No one is even implying that N.J. was a liar
.
Always remember that it was I who found the Nelson article in the first place, and I corresponded with him briefly and it is from that correspondence that we have images of Nelson's own Sunday scabbards by N.J.; and it is from that I was able to identify that there was a group of Brills made one way, and another group of Brills made another way.
The difficulty is not at all with N.J. It is with Nelson's telling of the tale. My analysis of his article, carefully parsing each word as to what he said and what we think he said, is that the dates demonstrate that N.J. absolutely could have been there for Hughes.
Don't misconstrue my comments, and you are. In those times N.J. was required by the guild to work only as an apprentice; and he could not work as a saddler until he became a journeyman. So if anyone says he was 'too young' it was the guilds, not me.
I myself was a child prodigy at gunleather and began at 16 when I discovered Chic Gaylord's 1960 book in 1966 at the Oakland main library shortly after my family had returned me from London to there. Nothing about my comments about age c/b condescending to the youngies, I was one once, too. 50 gunleather patents later, I've paid my dues.
The difficulty I'm having, is with LaGrange Saddlery. It appears for the very first time in January 1904, having been formed by the purchase of Lange Saddlery, in a notice in the LaGrange Journal. N.J. then appears at the saddlery in 1909 in an article shortly before his departure from there is announced late that year. Other mentions of N.J. in the Journal don't place him there in that time period 1905 to 1907.
So, in the way that Nelson chose to retell N.J.'s story, Hughes came into an unnamed saddlery where N.J. was working. The date is vague because Nelson chose to use the title of the city directory where he confirmed that in Austin around the correct time period, Hughes was 'there'. The directory is titled "1906/1907" and copyrighted 'January 1907'. Trouble is, Hughes was only in Austin from mid 1905 until mid 1907. When I put my original story together for Holstory the First Edition I had only that info from Nelson so I found myself forcing the holster's invention into early 1907.
Now I realize with more info that Hughes was sent with his company of 5 or so Rangers to 'clean up Austin' because it was/is the capitol city of Texas. Now, we KNOW from newspaper accounts when he arrived, and when he left. It is Nelson who states the scabbard came from the need to conceal the Rangers' weapons. And it seems to me that Hughes would have hit the ground running and had his scabbard created IMMEDIATELY so he could accomplish his mission and leave.
Where it all gets wobbly is with Hughes and his company in Austin's central business district, AND ON FOOT PATROL,
why has he removed himself to LaGrange that is 85 or so miles to the East, when there are two prominent saddleries within 1/2 mile -- walking distance -- of the Capitol buildings: W.T. Wroe, and Kluge Bros. And August Brill is working at Wroe, and Charles Kluge is working at Kluge Bros. So, what was the attraction for Hughes to leave his men (but take White with him for his King Ranch holster) to visit LaGrange Saddlery for his scabbard redesign, when he was supposed to be guarding the big city, so to speak?
So, Neale, from your connection of the Rabensburgs and Kluges of Bastrop, it occurs to me that N.J., an apprentice, certainly could have served his apprenticeship at Kluge Bros. Then having 'graduated' (I have a reference that says that in 1912, for example, 'no man can get a job at a saddlery without his apprenticeship papers' which was 3-4 years) N.J. went to LaGrange. But having created what would become the Brill, why then did he practically run away first to Houston, then to Utah?
Nelson's paragraph is very loosely constructed and this has always given me pause. For example, was 'employed' really the right word for N.J.? He was too young to be anything but an apprentice, which normally started at 15 in those times and he turned 15 in late 1904. Apprentices were not employees, they were serving a sort of voluntary servitude;
they weren't paid and they couldn't leave (!) until they 'graduated' under the terms of their contracts. And couldn't be employed by another without their papers from completing their apprenticeships.
So I don't doubt what N.J. told Stan Nelson. What we don't know, because there is only Nelson's tale and he died two years ago, are N.J.'s own words. I'd've expected that N.J. would have treasured his apprenticeship papers, and he surely was promoted from journeyman to master so preserved those papers, too. My f-i-l had the originals of every paper ever issued to him during WWII by the American Army, at his death 80 full years later; and we still have them all plus copies.
All good. In the second edition Witty and I have taken no exception to the original tale of Rabensburg and the Brill; but added that two men have claimed to be its inventor; Charles Kluge and Newton Rabensburg. Both are plausible
.
This is a place to learn, laugh, and even cry sometimes. When I went through my Stage 4 Cancer ordeal in 2017, it was many members/friends here that helped me get through it with their support and encouragement! Neale , stick around and help us continue to make this the best forum on the internet.
