More Interesting New Findings From The Beale Ciphers

[ECS]

...
The fact that someone did go to Ward and confirm the content of the pamphlet as true is a God Slap to any Hoax believer.
We have confirmed the Beale Papers as FACT 18 years after the published pamphlet.

The only source of this information is the HART PAPERS, and that is what George Hart "remembered" as being told by his brother, Clayton.
How could Ward be able to confirm "all" in the pamphlet, he was not present to hear Morriss revel the tale, unless he was the author?
...and Ward's son could only confirm what he was told.
The Hart also presented "JEFFERSON" as a middle name, there was only a "J" in the Beale Papers, and the mention of the "Planters Hotel", also not in the original, but utilized by later Beale story writers as "fact"- which came from a medium at a séance.
One must be very desperate to use the "alleged" and "surmised" , as the work's title states, of the Hart Papers as proof of anything concerning the Beale Papers.

 

[Cryptography]

The only source of this information is the HART PAPERS, and that is what George Hart "remembered" as being told by his brother, Clayton.
How could Ward be able to confirm "all" in the pamphlet, he was not present to hear Morriss revel the tale, unless he was the author?
...and Ward's son could only confirm what he was told.
The Hart also presented "JEFFERSON" as a middle name, there was only a "J" in the Beale Papers, and the mention of the "Planters Hotel", also not in the original, but utilized by later Beale story writers as "fact"- which came from a medium at a séance.
One must be very desperate to use the "alleged" and "surmised" , as the work's title states, of the Hart Papers as proof of anything concerning the Beale Papers.

It would seem we have the testimony of Morriss to the author who writes the testimony of Morriss. The testimony of Mr. Morriss is then given to Mr. Ward who had no knowledge of such an event. Mr. Ward publishes the work as a pamphlet after making the linguistic changes to make it more comprehensible to the people of the particular time frame. The pamphlet is then in 1885 and up for sale. News articles in a review form are printed about the book April 1885. In 1893 January and update is printed in a different newspaper. This article references many searching for the treasure and references the Beale papers as a true event. About 10 years later we have a man Mr. Hart going to Mr. Ward and asking them about the pamphlet and information it documents. Mr. Ward and his son told Mr. Hart that the pamphlet is correct in the information it holds. At this point show us the reference of Mr. Hart confirming with Mr. Ward that the information held within the book is 100% correct is more proof that needed that the Beale papers events are historical documentation backed up by that of a witness that has confirmed these things with the publisher.

 

[Cryptography]

 

[bigscoop]

It would seem we have the testimony of Morriss to the author who writes the testimony of Morriss. The testimony of Mr. Morriss is then given to Mr. Ward who had no knowledge of such an event. Mr. Ward publishes the work as a pamphlet after making the linguistic changes to make it more comprehensible to the people of the particular time frame. The pamphlet is then in 1885 and up for sale. News articles in a review form are printed about the book April 1885. In 1893 January and update is printed in a different newspaper. This article references many searching for the treasure and references the Beale papers as a true event. About 10 years later we have a man Mr. Hart going to Mr. Ward and asking them about the pamphlet and information it documents. Mr. Ward and his son told Mr. Hart that the pamphlet is correct in the information it holds. At this point show us the reference of Mr. Hart confirming with Mr. Ward that the information held within the book is 100% correct is more proof that needed that the Beale papers events are historical documentation backed up by that of a witness that has confirmed these things with the publisher.

The only way your proposal would even qualify is "if" you are concluding that Ward was indeed the actual unknown author, otherwise there is no possible way that Ward could confirm the alleged details of the exchange between Morriss and the unknown author. Also, what provenance do you have that Ward ever made any changes to the manuscript at all? Your "honest author" tells you that Ward had only been selected as agent, are you suggesting that this honest author was telling even more additional fib once again? This is what you keep misunderstanding about all of your continued twisting and turning of the narration, the more you do this the more evidence you're producing in support of the fiction/complete fabrication theory, and not the other way around. Most understand this and see it as such. At some point you have to recognize that all you are accomplishing is further discrediting of the author's word and the details in the narration.

 

[ECS]

1.It would seem we have the testimony of Morriss to the author who writes the testimony of Morriss.
The testimony of Mr. Morriss is then given to Mr. Ward who had no knowledge of such an event.
2. Mr. Ward publishes the work as a pamphlet after making the linguistic changes to make it more comprehensible to the people of the particular time frame.
3. The pamphlet is then in 1885 and up for sale.
News articles in a review form are printed about the book April 1885. In 1893 January and update is printed in a different newspaper. This article references many searching for the treasure and references the Beale papers as a true event.
4.About 10 years later we have a man Mr. Hart going to Mr. Ward and asking them about the pamphlet and information it documents.
Mr. Ward and his son told Mr. Hart that the pamphlet is correct in the information it holds.
5. At this point show us the reference of Mr. Hart confirming with Mr. Ward that the information held within the book is 100% correct is more proof that needed that the Beale papers events are historical documentation backed up by that of a witness that has confirmed these things with the publisher.

1. There is no existing evidence outside of the Beale Papers that these interviews and contacts ever occurred.
2. According to the Beale Papers, Ward was presented a finished manuscript but applied for copyright with only the title, claiming the "book" was not finished. Nowhere is it mentioned that Ward made "linguistic changes".
3. The articles that appeared in the newspapers were not confirmation that the Beale treasure existed, but were basic book reviews, including the 1893 Roanoke Times "human interest" treasure story, common for that time period.
4. The only account of Clayton Hart visiting Ward and his son is the hearsay account given by George Hart in the Hart Papers, which contains many events that are highly questionable. There is NO WAY that Ward, much less his son, confirm "ALL" in the Beale Papers, for his entire knowledge stems from the "unknown authors" presented manuscript, which is nothing more than a hearsay account.
5. There is NOTHING that exists that can prove that "the information held within the book is 100% correct" and there is NO "historical documentation" that has been found in the 135 years since the pamphlets publication that can back up anything stated in the Beale Papers.

The employment of the names in both the Beale and Hart Papers are used as literary device characters, as well as the locations and events, and since the publication of both of these works, NO ONE has been able to prove that any different.

 

[masterpoe]

View attachment 1485903

The rest of the story! Amazing the difference between what ECS said was in the Hart Paper and what's accurate to the Hart Papers.

 

[masterpoe]

1. There is no existing evidence outside of the Beale Papers that these interviews and contacts ever occurred.
2. According to the Beale Papers, Ward was presented a finished manuscript but applied for copyright with only the title, claiming the "book" was not finished. Nowhere is it mentioned that Ward made "linguistic changes".
3. The articles that appeared in the newspapers were not confirmation that the Beale treasure existed, but were basic book reviews, including the 1893 Roanoke Times "human interest" treasure story, common for that time period.
4. The only account of Clayton Hart visiting Ward and his son is the hearsay account given by George Hart in the Hart Papers, which contains many events that are highly questionable. There is NO WAY that Ward, much less his son, confirm "ALL" in the Beale Papers, for his entire knowledge stems from the "unknown authors" presented manuscript, which is nothing more than a hearsay account.
5. There is NOTHING that exists that can prove that "the information held within the book is 100% correct" and there is NO "historical documentation" that has been found in the 135 years since the pamphlets publication that can back up anything stated in the Beale Papers.

The employment of the names in both the Beale and Hart Papers are used as literary device characters, as well as the locations and events, and since the publication of both of these works, NO ONE has been able to prove that any different.

Nice OPINION, but that is all we are looking at here is just your opinion! Just the facts!

 

[masterpoe]

It would seem we have the testimony of Morriss to the author who writes the testimony of Morriss. The testimony of Mr. Morriss is then given to Mr. Ward who had no knowledge of such an event. Mr. Ward publishes the work as a pamphlet after making the linguistic changes to make it more comprehensible to the people of the particular time frame. The pamphlet is then in 1885 and up for sale. News articles in a review form are printed about the book April 1885. In 1893 January and update is printed in a different newspaper. This article references many searching for the treasure and references the Beale papers as a true event. About 10 years later we have a man Mr. Hart going to Mr. Ward and asking them about the pamphlet and information it documents. Mr. Ward and his son told Mr. Hart that the pamphlet is correct in the information it holds. At this point show us the reference of Mr. Hart confirming with Mr. Ward that the information held within the book is 100% correct is more proof that needed that the Beale papers events are historical documentation backed up by that of a witness that has confirmed these things with the publisher.

Nice outline! We need more information I can work with.

 

[masterpoe]

The only way your proposal would even qualify is "if" you are concluding that Ward was indeed the actual unknown author, otherwise there is no possible way that Ward could confirm the alleged details of the exchange between Morriss and the unknown author. Also, what provenance do you have that Ward ever made any changes to the manuscript at all? Your "honest author" tells you that Ward had only been selected as agent, are you suggesting that this honest author was telling even more additional fib once again? This is what you keep misunderstanding about all of your continued twisting and turning of the narration, the more you do this the more evidence you're producing in support of the fiction/complete fabrication theory, and not the other way around. Most understand this and see it as such. At some point you have to recognize that all you are accomplishing is further discrediting of the author's word and the details in the narration.

BS spins out of control on this one!

 

[masterpoe]

What was the "all" confirmed, as Ward and his son, if they were really interviewed by Clayton Hart?
Ward's knowledge of the entire Beale story comes from the hearsay manuscript presented by this "unknown author", his son would know less.
All Ward could confirm is that he acted as copyright agent and publisher for this "unknown author", but whether the adventure treasure tale actually occurred, NO!
All these testimonial "confirmations" be it in the original Beale Papers or the Hart Papers, are all based on hearsay statements, and do not serve as evidentiary proof of anything being true in either work.

Opinion, and not a very good job.

 

[ECS]

Opinion, and not a very good job.

Do you have evidence outside of the Hart Papers that can prove that this encounter between Clayton Hart and James Beverly Ward and Ward's unnamed son (first name) and then an actual transcript of what was discussed and said?
If not, you are claiming the second hand hearsay of George Hart as solid proof, which it is not, to form a "not very good" opinion.

 

[bigscoop]

BS spins out of control on this one!

It's really quite simple common logic, once you edit what was originally narrated then the original author's statements are no more, you have established that the original source wasn't speaking accurately or in truths. So here we have a situation where you guys keep doing this and yet you still fail to realize what you're actually establishing. In essence you are saying that the author's word shouldn't be trusted as presented and that it isn't accurate as presented.... There's no big mystery in this, this is what you're actually accomplishing with all of your speculative and creative alternate context. This is also why you're struggling to find an audience.

 

[ECS]

While we are on the subject of "spinning", all the "new" presented evidence about the Beale story being true is the same "old" source material that has been hung out to dry many, many times.
Another spin wash agitation isn't going to change the nature of the cloth and reveal a new sheen.

 

[masterpoe]

While we are on the subject of "spinning", all the "new" presented evidence about the Beale story being true is the same "old" source material that has been hung out to dry many, many times.
Another spin wash agitation isn't going to change the nature of the cloth and reveal a new sheen.

Sorry, but you don't have to reply then!

 

[releventchair]

Yes, there would be more document's about some Spanish ships lost at sea than a group of people hunting furs and happening upon gold.You said you read information about the flood of 1826! Were is the information located? Or did you just make that part up?

Hunting furs?
Furs are trapped. Hides are hunted.
Prime pelts or bison hides are a winter or earliest spring activity.

IF a party of thirty had the means to transport many bison hides ,how far would they go?
How many beaver plews could a horse carry ,and where would they have been sold or traded?

No sound logic would see hauling them back east after two years.
That leaves Taos or St. Louis.
With salted hide weights of bison ( or else where is trapping mentioned if anything more than bison were sought?) and getting them delivered before hair slipping.
Yet no record of gringo's in Taos matching the party's description at such an early time dealing in hides,or furs?
Or of a large trapping party arriving / departing St. Louis...That bastion of fur trading where competition would not go un noticed when strangers were involved.

If pecking rock is intruding....trapping will get you noticed still today.
Good fur sign means a lazy trapper is around. During Beale expedition ,plenty of folks were trapping . Where were such lonely places that a large group could avoid detection from natives and other competition?

 

[45th_Johnny]

releventchair, "IF a party of thirty had the means to transport many bison hides ,how far would they go?"

Back then, they would only go as far as the nearest town or railroad. The hides and pelts were in demand and buyers were everywhere.

 

[bigscoop]

Hunting furs?
Furs are trapped. Hides are hunted.
Prime pelts or bison hides are a winter or earliest spring activity.

IF a party of thirty had the means to transport many bison hides ,how far would they go?
How many beaver plews could a horse carry ,and where would they have been sold or traded?

No sound logic would see hauling them back east after two years.
That leaves Taos or St. Louis.
With salted hide weights of bison ( or else where is trapping mentioned if anything more than bison were sought?) and getting them delivered before hair slipping.
Yet no record of gringo's in Taos matching the party's description at such an early time dealing in hides,or furs?
Or of a large trapping party arriving / departing St. Louis...That bastion of fur trading where competition would not go un noticed when strangers were involved.

If pecking rock is intruding....trapping will get you noticed still today.
Good fur sign means a lazy trapper is around. During Beale expedition ,plenty of folks were trapping . Where were such lonely places that a large group could avoid detection from natives and other competition?

This all takes us right back to the failure to research the details in the story itself first, this failure not allowing many folks to realize that the author of both the letters and the narration obviously had little to no first hand knowledge about the subjects these two sources speak of. Both documented history and science rebut much of what is claimed in this tale of treasure, and yet, "it is about potential fame and fortune and lost treasure and so it must be true!" From here all manner of alternate wild adventure and evidence is manufactured just to keep this romance and blindly pursuit false hope alive. As is all-too obvious even today.

 

[ECS]

...

Or of a large trapping party arriving / departing St. Louis...That bastion of fur trading where competition would not go un noticed when strangers were involved.

If pecking rock is intruding....trapping will get you noticed still today.
Good fur sign means a lazy trapper is around. During Beale expedition ,plenty of folks were trapping . Where were such lonely places that a large group could avoid detection from natives and other competition?

In the 1820's, St Louis was sill a frontier town, and the first banks were formed by those who were involved in the fur trade, and gave loans, using fur as collateral. The stores and mercantile business, as the Kennerly brothers (uncles to Julia Handcock of the Beale duel with Risqué, and to the Hutters and Ward) were geared as outfitters for these expeditions west of the Mississippi.
Frontier towns during that time period rarely had a need or use for a jewelry store, but when the Hutters were there and later, Ward and his wife, yes there were jewelry stores in St Louis, and is another anachronistic error found in the 1885 Beale Papers.

 

[franklin]

In the 1820's, St Louis was sill a frontier town, and the first banks were formed by those who were involved in the fur trade, and gave loans, using fur as collateral. The stores and mercantile business, as the Kennerly brothers (uncles to Julia Handcock of the Beale duel with Risqué, and to the Hutters and Ward) were geared as outfitters for these expeditions west of the Mississippi.
Frontier towns during that time period rarely had a need or use for a jewelry store, but when the Hutters were there and later, Ward and his wife, yes there were jewelry stores in St Louis, and is another anachronistic error found in the 1885 Beale Papers.

There were silversmiths and jewelry stores in St. Louis during the time of TJB's Expedition. I counted at least six and made copies of them.
Have you ever thought to look into the papers of Clark, Governor of the Territories. He could easily exchange $13,000 of jewelry for silver. Or the Chateau Family founders of St. Louis. It had to be someone trustworthy enough not to let the word out about the silver.

 

[bigscoop]

There were silversmiths and jewelry stores in St. Louis during the time of TJB's Expedition. I counted at least six and made copies of them.
Have you ever thought to look into the papers of Clark, Governor of the Territories. He could easily exchange $13,000 of jewelry for silver. Or the Chateau Family founders of St. Louis. It had to be someone trustworthy enough not to let the word out about the silver.

That's just it Franklin, keeping all of this activity a secret in St. Louis in the early 1800's would have required "a lot" of resources, including bodies, and also a lot of advanced planning. Not very likely it could have even been pulled off when you consider the realities within the story's proposal. And then what about the mine and gold and silver, history and science are both conclusive to the fact that this portion of the tale isn't true because it can't possibly be true. The continued clinging to these false statements isn't going to get anyone anywhere, just going to keep them roaming about in the same old circle in search of answers that can't possibly exist anywhere in that circle.