Marriage of Antrim & McCarty

[Texas Truth Teller]

Brushy Bill Roberts relied on “The Authentic Life of Billy the Kid” for information prior to 1882. Both Garrett and Brushy refer to “Kathleen”, not Catherine. Both Garrett and Brushy refer to Bonney, not McCarty. Both Garrett and Brushy have “Kathleen” living for a short time in Colorado. Garrett places the marriage of Antrim and “Kathleen” in Colorado. Brushy said he came to “that country up there when I went up there in New Mexico with Mrs. Antrim”, (p. 30), effectively saying that Kathleen had married Antrim in Colorado. If Brushy Bill had been in the care of “Kathleen Bonney”, he would have known that she was Catherine McCarty, not Kathleen Bonney, prior to her marriage to Antrim, and that the marriage was in Santa Fe, New Mexico Territory, not Colorado. This is easily explained. Rasch and Mullin, in 1953, published information about the marriage of William Antrim and Catherine McCarty in “New Light on the Legend of Billy the Kid”. This is the first time the date of the marriage, 1 March 1873, and names, Catherine McCarty and William Antrim, were known. Brushy Bill was completely ignorant of that fact and relied upon information in Garrett’s book. Since Brushy did not know about the 1873 marriage, he left Silver City in 1872 to go back to Texas to see his people. He stayed in Texas for 2 years, leaving in May of 1874 on his way to the Indian Territory after recovering from the beating his father gave him.

[XS59]

Texas Truth Teller, you're making good points here.

[Texas Truth Teller]

XS59,
It is much easier to shoot holes in Brushy Bill's story that to find ANY documentation that supports his story as recorded by Morrison. Of course, there are marriage or death records for each of the 3 women that Brushy said were his wives. The groom was never identified as Brushy Bill Roberts, or William Henry Roberts. They were all in the name of Oliver Roberts, O. P. Roberts, Ollie Roberts, or O. L. Roberts. In fact, I do not believe anyone has ever found an official record, or a record of any kind, in the name of Brushy Bill Roberts or William Henry Roberts.

Brushy Bill impressed Morrison and others with his detailed knowledge of the events and characters in the Lincoln County war. His knowledge of the Lincoln County war did not necessarily come from participation in those events. Books published prior to 1949 with details of the Lincoln County war includes "The Authentic Life of Billy the Kid", by Pat Garrett, 1882; "History of Billy the Kid", by Charles Sirengo, 1920; "The Saga of Billy the Kid", by Walter Noble Burns, 1926; and "The Real Billy the Kid, with New Light on the Lincoln County War", by Miguel Antonio Otero, 1936. There were probably other books and pamphlets printed prior to 1949. All probably contained some valid information, and some erroneous information.

[Wayne Land]

I don't believe Brushy's knowledge could have come from books. Sonnichsen said Brushy was not a "literate" man, which many took to mean Brushy could not read and write. I understand Sonnichsen later corrected that statement to mean "literary" as in Brushy didn't read much. Either way, he didn't read a lot or he couldn't read, it just doesn't seem likely he would remember as much as he did just by reading those books or having them read to him.

Yes, there is a record of William H. Roberts as a member of the Rough Riders. As for as the name Bonney is concerned, no one has proven what Catherine McCarty's maiden name was. It may well have been Bonney. Why must we assume that everything in Garrett's book is bogus? And it wouldn't be so strange for Brushy to refer to Catherine as "Mrs. Antrim" even if he is speaking about something she did prior to her marriage to Antrim. Brushy did not say she got married in Colorado. On that point, you're putting words in his mouth that weren't there.

[Texas Truth Teller]

"Yes, there is a record of William H. Roberts as a member of the Rough Riders."

So what. Can you identify him as the man who allegedly enlisted in Muscogee? There are 168 men named William Roberts in the 1900 census born after 1858 and before 1878, all of an age who could have served in the Spanish American War.

[Wayne Land]

You wrote "In fact, I do not believe anyone has ever found an official record, or a record of any kind, in the name of Brushy Bill Roberts or William Henry Roberts."
I was simply sharing that you are incorrect on that point. Of course, I am presuming the H. stands for Henry. Maybe it stood for "Horatio" or "Horace"?

Of course there aren't any records in the name of Brushy Bill Roberts since that was purely a nickname! Did I really need to point that out?

[Texas Truth Teller]

You wrote "In fact, I do not believe anyone has ever found an official record, or a record of any kind, in the name of Brushy Bill Roberts or William Henry Roberts."
I was simply sharing that you are incorrect on that point. Of course, I am presuming the H. stands for Henry. Maybe it stood for "Horatio" or "Horace"?

I must have overlooked that fact. Please cite the official record, or record of any kind, that can be positively identified as Brushy Bill under his supposedly real name of William H. Roberts.

[Wayne Land]

Your initial statement did not specify a record that could be positively identified as Brushy Bill. You simply said no one had found an official record or a record of any kind in the name of William Henry Roberts.

[xs59]

Of course not everything in Pat Garrett's book has to be bogus. He probably recorded a lot of the provided factual information in good faith as well as he knew it at the time he wrote his account.
As far as Brushy's claim is concerned: what I find most troubling is this cluster of information which seems to be straight out of Garrett's book. And specifically Brushy's use of the name "Kathleen" is a red flag since he surely should know the correct first name. I think that's more problematic than his use of the expression "Mrs. Antrim" when Mr. Antrim wasn't yet part of the picture. I have to agree with Wayne here: Brushy doesn't necessarily mean that she was already Mrs. Antrim at the time he was referring to - but later she was and that's what Brushy might've had in mind.
But by using "Kathleen" instead of the correct "Catherine" Garrett might've simply slipped up and committed a slight and by itself unimportant error - and Brushy apparently repeated it. That can't be so easily explained away or just ignored IMO.
As to Brushy being "not literate": this expression can mean a lot. If Brushy couldn't read and write then he can't have been the Kid because the Kid could read and write. If however Brushy could read and write then we cannot exclude in good faith that he might've gotten a lot of his information from books and pamphlets. That he did no such thing is just the opinion of men who didn't know him before he came out with his claims. They don't have to be correct about that. Even if they formed and expressed that opinion in good faith it doesn't have to be true. Also, Brushy could've collected a lot of his information from others who did read the literature available at the time or had actually known the Kid and his associates.
As I said in another thread: Brushy's not outright noticeable but nevertheless undeniable similarity to the Kid might be the key for unravelling this intriguing story. If he wasn't the Kid, how did he become aware of this similarity? Certainly not by looking into a mirror. Most people who look at the only picture available of the Kid at the time do not think that there is a noticeable similarity - probably because the Kid in real life struck people differently. But this means that only persons who knew the Kid or had at least gotten a good enough look at him could've told Brushy about that similarity, which would've been strongest when Brushy was a young man. And those people might've been a source of information, even if not everything they might've related was necessarily correct. Once Brushy had been made aware of his similarity to the Kid he might've gotten interested in the subject and sought out information by himself. If he could read we can't exclude that he read some of that information all by himself - even if he wasn't a literary man in the sense that he had read many books or had a good education and brought knowledge. And why shouldn't he remember well what he had been told or read himself? People who don't read a lot often compensate with a good memory - especially if they are interested in a certain subject. It's of course possible that all that goes back to Dalton. He might've noticed somehow the striking similarity between Brushy and the Kid and might've provided him with a lot of information available at the time. They knew each other long enough after all.
All this can't be considered as proof one way or another. The points mentioned by Texas Truth Teller are red flags for me - nothing more and nothing less. Since a DNA study doesn't seem to be a viable option right now I wish someone would make another professional forensic comparison between Brushy's pictures (especially those of him as a young man) and the two known Billy the Kid tintypes. To have another picture now (if that is indeed correct) might be a very valuable addition. A professional forensic study would not only compare Brushy's pictures with those of the Kid. It would also look at the picture of 14-year old Brushy and try to determine if the technical standard is compatible with the standards of photography before 1881. Such a study would also look at the pictures of Brushy in his 20s and try to determine in which time period they were most likely made and to what time period his cloths in those pictures most likely belong. What about his hairstyle? Also: are there pictures of Brushy's alleged relatives? If Brushy was indeed Ollie P. Roberts shouldn't there be a certain amount of similarities with his relatives upon further inspection? A lot of information not yet retrieved might still be hidden in the available pictures.
Wayne - despite being a layman - did a remarkable and convincing job showing us not only the similarities between Brushy and the Kid but also showing us that other contenders like John Miller simply can't have been the Kid because their features, height and other markers are just too different from the Kid. But if someone discovers one single, over the years unchangeable feature of Brushy which differs from the Kid's corresponding feature - then Brushy can't have been the Kid either. No matter how big the overall similarity is. But in that case the story doesn't necessarily end. We would have to ask ourselves who exactly Brushy was and what motivated his old age claim.

[Wayne Land]

I appreciate that post and enjoyed reading it. But I'd like to ask a question no one has ever answered. If Brushy had such a great memory for the things he'd heard through the grapevine and/or by reading books and pamphlets then why did he not remember that on the night Garrett allegedly shot Billy, there were only two shots fired? That would be a major, major event in Billy's life that you really wouldn't forget once you read about it. And also, regarding the escape from the Lincoln Courthouse, why would he not mention he had gone to the outhouse? Doesn't Garrett's book make that claim? Isn't that something one would remember if their knowledge came from the books in question? Why did he have to insist he was not Catherine McCarty's son? While we're pointing out how many of his comments seemed to come from Garrett's book, can we also acknowledge there were just as many if not more that differed from any of the books?

So the question never answered is, if he was a fraud why didn't he make himself more believable by sticking with history's version of events?

[Texas Truth Teller]

"Your initial statement did not specify a record that could be positively identified as Brushy Bill. You simply said no one had found an official record or a record of any kind in the name of William Henry Roberts."

There are 249 memorials for William Henry Roberts in various cemeteries. There is also a memorial over the grave of Oliver Pleasant Roberts with dates and the words, "William Henry Roberts, A K A Billy the Kid". Only the death date is correct.

No official records for William Henry Roberts, or William H. Roberts, have been found to support Brushy Bill's claim that his birth name was William Henry Roberts.

[Texas Truth Teller]

"As to Brushy being "not literate": this expression can mean a lot. If Brushy couldn't read and write then he can't have been the Kid because the Kid could read and write. If however Brushy could read and write then we cannot exclude in good faith that he might've gotten a lot of his information from books and pamphlets. That he did no such thing is just the opinion of men who didn't know him before he came out with his claims. They don't have to be correct about that. Even if they formed and expressed that opinion in good faith it doesn't have to be true. Also, Brushy could've collected a lot of his information from others who did read the literature available at the time or had actually known the Kid and his associates. "

XS59,
I try to avoid posting hearsay, but I will repeat this story since the topic is Brushy's literacy.
I have communicated with the city manager of Hico, who has an interest in Brushy Bill's story. It is good for the economy of Hico. He said, and this is definitely hearsay, that a Hico librarian, probably a retired librarian, said that Brushy Bill requested all publications about Billy the Kid. It is now 2015. If the information is correct, Brushy would have made his request about 70 years ago in 1945. The librarian perhaps would have been about 20, and would now be in the 90s.

[Texas Truth Teller]

"I understand Sonnichsen later corrected that statement to mean "literary" as in Brushy didn't read much. Either way, he didn't read a lot or he couldn't read, it just doesn't seem likely he would remember as much as he did just by reading those books or having them read to him."

No one is in a position to assess the reading and writing skills, or the literary capabilities, of Brushy Bill. There are few clues.

"Alias Billy the Kid", p. 29. Brushy Bill set down a story of his life in a series of paper covered notebooks and corrected them shortly before his death.

Sounds as if he could write; his signature on his WWI draft registration was not printed, but cursive and legible. The grammar in his letter to "Uncle" Kit Carson was poor, assuming he wrote or dictated the letter.

[Texas Truth Teller]

xs59,
It is also noteworthy that neither Garrett or Brushy Bill mentioned that Catherine McCarty and Henry lived in Sedgewick County, Kansas from about August 1870 until August 1871. Of course, that is assuming Catherine had her 12 year old son Henry McCarty with her. That information was not published by Waldo Koop until September 1964, but Brushy Bill should have remembered living there. Brushy mentioned being in Colorado with Kathrine Bonney, and yet no record has yet been found proving Catherine McCarty was in Colorado.

[Wayne Land]

Did I ever mention I lived in Morgan, GA for a couple years? Well, I guess that means I'm not really me.