WARD BASED HIS STORY ON ORIGINAL "THE BEALE PAPERS" PUBLISHED 1850

[bigscoop]

bigscoop, you keep accusing people of changing things about the story, but didn't you change the story yourself, by saying the hunting party didn't really happen, but was a possible cover story for something else? Isn't that creating an entirely different tale? I tend to agree with that possibility, btw. No one is changing anything, just considering possibilities. If we don't consider possibilities, how will we ever find out anything? And judging by what I know of the past, I can tell you that alternate spellings of names is no great reason for concern.

I believe I've used "we" in a lot of those statements. And I believe I've allowed one basic change that I'm aware of and that being the possible alternate source and true cause.

And if you want to believe that the author made such a grave error in the spelling of the vital character's name then go ahead. But you still won't find a good suspect, just as the thousands of quality researchers before you have been unable to do.

Nothing new can be found unless we look in new places. Rehashing the same old dirt isn't going to bring about anything new because there's nothing new there left to be found. Ward, Hutter, etc., etc.,.....there's no skin left on these mauled bones.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[ECS]

... So which is it, dime novel or CSA coverup? ...

As far as a "good mix" of family sources, could be right, but still just another theory in the long list of theories...still nothing conclusive.

...it was either a simple dime novel or a U.S./French thing that actually took place in the era described.

A "good mix" of family sources that lived real history in that era,and in the case of William Clark,married into the extended family,made history in that era.
Baseing the US/French thing on "connexion",the fitting historical events to make the case,is a longer stretch than grabbing the "2nd year of the Confederate War" reference.
Is it possible that the French "connexion" could the copy of Vattles LAW OF NATIONS,given to CSA Major E S Hutter by CSA Sec of State Judah P Benjamin at Danville,April 1865?Vattles was used as a Confederate codebook,and was printed in both English and French,and the 1885 Beale Papers were published 20 years after the "Confederate War",and after the end of Reconstruction.
Now if a treasure still existed,the United States government would hold claim to any and all remaining assets of the Confederate treasury,but hold NO claim on a 1820's hunting party treasure.
Dime novel or coverup?Could be both.

 

[ECS]

...

Nothing new can be found unless we look in new places. Rehashing the same old dirt isn't going to bring about anything new because there's nothing new there left to be found. Ward, Hutter, etc., etc.,.....there's no skin left on these mauled bones.

The same can be stated about Vine & Olive,Champ d' Asile,Jean LaFitte,Lallemand,etc.The Beale treasure tale revolves around Bedford county,Virginia,and was for sale only in Lynchberg,20 years after the "Confederate War".The 1820 dates may well be a "red herring",for the uninformed concerning actual events of the "2nd year of the Confederate War"

 

[bigscoop]

Do you even know who was in Richmond during the second year of the confederate war? Are you aware that there exist "actual documents" alleging the very payoffs described in the Beale Papers? And last, are you aware that until the signing and ratification of Adam's Onis Treaty that famous Louisiana Purchase was left in dispute and without clear borders? Ironically, the dates of this historic and critical event correspond exactly with the dates offered in the Beale Pamphlet. So in essence, the Louisiana Purchase wasn't even complete and it's boundaries in the west completely uncertain until the ratification of the Adam's Onis Treaty. And as for the deposits in question, look really close as to when they were said to have been made.....how do those deposit dates correlate with the signing and ratification of that critical treaty? They were made like clockwork, very timely. This is all fact, not fiction and unfounded speculation. There wasn't even a defined west until the Adams Onis Treaty.

And yes, many of these key people were in Richmond and the Bedford region throughout the entire period, again, all documented. So I think one needs to be careful when throwing the word "uninformed" around. I'm well versed on the events of the civil war which is why I've discounted it as being even a remote possibility as to the source. You have to go beyond the interent and books to find accurate history, this means you have to spend countless hours in various archives and collections. You'd be surprised at what is out there. Having said all of this....Thomas Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase never even came to be realized until the Adam's Onis Treaty and this was achieved with the help of the French, French who were very well acquainted with Lynchburg, Richmond, and Bedford county. I'll bet you've never even seen the documents concerning Grandpa Risque and his association to these Frenchmen and various mining interest. But they are there and he was involved. This isn't "makeup", this is real documented history. Sorry it isn't consistent with all the local myth and lore.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Do you even know who was in Richmond during the second year of the confederate war? Are you aware that there exist "actual documents" alleging the very payoffs described in the Beale Papers? And last, are you aware that until the signing and ratification of Adam's Onis Treaty that famous Louisiana Purchase was left in dispute and without clear borders? Ironically, the dates of this historic and critical event correspond exactly with the dates offered in the Beale Pamphlet. So in essence, the Louisiana Purchase wasn't even complete and it's boundaries in the west completely uncertain until the ratification of the Adam's Onis Treaty. And as for the deposits in question, look really close as to when they were said to have been made.....how do those deposit dates correlate with the signing and ratification of that critical treaty? They were made like clockwork, very timely. This is all fact, not fiction and unfounded speculation. There wasn't even a defined west until the Adams Onis Treaty.

And yes, many of these key people were in Richmond and the Bedford region throughout the entire period, again, all documented. So I think one needs to be careful when throwing the word "uninformed" around. I'm well versed on the events of the civil war which is why I've discounted it as being even a remote possibility as to the source. You have to go beyond the interent and books to find accurate history, this means you have to spend countless hours in various archives and collections. You'd be surprised at what is out there. Having said all of this....Thomas Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase never even came to be realized until the Adam's Onis Treaty and this was achieved with the help of the French, French who were very well acquainted with Lynchburg, Richmond, and Bedford county. I'll bet you've never even seen the documents concerning Grandpa Risque and his association to these Frenchmen and various mining interest. But they are there and he was involved. This isn't "makeup", this is real documented history. Sorry it isn't consistent with all the local myth and lore.

"REAL documented history" is WHERE...?

 

[bigscoop]

"REAL documented history" is WHERE...?

Exactly! ......j/k

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Exactly! ......j/k

YOU DON'T have it, then...? (Post # 864)

 

[tat2guy]

It's funny how all this talk of factional events is missing IMO one of the best story that was very similar to the BP. That's the one that connects to Bedford county and the Risqué family. A hunting party of about 30 is massacred. I know I'm
Missing something. But the families petitioned congress over it. Have you guys missed this? Reb I know you know this one. Fill in some blanks if I missed something

HH Jay

 

[Old Silver]

And if you want to believe that the author made such a grave error in the spelling of the vital character's name then go ahead. But you still won't find a good suspect, just as the thousands of quality researchers before you have been unable to do.

Nothing new can be found unless we look in new places.

I don't think it would be a grave mistake. If someone were to write about me today, they would spell my last name with a letter on the end that was not originally there when spelled by my ancestors. Now do you actually think that the writer would go back into the past to find that out? Why would he, unless that would have a bearing on the story he's writing? Otherwise, no writer would be interested in such a trivial point. I don't see why you want to make such a big deal out of nothing.

As far as what will be found, I'll agree with what you last said: "Nothing new can be found unless we look in new places."
Who know what might still be found, stuck back in old family Bibles, in old family trunks, etc. No one is saying you're wrong, just that you can't know for sure that what the name wasn't spelled different ways by different people. And just because there's no J in a certain spelling doesn't necessarily mean his middle name didn't start with J. I really don't see the reason for controversy here.

 

[ECS]

The University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill has the Risque papers.What you allude to is a broadside of the massacre of John Pickrell Risque by indians at Gold Gulch in 1882,which I had provided a link.It was NOT a hunting party,and there was not 30 people massacred.
www2.lib.unc/mss/inv/r/RISQUE.F.W.html
Now John Radford,married to Risque niece,Harriet Kennerly,was killed during a hunting party in 1817,not by indians,but by a wild boar.The size of the hunting party is not known.Harriet went on to marry William Clark(of LEWIS & CLARK) Nov 28,1821.

 

[ECS]

YOU DON'T have it, then...? (Post # 864)

He would have skinned that smoke wagon if he did.

 

[tat2guy]

The University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill has the Risque papers.What you allude to is a broadside of the massacre of John Pickrell Risque by indians at Gold Gulch in 1882,which I had provided a link.It was NOT a hunting party,and there was not 30 people massacred. www2.lib.unc/mss/inv/r/RISQUE.F.W.html Now John Radford,married to Risque niece,Harriet Kennerly,was killed during a hunting party in 1817,not by indians,but by a wild boar.The size of the hunting party is not known.Harriet went on to marry William Clark(of LEWIS & CLARK) Nov 28,1821.

This is two different occurrences. Let me look back threw my notes over the holiday. I have the congressional records notes. I found records of a church where the only 2 survivors returned to.

 

[Old Silver]

I'd love to see these documents.

 

[bigscoop]

Start here. What do you know about the political history behind this cartoon? What was the controversy?

 

[Old Silver]

Start here. What do you know about the political history behind this cartoon? What was the controversy?
View attachment 1084757

I'm ready to listen. I was mainly referring to the men spoken of by Tat and Franklin, but I like looking at all this stuff.

 

[bigscoop]

The controversy surrounding this cartoon was that the Louisiana Purchase was orchestrated by the French/Napoleon to their benefit. Common belief is that it was simply a means for Napoleon to continue to fund his campaign but in certain political circles it was suggested that there was a lot more to it, that Jefferson's desire to make the purchase forced him into a secret deal with Napoleon.

One accusation is that the Louisiana Purchase was a loan, the land being held in collateral until that loan was payed off at the end of the agreed term. If this was the case then is this the ten-year term spoken of in the Beale Papers? When we look at the evidence then this could very well be the case. This would also explain why the French refugees were granted such quick and accommodating terms here in the U.S. and why they were allowed free and supported access into Texas. Even after defeat at Waterloo if the terms were still in place then the survivors would have had the right to payoff the debt and reclaim their right to "New France". This would also explain the political turmoil and strange difference of opinions during the era in regards to U.S. expansion into the region. Even Jefferson changing position on the issue.

And the French, even in 1862 they were still boiling over the way the French had been treated/screwed in the whole ordeal, the further restrictions brought on by the Civil War only adding more breeze to those still smoldering embers. So there was a lot of controversy over the Louisiana Purchase during the day, a lot of accusations and allegations, the existence of certain letters greatly supporting these claims.

 

[Old Silver]

The controversy surrounding this cartoon was that the Louisiana Purchase was orchestrated by the French/Napoleon to their benefit. Common belief is that it was simply a means for Napoleon to continue to fund his campaign but in certain political circles it was suggested that there was a lot more to it, that Jefferson's desire to make the purchase forced him into a secret deal with Napoleon.

One accusation is that the Louisiana Purchase was a loan, the land being held in collateral until that loan was payed off at the end of the agreed term. If this was the case then is this the ten-year term spoken of in the Beale Papers? When we look at the evidence then this could very well be the case. This would also explain why the French refugees were granted such quick and accommodating terms here in the U.S. and why they were allowed free and supported access into Texas. Even after defeat at Waterloo if the terms were still in place then the survivors would have had the right to payoff the debt and reclaim their right to "New France". This would also explain the political turmoil and strange difference of opinions during the era in regards to U.S. expansion into the region. Even Jefferson changing position on the issue.

And the French, even in 1862 they were still boiling over the way the French had been treated/screwed in the whole ordeal, the further restrictions brought on by the Civil War only adding more breeze to those still smoldering embers. So there was a lot of controversy over the Louisiana Purchase during the day, a lot of accusations and allegations, the existence of certain letters greatly supporting these claims.

So Beale was allied with the Napoleon party, in an attempt to pay off the debt? Who do you think Beale actually was? I assume you don't believe he was the Thomas Beale who lived in New Orleans, and interacted with Jean Lafitte. And what of Lafitte, how does he tie into this?

 

[releventchair]

So Beale was allied with the Napoleon party, in an attempt to pay off the debt? Who do you think Beale actually was? I assume you don't believe he was the Thomas Beale who lived in New Orleans, and interacted with Jean Lafitte. And what of Lafitte, how does he tie into this?

Hmm. Part of a mix of politics. Cuba unwelcomes you. Then near that time La. was sold to U.S..Lots of displaced French were there and you join them. Kind of hard to continue what was going on and plan ahead for a normal future when the land you are on changes hands...so that must have nagged a bit.
Now the question ,who will ship needed goods to you? The Americans were not delightful to the French residents and would be avoided if possible trade wise. Nor Spain or Cuba and absolutely not the British.
The Lafitte bros. fit the bill very well, being equipped with ship(s), knowledge, skill at blockade running and contacts. and and were well thought of by a certain and major part of the residents. Whether involved or not they would very likely know who was shipping what and other details. With that great of presence, nearly monopolizing such activity, and public acceptance in just the shipping side ,the political connections make that same network a potential go to to move anything and informal dealings would still hold weight.

Futures of multiple groups involved. "All for France" was still alive in Orleans as well as other places with passion. Meanwhile as Scoop notes at times, what are other nations up too?
A busy chess game perhaps over territories and strength? Players and pieces required to be played then.

 

[bigscoop]

So Beale was allied with the Napoleon party, in an attempt to pay off the debt? Who do you think Beale actually was? I assume you don't believe he was the Thomas Beale who lived in New Orleans, and interacted with Jean Lafitte. And what of Lafitte, how does he tie into this?

Laffitte is an interesting character and his mysterious ability to stay out of trouble with authorities and to always be on the front lines of important events only adds to the mysteries of his known involvement with the French refugees. We don't believe he was directly attached to the refugees though he certainly provided them aid. There is also mystery surrounding his involvement with the U.S. and other high ranking citizens of the era who were likewise involved with the refugees and U.S. politics. Through the slave trade there is also evidence to suggest that he was intimate with Lynchburg/Bedford region. There is also evidence suggesting that several people from the Lynchburg/Bedford region were in attendance at Galveston Island and Bolivar. And the real kicker, many of these people were in Richmond in 1829 & 1830 concluding "important business affairs". We also know several of these same French interest were in Richmond in 1861 through 1863.

As for Beale, personally, at this point I think as far as the pamphlet is concerned, the name was perhaps an alias. If he had truly existed he would have been found by now. And I've said this many times before....the duel between Risque and Beale was not over a woman, though that may have been used as a publicly accepted excuse. Politically, there were two distinct factions and causes at work in the region and I think that duel was the result of the growing friction between them.

 

[releventchair]

And regarding the New Orleans /La. area's French population. Politically the Napoleonic supporters in time when power in France returned to house of Bourbon were not welcomed to France. Meaning where will they go? Few countries were welcoming. Trying to hold an already established territory in new,(American) hands now would be tempting but how?