Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site abnjh.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!abnjh!cbspt002
From: cbspt002@abnjh.UUCP (Marc E. Kenig )
Newsgroups: net.crypt,net.misc
Subject: Re: The Beale Ciphers
Message-ID: <730@abnjh.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 7-Jul-84 21:00:45 EDT
Article-I.D.: abnjh.730
Posted: Sat Jul  7 21:00:45 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Jul-84 00:35:23 EDT
References: <148@oakhill.UUCP>, <3102@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: ATTIS, NJ
Lines: 30

<Beale's first two names are Thomas Jefferson...hmmm sort of obvious, no?>

  The owners of the land would only be abe to stake a claim if they KNEW
that the treasure was there when they acquired the land, or if they are
direct descendants to TJ Beale and/or company. Also, come into play the
laws of slavage in W. Virginia (and W. Va. Lawyers out there?).  You'd
pay tax immediately to the feds on those articles on which could be placed
immediate value (i.e. the gold and silver).  Fortunately, the 3rd
cipher (giving relatives names of those in Beales expedition) can not
be considered a will or title.
  Personally, I think it's a hoax.  Why put the most expository narrative
in the second, rather than the first cipher?? Also, if one is encoding a
message, you tend to write in a dry 'telegram' style.  TJ Beale not only
repeats himself, but uses qualifiers like 'vault or excavation', etc.
How about the ability to haul all that weight thousands of miles given
1820's wangons and a distinct lack of roads through tough terrain? Or the
fact that it was only buried six-feet deep (I'd of buried it a lot deeper
myself).  And why use such a popular document such as the Declaration for
one cipher key and then turn around and use far less obvious keys for the
others?  How come there are absolutely no Spanish records on such a party
ever visiting New Mexico (which had pretty thoroughly been picked clean by
the Spanish for over two centuries)?  And Mr. Morriss was either very honest
or had absolutely no curiosity to hold a lockbox for over 20 years and not
peek inside.
  Proving the ciphers to be hoaxes can only be done by indirect evidence and
hostorical analysis - which is as much part of cryptanalysis as codebreaking.
The Beale Cipher Society has some good collections of papers along this line.

M. Kenig  "Of course, somebody could've already dug it up and not told
...abnjh!cbspt002                          anybody. That's what I'd do!"