bigscoop
Gold Member
- Jun 4, 2010
- 13,535
- 9,072
- Detector(s) used
- Older blue Excal with full mods, Equinox 800.
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Look, I'm going to toss this out here for those who desire to entertain it, but basically it relates to all of the ongoing arguments and debates about Thomas Beale, Sr., Jr., etc. So here goes;
If we strip the narration down to the bare bones then the entire narration is basically about one man and his money, this being a Thomas Beale. Now we know that this money was placed in some sort of a trust with a ten-year term, however, we have no idea how this trust was designed, and that's unfortunate. But basically, we do know that Morriss was acting as executor, or perhaps a third independent party representing this trust, if his services were so required. And this is all we know.
As to Beale, it really has no bearing when this man died in regards to the trust as long as there was some beneficiary in place in his stay, so let's assume this was Jr. But here's the thing in all of this, both of these men were clearly dead before the lapse of that ten-year term so how can a trust pay out to benefactors if there are no remaining benefactors, or verified heirs?
So I think the ensuing debates and arguments over who died when really don't matter at all. What I suggest does matter is the following, and that is, who, in 1885, would have felt as though they were deserving?
At no time in the pamphlet does the author ever offer hunt as to the identities of the other men who had allegedly accompanied Beale to the Morriss establishment, even though the author makes perfectly clear that Morriss knew who they were, even knew where they lived. I submit to you now that this failure to identify those men wasn't by error but rather this was with reason, as to not confuse who the story was about, Thomas J. Beale, and also possibly not to incriminate those men and their families, all of this simply included to further induce someone with the correct information being sought to step forward.
So who was the author? Perhaps someone privileged to the secret that had been confined to a small circle of family and one true friend, this friend not being Ward, but rather Morriss. Strange that the author references the details of how Morriss and his wife had allowed a boarder to stay with them for a number of years with no remuneration at all. That folks, is a pretty darn good friend.
The author had important business affairs in Richmond, Thomas J. Beale lived in Richmond, parents unknown. Hard to claim rights to a trust if you can't prove that you're an heir. Now consider the described Thomas J. Beale's complexion, etc. The Thomas J. Beale in Richmond was a free man of color. In 1862 did Morriss finally tell him about his father and the trust? This, given his relationship to Morriss, would also explain Ward as the chosen agent.
If we strip the narration down to the bare bones then the entire narration is basically about one man and his money, this being a Thomas Beale. Now we know that this money was placed in some sort of a trust with a ten-year term, however, we have no idea how this trust was designed, and that's unfortunate. But basically, we do know that Morriss was acting as executor, or perhaps a third independent party representing this trust, if his services were so required. And this is all we know.
As to Beale, it really has no bearing when this man died in regards to the trust as long as there was some beneficiary in place in his stay, so let's assume this was Jr. But here's the thing in all of this, both of these men were clearly dead before the lapse of that ten-year term so how can a trust pay out to benefactors if there are no remaining benefactors, or verified heirs?
So I think the ensuing debates and arguments over who died when really don't matter at all. What I suggest does matter is the following, and that is, who, in 1885, would have felt as though they were deserving?
At no time in the pamphlet does the author ever offer hunt as to the identities of the other men who had allegedly accompanied Beale to the Morriss establishment, even though the author makes perfectly clear that Morriss knew who they were, even knew where they lived. I submit to you now that this failure to identify those men wasn't by error but rather this was with reason, as to not confuse who the story was about, Thomas J. Beale, and also possibly not to incriminate those men and their families, all of this simply included to further induce someone with the correct information being sought to step forward.
So who was the author? Perhaps someone privileged to the secret that had been confined to a small circle of family and one true friend, this friend not being Ward, but rather Morriss. Strange that the author references the details of how Morriss and his wife had allowed a boarder to stay with them for a number of years with no remuneration at all. That folks, is a pretty darn good friend.
The author had important business affairs in Richmond, Thomas J. Beale lived in Richmond, parents unknown. Hard to claim rights to a trust if you can't prove that you're an heir. Now consider the described Thomas J. Beale's complexion, etc. The Thomas J. Beale in Richmond was a free man of color. In 1862 did Morriss finally tell him about his father and the trust? This, given his relationship to Morriss, would also explain Ward as the chosen agent.
Amazon Forum Fav 👍
Last edited:
Face it, accept it, the moment Beale allegedly deposited funds and placed it in the care of Morriss that money was in a trust. You don't have to like it, but come on man, to even attempt to argue the notion?
