trusted middleman, this being Ward. In this scenario the holder of the missing piece of paper would have to make contact with Ward who in turn passed the information onto the unknown author. In the end the “missing piece of paper” and the “original ciphers” can finally be brought together in a cautious and well-arranged manner.
And consider this as well. The key was said to be held in Saint Louis so why didn't the author go looking for his missing piece of paper in Saint Louis. Why did he elect to publish his narration only in the Lunchburg region? Is it possibly because he also had unspoken knowledge about the general location of that missing piece of paper? Most likely the answer is a resounding, yes.
