The Beale Papers, Part Four: What Can We Learn From The Cipher We Can Read?

 

The story behind the Beale “treasure” is in a sense meaningless because even if we could absolutely prove that the entire story was absolutely false (and given the problems in “proving” a negative), then the legend would still have believers, joining the group of people who propose that of course the story is a fake to cover up that the real treasure was Jean Lafitte’s, or the Confederate treasury, or some other secret source.

The Beale story is in that sense meaningless because no problem can ever finally break it. What we can reliably analyze are ciphers themselves. If anything here is going to be real, it has to be the numbers. Are they real? To talk about that, we first have to gather what we can from the B2: The Treasure. What have we learned about the encipherer by “breaking” B2?

The cipher in B2 was made using the Declaration of Independence as a book cipher, with every number representing a letter. Leaving aside for the moment the substantial numbers of mistakes that were made in the encoding, the message itself is written as if it was being sent to TJB’s tenth-grade English teacher.  Since the appearance of any words that appear to someone trying to break a cipher serves as a clue that they are on the right track, a truly cautious coder will toss in the occasional nonsense word, have numbers or symbols that don’t have any meaning in the cipher (nulls), spell words phonetically as opposed to being wedded to the Queen’s English (or King’s English, if one holds that this was written circa 1822) such as “siks” for “six” (which also would have helped with the VYX problem, further addressed below), along with other techniques. The encoder did none of these in B2. The only important thing to the PA was to make sure that the note was stylistically what they were aiming for. (Seriously speaking, if the cipher is real, the encoder could have written "six" as "five and one" in the same way they picked "ten hundred".

THE KEY

I propose that the encoder made a key while constructing B2. Starting with the alphabet listed on a paper, and when each letter is needed, the Declaration of Independence was scanned until a word starting with the correct letter was found, and then the number was written on the list. For example, the first letter is “I”, and when it is found that the 115^th word starts with “I”, the number 115 is written on the cipher paper and on the key. After several different numbers had been found for a particular letter, the encoder began reusing numbers instead of looking them up individually, speeding up the ciphering process tremendously.   

THE VYX PROBLEM, REVISITED

In the Declaration of Independence, two words begin with the letter “V”, the first word is 819 words in. (Due to the series of errors made by the encoder, this appears as #807, which seems to indicate that the encoder spent the effort to count out that far, although not far enough to reach 1133 (which would be 1121, after mistakes), and they used 807 for every appearance of “V”, for which there were eighteen.  This is by far the sloppiest approach to any letter. If we compare the number of times that a letter is used in the code and compare that to the number of cipher numbers used to represent that the letter, on average each number is used 4.5 times. This is where the encoder balanced security (the more numbers the better!) with convenience (looking up a new letter takes time!). This value for “V” is therefore eighteen, with “Y” (and there are NO words that begin with “Y” in the Declaration, the encoder might have grabbed a word with a “Y” somewhere in it, or just took a big number) coming in second with nine (nine appearances and again, only one number used in enciphering), and “N” and “E” coming in with 8.6 and 7.2. (Doing all this, I learned that the letters “E” and “N” appear *in* words far more often than they *begin* words.  There, now there’s a possibility that you have learned something too; if you already knew this, please leave your age in the comments so I can work out how far behind I am.) We get into downright admirable security for “B” (appears 11 times, 7 substitution numbers are used), “M” (appears 7 times, 5 substitution numbers are used), and “J” (appears 3 times, using a different number each time). Only one number appears for the letter “K”, but it only gets used once. The only other letter ciphered with a single number was “X”.

There are no numbers (duh) beginning with the letter “X” in the Declaration of Independence. You could have easily guessed that. I easily guessed that. Somehow, the encoder missed this until they set down to translate their work, including the words “exchange”, “exact”, “excavation”, and “six”. Instead of using the word “trade” for “exchange”, “precise” for “exact”, “big freaking hole” for “excavation”, and “Rosencrantz! Guildenstern! Grab your shovels, we gotta add one (no, dammit, “V” is already a problem), TWO extra feet of dirt onto the treasure!”, they apparently grabbed a number way larger than any other number they had picked (possibly a number they thought was greater than the number of words in the Declaration of Independence) and trusted to context to let its audience (future TJB or MTF) work out that it was an “X”, use actual code words as well in addition to the ciphering, and more.  The encoder of B2 did none of these.

The key looked like this at the end of encoding B2.

As an argument that this is what the writer did, the following table shows how often each number is used.  Notice that in almost all cases, the first numbers found are the ones most used. (Perhaps the encoder finally reached the point of saying, "Screw it! I'm tired of looking for 'E"s!"?) Since there are numbers that are used quite often, it stands to reason that these numbers had been written down.

            So in enciphering the cipher we have as B2, the writer collected the numbers used to more easily use them, did not worry about reusing the same letter eighteen times for a hard-to-find letter, or just grabbing two numbers and depending on context to demonstrate their meaning. To be fair, for a book code, this still represented a difficult to overcome level of security, but that was all due to the choice of a book code, and none to clever efforts on the part of the encoder.  If have seen many theories about clever techniques that will explain why the other ciphers can't be made to make sense, but all of those depend on the encoder doing something with B1: The Location and 3: Names & Addresses that was drastically different to anything seen with regard to B2. 

            In the post that will go up on Monday morning, I will try and show how there *is* a way in which what we have as B1 and B3 can be explained by appealing to what we have, without an multiplication of outside forces.
 

The Beale Papers, Part Three: Deciphering The Second Beale Cipher

 

              This is the third in a series of x posts (see the previous entry for my cunning plan on this score)examining the Beale Papers, centered on a series of alleged ciphers contained in a pamphlet printed in Virginia in 1885. Three series of numbers were included, with the pamphlet 

stating that one cipher listed the contents of the treasure, one list the location of the treasure, and one listed the names and addresses of the heirs that the treasure was supposed to be divided among.

              If none of the original ciphers had been broken, then I argue that far more people, even those readers that had spent money on it, would have sooner or later simply assumed that the numbers were random gibberish, and tossed it aside. However, the higher-than-average price conveyed a sense that there must be something real at the base to justify that price, and the claim that one encryption had been broken implied that the other two were real ciphers that could be broken as well.

Without at least one cipher being broken, I very much doubt that the pamphlet would have so any public attention, so it is fortunate for the story that one (if the message was really ‘hidden’ in the first place) of the ciphers was broken, and that it was the one listing the treasure.

If the cipher listing the location of the treasure had been translated, I can’t see why the pamphlet would ever have been published. I, at least, would have been off like a shot and as long as the treasure had been anything above mildewed counterfeit Pokémon cards, I would have been happy. If the cipher containing names and addresses of heirs had been decoded, at least the story could be checked, and the heirs would be running around chasing the people wandering about with shovels.

              So it was really amazingly good luck for the staying power of the story and the sales draw of the expensive pamphlet that the page that was deciphered just listed the contents of the treasure.

              It would make some sense for a would-be codebreaker to attack what we call B2 first.  It is the longest set of numbers, so if any successful attack on the code is made, there are more places for clear meaning to appear as words. As we shall also see, if B1: The Location and B3: Names & Addresses are real ciphers, they appear (for reasons that I will go into in Part Five) to be enciphered with far more care and discipline. Here are the numbers, as given in the pamphlet. There are 762 (actually 763, at one point two numbers appear to be combined into one) numbers listed.

115, 73, 24, 807, 37, 52, 49, 17, 31, 62, 647, 22, 7, 15, 140, 47, 29, 107, 79, 84, 56, 239, 10, 26, 811, 5, 196, 308, 85, 52, 160, 136, 59, 211, 36, 9, 46, 316, 554, 122, 106, 95, 53, 58, 2, 42, 7, 35, 122, 53, 31, 82, 77, 250, 196, 56, 96, 118, 71, 140, 287, 28, 353, 37, 1005, 65, 147, 807, 24, 3, 8, 12, 47, 43, 59, 807, 45, 316, 101, 41, 78, 154, 1005, 122, 138, 191, 16, 77, 49, 102, 57, 72, 34, 73, 85, 35, 371, 59, 196, 81, 92, 191, 106, 273, 60, 394, 620, 270, 220, 106, 388, 287, 63, 3, 6, 191, 122, 43, 234, 400, 106, 290, 314, 47, 48, 81, 96, 26, 115, 92, 158, 191, 110, 77, 85, 197, 46, 10, 113, 140, 353, 48, 120, 106, 2, 607, 61, 420, 811, 29, 125, 14, 20, 37, 105, 28, 248, 16, 159, 7, 35, 19, 301, 125, 110, 486, 287, 98, 117, 511, 62, 51, 220, 37, 113, 140, 807, 138, 540, 8, 44, 287, 388, 117, 18, 79, 344, 34, 20, 59, 511, 548, 107, 603, 220, 7, 66, 154, 41, 20, 50, 6, 575, 122, 154, 248, 110, 61, 52, 33, 30, 5, 38, 8, 14, 84, 57, 540, 217, 115, 71, 29, 84, 63, 43, 131, 29, 138, 47, 73, 239, 540, 52, 53, 79, 118, 51, 44, 63, 196, 12, 239, 112, 3, 49, 79, 353, 105, 56, 371, 557, 211, 505, 125, 360, 133, 143, 101, 15, 284, 540, 252, 14, 205, 140, 344, 26, 811, 138, 115, 48, 73, 34, 205, 316, 607, 63, 220, 7, 52, 150, 44, 52, 16, 40, 37, 158, 807, 37, 121, 12, 95, 10, 15, 35, 12, 131, 62, 115, 102, 807, 49, 53, 135, 138, 30, 31, 62, 67, 41, 85, 63, 10, 106, 807, 138, 8, 113, 20, 32, 33, 37, 353, 287, 140, 47, 85, 50, 37, 49, 47, 64, 6, 7, 71, 33, 4, 43, 47, 63, 1, 27, 600, 208, 230, 15, 191, 246, 85, 94, 511, 2, 270, 20, 39, 7, 33, 44, 22, 40, 7, 10, 3, 811, 106, 44, 486, 230, 353, 211, 200, 31, 10, 38, 140, 297, 61, 603, 320, 302, 666, 287, 2, 44, 33, 32, 511, 548, 10, 6, 250, 557, 246, 53, 37, 52, 83, 47, 320, 38, 33, 807, 7, 44, 30, 31, 250, 10, 15, 35, 106, 160, 113, 31, 102, 406, 230, 540, 320, 29, 66, 33, 101, 807, 138, 301, 316, 353, 320, 220, 37, 52, 28, 540, 320, 33, 8, 48, 107, 50, 811, 7, 2, 113, 73, 16, 125, 11, 110, 67, 102, 807, 33, 59, 81, 158, 38, 43, 581, 138, 19, 85, 400, 38, 43, 77, 14, 27, 8, 47, 138, 63, 140, 44, 35, 22, 177, 106, 250, 314, 217, 2, 10, 7, 1005, 4, 20, 25, 44, 48, 7, 26, 46, 110, 230, 807, 191, 34, 112, 147, 44, 110, 121, 125, 96, 41, 51, 50, 140, 56, 47, 152, 540, 63, 807, 28, 42, 250, 138, 582, 98, 643, 32, 107, 140, 112, 26, 85, 138, 540, 53, 20, 125, 371, 38, 36, 10, 52, 118, 136, 102, 420, 150, 112, 71, 14, 20, 7, 24, 18, 12, 807, 37, 67, 110, 62, 33, 21, 95, 220, 511, 102, 811, 30, 83, 84, 305, 620, 15, 2, 108, 220, 106, 353, 105, 106, 60, 275, 72, 8, 50, 205, 185, 112, 125, 540, 65, 106, 807, 138, 96, 110, 16, 73, 33, 807, 150, 409, 400, 50, 154, 285, 96, 106, 316, 270, 205, 101, 811, 400, 8, 44, 37, 52, 40, 241, 34, 205, 38, 16, 46, 47, 85, 24, 44, 15, 64, 73, 138, 807, 85, 78, 110, 33, 420, 505, 53, 37, 38, 22, 31, 10, 110, 106, 101, 140, 15, 38, 3, 5, 44, 7, 98, 287, 135, 150, 96, 33, 84, 125, 807, 191, 96, 511, 118, 40, 370, 643, 466, 106, 41, 107, 603, 220, 275, 30, 150, 105, 49, 53, 287, 250, 208, 134, 7, 53, 12, 47, 85, 63, 138, 110, 21, 112, 140, 485, 486, 505, 14, 73, 84, 575, 1005, 150, 200, 16, 42, 5, 4, 25, 42, 8, 16, 811, 125, 160, 32, 205, 603, 807, 81, 96, 405, 41, 600, 136, 14, 20, 28, 26, 353, 302, 246, 8, 131, 160, 140, 84, 440, 42, 16, 811, 40, 67, 101, 102, 194, 138, 205, 51, 63, 241, 540, 122, 8, 10, 63, 140, 47, 48, 140, 288

              Wasn’t that exciting? I left the numbers as text instead of using an image in case anyone wanted to take them for themselves. (Although if anyone wants to do this, drop me an email at Astronoharry at gmail dot net, and I’ll send you a copy of an Excel file with all the numbers tied to a way to test any text you want to see if that will work as a book code for the others.)

              There are many ways to encipher information. Most of the codes available at the time were substitution ciphers, in which each letter was replaced by another letter or number.  This actually isn’t a good way to encode a secret, especially a secret this long, because the letters aren’t used evenly in the English language. The most commonly used letter is E, followed by T, then A, then OINSHRDLCUMWFGYPBVKJXQZ. The two graphs shown below demonstrate the letter distribution for a large number of English-language texts, followed by the letter distribution for B2: the Treasure. I will come back to these in my analysis of B1: The Location and B3: Names and Addresses.

 

 

The vertical axis represents the pecentage of letters made up of that particular letter, and the horizontal axis is the alphabet, where "A" is represented by 1, "E" is represented by 5, "T" by 20, and so on. It could be that the differences are due to the set being limited to 763 letters; maybe a longer message would have fit the first plot even better. In the case that the differences (though small - see the graph below) represents a difference in style between the author of B2 (TJB or Ward) and general English, I'll use both graphs when I try and play around with B1 and B3.

 

It can’t be the case that this is a simple substitution cipher, as there are more than 26 different numbers, so this would seem to be a homophonic substitution cipher, in which each letter is replaced by several letters, so that a reader can’t break this code the way a simple substitution cipher could be broken. If this cipher was constructed by selecting numbers at random to replace letters, this would be an extremely difficult code to break, made the more difficult by the more numbers assigned to each letter. A code in which each number appeared only once would be unbreakable without the key.

              This, then is where the key becomes a weakness, because one presumes that someone encoding a message would like at least one other person (even if it’s themselves at a later time) to be able to decode it. Therefore, the key must be provided to the other person. If the key is intercepted, the enciphering is worthless, and perhaps worse than worthless if the person who enciphered it does not know that communication has been compromised. How to get the key to the other person?

If it is a book code, one could tell the other person what the book would be ahead of time, mention the book in another communication, or just mail them a copy of the book. Or one person might have the book, and another person the numbers, keeping security as long as the two don’t know who each other are.

If we agree with MP that this is a book code, and we take the logical guess that each number refers to the first letter of a word given by its position in the document, then we are looking at simply testing this with one document after another.  This would take us basically infinite time, even if we constrained ourselves to using books available in 1822. (And it could always be that TJP wrote up a single essay that was then used as a basis, so we would be doomed in any case.) Happily (choose your level of sarcasm), MP discovered (adjust sarcasm level again) that the Declaration of Independence served as the key text for this set of numbers.

              It surprised me to learn that there are a number of different versions of the Declaration of Independence that exist. I grabbed the one that I’m going to start with using through a quick Google search. Only after trying this with my own hand using this will I compare it to the version included in the pamphlet. When using this version, I produced the text reproduced below. Some words are clearly there. I am going to cheat just a smidge and from the beginning and include word spacing where it will eventually appear.

 

I hare depostted in the countf of gedford aboar four miles from btfords ii aa ehcaration or raalt sih feet below the sirface ot tta nrohid the foolonrng articles belongiag joiattf to the ptrties wtosa iamls are girep in ihmbeh thrlt horewith tht fitst deposit copsistcd of ten hopdred and fourteea poiodh oh gold cpa thihtf eight haadred and twelre pounds of silrer deposited nor eighteea iineteen the second wat made aec linhteen twentf ona aad consiftoi hp iinetltn htoared ani seren potnds of gold api twelre taaired api eightf eight of silrer also heweos obtained in st lotrs in ehchange to sare transportation apd raltea ap thirteep rhoisand doltars the abore is securllf pacpad itron pots with irop cortrs tht rapot is roanhlf oined with stone amd the resseth rest on solid stone aid are cororld uppr othors paper itmber one descrifah thc thact localitf of tho rarot to that ah aifficultf will be had ip finding in

 

              The greatest weakness in using a book code, even if both parties have exactly the same version of the book (and it turns out that there are a lot of versions of the Declaration of Independence with minor differences), is that one error in counting could doom the effort. Whether this was encoded by TJB or James Ward, the encoder did not feel that it was worth the effort to double-check the work. Still, some words can be seen. I have cheated by cutting the text to fit the final words, but surely the gentle reader is intelligent enough to consider the problems inherent in sorting the wheat from the chaff, and no one has any desire to see this get longer through the use of a coupe of theoretical blind alleys!  Here, let me even go so far as to print words in bold as they reach their final form.

 

I hare depostted in the countf of gedford aboar four miles from btfords ii aa ehcaration or raalt sih feet below the sirface ot tta nrohid the foolonrng articles belongiag joiattf to the ptrties wtosa iamls are girep in ihmbeh thrlt horewith tht fitst deposit copsistcd of ten hopdred and fourteea poiodh oh gold cpa thihtf eight haadred and twelre pounds of silrer deposited nor eighteea iineteen the second wat made aec linhteen twentf ona aad consiftoi hp iinetltn htoared ani seren potnds of gold api twelre taaired api eightf eight of silrer also heweos obtained in St. lotrs in ehchange to sare transportation apd raltea ap thirteep rhoisand doltars the abore is securllf pacpad itron pots with irop cortrs tht rapot is roanhlf oined with stone amd the resseth rest on solid stone aid are cororld uppr othors paper itmber one descrifah thc thact localitf of tho rarot to that ah aifficultf will be had ip finding in

 

              THE ENCIPHERER’S VYX PROBLEM

Just from this pass, we can see enough clear words to indicate that this must be the key for the book code, and also that there are problems. Before trying to address some of the letters that seem at first to make no sense, there is one quick cut that I want to make. From context, using an examination of what we can already work out, it seem likely that 807 is the letter “v”,  the number 811 represents the letter “y”, and 1005 represents “x”. Replacing these three numbers with these three letters does add clarity to the message, and agrees with the translation in the pamphlet (which carries extra weight if PA/MP is the encoder – i.e., if it’s a fake). I have also begun adding in capitalization and punctuation where it seems to make sense.

 

I have depostted in the county of gedford aboar four miles from btfords ii aa excaration or vaalt six feet below the sirface ot tta nrohid the foolonrng articles belongiag joiatty to the ptrties wtosa iamls are givep in ihmbeh thrlt herewith. Tht fitst deposit copsistcd of ten hopdred and fourteea poiodh oh gold cpa thihty eight haadred and twelve pounds of silver deposited Nov. eighteea iineteen. The second wat made aec linhteen twenty ona aad consiftoi hp iinetltn htoared ani seven potnds of gold api twelve taaired api eighty eight of silver, also heweos obtained in St. lotrs in exchange to save transportation apd valtea ap thirteep rhoisand doltars. The above is securlly pacpad itron pots with irop covtrs. Tht vapot is roanhlf oined with stone and the vesseth rest on solid stone aid are covorld uppr othors. Paper itmber one descrifah thc txact locality of tho varot to that ah aifficulty will be had ip finding in.

 

There is still quite a lot of noise in the above signal.  If one has done this using a spreadsheet, as I have (take THAT, nineteenth century treasure hunters!), or if one marks with a dot every letter than doesn’t seem to fit, one will see that along with a couple of scattered problems, every number above 240 is incongruous. If one were to look at some examples, thinking perhaps that there is no Gedford County, but there is a “Bedford”, and the pamphlet was published in Bedford County, and there is a “B” one number off from the “G”, then if assume that somewhere around 240 the encoder miscounted by one ...)

 

I have deposcted in the county of Bedford about four miles from Buford’s in an excavation or vault six feet below the surface of ths ground the following articles belonging joiptly to the parties whosl namfs are giveo in number thrfl harewith. Tha first deposit coosistcd of ten huodred and fourteen poitds of gold aod thirty eight hupdred and twelve pounds of silver deposited Nov. eighteen nineteen. The second wao made Dec. fighteen twenty onl and consistad oh ninetfln hutdred and seven pounds of gold aod twelve hundred aod eighty eight of silver, also aewels obtained in St. Louis in exchange to save transportation aod valuet as thirteeo rhosand dollars. The above is securlly packsd itron pots with iroo covtrs. Tht vault is roughly lined with stone and the vessetr rest on solid stone and are coverfd uish othors. Paper number one descrialr thc axact locality of tho varlt oo that no difficulty will be had io finding it.

 

              This is much better, but still not perfect. Let’s take another look through to see if we can see another pattern. (After all, we’re not doing this to read B2; we could pretty much do that already. We want the key that the encoder is building as B2 is being enciphered. 

              Looking back at the spreadsheet/dots/whatever you’re using, we now see that almost all of the problems are at numbers of 485 and above. We could do as before, guess what letter should be in a slot, and then look at what shifts are needed to fix the problem. Number 486 should encipher as an “E”. Strangely, there is only one “E” even relatively close by, and that requires a shift of ten. Number 511 should also be an “E”, not an “F”, and a shift of adding ten brings that in accordance as well.  Checking a couple other numbers in the low 500’s shows the same effect. (I’m trying to stay close to the problem break in case the encoder makes another mistake later.) If we peek at the version of the Declaration in pamphlet, we see that the inset numbers, included after every ten words, reads “450 … 460 … 470 … 480 … 480 … 490 … 500) and so on. Let us apply that ten shift to every number above 480:

I have deposmted in the county of Bedford about four miles from Buford’s in an excavation or vault six feet below the surface of the ground the following articles belonging jointly to the parties whose names are given in number three herewith. The first deposit consistcd of ten hundred and fourteen pounds of gold and thirty eight hundred and twelve pounds of silver deposited Nov. eighteen nineteen. The second was made Dec. eighteen twenty one and consisted oj nineteen hundred and seven pounds of gold and twelve hundred and eighty eight of silver, also jewels obtained in St. Louis in exchange to save transportation and valued ao thirteen rhosand dollars. The above is securely packed itron pots with iron covtrs. Tht vault is roughly lined with stone and the vessels rest on solid stone and are covered uioh others. Paper number one describes thc exact locality of the varlt so that no difficulty will be had in finding it.

              In order to get the final key, let’s take a look at the leftover misfits.

                          

Number	Decodes as	But Should Be	The smallest shift is
647	M	I	+1
84	C	E (twice)
666	J	F	+1
643	O	T (twice)	+1
53	R	T
188	T	E
32	T	E
440	U	W
96	R	U

 

Number 108 appears just once, and decodes as “T”, but if there had been a decoding of typesetting error, and this should read “10 8”, then it decodes as “N I” and “itron” becomes “in iron”. If another word is missed between 620 and 643

If I now make a mark at every letter that seems like it does not help create a proper word, I find that with six exceptions (to be examined individually) we find that this is every number from 466 to 666 (and it is possible that the original encipherer counted beyond this point. The first appearance of the letter “v” beginning a word in the Declaration is at word 819, and no word begins with “y” or “x”. There are two instances of 440, which decodes as “u” according to the text of the Declaration that I used.  Somewhere between 421 and 439 a word was skipped, or a version was used with a word left out. (Though I cannot see where a word could be dropped as a variant and leave the flow of the text continuous in the area, “… right inestimable to them, and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, …”

This leaves us with eight more errors. Errors using “84” for “E”, “666” for “F”, “53” for “T”, “32” for “E”, or “96” for “U”, can be explained by the encoder looking up these letters individually and miscounting by one. This is not explainable if the encoder made a key before starting, and it is not consistent if each word was numbered, so I hold that the copy of the Declaration used had marks every ten words, as in the version printed in the pamphlet. (I further hold that this is because this was the exact copy used to encode B2: The Treasure, but I address that more fully elsewhere.)

Encoding “188” for “E” and the time “440” is encoded as “W” are more complete errors. The final reconstruction of the original text follows.

 

I have deposited in the county of Bedford about four miles from Buford’s in an excavation or vault six feet below the surface of the ground the following articles belonging jointly to the parties whose names are given in number three herewith. The first deposit consisted of ten hundred and fourteen pounds of gold and thirty-eight hundred and twelve pounds of silver deposited Nov. eighteen nineteen. The second was made Dec. eighteen twenty-one and consisted of nineteen hundred and seven pounds of gold and twelve hundred and eighty eight of silver, also jewels obtained in St. Louis in exchange to save transportation and valued at thirteen thousand dollars. The above is securely packed in iron pots with iron covers. The vault is roughly lined with stone and the vessels rest on solid stone and are covered with others. Paper number one describes the exact locality of the vault so that no difficulty will be had in finding it.

 

              This text, again, could have been reasoned out much earlier in the process, but due to the prevalence of several key errors, we needed to go through each of these steps to recreate the key the encoder had created by the end of this process. We will find (spoiler alert) that this key will not translate either of the two other ciphers, but that this key was used in creating at least one of the other two lists of numbers.

              I am trying to complete the model of the encoder's Declaration of Independence because I want to argue that the encoder only constructed a key for the Declaration of Independence, and then did not use it to encode a real text in B1/B3, and this is going to lead me to make a bit of a leap. The location of the skips are between 630 and 640, 670 and 680, and xxx and xxx. In each of those intervals, there is a point at which the same letter appears twice in a row (for 630-640, the first letters are TOPSAWTCOOL - "...times of peace, standing armies without the consent of our legislatures."). I am going to make the assumption that the miscounting occurs at that doubled letter, so that if the encoder would have used one of these numbers, they would have used TOPSAWTCOL If I am wrong, then this only affect a couple of letters falling in these gaps.

              The ninth word, "four", has a bit of a story behind it as well. Using the version of the Declaration that I happened to grab, this translates as "four"; using the Declaration of Independence as given in the pamphlet, this should translate as "foir", going back to a long-standing argument over whether the Declaration declares that there are "unalienable" rights or "inalienable" rights. I have seen arguments putting this error forward as positive evidence for the truth of the Beale cipher since in this one respect the pamphlet version differs from the version used to encipher B2. I think that it is just as likely, if not more so, that the typesetter was carrying words in their head from the text to the letter bins, and switched versions because they had grown up with "inalienable" themselves.

              There is yet one more “piece of luck” to be added to the mix. As James Gillogly noted, the PA enciphers 87 characters at the end to include “Paper number one describes the exact locality of the vault so that no difficulty will be had in finding it.” Since MTF was to decipher all of the lists anyway, this is just meaningless extra work, if the cipher is real, but if the cipher is fake then this line enhances the claim that there is value in breaking the other two ciphers.