The Answer Rest Here

[TN_Guest1523]

"Scoop", YOUR focus is on the Lafitte Memiors, and the ONLY "link" with the Beale PAPERS, are the names...? HA! MANY believe, think, "know" the LM is FAKE, written in the late 1940's. Names COULD have been taken from the Beale PAPERS of 1885... dunno.

Just the same people that think The Beale Papers to be fake right.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[bigscoop]

First, the author, James Beverly Ward, as confirmed by is daughter, Adeline Ward McVeigh, did NOT include exact information from the fraudulent Laflin Lafitte memoirs. That is an assumption on your part.
Secondly, how can you validate the accuracy of the memoirs which are considered a forgery.
I may have no "first hand knowledge", but neither do you.
Remember, a house of cards built with aces back to back is still subject to collapse.

The summation you present is, once again, "based on speculatory assumptions" without any first hand knowledge, so allow me to clear some things up for you, again. First, the memoirs.

You keep referencing the subject of forgery which has never been clearly determined, your summation being based on circumstances that are not conclusive and still debated today. What you fail to understand in your assumption is that the information within that text, regardless of author, has never been established to be inaccurate despite efforts to do so. Just as with the Beale Pamphlet "the actual author" has been your only focus and the sole focus of these "non-conclusive" references. There have been all kinds of forgeries, this even including documents such as the DOI, forgeries, yes, but also accurate down to the each and every word. This is why I have requested that you actually speak to live bodies and actually research these findings and that you ask the right questions. Until you do you are trying to hold debate/protest on subjects that are only at the sole mercy of your personal assumptions and blind speculations.

Two, you keep referencing the interview of Adeline Ward McVeigh and the statement that she only believed her father to be the author, again, a non-conclusive response/reply to the question asked. Clearly she wasn't sure but only assuming, just as you are now. If Adeline Ward McVeigh said that she personally believed her father to be Jesus would you likewise be so easily convinced? Adeline Ward McVeigh could provide no evidence to support her claim, a claim that she wasn't all that certain of herself, so why are you allowing that uncertain claim to hold so much absolute water? I know why, as do you. A very odd circumstance for someone who demands such absolute clarity, don't you think?

Your dilemma is this, how, in 1885, did your author know about those same distributions in the LM when that information wasn't public until the 1940's? Very clearly, he did know about them, right down to the dates of deposit.

 

[bigscoop]

"Scoop", YOUR focus is on the Lafitte Memiors, and the ONLY "link" with the Beale PAPERS, are the names...? HA! MANY believe, think, "know" the LM is FAKE, written in the late 1940's. Names COULD have been taken from the Beale PAPERS of 1885... dunno.

I don't think you can find a single authority on the subject who can establish that the information within the LM is inaccurate, and in fact, I know several who believe the LM to be a forgery who will openly tell you that despite their believing the LM to be a forgery they still can't explain many of the accuracies within. "The sole source of evidence in regard to the LM being a forgery has been the handwriting evidence, evidence that for many reasons, can't be taken as conclusive proof that the information within is inaccurate."

 

[ECS]

A good forger does his research so his forgery will be perceived as authentic.

 

[bigscoop]

A good forger does his research so his forgery will be perceived as authentic.

Exactly. So how did your author know of those same distributions in the LM when that information wasn't made public until the 1940's?

As a matter of record a "Thomas J. Beale", an alderman, existed in "Jackson Ward, Richmond, Virginia" in 1884, just one year prior to the publication of the "Beale Papers" in which the main character of that publication was a "Thomas J. Beale" and a major point of focus in that publication was "Richmond, Virginia." Ironically, the holder of the copyright for this publication was named, Ward, and one of it's referenced personalities was named, Jackson. Probably no connections here at all but it might be worth looking into anyway?

 

[ECS]

Just the same people that think The Beale Papers to be fake right.

Well with Bs's theory of a corporate cabal that he derived from the highly questionable Lafitte memoirs by Laflin, the story in the Beale Papers would be considered a work of fiction.

 

[bigscoop]

Well with Bs's theory of a corporate cabal that he derived from the highly questionable Late memoirs by Laflin, the story in the Beale Papers would be considered a work of fiction.

Allow me to accurately rewrite this summation for you;
"Well with Bs's theory of a corporate cabal that he derived from the comparable and accurate information contained in both the highly questionable Late memoirs and the Beale publication, I would personally still consider the Beale Papers to be a work of fiction."

 

[ECS]

You have presented 1820's historical events that are NOT mentioned in the Beale Papers, and now present a contemporary Thomas J Beale to the pamphlet publish date, with nebulous connection of Jackson Ward in Richmond.
You must have a very different definition of fiction.

 

[bigscoop]

You have presented 1820's historical events that are NOT mentioned in the Beale Papers, and now present a contemporary Thomas J Beale to the pamphlet publish date, with nebulous connection of Jackson Ward in Richmond.
You must have a very different definition of fiction.

Well, you could always resort to researching the evidence and information provided to discover for yourself why I'm presenting these summations. That might be one pro-active and possible productive course of action that you could take. Otherwise you can only speculate the reasons for my reasons and personal summations. Yes?

For instance, maybe you could start here:

As a matter of record a "Thomas J. Beale", an alderman, existed in "Jackson Ward, Richmond, Virginia" in 1884, just one year prior to the publication of the "Beale Papers" in which the main character of that publication was a "Thomas J. Beale" and a major point of focus in that publication was "Richmond, Virginia." Ironically, the holder of the copyright for this publication was named, Ward, and one of it's referenced personalities was named, Jackson. Probably no connections here at all but it might be worth your looking into anyway?

What was that Sherlock quote you're always applying, something about the obvious? Do you think he only applied that to his fictional character or only when his current mystery found it convenient to do so? I wonder what he might say about the above info?

 

[ECS]

...
As a matter of record a "Thomas J. Beale", an alderman, existed in "Jackson Ward, Richmond, Virginia" in 1884, just one year prior to the publication of the "Beale Papers" in which the main character of that publication was a "Thomas J. Beale" and a major point of focus in that publication was "Richmond, Virginia." Ironically, the holder of the copyright for this publication was named, Ward, and one of it's referenced personalities was named, Jackson. Probably no connections here at all but it might be worth your looking into anyway?...

So, are you saying that the Beale named was employed as a fictional character in the job pamphlet?

 

[bigscoop]

So, are you saying that the Beale named was employed as a fictional character in the job pamphlet?

No....you're the only one who is continually applying such logic and making that claim. You see, here's how it would work, if the Thomas J. Beale of Richmond was the same Thomas J. Beale of the Beale papers then he wasn't a fictional character at all. Do I really have to explain this rather simple concept to you? But of course not. Obviously your personal desire that the story remain a complete work of fiction is the central focus and goal of your continued posting. "Clay, Coles, Witcher, Jackson, and Chief Justice Marshall..."

"Thomas J. Beale" of the Beale Papers, "Thomas J. Beale" of "Richmond", the same city our author had important business affairs.

Two chronological sources of wealth that share the same dates, the same promise of distribution. How did your author know about all of this? Not going to find those answers at either end of your two mandated extremes.

 

[ECS]

...

As a matter of record a "Thomas J. Beale", an alderman, existed in "Jackson Ward, Richmond, Virginia" in 1884, just one year prior to the publication of the "Beale Papers" in which the main character of that publication was a "Thomas J. Beale" and a major point of focus in that publication was "Richmond, Virginia." Ironically, the holder of the copyright for this publication was named, Ward, and one of it's referenced personalities was named, Jackson. Probably no connections here at all...

Probably not.
Is this the Thomas J Beale of Ward's dime novel or the 1820's Thomas J Beale, runner for Lafitte's corporation cabal of international bankers, businessmen, and investors?

 

[ECS]

...
Two chronological sources of wealth that share the same dates, the same promise of distribution...

One source is from the disputed authenticity of the Laflin Lafitte memoirs to prove the other from the Beale Papers job pamphlet.
Speculation to fit a pet theory is not hard evidence, my friend.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

Probably not.
Is this the Thomas J Beale of Ward's dime novel or the 1820's Thomas J Beale, runner for Lafitte's corporation cabal of international bankers, businessmen, and investors?

The Second Bank of the United States was established in 1816, and lost its authority to be the central bank of the U.S. twenty years later under President Jackson when its charter expired. Both banks were based upon the Bank of England. Ultimately, a third national bank, known as the Federal Reserve, was established in 1913 and still exists to this day.

 

[TN_Guest1523]

The Second Bank of the United States was established in 1816, and lost its authority to be the central bank of the U.S. twenty years later under President Jackson when its charter expired. Both banks were based upon the Bank of England. Ultimately, a third national bank, known as the Federal Reserve, was established in 1913 and still exists to this day.

I hope this is not the bank you guys are talking about.

 

[bigscoop]

I hope this is not the bank you guys are talking about.

When we talk about this bank, or corporation, we have to keep in mind that it was just an existing circumstance, or tool, that made a lot of things more accessible, or manageable.

 

[bigscoop]

One source is from the disputed authenticity of the Laflin Lafitte memoirs to prove the other from the Beale Papers job pamphlet.
Speculation to fit a pet theory is not hard evidence, my friend.

All of the required connections are absolutely there if only you take the time to start investigating the matter for yourself. I can't make you do this but until you do you can't even begin to debate these claims.

 

[bigscoop]

The Second Bank of the United States was established in 1816, and lost its authority to be the central bank of the U.S. twenty years later under President Jackson when its charter expired. Both banks were based upon the Bank of England. Ultimately, a third national bank, known as the Federal Reserve, was established in 1913 and still exists to this day.

Note the differences of operation and oversight between the first and second bank and that of the federal reserve. Also, I might suggest, just to help you grab a better understanding of the other political issue at hand concerning these banks, that you research Thomas Hart Benton, or "old Bullion" as he was called. also take notice of who he was related to and where and when he relocated. The issue was a huge issue. This, coupled with other reasons, is why your author made reference to the party's distrust of banks.

 

[ECS]

... I might suggest, just to help you grab a better understanding of the other political issue at hand concerning these banks, that you research Thomas Hart Benton, or "old Bullion" as he was called. also take notice of who he was related to and where and when he relocated. The issue was a huge issue. This, coupled with other reasons, is why your author made reference to the party's distrust of banks...

Known for his heated temper, "Old Bullion" preferred hard currency, opposed the Second Bank of he US, and was fond of duels, even putting a round in Andrew Jackson. John C Fremont was Benton's son-in-law.
Another nebulous connection to the Beale Papers.

 

[bigscoop]

Known for his heated temper, "Old Bullion" preferred hard currency, opposed the Second Bank of he US, and was fond of duels, even putting a round in Andrew Jackson. John C Fremont was Benton's son-in-law.
Another nebulous connection to the Beale Papers.

Some will never know, others will, this all being dependent upon their own personal desire to find out. Or, they can spend this same amount of time continuing to attempt to argue points they personally know nothing or very little about. One is a pro-active response, the other is just wasted breath and wasted time with little to no impact either way.