|
Post by Repka on Aug 30, 2024 15:24:01 GMT -5
I agree Wayne, it appears Cline gathered stories passed down through various persons over the years. The details may have changed over time so were left with third hand hearsay at best. Still, hearsay can be very interesting and sometimes contains truth, there’s no denying that. I wonder about Cline though, was he a respected historian? I never came across any of his books. I also wonder if we can trust Cline's manuscript wasn't tampered with at some point along the way? Wasn't it Gale Cooper who had gotten these documents in her possession before Rufus got them? I dont believe he was, and his book Alias Billy The Kid is just terrible. He said that Billy was a cowardly crook and did not hesitate to kill for money, lol what a joke. Everyone knows that he was rough but a coward? And did not hesitate to kill for money? Give me a break. Everyone that brings Donald Cline to the discussion board here should know better. You make me laugh. You actually think your an authority on BTK but unfortunately you're a wee one. And that's where the wee ones need to stay.
|
|
|
Post by chivato88 on Aug 30, 2024 16:25:09 GMT -5
I dont believe he was, and his book Alias Billy The Kid is just terrible. He said that Billy was a cowardly crook and did not hesitate to kill for money, lol what a joke. Everyone knows that he was rough but a coward? And did not hesitate to kill for money? Give me a break. Everyone that brings Donald Cline to the discussion board here should know better. You make me laugh. You actually think your an authority on BTK but unfortunately you're a wee one. And that's where the wee ones need to stay. My post was never about authority on BTK and Ive never claimed to be so you need to pipe down. And may I add that your comment is pretty much garbage.
|
|
|
Post by Rufus on Aug 31, 2024 0:30:25 GMT -5
Donald Cline, for the record, is not a known criminal by the same name. Nor any relation to that individual. Cline died in 1990. He was considered by many to be one of the top authorities on Billy The Kid in his time, so much so that C.L. Sonnischen (yes that Sonnischen) would refer people to Cline on the subject of Billy The Kid.
Secondly, no Cline did not have a positive view on Billy Bonney. He saw him as a cop killer, thief, and braggart. Some people hold the opinion that there is nothing redeemable about those who kill lawmen even if the lawmen were crooked. I know Steve Sederwall, who was also a former lawman, held the same opinion on Billy The Kid when he first began researching him.
However, I don't think one has to be a fan or pro-Billy to write a decent/good/solid book on Billy The Kid. A lot of people assume that you have to be in order to do somebody justice. I don't hold that view, as long as one's personal biases don't overtake the work.
Cline quoted the following individuals:
Mary June Roberts Geneva Pittmon Vernice Galloway Elizabeth Bennett Wayne Roberts (Thomas Ulysses Roberts's Children)
Linda Barclay (The Roberts Family Historian)
Philip Jay Allison Junior Allison Robert Allison Paul Allison (Malinda Allison's Grandchildren)
Among others of importance. Martha Vada Heath's children also were quoted, and she was one of Brushy’s older sister's. Throw in family recollections of Brushy staying in Dibble Oklahoma with Cordelia, him mentioning Dudley Heath in conversations with Morrison, his sister Samantha in Carlsbad, etc you can account for basically most of his life.
Now, people can believe he's Billy The Kid all they want but on the basis of his own family's recollections and censuses, etc the vast majority of his claims: Rodeo Champion, Roughriders, Shetland Islands, South America, Mexican American War, etc would have to be disregarded as complete falsehoods.
Even the name "Brushy" seems to have come from his sister's town of Dibble as the creek that ran through it was originally known as Brushy Creek and it was after that initial stay in Dibble did he start referring to himself as "Brushy" Bill Roberts. Funny enough the book essentially quotes Henry Oliver Roberts through the recollection of his daughters, because he had heard his sons stories and said he (Henry) was never in any war as Brushy claimed.
It must be noted the cover of the book is a blown up picture of Oliver Pleasant Roberts as a child, maybe ten or twelve years of age. I believe it's a group family picture that focuses strictly on him. The big ears, heavy jaw, and mouth trying to conceal the protruding upper teeth he had is pretty definitive that was indeed Brushy as a child. Never forget DeWitt Travis paid for the teeth to be extracted when Brushy was much older and said it was tusk like incisors.
Do I think there is far more to be found or discovered about Brushy? Of course. But it wont prove hes Billy The Kid. At some point something will pop up in 1910-1911, verifying he was working as a farm hand or it will be some other date once again demonstrating he was at home with his family when he was supposed to be elsewhere.
More pictures are bound to be found, in old books or scrapbooks. It was only a few months ago pictures of him riding in a car in a parade with J. Frank Dalton was discovered. I'm sure perhaps some of the Roberts family might have more pictures nobody ever saw. Etc.
I find Oliver Roberts just as intriguing as Billy The Kid, but for different reasons. Where the truth begins and fiction starts is what makes him so interesting to research. I think theres still some hidden gems out there, but the road dont lead to Billy The Kid. Just to Ollie Roberts.
Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
|
|
|
Post by nmjames on Aug 31, 2024 7:19:04 GMT -5
Nice post Rufus.
Can you tell me who Mary June Roberts was? I don't find her with Thomas Roberts. I also didn't know that Samantha lived in Carlsbad. Brushy's sister Mary Cordelia Roberts Adams who was born on 17 April, 1878, had a daughter, Ruby M. Adams Ballard who lived in Carlsbad for several years. Ruby was born in 1900. I believe Donald Cline states that Cordelia also lived there. I have information from another researcher who said the same thing and even gave Cordelia's address. It is said that Brushy stayed with Ruby at times.
Martha Vada Heath's son J.A. (John) Heath born in 1894, wrote a letter to Roland Holford of Hico in Jan. 1951 a few weeks after the death of Brushy and told Roland he J.A. Heath of Canton is Brushy's nephew and Tom Roberts is Brushy's brother and that Brushy was not Billy the Kid. (Waco Tribune Hearld, Jan. 21, 1951) I have a few more newspaper articles where family members said Brushy was not Billy the Kid.
nmjames
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Aug 31, 2024 12:05:58 GMT -5
Bottom line, Cline's book does not accomplish what it sets out to accomplish. It does not prove that Brushy and Oliver Roberts were the same person. The individuals that are quoted as saying they were the same are second generation relatives who obviously "believed" they knew who he was. I understand why second hand identifications like those would be trusted by many folks as true facts. But I don't trust them because there is so much evidence to the contrary and they can not be assumed to be FACT. Illustrative Point: My own uncle might have been using a fake identity. I don't believe he was and you could never convince "me" because my parent told me who he was when I was a child and my parent wouldn't lie about it. That justifies my believe but that "DOES NOT" make it "FACT"! My impressions would be more valid as fact if I had known him as a child "and" as an adult. Therefore, the book does not prove as a fact that Brushy and Oliver were the same person. End of story!
|
|
|
Post by nmjames on Aug 31, 2024 13:32:57 GMT -5
Wayne. I am not going to argue with you. The Reason I put the date on my post that Cordelia Roberts was born 17 April 1878, is because Brushy was born 26 August 1879. She was older than Brushy and lived around him all his life. Martha V. Roberts Heath was born in 1874. They knew that Brushy was Oliver P. Roberts. You have no proof that Brushy was born in 1859 or that Oliver P. Roberts left his family and was killed or anything else. If you do, please show it to me. I came to this site to learn but in doing research, I need facts not I think Brushy was William H. Roberts. Oliver L. Roberts, etc.
Billy the Kid, Henry McCarty, his real name was killed July 14, 1881. Brushy was about two years old.
Like Rufus says, we will just have to agree to disagree.
nmjames
|
|
|
Post by RonBk on Aug 31, 2024 15:37:20 GMT -5
Like Wayne said, second hand info aint proof. Furthermore, there is a big problem with Clines "book" which can not be ignored. It was never published, that is a big problem. That means we don't have a clue if Cline would stand behind anything in those documents. For all we know Gale Cooper edited the damn thing.
|
|
|
Post by Rufus on Aug 31, 2024 20:56:36 GMT -5
The book, from my understanding in its current form is the unedited draft that Cline never published because he died before he could do subsequent redrafts and proper editing. Therefore Gale Cooper couldn't have edited it, or changed it. It's the exact copy from the type written draft in the New Mexico archives.
To believe it could be edited or changed then by that logic, the works of William Morrison since his death have been corrupted by W.C. Jameson, Tunstill, Edwards, etc. So it's not a good line of argument especially when the physical copies are there at the New Mexico archives for anyone to see or purchase.
As for the argument "second hand sources are meaningless," is to essentially disregard the bulk of history since basically all documents from antiquity or even modern times are built largely on second hand sources.* It's the chain of custody more than anything else that matters.
What is chain of custody? For example, The Bible's four gospels are first hand information written down by second hand sources, which in turn was handed over to third hand sources, etc. To elaborate further, the apostle John had students named Polycarp and Ireaneus for example. The writings of Polycarp and Ireaneus still exist and quote verbatim from the gospel of John. They in turn had their own students, etc and that's why in part why we have the gospel of John.
In this case, we have the children of Samantha and Cordelia and Martha and Mary and Thomas quoting their parents recollections as well as their own so its a combination of 1st hand information from 2nd hand sources (parent>child) and 1st hand to the author (nieces/nephews>Cline).
Now, the question one ought to ask themselves is, "Where would it benefit the Roberts family to lie about Brushy?," because they weren't going to profit from the book for starters. Secondly, they didn't search out Cline so they weren't seeking fame. Thirdly, they had no relationship to Cline so there was no reason to lie or distort anything because of him. Lastly, there was no power or authority to be gained from these testimonies it wasn't like such revelations would catapult them into some higher position to leverage anything in their lives.
What are motives to lie? Money. Power. Sex. Fame. The Roberts family pass those motivations. Therefore their only motivation was to tell the truth as far as they knew it. Now, you might argue they didnt know the truth, but I think thats a hard buy. Why? Because, again we have older siblings giving testimonies and their children are merely reporting what their parents had told them.
Somebody older would know better. Brushy's story simply doesn't make sense, when you figure he allegedly fooled Henry and Sarah into believing he was their son, as well as the siblings, and the neighbors, and the entire community... yet he was telling anyone who would listen he was Billy The Kid, Frank James, an indian scout, a war hero, etc.
Though not in the book, I have a quote from Tony Preston who was Brushy's stepgrandson via Jewel Brown who was Brushy's stepdaughter. Hes still alive, and is in multiple Brushy facebook groups. Quoting his parents and grandparents and uncles that Brushy was claiming to be Billy The Kid even then. I will post it later, I have to get ready for work.
Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
|
|
|
Post by Rufus on Aug 31, 2024 21:15:09 GMT -5
Full quote from Tony Preston from November 2023:
"Jewel Brown married John Buck McCoy.
Molly had a twin sister. I think her name was Martha. She married a Gully. My mother was Vivian.
Buck didn’t like O.P., either. I think they had a few words, something to do with Buck courting Jewel. I know he told Buck that he was from Texas thinking that was enough to put the fear in him, and Buck told him he knew all about Texas, that he had been down there before, or words to that effect. Any way, it didn’t worry Buck. More or less, Buck just thought he was a windbag.
I always felt I shouldn’t ask Buck or Jewel very many questions about their family, and I think their kids felt the same way. Mother and her brothers would tell me anything I wanted to know. But I didn’t know very much.
My uncle told me O.P. was supposed to be a cowboy, but he couldn’t even ride Molly’s donkey. It threw him off, once, when he got on it.
Uncle Bill Brown said him and O.P. picked cotton together somewhere about the next year after Molly had died, and O.P. told Uncle Bill that he was Billy the Kid. And I think Bill believed him. I don’t think he told very many. But I know he told Uncle Bill back then.
My grandmother and granddad didn’t know anything about it until somebody sent them the book (Alias Billy the Kid).
I have a lot of letters that Perry Brown sent Jewel while he was in the navy. And I have a lot from Uncle John to Jewel. I don’t think Uncle John every mentioned O.P., but Uncle Perry did a few times.
I asked my uncle what Jewel thought about the book, when she found out. He said she was disappointed he did that. She said the picture of O.P. on horseback in that book looked exactly the way he did when her and Molly first met him at a rodeo in Canton, Texas.
I have no idea how Morrison and O.P. met, but I’m sure Morrison put a lot of words in O.P.’s mouth. I think Morrison more or less just got O.P. to agree to whatever he wanted to say in the book."
Again, as mentioned previously, you can find Mr Preston on facebook groups pertaining to Brushy Bill Roberts and you can ask him yourselves his thoughts on his step great-grandfather. Just another snapshot into the historical Oliver Pleasant Roberts alias Brushy Bill Roberts.
Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
|
|
|
Post by Rufus on Aug 31, 2024 22:29:12 GMT -5
Nice post Rufus. Can you tell me who Mary June Roberts was? I don't find her with Thomas Roberts. I also didn't know that Samantha lived in Carlsbad. Brushy's sister Mary Cordelia Roberts Adams who was born on 17 April, 1878, had a daughter, Ruby M. Adams Ballard who lived in Carlsbad for several years. Ruby was born in 1900. I believe Donald Cline states that Cordelia also lived there. I have information from another researcher who said the same thing and even gave Cordelia's address. It is said that Brushy stayed with Ruby at times. Martha Vada Heath's son J.A. (John) Heath born in 1894, wrote a letter to Roland Holford of Hico in Jan. 1951 a few weeks after the death of Brushy and told Roland he J.A. Heath of Canton is Brushy's nephew and Tom Roberts is Brushy's brother and that Brushy was not Billy the Kid. (Waco Tribune Hearld, Jan. 21, 1951) I have a few more newspaper articles where family members said Brushy was not Billy the Kid. nmjames I believe that this might've been a typographical error by Cline. On page 13 he mentions Mary June Roberts and says she was a daughter of Thomas. Far as I can see he had no daughter by this name, however, I think he meant Mary Jane Adams the daughter of Mary Cordelia Roberts. She was born in 1918 and died in 2011. As I stated before, this was a first draft that was never edited or redrafted so what we are seeing is a document "warts and all," so I would expect to find mistakes such as this. Perhaps to save people from confusion Cline called her Roberts though she was an Adams. I would love to see those newspaper articles or letters you referenced, feel free to find me on Facebook in Cold West, Alias Billy The Kid, The Anti Brushy Association or The Billy The Kid Coalition groups. I'm pretty sure I'm the only Rufus on those groups, lol. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
|
|
|
Post by RonBk on Sept 1, 2024 0:24:15 GMT -5
So, some of these people had a personal bias in that Brushy had arguments with some of their relatives. Buck didn't like Brushy and naturally everyone who are friends or relatives with Buck are going to say Brushy is a fraud. Uncle Bill Brown on the other hand believed Brushy, why do you think? You claim Morrison was a liar but this is only your opinion. There is zero evidence to support your claim. Morrison's work was co-authored by a respected historian and it was published in a real book. Cline's work on the other hand was never published so we dont even know for certain he wrote the documents himself.
|
|
|
Post by nmjames on Sept 1, 2024 0:35:22 GMT -5
Thanks Rufus.
Some years ago, while doing research in the family research center in Carlsbad, I came across the family of Mollie Brown Roberts. In doing more research, I found that she had a twin sister, Martha Frances "Mattie Brown Gulley". I also found a picture of her and her family. Martha passed in 1951. They had a brother Martin Chester "Mark" Brown who lived in the Hagerman area and is buried in the Hagerman cemetery not far from Roswell, NM. He was born in 1890 and died in 1958.
I have done a lot of research in the last 25 years. You wouldn't believe what I have found but some of it I can't share because certain family members that gave it to me ask me not to post it anywhere.
I am not on any Facebook or anything like that. I am not much of a computer person. I hate to write but love doing research. I will dig them out and tell you what newspapers they are in. As for one of the letters I have that I can't share, is a twelve-page letter between Donald Cline and a Ranger in Fort Sumner. I also have a copy of the letter the Ranger sent to Cline. In Cline's letter he talks about having documents and letters from the Robert's family. If they have copies of the letters in Santa Fe from the different Robert's family, that's great. The ones I want would be the ones from Cordelia.
Thanks again. nmjames
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Sept 1, 2024 14:36:24 GMT -5
Rufus, for personal reasons, I have to address your earlier post that used the Bible as an analogy regarding second hand information. I've been a Christian my whole life and so I've been personally acquainted with hundreds, maybe thousands of other Christians. And based on the way you finish all your posts, I have to assume you are a devout Christian so you'll understand what I have to say here. And it is this. Christians believe the Bible is the inspired word of God through "faith". Not because it has been proven to be fact. Second hand testimony does not prove fact. "Faith" is believing without seeing and it is faith that brings us to believe what the Bible says. In Brushy's case, I'm looking for "facts" to prove he was or was not BTK and unfortunately we don't have such "facts". Where Brushy is concerned we're all exercising faith where faith shouldn't be enough. I'm just saying Cline's book does not provide enough "facts" to prove Brushy's true identity was Oliver P. Roberts. Yet, the naysayers like yourself always seem to insist "they" know the facts. They don't.
|
|
|
Post by Rufus on Sept 2, 2024 0:23:31 GMT -5
Faith derives from the Latin "fides" for fidelity, and the Greek "pistes" for trust. I won't give a lecture but there is a difference between faith and "blind faith," which is belief without evidence. The Bible is one of those historical documents in which evidence is provided, as the field of Christian Apologetics demonstrates via pagan, secular, Jewish, etc sources along with the scriptures. To quote the apostle Peter: "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty," from 2nd Peter 1:16. The point is Biblical history is indeed history; even staunch atheists like Bart Ehrman who is himself a Biblical scholar has stated, "Jesus of Nazareth existed whether we like it or not," on the basis of evidence(s) of various kinds. On to the matter of Brushy Bill Roberts, and what constitutes as evidence in the field of history and what doesn't. Time and again I hear the assertion that 2nd hand sources are not evidence, but this is untrue. Much of history in antiquity and the present time is second hand. Primary sources are from eyewitnesses, and secondary sources are reports from those who discussed or referred to the eyewitnesses. In the case of Brushy Bill Roberts we have both where the children, in laws, friends, etc were eyewitnesses of him, and in turn they report what their parents told them about him. What we have here is the following: The oldest children quoting their father Henry Oliver Roberts saying he was never in any war, in response to hearing Brushy’s stories ☒ The oldest children being quoted by their children that they were there when Brushy was born, grew up with him, went to school with him, and that he resided with them off and on throughout their lives ☒ The nieces and nephews giving their own testimonials about Brushy and how he lived with them, how he told tall tales, how inconsistent he was with work and unstable relationships, etc ☒ In-laws, stepchildren and stepgrandchildren giving their own testimonials about Brushy about him either being a habitual liar, braggart, or tall tale teller ☒ What we have, then, is essentially 4 consistent layers of various generations of individuals saying essentially the same thing. Throw in censuses, marriage and land records, etc what we have here is documentation proving that he wasn't where he was as he claimed to Morrison and more importantly wasn't who he claimed to be. If he wasn't in the homes of his parents or siblings or nieces and nephews he was in the household of people like Frances LaRhetta Thompson and the Penden family doing work. Basically every moment of his life can be accounted for. His alternative life story has no documentation, evidence or proof beyond conjecture. Much of the Brushy Bill Roberts legend is built on falsehoods that were created following his death to try to "improve" the story he told Morrison. Therefore its only worth looking at "Alias Billy The Kid," and Morrison's actual papers. The story he told Morrison had so many historical inaccuracies, or lead to dead ends. Even if you wanted to believe he was Billy The Kid you would have to admit that his own recollections of the Lincoln County War and other events were false. That he either lied about such events, which makes no sense if he was trying to prove he was Billy The Kid, or he was such a wild exaggerator and so old he couldn't remember anything properly that the entire testimony is basically worthless. What makes more sense? Three generations of family saying that he was a troubled man who preferred dreaming rather than growing up, with basically every record available on their side, or that this guy was Billy The Kid but that he lied about everything in his own testimony for no real rhyme or reason otherwise you'd be able to find evidence for it or be able to corroborate it. I remember somebody saying that the reason why they believed it is because if it was an imposter why wouldn't you just stick to the New York story, etc. But I think the same logic applies in the reverse... if Brushy was Billy then why did he try so hard to attach himself to Henry Oliver Roberts a poor farmer in Sebastian County Arkansas? I think it's hard for people to imagine somebody being mentally ill and still being able to function in society and being capable of fooling a lot of people. But it's been done before many times. Before there was J. Frank Dalton there was John William James who toured much of the country as Jesse James before being exposed and later admitted into an asylum. The Many Faces of Jesse James by Philip Steele covers him briefly, and I'll post that link of the book following this paragraph. Ironically Brushy's friend Dalton bought all of the man's affidavits and claimed them for himself. Nonetheless John William James is proof that someone can be completely absorbed in delusions of grandeur and seem reliable. archive.org/details/manyfacesofjesse0000steeI guess I have to ask, what evidence would it take for one not to believe Brushy Bill Roberts was Billy The Kid? Because if family testimony is not sufficient, and neither is records, and neither is inconsistent or false statements about his alleged life... is this not sounding like "blind faith" instead of evidence based faith? Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Sept 2, 2024 14:13:56 GMT -5
I have to hand it to you Rufus, you are quite proficient at trying to prove the unprovable. Mr. Cline made a pretty good effort too. But you haven't "proven" anything. Faith, whether blind or not, is not proof of fact. You ask what would it take to convince me. DNA would prove it but we'll likely never have that, so what else? Well, I've basically already told you. Someone, anyone who knew Oliver Pleasant Roberts in the 1880's when he was just a child and was around him until after 1910 that provided first hand witness that he was Oliver and no one else would suffice, so long as that person could be trusted to tell the truth. I think we're still talking about Cline's book. And I'm saying he doesn't sight such testimony. All he has is second hand and even though it might all be accurate, it also might not be. It's not "PROOF". Do you not understand the concept of proof vs. hearsay?
|
|