The Jacob Beeler 1750-1843, Who Wasn't At King's Mountain.

This is the post that started the Jacob Beeler 1750-1843 at King's Mountain Story to come apart.

It has become pretty much an amusing nuisance because of the overwhelming amount of sworn documents. Not one of these United States documents sworn in court supports that lark.

Anyway, this is when it was discovered to be nothing but a story and a figment of three persons imagination. Go read the documents yourself....

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Posted by Ken Parker on 12-29-2009. I had read the U.S. Pension that addressed those persons involved and found the omission of facts were so very flagrant. Age. It took another four years to discover there was NO family relationship for the Jacob Beeler 1750-1843 and everyone knows what we have now.....Here we go 4-1/2 years ago"

Pxx Gxxxxx,

I have reviewed a paper by a D. R. Cosper from about 1994. It may be the one my son-in-law said was posted by you on one of the sites. I am not sure. In any case it does not matter all that much. The article did point to a pension filed in 1832, but addressed no details, and the rest of it stated some accepted positions long held and spent the rest in speculation, circumstantial and conjectural observations. Cosper admitted that.

Keystone documentation was missing. The only 1832 pension application I have been able to find is for the younger Jacob Bealor of Sullivan County Tennessee. It clearly is not for the elder Jacob Beeler of the same county which may be the claimants uncle. The pension file itself is on line.

What is strange about the Cosper paper is that the one pension I found clearly refutes his position. The pension I refer to was administered in court August 22, 1832, Sullivan Co. Tennessee. He, Cosper, could not have read this one and come to the conclusion he did. Surely he refers to another.

I did find a reference to a Jacob Bealer on the census of 1840 regarding pensioners. The younger Jacob Bealer was probably dead by that time so it could be the wife of the younger Jacob Bealer if he had one alive that was getting a pension. The age given was 89 years which would be close to the age of the elder Jacob Bealer but there is no pension in fact to support the Cosper claim that he ever applied for a pension. Also, I don't think the elder Jacob Bealer would be eligible to get the pension of his deceased nephew but I am not sure.

The Acts of 1816, 1818, 1832, 1836 and 1838 could apply in the instance above so I am not sure what is the case. The general belief at the time and possibly a requirement was to swear that you had no property that amounted to $100, and I refer to Revolutionary War Pensions, Adam Cabbage, S.2111, page 9. I feel that Joseph Bealer the younger in Grainger County would not be eligible as he seems to have been fairly well off. I do not know about the elder set of brothers but men of property do not seem to be claimants but as Adam Cabbage stated, "he saw other of his neighbors get the pension that had more than he did so he decided to claim it to".

The United States War Department had inquiries on the above person (Jacob Bealer) in 1910, 1914, 1938 and 1940. The letters are in the file and the answer was consistent. It seems like there is a fixation about "who was at Kings Mountain?" (1) The Draper paper tells you the Bealers were brothers and (2)the War Department pension application tells you which set of brothers and battles involved. You need both.

In the case at hand, the claimant respondent seeking the benefit of the Act of Congress 7 June 1832 had to: state his name, age and service in multiple places, have at least one witness to his claim. He did. He also signed it in script; he writes. He did not execute a "his mark".

On the 22nd day of August 1832 the CLAIMANT would have to be 81 years old if it was the son of Ulrich Bealer, or 70 years old if the son of John Valentine Bealer. It IS written in Arabic numbers AND in word form and sworn to by three persons. I suggest anyone interested go read it themselves. THE ONLY 80 FOUND IN THIS ENTIRE FILE IS THE DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR EACH YEAR. $80 per annum.

The "brothers" were the sons of John Valentine Bealer. Joseph was 18 years and three months old and Jacob Bealer was nineteen years and one month old in October 1780.*

Also, while reading one of the posts by Maxine Yeats, I noted one comment she made which would apply in this case discussed. Documentation, documentation and documentation. I have to admit I ALMOST didn't go look in the files at the War Department when I read the article by Cosper. ALMOST!

There was a tone, if you will, to that article that would beg a closer look. My real surprise is that apparently no one else has picked up on the error.

Down here in Texas the thing is "who was at San Jacinto, the Alamo, etc", what I would call "bragging rights". Since it was "a given" that the elder Jacob Bealer was a Patriot, the argument had to be over "bragging rights". So what I got out of that article was it was very very important for some reason known only to Mr. Cosper to "place" the elder Jacob Bealer at Kings Mountain.

As one involved in peer reviewed papers, I respond to Mr. Cospers invitation for question and no offense is intended. This public forum is acceptable to me but others wishing to contact me by email are invited to do so.

I will be putting the file in question up on blog because of the supposed "confusion". Until then please go to the Revolutionary War Pension files, Jacob Bealer and read the documents for yourself.

I hope this helps,
Ken Parker


* My calculations and I trust you will agree I am very close.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

As it has turned out, it was a flagrant omission of data that could not be explained away, the age was eleven years off and not the man claimed.

That failure, by withholding crucial information, created a total lack of credibility that exists today. The age error left out was followed by claims of the famous "Beeler Family Bible" that were intended to mislead as well.

The claim of relationship, Jacob Beeler 1750-1843, to Joseph Beeler 1744-1833 was fabricated in the same manner. It is well covered on the GenForum.com site Beeler Family Forum. It does get a little testy at times but it is a very good example of what happens when information you have claimed does not exist. Even if you or slightly off, fudging if you will, the object was the same...mislead.

There can be no credibility related to the story or anything written about it by anyone involved.

However, if you are into Minutia, you can't beat it for entertainment. There are no others better at it and I would put them up against anyone in that regard. Check it out. It is pretty amazing the amount of useless information that can be assembled if you have no proof.