Wheres The Beef?

[bigscoop]

Where's The Beef?

I am at a complete loss as to why nobody wants to concentrate on trying to confirm that the Beale Pamphlet story, or any portion of it, was true? Why is so much time and effort being spent on trying to solve a mystery that may not even exist?

Cover story? If this is the case then the original story is indeed fiction and there is no original true treasure tale at all.

Partially true? If this is the case then what portion of the treasure tale can we confirm? Thus far, we can’t confirm there ever was a treasure.

So my question is this; what is the strongest evidence anyone has confirming the story, or any portion of it, that there ever was an actual treasure relevant to the story in the pamphlet. Considering all of the theories, even my own, and all of the claims, I think this is a fair question to put on the table. But, let’s deal in confirmed facts only, not speculation and circumstantial evidence. What compels you to believe the story or any portion of it, or that it was written in reference to an actual treasure? What can you confirm to support this treasure tale?

Let me add, I want to believe in the tale just like everyone else and I'll keep looking for these confirmations just like everyone esle. But to date, I've not come across a single confirmation yet, not really, just strong circumstantial tid-bits here and there. Sure, I'm a hard sell, but I think we need to be in this sort of thing.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Rebel - KGC]

I am at a complete loss as to why nobody wants to concentrate on trying to confirm that the Beale Pamphlet story, or any portion of it, was true? Why is so much time and effort being spent on trying to solve a mystery that may not even exist?

Cover story? If this is the case then the original story is indeed fiction and there is no original true treasure tale at all.

Partially true? If this is the case then what portion of the treasure tale can we confirm? Thus far, we can’t confirm there ever was a treasure.

So my question is this; what is the strongest evidence anyone has confirming the story, or any portion of it, that there ever was an actual treasure relevant to the story in the pamphlet. Considering all of the theories, even my own, and all of the claims, I think this is a fair question to put on the table. But, let’s deal in confirmed facts only, not speculation and circumstantial evidence. What compels you to believe the story or any portion of it, or that it was written in reference to an actual treasure? What can you confirm to support this treasure tale?

Let me add, I want to believe in the tale just like everyone else and I'll keep looking for these confirmations just like everyone esle. But to date, I've not come across a single confirmation yet, not really, just strong circumstantial tid-bits here and there. Sure, I'm a hard sell, but I think we need to be in this sort of thing.

LOL! You ARE a "hard sell"...

 

[Rebel - KGC]

"The story" in the "JOB PRINT"/THE BEALE PAPERS/the Pamphlet is KEY here; "The Story" is NOT in the HART PAPERS... only somewhat "changed" ciphers (BC#1, BC#2, & BC# 3) are. With an account of TWO brothers, who were the FIRST "Beale Treasure" hunters, interviewing JB Ward. N. Hazlewood is ALSO important bc HE had the FIGURES on papers for C. Hart to make copies of; Hazlewood WAS ex-CSA (Sgt.) & POSSIBLY a REB Spy in the "old days". NSA (FEDS) was ALSO interested in the ciphers/"treasure"... BUT! NEVER called it "Beale Treasure" to MY knowledge. I think during the years, NSA Agents watched Hazlewood, and the Hart Bros. (of Roanoke/Montvale, Va.)... NSA had an office in Lexington, Va. near VMI (which PROBABLY used part of the CSA Treasury to re-build after the CONFEDERATE WAR). NSA Agents WERE sent to Lynchburg, Va. during WW II... asking "ppl" on the streets, what THEY knew about the "JOB PRINT", Beale Treasure; got NOTHING! HA!

 

[bigscoop]

"The story" in the "JOB PRINT"/THE BEALE PAPERS/the Pamphlet is KEY here; "The Story" is NOT in the HART PAPERS... only somewhat "changed" ciphers (BC#1, BC#2, & BC# 3) are. With an account of TWO brothers, who were the FIRST "Beale Treasure" hunters, interviewing JB Ward. N. Hazlewood is ALSO important bc HE had the FIGURES on papers for C. Hart to make copies of; Hazlewood WAS ex-CSA (Sgt.) & POSSIBLY a REB Spy in the "old days". NSA (FEDS) was ALSO interested in the ciphers/"treasure"... BUT! NEVER called it "Beale Treasure" to MY knowledge. I think during the years, NSA Agents watched Hazlewood, and the Hart Bros. (of Roanoke/Montvale, Va.)... NSA had an office in Lexington, Va. near VMI (which PROBABLY used part of the CSA Treasury to re-build after the CONFEDERATE WAR). NSA Agents WERE sent to Lynchburg, Va. during WW II... asking "ppl" on the streets, what THEY knew about the "JOB PRINT", Beale Treasure; got NOTHING! HA!

Interesting, BUT, where is the beef/facts to confirm the treasure story or any portion of it? CSA, the French, a party out west discovering gold, etc. Could be any one of them, or it could be none of them. NSA, if what you're saying is true then why not? Why would we expect them to not investigate something we are investigating ourselves? Seems only natural that many such agencies would investigate the possibility to see if there was any credible evidence supporting the original tale. What I'm looking for is confirmation that the treasure was indeed real, that it was a story in reference to a real treasure. Again, not saying it wasn't, just asking where the confirmation is that provides the authenticity of the treasure?

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Interesting, BUT, where is the beef/facts to confirm the treasure story or any portion of it? CSA, the French, a party out west discovering gold, etc. Could be any one of them, or it could be none of them. NSA, if what you're saying is true then why not? Why would we expect them to not investigate something we are investigating ourselves? Seems only natural that many such agencies would investigate the possibility to see if there was any credible evidence supporting the original tale. What I'm looking for is confirmation that the treasure was indeed real, that it was a story in reference to a real treasure. Again, not saying it wasn't, just asking where the confirmation is that provides the authenticity of the treasure?

AGAIN... you ARE a "Hard-Sell"! LOL! The FACT that NSA was VERY interested in the ciphers, Beale Treasure... tells me, that it was part of the CSA Treasury. Yanks probably thought that they were entitled to "It" as "Spoils of War" or something. Last I heard, they thought CSA Treasury (or the "Beale" part of it) was down in New Orleans... under WATER!

 

[Rebel - KGC]

LOL! "Under water", down in New Orleans... COULD be sunken CSA ship hauling $$$$$$$$$$$ to Cuba; COULD be CSA MINT (now museum), "flooded out"... sounds like a code or something; TH'ers, what does "UNDER WATER" mean...?

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Interesting, BUT, where is the beef/facts to confirm the treasure story or any portion of it? CSA, the French, a party out west discovering gold, etc. Could be any one of them, or it could be none of them. NSA, if what you're saying is true then why not? Why would we expect them to not investigate something we are investigating ourselves? Seems only natural that many such agencies would investigate the possibility to see if there was any credible evidence supporting the original tale. What I'm looking for is confirmation that the treasure was indeed real, that it was a story in reference to a real treasure. Again, not saying it wasn't, just asking where the confirmation is that provides the authenticity of the treasure?

LOL! THAT'S like asking... Did Columbus REALLY discover America...? THINK ABOUT IT!

 

[bigscoop]

Franklin, perhaps, but consider the following;
In my own research, and that of partners, we can also find not one, but two Beales/Beall that we can also connect to a lost fortune from the west during the period in question, and likewise, we can also connect both of these men back to Bedford County and we can likewise produce a lot of close connections there. This same thing can also be done with the CSA theory. Here we have three completely different sources of the wealth, three completely different series of events leading back to Bedford County, and three completely different piles of strong circumstantial evidence. This is what happens when we look for solutions before we can even confirm the tale. The events within the era itself only serves to complicate matters. To this day, we still can't confirm that there ever was a Beale/Beall party that went out west during the period in question. The fact that we can't confirm any of it is what lays heavy on mind these days, because by now that "confirmed" evidence should be present, and it isn't. No matter which theory you look at, just too many people involved with way too many family connections for it not to be there somewhere.

 

[bigscoop]

Yes, but my post has the only person that found gold on the South Fork of the Platte River where TJB said the gold was found north of Sante Fe. I might also add the Cooper Scouts were seen on the plains of Kansas by Jacob Fowler and party returning from Sante Fe. Also the time line of travel when TJB said he left St. Louis in his letters to Robert Morris would place the party where Jacob Fowler saw them. What have you got? Not a single thing to do with TJB his genealogy or the treasure from the southwest I would not care to bet you.

Actually, we do have substantial wealth coming from the southwest during the same period, and we do have, not one, but two Beale/Beall's that we can directly connect to the people in care of that wealth, and the connections back in Bedford County run deep and many, i.e., Sherman's, Ward's, Buford's, just to name a few, and yes, all of the genealogy is there. But our problem is the same as yours, we lack the same type of absolute confirmations.

The problem in both cases is that there were just too many people involved for there not to have been something conclusive to confirm our strongest, "suspicions", and this is especially true with our research as it involves a lot more people and politics then yours. Which is why I am scrutinizing and looking for confirmation of the original tale again. I really believe that confirmation will fill in the rest of the holes that exist, weather it is to our immediate benefit or not.

I agree, you have collected some very strong circumstantial evidence, but if you don't think this same strong circumstantial exist in areas you've yet to research for yourself then you are mistaken because it does exist. And there rest the issue, both theories can't be right.

 

[bigscoop]

What exactly do you mean by circumstantial? My evidence is documented in books and historical works. There is no circumstantial evidence. The gold was found 13 years before the expedition and it was TJB's half brother that found the gold. The location where the gold was found is in Zabulon Montgomery Pike's 1810 published book. There is no doubt in my mind that this confirms the Beale Treasure. I have also gotten information from the Spanish Archives of an illegal buffalo hunt in 1818 and there was no other illegal buffalo hunt in the Spanish Archives. The genealogy ties the guides that opened the Sante Fe Trail and the trails later to California. What other proof do you need because all of this information is documented.

But it is, "circumstantial evidence" as it might, or might not, pertain to the actual tale in the Beale Pamphlet. Our source information is just as compelling and even includes the personal letters and correspondences of those involved, again, also including Beale/Beall, the Bedford connection, etc. And, just to help express my point, what if I were to tell you that your Beall also knew many of our major players? Now what? And here is the problem with the era, the events of the era, and the fact that genealogies often lead to us to a lot of the same people and these various events and connections simply because of the era. Another example, you mentioned Kentucky, many of our connections and suspects were either from, or had family in, the same region. And like your research, all of ours is from historical records and documents. It is all of this that has lead me to say to myself, "something isn't right here. Too many different roads leading here, and other places as well." So.......what to make of it all, exactly? It can't all be right, or can it?

 

[ECS]

Throughout history,treasure tales combined with conspiracy theories abound.It is only human nature to be forever looking for that great treasure cache with connections to invisible pupeteer cabals manipulating the grand scheme of things and governments with vast hidden wealth.
Some of these secret cabal treasures are based partialy on historical fact like the TEMPLARS and lost CSA gold,while others are mere fanciful fictions.
Sometimes when fact and fiction are woven together,the line between both become a tangled tapestry of false history.

 

[bigscoop]

Throughout history,treasure tales combined with conspiracy theories abound.It is only human nature to be forever looking for that great treasure cache with connections to invisible pupeteer cabals manipulating the grand scheme of things and governments with vast hidden wealth.
Some of these secret cabal treasures are based partialy on historical fact like the TEMPLARS and lost CSA gold,while others are mere fanciful fictions.
Sometimes when fact and fiction are woven together,the line between both become a tangled tapestry of false history.

I have been on my fair share of failed yet "certain" treasure hunts in the past. This is why I'm such a hard sell these days and why I won't even put the boots on until I'm 100% certain the mystery is real and the information is accurate. As you say, it's just too easy to make yourself believe in things you really want to believe in, too easy to fool ourselves. It's what keeps legends and myths alive, our need and desire to believe in them.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

I have been on my fair share of failed yet "certain" treasure hunts in the past. This is why I'm such a hard sell these days and why I won't even put the boots on until I'm 100% certain the mystery is real and the information is accurate. As you say, it's just too easy to make yourself believe in things you really want to believe in, too easy to fool ourselves. It's what keeps legends and myths alive, our need and desire to believe in them.

Just disclose what YOU have; MAYBE you & franklin can collaborate "resources"...

 

[bigscoop]

Have already touched on that with him. Up to him.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Have already touched on that with him. Up to him.

OK; don't know...

 

[bigscoop]

Here's some info that I touched a while back that nobody apparently had any interest in, when actually it may be more telling then we realize. The Adams Onis Treaty, most people are aware that it settled an ongoing boundary dispute between the U.S. and Spain. However, there is something very curious in that actual settlement. When we read the exact description of that boundary settlement it is offered to us in lines, as one might expect to a boundary to be drawn and agreed upon. BUT, when we actually look at a map of that agreed settlement we find that it also included "a large piece of territory in Colorado". What was so important about this Colorado location that it was included in the agreed settlement but not in the general boundary description? When we look at the Beale story the time period is accurate with the treaty events and when we consider this included Colorado Territory in the treaty agreement then it tends to, perhaps, raise a flag of suspicion. And it only gets more intriguing from here.

According to the story there were two deposits, the first one coming in the same year the treaty was signed, the second one coming in the same year the treaty was ratified. Stick with me....

Franklin has his Beall research/suspect roughly in line with this same Colorado territory in the treaty. We can place our Captain Thomas Beall on the same ship with the refugees who would later occupy Camp D'Asile. Both regions eventually become part of the treaty agreement. Both locations and theories contain a Captain Thomas Beall and they are both time period correct. If the Beale Pamphlet story, or any portion of it is true, then both theories also have "very strong" documented St. Louis ties. And there is more, much more. It raises the question, did both of the deposits come from the same source, or did they actually come from different sources by way of the same delivery man/party? After the last deposit, and for some unknown reason, it became necessary to invite an unbiased third party in the event that things went astray. Why was this really necessary, and why the period of ten years? And ironic as it may be, both Beall suspects can be connected to many of the same influential people and they can both be placed in many of the same locations. And as for "Thomas Beale"...well, he fits into all of this as well. Pretty darn strange, eh?

 

[bigscoop]

"If" a Thomas Beale did in fact show in the Bedford region, then why didn't anybody know him prior to his showing up the Morriss place? Obviously, he was not from, or know in, the region. A duel is something people would have remembered and some would have been able to connect a face with that event, same is true of most any past resident. So, why didn't anyone know this Thomas Beale prior to his showing up at the Morriss place? If Beale had been from the area then Morriss would have certainly learned more about him just through general conversation if by nothing else, and yet, apparently that never happened. Why? The only reasonable answer I can think of to explain this is that this Thomas Beale wasn't from the area and he wasn't know to the area prior to his showing up at the Morriss place.

 

[ECS]

Here's some info that I touched a while back that nobody apparently had any interest in, when actually it may be more telling then we realize. The Adams Onis Treaty, most people are aware that it settled an ongoing boundary dispute between the U.S. and Spain. However, there is something very curious in that actual settlement. When we read the exact description of that boundary settlement it is offered to us in lines, as one might expect to a boundary to be drawn and agreed upon. BUT, when we actually look at a map of that agreed settlement we find that it also included "a large piece of territory in Colorado". What was so important about this Colorado location that it was included in the agreed settlement but not in the general boundary description? When we look at the Beale story the time period is accurate with the treaty events and when we consider this included Colorado Territory in the treaty agreement then it tends to, perhaps, raise a flag of suspicion. And it only gets more intriguing from here.

According to the story there were two deposits, the first one coming in the same year the treaty was signed, the second one coming in the same year the treaty was ratified. Stick with me....

Franklin has his Beall research/suspect roughly in line with this same Colorado territory in the treaty. We can place our Captain Thomas Beall on the same ship with the refugees who would later occupy Camp D'Asile. Both regions eventually become part of the treaty agreement. Both locations and theories contain a Captain Thomas Beall and they are both time period correct. If the Beale Pamphlet story, or any portion of it is true, then both theories also have "very strong" documented St. Louis ties. And there is more, much more. It raises the question, did both of the deposits come from the same source, or did they actually come from different sources by way of the same delivery man/party? After the last deposit, and for some unknown reason, it became necessary to invite an unbiased third party in the event that things went astray. Why was this really necessary, and why the period of ten years? And ironic as it may be, both Beall suspects can be connected to many of the same influential people and they can both be placed in many of the same locations. And as for "Thomas Beale"...well, he fits into all of this as well. Pretty darn strange, eh?

This can be considered as weaving fact into the cloth of fiction to make a tapestry of false history.

 

[Rebel - KGC]

"If" a Thomas Beale did in fact show in the Bedford region, then why didn't anybody know him prior to his showing up the Morriss place? Obviously, he was not from, or know in, the region. A duel is something people would have remembered and some would have been able to connect a face with that event, same is true of most any past resident. So, why didn't anyone know this Thomas Beale prior to his showing up at the Morriss place? If Beale had been from the area then Morriss would have certainly learned more about him just through general conversation if by nothing else, and yet, apparently that never happened. Why? The only reasonable answer I can think of to explain this is that this Thomas Beale wasn't from the area and he wasn't know to the area prior to his showing up at the Morriss place.

HA! There were TWO Thomas Beale... SR. (who had the duel with J.B. Risque... GRANDFATHER of the HUTTER brothers AND J.B. Ward); AND! Thomas Beale, JUNIOR. Both Beale folks were from Fincastle, Va., adjacent to Bedford County, Va. and @ 70 miles WEST of Lynchburg, Va. (STILL IN WESTERN part of VIRGINIA - NORTH of Roanoke, Va.).

 

[bigscoop]

This can be considered as weaving fact into the cloth of fiction to make a tapestry of false history.

Not saying it isn't, but to put all the specific facts in front of you would also require a rather lengthy book. I don't know just how much you know about the Louisiana Purchase, West Florida, the French refugee period, the events in South America, Bonapartism, the disputed territory, etc., and especially on the political ends, but it's all pretty amazing stuff.

And just to add, it would really surprise you to learn just how many issues and alot of the same type connections come back to Bedford County and the surrounding area. It's all of this that has given me cause to ask, "where's the beef?" And "where's the smoking guns?" So I'm not arguing your point, not by a long shot, in fact it's the very reason that has raised these new questions and brought me back to the original story again with different questions.