Idahodutch
Bronze Member
Isnāt it funny how everyone is certain theyāre right. š
New Clay Worst Interview. I think it's awesome!
- Thread starter OldManOfTheRiver
- Start date
Idahodutch
Bronze Member
There is a layer between what Clay said, and what we read.
I would want to hear confirmation that the words we read were all provided by Clay, or if some of it was from some other source.
This account is saying that Waltzā deathbed confession, was the first time Waltz ever attempted to tell how to get to the mineā¦. To anyone.
In my opinion, there is absolutely nothing to back this up, yet much to back up the contrary.
I have seen no correction, saying ā¦. Ooops hehe, sorry.
Maybe one will still come out.
A simple formal statement, would remove the question, regarding if this was just mistaken or deliberate wording. š
Hinterlander
Jr. Member
Idaho, did you ever consider that Clay is just telling the story as he knows it? Clay got his information on Waltz and the deathbed story from Brownie who got it directly from Dick. Dick wasn't involved in any of the conversations that Waltz reportedly had with Julia and Rhiney. If Clay didn't have direct information from them then he would be passing on the hearsay of another person. This is how we've ended up where we are, with limited actual clues and loads of BS. You'd do yourself and everyone else a favor to congratulate Clay for sticking to just passing on the information that he received second hand from Brownie, rather than embellishing it with information that he received third, fourth, fifth or more hand or read in a book. If everyone had done that maybe we could piece together the true story.
Idahodutch
Bronze Member
Hello hinterlander.
I have considered it, and given it much thought.
In the YouTube video, Clay said stuff, but the areas of conflict come the parts written in the article.
We didnāt hear Clay say the deathbed stuff. We only read it. (I guess only some of us actually read it š¤·š¼)
By your response, it sounds as though you missed where almost right at my first post, where clarified that I was not doubting clays word
I wanted to give opportunity for corrections, or validations to occur.
But I doubt any will come.
Last edited:
Idahodutch
Bronze Member
In the text portions of the article, the part where I have issue, is not just because it contradicts the existing versions out there, but it also contradicts other portions of this same text.
The information being delivered is not consistent within it self.
Clay did not do the writing, but a guy named Geoffrey Gray.
Isnāt this thread to talk about this video/article combo thing?
Sincerely, Idahodutch
The information being delivered is not consistent within it self.
Clay did not do the writing, but a guy named Geoffrey Gray.
Isnāt this thread to talk about this video/article combo thing?
Sincerely, Idahodutch
Hinterlander
Jr. Member
The thread was a posting of the article, not a comparison of it to a YouTube video. You inserted the video into the conversation. Of course Clay didn't do the writing, that is the reason for the byline "BY CLAY WORST AS TOLD TO GEOFFREY GRAY". I find it highly unlikely that the author would take liberty with Clay's words when Clay is still living and able to contradict anything that was not correct.
Who are you expecting a correction from? The author did not post the article and is more than likely not a member of treasurenet. So do you expect one of us who did read the article to provide you a correction? Or possibly the original poster? I wouldn't hold your breath.
In one of your earlier posts in this thread you mentioned "those that argued that P.C. Bicknell didn't actually speak to Julia". I challenge you to find anywhere in the article where it mentions Julia by name, says that Julia was the only hearer, P.C. says that he got his information directly from Julia or anything else that validates what he wrote as coming from Julia. If you believe the story as it is traditionally known from the Bark Notes or Sims Ely, then by putting so much credit into P.C.'s story you are discrediting that Rhiney was also there. Was he not also a "hearer"? Yes, it has been said that Waltz admonished Rhiney for not listening, but he was there. So there are inconsistencies all around and that was my point. There is so much BS out there that you cannot separate truth from fiction. A researcher has to take the totality of what is out there and try to find the nuggets.
Again, I applaud Clay for sticking to only the information that he received directly from Brownie. Although, even that could be flawed.
Who are you expecting a correction from? The author did not post the article and is more than likely not a member of treasurenet. So do you expect one of us who did read the article to provide you a correction? Or possibly the original poster? I wouldn't hold your breath.
In one of your earlier posts in this thread you mentioned "those that argued that P.C. Bicknell didn't actually speak to Julia". I challenge you to find anywhere in the article where it mentions Julia by name, says that Julia was the only hearer, P.C. says that he got his information directly from Julia or anything else that validates what he wrote as coming from Julia. If you believe the story as it is traditionally known from the Bark Notes or Sims Ely, then by putting so much credit into P.C.'s story you are discrediting that Rhiney was also there. Was he not also a "hearer"? Yes, it has been said that Waltz admonished Rhiney for not listening, but he was there. So there are inconsistencies all around and that was my point. There is so much BS out there that you cannot separate truth from fiction. A researcher has to take the totality of what is out there and try to find the nuggets.
Again, I applaud Clay for sticking to only the information that he received directly from Brownie. Although, even that could be flawed.
Idahodutch
Bronze Member
Once again, the text portion of the article contradicts itselfā¦.. You may make whatever excuses you want. Believe whatever you want š¤
Soon enough, someone will produce matching ore, from a spot that matches up to clues, and we will all be able to see how things actually were/are. š
Edit: I will try to address your post a bit more.
As far as the video portion, we see and hear the words delivered.
The text portion, we donāt see or hear the words coming from clay. Only print. I too find it unlikely that he took liberties. So is the contradiction in the text simply pass through? ā¦.. probably.
The contradiction is a big one. The bits are NOT right next to each other in the text, but separated far from each other within the textā¦.. so could have been missed easy enough.
If I had put out something like this article, with a big contradiction in it, I would be embarrassed, and would want to correct it somehow, or if applicable, offer explanation for the contradiction.
Thatās it.
The mention about Julia (the woman) was only to explain my suspicions of efforts to discredit clues, may also be creeping in again.
Itās phrases like āonly true clueā that appeared first on the T-net forums, in discredit attempts of Julia. Now here it is againā¦ for same agenda, of exclusion of Julia clues.
I have no special feeling for Bicknell š
Clues are clues. Some may help, some may not.
The camp feuds gets old real fast though.
The deathbed statements in this article donāt fit the evidence of actions that followed. There is no getting around it.
In my opinion, if itās proof enough to get a person hanged, itās counts.
Names are not needed for proof.
In my opinion, it is simply camp feud creeping in.
Hopefully that splashed a little water onto the fire.
Last edited:
Idahodutch
Bronze Member
Hinterlander,
It may or may not help our conversation, but here are some things I believe about the clues:
- the version of death bed part that has Julia going out looking for the doctor, while Holmes and Roberts goes in to be with Waltz.
- that Waltz had been previously trying to explain to Julia and Rhiney, directions to the goldā¦.. in multiple attempts, over a period of time (months).
1) the background of Waltz getting the mine and the monumented trail path - maybe only Julia present? Maybe hit and miss with Rhiney?
2) the German clues path - both Julia and Rhiney present.
3) discriptions of the site - both present
4) the alternate plan where Waltz will try to take them himself, with contingency built in the plan to stay partway behind in a wagon.
Details of which, most likely focused on getting to the board house together. I donāt know.
I would guess pretty much in that order chronologically. 2 &3 same time.
Not saying my way or Highway š¤
Just giving some info on where Iām coming from, that might make conversing easier.
It may or may not help our conversation, but here are some things I believe about the clues:
- the version of death bed part that has Julia going out looking for the doctor, while Holmes and Roberts goes in to be with Waltz.
- that Waltz had been previously trying to explain to Julia and Rhiney, directions to the goldā¦.. in multiple attempts, over a period of time (months).
1) the background of Waltz getting the mine and the monumented trail path - maybe only Julia present? Maybe hit and miss with Rhiney?
2) the German clues path - both Julia and Rhiney present.
3) discriptions of the site - both present
4) the alternate plan where Waltz will try to take them himself, with contingency built in the plan to stay partway behind in a wagon.
Details of which, most likely focused on getting to the board house together. I donāt know.
I would guess pretty much in that order chronologically. 2 &3 same time.
Not saying my way or Highway š¤
Just giving some info on where Iām coming from, that might make conversing easier.
Hinterlander
Jr. Member
Idaho, you and I seem to have a lot of common beliefs as to what actually occurred. Again, that was not my point. My point is that you criticized the article, and by extension Clay, for not following the information as you (we) believe it. Again, I am simply applauding Clay for sticking to the information as he heard it from Brownie, right wrong or indifferent, and not adding in any additional information. Clay is the closest source to Waltz and the actual story that we have. So anything that he says about it that is unchanged is as close as we can get to the truth. Assuming of course that Dick was truthful with Brownie and Brownie with Clay. So you criticize this article, but on the other hand, from this thread and many others, you seem to put a lot of weight into The Bicknell article, when Bicknell doesn't name a single source other than "the woman". "The woman" could be anyone of the female gender that Bicknell talked to, we don't know. Hell, Sims Ely, who was a contemporary in the story, unlike Bicknell, and who, along with Jim Bark, interviewed "the woman" even clearly states in his book that "the woman" is "Helena, Mrs. Charles Thomas, not Julia as claimed in other books". Well Julia Thomas was married to Emil Thomas, so are we now to believe that Julia isn't "the woman"? Obviously, Sims' book was written by an author and not by Sims, so something may have gotten lost in translation. But that is a pretty clear statement to the negative and not merely a misstatement. Sims was dead by the time his book was published so we will never know. So when reading the Bicknell article or Ely's book it is a leap of faith to identify "the woman" as Julia and thereby an even bigger leap of faith to assume that anything else in the book/article is true. But to have Clay state something was told to him directly by Brownie, there is not a lot of room for error, unless of course Mr. Gray got it wrong, but Clay is still with us to dispute it if that we're the case. Additionally, at the time Bicknell wrote his article he was an active Dutch Hunter. So what good for himself would he do to put out factual clues and information? He would just be inviting competition. At least Clay is honest in saying that he is withholding information.
So again, I couldn't care less which story and clues you believe, to each their own. Just don't criticize a source because they do not regurgitate the same story that you have already deemed to be true. Take it for what it's worth and either add it to your list of clues or discard it.
So again, I couldn't care less which story and clues you believe, to each their own. Just don't criticize a source because they do not regurgitate the same story that you have already deemed to be true. Take it for what it's worth and either add it to your list of clues or discard it.
Idahodutch
Bronze Member
Hinterlander,
Thatās a nice post you just made. š
You bring up a lot of valid points.
I will try to get to the crux of the matter ā¦.
Here is a snip from this article, about the deathbed.
The wordingā¦ āfor the first time in his life, attempted to direct someone to his mine.ā
If that is to be applied, as part of āthe only true clue leftā statements, we have immediate issues/clashes with with actual events that only were able to happen, because Waltz had shared information in regards to finding his mine, ā¦.. prior to death bed. š³
Thatās the hard part ā¦.. there is evidence, if we care look at it.
Edit: I had my phone turned in vertical position when posting, and the snip insert looked normal ā¦. Not Huge Font šš. Sorry about that.
Thatās a nice post you just made. š
You bring up a lot of valid points.
I will try to get to the crux of the matter ā¦.
Here is a snip from this article, about the deathbed.
The wordingā¦ āfor the first time in his life, attempted to direct someone to his mine.ā
If that is to be applied, as part of āthe only true clue leftā statements, we have immediate issues/clashes with with actual events that only were able to happen, because Waltz had shared information in regards to finding his mine, ā¦.. prior to death bed. š³
Thatās the hard part ā¦.. there is evidence, if we care look at it.
Edit: I had my phone turned in vertical position when posting, and the snip insert looked normal ā¦. Not Huge Font šš. Sorry about that.
Last edited:
Matthew Roberts
Bronze Member
Idahodutch,
I think there's something you're not considering (in my opinion).
Both scenarios can be correct at the same time.
Waltz did try to give numerous clues to his mine to Julia and Rhinehart in the months before his death.
And also for the first time attempted to direct someone to his mine (Dick Holmes).
When Waltz was giving clues and directions to Julia and Rhinehart, he at that time believed he was going with Julia and Rhinehart to that mine. He did not think he was going to die.
That makes all the difference in the world.
Waltz would not have given the final steps to the mine to someone as long as he was alive and able to lead the way those last vital steps.
When Dick Holmes was present everything had changed. Waltz knew he was dying and would never himself go to the mine again.
The Dick Holmes account was Waltz's feble attempt to get someone those last final steps. (this is where Clay admits things are witheld).
Admittedly there is more to the account that has not (cannot) be divulged and that leads greatly to the overall confusion.
Matthew
Idahodutch
Bronze Member
Matthew,
You bring up an interesting point. If all three were present with Waltz for the deathbed accounts, Julia, Dick and Gideon ā¦. It would mean all three heard everything ā¦.. that means Julia too.
This is different than the manuscript version you have strongly endorsed, is it not? Just asking š¤ hoping for explanation
Idahodutch
Matthew Roberts
Bronze Member
Idahodutch,
Julia was not present for Waltz final conversation with Holmes and Roberts.
She left to summon a doctor as Holmes and Roberts entered to sit with Waltz and did not return until after Waltz had died.
Julia knew nothing about Holmes taking Waltz ore from under his bed until the next day. Had she been present with Holmes and Roberts in that final deathbed confession she would have surely know of the ore immediately.
Matthew
Idahodutch
Bronze Member
Thank you Matthew.
Curious that Clayās article is different.
Donāt get me wrong, I agree with you.
šµāš«
Fun stuff š
Matthew Roberts
Bronze Member
Everyone has their own opinions and theories and none are better than someone else.
Here is why I believe some things about the Waltz deathbed issues.
In 1980 I sat and talked with Hilda Kramer. She was the daughter of Alexander Steinegger and Caroline (Thomas).
Caroline (her mother) was the sister of Emil Thomas, the husband of Julia.
Hilda father Alexander employed Waltz to supply eggs and produce to his restaurant and hotel in Phoenix.
Julia and Emil also used Waltz to supply their restaurant with eggs and produce.
At the 1932 annual Phoenix Pioneer Reunion, Hilda sat with several of her family and close friends.
Present that day were her mother Caroline, Christine Cavaness (sister of Matt Cavaness), Christine's sister Rebecca, (Mrs. Abraham Peeples) and Rhinehart Peteasch.
All these people had know each other intimately in early Phoenix.
Hilda told the conversation that day turned to Jacob Waltz and if he had a mine somewhere. The Adolph Ruth story had been in all the newspapers just a few months earlier.
Hilda remembered Rhinehart saying, neither he or Julia paid much attention when Waltz spoke of a mine because they both believed Waltz would take them to the mine.
Rhinehart told Hilda, " I never thought Waltz would die before he would take us to the mine."
Edit:
It should be noted Hilda and Brownie Holmes grew up and went to school together in Phoenix. Hilda knew the Holmes family and was close friends with Brownie, Dick and Ida Holmes, and Brownies half brother, Jesse Roberts.
Matthew
Last edited:
Idahodutch
Bronze Member
Hinterlander,
Since this post, I shared some of my beliefs ā¦. In particular, potential time lines of sorts for when Waltz gave info, and who might have been present, during the different discussions with Waltz.
I think it important to stick to the clues we have, and try not to read anything into them, that are not actually factual, but from our own mind.
I am not as sticky about the phrase āthe womanā and who Bick was referring to. To me, all current evidence points to Julia.
Bicknell states only hearer, If we are to go by the clues, then thatās how the pieces should be able to be fitted, if the clues used are accurate.
You and I were not present for the months leading up to Waltzā death. It seems to me though, that Rhiney never seemed to mention anything about the Monumented trail, and if I am remembering correctly, not much, if anything about Waltz getting the mineā¦ā¦.
Occamās razor would say simple answerā¦. Rhiney not present for that portion = Julia as only hearer for that portion of How Waltz got the mineā¦ the backstory and path.
That seems to fit just fine, no discrepancies ā¦.. unless we try to say that Rhiney had to be present for all of the LDM talks with Waltzā¦.. which is not the case. Just had to be there enough to hear about the rest of it. No alterations are needed at all for that to fit that way š
You seem curios as to my fondness of Bickās 1895 SF article ā¦..
it was what I went by for the directional clues. That, and I was taught at very young age ā¦ almost 50 years ago, that the clue ā¦. If you pass the little red hills, youāve gone too far.
With that I eventually ended up ready to investigate the last of the potential spots that I marked on a topo map, of the places that were candidates for the LDM., in my mind. Life then got busy.
It wasnāt until much later, after seeing the directional clues from the Holmes Manuscript, that I looked to see if those directions were able to get to the same spot as the last unexplored spot from my search, many years earlier.
I was able to see potential alignment between the 2 sets of clues. Also, Holmes clues, gives a real good confirmation clue to make sure youāre at the right spot.
The 4 peaks clue.
For me, it was worth a special trip to see if I was on target. We made the trip, and confirmed the view and the spot, with that clue.
So yeah, now I have very little doubt about accuracy of that article of Bicknell. But I also have a fondness for the directional clues from Holmes now too. š
How about you Hinterlander, are you actively searching ?
Matthew Roberts
Bronze Member
Idahodutch,
Not sure if you recall this or not but in Sims Ely's book, The Lost Dutchman Mine, there is a chapter that tells of Julia and Rhinehart taking Christmas dinner (1890) out to Waltz homestead.
After the dinner Waltz, Julia and Rhinehart sat outside on chairs and Waltz pointed over to the east and said, "My mine is over there in those Salt River Mountains." From Waltz homestead you can see the Superstitions which were once called the Salt River Mountains.
According to Ely who got this information from Julua, it was the first time Waltz opened up about his mine and told some stories / direction / clues.
No one can say for certain exactly what Waltz told Julia and Rhinehart that day.
Top Member Reactions
-
2345 -
1131 -
1055 -
891 -
834 -
781 -
751 -
748 -
607 -
502 -
488 -
475 -
461 -
420 -
397 -
393 -
O
393
-
383 -
381 -
381
