Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Anonymous
Re: Spoiling a Good Yarn...
Thu Aug 30, 2018 8:15pm
2601:681:4701:bfe8:7168:51de:979b:bc46

The Nov 1901 signature matches the undocumented scribble on a piece of paper that anyone could have planted in the Pinkerton file. How convenient. I think that sums up the similarity.

I'm glad you've acknowledged the likelihood that BC and SK didn't sign the 1901 docs in person because they weren't accessible. Hmm, I wonder where they could be? No witnesses in 1901, only signed documents.......mainly copies past from person to person. I'm D Brand had their US address in his rolodex.

Brett






I'm glad we cleared that up, that H.A. Place actually signed the November 1901 document.

I didn't mention the two Gardner signatures because I thought I'd caused you enough angina for the day. People do put each others names on documents, on petitions, open letters, for example, especially in an early 1900s frontier region where not every one is accessible. Another even more common example is census information provided by one person for an entire household. Doesn't mean the people on the form do not exist; they just weren't there when the enumerator came calling.

  • Re: Spoiling a Good Yarn...Daniel Buck, Thu Aug 30 6:53pm
    I'm glad we cleared that up, that H.A. Place actually signed the November 1901 document. I didn't mention the two Gardner signatures because I thought I'd caused you enough angina for the day. People ... more
    • Re: Spoiling a Good Yarn... — Anonymous, Thu Aug 30 8:15pm
      • what I wrote vs. what you postedDaniel Buck, Fri Aug 31 4:21am
        What I wrote: "People do put each others names on documents, on petitions, open letters, for example, especially in an early 1900s frontier region where not every one is accessible. Another even more ... more
        • CNNChrisV, Fri Aug 31 5:20am
          Lets see the estancia horse purchase. Never seen it You forgot to mention the July 18, 1901 document the pair sign giving D Brand authority to work on their behalf. Very important for your theory.... more
      • You never disappoint ChrisV, Thu Aug 30 8:23pm
        "I'm glad you've acknowledged the likelihood that BC and SK didn't sign the 1901 docs in person because they weren't accessible. Hmm, I wonder where they could be? No witnesses in 1901, only signed... more
    • Re: Spoiling a Good Yarn...ChrisV, Thu Aug 30 7:46pm
      We didn't clear that up. The November 5, 1901 document is a poorly done forgery. The other undated document is fine IMO but should still be looked at by a expert. As far as John Gardner's signatures, ... more
Click here to receive daily updates