Why C2?

[ECS]

In 1816 a Thomas Beale loses a fortune in a sensational bankruptcy.
In 1817, and on the other side of the ocean, we have the start of the now famous Thomas Beale treasure mystery.
The Thomas Beale treasure mystery is said to have been confined to immediate family and one trusted friend.
C3 is to contain the names of those deserving, and/or their heirs.
C3 is too short to contain what it claims to contain unless those individuals are somehow related and confined to just a few locations.
The region of Virginia in question and the surrounding territory was loaded with Beale's.
Hmmmmmm.........

...and the game will be played to the end.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[bigscoop]

In 1816 a Thomas Beale loses a fortune in a sensational bankruptcy.
In 1817, and on the other side of the ocean, we have the start of the now famous Thomas Beale treasure mystery.
The Thomas Beale treasure mystery is said to have been confined to immediate family and one trusted friend.
C3 is to contain the names of those deserving, and/or their heirs.
C3 is too short to contain what it claims to contain unless those individuals are somehow related and confined to just a few locations.
The region of Virginia in question and the surrounding territory was loaded with Beale's.
Hmmmmmm.........

I closed that post with a laugh but I think the above theory "of alternate possibility" probably has more meat on the bones then any other avenue except the dime novel theory, which due to any real evidence of the story being anything else lends it top billing.

 

[ECS]

...then there is that coincidence of the Beale treasure deposit dates and the signing and ratification dates of the Adams-Onis Treaty.

 

[Old Silver]

It is in context with the entire narrative story text- a game that they will play to the end.
This is on of several "tells" in the job pamphlet.

So you think an author would write a story he wants his readers to believe, and then warns them against believing it? Man, that's a new one on me.

What they had in common is the use of real names of people, either dead or alive during publication, in adventures that were solely the creation of the author. It was at he readers discretion to decide if the tales were truth or fiction.

So you are now admitting that Thomas Beale was a real character?
The bottom line is, until there is proof, either way, on the Beale story, you don't know that it was solely the creation of the author. And while the belief of any story is ultimately up to the reader, it's the writer's job to be convincing. A fiction is not a work intended to deceive, but rather to entertain. And this is how we know that the Beale papers was not written as a tale to entertain, because the author doesn't give it in fiction form. Anyone who knows anything about writing can tell that the Beale papers is written in the form of non-fiction. Whether or not it's actual fiction, I can't say, but it's not written in the form of fiction. Consider the reason why novels have the word "FICTION" printed on the book.

 

[Old Silver]

...then there is that coincidence of the Beale treasure deposit dates and the signing and ratification dates of the Adams-Onis Treaty.

And proof if this being a coincidence?

 

[bigscoop]

...then there is that coincidence of the Beale treasure deposit dates and the signing and ratification dates of the Adams-Onis Treaty.

Not to mention the same ten-year term, which I think makes these more then just simple coincidence. But to what intended purpose or possible connection for sure?

 

[ECS]

No sir, it says authentic statements concerning treasure. Now, who made the statements about the treasure? Whoever it was, the author says their statements are authentic. He didn't say the story itself is authentic, as you said, but he said THE STATMENTS are authentic. I never said authentic meant true.

Those people were indeed alive in 1885. I have done the research on it...

What people?
As you are so fond of asking others, Proof.

 

[Old Silver]

What people?
As you are so fond of asking others, Proof.

Not others, just you. And that's because you require proof. I'm just holding you to your own standards.

What people? Are you serious? Ask yourself who YOU were talking about and BOOM! you've got your answer. Man, I know you have better understanding than that.

 

[ECS]

Not others, just you. And that's because you require proof. I'm just holding you to your own standards.

What people? Are you serious? Ask yourself who YOU were talking about and BOOM! you've got your answer. Man, I know you have better understanding than that.

That reply made no sense whatsoever.
You stated that people of 1820 Lynchburg were still alive in 1885 that knew Beale met Morris and had done the research on that.
...and who are you to hold anyone to your imposed standards? Have you become a TN moderator?

 

[Old Silver]

That reply made no sense whatsoever.
You stated that people of 1820 Lynchburg were still alive in 1885 that knew Beale met Morris and had done the research on that.
...and who are you to hold anyone to your imposed standards? Have you become a TN moderator?

I'm not surprised that made no sense to you. After all, you are the guy who thought Sherlock Holmes had the truth of the Beale papers. Yes, ECS, you can look at records and see people alive in 1885, and then you can go back further and find those same people living at an earlier time. It's called research. It's really not a difficult concept.

The standards are yours, so the better question would be, who are you?

 

[Rebel - KGC]

I'm not surprised that made no sense to you. After all, you are the guy who thought Sherlock Holmes had the truth of the Beale papers. Yes, ECS, you can look at records and see people alive in 1885, and then you can go back further and find those same people living at an earlier time. It's called research. It's really not a difficult concept.

The standards are yours, so the better question would be, who are you?

"Who are you" is a bit of "personal question"... NOT necessary.

 

[Old Silver]

"Who are you" is a bit of "personal question"... NOT necessary.

It was a rhetorical question by ECS to me. It wasn't personal, he was just asking me who do I think I am to question him. I was just turning the same rhetorical question back at him.

 

[bigscoop]

So "what if" a guy like Thomas Beale decided to fake/manufacture his own bankruptcy, or "what if" that wealth had been somehow swindled from him in some way? Well, right away you would have illegally gained wealth that would require a certain amount of secrecy and special handling, wealth that couldn't be deposited into banks for obvious reasons, etc. The question then becomes, at least for me anyway, is how might the signing and ratification dates and ten-year term of the Adams Onis Treaty come into play?

 

[Old Silver]

So "what if" a guy like Thomas Beale decided to fake/manufacture his own bankruptcy, or "what if" that wealth had been somehow swindled from him in some way? Well, right away you would have illegally gained wealth that would require a certain amount of secrecy and special handling, wealth that couldn't be deposited into banks for obvious reasons, etc. The question then becomes, at least for me anyway, is how might the signing and ratification dates and ten-year term of the Adams Onis Treaty come into play?

Also of note is that the Adams Onis treaty had to do with the area of the supposed Beale mine/s.
If it had anything to do with the Thomas Beale of the bankruptcy, and I'm not saying it didn't, then in my opinion, Beale of the Beale papers would likely be someone other than Thomas Beale. Someone could have been using his name. Anyone who had embezzled money from his company would likely not use his own name as Beale supposedly did, with such fame attached to the name. Besides, there's nothing about the bankruptcy Thomas Beale that seems to match the description of the Beale of the treasure story. Wasn't he an Englishman? That might have been hard to hide in 1820 Lynchburg, VA. In my mind, any cover story would require a cover name. Otherwise it would be a poor cover. A swindler? Maybe.

 

[bigscoop]

Remember, the story wasn't published until “1885” and it was penned sometime shortly before this. “If” whoever penned it was actually looking for that person with the “missing paper” then they would almost be forced to use the “real name” identified with that missing paper, or Thomas Beale. In reality, back in 1817-1822 the individual who had actually stayed with Morriss could have gone by any name, Thomas Beale himself perhaps having never stepped foot in this country, the entire affair in the states having been conducted by family, etc.

This is just another reason why I'm certain that the letters are bogus, a simple cover story for what may have really transpired back in 1817-1822. It's also one of the reasons why I feel pretty certain that C3 will contain names closely associated with the Beale family. And yes, I also believe the Thomas J. Beale of Richmond is strongly associated with the story, if in fact he wasn't the actual author in search of something with Ward's help, that family secret he still believed to exist. I'm fairly certain that the possible answer is something along these lines of thought. This is also why those letters are closed with only TJB and also why the alleged Morriss description subtly references a free man of color named Thomas J. Beale.

 

[ECS]

Remember that the story proper, was not submitted for copyright, only the title was submitted to the Library of Congress by Ward as agent.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

It MAY well be that "the Story" was STILL being "finalized" from VARIOUS Papers submitted for the Beale PAPERS Pamphlet...

 

[Rebel - KGC]

AND! The "DARK" Secret that RM may have known is...(since C2 is DOI/Thomas Jefferson-related), is that TWO "slave sons" TJ had with SH, passed for "white", serving in WHITE units of YANKS during the Confederate War (aka the War Between the States). MAYBE after "The War", they met with Alderman Thomas J. Beale of Richmond, Va.; dunno...

 

[ECS]

Remember, the story wasn't published until “1885” and it was penned sometime shortly before this. “If” whoever penned it was actually looking for that person with the “missing paper” then they would almost be forced to use the “real name” identified with that missing paper, or Thomas Beale. In reality, back in 1817-1822 the individual who had actually stayed with Morriss could have gone by any name, Thomas Beale himself perhaps having never stepped foot in this country, the entire affair in the states having been conducted by family, etc.

This is just another reason why I'm certain that the letters are bogus, a simple cover story for what may have really transpired back in 1817-1822. It's also one of the reasons why I feel pretty certain that C3 will contain names closely associated with the Beale family. And yes, I also believe the Thomas J. Beale of Richmond is strongly associated with the story, if in fact he wasn't the actual author in search of something with Ward's help, that family secret he still believed to exist. I'm fairly certain that the possible answer is something along these lines of thought. This is also why those letters are closed with only TJB and also why the alleged Morriss description subtly references a free man of color named Thomas J. Beale.

If the Jackson Ward Alderman was involved and it concerned a family "secret", then the tacit belief that stands is that the narrative text in the 1885 Beale Papers, even if it was a cover story, is fiction written in style of a dime novel treasure adventure of the period.

 

[bigscoop]

I still believe it is possible that the pamphlet was written for two entirely different audiences, the general public and also a specific and much smaller audience. Wouldn't be the first time that hidden communications were including in books, etc.