Hey Bloodhound,
Happy to answer your inquiries. I have obtained the entire collection of research material on Eaton from the OSU archives. Using this and my other research material, the only documentation that I find to indicate that Eaton was a law man at Perkins is his own testimony and some notations in newspaper articles from the 1940s-1950s which appear to be based on Eaton's own testimony. I can find no official documentation that he served as a lawman. The one interesting side note to this is that the late great Glenn Shirley told me back about 1998 that he was a police officer at Stillwater in the 1940s[?] and knew Eaton as he was often around. He said that Eaton was allowed to carry pistols but not loaded and said that he may have held a ceremonial deputy sheriff commission from Payne County or a similar commission from the Stillwater or Perkins Police Department.
Regarding Eaton's service as an Army scout, I have a problem with this claim as well. He stated that he was a scout with Crawford's Apache Scouts in Arizona and Mexico during the 1880s. However, the lists of scouts I have located which seem to be as complete as possible, make no mention of Eaton. I believe the only whites in that group were Crawford who was an army officer and the noted scout Tom Horn[I need to double check on this but I'm pretty sure it was Horn who was noted on the list].

From my upcoming article:
"The Indian Scout
Eaton’s Version
In an undated interview/questionnaire sheet supplied by the Oklahoma Historical Society, Eaton responded to a question which asked, “Any military, political, civic record?” His response was that he had served in Crawford’s Apache Scouts and that he participated as an Indian fighter.(39)

Verifiable Facts
Crawford’s detachment consisted solely of “Apache” Indians and were engaged in the pursuit of hostile Apaches who had fled their reservation in Arizona in 1886 resulting in what is commonly referred to as the Geronimo Campaign of 1886. There is no documented evidence that anyone other than Apache Indians served as regular scouts in this detachment. Some civilian scouts such as Al Sieber were periodically attached to the command, but Eaton’s name does not appear on the list of known scouts who served. Capt. Crawford was killed in 1886 in Old Mexico by Mexican troops who fired on him and his Apache Scouts."

I just ran a search on Ancestry.com to see if Eaton ever filed for a federal pension based on his "military" service. There are several Frank and Francis Eatons but none are shown as having lived in Oklahoma at the time of filing and none note service with Crawford's Apache Scouts.

"There is no official documentation that has come to light to indicate that Eaton held the position of Constable or any other law enforcement officer. Other than personal recollections based on hearsay testimony and second hand information, no archival repository, public or private, has been found that has any documentation showing that Eaton was a law enforcement officer at any time during his life. In the Melton interview of May 22, 1955, Eaton figured that he had served as a peace officer for “67 years” from that date which would mean that he began his law enforcement career about 1888 contradicting his earlier statements that he was commissioned as a deputy U.S. marshal in the mid-late 1870s. Eaton could not have been a deputy U.S. marshal in the mid-1870s as, according to his sworn testimony in the federal land records, he would have been about eight years old at the time."

Thanks for the information. Sounds like he may have been simular to Cole Younger, having his story embelished over the years and the true story become muddied.

I was just wondering, what was Frank Eaton's father's name? I have seen Sr. listed, but I wasn't sure since I have seen B and L for a middle initial. Thanks

Eaton's parents were Francis Leonard and Elizabeth (Widgeon) Eaton. Both were from Connecticut if I remember correctly. If not, they were both from the northeast all but quashing the claim by Pistol Pete that his father was Cherokee Indian and a Texas rancher as he often claimed

Ok, thanks. I was curious, and going to look up his father's civil war record. I had found a Frank B. from Ks.; which the OSU-SCUA lists Pete as Frank Boardman.(but no name for his father, and being born in Conn.)Since I had seen him listed as a junior this piqued my intrest. For Francis, there were several who served: one Francis L. served in the Regular Army as a Hospital Steward, no home state given. There were two Francis' with no middle name given that were from the Conn. area. The first was from Middleboro Mass. and was 44 when he enlisted in 1864. The other was from Providence Rhode Island, with no age given elisted in 1862.
Once again thanks for the info.

APACHE SCOUTS

In 1872, General George Crook, the most successful Indian fighter the Army ever produced, was given permission to hire Apache Scouts to track down and bring in fellow renegade Apaches. These "renegades", or "Broncos", as they were known, became the scourge of the Southwestern border country of Arizona and New Mexico and the northern extremes of Sonora and Chihuahua in Mexico.

General Crook, working with "both" white and Indian scouts, forged them into tracking and fighting units known as "Companies". In the beginning, there weren't enough Apaches to fill out the ranks so Crook signed up Walapais, Yavapais, Maricopa, Pima and Paiutes.

A Company of Apache Scouts consisted of 26 men attached to a column of cavalry. At the head of "each" Company of Indian scouts, Crook placed a civilian, "white" Chief-of-Scouts to control and transmit orders to the Indians. Crook hired "a dozen or so" of these white intermediaries, such as Dan O'Leary, Gus Spear, Joe Flemer, Mickey Free, and Al Sieber. A military officer was also assigned to each Company and--often times--an interpreter accompanied the unit, when communications with the renegades was expected.

General Crook's aide, Lieutenant John G. Bourke, mentions two other "white" Chief-of-Scouts in his 1891 published account about his years with Crook. They were MacIntosh and Besias. Some of the other military officers, who commanded Companies of Apache Scouts, were Lieutenant Walter Schuyler, Lieutenant Augustus Tassin, Lieutenant William Ross, Captain George Randall, and Major William Brown. In March of 1875, General Crook, after much success in the field, was re-assigned to fight Indians on the Great Plains, leaving a relatively peaceful Apacheria.

By 1882, Indian outbreaks had re-occurred to a point that Crook was asked to return. To subdue this new generation of renegades, Crook quickly re-organized five (5) Companies of Apache Scouts, consiting of 29 Apaches in each Company, including one with the rank of sergeant and two corporals. In addition to a civilian "white" Chief-of-Scouts, such as Al Sieber, each Company had an Army Officer in charge, such as Lieutenant Britton Davis, Lieutenant Charles Gatewood, and Captain Emmet Crawford. In 1883, General Crook and Captains Crawford and Gatewood, commanding 193 Apache Scouts (nearly seven (7) full Companies), and 42 white enlisted soldiers, along with a supply train of pack mules, moved into Mexico in pursuit of the Chiricahua Apaches. The expedition was a great success and the crisis was settled.

The last major uprising, or breakout from the reservations, happened in May of 1885. Hostilities would continue for the following 15 months, until the renegades were subdued, killed and/or returned to the reservations by August of 1886. Again, Captain Crawford and Lieutenant Davis, in charge of at least two (2) Companies of Apache Scouts, traveled deep into Mexico in pursuit of hostiles. It was here that Crawford--his unit mistaken as renegades by a Mexican militia--was shot and killed. Another column of U.S. soldiers with 78 Apache Scouts (nearly three (3) Companies), attacked Geronimo's camp on the seventh of August at a different location.

From this account of the activities of the U.S. Military and their allies, the Apache Scouts, between 1882 and 1886, it is clear that many more individuals were involved in these operations than the scant few named in the historical record. Not all of the "white" Chief-of-Scouts are named, nor recorded in the official record, nor are any civilian contingencies of working cowboys, lawmen, local gun-hands, mercenaries, who may have volunteered their services to help fight these marauding renegades, are mentioned. When hundreds of ranches and farms were decimated, and women and children were slaughtered by murdering bands of cutthroats, it is naive to assume that the civilian populace would sit idly by and not get involved.

Glenn Shirley states in a 1969 article entitled 'Pistol Pete - Badmen's Nemesis', "With the Apache outbreak in the summer of 1885, Frank (Eaton) joined Captain Emmett Crawford's Warm Springs band to fight the crafty Geronimo and served as 'scout' alongside Tom Horn, Al Sieber, Arizona Bill Gardner an OTHERS." Frank Eaton, a young 20-year-old "cowpuncher", working in West Texas as an 'undercover' range detective for the Cattlemen's Association, may not have been one of the exalted "Chief-of-Scouts", leading a Company of Crawford's Apache Scouts into battle. However, who is to say that he wasn't there, possibly as a volunteer wrangler on the supply pack train, or with a civilian group of ranch-hands, and other plainsmen, ready to backup any tactical need that the military might deem prudent and necessary in their war against the Apaches.

The Oklahoma Historical Society questionnaire, recently mentioned in an article about Frank Eaton, is a very telling document. Under "Occupation", Frank Eaton modestly refers to himself as a 'cowpuncher - - am now Blacksmith'. He states his date-of-birth as October 26, 1862 - - closer to his correct year of birth of 1865 but still "off" by three years, which consistenly shows that he wasn't sure of his actual birth year.

In answer to the questionnaaire: "Any military, political, CIVIC record?" he responds with five (5) simple words: "Crawford - Apache Scouts - indian fighters". Now, if one chooses to mistakenly interpret this as Mr. Eaton claiming to have "SERVED IN" Crawford's Apache Scouts, one would be in error. Mr. Eaton never claimed to have "served in" the Apache Scouts. Also, by pointing out the "Crawford's detachment consisted 'solely' of Apache Indians", the author mistakenly implies that Mr. Eaton was claiming to be an Apache Indian. Mr. Eaton never claimed to have "served in" the Apache Scouts, nor that he was an Apache. It is possible that Frank Eaton was merely claiming a supporting role in the Apache wars; and, as a civilian Indian fighter (with many other plainsmen), worked very closely with the military authorities, including Captain Crawford's command, providing any field services necessary, such as a scout.

Mr. Eaton is nether claiming that he "SERVED IN" Crawford's Military detachment, nor "IN" a Company of Apache Scouts, nor as a scout. Mr. Eaton served in a "civilian" capacity as an "Indian fighter" in "conjunction with" and in "support of" Crawford's command. This war against the Apaches was NOT totally left in the hands of the military. The civilian population, the ranchers and farmers and the "cowpunchers" and wranglers, were all involved in the fight with the renegade Apaches due to the fact that they were living on the battlefield of Apacheria. They were defending their homes. It was their "CIVIC" duty, as well as an act of self-preservation, to participate in the conflict.

Statesments such as: "There is no documented evidence that anyone other than Apache Indians served as regular scouts in this detachment. Some civilian scouts, such as Al Sieber, were 'periodically' attached to the command...". Both statements are IN ERROR. "White" Chief-of-Scouts, such as Al Sieber, weren't 'periodically' attached to the command. They were a fixed, permanent and integral part of the detachment--a vital and necessary link in the chain-of-command. Every "Company" of Apache Scouts had a white, Chief-of-Scouts to lead and command them. Furthermore, the statement that the Apache Scouts were 'solely' Apaches is historically incorrect. As reported earlier, General Crook was not opposed to using Indians from several different tribes to fill-out the ranks of his Companies of Apache Scouts.

TIME-LIFE's "The Old West Series", has a volume dedicated to "The Scouts" - - Chapter Five is entitled "When Apache Hunted Apache" (pp. 148-193).

On pages 154-155 is a photograph of an "unidentified" white, Chief-of-Scouts leading a contingency of Navajos in Apacheria; and, in the background of this photo, one can make-out another line of Indian scouts.
On page 156 is a photograph of Al Sieber; and, a photo of Indian scouts (in uniform), accompanied by an "unidentified" white civilian on horseback.
On page 170 is a photograph of a Company of Apache Scouts in the field, with their "unidentified" white commander, Chief-of-Scouts, crouching within their midst.
On page 171 is a photograph of "Mexican-Irish" Mickey Free, the scout nobody loved.
On page 178 is a photograph of a Company of White Mountain Apache Scouts along with their military leader, Lieutenant Charles Gatewood. Also, in this photo, standing behind Lt. Gatewood, appears to be an "unidentified" Mexican and/or African American civilian--possibly the units' Chief-of-Scouts.
On page 179 is a photograph of Captain Emmet Crawford.

(And So It Begins!)

Hey OldWest,

You bring up some good points in your posting. What I love about researching the Old West is that there are very few times when we will actually know the entire story. I hope that you came away after reading my recent article in the Oklahombres Journal, that the article is meant to be a research document that separates the historically-documented, proveable evidence vs. the folklore that has surrounded Eaton for all these years.

I don't dispute what you found about the Apache Scouts, but please note the references that I cited in my article. I also found no documented evidence where Eaton's name shows up on any list of scouts. These are certainly incomplete, but the ones that I found make no mention of Eaton by name. If we go by the belief that an "unnamed scout" COULD be Eaton, we COULD say that about anyone. Deputy U.S. Marshal Chris Madsen claimed to have fought in the "foreign legion" and any number of accounts can be found to document this, but they are all from second hand sources or Madsen's own telling of the story. Current research has not turned up any confirmation that he had any such service. Yet, Madsen stated on numerous occasions and in numerous interviews/articles that he participated in such service. What I was after in my article was what can be proven vs. what can be speculated about.

Regarding the OHS questionaire, I am not sure how else one could interupt what Eaton put. He states under the heading of "any military, political, or Civic record" he responds with "Crawford-Apache Scout-indian fighters." I am not sure how else one would interpret that. The question is asking him what military unit, if any did he serve in, and he responds with the above regarding Crawford's Scouts.

I was waiting for someone to open up discussion on what I wrote in the article and am very pleased that we can have a dialogue about Eaton. I have stated many times to our Oklahombres cohorts that I would love nothing more than to prove that Eaton did all the things he said he did in his numerous interview, articles, and his autobiography.

With this being said, even if we establish that he was a member of Crawford's Scouts or any other Indian Scout detachment, this still leaves the debate open for his numerous other claims regarding his law enforcement background. Let's keep the information rolling and maybe we can all finally get "Pistol Pete" ironed out.

Being an Investigative Researcher for some time now, I have found Many Many "Fables" especially concerning the old west... Well kept records and newspaper accounts (taken with a grain of salt) are a testament to these "Daring Deeds" or No! Ole Frank Eaton is just one of "Many"! Other than being a Great Mascot figure for Oklahoma State University (as well as A&M), Frank was just a "Colorful" figure that ran an old blacksmith shop and was also the honorary City Marshal of Perkins, OK. Many years ago I was the elected Sheriff of Noble county, Oklahoma. I found out that Bill Tilghman had been the first (appointed)City Marshal...I was enamored by this and began a campaign of research at once...Sadly records reflected that Tilghman was "Fired" after only two or three months of service, and there was no record or "Any" arrests facilitated by him or his assistant Heck Thomas....Searching records for the next two years I found that Bill Tilghman was his biggest fan and that most of his Daring Exploits were reported Only by him.... So we have to be carfull not to fall into the very enamored romantic trap spun by some by some of the Famous and Infamous... Frank Eaton was a excellant figure for a university mascot and still is.....but that is his only claim to fame!!!

According to the "Historical Register and Dictionary of the United States Army", located in the U.S. Army Historical Register, 1789-1903, Vol. 1:

Coppinger, John Joseph. Ireland. NY. Capt 14(th) Infantry 30 Sept 1861; Colonel 15(th) NY Calvary 27 Jan 1865; honorable mustered out of vol services 17 June 1865; transferred from 14(th) to 23(rd) Infantry 21 Sept 1866; Major 10(th) Infantry 20 Mar 1879; LIEUTENANT COLONEL 18(th) INFANTRY 31 OCTOBER 1883; Colonel 23(rd) Infantry 15 Jan 1891; Bridadier-General 15 Apr 1895; Major General Volunteers 4 May 1898; honorable discharge from Volunteers 31 Oct 1898; Retired 11 Oct 1898.

Lt. Col. Coppinger was with the 18th Cavalry, stationed at Ft. Gibson, I.T., as early as October of 1883. He may not have attained his position as Commanding Officer of the fort until 1886 (as stated in the most recent article about Mr. Eaton); however, he was there in 1883.

Frank Eaton's mother died in April or May of 1883 and is buried in the Stokes Cemetery, near Bar Dew Lake, Washington County, Oklahoma. Frank was 17 years old. He wouldn't turn 18 until October 26, 1883. (Note: He was born on October 26, 1865. (1865 + 18 = 1883)

His older sister, Elizabeth, who married Benton Saffles and moved to Wabaunesee County (Ks), was taking care of the surviving Eaton children, and Frank was out-in-the-world and "on his own". It is quite possible that he visited Ft. Gibson in the Fall of 1883.

When exact "dates" are so critical in constructing an accurate "time-line" to an individual's activities and whereabouts, why would a chronicler skew an event as important as this, and then make the statement: "This time frame could not be correct as Coppinger would not have been the commanding officer at Fort Gibson for another decade."

If one continues to refer back to, and rely upon, Frank Eaton's erroneously stated date-of-birth of 1860, nothing in his story will make any sense, and the "truth" will never be found.

Oh, by the way, Endnote #27 in the Pistol Pete article, which appeared in the Fall 2006 issue of the Oklahombres Journal, is OFF by EIGHT (8) YEARS! It cites an undated article from an unknown magazine ca1958 entitled "The Vengeance of Marshal Frank Eaton" by Raymond J. Ross.

This article first appeared in "The West" magazine in 1966; and, again, in "Golden West" magazine in 1972; and, again, in "Western Frontier" magazine in 1979 and 1985. So, see, even the best of researchers can be OFF a few years.

I know there has been much controversy over the veracity of Pistol Pete's autobiography. Two things that I found there were true in his book were:
1. Pete mentioned Dick Vann as being an African/Cherokee outlaw who killed Sam Sixkiller. Most books list Vann as a half-breed, I found out later doing research that Pete was correct.
2. Pete talks about assisting black Deputy U.S. Marshal Charlie Pettit make an arrest in Pawhuska. I don't know if the event happened, but Pettit was a good officer who worked the Osage Nation and little has been written or said about him. Pete decided to include him in his book. I wrote about this incident in my book, Black, Red and Deadly.
This doesn't clear up anything up, but adds to the dialogue on the colorful character "Pistol Pete" Frank Eaton.

Old West

You answered your own question I think. My article stated that Coppinger was not commanding officer at Gibson until 1886. I never stated he wasn't there before...HE WAS NOT COMMANDING OFFICER as Eaton stated he was. You are picking apart the article and that is fine, but take a look at the whole of Eaton's statements and testimony and you will see that it is full of holes.

If you would be interested in actually writing an article instead of just picking apart my work, I'd be happy to publish it in an upcoming issue of the Journal.

Old West

By the way, the reference you cited as being off by 8 years was an "undated" article from an "unknown" magazine as I found it as described in my footnote in the OSU Archive collection. I noted it as "ca1958" as it closely matched other articles from that time period. "ca" does indicate an approximate date.

Again, I welcome you to actually write an article (on this or any other subject) and submit it for publication in the Journal.

Diron,

"Thank You" for inviting me to write a story on this subject for publication in your very fine Journal; however, in the fifteen plus (+15) years that I've been associated with Oklahombres, I've never submitted a single article, or story, for publication and, probably, never will. There's a very good reason for that - - I "ain't no" writer. I don't pretend to be a writer. I enjoy reading and doing the research. That's it! If this precludes me from participating in the dialog on this Topic Board, so be it.

I'm sorry that you feel that I have been "picking apart" your article on Frank "Pistol Pete" Eaton. I thought that you'd be delighted and excited that someone was pointing out the errors in your article. I've always believed that Oklahombres prided themselves in getting the story accurate, "straight" and telling "the truth". You even stated on this Bulletin Board posting, dated 3/22/2004, "...I'd love to prove myself wrong" about Eaton. And, again, on 10/11/2006, you stated, "...I would love to be proved wrong"; and, finally, as recent as 4/9/2007, "I would love nothing more than to prove that Eaton did all the things he said he did." I was just trying to make all of your wishes come true!

My points: that Apache Scouts weren't ALL, necessarily, Apaches, as you had erroneously stated; and, that there was ALWAYS a "white" Chief of Scouts attached to each Company of Apache Scouts, rather than 'periodically' assigned to that position, as you had erroneously stated; and, that Lt. Col. Coppinger was at Ft. Gibson as early as 1883 and could have very easily met the seventeen-year-old Frank Eaton that year, when you had erroneously stated that it could not possibly have happened -- were all valid points.

By the way, while on the subject of Lt. Col. Coppinger and the issue of whether or not he was a "Commanding Officer" when Mr. Eaton was there, I'd like to suggest another very plausible scenario. I don't know if you have any military background, or experience. I understand that you spend a lot of time in Ft. Sill's Museum Library and Research Center, which is sort-of-like being in the military; and, you know quite a bit about military activities in pre-Statehood Oklahoma; but, do you understand that there can be "several" Commanding Officers on a base?

When I was in the Marine Corps, assigned to an F-4 Phantom Squadron in South Carolina; and, later, a helicopter medivac/resupply outfit in viet nam, our squadrons always had a Commanding Officer, and an Executive Officer, as well. In fact, every squadron on the base had their own Commanding Officers; then, there was a Group Commanding Officer, who was over all the squadrons. Finally, there was a Base Commanding Officer, and so forth.

Therefor, it doesn't take a great deal of thought to understand that Lt. Col. Coppinger was a "Commanding Officer" of his troops, either a Company, or Battalion, or Regiment. So what, if he didn't become the overall Commanding Officer of the Fort until 1886. He could still have been a "Commanding Officer" over his troops when Frank Eaton knew him. If that's too difficult a concept for you to grasp, let me try another possible explanation for Mr. Eaton referring to Coppinger as a Commanding Officer.

People, who have attained a certain Rank, or Title, in life, are often referred to that title later in life as a sign of respect. Former Presidents of the United States are always addressed as "Mr. President". The same goes with ex-Governors. Dr. Bob Blackburn, Director of the Oklahoma Historical Society, recently hosted a gathering of all of the living ex-Governors of the State of Oklahoma. They were, individually, addressed as Governor Keating, Governor Nigh, Governor Walters, Governor Hall, Governor Bellmon and so forth . . . see, even the crooked ones are remembered in this manner, as a formality and a sign of respect.

Therefor, when Frank Eaton told his life story to the ghostwriter in the 1950's, he could have been referring to Colonel Coppinger as a Commanding Officer because he (Eaton) knew that Coppinger had attained the rank and title at some point in his career...and deserved to be called such. (Note: I had never heard of Colonel Coppinger until I read Mr. Eaton's book; and, I do a lot of reading and researching of Oklahoma history. Do you suppose that Frank Eaton just pulled his name out of thin air; or, do you think that he went back into the Ft. Gibson records to ascertain "who" was stationed there at the appropriate time for the telling of his story? (If so, what a devious, deceitful and duplicitas mind he must have had!?!)

Now, since I consider myself an Oklahoma Sooner fan, and have no great affection for Frank Eaton, or his "Pistol Pete" image, which serves as the beloved mascot to that "other" univesity, I could have sat passively on the sideline and said, "I ain't got no dog in this fight." (Note: I do "pull-for" the Oklahoma State football team when they're playing "anyone" else, except O.U.). It just bothered me that someone was bad-mouthing an "old cowpuncher" fifty years after his death, when he's not around to defend himself.

When I initially responded to the "Frank Eaton" story on this Bulletin Board, I had planned on keeping my observations as factual, balanced and impersonal as possible. However, since you have addressed me, directly, with your challenge that I write something for publication, I assume that I can direct any future comments "directly" to you. Or, was your invitation for me to write an article just your nice way of saying, "Write your own article, if you think you can do any better, and "shut up" about mine"?

I found your "Pistol Pete" article in the Journal to be the most flagrantly unbalanced, slanderous, libelous "hatchet job" that has ever appeared in any of the previous Journals. Your "obsession" to destroy Frank Eaton's good name, character and life-story is way out of bounds. Your undisguised disgust and elitist attitude toward Frank Eaton has distorted your ability to report the facts in a fair, accurate and impartial manner.

At this point, I believe it necessary to inform the readers of this column, or viewers of this web site, as it were, the genesis of the controversy. In the Oklahombres Journal (Vol. 13 No. 3 - Spring 2002), you wrote a very nice "In Memoriam" tribute to the late, great western writer, Glenn Shirley. In this solemn forum, you interjected your personal feelings that Frank Eaton was a "great fraud" and the "he was seen by many to be unbalanced", and that Glenn (Shirley) held the same views as you did. (Note: You didn't say that Glen Shirley held these negative views about Frank Eaton and that you agreed with him; rather, these were "your" views and the great sage of western writing, Mr. Shirley, agreed with you. There is a difference!)

These comments resulted in an outpouring of negative sentiment against the Oklahombres organization by some very devoted readers. One member from the Tulsa area even returned his Journal and demanded to be stricken from the membership roll. He also challenged you to "show" him "in writing where Glenn Shirley said those things about Mr. Eaton." He went on to say that if you can't show him "in writing" that Glenn Shirley ever said those things; then, "you owe Mr. Eaton, Mr. Shirley, and your readers an apology."

As far as I know, neither the "proof" that Glenn Shirley ever held those demeaning beliefs about Frank Eaton, nor an apology from you has been forthcoming. Your response, to this ex-hombre's challenge, was to do everything in your power, using every research weapon in your vast arsenal, to "prove" that Mr. Eaton was the "unbalanced fraud and liar" that you said he was. This is exactly the reason "why" your reporting can not be believed or trusted; because, you began your research with a pre-conceived BIAS about the subject and, thus, SLANTED everything you found to prove your point-of-view. The only thing "unbalanced" in this whole exercise is your article.

I found one thing especially curious and troubling about your extremely comprehensive article on Pistol Pete, which includes 2 1/2 pages of reference material that you have, obviously, been working on for well-over five (5) years. The one article that you chose NOT to list as a source, or even quote from, was Glenn Shirley's article in Westerner magazine, entitled "Pistol Pete - Badmen's Nemesis." Why is that!?!

As for your "Endnotes", I would like to make a small, constructive suggestion. Ibidem! Ibid! Ib!

You showed me that you know what "ca" means, ie. Circa, prep. {L.}, about: used to indicate an approximate date: abbreviated c., ca., cir., circ., C. And, "thank you, again" for pointing this out to me even though I've been doing genealogical (family history) research since 1975. I thought, until now, that I had a fairly good understanding of the term. However, whenever I use "circa" in estimating a date, I try to keep it within 3 or 4 years of the actual date, not 8. If we use your criteria (+)(-) 8 years, then, the statement that Pistol Pete was born "ca" 1860 would be correct. In fact, this would make most of the disputed dates in your long, convoluted article within acceptable parameters.

At the risk of being chastised for pointing out additional mistakes in your article, which there are many, here is another. On page 8 of the Journal, there is a hand-drawn sketch of the area surrounding where the Eaton and Kempsey families resided in Kansas. You state in the caption: "Diagram Drawn By Frank 'Pistol Pete' Eaton Showing Vicinity of the Eaton Farm in Osage County, Kansas."

This diagram, drawn by J.C. Blackburn of Clarendon, Texas, was part of a letter sent to the Eaton family after the "Pistol Pete" book was released. Mr. Blackburn was born and raised in the subject area. Those are his words written in the lower, right-hand section stating, "Where I was raised...1/2 mile South and one mile East of Kempseys." Mr. Blackburn's grandfather was Perry Mannen, a neighbor to the Eatons and is also listed on the same 1870 Census page, shown in your article. (Note: Pistol Pete called him "Manning" in the book; because, he probably never saw the family's name in-print. He was reporting it phonetically.)

It was Mr. Mannen who was with Frank Eaton Sr., that fateful day, when they drove their wagons to Carbondale to get some coal, and supplies. While ther, they learned that the Sheriff was looking for some stolen horses. Mannen reported to the Sheriff that he could find the stolen stock in Kempsey's corral, and gave the Sheriff the directions. When the Sheriff and his posse arrived at the Kempsey place, the Kempsey's "got the drop" on them, and made their escape with the stolen horses. This is what got Frank Eaton killed! And, the Kempsey's also tried to bushwhack Mannen. They shot at him, knocking his hat off of his head, as he drove his wagon toward home.

In a series of letters addressed to the Eaton family, here is what Mr. Blackburn wrote: "Grandfather (Perry Mannen) had a hole shot through his hat by the Kempseys." And, concerning the "Pistol Pete" book, here is a sample of what Mr. Blackburn related: "There were a few minor mistakes in spelling, etc, in the book; but, really, it is remarkable how Mr. Eaton remembered the details like he did. The book, Pistol Pete, is history and not just a story." Also, "The book is true history in spite of the fact that a certain history teacher (Mr. Carpenter) in Overbrook, Kansas, has tried to discredit the entire book as fiction." And, "The book 'Pistol Pete' is absolutely true so far as his stay near, what was later, Overbrook, Kans. I have no way of following him from there until he reached Goodnight...Mr. Eaton did might well in remembering, for an 8 year old boy. He was only off on two directions to other towns, and the {spelling of the} names 'Kempsey' and 'Mannen'." Mr. Blackburn goes on to describe in great detail the sites drawn on his map.

Mr. Blackburn, a retired railroad telegrapher, describes his meeting Frank Eaton (Jr.) at a Cattlemen's convention in Amarillo, many years earlier. He states: "I had heard that some old-timers could pull a six-shooter faster than the eye could see it done. I never did believe it until I saw 'Pistol Pete' do just that and he must have been between 85 and 90 then." Finally, this excerpt: "My Grand Parents were neighbors of and personally knew all of the Eatons and Kempseys (Knew the Kempseys all too well)...The record of Pistol Pete's stay in the vicinity of what is now Overbrook is absolutely true...".

On page 7 of your article, you asked the question, "Why would he (Pistol Pete) need a foster father...(and) could this relationship with (Jasper) Exendine be the source of Eaton's claim of Cherokee Blood?" First, Jasper Exendine was a Delaware Indian; however, the Delawares became officially "incorporated" into the Cherokee Tribe on April 8, 1867, as citizens with equal rights. (Source: Daily Oklahoman, "Orbit" section, April 2, 1967, p.46. This article also includes a very nice photo of Jasper Exendine.)

After Frank Eaton's father was murdered, he had to grow-up very, very fast, just to survive. Young Frank Eaton resided with his mother and stepfather in the Osage country, around what is now Bartlesville, OK. They lived amongst the various Native American tribes in the area. He learned their ways and customs; and, he worked "with" and "for" them. There were (at least) two problems with this arrangement. His first hurdle was his youthful age. As a teenager (13 or 14), he was too young to work for the big cattle companies as a ranch hand; UNLESS, he claimed to be born in 1860, making him eligible. His second hurdle had to do with his race--being "white". In some tribes, it was against their law for tribal members to hire a white man to do work; UNLESS, he was adopted by a tribal member and, thus, became a citizen of the tribe.

Jasper Exendine adopted the young Frank Eaton because he was a close friend of his family, and a good worker. Jasper was once cited for hiring a White man; so, he knew how to make their relationship lawful. Jasper Exendine also served as a Deputy U.S. Marshal for a short period.

I also have a problem with a lot of "little" inconsistencies in your article. For example: On page 5, after giving a fairly good run-down on several of the individuals mentioned as friends and neighbors of the Eatons, while they were living in Kansas, you go to quoting from the 1870 Census page--printed on page 4 in the Journal. You state: "Verifiable Facts - According to the 1870 Federal Census taken July 14, Francis Boardman Eaton was born . . .". Where on that census page is the word "Boardman"? The census indicates that Frank Eaton's name as "Francis L.", same as his father's name, not Boardman! If you're going to quote from a source, please, report if just exactly as it appears.

FYI: You found Mose Beaman on the 1870 Census in Marion Twp, Douglas Co., Kansas; however, you stated: "No information has been found on George Saffles, or Bill Montcastle." Well, Mose Beaman was on page 413B of the census micro-film reel, and George Saffle and family are on page 414A--that's the next page on the reel! Obviously, they were neighbors. In the Saffle household, the oldest son is listed as "Ira B." (age14). This turns out that Ira Benton Saffle, or Ben Saffle, who ultimately marries Frank Eaton's sister, Elizabeth. The Saffles can be found on the 1880 Census, residing in Rock Creek Twp, Wabaunsee Co., Kansas. George Saffle, his wife and six (6) children are listed on page 4; and, BentonSaffle with his wife, Lizzie, and their two kids are listed on page 2. (Note: It was Ben Saffle who, with a group of concerned citizens, was reported in the book to have been "in on" the extermination of the Bloody Benders.)

When I began this response, this evening, I hadn't planned on it being so lengthy; however, your 19-page article covered a lot of ground; and, believe it or not, I intend on "taking issue" with you on just about every conclusion that you've made. If I'm still allowed back on the Bulletin Board after this rather scathing report, I'm going to attempt to unravel and explain, to your satisfaction, the myriad of conflicting dates given throughout Mr. Eaton's story, which, obviously, has you confused and trying to deal with a great deal of mental consternation. I'm also going to try and answer the main questions, which are: "Was Frank 'Pistol Pete' Eaton a lawman? Was he ever commisssioned a Deputy U.S. Marshal? If so, "where" and "when"?

More later.

Greetings All,

Enough is enough. This topic has been run to ground, and everything that needs to be said has been said. Let's remember that we are all on the same team here. While we may not agree on everything, let's not forget what brought us together in the first place, our love of history and research. We can continue to pursue our research knowing that each new piece of information that we uncover is part of a huge puzzle. Sometimes the puzzle presents a clear picture that we can agree on, and sometimes it doesn't. That is just the way it is.

We are only human, and it is only natural that we sometimes feel that our opinion has not been given the respect that it deserves. Lets keep things in perspective. Lets also keep in mind that Oklahombres is operated by volunteers. We may not always agree with something that one of our volunteers has said or done, but the volunteers who are performing tasks for the organization are doing the best they can.

I am asking that all parties who have participated in this particular debate to call it quits.

Thanks to eveyone who participates in our online forum, and in the operation of Oklahombres. Please continue to bring to the table the your individual qualities and perspectives. Please continue to share the information you uncover in your research. By bringing together our various resources, we can cast a brighter light on the shadowy mysteries of the past.

Dee

Very livily converation, I do think there was some embleishment in the book but for the most part I beleive it.

Just some thoughts about varifying info from his book, has anyone tryed to find reports or grave sites of the men he killed ? gun battles he was in ? look into the men he was with in the gun battles and see about documentation there. Trace the bad guys and see if there is any indication as to who killed them, One name sticks out to me that might be good to try is "Bud Wells" Since Bud appearantly "went good" after dealing with Frank there might be some family history there.
I would think with the Rolla Goodnight connection there would be some documentation or photos there of the younger years.
About the date of birth discrepence, He most likly lied about his age when he was younger and that carried though into his adult years,

Just some thoughts..........

There is an interesting article in the OSU Newspaper the Daily O'Collegian on Eaton for the school's homecomming. This article includes a short quote from Diron about his research on the local legend. This newspaper is online at: www.ocolly.com

Thanks for the headsup Bloodhound. The writer of the article was supposed to let me know when it was published.

On a sidenote, Robert McMurtry (who I believe designed the cover art for Art Burton's first book Black, Red, & Deadly) has published a large "comic book" telling of Eaton's life. I received a copy from the author and it is very well done. It does a fantastic job of telling Eaton's story both through the use of folklore and documented sources. It is published by New Forums Press of Stillwater.