Jump to content


Photo

Uncle Nearest 1856 whiskey


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#41 SuperDave

SuperDave

    1915 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 1,971 posts
  • LocationVermont USA
  • Ebay Name:SuperDave18
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 28 August 2017 - 12:25 AM

I can't see not collecting and changing my feelings and desire for the brand and the history BUT I also can't see changing the history on hearsay.


  • blkold7, JD.Maniac, Belgianjack and 3 others like this

#42 southrock

southrock

    1954 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 2,613 posts
  • LocationMissouri
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 28 August 2017 - 12:31 AM

I will always be a collector until the day I die. The history is already permanently embedded in my brain and cannot be changed !!!

 

They can say what they want and make claims, but they must have solid proof !!

 

I am from Missouri.. The SHOW ME state !!!  Show me some proof !!  or go away quietly ....


  • SuperDave, blkold7, JD.Maniac and 5 others like this

#43 SuperDave

SuperDave

    1915 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 1,971 posts
  • LocationVermont USA
  • Ebay Name:SuperDave18
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 28 August 2017 - 12:34 AM

A coach teaches the members of the team how to play the game, does the coach win the game?  A teacher teaches our children how how to go on and make a career - do they get a part of the future degree or salary?? Did Nearest invest in property and build a distillery?  Apply for THE FIRST DAMN DISTILLERY LICENSE IN THE COUNTRY?????  Hire staff and buy product?  Or did he teach technique 


  • blkold7, Belgianjack, southrock and 1 other like this

#44 blkold7

blkold7

    1915 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 1,747 posts
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 28 August 2017 - 01:55 AM

Dear Members of Maxwell House Forum,

 

 I can understand your feelings on this changing of Jack Daniel's History, weather it is because of Political Correction or not..  Or because it is done on a One Sided Interview. Or because it was done on Folklore, not Facts.. I am like Tate, we really need to do a little write in campaign to let Brown Foreman know that what is happening or what has happened is completely wrong on their part and they need to out on their Big Boy Pants and straighten this out. I have sent them an email and figured that when Tate left an Brown Foreman email address, he did too. But it will take more than just one or two emails. I let them know we are world wide and have over 700 members, even though a lot are not active.. I let them know we are The Historians, The Collectors and The Consumers of Jack Daniel's Whiskey and Products related to Jack Daniel's.  I have even made my self clear on my Face book page on how I feel, even though T know some of you don't use Facebook. But here is the problem, if only Tate & myself do this, BF might just laugh it off. But if more join in and just write out a heart felt email to Brown Foreman, they might decide it is in their best interest to tell Ms Fawn Weaver to STFU.

 

 I am going to show you the copy of what I wrote. Try to be civil and don't use every word I used if you take from my letter or at least, don't copy and paste, but use what you feel will help get your point across.

 

 

 

 

My letter:

 

Dear Brown Foreman and Board of Directors,

It has come to my attention and well over 700 other Members I know that belong to a Forum that has been around since May of 2006, in which this Forum I belong to deals strictly with The History, The Product and The People surrounding Jack Daniel in one way or another, that it has been found the History of Jack Daniel's Whiskey has been brought  to some very disturbing changes, all because of one woman, a Black Author of Happy Marriage Books, her name being Fawn Weaver. Seems for what we have read and heard, everything she has to offer is from 150 years of Folklore instead of actual Facts, something that should be more Facts than Folklore. We are now hearing that either it is being considered or actually has been done to having Jack Daniel be renamed as Master Distiller #2 and being replaced by Nearest Green being Titled as Master Distiller #1, since it is being claimed he taught a young Jack, who actual name is Jasper Newton, the art of making Whiskey, way before Jack had purchased the Still from Dan Call at the age of 13. Now it might be he was taught by Nearest Green, but that was many years before Jack Daniel's Whiskey was ever made. That would have been done when Jack was making Whiskey for Dan Call, not Jack Daniel. So it is very hard to see where Nearest could even be considered a Master of Jack Daniel's Whiskey, since Jack already knew the Art of Making Whiskey once he bought the Still Rights at 13 from Dan Call, for Jack had been making the Whiskey since the days of living with Dan Call, years after he had ran away from home, in which he had lived with Felix Waggoner for a year before moving in with Dan Call.
Another thing that seems to find holes in Fawn Weaver's story is about Dan Call. For years it has always been that Nearest Green was one of Dan Call's slaves. But now with this Fawn Weaver, she is changing the story with only one witness. a witness that is only using recollections.

Here is what she says when trying to prove that Nearest Green taught Dan Call how to make whiskey....................................... "Here is what I know. Dan Call's son, A.B. Call, had Sunday dinner at the Tucker's home every week. The Tuckers property adjoin the Dan Call Farm. The recollection of Francis Tucker is Nearest Green taught Dan Call the art of charcoal mellowing".

Fawn Weaver has tried to lead others to believe that Nearest Green was a Rented Slave to Dan Call and other farmers to show them how to make Whiskey. She says that a Company called Landis & Green, rented Nearest Green to Dan Call and others. But no one seems to find any information that there was ever a Landis & Green Company.

Another problem found in he investigations as noted in the NY Times, in which I will furnish a link, was that she only interviewed the Black Residents of Lynchburg. She did not get the complete story. Her investigation when you come down to it is One Sided. Why would you change History from One Sided Interviews? This makes no sense to any of the Members or myself. Are you afraid of this Woman because she is Black? Are you really going to change History just to please Political Corrections.

Here is the NY Times link: https://www.nytimes....rest-green.html

The above link leads to a Story which really seems to be One Sided instead of being fairly reported There is a lot more to this and it seems more likely a Carpetbagger has come to Lynchburg and done a good fair share of Scamming. We understand how you might have given into this Fawn Weaver for Political Correctness, but it is best that The Real Truth be known than Stories of Folklore from a One Sided Interviews.

If you think it is harder to admit you have been scammed, it will be much harder that the problems this is causing with over 700 members World-Wide, plus others we may have join once we get our side of the story out. We are Historians,The Collectors and The Consumers World Wide of Jack Daniel's Whiskey and Product related to Jack Daniel. Our Forum is well known around the world.

I thank you for your time and really hope you take all of this to heart and correct anything that has been changed because of Political Correctness.

Thank you much,
Roy Hampton

 

 

If you missed the email address when Tate furnished it, here it is again:     Brown-Forman@b-f.com

 

 

 

 

You can do this now or do it later, but by all means, join in together and let them know they have woke us up

 

Thanks much,

 

Roy


  • JD.Maniac, Belgianjack, MikeandJack and 4 others like this

#45 Max

Max

    1981 Gold Medal Member

  • Administrators
  • 24,462 posts
  • LocationBirmingham, England
  • Ebay Name:jackdaniels-uk
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 28 August 2017 - 08:40 AM

I'm loving this thread and seeing different views - all very valid

I agree that even though Nearest did teach Jack the art of Whiskey making, it doesn't make him the 1st Master Distiller of the Jack Daniel Distillery, I do however think he should be acknowledged officially by BF as we all know that he did indeed work with Jack in the early days showing him they way to make whiskey but certainly not as the first Master Distiller. It is my belief from photos and stories, wether Nearest was a slave or not, he was respected by Jack Daniel and considered a close friend.

So what about about Lem ? Why isn't Lem acknowledged for his part in the success of Jack Daniels, if it wasn't for Lem it wouldn't be on the shelf today. Jack Daniel is listed as the first Master Distiller from the year he first registered the Distillery in 1866 up until his death in 1911 however there is the issue of prohibition, his very bad health and we also know in his last years Jack had become very religious and no longer wanted part in the whiskey business, it was Lem who was fighting to keep the Distillery going, moving production from State to State to avoid prohibition as long as he could.

I think this thread should now be moved to the history board



Sent from my iPhone using Maxwells House JD Forum Mobile App
  • SuperDave, JD.Maniac, Belgianjack and 10 others like this

#46 blkold7

blkold7

    1915 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 1,747 posts
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 28 August 2017 - 10:51 AM

I'm loving this thread and seeing different views - all very valid

I agree that even though Nearest did teach Jack the art of Whiskey making, it doesn't make him the 1st Master Distiller of the Jack Daniel Distillery, I do however think he should be acknowledged officially by BF as we all know that he did indeed work with Jack in the early days showing him they way to make whiskey but certainly not as the first Master Distiller. It is my belief from photos and stories, wether Nearest was a slave or not, he was respected by Jack Daniel and considered a close friend.

So what about about Lem ? Why isn't Lem acknowledged for his part in the success of Jack Daniels, if it wasn't for Lem it wouldn't be on the shelf today. Jack Daniel is listed as the first Master Distiller from the year he first registered the Distillery in 1866 up until his death in 1911 however there is the issue of prohibition, his very bad health and we also know in his last years Jack had become very religious and no longer wanted part in the whiskey business, it was Lem who was fighting to keep the Distillery going, moving production from State to State to avoid prohibition as long as he could.

I think this thread should now be moved to the history board



Sent from my iPhone using Maxwells House JD Forum Mobile App

Max, 

 Here is a Timeline I did a while back on Lem Motlow. Not sure if I left any important Dates out or not. 

 

https://maxwellshous...-to-lem-motlow/

 

 

Roy


  • Max, Belgianjack, MikeandJack and 2 others like this

#47 MikeandJack

MikeandJack

    1981 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 11,594 posts
  • LocationLynchburg, Tennessee
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 28 August 2017 - 02:13 PM

Totally agree with you Max. Nearest should be acknowledged for his accomplishments and being a close friend of Jack, but not to the level they are taking it too now.

I have no problem with Nearest and his descendants receiving some recognition.

 

Great timeline on your Lem thread Roy. Did you ever hear anything from Brown Forman? If you did, they obviously did not do anything about it. I have never understood why they have not acknowledged Lem and the Motlow's. Another Lem bottle would be great.


  • Max, SuperDave, JD.Maniac and 7 others like this

#48 blkold7

blkold7

    1915 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 1,747 posts
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 28 August 2017 - 07:26 PM

Hi Mike, no,Brown Foreman said nothing about the Timeline. The Distillery said it looked like it was correct.
On Nearest Green, I also agree he should be aknowledge, but not as 1st Master Distiller. Teacher of The Art of Making Lincoln County Whiskey, I would say yes if he did, but not Master Distiller . Assistance Master Distiller would be more like it if you were to peg him as a Distiller. But this changing History for Political Correctness is not the way things should be done.
  • Max, SuperDave, JD.Maniac and 6 others like this

#49 SuperDave

SuperDave

    1915 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 1,971 posts
  • LocationVermont USA
  • Ebay Name:SuperDave18
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 29 August 2017 - 01:54 AM

Very much agree with Max and Roy, he should be honored and it should be by BF.  History should never be changed or altered for political correctness.  If the majority agree policies should be changed for political correctness than fine but never change history. JMAO


  • blkold7, JD.Maniac, Belgianjack and 3 others like this

#50 MikeandJack

MikeandJack

    1981 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 11,594 posts
  • LocationLynchburg, Tennessee
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 30 August 2017 - 11:39 AM

I was reading the New York Times article yesterday & found a few things that are very interesting.
Reading the article, about half way down, there is a picture that says "Mementos from the photo album of Annabella Mammie Green, a granddaughter of Nearest Green".
The problem with this picture & caption is the three items on the left are from my collection, not from this photo album. There is a report card of Felix Motlow from the Mulberry School in 1897, a wrinkled Jack Daniel black label, and the blue document is a slave bill of sale from Landis & Green, which is a major contributor to this theory about Nearest Green.
Here are the pictures from my collection:

Attached Images

  • IMG_20170829_083240.jpg
  • IMG_20170829_083211.jpg
  • IMG_20170829_083449.jpg

  • blkold7, JD.Maniac, Belgianjack and 2 others like this

#51 MikeandJack

MikeandJack

    1981 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 11,594 posts
  • LocationLynchburg, Tennessee
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 30 August 2017 - 11:58 AM

Here is a better picture of the slave paper.
It reads:

"I have this day bargained and sold and conveyed unto A. L. Landis and L. P. Green co partners trading under the name firm and style of Landis & Green one negro man named Campbell also a negro woman named Adeline aged twenty seven years old each for and in consideration of one thousand six hundred dollars in hand paid slaves for life I warrant and defend this title to said slaves against the lawful claims of any and all persons whatsoever also warrant the said slaves Campbell & Adeline sound & healthy given under my hand and seal this 19th day of January 1856. Alfred Eaton (seal)"

Attached Images

  • IMG_20170829_083526.jpg

  • blkold7, JD.Maniac, Belgianjack and 4 others like this

#52 MikeandJack

MikeandJack

    1981 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 11,594 posts
  • LocationLynchburg, Tennessee
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 30 August 2017 - 12:27 PM

The New York times article says Nearest Green was owned by Landis & Green (who were white slave traders here in Tennessee).

I am wondering if this is the document being used to prove the Nearest Green theory? The slave in this document is named Campbell, not Nearest.

 

Also, where does the date of 1856 come from? It is on the front of the new Nearest Green bottle. Could it also be taken from this document?

 

I have owned this document for at least 10 years, but have never shown it to anyone but a few friends because I saw no significance of it to the history of Jack Daniel. I obtained it, along with several other historical documents, from a descendant of the Motlow family. It seems now this document is more important than I thought.


  • Max, blkold7, JD.Maniac and 8 others like this

#53 southrock

southrock

    1954 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 2,613 posts
  • LocationMissouri
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 30 August 2017 - 01:01 PM

Any authentic old document pertaining to Jack Daniels, Nearest Green, or the early days of the distillery are of major importance and are irrefutable proof of what actually happened, as opposed to hearsay being verbalized by people about the history, who depend on memories to recall history.

 

It is awesome that you and Beth have collected and kept those old documents They are fantastic and tell the whole story and the truth about the past. The truth with the proof shall prevail !!

 

No matter what BF or anyone else says. Fantastic job of keeping the history accurate Mike and Beth !!!  Thank you both !!


  • Belgianjack, MikeandJack, mprjack and 2 others like this

#54 Belgianjack

Belgianjack

    1981 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 10,490 posts
  • LocationErps Kwerps, Belgium
  • Ebay Name:Belgianjack
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 30 August 2017 - 05:52 PM

Thank you once again Mike!!!!!!


  • MikeandJack, southrock and Willie Pete like this

#55 blkold7

blkold7

    1915 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 1,747 posts
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 30 August 2017 - 10:39 PM

The New York times article says Nearest Green was owned by Landis & Green (who were white slave traders here in Tennessee).

I am wondering if this is the document being used to prove the Nearest Green theory? The slave in this document is named Campbell, not Nearest.

 

Also, where does the date of 1856 come from? It is on the front of the new Nearest Green bottle. Could it also be taken from this document?

Mike,
That information would had to be furnished thru Fawn and I would bet a Dollar to a Donut , she took the part of this for granted and applied it to Nearest. It may pay to ask her about this and does she have written proof showing Nearest being rented to Dan Call or did she just take it for granted and did not expect anyone to follow up. At least now I see there was a Landis & Green, for I could not find any information on them before. But until Fawn came into the picture, I always thought Dan Call owned Nearest. Also in the NY Times piece it says Nearest was Rented out to the farmer, not saying he was sold. So does she have any documents showing he was Rented or was that Folklore? Tell her that you read about and you wish to keep history correct, to show you those documents so you could take pics to show everyone who has doubts, for I believe most of us doubt she has any proof and its all based on so called recollections or folklore. I'm thinking Francis Tucker is pretty old to be Recollecting anything.

 

How old is Francis Tucker today? Let say she is 80. It is now 2017. So that would mean she was born in 1937. Let say A.B. Call was born the same year as Jack, 1850. If they started having Sunday Dinner's at Francis Tucker's Parent house and overheard the conversation at say, 14 years old. The year would be 1951. A.B. Call would be 101 years old. 

 

 Still trying to think how old A.B. Call was, when he met Francis Tucker for Sunday Dinners. Look at it this way, if Jack was born in 1950 and suppose to have ran away from home at age 6 or 7, stayed with Felix Waggoner for one year before going to Dan Call and bought The Still from Dan Call at 13. That dateline would have been 1863. What year did A.B. Call die and what year was he born? Did he see his dad being taught how to make whiskey by Nearest or was he told after he sold The Still to Jack? Was he told many years after Jack bought The Still?  Things just really don't add up. It would maybe make sense if we knew when A.B.Call and Francis Tucker were born


  • Belgianjack, southrock, polish_jd_collector and 1 other like this

#56 MikeandJack

MikeandJack

    1981 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 11,594 posts
  • LocationLynchburg, Tennessee
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 31 August 2017 - 03:50 AM

Roy:

We agreed to let Fawn have all of our historical documents for her research on the condition she did not change history unless she had proof.

She kept our documents for several months and made copies of all of them. I even went with her on a few of her research trips.

The pictures in the NY Times article were taken when she had our original documents. The other picture taken of her in the Dan Call house where she is setting at a computer desk looking back at the camera by a table full of papers....most of those are our documents.

I don't know if she proof read the article before it was printed. I hope she didn't know the picture of the slave bill of sale was in the scrapbook and let them print it anyway.

 

A.B. Call was born in 1880 & died in 1964. I have a picture of him, but Fawn has it now to make copies. I think the Francis Tucker you are referring to is a man and he is in his 90's.

 

I sat down with Fawn 2 weeks ago and discussed these items with her. I had not read the NY Times article at the time, and don't even know if it was published yet.

She said she had proof of everything she is claiming and will show it to me soon. I haven't heard from her since, but I know she is very busy.

When I get the proof, I will publish it. If there is no proof, I'll document that too.


  • Max, Belgianjack, qdctj and 5 others like this

#57 blkold7

blkold7

    1915 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 1,747 posts
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 31 August 2017 - 06:34 AM

Mike,
Francis Tucker might be a man, for I know sometimes men did have that name, for I had a cousin who was Francis Doris, but everyone called him Bubba. I just thought it was a woman.
  • Belgianjack, MikeandJack and southrock like this

#58 blkold7

blkold7

    1915 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 1,747 posts
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 31 August 2017 - 06:34 AM

Mike,

the part where I come up about A.B.Call having Sunday Dinners with Francis Tucker, that was a reply Fawn made to me on Facebook on the Uncle Nearest 1856 Facebook Page. That did not appear in the NY Times

 

 

Roy


Edited by blkold7, 31 August 2017 - 06:43 AM.

  • Belgianjack, MikeandJack and southrock like this

#59 Max

Max

    1981 Gold Medal Member

  • Administrators
  • 24,462 posts
  • LocationBirmingham, England
  • Ebay Name:jackdaniels-uk
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 31 August 2017 - 12:44 PM

How old is Francis Tucker today? Let say she is 80. It is now 2017. So that would mean she was born in 1937. Let say A.B. Call was born the same year as Jack, 1850. If they started having Sunday Dinner's at Francis Tucker's Parent house and overheard the conversation at say, 14 years old. The year would be 1951. A.B. Call would be 101 years old.

Still trying to think how old A.B. Call was, when he met Francis Tucker for Sunday Dinners. Look at it this way, if Jack was born in 1950 and suppose to have ran away from home at age 6 or 7, stayed with Felix Waggoner for one year before going to Dan Call and bought The Still from Dan Call at 13. That dateline would have been 1863. What year did A.B. Call die and what year was he born? Did he see his dad being taught how to make whiskey by Nearest or was he told after he sold The Still to Jack?


Just for the record Jack was not born in 1850 as his mother died in 1847, it is thought Jack was born Sept 5th 1846 - this is another huge mistake Brown Forman made with their published history, you'd think they'd learn huh


I'm really enjoying the discussion about this, lots more fact finding to be done but no one is saying Nearest Green wasn't involved in teaching Dan Call or Jack Daniel the art of whiskey making but at the end of the day this would have been before the Distillery was registered so how can they say he was the first Master Distiller of the Jack Daniel Distillery ? It just makes no sense at all.

I do really think it would be cool to commemorate Nearest's involvement with an official Jack Daniels cylinder style cork bottle or perhaps a small ceramic stencilled jug, remember we are talking about a time well before square glass bottles were being used.


Sent from my iPhone using Maxwells House JD Forum Mobile App
  • blkold7, Belgianjack, MikeandJack and 6 others like this

#60 qdctj

qdctj

    1981 Gold Medal Member

  • Gold Medal Member
  • 4,080 posts
  • Ebay Name:qdctj
  • Tennessee Squire:Yes

Posted 31 August 2017 - 11:59 PM

I too am enjoying the conversation on this subject.  Just awesome the history discussed on this.  Will be interested to see what proof comes up as I too agree to honor Nearest, but make him the 1st Master Distiller is just plain crazy.


  • Max, blkold7, Belgianjack and 4 others like this




SSL