Rebel - KGC
Gold Member
- Jun 15, 2007
- 21,663
- 14,726
WHO CARES!Anyone can with a genealogy search, and that has been presented on another thread.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
WHO CARES!Anyone can with a genealogy search, and that has been presented on another thread.
The question being asked about Mr Otey's iron box with that torn slip of handwritten random upon it, is WHY did George L Hart have it shown to Pauline Innis?This thread started with the Iron Box, it was mentioned in some accounts and not in others, this is not a proof of validity or not, some felt the box was important and others did not...
It may well be, that the pages of Ciphers Were 8 sheets of paper... dunno. The torn pieces of paper (NUMBERS), DID appear to be torn, as to match each other, as "A CODE". It is on pg. 222 of the GOLD Cover paper back, GOLD IN THE BLUE RIDGE by P.B. & Walter Innis... GET IT!The question being asked about Mr Otey's iron box with that torn slip of handwritten random upon it, is WHY did George L Hart have it shown to Pauline Innis?
Was this iron box represented as THE BEALE iron box?
How can that torn slip of paper represent the 3 pages of ciphers mentioned in the Beale Papers or the 8 sheets of ciphers that N H Hazelwood had Clayton Hart copy?
NOTHING about a Iron Box......but was that the Otey iron box or another...Just saying.
That's because there's absolutely no evidence whatsoever that there ever was a box.
AH SO! "Just Saying" stated that he DID find an Iron Box that fell apart on him in PA... YEARS, ago! Was even on TV!.and that is the point being made.
James Beverly Ward NEVER saw the actual box or ciphers or the Beale letters to Morriss according to the narrative text- he was provided with a finished manuscript by the "unknown author" which mentioned the iron box and ciphers.
The existence of the iron box and ciphers is solely based on the word of the "unknown author" as stated in the manuscript he presented to Ward, and the entire Beale treasure story is based on the existence of these letters and the iron box ciphers.
There is no collaborating evidence contemporary with the events in the "Beale letters" or during the "2nd year of the Confederate War" that can confirm the existence of this iron box or ciphers which makes Mr Otey's iron box with torn numbers paper highly suspect as being the Beale iron box of the story.
.and that is the point being made.
James Beverly Ward NEVER saw the actual box or ciphers or the Beale letters to Morriss according to the narrative text- he was provided with a finished manuscript by the "unknown author" which mentioned the iron box and ciphers.
The existence of the iron box and ciphers is solely based on the word of the "unknown author" as stated in the manuscript he presented to Ward, and the entire Beale treasure story is based on the existence of these letters and the iron box ciphers.
There is no collaborating evidence contemporary with the events in the "Beale letters" or during the "2nd year of the Confederate War" that can confirm the existence of this iron box or ciphers which makes Mr Otey's iron box with torn numbers paper highly suspect as being the Beale iron box of the story.
As stated in Pauline B Innis's obituary, the Right Rev Lawrence E Luscombe, former Primus of the Episcopal Church of Scotland, as first cousin, was her closest relative.While up there with her husband, she most likely contacted her next of kin, the Harts.
I know they were kin but I do not have the records to verify.
As stated in Pauline B Innis's obituary, the Right Rev Lawrence E Luscombe, former Primus of the Episcopal Church of Scotland, as first cousin, was her closest relative.
The Right Rev Luscombe traveled from Scotland to preside at her funeral in Washington DC.
That Innis was "next to kin" to the Harts is at best an assumption that is "alleged" and "surmised" as true, but most likely force fitted speculation lacking any verifying records.
From what you wrote, it seems that Pauline Innis never actually stated that the iron box was in her possession.I telephoned Pauline one night inquiring about the two small pieces of paper that were said to have come from the iron box. I asked her was she sure that that was all that was contained in the iron box. These are her exact words, "Give me a couple of days. I will look and I will get back to you." I asked if it was o.k. I would telephone her back after a couple of days. She said, "That would be fine." So I let it go about a week. Not wanting to over stay my welcome. I telephoned her and asked her bluntly about the iron box. I said, "Pauline was that all that was in the iron box." She replied, "Yes, that was all." Now if she did not have the iron box, why would she have to look for it to see if that was all that was contained in it. I assure you Pauline had the Otey iron box from Roanoke, Virginia, that George Hart told her about in her "Gold" Book.
From what you wrote, it seems that Pauline Innis never actually stated that the iron box was in her possession.
"I will look and I will get back to you" could mean she had to consult her notes concerning the iron box and its contents.
There is no mention of Mr Otey giving the iron box and contents to Pauline Innis, only that she was shown the box.
Without personally observing the "Otey iron box from Roanoke, Virginia" in Pauline Innis's possession, one can not "assure" that it was in her possession from a telephone call.