If Tom lost his earldom for marrying beneath his class and came to America...
I'm not convinced that is what happened, at all. It seems to be a simple misinterpretation that no one has questioned thus far. He shows up on Scottish criminal records standing trial for theft, multiple times before he leaves for the US. The first one we can see a record of shows the charges levied against him and a conspirator as "Precognition against Thomas Douglas for the crime of theft
and previous conviction." So by this time, the court is already looking at him as a potential career miscreant. Then he is back in a few years later for "Precognition against Thomas Douglas for the crime of robbery, or theft,
habit and repute, and previous conviction." And I think this is where the confusion lay. In Scotland at the time, if the charge of "habit and repute" is used in a civil sense, it means an illegal or common law marriage, so the authors that chalked it up to that would have been correct if the theft charges weren't already in the mix. When you preface "habit and repute" with "theft" it completely changes the meaning.
HABIT(E) AND REPUTE, adj. phr. Sc. Law: an adaptation of med. Lat. phr. habitus et reputatus, held and reputed (to be so and so); also used substantivally = the fact of being held and reputed, reputation. “Habit and repute, in the law of theft, means the reputation of being a thief, the words being used in aggravation of the particular charge. In civil law it is the reputation of being married which, coupled with cohabitation. constitutes an irregular marriage” (Sc. 1946 A. D. Gibb Legal Terms 39).
In the sense that it applies to Thomas, the court is essentially saying "not only are you a thief, but you are of poor character, and an all around bad person as well." This is getting ready to lead to stacked charges next time he screwed up, which he would, as records and stories about Tom all say he was a raging alcoholic. It is important to acknowledge that Thomas has moved up from plain old theft, to robbery as well. So, I think it is pretty safe to say, that the actual reason Thomas made a run to the states, was because first and foremost, he knows next time he's facing charges the legal system is not going to treat him kindly, and maybe he was an embarrassment to a powerful family (I have yet to find one shred of evidence for this that isn't purely speculative, and the names and dates don't match up for the Earl of Angus or the Marquess of Douglas and Clydesdale, to whom's first born son goes the title of Earl of Angus, at the time) and they are done with him (hence no titles for Tommy).
Now he might have married at some point, as he purportedly had two children, however when it started and ended isn't entirely clear and it might be a mixup with an auto mechanic of the same name who lived in Tacoma at the same time. I tend to believe this is the case, and Tom was a bachelor. Sure, some records show "Thomas Douglas" as married at his departure or arrival, but it's a common name, and either way if he was, by the time he gets to Chelan County, Washington he is listed as Single in the censuses, and never a wife to be seen. Seems to me, Tommy was just a (possibly rich) kid with a drinking and stealing problem. The fact that he owned a mining claim that he never worked and and was widely known to be worthless, leads me to believe he might have owned that claim solely so he could legally live on the government land it sat on, away from prying eyes and judging questions. Was he running cons on those Tacoma or Seattle trips using info gleaned from all those newspapers and magazines and then hoofing it back to Blewett until the heat died down? Or was he still up to his old tricks, robbing miners, or stagecoaches with the help of Archie McKinnon, using the miners cabin as a hideout after the fact. It's hard to know for sure.
...he may have been a "remittance man" given a yearly stipend
from his father in Scotland.
That sounds much more likely than he was traveling with a chest full of gold. It was the 20th century, and having huge amounts of cash on hand was not only not necessary, but just a really bad idea all around, unless of course it was ill gotten.
P.S.: According to the probate requests filed with the county courts after his death, the grand total of his net worth, including cash on hand, value of real estate holdings (he owned none. His cabin was on government land), judgements in his favor in two separate lawsuits he was involved in at the time of his death (Tom
LOVED to sue people. Could be part of the reason he's not exactly loved by those around him, or his source of income), all of his prospecting / mining equipment, pots, pans, dishes, tables and chairs, and the clothes on his back........ was no more than $1,000. And they were never able to locate any of his heirs to distribute his estate in the 5 years of probate, but that was probably by design (His attorney filed for administration of his estate on the day he died, and ended up the sole beneficiary of said estate). I wonder if the recollections of seeing him with / burying a chest of gold coins was recollected before or after they found out about his purported titled origins? I know the neighbor's story wasn't told to anyone until after...
Some interesting tidbits to know:
Some pieces of the story of Thomas' lineage do match up to someone in the same family tree as the Earls of Angus, specifically James Hamilton, 6th Duke of Hamilton. He had a clandestine wedding that was frowned upon, but retained his titles and died in 1758 so he can't possibly be Thomas' father. I am unable to find a James & Mary in the line, post 17th century.
Thomas' birth year as listed on his grave is most likely a guess. They were never able to contact anyone who knew him well, and his death certificate as well as interment papers both list his birth date and age as "DK," don't know. His neighbors guessed he was around 60 when he passed. This leads me to believe the story of a letter to an "Elizabeth" and a birth certificate from Perth giving the names of his parents as James and Mary Douglas and his birth year of 1850 are both fabrications. They show up nowhere in any of the official documents following Thomas' death, nor does any reply from Scotland confirming his lineage. The only item listed in the inventory as being found besides clothing, furniture, and tools, was a 2 oz piece of amalgam so he must have been processing placer at some point.
The Leavenworth Echo from March 24, 1905 speaks of Thomas' death, and claims he has 2 daughters, a son, and a brother in the Seattle area. If true (should be decently easy to check on), this could throw a serious wrench in the Earl of Angus legend.
