|
Post by rwt on Jan 7, 2015 0:40:36 GMT -5
"Tell me how you think Brushy knew the original layout of the court house in Lincoln when he visited there in 1949? And on the same topic, tell me why he shed tears at the prospect of visiting that building and was so reluctant to go in."
Were you there? Did you see and hear Brushy? Or are you just quoting hearsay from a book?
"After 65 years, no one has "proven" Brushy's story was fraudulent." There are those that cling to microscopic threads of fantasy rather than accept the fact that their long held convictions are based on suppositions and hearsay.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Jan 7, 2015 1:38:32 GMT -5
Are you prepared to edit your book so that it contains no statements you heard or heard about or read about second hand? Let's try and maintain a level playing field here. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. As far Morrison's book, I decided a long time ago that there was sufficient reason for me to believe he was honest.
Can you define "microscopic threads of fantasy"? A fact is not a fact until it is proven. I'm looking forward to reading your book so I can determine for myself whether I believe you've illustrated facts I was not aware of before. In the meantime, I would appreciate it if you approach your comments to me with the assumption that I am an intelligent and reasonable person. If the proven facts are there, then I am more than willing to recognize them. Let's table this discussion until I've been able to read your book. You may be surprised by my response to it. You never know.
|
|
|
Post by rwt on Jan 7, 2015 17:52:16 GMT -5
You have erroneously assumed that I wrote a book.
Roy Haws lives in Jacksonville, Texas. He wrote the book. I live in California, zip code 95046. I am a genealogist. I research those who claim to be, or are promoted as, outlaws.
There are a few individuals who question accepted historical facts and choose to promote their own candidate as the real deal. They believe their own version of history. Longley and Hardcastle believe that William T. "Bloody Bill" Anderson escaped the 1864 Union ambush where he was killed and fled to Brown County, Texas. Duke believes her great-grandfather, James Lafayette Courtney, a Union army bugler, was Jesse Woodson James. Longley and Hardcastle believe J. Frank Dalton was Jesse Woodson James. Highley believed William John James was Jesse Woodson James. Simmons believes his grandfather Jacob Benjamin Gerlt was Jesse Woodson James. Epperson believes Senator William Andrews Clark was Jesse Woodson James. Pastore believes Jeremiah M. James was Jesse Woodson James. Snow believes Joe Vaughan was Alexander Franklin "Frank" James. Longley and Hardcastle believe Brushy Bill Roberts was Billy the Kid.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Jan 7, 2015 18:33:46 GMT -5
My apologies for the mistaken assumption you were in fact Row Hawes. I'll be more careful about that in the future. The list of "believers" is interesting but of course you do realize it proves nothing. I hope you appreciate the reference but I'm sure you've heard the story about Edison being asked how it felt to fail at the invention of the light bulb over 10,000 times. His answer was that he had not failed 10,000 times. He had learned 10,000 ways "not" to make a light bulb.
It is therefore possible that "one" or more of those examples is true. So, 10,000 fraudulent claims made to the identity of someone famous or infamous doesn't rule out that one such claim might be true. I frankly am not very interested in any of the claims except Brushy's. I know there are many holes in the story and many inconsistencies. And I fully understand why many people who read his story think he was just a half crazy old man who wanted to be famous. But there are a great many reasonable and intelligent individuals who lean toward believing his claim. When I get Roy's book I will read it with an objective mind and if he convinces me I will say so. If he doesn't I'll try to explain why not. To be honest with you, this story has consumed me so much for so long, I might actually be "relieved" a little if his book can convince me.
I've wondered for years why no one in the Roberts family has ever made the attempt to tell what the family thought of it all. Unfortunately, Mr. Hawes is several generations away from the family members who were in a position to know one way or the other for a fact. I think it speaks volumes as to how much information was handed down to him that he knows to be fact when you consider that he himself admits his mother once believed Brushy's claim, he once believed it and initially set out to write a book to prove it was true only to reverse his opinion after he researched "the facts". We'll see what "facts" he has though.
|
|
|
Post by MissyS on Jan 8, 2015 18:47:38 GMT -5
It's puzzling to me why Brushy would tell anyone that would listen about him being Billy The Kid but not want his wife to know? He told Morrison to come back the next day when his wife wasn't home to answer questions about him being Billy The Kid, It's not that I don't believe it, I just don't know why his wife would be exempt from knowing his past, and how she kept from knowing it if he told a lot of people? I do want to read this new book, it looks like there was alot of research that went into it. Thanks for posting about it rwt.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Jan 8, 2015 23:16:37 GMT -5
Good question Missy. I don't want to pre-judge the book but that is one of the things that peaked my interest. According to several individuals I personally spoke to in HIco and Hamilton, TX, Brushy did not run around telling everybody he was Billy The KId. He did like to say he had a secret. In reading the book, I'll be looking for specific quotes from specific people as to exactly what and when he said he was Billy the Kid. And who he said it to. I "will" read it with an objective mind.
|
|
|
Post by rwt on Jan 9, 2015 11:17:02 GMT -5
Wayne, No apology necessary. Although there have been numerous impostors claiming to be, or promoted as, Jesse Woodson James, would a reasonable person consider the 1907 will of his mother, Zerelda Samuel, as proof that Jesse Woodson James was dead?
Will of Zerelda Cole James Samuel
Page 1.
In the name of God_Amen.
I, Zerelda Samuel, of the County of Clay in the State of Missouri , being in good bodily health and of a disposing mind and memory and being desirous of settling my worldly affairs whilst I have strength and capacity to do so. Therefore, do make, publish, and declare this to be my last will and testament herein expressly revoking and making null and void all last will and testaments by me at any time heretofore made: And first, and principally, I commend my soul to God, who gave it, hoping and assuredly believing, through the only merits of Jesus Christ my Savior, to be made Partaker Of life everlasting: My body I commit to the earth to be buried by my Executor, hereinafter named , in the Baptist Cemetery at Kearney, in Said County of Clay, between my two dead sons, Archibald Peyton Samuel and Jesse W. James in such decent manner as shall befit my condition and circumstances in life: And as to all of the worldly estate, real, person, and mixed, and wheresoever situate, whereof I shall be the owner at the time of my death, I dispose thereof in manner and forms the following, to wit: -
First: It is my will that all of my just debts, funeral expenses, and the costs and charges of the execution of this last will and testament be paid by my Executor as soon as practicable after my death.
Second: I have heretofore given to my daughter Sarah Louisa Nicholson what I regard as a full, adequate, and liberal share of my property: I therefore give and bequeath to said Sarah Louisa Nicholson, in and by this last will and testament, the sum of one dollar_and no more_and I direct my Executor to pay said Sarah Louisa Nicholson said sum of one dollar in full of all gifts, bequests, and devises to her from me.
Third: I have heretofore given to my grand-daughter
Page 2:
Mary S. Barr, and done for her that which is a full and adequate expression of my bounty to her and of my love and affection for her_wherefore, I give and bequeath to said Mary S. Barr, in and by this will and testament, the sum of one dollar_and no more_and I direct my Executor to pay said Mary S. Barr said sum of one dollar in full of all gifts, bequests, and devises to her from me.
Fourth: I give and bequeath all of the rest, residue, and remainder of my person estate, absolutely, to my son, Alexander F. James, usually known as Frank James.
Fifth: I have during all the years that my husband Dr. Reuben Samuel has been a patient in the insane asylum at St Joseph, Missouri, at my own costs and charges, maintained and provided for him therein and this is as ample and faithful a manner as my circumstances permitted and inasmuch as, if he survives me, he will be tenant By the curtesy of the real estate that I shall own at the time of my death it is not necessary that I should_ nor do I hereby_make for him in this last will and testament specific or other provision, or make him any bequest or devise.
Sixth: I give and bequeath to my grandson Jesse E. James_son of my dead son, Jesse W. James_the sum of seven hundred dollars ($700) and I charge him the payment of said sum, so given and bequeathed to said Jesse E. James, on the following described real estate belonging to me, (Subject to the tenancy by the curtesy therein of my said husband, and if he survives me) situate in said County of Clay and thus described, to_wit: A part of the North-West quarter of Section No. 19 in Township No.53 of Range No.30, and a part of the East half of the North-East quarter of Section No. 24 in Township No. 53 of Range No. 31, containing in the aggregate 40 acres_and the whole bounded as follows: to_wit: Beginning at a point on the South line of said North West quarter of said Section No. 19 which is 6 and 86/100 chains East from East from the South_West corner of said quarter section, _said point of beginning to South-East corner of J. B. Crook’s two acres on March 2, 1902,_Thence running East to a point which is distant 80 poles from said South-West corner of said quarter section, thence running North 31 ½ degrees West 68 poles from to a point thence running North 14 degrees West 12 poles to a point, thence running North 34 degrees East 18 poles to a spring, thence running North 33 degrees West 43 & 4/100 poles to a point, thence running South 59 & 24/100 poles to a point, thence running East 11 & 8/100 poles to a point thence running East 54 links to a point, thence running South 12 & 4/100 chains to the North West corner of said J. B. Crook’s two acres on March 29th 1902 thence running East 6 & 32/100 chains to North East corner of said J. B. Crook’s two acres on March 29th 1902, and thence running South three & 16/100 chains to the point of beginning. And at said real estate, containing forty acres, subject to said claim in the sum of Seven hundred Dollars ($700) and subject to the tenancy by the curtesy of said husband also, if he survive me, I give and devise to my said son, Alexander F. James, and I direct him to pay said sum, so charged or said real estate within six months after my death to said Jesse E. James.
Seventh: I give and bequeath, also, so my said grandson, Jesse E. James, the further sum of three Hundred Dollars ($300) and I charge the payment of said sum so bequeathed and given to said Jesse E. James on all of the rest, residue, and remainder of
Page 4:
my real estate, situate in Said County of Clay containing about 36 acres: and the said rest, residue, and remainder of my real estate situate in said County of Clay, containing about 36 acres, subject to said charge in the sum of three hundred dollars, and subject also to the tenancy of to by the curtesy thein of my said husband if he survie me. I give and devise to my son John T. Samuel and my daughter Fannie Q. Hall, equally share and share alike: And I direct said John T. Samuel and Fannie Q. Hall to pay said sum, so charged on the rest, residual, and remainder of my real estate to said Jesse E. James within six months after my death.
Eighth: I hereby nominate, constitute and appoint my son, Alexander F. James, Executor of this, my last will and testament, and expressly request that he be not required to give any bond as such Executor.
In testimony whereof, I, Zerelda Samuel, the said testatrix, have to this my last will and testament set my hand and affixed my seal on this the 17th day of October 1907.
s/Z Samuel (SEAL)
Signed, sealed, published and declared by the said testatrix Zerelda Sameul as and for her last will and testament, in the presence of us and of each of us, who, at her request, and in her presence, and in the presence of each other, have hereto set our hand as witnesses thereunto this 17th day of October 1907.
Signed Frank Crowley
George Riley
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Jan 9, 2015 11:52:36 GMT -5
Reasonable? When one person holds a specific belief they consider "reasonable" and another person disagrees, it's easy for the second person to suggest the first one's belief is not reasonable. I'm sure what is or is not reasonable is a matter of opinion. It is my opinion that the will doesn't "prove" Jesse James was dead at the time. It only "proves" that his mother said he was. Is it strong evidence that Jesse was dead? Yes, somewhat. Is it "proof"? Absolutely not! To me, that position is objective and reasonable. I'm pretty sure in a court of law even, the will would not be accepted as proof of Jesse's death. It would probably be allowed in as evidence but it would not cause a Judge to say, "well, we have proof the man is dead so case dismissed".
One other point here. Don't you think Zerelda, if she even knew Jesse was sill alive, would have wanted to go along with the faked death in order to protect him from being arrested and punished for his crimes. Don't you think she would have cared more about that, than she would making sure he got his $300 inheritance or whatever it was.
Now understand, I am not and never have been convinced that Jesse was not killed as history says he was. I just believe it has not been proven beyond a doubt. So I don't consider Brushy's identification of J. Frank Dalton as Jesse James to be proof that he, Brushy, was not Billy The Kid. Even if I were positive that Dalton was a fraud, I still wouldn't consider it proof that Brushy was as well. To me, that position is also reasonable because I have "reasons" to take that position.
I believe, to say a person is "reasonable" is to say they have "reason" for their opinions and beliefs. If the exhumation of Jesse would have provided DNA that had solid provenance it actually came from the body that was in the grave and it matched the DNA of his family and I were then to suggest his death had not been proven, "that" would be "unreasonable". If I take a position that has a reason that is possible, then I am being reasonable.
Thanks for sharing.
|
|
|
Post by rwt on Jan 9, 2015 13:18:08 GMT -5
Everybody loves a good story, no matter how far fetched the plot.
Books about the claims of "Brushy Bill" Roberts:
Books advancing the claim:
Alias Billy the Kid by C. L. Sonnichsen & W. V. Morrison, 1955. Billy the Kid & Me Were the Same by Dr. William A. Tunstill, 1988. The Trial of Billy the Kid by Judge Bobby E. Hefner, 1990. Billy the Kid: Killed in New Mexico---Died in Texas by Dr. Jannay Valdez & Judge Bobby E. Hefner, 1995. The Return of the Outlaw Billy the Kid by W. C. Jameson & Frederick Bean, 1998. The Real Billy the Kid AKA: Brushy Bill Roberts by Brett L. Hall, 2004. Billy the Kid: Beyond the Grave by W. C. Jameson, 2005. Billy the Kid: The Lost Interviews by W. C. Jameson, 2012.
Books refuting the claim:
Billy the Kid, His Real Name Was by Jim Johnson, 2006. Billy the Kid's Pretenders Brushy Bill & John Miller by Gale Cooper, 2010.
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Jan 9, 2015 13:44:27 GMT -5
I either have read or owned most of those books including Johnson's book and I will soon have Row Hawes' book. None of them have "proven" anything to me because I have a very high standard of what constitutes proof.
I do love analogies and the following is a true story. In my days as a high school band instructor I once questioned a student who missed a rehearsal and he said he couldn't come because there was a snake in his front yard and he could not safely get to the car. I asked him why he didn't just exit the back door of the home and circle around to his car and he said because it was raining in the back yard. I asked him why he didn't use an umbrella or a rain coat and he said he didn't have any. He hadn't mentioned the rain initially so I asked if it was also raining in the front yard and he said no. Try as I might, my questioning was not able to provoke an admission of guilt or prove that he was lying. My point? I didn't believe his excuses. They were too "far fetched". But you know what? I couldn't prove they weren't true so I had no choice but to forego the penalty for missing rehearsal. Some band teachers would have assigned the penalty anyway. I believe my position was the reasonable one.
|
|
|
Post by rwt on Jan 10, 2015 16:13:18 GMT -5
I see that Roy Haws posted on another thread as a guest last year: An excerpt from Roy's post - "I will in my spare time now (since I am retired) to try to make sense out of it all. With the few books I have read thus far, I am currently leaning toward the idea that he was indeed the real Billy The Kid...although, I could be biased due to the psychology of subconsciously desiring that one of my relations was the infamous outlaw. :-) At the moment, however, I will remain undecided as I tend to be an analytical person by training during my lifetime. "
|
|
|
Post by Wayne Land on Jan 10, 2015 16:43:11 GMT -5
Quoting Roy Hawes from a post on his Facebook page (Brushy Bill Debunk Society):
<<Several members of my family including myself bought into the story. Mother had told me and other members of the family that it was true. At the time, I had many things going on with my employments and gave it little thought. My attitude was simply that it was interesting, but so what if I was somehow family related to Billy the Kid. So it remained for many years. Mr. Tunstill's ridiculous book was published in 1988 and other authors (like W. C. Jameson who penned three books claiming Brushy was Billy the Kid) took his conclusions as fact along with the fairy tale Brushy told in the book "Alias Billy the Kid" published in 1955 by Sonnichsen and Morrison. Now in my latter years with time on my hands, I thought I might investigate and prove with more satisfaction that Brushy was indeed Billy the Kid. I thought I could with the aid of more information easily available on the internet do a better job with the proof. Alas, after the first day of research, it became quite evident it was all a confabulated lie! So, I reversed course in my research and found I could "debunk" the whole thing for once and for all.>>
My point in my earlier post was, if the family had been so certain Brushy was not Billy The Kid then why would Roy's mother ever have believed Tunstill's information in the first place. There must have been some room for doubt in what the family knew or she wouldn't have spent 5 years working with Tunstill to try and prove Brushy's story.
|
|
|
Post by RWT on Jan 10, 2015 19:33:11 GMT -5
Wayne, I'm sure you must be referring to Roy Haws rather than Roy Hawes. Never underestimate the importance of accuracy and integrity in history and genealogy.
|
|
|
Post by RWT on Jan 11, 2015 12:01:19 GMT -5
Wayne, I respect your knowledge of music and music appreciation, for I have almost none. The same is not true for genealogy. Genealogists rely on a number of sources. No source is 100% correct in every instance, but some have fewer errors than others. In my OPINION, sources can be placed in the following order based on probable accuracy: 1. Personal knowledge about immediate family members (parents, siblings, spouse, children) 2. State vital records (birth, marriage, death, divorce) 3. Social security death index (death date sometimes is approximate) 4. Quaker meeting house records (births, marriages, deaths, membership transfers) 5. Bible records (provided information was recorded at the time of the event) 6. Baptismal records 7. Cemetery records (provided monuments were placed in a timely manner) 8. Local area histories 9. Old family letters The following sources provide clues, not facts, which require verification by independent sources. 10. Prior published family histories and genealogies 11. Information found in books with references and sources The following sources are suspect, but may provide clues. 12. Books with no sources or references 13. Ancestry.com family trees (which vary from trash to treasure, depending upon the owner) 14. Hearsay (Great-uncle Henry told grandma that he saw Jesse James riding a mule at night.)
There may be additional sources that I have failed to list. DNA is a valuable resource. Since random mutations of alleles can and do occur at various loci, and between generations, conclusions must be based on probability. The greater the number of alleles characterized, the more reliable the comparisons. DNA is most useful in proving that two individuals are not related. If two individuals are closely related, DNA cannot determine the precise relationship. If the YDNA results of Brushy Bill and Thomas U. Roberts were a perfect match, DNA results would indicate they were closely related but could not identify them as brothers; father and son; uncle and nephew; etc.
|
|
|
Post by RWT on Jan 11, 2015 13:42:08 GMT -5
Post by Guest on about an hour ago Wayne, I respect your vastly superior knowledge of music and music appreciation, for I have almost none. The same is not true for genealogy. Genealogists rely on a number of sources. No source is 100% correct in every instance, but some have fewer errors than others. In my OPINION, sources can be placed in the following order based on probable accuracy: 1. Personal knowledge about immediate family members (parents, siblings, spouse, children) 2. State vital records (birth, marriage, death, divorce) 3. Social security death index (death date sometimes is approximate) 4. U S census records 5. State census records 6. Quaker meeting house records (births, marriages, deaths, membership transfers) 7. Bible records (provided information was recorded at the time of the event) 8. Baptismal records 9. Cemetery records (provided monuments were placed in a timely manner) 10. Local area histories 11. Old family letters The following sources provide clues, not facts, which require verification by independent sources. 12. Prior published family histories and genealogies 13. Information found in books with references and sources The following sources are suspect, but may provide clues. 14. Books with no sources or references 15. Ancestry.com family trees (which vary from trash to treasure, depending upon the owner) 16. Hearsay (Great-uncle Henry told grandma that he saw Jesse James riding a mule at night.)
There may be additional sources that I have failed to list. DNA is a valuable resource. Since random mutations of alleles can and do occur at various loci, and between generations, conclusions must be based on probability. The greater the number of alleles characterized, the more reliable the comparisons. DNA is most useful in proving that two individuals are not related. If two individuals are closely related, DNA cannot determine the precise relationship. If the YDNA results of Brushy Bill and Thomas U. Roberts were a perfect match, DNA results would indicate they were closely related but could not identify them as brothers; father and son; uncle and nephew; etc.
|
|