California Gold Rush Facts

The California Gold Rush, 1848 to 1855, began on January 24th, 1848, when gold was found by James W. Marshall at Sutter's Mill in Coloma, California. The news of gold brought some 300,000 people to California from the United States and all corners of the world.

Yes, they were known as "Argonauts." And while the Gold Rush did include thousands of miners heading west in wagons, many of the first prospectors actually arrived by ship. Few of them had a return ticket. And within months, San Francisco's port was filled with ships that had been abandoned after their passengers, and crews, headed for the gold country to hunt for gold.

San Francisco began to boom and demand for lumber increased dramatically, and the ships were dismantled and sold as construction material. Hundreds of houses, banks, saloons, hotels, jails and other structures were built out of the abandoned ships. Other ships were used as landfill for lots near the waters edge. 

Today, more than 150 years after the great California Gold Rush, construction workers still stop at time to bring in archeologists and preservationists to investigate finds of relics buried beneath the city. And yes, sometimes entire ships are found beneath the streets of San Francisco.

At the time, gold initially was valued from $12.00 to $35.00 an ounce. The world's second largest gold nugget, and California's largest, was found at Carson Hill in Calaveras County in 1854. It weighed in at 160 pounds.

Prospecting for gold was a very costly enterprise. Most of the men who flocked to northern California arrived with little more than the shirts on their backs. Once in California, the new arrivals needed to buy food, goods, and other supplies,

This was great for San Francisco’s merchants who were willing to provide everything needed at a price. And yes, that price was high. For example, at the height of the boom in 1852, a prospector could expect to buy a single egg for $3 each. Coffee went for more than $100 per pound. Replacing a pair of worn out boots could set you back more than $2,500. Whiskey was $16.00 a bottle. Pills for whatever ailed you were $10.00 each without advice, and $100 each with advice.

In early 1848, California's non-Indian population was less than 20,000; two years later in 1850, the federal census accounted for 93,000 non-Indians. And no, that does not include the census returns from San Francisco, Contra Costa, and Santa Clara counties because they were lost.

In 1852, the state took its own census and counted 223,856. Yes, the California Gold Rush ushered in the largest mass migration in United States history.  

In March 1848, there were roughly 157,000 people in the California territory. Of them. 150,000 Native Americans, 6,500 Californios of Spanish descent, and fewer than 800 non-native Americans.

Just 20 months later, following the massive influx of settlers, the non-native population had soared to more than 100,000. By the mid 1850s there were more than 300,000 new arrivals. And yes, 1 in every 90 people in the United States was living in California.

All of these people, and their money, catapulted California to statehood. In 1850, just two years after the U.S. government had purchased the land, California became the 31st state in the Union.

In 1860, the federal census accounted for 380,000. In 1870, the federal census accounted for more than 560,000 Californians.

Immigrants from around the world rushed to California. By 1850 more than 25 percent of California's population had been born outside the United States. Fact is, as news of the discovery was slow to reach the East Coast of the United States ships took the news to Hawaii and to South America. This is why many of the first miners to arrive were from Hawaii, Asia, and South America. And by 1852, more than 25,000 immigrants from China alone had arrived in California. 

Since the vast majority of those who journeyed to the California gold country were men, by 1852 it is said that 92 percent of the people prospecting for gold were men. The few women who traveled West made a living in the growing boom-towns by working in the restaurants, saloons, brothels and hotels that quickly arose.

Some women's journals on the east coast ran ads encouraging educated, morally minded young women to travel West "to tame these men." But the percentage of women in gold mining communities was never much higher than in 1860 when they still numbered fewer than 10,000. Yes, just 19 percent.

As the amount of available gold decreased, miners began to fight one another for profits and anti-immigrant tensions soared.

To make matters worse, in 1850, California's legislature passed a "Foreign Miner's Tax" which required a $20 monthly fee for non-citizens. That's the equivalent of more than $500 a month in today's dollars. That was eventually repealed, but was replaced with another in 1852 that expressly targeted Chinese miners, charging them $2 a month. That's the equivalent of more than $80 a month today. Imagine that each month. 

Violence against foreign miners increased, there were attacks and whole skirmishes. And yes, even murders of foreign miners became commonplace.

California's Indians suffered the worst consequences of such violence.. Before the Gold Rush, California's native population numbered roughly 150,000. Within 20 years, more than 100,000 had died from personal attacks, disease, mining-related accidents, and war. It is estimated that more than 4,000 were murdered by angry miners.

In 1848, about 6,000 miners found $10 million worth of gold. In 1849, about 40,000 miners found between $20 and $30 million worth of gold. In 1851, during the peak year of gold mining, about 100,000 miners found close to $80 million worth of gold.

By 1851, some miners who recognized that the placer gold was harder to find formed partnerships with their neighbors to form corporation to buy expensive hydraulic mining equipment. Soon hundreds of small companies took over the gold mining efforts in the Sierras.

By 1860, according to one account, hydraulic mining "was strictly big business, with a handful of owners and hundreds of wage laborers." Though hydraulic mining had yielded over $100 million in gold, or one-third of the total gold produced in California, because of it's negative impact on the land by 1880 that mining practice was banned. 

The boom started to peter out and the state's gold production in 1865 was less than $18 million overall. But though that's the case, 1855 is the year considered by most to be the actual year of the end of the California Gold Rush. I believe they consider that the peak.

Of course, more fortunes were made by merchants than by miners. Some men realized very quickly that there was more money to be made by catering to newly arrived miners rather than mining. But while that's the case, all in all, it is said that very few individuals really prospered from placer mining. Fact is that most of the real money was had by people who got together and formed corporations so that they could afford hydraulic and quartz mining equipment.

In 1869, the name "Mother Lode" was coined and referred to only five counties: Mariposa, Tuolumne, Calaveras, Amador and El Dorado. And yes, some estimates say that more than 80% of the gold in the Mother Lode is still in the ground.

And as for the thousands of prospectors who got rich, John Sutter wasn’t one of them. John Sutter was a Swiss immigrant who fled Europe in the 1830s to finally settle in tiny Yuerba Buena, modern-day San Francisco, in 1839.

With the assistance of the local Mexican government, Sutter quickly realized his goal of establishing an agricultural community on a 50,000-acre tract of land he called “New Helvetia,” which is Latin for “New Switzerland".

His land became an important outpost for emigrants traveling to the west. It was during the construction of a sawmill on Sutter's land along the American River that one of his employees first discovered the gold nugget that would change the world. Sutter was initially more interested in maintaining control over his property, and actually tried to keep the discovery quiet.

But once the news leaked out, most of his workers had abandoned him to search for gold themselves. All while thousands of other prospectors flooded into his land and destroyed much of his equipment.

Faced with mounting debts, John Sutter was forced to deed his land to one of his sons. His son used it to create a new settlement called Sacramento. His father was furious since he had hoped the a new town on his land should be named after him.

Nearly bankrupt, John Sutter tried to get the United States government reimburse him for his financial losses. But that, well that just wasn't in the cards. So yes, while thousands of others became rich off his former land, John Sutter retired to Pennsylvania and died a very bitter man.


As for Sutter's Mill, in the flood of 1862 Sutter's Mill was destroyed. Yes, it is said that all traces of it were obliterated. And it wouldn't be until another flood in 1924, that the mill's undeveloped foundations was again exposed and it was again "discovered." The mill was then re-created using old photographs and Marshall's own drawings.

By 1852, at its peak, a total of $2 billion worth of precious metal was extracted from the area during the Gold Rush. During that time, over 125 million troy ounces of gold was mined, at a worth of more than $50 billion by today's standards.

And as I said earlier, thousands of prospectors got rich. But really, that fact doesn't matter to the thousands who returned east with empty pockets and sour over the experience. One such case was Hinton Helper. He was said to be "notoriously grouchy."

In 1855, he published The Land of Gold: Reality versus Fiction. In it the author states that after he worked for three months of digging in the California mines, all that he was left with was a profit of 93 and three-quarter cents. His conclusion was that "California can and does furnish the best bad things that are obtainable anywhere in America."

The "notoriously grouchy" Hinton Helper died in 1910. His obituary in The Polk County News reported that he died "obscure, neglected, and in abject poverty." So no, I'm thinking his book on mining during the California Gold Rush was probably too negative to make it a Best Seller.

Too bad really, because there were many Argonauts who did not prosper in the mines yet still prospers later as merchants catering to the miner's needs. They did not let not finding gold in the ground stop them from finding gold in the pockets of others.

Tom Correa

Colt's New Agent 1911 -- Why Can't I Buy One In California?





Dear Friends,

Have you ever had a chance to buy something but didn't, then later kick yourself in the ass for not doing so. Well, that's the way I'm feeling about not buying a Colt New Agent 1911 when I had the chance. I waited too long and later found out that I couldn't buy it. 

Why can't I buy one? Well, it has to do with the new Colt 1911s not being sold in California anymore. Colt rifles are accessible to residents of California, and so are Colt Single Actions, but not the Colt 1911 or any of its versions including the Colt New Agent.

In May of 2015, believe it or not, the California DOJ's endless list of banned rifles, shotguns, and pistols that have been labeled "assault weapons" includes almost all Colt 1911s. It's true, I'm now finding out that almost every Colt 1911 is banned in California.

I find it interesting that California now has two lists, their Drop List and their Assault Weapons list. The Colt New Agent met the requirements of the Drop Tests and was sold up until recently. But Colt would not re-engineer their semi-autos to put the California state-required little red flag on the slide like Smith & Wesson and others have on their California Compliant guns. And while Colt sees California's demands as unreasonable, California has put Colt's semi-autos on its Assault Weapons list. Basically, Colt has been driven out of California.

And while I was told by one firearms dealer that the Colt Commander model #04691(?) is thought to remain on the "approved" roster of both lists, I really haven't been able to determine which Colt 1911 is acceptable for sale to regular law-abiding citizens and not just to law enforcement. Of course, these pistols are also not to being sold to law-abiding citizens with CCW permits who have undergone background checks.

I've checked with a number of firearms dealers in Northern California, and all tell me the same thing. Colt semi-auto pistols fell of the "approved" handgun for sale list, the California Drop List, and are now determined to be an "assault weapon." To me, this is just a way for anti-2nd Amendment, anti-Constitution, gun control Democrat crazies in California to disarm law-abiding citizens. 

And for those who have taken the time to defend the Democrats saying it's not them who are trying to take away our guns in California, you either obviously don't live here -- or you don't understand that the Democrat Party controls California no differently than the Communist-controlled the Soviet Union. This is a "one-party state" with Democrats in complete control of what becomes law. The Leftists are in charge here, and they see the U.S. Constitution and an armed citizenry as a threat to their "rule." Yes, rule.

How is it that the State of California can break the law and legalize marijuana, which is illegal under federal law, yet at the same time make guns illegal under State law which is legal under federal law?

When I was studying for my degree in the Administration of Justice/Criminal Justice, I remember being taught about the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It states:

Amendment XIV

Section 1.

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Isn't that what the State of California is doing? Isn't the State of California curtailing my privileges and immunities as a citizen of the United States? Fact is, it doesn't take a lawyer to see the State of California is breaking Federal law. But does that matter to anyone in government, especially in the California State Capitol controlled by anti-gun Democrats? No, it doesn't.

And what does any of this have to do with my wanting a Colt New Agent .45 ACP? Everything!

I took a look at the Colt New Agent and liked the lightweight, the grooved sights, the lack of sights that grabs on to one's clothing when drawing it, the standard slim design, and ergonomics of the 1911A1 design. I believe that this pistol is perfect for a concealed carry weapon for me as a citizen exercising my Constitutional rights under the 2nd and 14th Amendments.

It is perfect for someone like myself who likes the 1911 .45 ACP and wants one when exercising my rights as a law-abiding American citizen. Yes, a law-abiding citizen with a concealed carry permit who went through the classes and did everything correctly, including undergoing a background check, to exercise my rights.

Fact is, the whole pistol looked to be well thought out. It fills a niche in the concealed carry market which is pretty void of good 1911s specifically designed as carry-pistols.

Today, it seems that many 1911s out there are made for competition shooting with enormous front and rear sights. Many of those are not made for quick up-close work where one defending himself or herself cannot go into a Weaver Stance and take the time to use those bulky sights.

It is just my opinion, but it has been my personal experience that if you have the time that it takes to drop into a Weaver Stance and sight in, then you may also have the time to maneuver away from the dangerous situation. But since the vast majority of gunfights take place within 3 to 7 feet of one's assailant, most have only a second to get your weapon out and into action.

Frankly, most folks don't have the time to drop into a Weaver Stance and sight in. Most have to go with just getting a general sight picture. And no, that hasn't changed in over 40 years from when I was first trained for such encounters.

Also, that's the same reason why back in the late 1800s, lawmen were opting for the shorter Colt Sheriff's Model SAA instead of the longer standard 7.5-inch barrel Colt Single Action Army of 1873. A shorter barrel means you have a less cumbersome weapon to get out and into play when you need it in a hurry. I wrote about this in The Buntline Special vs Colt's Sheriff's Model when I addressed the myth of the so-called Buntline Special.



As for the 1911, I love my 1911s and I own a couple of them. But frankly, I don't own any that can realistically be used for International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA) or United States Pistol Shooting (USPSA) competitions. The reason is that I do not own target guns designed to be "race guns." I own basic close-quarter self-defense guns. Yes, no-frills self-defense guns like my Colt Series 70 and my Springfield Armory 1911 Mil-Spec pistol which I just love and carry.

As for the Colt New Agent, it got my attention when I first looked at it as a lighter option to my Rock Island Compact .45 ACP.  While I loved the lighter weight, I really liked the "trench sights" which is a "grove" running the length of the slide. Yes, the perfect kind of sight to prevent the gun from snagging on clothing or even a holster.

And when all you need to get is a general sight picture, Colt New Agent's sights are plenty suitable for anything within 20 yards. And like my Rock Island Compact, the Colt New Agent's 3-inch barrel is perfect for easy concealment.

I like carrying a pistol made of metal and not plastic. And no, I don't care that it is a bit heavier than the Glocks that everyone seems to be carrying these days. I know the 1911 and I cut my teeth on them in the Marine Corps. And if you're like me, and maybe learned how nice a 1911 is when you were in the military or shooting your Dad's, or Granddad's, then you really would like one of these Colt New Agent 1911s. And yes, you too can have one if you want to buy one. That is if you live in just about any other state but California!

And there's the problem. Why should every other American be able to buy one, but not the people here in this state? Frankly, this is all just bullshit and the sort of thing that makes people do things that they don't want to do.

For example, businesses don't want to uproot their workers and leave California, but a lot of businesses are fed up with the over-regulation in California and are simply moving out. The same goes for law-abiding tax-paying citizens. Many of us don't want to uproot our families, but many are moving out.

Of course, once in another state that allows one to have full ownership of their rights as an American citizen then they can exercise all of their rights as an American. And that, well that goes directly to why this truly pisses me off.

Why do I have to sell my home and move somewhere else just to be able to have all of the rights granted to me as an American citizen? Why is it that I have to either move or break the law and buy one illegally if I want to own a firearm that is on the market legally in most states? And how is it that California can get away with denying me my rights as an American?

I have had to update this article because I've gotten some emails telling me to simply accept the way things are even though it's not right. And friends, that's part of what pisses me off. It's the politics behind this. The gun in question is not sold for political reasons, and I know that I can buy a firearm very similar to it made by other makers.

But why should I since this pistol is not an "assault weapon" and has already met California's required "Drop Test"? It is simply a scheme to deprive guns to citizens. It is simply a way around the law and for the gun control Democrats in charge of California to get their way. It is simply an attempt to deprive Americans in California of guns and subsequently our ability to exercise our Constitutional rights.

No, I don't think this is right at all.

Tom Correa

The Yuma & California's Gila Expedition

Dear Friends,

After writing about the Wiyot Indian Massacre that took place in February of 1860, I soon found out that some of my readers were surprised that California had Indian massacres that were in many ways worse than those that took place in other places around the nation. Many of my readers also wrote to say they were very surprised to find out that California had so many Native American Indian tribes.

The Gila Expedition, which is also known as the Morehead War, was an 1850 California militia attack on the Quechan Indians. It was a military operation set into motion in retaliation for what was called the Glanton Massacre near the Gila River and Colorado River in Arizona. 

The Quechan, also known as the Yuma, are a Native American tribe and today live on the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation on the lower Colorado River in Arizona and California just north of the Mexican border. They are federally recognized, and it's tribal members mostly live on the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation. Though the Quechan tribe's main office is located in Fort Yuma, Arizona, its operations and the majority of its reservation land are located in California.

The historic Yuman-speaking people in this region were skilled warriors and active traders, maintaining exchange networks with the Pima in southern Arizona and others.

The first contact of the Quechan with Europeans was with the Spanish explorer Juan Bautista de Anza and his party in the winter of 1774. Relations are said to have been friendly. In fact, it is reported that they were so friendly that on de Anza's return in 1776 from his second trip to Alta California (Upper California), that Quechan Chief Palma and three of his men traveled with de Anza to Mexico City. This was to show others that it would be fine with the Indians there to establish missions.

The story also goes that the Quechan chief Palma and his three men were baptized as Catholics in Mexico City on February 13th, 1777. Chief Palma was given the Spanish baptismal name Salvador Carlos Antonio. And though that sounds wonderful, fact is that Spanish settlements among the Quechan did not go smoothly. 

In fact, in July of 1781, the Quechan tribe attacked and killed 4 priests and 30 Spanish soldiers. They also attacked and killed many more at the Spanish missions of San Pedro y San Pablo de Bicuner and Puerto de Purísima Concepcion. The following year, the Spanish retaliated with military action against the tribe. 

Of course, after winning the Mexican-American War, the United States annexed the territories and the Yuma War took place. That war lasted from 1850 to 1853. 

The Yuman (Quechan) tribe was small compared to many other North American tribes. It's said that on average a Yuman village had anywhere from 80 to 250 men and women. They were spread out along the far western Gila and southern Colorado Rivers. 

Following the Mexican Cession and the California Gold Rush, American settlers headed west and many crossed the southern portion of the Colorado River through Yuman territory. Believe it or not, the Yuma Indians saw this as a money making opportunity and established a ferry near the confluence of the Gila and the Colorado Rivers to transport American settlers from Arizona to California. Imagine that.

Upriver from where the Quechan set up a ferry business to transport people, animals and goods across the Colorado River on their way to the California Gold Rush, a ferry was established by A.L. Lincoln, 

Then in early 1850, a Texas scalphunter by the name of John Joel Glanton and his gang of twelve killers attacked their Yuma ferry. They killed the Yuma Indians there and actually occupied the area for a time. The Glanton gang was not above killing and robbing both Americans and Yuma Indians in the area. In fact, they were known to murder those traveling across the river and throwing their bodies into the river. 

Finally, in response a Yuma Indian war party attacked the Glanton's gang. Sadly the Yuma only killed nine while four escaped. While it is said that those of the Glanton gang who were killed were also scalped and burned in a large bonfire, instead of giving the Yuma medals and money for killing a bunch of no good outlaws and murderers, Californians called it the "Glanton Massacre" and wanted revenge even though the Yuma Indians did everyone a favor by killing them. 

Californians responded with the Gila Expedition. Immediately a militia of 142 men was raised. Why only 142, you ask? Well, I believe it was because they were paid six dollars a day. Yes, $6 a day to fight the Yuma instead of panning gold when it was still plenty to be had.

On April 16th, 1850, the the Gila Expedition entered what is today Arizona only to be defeated time and time again in a series of skirmishes. Then on September 16th, the Gila Expedition officially ended and the troops went back to mining their claims.

The Gila Expedition was a failure because of what it did for what it cost. It didn't do very much in that it was defeated tactically over and over again. As for what it cost, because of the inflated prices of supplies caused by the California gold rush, the cost to the newly formed State of California $113,000. Yes, as its first military operations against California Indian tribes, the Gila Expedition nearly bankrupted the state of California.

The Gila Expedition lead to the Yuma War.

Yes, believe it or not, even though the California militia was routed, for the next few years from 1850 to 1853, the Yuma War took place. That was when the U.S. Army got involved with conducting military operations in southern California and what is today southwestern Arizona. Primarily they fought the Yuma and other tribes which were drawn into the conflict.

While the Yuma Indians were the primary target of the U.S. Army, there were small engagements fought between American troops and other tribes in the region. But in general, the actual conflict took the form of guerrilla warfare and over the course of three years. As for a base of operation, during the conflict, the historic Fort Yuma was constructed and became a strategic military outpost on the American frontier.

During that time, the U.S. Army engaged in pursuing the enemy, protected American settlers crossing the Colorado River, and supposedly prevented the conflict from spreading further to include a broader war between the United States and other tribes.

But in the end, the war was a failure and it sparked a war between the Yuma and the Cocopah Indians. As for the United States, in the summer of 1853, a peace treaty was signed ending hostilities with the Yuma. All in all, they were a much tougher foe than initially thought.

Tom Correa

Daily Life In Tombstone

By Terry McGahey
Associate Writer/ Old West Historian

There have been more than plenty of articles and movies written and made about the town of Tombstone when it comes to the gunfights, saloons, bawdy houses, and of course the gunfight which took place near the OK Corral in 1881. In this article I am going to touch on the every day life in which the average citizen experienced from day to day as written in the Tombstone Epitaph.

It's my opinion that these articles are just as entertaining to read by the manner in which they are written, and also show that Tombstone was not so much different that any other town from that period in time as well as now days in some cases.

• A miner was arrested for striking his brother in-law over the head with a six-shooter, because the latter persisted in blowing himself in against faro, was yesterday fined $2 and costs by Justice Easton.

• It won't do any harm to go to church today. Try the experience anyhow.

• A carload of beer received this week by the Cochise H & T Co., one received by Hoe Hoefler, and one of keg beer by Martin Costello last week, will indicate that we will not suffer for something to eat or drink for a short time to come.

• About noontime yesterday the remains of the late Kiv Phillips were taken from the undertaker's room on Allen street and started the journey to San Francisco. The body was not well embalmed and the stench was beginning to get so great it was feared the express company would not ship it. 

• The Elite Theater Company gave a torchlight parade last night on Allen street.

• A new attraction will be at the Crystal Palace concert hall tomorrow night. The band is well versed in thorough base, as well as popular music of the day, although not capable to leading the great orchestras of the world. If they were as fine as some of our local talent thinks it is, they would have no need to reside in Arizona and play occasional pieces.

• James Fair, Jr., is dead. It was the same old story of heart failure, which is another name for alcoholism.

• Henry Campbell recently received several casks of fine table wines, including white and claret, from the Los Angeles Vintage Company which he was busily engaged in bottling.

• Johnny Nobile, the popular mixologist of this city, now dispenses the liquid fluid at the Crystal Palace. John is a dandy at his business.

• A squaw gave birth to a child boy in the brush this side of the San Pedro yesterday. She was unattended, but she managed to get along nicely, also she attracted a number of interested spectators. The child is said to be exceptionally light and doing remarkably, and was named Pedro by its several by standing godfather witnesses.

• A woman known as Shoo-fly was arrested and locked up by officer Weiser. She was booked for being drunk and disorderly.

• Fresh buttermilk at the Can Can.

• A sporting man known as Portuguese Joe fell in a fit in front of the Crystal Palace saloon last night.

• A hair-pulling match occurred on Fifth street yesterday between two parties of the weaker sex. For a few moments the scene would have made a picture for the brush of Dore, but the combatants were finally separated. During the melee various and numerous articles of feminine wearing apparel were flying wildly through the air and the total annihilation of everything present seemed imminent. The only intelligible expression heard was "How dare you interfere with my husband!" and the balance of the fracas would have given John L. Sullivan some exceedingly valuable points in the way of prize slugging. The combat was declared a draw as it was interrupted before either of the contestants had been knocked out.

• Services at the Catholic church at the usual hours today.

• An accidental shot caused by the careless handling of a pistol caused quite a little commotion in the Occidental bar last night.

• Another crank has been toying with a Gila monster, with the result that he is likely to die.

• A Mexican lad having six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot was an object of much curiosity on Allen street yesterday.

• Pat Holland says that since leaving here he has had a siege in the Territorial prison and also a term in the insane asylum but that he came out of both institutions in fine health, and that he now feels content to spend the rest of his days in Tombstone.

• A Sixth street Cyprian was fined $20 and costs in the City Recorder's court yesterday, for soliciting prostitution. The complaining witness was a next door neighbor, in the same line of business.

• There appears to be an epidemic of sickness visiting Tombstone at the present time. Several deaths have recently occurred and a few cases of illness are reported. If some of the fossilized, pessimistic anti-statehood cranks were to die off it would probably do the country some good.

• A tenderfoot from New Jersey named Markley while playing cowboy at Crittenden a few days since, undertook to show his skill with a pistol. The result was that he shot the horse he was riding through the neck, killing it, and in falling it broke Markley's leg.

I hope you enjoyed these short articles as much as I have. 

About the Author:

Terry McGahey is a writer and Old West historian.

This once working cowboy is best known for his fight against the City of Tombstone and their historic City Ordinance Number 9, America's most famous gun-control law. He was instrumental in finally getting Tombstone's City Ordinance Number 9 repealed and having Tombstone fall in line with the state of Arizona. 

If you care to read how he fought Tombstone's City Hall and won, please click:

The Last Gun Fight -- The Death of Ordinance Number 9 (Chapter One)

Ebenezer Hamilton vs Marysville's Cemetery 1870

Dear Friends,

On February 26th, 2017, it was reported that the water released from Lake Oroville has flooded the historic Marysville Cemetery on the ouskirts of Marysville, California.

The report said, "In a city where the dead nearly outnumber the living, corpses are rolling in their graves."

While that is unknown for certain, it is known that as water from the Oroville Dam pounded down its damaged spillway last week, over 200,000 residents living in the surrounding areas and its path quickly evacuated. And more than 30 miles downstream from Lake Oroville, the Feather River swelled and the Jackson Slough over took its banks. That resulted in the flooding of the historic Marysville Cemetery. 

Photo by San Francisco Chronicle's Michael Macor

Even now, it is still under several feet of water. As seen in the picture above, the tops of mausoleums and tombstones can be seen reflecting in the water's eerie surface. The 14 and a half acre cemetery here has flooded before, but the water is said to be now at a level unseen in decades. And while this is now a problem, it is said that over the years, ground squirrels burrow tunnels under the centuries-old pine coffins and unearth bones while creating sinkholes in the soft earth. Of course some grave markers have collapsed under the water's weight while others simply sink out of sight.

Unlike what went on in Louisiana last year when flooding caused caskets to raise up out of their rain soaked graves, the rumors that bodies are floating up in Marysville Cemetery are not true. At least, that's true as of right now. 

The Marysville Cemetery was founded in 1850, and that makes it is one of the oldest cemeteries West of the Mississippi River. The Marysville City Council and mayor appoint people to the seven-seat Cemetery Commission. They are tasked with overseeing the graveyard's maintenance.

The first to be buried there was in 1850, and the last to be buried there was back in 1983. But frankly, according to the report, the commission admits that it doesn’t exactly know where some of the graves are. There is a reason for their not knowing, and that's where Ebenezer Hamilton comes in. 

He is said to have been one of Marysville's first pioneers. But, all in all, he is also said to have been a blackmailer and extortionist. He was an outlaw of sorts. The reason folks back in the day saw him as such has to do with his actually blackmailing the city for a salary raise in 1870. 

He was born in Rhode Island and first settled in Massachusetts where he was married. He arrived in California in 1849 during the California Gold Rush. He then brought his family to Marysville after he established his Undertaker business. A later census shows that they had seven children.

In the very early 1850s, Hamilton was elected City Coroner and kept the Marysville City Cemetery records. He held the position of City Coroner for over 20 years. So while some were digging for gold during that time, he was digging graves.

After 20 years of doing this, he wanted another raise and decided to use the records of who was buried in that cemetery and where they are buried in that cemetery to get his raise. 

Believe it or not, he then fought the city over who owned the cemetery records. Believe it or not, Hamilton tried to say that he owned the city's cemetery records and would not relinquish them to the city of Marysville until he gets more money. That's why some called him a blackmailer and extortionist. 

This went on for a couple of years, until at age 53 on December 5th, 1875, Ebenezer Hamilton died. And no, it's not clear when most of the family moved on from Marysville to Oakland, Alamedia County, California, but it is belived they did soon after his death.

The cemetery is said to be the final resting place for Gold Rush pioneers and explorers who founded the Golden State, and others who settled in the city once considered as a place for the California State capital. But as a result of his death, the burial records of the Marysville City Cemetery from 1850 through April of 1870 were lost and have never been recovered.

The graveyard has nearly 10,000 dead, which includes sections for babies and Veterans, Japanese Americans, African Americans, Chileans, Masonics, Oddfellows and Jews. And yes, in that cemetery is a founder of Macy’s department stores, there is a Wells Fargo stagecoach driver, and there are survivors of the Donner Party. 

So the then City Coroner Ebenezer Hamilton actually stole two decades' worth of records of who and where folks are buried there. He never got the raise he was willing to blackmail the city for. The city never got the records back.

And that, well that's why several corpses were accidentally dug up during burials. That's also why after one too many times of that taking place, the city of Marysville ruled that only ashes could be interred there. That may be why it was finally closed in 1983.

As for Ebenezer Hamilton, he is buried in the historic Marysville Cenetery. The picture above is his family's mausoleum. The picture taken in dryer days. 

And yes indeed, I'd say it's probably a safe bet to say that he's probably under water right now. Yep, just the same as all of those souls who today remain unknown and lost somewhere in that cemetery because of the records that he stole and was never recovered.

Tom Correa

Texas Has A Feral Hog Problem

Dear Friends,

If I have my way about it, I may be going to Texas this Summer to shoot feral hogs. Texas has become the Feral Hog Capital and I would love to go down there and shot as many as my rifles can handle.

Why, you ask? Well, they are among the most destructive invasive species in the United States today. There are estimates that range from two million to six million of the beasts running free to wreak havoc in at least 39 states. And friends, half are said to be in Texas.

Hogs were first introduced to North America by Spanish settlers. The breed most commonly seen in Texas is a mixture of those hogs and Russian boars brought over more recently for sport hunting, according to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. 

Some speculate the population boom is due to relatively recent cross-breeding in the wild. Feral hogs are much larger, meaner and wilier than their farm-raised hogs. The feral hogs, which are often referred to razorbacks or wild boar, have exploded across rural America in the last 20 years.  

Destructive is putting it mildly! Friends, I have people writing to tell me about wild hogs tearing up recreational areas, terrorizing tourists, and even attacking the family dog. But worse than screwing up some recreational area, it's estimated that feral hogs cause about $500 Million in agriculture damages in Texas alone. 

They do this by digging up fields, destroying pastures and crops, creating wallows and busting up fences. Besides destroying crops, they also pollute rivers and streams, and break farm machinery by digging ruts that damage tractors and other equipment. It is said that when not creating destruction, they are breeding. 

An official stated that a sow can bear two litters per year, with each litter consisting of up to a dozen, so that means one hog can become 200 over the course of just two years. And yes, according officials, that means 70 percent of the hogs must be killed each year just to maintain current population levels. And yes, a report from a year or so ago said there are 2.6 million feral hogs running loose in Texas. They are even pushing other animals out of the area. So yes, that means Texas has a huge feral hog problem.

Texas allows hunters to kill feral hogs year-round without limits. And of course some folks capture them alive to take to slaughterhouses. For me, I would think food banks and kitchens to help the needy would love some that meat. 

I have been told that thousands are shot each year. Some hunters, better shooters than me mind us, actually shot feral hogs from helicopters. And while I have heard some who have written to say that the goal is to control their growth, I say shot for eradication until someone says stop. And that, well that brings me to what's taking place right now. 

On February 21st, Fox News reported that the Texas state agriculture commissioner Sid Miller said that he wants to poison the feral hogs by using a human blood-thinner that supposedly proves especially deadly in swine. He is quoted as saying, "They're so prolific, you can't hardly keep them in check. This is going to be the hog apocalypse, if you like: If you want them gone, this will get them gone."

And believe it or not, though it sounds like BS, the pesticide used is called "Kaput Feral Hog Lure." It will be bait laced with the human blood thinner "warfarin."

Let's be real up front and admit that the use of warfarin as a pesticide to control the feral hog population is significant because it gives agriculture producers and landowners in Texas a new weapon in the fight against feral hogs. And according to some experts familiar warfarin, they believe it's a logical choice for hog toxicant because it is effective in swine. 

The manufacturer of the product, Scimetrics Ltd. Corp., has been manufacturing rodent management products for 15 years. Yes, warfarin has been used to kill rats and mice for a long time. Extensive testing of the effectiveness of warfarin on killing hogs has been conducted in Texas since 2008. The approval of warfarin for feral hog control is believed to be the culmination of several years of research in conjunction with the Texas Department of Agriculture.

So now how about other animals in the food chain? How much of a risk is there to livestock, horses, deer, and other animals? 

Experts say that other wildlife populations and livestock require a much higher dosage level to potentially have an affect on them. But frankly, that doesn't make sense since I would think high doses are needed to kill hogs. And if that's so that that puts livestock and other wildlife at risk. 

And while the folks at Texas A&M Agrilife Extension Service are supportive of the rule change and the use of warfarin for feral hog population control, they don't have anything to lose. Ranchers and farmers do if this "hog apocalypse" is an apocalypse felt by other animals as well.

Louisiana is considering the use of the same poison. But the FoxNews report siad that there is at least one state wildlife official who has gone on record to warn folks that the crumbs that a hog leaves behind could affect black bears and other animals.

While the state of Texas officials are downplaying the threat to other wildlife, some hunters in Texas disagree and say poison is not a viable option. Hunters in the state have collected more than 12,000 signatures in opposition of the use of this poison. 

In an effort to reassure people that the use of the poison will be safe for wildlife and livestock, Commissioner Miller said that there is only a "minimal" threat to other animals. But, according to Mr. Miller, hunters will be able to see that the substance was consumed by a hog because the fat will be bright blue. Imagine that. 

Eydin Hansen, the vice president of the Texas Hog Hunters Association is quoted as saying, "We don’t think poison is the way to go. If a hog is poisoned, do I want to feed it to my family? I can tell you, I don't."

Mr Hansen also mentioned the risks of another animal, like say a coyote, eating a dead carcass. His concern is about just how much of the whole ecosystem is effected by the decision to use poison.

By the way, last year it was reported that Caldwell County has become the Lone Star State's front line in the fight to curb the exploding population of feral hogs.

They have had a volunteer task force which has found success using a host of strategies including $5 tail bounties, helicopter hunts, and smartphone-controlled corrals.

In the two years since their volunteer task force was founded, the Caldwell County task force has helped kill or capture 10,000 of the hogs while providing a proven model of success for other counties dealing with the same problem. 

The Caldwell County Feral Hog Task Force pays $5 for each feral hog tail it collects. Of all the methods employed, the $5 bounty for tails has been one of the most effective. Setting up a roadside table, he and his fellow volunteers have paid out thousands of dollars for the tails that prove there is one less wild hog in the area. Funding for the Caldwell County operation comes in part from state and county grants.

The hogs are shot by hunters, sometimes from aboard helicopters, and trapped along the waterways they travel. Reports state that others, including entire broods, are caught in giant pens that are closed remotely after the hogs are inside.

The tails can be turned in by hunters who kill the hogs or by farmers and ranchers, who buy and take them to market. Hunters, who face no restrictions on the number of hogs they kill, can get up to $300 each. Some report bagging hundreds per year.

"In the last two years, I've gotten out of the red and into the black," said Val Ramirez, a landowner and hog trapper in Caldwell County to FoxNews.com. "On average, the revenue from selling wild hogs runs between $13,000 and $18,000 a year."

In Caldwell County, the hogs travel along the San Marcos River and Plum Creek, leaving behind large amounts of fecal matter and polluting the waterways in the process. Mr. Ramirez sets up dozens of traps along the creek and on the land of other ranchers looking for help.

"They are just a nuisance. We are not going to get rid of them completely. Trapping will never get rid of all of them, but at least we can try to curtail them," he said.

So now, if that's working in Caldwell County, why not open up the rest of the state using the same tactics? Why not pay for more hunters and make it worth their while to kill as many as possible?

Mr. Ramirez was right. They are a nuisance. So why not have counties, where the hog problem is the greatest, pay a bounty for each tail that's brought in just as Caldwell County is doing? I've known hunters who hire out to farmers to shoot feral hogs. And frankly, it cost ranchers less to hire someone to shot the invasive hogs than it costs them in crop losses. And if the farmers and ranchers knew they will be reimbursed by the state for the money that they are expending, I believe they will be more willing to spend more to get the job done.

As for the suggestion of reimbursing farmers and ranchers who hire others to remove their hogs, why not? That reimbursement may motivate other Texas ag producers to do that same if they really knew that they have the backing of the state.

Another option is allowing farmers and ranchers to bring in hunters from out of state. If that is a viable option, why not allow out of state hunters who will pay them to get rid of their hog problems? If Texas allows their farmers and ranchers to bring in out of state hunters, say from spring to the beginning of fall, there's the possibility that those hunters will be able to help eradicate the beasts?

The money that those farmers and ranchers will make from out of state hunters may even be helpful to recoup loses as result of the hog damage. A lot of them have been hit very hard by crop and equipment damage.

Bringing in more hunters, both locally and from out of state may even help a local economy that's been hit the hardest. Dollars coming in for everything from hotel stays and restaurants to hunting ammo and fees can't hurt a local economy who is open to out of state hunters wanting to bag as many hogs as the good Lord will allow.
  

Since feral hogs cost the state's agriculture industry about $50 million a year in damage, why not go with using other options instead of using poison which can have an effect on livestock, other wildlife, and the people eating these hogs?

Fixes like poison scares me because there is no telling how it spreads in the food chain? Does it enter the water that hogs drink from? Does it effect scavengers? Does it effect other animals which may consume it and pass it along by various?

And as for being harmful to people, remember, according to Commissioner Miller, hunters will be able to see that the substance was consumed by a hog because the fat will be bright blue. But he did not say not to eat it. He did not say that blue fat is not harmful to people. He did not say that blue fat is not harmful to people. Or did I read that wrong? 

And really what happens if someone doesn't know what he's looking at? Or what if some hunters decide to ignore what they see and eat these animals? What then? Who is responsible if people get sick or the poison is transmitted to people? Sound far fetched? Really? 

I find it interesting that people are concerned about not letting folks eat meat or chicken with growth hormones and antibiotics, yet someone is OK with Texans eating hogs which have been poisoned?

I find that unacceptable behavior on the part of public officials.

And yes, that's just the way I see it.

Tom Correa

The Coach Gun -- The Town Tamer

Above: Cimarron Firearms 1878 Coach Gun 

Dear Friends,

A while ago I made the claim that I believe shotguns were the real guns that won the West. Now a reader wants to know why I think such a thing? So here goes.  

Simply put, shotguns were much more widely available and used by more Americans in the 1800s than any other firearm of the period. Whether it was a brand new shotgun or one passed down from father to son, shotguns were considered the general-purpose firearms of the time. 

Shotguns were popular long before the Henry rifle, the Winchester 1873, the Smith & Wesson American, or the Colt Single Action Army. And yes, there were a huge number of shotguns that came West by pioneers. Whether it was someone's grandfather's percussion or other muzzle-loader shotgun, or a single or a double-barrel, our pioneers brought them with them. 

Pioneers who could only afford one firearm bought the one gun that was a more versatile tool than that of a pistol or a rifle. With a shotgun, a pioneer could bring in small game like rabbits and ducks while also loading up with buckshot to take down a deer. Produced by the thousands, they were used more than any other type of firearm.

They were used by lawmen, the military, shotgun messengers, prison guards, and average Americans alike. They were, as they still are, the single best most economical firearm for hunting and defense.

Of course, shotguns were used by Americans as far back as during the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812. And yes, there is the story that a shotgun was actually found at the Alamo. It was found after Santa Anna’s forces overran those holding the garrison.

As for the Civil War? Yes, both sides had troops that used shotguns. Cavalry units on both sides used shotguns as a devastating close-quarters weapon. And really, that makes sense since the cavalry was used as shock troops during the time. And yes, it was much easier for someone atop a horse to hit another what they were shooting at with a shotgun than it was with a rifle or a pistol.

In the Old West. the side-by-side double-barreled shotgun was a mainstay to settlers, miners, ranchers, and just about anyone who needed a weapon. They were primarily made by Remington Arms, Ithaca, Colt's Manufacturing Company, Parker, L.C. Smith, and also British and Belgian makers.

The term "coach gun" comes from express companies, like Wells Fargo & Co, who knew the value of shotguns. They armed their guards with shotguns that would become known as "coach guns" and "messenger's guns" because of their use by shotgun messengers on stagecoaches and by messenger wagons back in the Old West. 

Since a "coach gun" is simply a side-by-side double-barrel shotgun with a barrel from 18 to 24 inches in length, such a shotgun was used by shotgun guards on gold shipments on stagecoaches. They sat next to the driver on the coach, thus the name "coach gun." 

And while most were 12-gauge guns, there are reports that some were 10-gauge shotguns. Frankly, having a guard use a 10 gauge is a little hard to believe since a 10 gauge can be a little tough to handle.

The term "messenger's gun" is believed to have been coined in the late 1850s when Wells Fargo assigned guards to its shipments on stagecoaches in California. The company issued shotguns to their guards so that they would be able to defend their gold shipments coming out of the California Gold Country. Those Wells Fargo guards were called "shotgun messengers."

Wells, Fargo & Co. began regular stagecoach service from Tipton, Missouri to San Francisco, California which was a 2800 miles long route. In addition to carrying passengers and gold shipments, Wells Fargo was contracted to carry U.S. Mail. The reason for the armed guards is that the threat of road agents, and highwaymen, ready, and willing to rob stages was always present. In fact, it is said that between 1870 and 1884, Wells Fargo stages were the target of 347 robbery attempts.

Wells Fargo and other express companies recognized the need for firepower. They also understood the psychological effect of such an imposing weapon. With that, they hoped that those facts alone would deter someone from robbing a shipment.

And yes, it is believed that in some cases, the sight of a shotgun guard, or guards depending on the size of the shipment, may have changed the mind of the most determined road agent. This is probably true since the devastating effect of a shotgun was common knowledge to all at the time. No, there was no doubt of the effectiveness of a scattered blast of shotgun shot.  

Now if you are wondering why they didn't arm their guards with rifles or pistols? Most guards did in fact carry a pistol, and some did supplement a shipment with a supply of rifles, but express companies and shippers opted for the shotgun. Shotguns were simply more effective when trying to hit something with a single projectile fired from a rifle in the hands of someone atop a moving stagecoach or other types of wagon.

Let's face it, not everyone is accurate with a rifle. In contrast, those armed with shotguns didn't have to be expert marksmen since a shot blast is very forgiving. And that, well that's the same reason why other industries like say mining companies used coach guns for their guards.

Not all Wells Fargo wagons were stagecoaches as we can see from this photo.
Please note the four shotgun messengers. 

As for different types of shotguns? American gunmaker and inventor Daniel Myron LeFever is credited with the invention of the American hammerless shotgun. Working for Barber & LeFever in Syracuse, New York, he introduced his first hammerless shotgun in 1878. He went on to patent the first truly automatic hammerless shotgun in 1883.

His 1883 design was a shotgun that automatically cocked itself when the breech was closed. He later developed the mechanism to automatically eject the shells when the breech was opened. Before Mr. LeFever's design, all side-by-side shotguns used as coach guns featured external hammers.

Above: Stoeger Coach Gun, Hammerless 12 Gauge 20" Barrel

Famous American gunmaker and inventor John Browning, while working for Winchester Firearms, revolutionized shotgun design when he introduced the Model 1887 Lever Action Repeating Shotgun in 1887. The lever-action loaded a fresh shell by the operation of the lever really no different than a lever-action rifle. Browning then introduced a Pump Action Shotgun in 1893. The 1893 had a very short-lived production due to mechanical problems and reliability.

Though available in lever action and pump actions, Wells Fargo kept using side-by-side double-barrel shotguns because they believed there were too many reliability problems associated with both the new lever-action and pump-action designs. They saw, as many still do today, that a side-by-side coach gun is simply more reliable when one needs it.

It's interesting to note that the myth that says Wells Fargo shotguns were purchased by local agents is not true. In fact, prior to 1900, all of Wells Fargo's shotguns were purchased from San Francisco gun dealers because Wells Fargo's headquarters was located in San Francisco. It is also interesting to note that from 1908 to 1919, all Wells Fargo still side-by-side shotguns were made by Ithaca Gun Company. 

A group of Wells Fargo shotgun messengers guarding an outgoing shipment.

Before the Model 1887 Lever Action Repeating Shotgun and the Model 1893 Pump Action Shotgun, most shotguns were the "break open" type. Both the earlier side-by-side double-barrel shotguns and the later lever action and pump action guns, could all have been ordered from the factory with the specified barrel length that one wanted. Of course, gunsmiths would cut down the barrels.

So now, it's a safe bet that you're asking what's the difference between a "coach gun" and a "sawed-off shotgun"? Well, frankly, I always thought they were one and the same. And yes, my friends, I've owned a "coach gun" or two throughout my entire life. Yes, ever since I was 16 years old and able to buy my own, I did. Now, as for what's the difference between a "coach gun" and a "sawed-off shotgun"? 

Well,  doing my research for this article, I found out I was wrong and they are not the same. No, they are not the same. In fact, a "sawed-off" shotgun by law is a type of shotgun that is legally unacceptable because it has a barrel under 18 inches in length. Compared to a standard shotgun, or even a coach gun, a sawed-off shotgun has the shortest barrel and the shortest effective range. But even though that's the case, its reduced size makes it easier to conceal, maneuver, and put to use.

Why use a Coach Gun?

Shotgun guards used both "coach guns" with short barrels and longer barrel shotguns that some folks call "goose guns" because of their increased range.  Some shotgun guards believed in not letting a potential bandit get too close to a stage. Of course, the closer the bandit, the more effective the coach gun. 

As for the question, why use a short-barrel shotgun? The simplest answer is that the short barrel design simply makes a coach gun a weapon easier to maneuver and get into play when needed. For law enforcement, it was great in towns because its practical application is close-quarter fighting. 

A short-barrel coach gun is simply easier to use versus trying to get a longer-barrel shotgun into a fight. Stand in a narrow hallway sometime with both and find out for yourself. You'll find out fairly quickly that longer is not better when it comes to shotguns and pistols in urban warfare, and that's what fighting in a building is.

Yes, it's the same as with the mythical Colt Buntline Special. While I don't believe it ever existed, I also believe that if it did it would have been completely impractical because of its barrel length. That's especially true for lawmen because of their need to have weapons that are practical in close-quarters use. That's actually why city lawmen in the 1800s were known to cut down the barrels of their pistols. It was all about what fits the conditions that you're in. 

Take for example a Colt 1877 Double-Action Sheriff's Model Colt revolver with a 2 1/4" barrel. This was the preferred sidearm for city lawmen. It's true. Even the standard 7.5" barrel of the 1873 Colt Single Action Army was considered too long by most lawmen in the 1800s.

That's why, by the 1870s, lawmen were either ordering them with shorter barrels or simply having a local gunsmith cut a few inches off their barrels. It was all about getting a weapon into play faster and being able to maneuver that weapon faster in a gunfight.

For a shotgun messenger, the same principle applies. You would want a shotgun that can be handled fairly quickly. When using a lever-action rifle, one's aim matters more than when using a short-barreled shotgun with a wide-shot pattern. While one's proficiency is always important with any firearm, with a coach gun one also has less of a chance of missing -- especially at close range.

As for being lethal, side-by-side shotgun barrel lengths typically range from 20 to 30 inches, with 26 and 28 inches being the most common and versatile options for hunting. While long-barrel shotguns can be used for targets at a longer range, personal defense shotguns with shorter barrels, say those with an 18, 20, or 22-inch barrel, are typically considered close-range firearms. Those weapons will be extremely lethal at shorter ranges. Yes, that's especially true when loaded with standard buckshot. 

From my own experience, for such short barrels, beyond about 25 to 30 yards, the spread from most short-barrel shotguns becomes too unpredictable to reliably guarantee that any of the pellets will hit the intended target. At 50 yards, it's been my experience that you'd be lucky to get 1 or 2 pellets out of the 9 that are in a 00 Buck shell on your target. 

It is also important to note that in times of civil unrest and lawlessness, lawmen considered the shotgun, which in most cases was a coach gun, a "Town Tamer." While lawmen certainly appreciated the firepower, they also appreciated the psychological effect of having a shotgun in one's hands when facing an unruly crowd.

So yes, lawmen and guards know there are benefits of using a shotgun. If one were using a coach gun as a member of a posse, then one was pretty much assured of getting a great deal of respect from those you're after. And of course, if one happens to have the business end of one lined up on a badman, its wide pattern can help out a great deal to get your man in a bad situation where nerves are not always as steady as can be.  

As for outlaws and gunmen in the Old West who used shotguns or were the victims of shotguns? Yes, there was the occasional gunfighter who saw the benefits of using a shotgun. There were also those who met their end as a result of tangling with someone willing to use one.

For example, the famous California highwayman Black Bart was said to have used a short-barreled shotgun when he robbed stages in the Gold Country. He was known to tell the driver and shotgun messenger that guns were pointed at them from nearby bushes. Later the stagehands found out that those so-called rifles in the bushes were only sticks that were positioned to look like rifle barrels.

Then there is a question out there regarding the shotgun that Tombstone City Marshal Virgil Earp got from the express office just before the gunfight near the OK Corral. While I believe it was a 12 gauge coach gun loaded with buckshot, some say it was a 10 gauge.   

Yes, I'm talking about the same shotgun that Virgil Earp handed to Doc Holliday. It was the gun that Virgil told Holliday to put under his coat so that the public would not see it and become alarmed. It was the same coach gun that Holliday used to shoot Tom McLaury at point-blank range in the chest. Yes, Tom McLaury stood just a few feet from the business end of Holliday's shotgun when he was cut down. 

There is a debate if Wyatt Earp used a 12-gauge or a 10-gauge coach gun to murder Frank Stilwell in Tucson? Some say he used a 12-gauge Greener to kill Stilwell. Of course, as you've heard me say many times over the years, it doesn't matter since Frank Stilwell was murdered with more than just two blasts from Wyatt Earp's shotgun. 

In fact, when he was examined by the Coroner, it was determined that each one of the men in Earp's posse took their turns shooting the already dead Stilwell. In fact, the Coroner found that Stilwell was shot with five different caliber weapons, not counting being hit by two blasts from a shotgun. 

Some say Wyatt Earp killed Florentino "Indian Charlie" Cruz with a shotgun. But others say Cruz was shot and killed by Wyatt Earp with his pistol after Cruz drew his revolver. That's something that I don't think I can believe considering the Coroner's report said Cruz was fatally wounded when he was shot in the right temple -- execution style. If that sounds like an execution, well, there's a good chance Indian Charlie was already dead when a round hit him in his right temple. The reason is that, as was the case with what took place with Stilwell, the Coroner found that Indian Charlie was also shot with five different caliber weapons, not counting by at least one shotgun blast. Yes, indeed, that Earp posse was a vicious bunch. 

As far as the most famous picture of a dead outlaw who was shot with a shotgun, believed to have been a coach gun? Well, I believe that distinction goes to none other than outlaw Bill Doolin.

On August 24th, 1896, Bill Doolin who ran a gang known as the original "Wild Bunch" in the Oklahoma Indian Territory was ambushed and killed by Deputy U.S. Marshal Heck Thomas's posse.

Doolin was killed instantly when Deputy U.S. Marshal Heck Thomas opened up on him with both barrels of buckshot from his shotgun. One can see the devastating effect it had,  and actually, count the number of shots that hit him. As horrible as it was, such was an outlaw's death.

And lastly, this is out of a Corralitos, California, newspaper November 1879:

"Isaac Rich was discharged last Saturday. It was not proven that he intended to commit bodily harm to the workmen of the Corralitos Water Co. He only used the shotgun as a silent persuader. As the shotgun said nothing, and could not be made to testify, Rich and the shotgun were discharged."

Imagine that.

Tom Correa

John B. Stetson -- His Legacy

Dear Friends,

By coincidence, I've gotten a couple of letters, emails recently, which surprising ask me the same question in one way or another, "How would I describe John B. Stetson's legacy?"

I learned a great deal when I wrote about John B. Stetson in my article, John B. Stetson -- "Father Of The Cowboy Hat". So for me, Mr Stetson's positive attributes such as his drive to succeed after trial and error, his ability to identify a need and then have the desire to fill that niche goes to what makes America the land of opportunity. His story is inspiration because he came West to be successful by working for it.

Remember, he started his business in 1865. That was the year the Civil War was ending. The U.S. economy was in a horrible shape. There was a huge recession at the time. Some say it was a small economic depression. While people went West during the California Gold Rush of the 1850s, a lot were returning with empty pockets. One half the nation was reeling from the destruction of the Civil War, while the other half faced major unemployment because of the halt to Northern war production. So imagine starting a business in that atmosphere?

Yes, he found a true niche. A niche that would be filled at all points of the compass, from Texas to Montana, from California to Florida, his hats became a must have items for the man working in the elements.

As I wrote back to a reader who is putting together a book on Mr. Stetson, "As you and I know real well, John B. Stetson is the American West personified in a single item. Yes, the cowboy hat. People might think of horses and Colt .45 Peacemakers, they might think of covered wagons, Indians, and even John Wayne. But as we know, nothing says 'Cowboy' like a Stetson. Yes, a cowboy hat.

No one imagines John Wayne without one. No one imagines cowboys wearing
worn out Civil War kepi caps or slouch hats, as they initially did wear after the war when the migration of veterans heading west took place. No one imagines cowboys wearing bowlers or derbies, or sombreros. No one thinks of cowboys wearing wide brim straw hats as some did, But no, we all think of cowboy hats when we think of the Old West and cowboys."

And as for today, Stetson makes a number of different styles of hats for all sorts of lifestyles. Yes, you name it and they make it. And yes, today the Stetson company makes all sorts of apparel and accessories. Heck, they even make a fine bourbon whiskey which I've tried and enjoy.

But to find Mr. Stetson's true legacy, go to a rodeo, a penning, a cutting, any sort of Western cattle or horse event, go to cattle auctions, go to gatherings, take a look at what ranchers are wearing, and yes there you will see John B's legacy in one form or another.

His legacy is no different than what a badge is to a cop, without a badge what is he? Without a Stetson, without a cowboy hat, what's a cowboy?

And yes, today the term "Stetson" covers all brands and other makers unless someone is looking for a specific brand of cowboy hat. I walked into a Western Wear store a few days ago and asked "Where are your Stetson's?"

The owner said, "The cowboy hats are along the far wall." Yes, he knew exactly what I was looking for because "Stetson" says it all.

John B's creation, the cowboy hat, is today bought by adults, by both men and women, for themselves and for children. It is part of the Cowboy Culture today just as it was over a hundred year ago at his death. And friends, that ain't a bad legacy.

Tom Correa

SNOPES Does Lousy Research

Dear Friends,

Lately, I've been accused of creating a meme regarding a bogus comment that was attributed to Democrat Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. This was a meme that I did in fact share with my friends on Facebook.

I have told everyone that I did not create that meme, but I simply shared it. I also used incorrect punctuation when I commented on it when I asked the question, "She really did say this?!"
I told people that I did share the meme just as I have many others sent my way from friends. And with 5,000 friends, who can honestly say where every meme comes from? but I did not create it or fabricate it in any way.

On Facebook, I stated this and told people that I'd like to find where it did in fact come from. Well, I've found it on Pinterest. And one more thing. If you look at the dates when people commented on this meme, you can see that it was commented on a long time before I shared it on Facebook.

That specific Elizabeth Warren meme can be found edited and not edited in multiple locations on Pinterest:

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/422071796312155962/

https://www.pinterest.com/HuntFishRace/the-disease-of-liberalism/

https://www.pinterest.com/AuntT/politics-1112/

I've searched in an effort to clear my name. Now I can prove that it was out there long before I shared it. But there still is two questions that I would like answered.

First, how is it that SNOPES does such lousy research that they couldn't track it down to before I shared it, or to when it originally appeared? And second, while I have been trying to get this blog further away from politics, especially in the last year, why did SNOPES target me?

The reason I ask is that though my small blog does a modest 40,000 visits a month. And yes, some months better than that. Fact is my blog does not compare to big Conservative websites. So why attack me?

Of course, there could be another reason. I can't help but wonder if this attack by SNOPES was purely ideological since many tell me that SNOPES leans to the Left and is a huge supporter of Democrats while I'm not.

So if SNOPES was not trying to attack my blog, The American Cowboy Chronicles, were they attacking me because I distribute Conservative news and information via Facebook where I have the limit of 5,000 friend and a large number of followers? Some of my Facebook friends believe this is the case, and now I'm wondering if this is true?

At this point, my little blog may take a hit and lose visitors. But frankly, I really want the truth to come out and have SNOPES admit that that meme was in circulation long before I shared it.

I have contacted SNOPES with the information that I've found. I hope they are honest with their readers, and correct their article.
Tom Correa