The 1826 Flood Of St Louis Destruction of the Unintelligible Writing Key

[Five]

1826...?

The letter would be in St Louis at s friend's from 1822-1832. The 1826 flooding would throw a monkey wrench into that plan.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Rebel - KGC]

The letter would be in St Louis at s friend's from 1822-1832. The 1826 flooding would throw a monkey wrench into that plan.

Eh...? Friend's house...? WHO...?

 

[Five]

Eh...? Friend's house...? WHO...?

Just what the letter to Mr Morriss said. A letter addressed to Mr Morriss in the hands of a friend in this place. Possibly not these exact words. Beale letter to Morriss in the pamphlet.

 

[Five]

Such a key I have left in the hands of a friend in this place, sealed, addressed to yourself, and endorsed not to be delivered until June, 1832

 

[Rebel - KGC]

OK.

 

[bigscoop]

Such a key I have left in the hands of a friend in this place, sealed, addressed to yourself, and endorsed not to be delivered until June, 1832

Five, this friend, do you know who he was? If not and you can't directly connect him with the tale, then why lean on the flood? Why not just say that he died before he mailed it? Why not say that he simply moved away and he forgot to mail it. Or, if you really want to manufacture some drama, why not just say that he really wasn't a friend at all, but that rather he was really a French spy who ended up destroying the letter to protect the whereabouts of the super secret French mine and treasure?....

Since you can't ID the alleged friend and/or connect that alleged friend to the tale, then any of the above suggestions would hold the same water, pardon the pun, which is no water at all.

 

[Five]

Five, this friend, do you know who he was? If not and you can't directly connect him with the tale, then why lean on the flood? Why not just say that he died before he mailed it? Why not say that he simply moved away and he forgot to mail it. Or, if you really want to manufacture some drama, why not just say that he really wasn't a friend at all, but that rather he was really a French spy who ended up destroying the letter to protect the whereabouts of the super secret French mine and treasure?....

Since you can't ID the alleged friend and/or connect that alleged friend to the tale, then any of the above suggestions would hold the same water, pardon the pun, which is no water at all.

Interesting, most people use Lawyers for this sort of thing!

 

[franklin]

Most people do not need lawyers when they are chasing butterflies in the night?

 

[bigscoop]

Interesting, most people use Lawyers for this sort of thing!

So you have found the alleged letter containing the real key in the old papers of a lawyer friend of the alleged TJB? Or is this just more tossing out of random wild speculation as rock solid evidences?

 

[Rebel - KGC]

ACTURALLY, not many butterflies are out at night; MOTHS maybe...

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Then, there is... MOTHMAN!

 

[Five]

"HIGH WATERS.-The Mississippi is, at this time, considerably higher than it has been for many years. The water, in many places, is over its banks, and the low lands. for miles back, entirely inundated. The inhabitants have been compelled to leave their homes. ."-Missouri Republican, St. Louis, May 11, 1826.

Good article! I know there would be a lot of damage from a flood. The area according to the newspaper had a lot of lawyers. Who else would you pay to have a letter sent out at a specific time. Franklin had the same flood a few hours earlier.

Good work with the information!

 

[Five]

You're making this way too easy....

straw man
ˌstrô ˈman/
noun
noun: straw man; plural noun: straw men; noun: strawman; plural noun: strawmen

• 1.
  an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.
  
  "her familiar procedure of creating a straw man by exaggerating their approach"
• 2.
  a person regarded as having no substance or integrity.
  "a photogenic straw man gets inserted into office and advisers dictate policy"
  
  Note, "an intentionally misrepresented proposition" as you continue to keep pointing fingers at yourself again and again. Allow me to explain it to you yet again;
  
  If you read the story you'll discover that Morriss was just an alleged executor, but "only if" his services are to be required "within a ten year period." This is not the same thing as an executor at the time of death, or until time of death, Morriss was only allegedly made an executor within a ten year period and "only if" his services were required within "that ten year period." This is your first straw man inaccurate judgement..
  
  You second straw man inaccuracy involves the alleged party and the "required sum" which they were allegedly after which is never detailed so that remains an unknown. But let me submit to you the following scenario......what if the party realized their desired amount the next year and simply took it upon themselves to divide said funds evenly and go their merry way? In this scenario Morriss wouldn't be entitled to his share because, and here it comes, "his services were never required." And all of this even before your flood........now then straw man, can you say "Oopsie" yet again..... Yes, your certain claim just went down in flames once more.

PS: The above executor arrangement is what your "honest author" detailed in his narration so don't blame me.........blame yourself for not reading the narration just as it is written and then placing trust in your oh-so honest and truthful author. No wait a minute, if you don't believe the author, which you apparently don't, but claim that you do believe him, then does this make your "intentional misrepresented and easily defeated proposal" something from a straw man? Yep!

Very interesting that you should post this definition!

 

[Five]

ECS, I think we best either believe the Beale Treasure Story or we do not.

I hate to say it but your last post to verify your claim you are taking another claim by someone which you have already disclaimed. Does not make sense to take a disclaimer's information to verify that another claim is untrue? Just my thoughts but carry on.

Interesting information!

 

[Five]

Yet we have proof that there was a flood that did not kill Beale or his men, but washed a letter away. This originated with NSA Beale site. I trust the annalist have done there research well. I can ask them if you wish?

The only response to the facts the are presented, is simply saying it is a fictional story. That is the only thing they have when they are losing the conversation!

And yet everyone knows there are several required elements to a fictional novel at the given years of the pamphlets printing!

 

[Rebel - KGC]

Such as...?

 

[Five]

Such as...?

I would not want to offend you with something!

 

[Rebel - KGC]

I would not want to offend you with something!

OK...

 

[bigscoop]

And yet everyone knows there are several required elements to a fictional novel at the given years of the pamphlets printing!

...yep! Like absolutely zero supporting evidences of the main character, the grand adventure, the party, the treasure, etc., etc., also the presence of multiple author errors and flat out lies.....and....a long and continued list of manufactured and fabricated solutions and solves that, just like the tale, lack all of the same. "Sound familiar?"... Thanks for pointing that out (you) yet again.....

 

[Five]

...yep! Like absolutely zero supporting evidences of the main character, the grand adventure, the party, the treasure, etc., etc., also the presence of multiple author errors and flat out lies.....and....a long and continued list of manufactured and fabricated solutions and solves that, just like the tale, lack all of the same. "Sound familiar?"... Thanks for pointing that out (you) yet again.....

You have just described most of your own post!