Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Six

Before I get into the last part of this series of stories, which is looking at the Jonathan R. Davis 1854 gunfight, I want to explain that I had to make some changes to make my material fit into my blog. So I'm sorry if it's puzzling, but I did have to delete some of what I wrote so that I'd have room to finish this. My apologies for the confusion.  

                                                             ___________________

As for the story of Jonathan Davis and his supposed epic battle, it is very obvious that I believe it was a hoax. Was it an event where a man took on 11 murderers single-handedly, first with a pistol in each hand, shooting them all in the heart or the head, and then with a Bowie knife while all four of them simultaneously attacked him with Bowie knives and a sabre. And not, there's no record of the Placer County Sheriff or the El Dorado County Sheriff ever being notified or ever looking into it. And that  makes it that much more unbelievable.

The reasons that the Davis story sounds so fishy to me are all the same reasons why the public started asking questions within a fairly short time. And yes, it was fairly quickly that the story's legitimacy came into question. Newspapers like the Georgetown News echoed the public's concerns in their report on January 4, 1855, saying: "As it now stands, however, one cannot but look at the whole affair as an ingenious 'sell' upon the part of Capt. Davis and his friends. Although that gentleman still affirms its truth, as he is not able to bring the least evidence to attest it, we are obliged for the present to place him upon the list of practical humbugs."

Other than what was published in The Mountain Democrat and syndicated on the wire in newspaper articles, there is no record of an attempted homicide, homicides, robberies, a gun battle, or a knife fight ever taking place with a large gang of men involved in December of 1854. And no, there is no evidence that a shooting, nevertheless multiple homicides, ever took place.

According to one source on this story, "Seven robbers lay dead, killed outright. ... Davis had the booty, which consisted of $491 in coin and several valuable watches, sent to the dead man’s family."

That source said that the $491 was all the booty they had. But how about their other valuable stolen goods? How about their guns? Two pistols apiece would have been 22 pistols. And let's not forget their ammunition, balls and caps, powder, and more. And if they had rifles or shotguns, then that would have been that many more guns. Yes, that sounds like enough guns and ammo for Davis to open up his own gun shop in the Old West. 

And there had to be more. Those outlaws had Bowie knives while at least one of them had a sabre. And yes, they had boots, canteens, packs, coats, blankets, food, maybe watches, and their own horse and pack animals? I doubt such a large gang traveled on foot. So what happened to their gear, their horses and mules, their saddles, bridles, tack, tents, and the rest of their stuff?

The Public Wanted Evidence

If there was anything that most people wanted after a few weeks of reading about the Davis story, they wanted more evidence. I believe, more than anything else, it was the lack of evidence that made people question Davis and his story. And frankly, that was even more true after he came out with his letter to the Editor of The Mountain Democrat on January 11, 1855, to recant parts of his story. 

While he was still sticking with what he called the "general facts as published," he recanted how many times his hat was shot and how many outlaws attacked him with knives. Recanting a statement means withdrawing or taking back a previously made statement, often because it's no longer believed to be accurate or because the person is no longer willing to support it. This can happen in many different situations. Of course, in a legal context, that means someone is retracting their initial statement.

Recanting a statement means the person formally or informally states that they no longer agree with, or believe, the previous statement they made. As for the consequences of recanting some of their initial statement, even if it was to a newspaper, that could mean possibly changing the impact of the story. It may change what may be seen as a crucial piece of evidence. While it doesn't automatically mean that something didn't happen, it can challenge a person's credibility. I believe it negatively affected how the public saw Davis and the whole story. 

Thankfully for Davis, he changed parts of his statement to The Mountain Democrat newspaper, and it wasn't as if he were under oath giving a statement to the County Sheriff, where changing his story could have led to legal consequences like perjury charges. Then again, if there were an actual ongoing investigation of the supposed multiple homicide, even if the original statement wasn't sworn under oath, recanting it with a false explanation could still lead to charges of making a false statement. 

Of course, in his letter to the Editor of The Mountain Democrat, in regards to the number of rounds that struck his hat, he says, "They must have counted all the holes where the balls came out of it, in their passage through the crown and brim of it. as well as where they entered. The miners have disfigured it very much by poking their lingers through the holes, and tearing it. so that it is somewhat difficult to decide upon the number. I do not believe that over one-half of that number touched it."

And in regards to 4 men attacking me with knives and a sabre all at the same time, he tried to tamp that number down by changing the story. To do that, he said in his letter to the Mountain Democrat's Editor, "Mr. Lyles is perhaps correct in his assertion that two of the four who made the charge upon me were unable to fight on account of their old wounds." So all in all, his letter to the Editor changed a 4-on-1 knife-fight against healthy outlaws to a 4-on-1 knife-fight against 2 healthy and 2 wounded outlaws. Yes, it's laughable. 

Let's Talk About Those Outlaws & Davis's Hat

As for the criminals, that band of murdering bandits, who Davis said he supposed killed single-handedly, they were obviously the worst gang of outlaws ever. Think about it, those outlaws decided to sit around on a rocky trail -- just waiting around until they'd be able to surprise a few travelers and rob them for whatever they had on them -- if they had something on them worth stealing. 

If each of them had 2 pistols, the same way that Davis supposedly carried 2 pistols, then that's a lot of rounds being rained on Davis and his party. Two pistols for one man is 12 shots if the pistol is loaded with 6 rounds each -- which is what one would load in a pistol if you know you're going into a fight. If you are just carrying a revolver of the time, like say a Colt 1851 Navy, you only load 5 and keep the hammer down on an empty chamber as a safety. 

So, thinking that killers would load each of their pistols with 6 each for action instead of being loaded with 5 each for carry, that means those 11 murderers had 132 rounds to Davis's 10 rounds. And yes, that's just thinking that those outlaws were only carrying 2 pistols each -- when it was not unusual for bandits to carry more than that at one time.

Because, according to Davis's story, we know James McDonald was shot once and killed, Dr. Sparks was shot once and died later, there were supposedly 11 bullet holes found in his coat, and 17 bullet holes in his hat. That means the bandits expended 30 rounds, shooting 1 for McDonald, 1 for Sparks, 11 into Davis's coat, and 17 shot into Davis's hat. That means those bandits, if they were armed like Davis and had 2 guns each, had almost 100 rounds left after shooting McDonald, Sparks, and Davis's coat and hat.

And, again, according to Davis's story, we know the killers ran out of bullets after not hitting Davis with all of those rounds before resorting to simultaneously charging Davis with their knives and a saber. That means those bandits couldn't shoot straight. While that is a presumption on my part, I'd say I'm justified in looking at this like that since the bandits didn't hit and kill Davis with their pistols.

Now, before I talk about the great 4 to 1 knife fight, let's talk about Davis's shot-up hat. Those outlaws must have been the worst ever assembled. Besides not being able to hit Davis with a lot of rounds, especially since he is said to have stood his ground during incoming fire, the only thing those pitiful bandits did was shoot is shoot his coat and hat. They shot his hat. Yes, they shot his hat with 17 rounds!

Well, I have a small shooting range on the side of my home on my property, so I tried to recreate that scene. My father-in-law and I used his replica Colt 1851 Navy Revolver, .36 caliber, six-round cap and ball revolver, and we tried to shoot a few different hats to see if it was possible to shoot a hat 17 times, or even 8 times, without hitting the foam head inside of it. 

For our test, my father-in-law and I used white foam heads to hold the hats in place. And yes, we both tried to only shoot the hat and not the foam heads. By the way, the replica 1851 Navy Revolver matches the design by Samuel Colt. The original Navy Revolvers were in production between 1847 and 1850. Replica Colt Navy revolvers, particularly the 1851 Colt Navy, are popular among black-powder shooters like my father-in-law. As I said before, the replica that we used belonged to my father-in-law and was made by Uberti.

We shot a modern fur-felt "cowboy hat," a straw "cowboy hat," a replica of a California Gold Rush miner's slouch hat with a very low crown, a replica of a Mexican-American War wheel hat, and a Dickens Christmas type of top hat to try to match the bogus Jonathan R. Davis picture being circulated on the Internet.

We shot the standard .36 caliber ball round at different speeds. What I mean by different speeds is that we tried to move faster and draw and fire and hit the hats as fast as I could. And yes, my father-in-law helped me do these tests. The reason that I bring this up has to do with the fact that Tom Prickett, aka Nickle Jim, my father-in-law, was a much better shot than I am, was faster than I am, and was much more proficient at using a cap-and-ball black-powder pistol. He was perfect for helping with this test.

Our tests took about 6 hours, and his pistol was great. It truly mimicked the feel and function of the original Colt 1851 Navy Revolver. Yes, including a loose cap that jammed the pistol on four separate occasions.

As for the hats, the results varied but it wasn't good for the foam heads. Our tests found that we missed the hats altogether if we drew the pistol from a holster and shot too fast. It was very hard to just hit the hats if we were moving at a combat action pace. Of course, we slowed down so that we could hit the hats, and that's when we found out that the foam heads were hit every time we shot. My worn-out old modern fur-felt "cowboy hat," the straw "cowboy hat," the replica California Gold Rush miner's slouch hat, had about an inch or two about the foam head where a bullet wouldn't hit the foam head. As for the replica of a Mexican-American War wheel hat, the area about the foam head was reduced to about a half an inch to an inch. As for the Dickens Christmas top hat, that was hit and miss. 

We found that we needed to purposely aim high at the hats and shoot very slowly to deliberately try to hit the very top of the hats to get a round to miss hitting a foam head. We also needed to shoot slower to hit any of the hats and miss a foam head. We found it easy to shoot the hats without the foam heads in the hats.

Now, as for the gang being lousy shots? They might not have been if they were trying to deliberately shoot Davis's hat without hitting him in the head. Our tests showed that they must have been aiming high and intentionally trying to miss hitting him in the head.

There is something else, something that we found very important to note is how long it took us to reset the hats for their next shot since in most every case the hat would get knocked off the foam head when shot, and how long it took us to deliberately put 17 rounds in that Charles Dickens top hat. Remember, this is the type of hat that most bogus pictures of Jonathan R. Davis on the Internet depict him wearing.

To hit it 17 times took a long time. As a moving target, shooting those hats was not easy. To make it easier for us to shoot them, we put them on a wooden post to shoot them. And to simulate it being shot by several assailants at once, I asked a couple of friends to help us shoot the top hat with 17 rounds. 

The bottom line from my hat test was simply this: One, if Davis was wearing that hat when it was shot, he must have been standing absolutely still the whole time to let them hit it. Two, Davis must have spent a lot of time putting back on his head every time one of the outlaws shot it off his noggin. Three, there is no way a hat could have been shot 8 to 17 times without hitting the wearer in the head. And four, Davis's hat was probably shot when he wasn't wearing it to perpetrate the hoax.

So now, let's talk about Knife Fighting 101.

Now, besides being lousy shots, let's talk about how that gang was made up of a bunch of lousy knife fighters. Let's talk about those outlaws and their inability to kill someone using a knife -- when the odds were in their favor. 

According to the Davis story, there were three gang members with knives and one gang member with a sabre. The four of them attacked him abreast of each other, all at once. They should have been able to take one man with a knife, no matter if he was an "expert fencer" as he was portrayed by The Mountain Democrat. How? By simply overwhelming him.

The supposed knife-fight between Davis and 4 killers is a real point of interest to me. While in the Marine Corps, and just a young Marine PFC, I remember going through knife-fighting training at Infantry Training School. During the training sessions, it was almost always a 1-on-1 scenario meant to get your form and stance down pat. But I do remember how, after one training session, I asked my Instructor, "What do we do if there is more than one at a time or even more who come at you all at once and try to overwhelm us? What do we do then?"

Though over 50 years ago, allow me to paraphrase what my Close Combat Instructor, Staff Sgt Weathers, said, "No amount of training will get you ready for Armageddon. You have to take it as it comes, move away, and try to line them up behind each other to take on one at a time. By keeping moving back, you let them come to you."

I still remember how he tried to instill in us the belief that when fighting with a knife, you fight like your very soul depends on it. Your attack should be with viciousness and veracity. And if there is more than one enemy with a knife, you slash everywhere of your attacker at once. Slashes are designed to keep an enemy off balance and allow Marines to come in close. Once you close the distance, you can then stab your attackers. Stabs do more damage and are more lethal. You probably won't have time to parry or thrust with more than one coming at you at the same time. And yes, more of them makes it that much more likely that they will try to overwhelm you. If you can get them to come to you, keep your balance, stay on your feet, keep slashing, punching, grabbing, and maybe throw them off balance if you can, then maybe you'd survive. The whole idea of surviving such a last line of defense fight for your life is all about keeping moving, cutting them up and bleeding them out. 

The Marine Corps teaches viciousness on the battlefield. Viciousness refers to the fierce fighting spirit and determination needed for Marines to succeed in combat. We Marines are trained to be relentless and aggressive in combat, employing any and all available resources and tactics to achieve victory. Because you have to have toughness and a strong sense of determination, if you strike with your left hand and move forward with a knife to stab your attacker, you have to be prepared mentally to do it over and over again until your attacker is neutralized. That's close combat. Of course, if you're fighting multiple attackers, and you're lucky, and they don't swarm all over you, or overwhelm you, or kill you, your viciousness might send them packing. 

To paraphrase what the Marine Corps teaches in regards to knife-fighting: "The primary objective when fighting with a knife is to insert the blade into an aggressor to cause massive damage and trauma. This is done with a thrusting technique. Thrusting techniques are more effective than slashing techniques because of the damage they can cause. But, slashing techniques distract the aggressor or cause enough damage so that you can close with him and apply more damaging techniques. Primary target areas are usually the limbs or any portion of the body that is presented."

Remember, what the Davis story said, "The only four surviving robbers made a charge upon Capt. Davis, three with Bowie knives and one with a short sword or sabre. Capt. Davis stood firmly on his ground until they rushed up abreast within about four steps of him. He then made a spring upon them with a large Bowie knife, warded off their blows as fast as they were aimed at him, and gave three of them wounds that soon proved fatal!"

When I read how Davis supposedly waited until the 4 attackers were about four paces away before he launched himself into the group, into a gang of 4 knife-wielding assailants standing abreast of each other, I remember thinking that someone charging forward against 4 men with knives is asking to be swarmed and stabbed from all sorts of directions. Instead of moving and fighting it out to maintain some sort of control on who is coming at you from the side and the back, he jumped in the middle of four others with knives,  taking away any sort of advantage he would have had if he kept moving and let them come to him. Besides the silly claim that his hat was shot 17 times, this is one of the reasons that I see this story as pure fabrication.  

Even if Davis were a trained martial arts fighter, which he wasn't, even if he was a professional soldier and not merely a volunteer who spent a mere a year and a half in the South Carolina Volunteer unit, even if he was actually trained in close combat which most Mexican-American War volunteers were not, launching yourself into four attackers with knives is a dumb move. And yes, it's way too hard to believe that it would be successful without getting yourself killed. So really, if you can take away anything from this hoax, it should be this: allowing yourself to be swarmed in a knife fight would not work in a real-world fight for your life. 

And really, think about how dumb this sounds? "Capt. Davis stood firmly on his ground until they rushed up abreast within about four steps of him; he then made a spring upon them with a large bowie knife, warding off their blows as fast as they were aimed at him."  

Frankly, that's as believable as a fake sped-up Chinese martial arts action film with all sorts of special effects where the hero moves with super-human speed and never gets touched -- nevertheless, stabbed to death from all sides. And yes, I really believe it would be perfect for Hollywood and people who don't know better. 

In fact, while we all know that Julius Caesar was stabbed to death when he was swarmed by about 40 Roman senators on the "Ides of March," according to Davis's story, Caesar would have survived if he were Jonathan R. Davis. He would have killed them all.

As for this hoax, the question isn't if the story is a hoax -- simply because there's too much evidence pointing to how it was a hoax. The question really is, why would Davis and the others, including the folks at The Mountain Democrat back in 1854 commit fraud? And yes, as you can tell, I really believe that it was all a poorly made-up news story. 

The Georgetown News newspaper called the story a "sheer fabrication" and "an unmitigated hoax." And yes, I truly believe they were right. I believe it was concocted between Davis, his friends, and folks at The Mountain Democrat newspaper for the same reason that all hoaxes are tried. 

It was all about attempting to deceive the public and gain fame, celebrity status, increase circulation, and make money. No one ever heard of Jonathan R. Davis before his tale hit The Mountain Democrat. But his tall tale had folks instantly treating him as an important man. Such attention can be intoxicating to some folks. That's why hoaxes are still pulled today. That's why I believe the whole Capt. Jonathan R. Davis gunfight story of 1854 was a hoax.

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part One

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Two

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Three

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Four

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Five

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Six

Tom Correa

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Five

As I mentioned in Part Three, the Mountain Democrat website posted the story, Deadliest gunfight of 1854 recalled, on June 5, 2012. That story concluded by stating, "As to the authenticity of the story itself, although it appears to be more than a bit improbable, we do have the affidavit from men who observed it and nothing but opinion to contradict it." 

Saying "although it appears to be more than a bit improbable" is an understatement. But after reading that they "have the affidavit from men who observed it," I couldn't help but wonder why they don't show everyone those affidavits? Why not show everyone who witnessed and signed them? Why not tell us why they have such documentation when they should be in the El Dorado County Archives? 

Well, checking both El Dorado County and Placer County records, I can't find any proof of the shooting ever taking place. As for the Mountain Democrat having the "affidavit from men who observed it," why weren't those affidavits ever turned over to the County Sheriff to be part of an official record in 1855? The Mountain Democrat website should tell us why those depositions were kept at a newspaper instead of being turned over to the Sheriff's Office in 1855, as they should have.

If you're wondering what affidavits the Mountain Democrat website story is talking about? I believe they are talking about the depositions that were supposedly taken from Davis and three eyewitnesses on March 20, 1855, at the office of The Mountain Democrat newspaper. 

The story goes that Davis and his three eyewitnesses supposedly appeared in the office of The Mountain Democrat before a local El Dorado County Judge by the name of "R.M. Anderson and a delegation of prominent citizens." 

From what I can tell, that "delegation of prominent citizens" did not include El Dorado County Sheriff James B. Hume, El Dorado County Coroner John M. C. Townsend, Placer County Sheriff Sam Astin, or Placer Coroner John Harper. If they had been present when Davis and the others supposedly gave a deposition before a judge, then they could have asked their own questions, and there would be records of what those county officials asked and witnessed. 

There Are No Records Of The Davis Story Ever Taking Place Other Than In The Mountain Democrat 1854 Newspaper Story.

Of course, while I've been looking into this for a few years, I haven't been able to find a news story or any sort of documentation that says that the supposedly meeting with a judge really happened -- which in itself is strange if he truly gave a deposition before a judge. As we all know, depositions are legal documents and possible evidence in a case. 

As for The Mountain Democrat keeping those supposed depositions and not turning them over to the county, why would they have done that? Why didn't that newspaper turn it over to the County Sheriff or the County Coroner's Office? What was The Mountain Democrat's reason for withholding such important evidence if there had indeed been an incident with multiple homicides? It could have helped the authorities legitimize a story that people were questioning.  

And by the way, I know I'm using the word "supposedly" a lot in this whole story, but I can't help it. You see, there's a huge problem with stories like this. That problem is that there is absolutely no evidence to prove what Davis claimed actually happened, just as there's no evidence that a meeting with a Judge by the name of R.M. Anderson ever took place. 

In fact, as for someone in 1855 by the name of R.M. Anderson? Other than the law firm of Hall & Anderson located in Placerville at the Empire Building on Main Street in 1855, with an R.M. Anderson listed as a law partner, I can't find an "Judge R.M. Anderson" mentioned in El Dorado County records. 

Of course, more important than finding out if there was or wasn't some local lawyer acting as a local judge or justice of the peace, I'd like to know why Davis and his witnesses decided to meet with a judge at the office of The Mountain Democrat. Why did they do that? If it really took place, why did Davis and his three witnesses meet with a judge at the office of The Mountain Democrat instead of meeting with county law enforcement? 

Instead of being forthright and meeting with law enforcement and the coroner's office, going out to the supposed graves, allowing the coroner to do his job and examine the bodies to find out if they were shot in the front or the back, Davis and his friends weren't honest and instead went to the newspaper that helped to create the hoax. To many, it may have appeared as if they were colluding on a story to deceive the public. 

Why put themselves in the position of looking like they are colluding with The Mountain Democrat by going to the office of The Mountain Democrat? Why meet at the newspaper office of the newspaper that had a vested interest in making a hoax appear real -- after all, other newspapers were already questioning the credibility of The Mountain Democrat just days after they reported Davis's story? 

So, yes, that newspaper had its credibility at stake. And frankly, the story of Davis avoiding talking to the authorities and instead going to the newspaper that first reported the story made it look more like a conspiracy to pull something over on the public.

And really, why did Davis and the others meet at the office of The Mountain Democrat instead of another newspaper in Placerville, there were others? And also, why meet at the office of The Mountain Democrat with the very people who were responsible for making Davis a celebrity and circulating his story? Then again, I think that answers why they met there. 

So, instead of appearing at either County Sheriff's Office, or specifically in front of authorities in Placer County which would have made more sense since the supposed battle took place in Placer County (according to the Mountain Democrat website's story), Davis and his three eyewitnesses arrived at the office of The Mountain Democrat. 

Once there, they are supposedly questioned by a judge regarding what took place. And yes, supposedly, Davis and the others repeat the facts in the story just as it was printed in The Mountain Democrat to the satisfaction of the judge. After that, with everyone satisfied, everyone went on their way.

Of course, I can't find anything that resembles a deposition given before an El Dorado County Judge in 1854 or 1855 by Davis and his friends. Frankly, that's a huge red flag since El Dorado County Historical Records are available online at El Dorado County (Calif.) Archives for anyone to research. That website has everything that transpired in that county from 1851 onward.

The El Dorado County (Calif.) Archive has 183 volumes of county records from government agencies such as the County Clerk’s Office, Sheriff’s Office, Coroner's Office, Auditor’s Office, Assessor’s Office, the Courts, and many others. Records include court dispositions, cash transactions in the treasurer’s office, tax rolls, property descriptions, land sales, lawsuits, tax levies, and a lot more.

To give you an idea of what the El Dorado County archives has -- they have records of receipts signed by attorneys for case files checked out from the County Clerk's Office; Notices of motions filed by attorneys in various legal actions in local courts; Payments of fees for legal actions as registered by the clerk of the court; Invoices of goods shipped from eastern merchants to San Francisco, including the name of the ship and date, and the port of departure. They have records of plaintiffs, defendants, nature of action, subsequent legal measures, and final disposition, signed by a justice of the peace; Lists of plaintiffs and defendants, the nature of actions, subsequent legal measures, and final disposition; Listings by the name of the former possessor of the property. And yes, they have all of the legal processes that were conducted by a local justice of the peace.

They have registers of sales, accompanied by clipped newspaper announcements of date and place. Special school tax assessment; public school registers and registers of attendance, as well as evaluation of scholarship and deportment of each student; Records listing Chinese residents and also for Mexicans, Chileans, and Europeans having no property and paying poll tax; Listings of land transfers, especially relating to the activities of hydraulic mining companies, which may have been extracted from the County; Town lot auction records and land transactions; Various road construction surveys; School funds ledgers; Listings of state, county, and school district funds for the county's schools; Register of land transactions; all of the registered mining claims in that county, and much more that I didn't list here.

As for the El Dorado County Sheriff's Office records available on that website, the archives have Jail registers with names of prisoners, date of confinement, and date of discharge; Sheriff's expenses for such activities as service of legal documents and fees received as payment; Registers of fees for such expenses as mileage and transportation; Listings of drafts issued upon county funds; The county's tax assessment rolls; Daily expenses, including costs for service of writs and subpoenas, boarding of prisoners, and other attendance at court sessions; and registers listing county warrants. Those volumes even include the details of the Vigilante episode in April 1852. And yes, they even have copies of telegrams sent to and from the El Dorado County Sheriff.

So, yes, to me, it smells fishy that I can't locate a deposition, or any sort of court records, telegrams between Placer County Sheriff and El Dorado County Sheriff, notification of the Placer County Coroner, or anything else in the way of records about what would have surely been the biggest multiple homicide in Northern California in 1854. 

And here's something else on this. The Mountain Democrat initially reported the following:

"On December 19, 1854, while trekking on a miner's trail along the North Fork of the American River, Dr. Bolivar Sparks, James McDonald, and Captain Jonathan Davis were bushwhacked by an international band of bandits. The bandits, a Frenchman, two Americans, two Britons, four Mexicans, and four Australians, had robbed and killed four American miners on the previous day and six Chinese miners on the day before that."

This demonstrates the problem with this story, there is no evidence to prove that an international band of bandits and killers made up of a Frenchman, two Americans, two Britons, four Mexicans, and four Australians, had robbed and killed 4 American miners on the previous day and 6 Chinese miners on the day before that. One account says a few days before those killers supposedly encountered Davis and his two friends. 

No, there are no records in the Placer County History, the El Dorado County Archives, or newspaper archives of the time to prove that a gang of killers described like what The Mountain Democrat describes robbed and killed 4 American miners on the previous day and 6 Chinese miners in either November or December of 1854. 

I've combed through newspaper archives and I can say that there are all sorts of other news stories about Indians killing "Chinamen," others killing "Chinamen," and even "Chinamen" killing others. In fact, I'll be writing more about that soon. But, there are no news stories about 4 Americans and 6 Chinese miners being murdered in December of 1854. 

By the way, I did find an entry in the archive from July 10th, 1853, a year and a half before the Davis story took place, that said, "An Indian was hanged on Bear River, northeast of Auburn, by order of a lynch court, for killing a Chinaman. Previous to his execution he confessed to the murder of five Chinamen and one American."

And yes, that makes me ask if this is where Davis and The Mountain Democrat got the idea to say that gang killed 4 Americans and 6 Chinese miners? Was that event of a year and a half earlier used to make the Davis story sound more plausible? 

And since we're talking about records, or the lack of records, why aren't there records of a James McDonald and a Dr. Sparks being murdered? Other than what was printed in The Mountain Democrat, there aren't any county records, in either county, of Davis's two companions being murdered. Why is that?

Here are a few examples of things that I did find in the archives. This might give you an idea of what's in there, and why it bothers me that I can't find any records of Davis's supposed epic battle or anything on his companions being murdered, or anything on those 4 Americans and 6 Chinese miners that The Mountain Democrat talks about. All of the events below can be found in the county archives:   

June 26th, 1854 — James Ryan was killed in an affray at Iowa Hill by Patrick Vance.

December 30th, 1854   — A mob lynched Thomas Johnson for shooting a man named Montgomery at Iowa Hill on the 24th ult.

May 12th, 1855 — The Indians in the neighborhood of Gold Hill were performing the funeral rites upon a deceased member of their tribe, when a quarrel ensued between a squaw and one of the males, which resulted in a brutal murder. The man took the woman's child and deliberately cut its head off throwing the body on the tire which was consuming the body of the dead squaw. The woman in revenge took the child of her opponent and threw it on the fire, but it was rescued from the flames by some of the spectators. The Indian was arrested, but subsequently discharged on a nolle prosequi.

March 19th, 1855 — M. J. Van was stabbed and killed by John Roberts, at Iowa Hill. They were proprietors of the Crescent City Hotel. The trouble grew out of a settlement. Roberts was convicted of murder and sentenced to be hanged, but the sentence was commuted by the Governor to imprisonment for life.

March 20th, 1855 — I. P. Beatty was killed at Rector's Bar by E. Lockwood, who was convicted of manslaughter for the crime, and sentenced to two years in State Prison, and fined $1.00.

April 10th, 1855 — Wm. Durham was shot and killed, at Auburn, by Hank Marsh. Durham was supposed to be insane, and attacked Marsh.

April 11th, 1855 — Smith was shot and killed by Woodward, in a negro dance-house in Dutch Ravine. Both men were gamblers, and the trouble grew out of the favors shown Smith by one of the negro women.

September 22nd, 1855 — A Chinaman was killed by an Illinoistown Indian, called Tubbs, on the trail leading from Christian Valley to the North Fork of the American River. The citizens of Christian Valley secured Tubbs and hung him to the limb of a tree. [Illinoistown (all one word) was a mining camp in Placer County destroyed by fire in the late 1850s]. 

So, Why No Records?

Why aren't there records about Davis's story in the county archives? Is it the same reason why an official investigation never took place? Is it the same reason that the Sheriff and the Coroner's Offices were not notified? Is it the same reason that The Mountain Democrat allowed Davis to supposedly meet a judge at their office instead of having him meet with the County Sheriff? Is it because Capt. Jonathan R. Davis's 1854 gunfight story was a hoax perpetrated by Davis and The Mountain Democrat?

I believe the reason is simple. It's the same reason records can't be found, or why historians failed to write about it at the time, and why newspapers of the time called it a hoax. There aren't any records because the story is totally unbelievable when you really examine what was claimed. Sure, there are people gullible enough to believe anything. And frankly, we'll never know if the County Sheriffs did hear about it. But if they did, they probably saw the whole story as ridiculously amusing.

While some folks have asked if the Sheriff and his Deputies would have looked into it if it were that remote, I believe the Sheriff and his Deputies would have certainly done their duty and checked it out -- if it had been reported to them. 

And yes, there would be a record of what they found, including their exact location, how they were buried if they really were, their cause of death, number of assailants, how they were armed, if they were shot in the back or the front, and maybe even get a few identified, and much more. They would have documented the scene, collected and preserved evidence, and analyzed it to reconstruct the events and possibly identify the perpetrators. 

The parts of this story that are lacking have to do with the public's need to find out exactly what took place, and the public's need to see evidence proving what really took place. If there were an official investigation by the County Sheriff, the public would have found out what transpired and would have reported it.  Of course, that didn't happen. The Sheriffs of Placer County and El Dorado County weren't called upon to investigate and document what took place. And yes, that should be a red flag -- to tell us this was a hoax. 

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part One

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Two

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Three

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Four

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Five

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Six

Tom Correa

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Four

Let's Talk About Hoaxes 

First, let's talk a bit about Jonathan R. Davis. While there is no known photo of him, we know that he did serve as a Second Lieutenant with the United States Volunteers Palmetto Regiment. While not a part of the Regular U.S. Army, he did serve in the U.S. Volunteers for a little over a year and a half from December 1846 to July 1848. Yes, he served a little over a year-and-a-half, during the Mexican–American War, and he was a participant at the Battle of Churubusco.

While online websites have his rank listed as "Honorary Captain" with the United States Volunteers Palmetto Regiment, there is no record of him being an "Honorary Captain." In fact, the official records of the United States Volunteers Palmetto Regiment list his rank upon discharge as a "Second Lieutenant," the same rank that he entered the unit.  

Was Capt. Jonathan R. Davis's story of his epic battle against a gang of 11 killers a hoax? 

Looking at the news reports of the time, 1854 and 1855, we can see that within days of its first report, more and more newspapers started to proclaim the story a hoax. And yes, my friends, there is a very good reason to ask whether the Davis story was a hoax or not, a reason that had nothing to do with the story itself. It had to do with newspaper hoaxes back in the day. Yes, what we call "fake news" today was printed as common practice in the 1800s. 

Believe it or not, creating "fake news," entirely fabricated information designed to disseminate deceptive content, or grossly distort actual news reports, has been around for longer than most people today realize. Selling fake news to deliberately misinform or deceive readers to influence people’s views, push a political agenda, cause confusion, increase anxiety, create panic and chaos, or benefit someone is not new. 

Even back in the 1800s, humbug, a sell, a hoax, was a way to use fake news stories to deceive people by appearing as authentic, trusted reporting, from reputable news organizations. And by the 1850s, as was the case throughout the 1800s, false news stories, fake stories that were not true, newspaper hoaxes, news stories that seemed too far-fetched for anyone to believe, were routinely published. It was simply a common practice at the time to take some stories with a grain of salt. 

Why would the news media back in the day do such a thing? Well, like today, they can call it what they want, but it's all about making money. Friends, it wasn't surprising when the Democratic Party controlled news media, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, and a slew of Democrat-controlled newspapers like The New York Times and The Washington Post saw their viewership and readership climb when they were peddling the Trump-Russia Collusion Hoax from 2016 to 2020. They ran with it and threw gas on the fire whenever possible to keep it going, because it made them a lot of money. 

Back in the 1800s, when print media was King, in most cases, the hoaxes were started and perpetrated by competing publications that competed for readership. They used sensational stories and fabricated accounts to increase circulation, which meant making more money. Hoaxes made newspapers a lot of money because they sold more papers and got more advertisers. 

There were fake claims of local riots and lynchings that never happened, mob justice, arsonists, bandits who were caught and hanged but weren't, as well as people being shot to death who weren't. In a lot of the archived newspapers that I research, I find a lot of fake articles about fires, robberies, and more, including their retractions. 

Of course, there were huge hoaxes, hoaxes on a national scale, like The Great Moon Hoax of 1835 where The New York Sun published a series of articles claiming that an astronomer had discovered life on the moon, including blue goats and bat-like creatures and The Balloon Hoax of 1944, where The New York Sun ran a story about a balloon that was supposed to go from London to Paris but was blown off course and ended up in South Carolina -- which made it a successful transatlantic crossing in a balloon. As with The Great Moon Hoax, those stories were national news and had a lot of people believing them. And while the articles were revealed to be hoaxes fairly quickly, they created a lot of excitement. Of course, as with the way things are today, people have to learn that not all news stories are true. 

For me, because the news media cannot be trusted 100%, I keep that in mind all the time while researching period newspapers. It's important to keep in mind that some newspapers did, in fact, consciously print hoaxes and sell them to the public while trying to pass them off as true. Other newspapers published biased news stories that are just as bad. 

A great example of an extremely biased and totally untrustworthy newspaper is The Tombstone Epitaph. The way they reported events in the early 1880s in Tombstone, while obviously throwing their full weight of support behind Wyatt Earp and his men during what became known as the "Earp Vendetta," bordered on dishonesty. 

If you don't think so, read some of the Arizona newspapers that didn't have a vested interest in attacking Tombstone's cowboy faction while trying to justify the actions of the Earps. Then compare that to what The Tombstone Epitaph was putting out as impartial journalism, and you'll see what I'm talking about. That's why it's important to read and compare stories to ferret out the truth. 

One of my favorite 1800s hoaxes is The Calaveras Skull Hoax of 1866 because it took place here in Calaveras County near where I live. The hoax started when a couple of miners found a human skull buried inside a mine. A mining engineer who was an amateur archaeologist identified it as dating back to the Pliocene Age. 

That would have made it a huge find in the Scientific world since it would have made that skull the oldest known record of human existence in North America. But then its authenticity was challenged, and a debate dragged on. Later, the skull was determined to be a fake. As for who was responsible for the hoax? Well, it's believed the miners who found the skull also planted it. It's believed they got it from an Indian burial site and planted it to play a practical joke on that mining engineer.

Then there's The Global Warming Hoax of 1874, where in February of 1874, the Kansas City Times ran a story claiming that Scientists had discovered that the transatlantic telegraph cables were acting like enormous electromagnets. The story used the names of scientists and engineers to fool people into believing that the transatlantic telegraph cables were acting like enormous electromagnets and pulling the Earth into the Sun. Their claims were wild, baseless conjecture, all a fraud to make money, but some people believed it hook-line-and-sinker. 

Yes, people back then believed their claim that "Europe would become tropical in 12 years, that the poles were melting, and the entire earth would be uninhabitable because of Global Warming." Sound familiar? It should, since the Global Warming Hoax of 1874, like other hoaxes, it's ability to scare people senseless has been used over and over again in different ways, Yes, including doing what most bonco artists would do and give it a different name. For example, remember when Global Warming became "Climate Change" because con artists knew people are gullible enough to bite at the same hook more than once if all you use is different bait.

By the way, what became known as "The Balloon Hoax of 1944" was written by Edgar Allan Poe. Later, Mark Twain would do the same thing during his 21-month career as a reporter for the Virginia City, Nevada, Territorial Enterprise (1862-64), where he produced a series of hoaxes. Of course, neither Poe nor Twain can hold a candle to the late 1800s hoaxer Joseph Mulhattan who was notorious for repeatedly succeeding in having his far-fetched tales reported in newspapers. 

Joseph Mulhattan was so good at what he did, that reporters would often assume it was Mulhattan whenever they heard someone had reported an outrageous or faked story. While some newspapers called him "Munchausen Mulhattan," other newspapers of the time are known to have called him a "Professional liar," and "The author of more hoaxes than any other man living."  At least one newspaper called him "The liar-laureate of the world."

From what I can tell, most newspapers in 1854 and 1855 had overwhelmingly decided that Jonathan R. Davis was a fraud. Most newspapers didn't have a vested interest in the now-famous epic battle. They just reported what was on the wire and attached their disclaimers in the preface or at the end of their reports. 

I think that was the case for The Mountain Democrat. Because they ran with it, their credibility was on the line. Though they seemed to have almost doubled down on their support for Davis, they did call him "Baron Munch" in the end. So while no one knows for sure, I don't know if the Editor for The Mountain Democrat saw himself as an unwitting accomplice in the hoax -- and didn't want to admit to that for the sake of credibility, or if he was a part of it. 

Some of you have voiced your opinion, saying that The Mountain Democrat's Editor may have realized that people were seeing his newspaper as being easily taken in by hoaxers. Some of you have put it a lot more bluntly and have told me, "The Mountain Democrat knowingly published the Davis hoax to increase circulation." Whatever the case, I believe it was a no-win situation for The Mountain Democrat. 

And yes, besides other newspapers starting to call The Mountain Democrat's credibility into question, the public was also asking if The Mountain Democrat had something to do with promoting what they were perceiving as a hoax by then. Remember, by the end of April 1855, the story of such an epic battle more or less died for lack of interest and believability.  

So yes, even back in the 1800s, there were reasons why Americans had to be suspicious of stories that sounded too much like fake news. And let's be frank, the Davis 11 on 1 gun battle that turned into a 4 on 1 knife fight was way over the top for most people in the West. 

It might have seemed completely reasonable to someone back East at the time who was reading Dime Novels of heroes accomplishing all sorts of incredible deeds against 100 to 1 odds. But for the people who lived in the West, people who lived in the frontier-towns and the mining camps, to the people who were part of the local Citizens Committee, those were people who knew what it was to be shot at or be the victim of armed robbery, they knew of the bandits and the badmen and the lynchings to stop such vermin. To those people, to the people who understood how dumb it would be for anyone to say that his hat was shot 17 times in such a fight for his life, the Davis story had too many holes in it to be believable.  

Why would the public think the Davis story was a hoax? Basically, they thought it was a hoax for all of the same reasons that many of you have written to me to say that you believe the Davis story is just a hoax. For all the same reasons that most of you think Davis was a fraud.  The whole story has more holes in it than Davis's supposedly shot-up hat.

Coming up -- Part Five

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part One

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Two

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Three

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Four

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Five

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Six

Tom Correa

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Three

Georgetown's Jonathan Davis Historical Marker with a Fake Photo of Davis

Photographed by Frank Gunshow Sanchez, March 15, 2020

If you've gotten this far in this saga and actually made it through Parts One and Two, then you have to be as interested in the Davis story as I've become over the years. And yes, in case you're wondering, it's occupied a bit of my time, off and on, for a few years now.   

So now, where are we in this story? 

Well, soon after the initial story of what supposedly happened in Rocky Canyon hit the wire, Capt. Jonathan R. Davis became an instant celebrity. This was so much the case that he was sought after as a guest at dinner engagements, he was invited to affairs, his name was thrown around to run for elected office,  and he was even consulted regarding items of interest in the news. Yes indeed, being a celebrity has not changed over the years.

As an example of his being consulted regarding current events of the time, read the Sacramento Daily Union report published on April 11, 1855:

The redoubtable Capt. Jno. R. Davis, who, it will be recollected killed half a score of robbers with his own hand, is a resident in the suburbs of our city. He has taken great interest in the war in the Crimea. He is impatient at the delay in taking Sevastopol. He offers to take fifty men, learn them his art of war, and then reduce the city of Sevastopol in three days. What a pity that "John Bull " and "La belle France" cannot avail themselves of his invaluable services.

Of course, it was the lack of evidence that made people question its legitimacy. As the Georgetown News pointed out in their January 4, 1855, report when they wrote: "As it now stands, however, one cannot but look at the whole affair as an ingenious "sell" upon the part of Capt. Davis and his friends. Although that gentleman still affirms its truth, as he is not able to bring the least evidence to attest it, we are obliged for the present to place him upon the list of practical humbugs." 

Of course, as is human nature, that didn't stop some folks from accepting Davis' story hook-line-and-sinker. For example, on April 18, 1855, the Daily Alta California reported a story about how a New York City magazine called The Knickerbocker (1830 to 1865), published a very long, extremely long, flowery poem titled CAPTAIN DAVIS: A CALIFORNIA BALLAD.

The Daily Alta California described the extremely lengthy poem as follows: "The object of the writer was to preserve, in the immortal Knickerbocker Magazine, a record of the 'Battle of Rocky Canon,' for fear the story might be lost in the perishable pages of the daily press." It's said that the New York City poet filled two and a half columns of newspaper space to "celebrate Davis' heroic actions against overwhelming odds in a fight against evil."

I really believe that, as with most stories about the Old West, there are people who will always believe what they believe, and that's it. And no, there's no rhyme or reason to what folks will believe -- even after handing over all sorts of evidence to prove that something or someone may be just humbug, a sell, a fraud, simply a hoax. 

For my long-time readers, you know how I believe the "Hero" myth of Wyatt Earp is mostly due to Hollywood and is inflated at best. If there is one thing that the myth of Wyatt Earp has taught me, facts don't matter when you're talking about someone's hero. 

Today, there are people who believe the story about how Jonathan Davis single-handedly killed 11 killers by either shooting all in the heart, the head, or cutting them to ribbons in a four-to-one knife fight. There are people out there today who have heard the story on television, or on the Internet, or read about it, and they believe it. I truly believe that there are a lot of people who believe that "Rocky Canon Tragedy" happened just as it was reported in the newspapers of the time. 

Here's something else. The Historical Marker Database website lists the town of Georgetown in El Dorado County, California, as a place that, in fact, has a "Jonathan Davis" historical marker. It is listed as a "Topic List: Notable Events. A significant historical date for this entry is December 19, 1854."

The website gives the historical marker location as 38° 54.381′ N, 120° 50.353′ W. And yes, it further states that the historic marker is in Georgetown, California, in El Dorado County, on Main Street, on the left when traveling east, on the front of the building, at or near the postal address: 6271 Main Street, Georgetown CA 95634. 

Georgetown's Jonathan Davis historical marker has an inscription that reads:

"On December 19, 1854 just North of Georgetown above Cherokee Bar on Ruck-a-Chuky a gunfight occurred that makes the OK Corral look weak. The Sydney Ducky Gang consisting of 5 Australians, 4 Mexicans, 2 Britons, 2 Americans and a Frenchman had been on a rampage. On Dec 17th they had murdered 6 Chinese miners then on the 18th murdered 4 American miners near Foresthill and were one of the most feared gangs in the region. It was then on the 19th that they attacked 3 miners at Ruck-a-Chucky. In the gangs initial ambush James McDonald was killed instantly. Dr. Bolivar Sparks managed to draw his revolver and fire two shots before being cut down leaving Jonathan Davis alone against 14 outlaws. Davis was a decorated veteran of the Mexican American War and drew his two revolvers. The outlaws advanced and Davis killed 7 of them before his revolvers were empty. At that point the leader of the Sydney Ducks Gang charged wielding a cavalry sword. Davis drew his Bowie knife and killed 3 more of the outlaws and cut their leader's nose and index finger off. At this point 3 fellow miners, John Webster, Issac Hart, and P.S. Robertson, who had witnessed the attack came within range to help Davis. The 4 outlaws now fled, the leader of the gang died a quarter mile away and the remaining 3 outlaws were captured the next day. Davis had 6 holes in his hat and 11 in his shirt but had only two minor flesh wounds. Jonathan Davis lived to the age 75 and died in California."

The historical marker database website states that there are also other historical markers in Georgetown, "At least 8 other markers are within walking distance of this marker: Wells Fargo Building (within shouting distance of this marker); Georgetown Firehouse (within shouting distance of this marker); Georgetown (within shouting distance of this marker); Georgetown Volunteer Firemen (within shouting distance of this marker); Chief Jack Anderson (within shouting distance of this marker); Georgetown Hotel (within shouting distance of this marker); Civil War Armory (within shouting distance of this marker); Miners Club (within shouting distance of this marker)."

To me, this shows that someone must believe the story is historically accurate and true. After all, someone had to go through the trouble of writing the inscription and raising the funds to put up the marker. And while whoever did it used a picture of a fictitious person off the Internet, someone who is not Jonathan Davis, to depict Jonathan Davis, the story inscribed on the marker is not what took place is we go by what was in the newspapers in 1854 and 1855. 

Of course, there is a great deal of irony in having a "Jonathan Davis" historical marker in Georgetown when one considers it was the Georgetown News back in 1854 that called the story a hoax. 

As for the The Mountain Democrat which initially ran with the Jonathan Davis gunfight/knifefight story in 1854, The Mountain Democrat (website) published the following story about the Davis tale on June 5, 2012:

Deadliest gunfight of 1854 recalled

By Doug Noble
Jun 5, 2012

A couple of months ago a copy of the January issue of the Veterans of Foreign Wars magazine was dropped off at the newspaper. In it was a story titled, “Mexican War Vet Wages Deadliest Gun Fight in American History.” It is a story that seems a bit of a tall tale which probably bears a bit of looking into.

The story, according to the magazine, had been lost for over 125 years until discovered by a researcher named Bill Secrest in 1980, who used it in his book “Gold Dust and Gunsmoke.” The fight, we are told, took place on Dec. 19, 1854, in Rocky Canyon, which is in Placer County, but it was first reported in a special edition of the Placerville Mountain Democrat just a few days later and apparently the Diamond Springs Miners Advocate soon thereafter.

Copies of that special edition of the Mountain Democrat and Miners Advocate are not readily available, but the story was immediately retold in the Dec. 24, 1854, edition of San Francisco’s Daily Alta California and Dec. 25, 1854, edition of the Sacramento Daily Union, both of which are freely available online as a part of the California Digital Newspaper Collection at http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cdnc.

According to the magazine article, Capt. Jonathan R. Davis, along with friends James C. McDonald and Dr. Bolivar A. Sparks, were on foot along a trail through the canyon heading for a vein of gold-laden quartz some 20 or 30 miles north of there.

A group of three men saw what happened and acting as a jury, signed an affidavit stating the following as reported in the newspapers: “As they were passing at the base of a mountain, three of the undersigned, being out on a hunting excursion on its side, saw a party of 11 men who were concealed in the bushes near the trail, spring up and commence shooting at them. Mr. McDonald had fallen dead ere he fired a pistol, or was even aware of his danger. He and his party had nothing but their revolvers. Dr. Sparks, after shooting twice at the banditti, fell severely wounded. Meantime Capt. Davis kept up an incessant firing upon them with his revolvers – every ball forcing its victim to bite the dirt. The only four surviving robbers made a charge upon Capt. Davis, three with bowie knives and one with a short sword or sabre. Capt. Davis stood firmly on his ground until they rushed up abreast within about four steps of him; he then made a spring upon them with a large bowie knife, warding off their blows as fast as they were aimed at him – gave three of them wounds that soon proved fatal – and having wounded the other one (it seemed very slightly) and disarming him by throwing his knife in the air in warding off a blow, a generous impulse seemed to force him not to inflict another wound upon him and to spare his life.

“The wounds of the living were then bound up by Capt. Davis, who expressed his regrets that necessity had forced him to do what had been done.

“The jury further state that in their examination of the persons of the deceased, of those that commenced the attack upon Capt. D, and his party, they discovered papers carefully concealed in their pockets, purporting to be a copy of law and bylaws by which they were governed – communications that seemed to have passed from one to the other of them, and other papers, all proving without the least shadow of a doubt, that they were a regularly organized band of robbers. The last of this band has just died. His wound, he thought himself, but slight, and seemed in a fair way to recover until within the last hour, and corroborated all the evidence proven by the papers found in their pockets.”

“A correspondent who signs himself John Webster, writing from Rocky Canon, Dec. 20th, says:

“Three of the wounded robbers having died last night, we had 10 of them to bury this morning, so that only one survives, who will likely recover. He is marked, however for life – having lost his nose, in toto, and the forefinger of his right hand. Seven of the deceased robbers were shot through the heart.

The surviving one, who seems to be but little hurt, says that their band was composed of two Americans, one Frenchman, five Sydney men, four Mexicans, and two men just arrived from London, and that none of them knew the right names of the others. He says, also, that they had just commenced operations – having killed six Chinamen three days ago, and four Americans, on the day before yesterday.

“Though we counted 28 bullet-holes through Capt Davis’ hat and clothes – 17 through his hat, and 11 through his coat and shirt – he received but two very slight flesh wounds.”

The story was immediately questioned, especially by the editor of the Sacramento Daily Union, who wrote: “SANGUINARY RUMOR.– On Saturday afternoon our enterprising up-street contemporary [Alta California] came out with a flaming extra, containing a shocking account of murder, confessions, inquests, and etc., the whole affair being quite as vividly portrayed as the bogus prize fight at Nevada, or the terrible disaster by which the [ship] New World had ‘a hole stove in her forward starboard quarter.’ The Mountain Democrat, extra, and the Miners Advocate, also, have versions of the story, which may all be true, but at present they savor strongly of Munchausenism [Baron Von Münchausen was well known for creating tall stories and even has a mental condition named after him].”

Note: The Alta California, on Dec. 11, 1854, reported the steamer “New World” to have struck a snag and sunk. On Dec. 13, the Sacramento Daily Union gleefully printed a letter that corrected this, stating that the New World had not sunk, but was tied up to a dock. No stories could be found regarding the “bogus prize fight in Nevada.”

One of the major difficulties in reporting or writing early California history is finding enough information to determine what really happened. In this case at least two newspapers reported on the story, a story that appears to have been closely repeated by at least two more. But, that doesn’t often happen.

More often a different interpretation of an event that happened has shown up in a number of publications and 100 years later someone finds one of these stories and it becomes the “truth,” when in fact it may not be.

In the case of this story we have readily accessible two almost identical reports, both based on the Mountain Democrat story and, if we are lucky, copies of the original stories in the California State Archives could be obtained if really needed. The only real difficulty, which brought some concern regarding the accuracy of the story, was not the story itself, but confusing dates.

The Alta and Union stories were published on Sunday, Dec. 24, and Monday, Dec. 25, 1854, respectively, only five and six days after the fight, which occurred on the previous Tuesday. The Mountain Democrat was, at that time a Saturday newspaper, which would mean its regular edition would publish on Dec. 23, too late for the Alta to receive and reprint it for the next day. Therefore the extra edition probably came out earlier in the week in order to “scoop” the larger newspapers in San Francisco and Sacramento.

The magazine story states that the “jury” of men showed up at the Mountain Democrat on March 20, 1855, with their affidavit, which has to be wrong, since it appears to have been printed in all the papers about three months earlier. Perhaps they showed up at the Mountain Democrat on Dec. 20, 1854, which caused the editor to rush it to print in a special edition. That would work.

As to the authenticity of the story itself, although it appears to be more than a bit improbable, we do have the affidavit from men who observed it and nothing but opinion to contradict it.

______________________

Do I think the Davis story is "more than a bit improbable"? Yes, but what I think is not important when I'm trying to figure out if it was a hoax or not. In Part Four, I will talk about why I think it was "more than a bit improbable." 

More to come in Part Four

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part One

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Two

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Three

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Four

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Five

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Six

Tom Correa

 

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Two

A group of California miners, or laborers, in the 1850s

The Jonathan R. Davis news story, also known as "The Rocky Canon Tragedy," is a matter of "Public Record" and can be found in various newspaper archives from 1854 to 1855. But, before we go on, please understand that the word "Canyon" in most newspapers back in the day is spelled in Spanish as "Cañón" for some reason -- possibly as a holdover from the years previous to California statehood in 1850 when it was still Spanish California. That's why the more you read about this, you will see it spelled both ways. 

Davis's supposed battle against a band of 11 killers was first published in newspapers and was taken as being a factual account of an incredible 11 to 1 gun battle that turned into a huge 4 on 1 knife fight. It was taken as factual until people started questioning it when too many inconsistencies in his story couldn't be proven. A total lack of evidence had people questioning it and asking if the story was a hoax or not.  

Because the story is so unbelievable, the Sacramento Daily Union, Volume 8, Number 1172, published on December 25, 1854, reported the same details of the story as every other paper -- but prefaced their report with the following caution for its readers:

Sanguinary Rumor

On Saturday afternoon our enterprising up-street contemporary came out with a flaming extra, containing a shocking account of murder, confessions, inquests, & the whole affair being quite as vividly portrayed as the bogus prize fight at Nevada, or the terrible disaster by which the New World had "a hole stove in her forward starboard quarter." The Mountain Democrat, extra, and The Miner's Advocate, also have versions of the story, which may all be true, but at present, they savor strongly of Manchausenism.

_________________________

What is Manchausenism? Well, the term "Munchausenism" is derived from Baron von Münchhausen. The famous Baron von Munchausen's full name was Karl Friedrich Hieronymus von Münchhausen (1720 - 1797). Baron Munchausen was, in fact, a German aristocrat who became famous for telling extremely tall tales. He told extremely detailed and totally unbelievable stories about his supposed adventures as a soldier and big game hunter. He became known for telling preposterous stories. His stories were utterly absurd and so ridiculous that he was taken as someone who was purposely trying to insult someone's intelligence as well as insult someone's common sense.

Today, as was the case in the 1800s, Munchausen's legacy is his name. His name describes someone who tries to get others to accept exaggerated and completely fabricated stories as factual just to gain attention and notoriety. Also, today, "Munchausenism" or "Munchausen Syndrome," also known as "factitious disorder imposed on self," is seen as a mental health condition where someone intentionally fabricates physical or psychological symptoms to gain attention or sympathy. The goal is to elicit attention. 

Some folks actually believed Davis's story of close-combat with 11 murderers and killing them all, some people took his story as the truth, and swallowed it hook-line-and-sinker. But, within a few days of Davis' story being reported, there were a lot of people who were quick to question such a fantastic yarn. 

Of course, most newspapers took the story right off the news wire, "as is," and published it without adding commentary. They ran the original story put out by the Placerville Mountain Democrat, which used the banner The Mountain Democrat. That's important to note because just a few days after it hit the news wire, newspapers were starting to have their suspicions that they'd been taken in. It wasn't long before The Mountain Democrat was being looked at as falling for and subsequently publishing a hoax.

The Sacramento Daily Union, Volume 8, Number 1174, on December 27, 1854, published the following: 

The El Dorado Slaughter. — The Alta in speculating upon the truthfulness of the rumor regarding the heroic exploit of Capt. Davis at Rocky Canon says, "The Sacramento papers give the story credence." Now, if the Alta includes this journal in the number, we respectfully inform it that abundant evidence to the contrary is furnished in our prefatory remarks to the detailed particulars of the transaction. It is not the first time that the Sacramento papers have indiscriminately been obliged to bear the onus of misstatements or erroneous opinions, which properly attach to a single journal.

__________________________

So, while some newspapers ran with it for all it was worth, not everyone believed such a tall tale. The editors at the Georgetown News, a paper located not too many miles from Placerville in Georgetown, reported the story and gave their opinion of its legitimacy. They were the first newspaper to label the Jonathan R. Davis "Rocky Canon Tragedy" story a "hoax."

The Georgetown News, Volume 1, Number 11, on December 28, 1854, repeated the wire story and clarified a few points. It did fail to mention Davis's "white hat" or the 17 to 28 bullet holes in Davis's hat and clothes, 17 to 19 rounds shot through his hat, and 11 rounds shot through his coat and shirt, as stated in other newspapers. 

Of course, the Georgetown News went one step forward and called Davis's supposedly heroic tale "a sheer fabrication — an unmitigated hoax." Here is their report: 

From the Mountain Democrat, Extra; 

Desperate Fight.

Three Miners attacked by Eleven Robbers — Death of the Assassins—Confession of the Robbers—Four Americans and Six Chinese Robbed and Murdered—Heroic Conduct of Captain Davis—Destruction of the Gang — Coroner’s Inquest.

The following extraordinary news was furnished to the Mountain Democrat [newspaper], on last Saturday [December 23, 1854].

In consequence of the unprecedented good fortune of Capt. Davis, at the time we received the extra, through the politeness of the Democrat, we were disposed to doubt the correctness of the information received by that paper, but we have since received corroborating accounts through sources that we cannot reasonably question.

We therefore publish the extra of the Democrat, either as a truthful statement of the incidents therein related; or, if not true, as one of the most infamous "sells” ever perpetrated on the press: We received the following startling intelligence last night, after our paper had been worked off.

The first letter was addressed to us, the second to Mr. Henderson, our County Surveyor. Capt. Davis, whose cool intrepidity was put to such a severe test and whose aim did such fatal execution, formerly lived near this place, and is well-known to some of our citizens. He is a man of iron resolution and undaunted courage, and familiar with mountain life. Rocky Canon, the place of the tragedy, is a deep and almost inaccessible Canon, about forty miles north of this place, near Todd’s Valley, and uninhabited.

Rocky Canon, Dec. 20th, 1854. Editor Mountain Democrat — No officer having been within a convenient distance to attend to a case of emergency that has just happened near our isolated camp in the mountains here, the undersigned constituted themselves a coroner's jury and held an inquest over the deceased bodies of twelve men that were killed within a mile of our camp, on the 19th inst., a full account of which we deem it our duty to publish. Three of the undersigned were eye-witnesses to the whole scene; though too far off to give aid in any way, and the rest of us can readily vouch for their veracity.

On yesterday, the 19th inst., three men who afterwards proved to be a Mr. James C. McDonald, of Alabama, (now deceased), a Dr. Bolivar A. Sparks, of Mississippi, and a Capt. Jonathan R. Davis, of South Carolina, were traveling on foot, on a trail within a mile of our camp, to prospect a vein of gold-bearing quartz, some twenty or thirty miles north of this.

As they were passing at the base of a mountain, three of the undersigned being out on a hunting excursion on its side, saw a party of eleven men who were concealed in the bushes near the trail, spring up and commence shooting at them. 

Mr. McDonald had fallen dead ere he fired a pistol, or was even aware of his danger, lie and his party had nothing but their revolvers. Dr. Sparks shot twice at the banditti, and then fell severely wounded. In the meantime, Capt. Davis, (who was the first to commence shooting m defense of himself and party in an instant after the first volley from the sobbers,) being still unhurt, kept up an incessant firing upon them with his revolvers — every ball forcing its victim to "bite the dust"— until all the loads of both parties seemed to have been discharged.

The only four surviving robbers made a charge upon Capt. Davis, three with bowie knives, and one with a short sword or sabre. Capt. Davis stood firmly on his ground until they rushed up abreast within about four steps of him; he then made a spring on them with a large bowie knife, warded off their blows as fast as they were aimed at him — gave three of them wounds that soon proved fatal — and having wounded the other one, (it seemed very slightly,) and disarmed him by throwing his knife in the air in warding off a bow, a generous impulse seemed to force him not to inflict another wound upon him and to spare his life.

As this last man expressed in a tone of gratitude before his death, Capt. Davis went to work at once, tearing up his own shirt, and binding up all the wounds of the living — of both his friends and his enemies — to stop their bleeding!

The three of the undersigned above alluded to, having reached the spot just after the close of the tragedy, Capt. Davis gave them an account of the affair, ere he was aware that they, or any one had seen it all from beginning to end, and having learned that no coroner or other officer was convenient, said that he would be better satisfied if all our party would come down and attend immediately to the wounded, examine all the deceased, himself and companions as well as their enemies, for evidence of guilt or innocence, ere one of them was touched; he came up with the three alluded to, and accompanied all of us down.

He remarked that, "though his own conscience justified him in all that he had done, he deeply regretted that necessity had forced it upon him, and that he would prefer at least for the sake of his wounded companion and the friends of the deceased one, if not for himself, that we would make a thorough investigation of the matter, and give the public a true and full account of the whole affair as far as we knew."

In our examination of the persons of the deceased, of those that commenced the attack upon Capt. D. and his party, we discovered papers carefully concealed in their pockets, purporting to be a copy of laws and bylaws by which they were governed — communications that seemed to have passed from one to the other of them, and other papers, all proving without the least shadow of a doubt, that they were a regularly organized band of robbers.

The last of this band has just died. His wound, he thought himself, but slight, and seemed in a fair way to recover until within the last hour, and corroborated all the evidence proven by the papers found in their pockets.

In conclusion, we deem it due to state that from all the evidence before us, Capt. Davis and his party acted solely in self-defense — were perfectly justifiable in killing these robbers — and that too much praise cannot be bestowed upon them for having so gallantly stopped the wild career of these lawless ruffians. We send this communication to your paper, because the bearer having a very sick family below, will travel posthaste all night to Placerville. W. C. Thompson, 0. B. Wingate, Joseph Hampton, W. A. Newman, P. S. Robertson, James C. Lewis, G. W. Hendricks, S. 0. Marshall, John E. Morris, T. C. Wallace, Isaac A. Hart, A. Hughes, T. J. Galligus, John Webster, N. B. Porter, Oliver E. Clark, J. K. Trist.

One of the three men who partially witnessed the above scene from a distance, says of this hero, that he is known in that portion of the mines as "a most industrious and excellent man, but a particularly unsuccessful miner."

We learn from Mr. Harris, Expressman from this place to Todd’s Valley, that Capt. J. R. Davis is from South Carolina, that he distinguished himself in the late war with Mexico, and that he was one of a few that escaped death in his ill-fated regiment at Palo Alto. The names attached to the article above are many of them known to citizens of this place, and therefore they inform us that the above statement and names are either a villainous forgery, or, from their knowledge of the men, the statement is undoubtedly correct. In our next issue, we shall have more light thrown on this affair, as responsible men have gone to the place where these scenes are said to have transpired in order to ascertain the whole truth in regard to it.

P. S. Later. —Through Harris’ Express, which arrived last night, we learn that interested persons in the vicinity where the above tragedy is reported to have taken place, have been investigating the truth of the matter, and report the whole a sheer fabrication—an unmitigated hoax. The exact locality of Rocky Canon is probably near Placerville — not a thousand miles from the office of the Mountain Democrat.

__________________________

People started questioning Davis' story. They were not accepting Davis' story and wanted proof, evidence, something more than what they suspected was a contrived hoax. The problem for Davis is that he could not furnish any evidence of it taking place, no bodies, no graves, nothing other than a hat that "he said" was shot full of holes by killers who couldn't shoot straight.

So, imagine how fast things were moving? In less than 10 days since the purported battle took place, and Davis was being called a "hero," the Georgetown News newspaper called the story a "sheer fabrication" and "an unmitigated hoax." Of course, the Georgetown News was just the first of many to follow suit fairly quickly. In fact, the Davis story ended up being debunked within a few weeks of it being first reported. 

The Columbia Gazette, Volume 3, Number 8, on December 30, 1854, published the report but included the word "Doubted" at the end of their report. Here it is:

Murderous Attack 

An Extra from the "Mountain Democrat" gives an account of a murderous attack made near “Rocky Canon,” on the 19th last, upon James C. McDonald of Alabama, Dr. Bolivar A. Sparks of Mississippi, and Capt. Jonathan R. Davis of S. C., by a band of robbers. Mr. McDonald was killed, A. Sparks severely wounded, and Capt. Davis was slightly wounded in two places. 

This small party was prospecting for quartz leads when they were attacked. The fight was a desperate one, and Capt. D. bore his share of it manfully. Seven of the robbers were killed in the fight, and three died of their wounds that same night. One survives, who will probably recover. He is well marked, having lost his nose and a forefinger. Seven of them were shot through the head. On one of the robbers was found a copy of bylaws by which they were governed. The survivor says, their band was composed of two Americans, Frenchmen, five Sidney men, and four Mexicans —that they had just commenced operations, and had two days before, killed four Americans and six Chinamen. Capt Davis had 28 bullet holes made through his hat and clothes during the fight. Doubted.

__________________________

The Weekly Butte Record, Volume 2, Number 8, on December 30, 1854, reported the entire Davis story but used the following cautionary preface:

"The following account of a desperate fight with a band of robbers, we find in the down river papers, is taken from an extra of the "Mountain Democrat." We cannot but entertain the belief that it is either a hoax or some mistake in the account of the battle. We however give it to our readers as an important item of interesting news."

__________________________

The Shasta Courier, Volume 3, Number 43, on December 30, 1854, reported the same story. But, they mocked the story's legitimacy and reported that Davis's hat was only struck by 17 rounds instead of 19 rounds. The Shasta Courier reported the story, getting all of the facts correct, then summed up the yarn by saying: 

"If the above account is true, —and that it is true we are the more disposed to believe for the reason that he was, at the time of the attack, in the continuation of a bad streak of luck which commenced two years back, and of course was in a most ferocious mood, —and we, therefore, avail ourselves of this, the earliest opportunity, to suggest him as a candidate for Governor."

__________________________

The Empire County Argus, Volume 2, Number 7, on December 30, 1854, reported the story and closed their report by calling the story a "sell" and "an unadulterated hoax". Here is their report:

Great Speed. —The electric telegraph has been cut down by the swift messenger who traveled post haste from Rocky Canon to Placerville, a distance of forty miles, in the unprecedented short time of forty-eight hours, bringing intelligence of the "desperate fight" said to have occurred near Todd's Valley, and of the heroic conduct of Capt. Jonathan R. Davis, of South Carolina, who is reported to have killed all of a hand of robbers, ten of the number, outright, dead as a door-nail, and wounding one slightly in the nose from the effects of which he died also, making eleven in all. 

The affair appears to have been quite miraculous. Captain Jonathan R. Davis and his party had nothing but their revolvers, yet subsequently, Capt. Davis springs upon his assailants “with a large bowie knife,” cuts down three of the robbers and wounds one in the nose, thus destroying the whole gang of eleven, “composed of two Americans, one Frenchman, five Sidneymen, four Mexicans and two men just arrived from London," making thirteen. Three robbers having been suddenly transmogrified into one for the occasion. 

A gentleman from Todd's Valley, Tuesday last, one week after the heroic affair, was surprised to hear of it in Coloma for the first time. The account of the “desperate fight” is no doubt a “sell” of the most bungling description. An unadulterated hoax.

___________________________

The Sacramento Daily Union, Volume 8, Number 1178, on January 1, 1855, reported:

Coloma Items. — The Empire Argus [newspaper] pronounces the desperate fight at Rocky Canon, a "sell" of the most bungling description.

___________________________

The Georgetown News, Volume 1, Number 12, on January 4,1855, published the follows:

The Rocky Canon Humbug

ln our last issue, in relation to the report of the destruction of a band of robbers by Capt. Davis, our devil in a postscript correcting the statement of the above affair, made rather unfair allusions to the Mountain Democrat as regards its credulity in giving publicity to the report. We are aware that from the manner in which the Democrat received the report, it could not well do otherwise than put confidence in it. As it now stands, however, one cannot but look at the whole affair as an ingenious "sell" upon the part of Capt. Davis and his friends. Although that gentleman still affirms its truth, as he is not able to bring the least evidence to attest it, we are obliged for the present to place him upon the list of practical humbugs.

__________________________

What is meant by a "sell" and a "humbug"? Well, in the 19th and early 20th century, the word "sell" meant "to trick or deceive" someone. The word "sell" can still be used as a noun to mean a "deliberate deception" or a "hoax." The word "sell" can be used as an idiom to mean "to deceive someone or tell them something that is not true." 

As for using the word "humbug," in the 19th and early 20th century, it was a way to describe a scam. The word "humbug" was used to describe "a person or thing that is deceptive or dishonest," often as a hoax or in jest. It can also be used as a verb to mean to deceive or hoax. Some synonyms of "humbug" include counterfeit, fake, fraud, imposture, and sham. 

As for calling Davis's story a "sell," "humbug," a "sheer fabrication," and "an unmitigated hoax," several newspapers felt that this story that Captain Jonathan R. Davis had told was all that. Just a "sell," a yarn to deceive people. And no, it didn't take it long for a newspaper to call Davis' story an out-and-out lie.

It's true. The Shasta Courier, Volume 3, Number 44, on January 6, 1855, ran a small article calling the Davis story a lie. Here it is:

The Rocky Canon Tragedy, "as we predicted," (only we didn’t, but like many others were grievously sold and likewise taken in,) turns out to be an unmitigated humbug. Capt. Jonathan Davis didn't slaughter eleven fierce brigands, nor has his hat been rendered "shocking bad" by being pierced with seventeen balls. "Lord, Lord, how this world’s given to lying."

__________________________

While this was taking place, Jonathan Davis was being treated as a "hero" and a celebrity. And as for his critics who weren't buying what Davis was selling, Jonathan R. Davis wrote to the editor of The Mountain Democrat to plead his case to get people to believe his story. But, by then, even the editors at The Mountain Democrat were referring to Davis as "Baron Munch" -- as in Baron Munchausen, who, as we covered above, became famous for telling totally unbelievable stories that he tried passing along as being factual when they weren't.

Jonathan R. Davis's letter to The Mountain Democrat hit the wire, and everyone was talking about it because it sounded like Davis was changing his story. Many saw his letter as him backpedaling from his earlier claims.

The San Joaquin Republican, Volume 5, Number 8, on January 11, 1855, printed the gist of Davis' letter:

The Rocky Canon Tragedy. — The Mountain Democrat publishes a letter from Capt. Davis, the hero of twenty-seven bullets, in which he sticks to his first assertion, and says he is prepared to show the graves of the robbers, together with those of his unfortunate companions. He says, however, that the party who published the first account erred in the number of bullets that passed through the hat; that they must have counted all the holes where the balls came out of it, in their passage through the crown and him, as well as where they entered. He does not think that half the reported number touched it.

__________________________

The Los Angeles Star, Volume 4, Number 37, on January 25, 1855, carried a letter to the Editor of The Mountain Democrat that Davis sent to that paper on January 11, 1855, reporting:

The Rocky Canon Tragedy Once More.

The Mountain Democrat (Placerville) publishes the following letter from Capt. Davis, the hero of the twenty-seven-bullet-and-eleven-men-slain story. If the whole affair be a "humbug" — a " sell,"' as fast people would call it, or a "lie," as slow folk would name it— the redoubtable Captain is pleased to persist in his statements. There is nothing like sticking to a thing, Right or wrong—stick to it.

Thus consistency and the admiration of others are gained, The Democrat says that the Baron Munch — Capt. Davis, we mean, has requested it to state that, if there be any persons still skeptical, he, the Captain, stands prepared to take them to the spot where the fight took place, and show them the graves of the robbers, as well as those of his unfortunate companions, Dr. Sparks and M. McDonald. His letter is as follows:

PLACERVILLE, January 4,1855. Editor Democrat: — Though scarcely able to leave a bed of sickness, it may not be amiss that I should say a word or two relative to our fight with the robbers the other day. Hitherto I have said as little of the matter as possible, lest my veracity should be doubted; and besides it is a matter of indifference to me whether the world is inclined to believe it or not. Your paper of last Saturday has just been shown to me; and I see your remark that I "still persist in saying that every word of it is true."

Of course; I meant the general facts as published. Since then the ''white hat" has been sent down to me; and, after a more minute examination. I find that the party who published an account of it, have erred in the number of bullets that passed through it. They must have counted all the holes where the balls came out of it, in their passage through the crown and brim of it. as well as where they entered.

The miners have disfigured it very much by poking their lingers through the holes, and tearing it. so that it is somewhat difficult to decide upon the number. I do not believe that over one-half of that number touched it.

Having been in a fever of excitement at the time I did not examine it carefully, and took it for granted that they were right. Mr. Lyles is perhaps correct in his assertion that two of the four who made the charge upon me were unable to fight on account of their old wounds.

They came up with the rest, making warlike demonstrations by raising their knives in a striking posture; and I acted accordingly. I noticed that they handled them with very bad grace, but attributed it altogether to fright or natural awkwardness. 1 did only what hundreds of others might have done under similar circumstances, and attach no particular credit to myself for it.

Yours, respectfully, J. R. Davis.

__________________________

The Sacramento Daily Union, Volume 9, Number 1249, on March 26, 1855, reported that three unnamed supporters of Davis stepped forward:

" Late in the Day." — The Mountain Democrat publishes the Statement of three individuals who corroborate the statement of Captain Davis, the hero of the Rocky Canon Tragedy. Their long silence is owing to the fact that they were living far up in the mountains and "didn't take the papers.''

__________________________

The Daily Alta California, Volume 6, Number 80, on March 26, 1855, published a report that seemed to end the Davis story, a story that by then very few believed:

The Rocky Canon Tragedy Again. — The Mountain Democrat still sticks to the Rocky Canon affair, in which Capt. Davis performed such wondrous deeds last December. Three of the signers of the first published statement, have subscribed to a card which concludes as follows: In a word, we assert that every word we published in oar statement of the fight, in your extra of the 23d of December last, and the private letter published with it, written to Mr. Henderson by one of the undersigned is strictly true. Our sole object then, was to state nothing but the simple truth, and we will ever be ready to verify it, even on our death beds.

__________________________

As for Davis, it didn't take long before people started to forget and even ridicule his unbelievable story. And while in January of 1855 it was said that "If there be any persons still skeptical, he, the Captain, stands prepared to take them to the spot where the fight took place, and show them the graves of the robbers, as well as those of his unfortunate companions, Dr. Sparks and M. McDonald," the fact is that Davis didn't take anyone to the spot of where it had supposedly happened. No, not even the County Sheriff. 

End of Part Two -- and Part Three is coming soon! 

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part One

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Two

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Three

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Four

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Five

Was The Capt. Jonathan R. Davis 1854 Gunfight A Hoax? -- Part Six

Tom Correa