 |
| Soapy Smith STAR Notebook Page 22 - Original copy 1884 Courtesy of Geri Murphy |
(Click image to enlarge)
ADDENDUM: Published September 12, 2025
(At bottom of page)
oapy Smith's "STAR" notebook, 1883-84, St. Louis, San Francisco, Soapy arrested: Pages #22-23
This post is on page 22 and 23 of the "STAR" notebook. I am combining these two pages as they only account for a total of seven lines. They are not appearing to be a continuation of earlier pages, but appear to be notes Soapy made as two separate, stand-alone notations. Page 22 is not dated. Page 23 is dated twice, December 31, 1883 and January 2, 1884.
This is the continuation of deciphering Soapy Smith's "star" notebook from the Geri Murphy collection. A complete introduction to this notebook can be seen on page 1. These notebook pages have never been published before! They continue to be of revealing interest. The picture that these pages draw is of young 23 year-old Jefferson pursuing "soap sales" over a very wide spread of territory and in a very tenacious, even driven, way.
The notebook(s) are in Soapy's handwriting, and sometimes pretty hard to decipher. A large part of this series of posts is to transcribe the pages, one-at-a-time, and receive help from readers on identifying words I am having trouble with, as well as correcting any of my deciphered words. My long time friend, and publisher, Art Petersen, has been a great help in deciphering and adding additional information.
I will include the original copy, an enhanced copy, and a negative copy of each page. Also included will be a copy with typed out text, as tools to aid in deciphering the notes.
PAGE 22:
 |
| Soapy Smith STAR Notebook Page 22 - Enhanced copy 1884 Courtesy of Geri Murphy |
(Click image to enlarge)
There are a total of 24 pages. This means that there may be upwards of 24 individuals posts for this one notebook. Links to the past and future pages (pages 1, 2, 3, etc.) are added at the bottom of each post for ease of research. When completed there will be a sourced partial record of Soapy's activities and whereabouts for 1882-1884.
Important to note that the pages of the notebook do not appear to be in chronological order, with Soapy making additional notes on a town and topic several pages later.
Although the communication of twenty-three-year-old Jefferson Randolph Smith II is with himself, the writing also communicates with us about him 142 years later (and potentially far beyond today).
 |
| Soapy Smith STAR Notebook
Page 22 - Negative copy 1884 Courtesy of Geri Murphy |
(Click image to enlarge)
 |
| Soapy Smith STAR Notebook Page 22 - Deciphered copy 1884 Courtesy of Geri Murphy |
(Click image to enlarge)
The date of this notation is unknown, though it is probably not too far from the dates noted in page 20-21 (1883-1884).
- Line 1: "W. O. Monroe:" I could not find anything in the St. Louis newspapers for 1883-84 in regards to “W. O. Monroe,” but I did find a "William E. Monroe" in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat regarding his marriage to "Miss Ella E. Owens," that took place in Clinton, Illinois. Why the notice was of interest in St. Louis is not in evidence, it may be a clue that Monroe lived in St. Louis, perhaps at the St. James Hotel, which was pretty common in the 19th century.
 |
| Wm. E. Monroe marries St. Louis Globe-Democrat November 29, 1884 |
(Click image to enlarge)
Was Monroe an associate or friend of Soapy's? Perhaps someone Soapy wanted to meet up with? Could Monroe been an early gang member, or was he a victim of Soapy's swindles? Perhaps a potential target to swindle?
- Line 2: "St. James Hotel:"
- Line 3: "St. Louis Mo.:" The city and state where the St. James Hotel is located. Of note is the fact that St. Louis is not mentioned elsewhere in the STAR notebook, so was Soapy's visit a spur of the moment trip? Was "W. O. Monroe" a target of Soapy's before, or perhaps after, his arrival?
 |
| St. James Hotel St. Louis, Missouri 1880s |
(Click image to enlarge)
PAGE 23:
 |
| Soapy Smith STAR Notebook Page 23 - Original copy 1884 Courtesy of Geri Murphy |
(Click image to enlarge)
 |
| Soapy Smith STAR Notebook Page 23 - Enhanced copy 1884 Courtesy of Geri Murphy |
(Click image to enlarge)
 |
| Soapy Smith STAR Notebook Page 23 - Negative copy 1884 Courtesy of Geri Murphy |
(Click image to enlarge)
 |
| Soapy Smith STAR Notebook Page 23 - Deciphered copy 1884 Courtesy of Geri Murphy |
(Click image to enlarge)
- Line 1: "Dec 31st 1883:" According to Star notebook page #6, Soapy, in his own handwriting, was operating in Tombstone, Arizona between December 17, 1883 and December 22, 1883. Four days later, on December 26, 1883, Soapy paid $4 for a vendor’s license in Phoenix, Arizona. According to a blog post (December 26, 2009) and the San Francisco Chronicle (December 30, 1883) Soapy arrived in San Francisco on December 30, 1883, from Point Arena, California.
 |
| Jeff Smith, Texas San Francisco Chronicle December 30, 1883 |
(Click image to enlarge)
Note that "Jeff" lists that he is from "Texas." It was common for Soapy and other bunko men to list places they had not been in a while, if at all. This kept him from being extradited back to towns where he might be wanted by the courts. Soapy did not list his birth place of Georgia, to keep family ignorant of his criminal escapades. The following day he wrote “Dec 31st 1883" on this notebook page.
- Line 2: "License [$]7.50:" He purchased a vendors license in San Francisco, California, for $7.50. This was a common practice for Soapy, as it often protected him from being arrested.
- Line 3: "Lawyer Jan 2, 1884.” It was a rare occurrence, but sometimes Soapy did get arrested.
Two days after arriving in San Francisco, New Year’s Day, January 1, 1884, Soapy is arrested for operating the “soap racket.” Rarely was Soapy ever around long enough to get arrested, let alone, stay around long enough for the police and newspapers to learn his name, but for some reason he remains in San Francisco and bucks the system. He may have been seeking to make San Francisco a base of operations, building his first criminal empire, but he was not successful in that endeavor. Likely, there was already a bunko gang in power, and drove Soapy from their turf. In less than a year he would make Denver his new reign.
The Daily Evening Bulletin (San Francisco), January 3, 1884 describes the events of his arrest..jpg) |
| Jeff Smith's Soap Racket Daily Evening Bulletin January 3, 1884 |
(Click image to enlarge)
Jeff Smith’s “Soap Racket.”A sharp young man, Jeff Smith by name, who has been working the “soap racket,” as it is called, to large crowds on the street corners in the business part of the city for several weeks, was obligated to suspend operations at the corner of California and Front streets this morning at the request of Detectives Ross, Whittaker and Colby. They compelled him to fold up his camp-stool, strap his valise and go with them to the city prison, where he was charged on the register with conducting a lottery game. He appeared a trifle disturbed at the interruption, for it is not probable that he will gull simple countrymen for some time to come. For some time past complaints have come to the police regarding certain swindling soap vendors, whose plan of operations have been … about the same as Moses’ plaint to the Vicar of Wakefield after his return from the fair. Smith it seems has been in the habit of setting up his stock by opening his valise containing small packages of soap wherever he thought he could attract a crowd. His soap sold for fifty cents a package or three for one dollar, but the attraction was that he rolled greenbacks, one dollar and five dollars, in the packages before the eyes of the crowd, but by skillful manipulation the purchasers never obtained a lucky package. About a month ago another vendor was arrested, but allowed to go on his promising to leave the city. Smith was arrested at the ocean beach on New Year’s day, but as he also promised to leave, was allowed to go.
"He appeared a trifle disturbed at the interruption, ..." Very interesting that Soapy felt "disturbed at the interruption" by the police. It would not be the last time that Soapy defended his occupation. The following day, January 4, 1884, the San Francisco Chronicle published their version of Soapy's operations and arrest.
 |
| Jeff Smith Arrested San Francisco Chronicle January 4, 1884 |
(Click image to enlarge)
A Soap-Vending Swindle.
Jeff Smith was arrested yesterday by Detectives Ross, Colby and Whittaker and charged with conducting a lottery game. Smith is a vendor of soap and has been making himself conspicuous of late by offering that article for sale on street corners at 50 cents a package or three packages for $1. But the great attraction was that he rolled one and five-dollar greenbacks in certain of the packages, before the eyes of all present, but by some skillful manipulation the lucky packages never fell to any of the purchasers. He was arrested on the beach, New Year's Day, but allowed to go upon promising to leave the city. It is the intention of the police authorities to suppress this system of swindling, if possible, as many people have of late been victimized.
Note that in 1883-84 Soapy was selling his prize package soap for 50 cents. Later, he would be charging $1 each. This coincides with my father's research, much coming from Mary, Soapy's widow, in which Soapy used a coin in the early days (1884 Seated Liberty Half Dollar) instead of currency (one dollar).
On the same day, the San Francisco Examiner also published what they knew of Soapy's operations and arrest.
 |
| Smith's Antiquated Swindle. San Francisco Examiner January 4, 1884 |
(Click image to enlarge)
Smith's Antiquated Swindle.
Jeff Smith, the greenback soap seller, was arrested yesterday morning by Detective Whittaker and officer Colby for conducting a lottery game at the junction of California and Market streets. The detective was forced to obtain the assistance of the other officer for the reason that "spotters" were on the outskirts of the crowd to warn the cheat of the approach of the police. Smith's soap, which is about the size of a postage stamp, is sold by him for 50 cents a package or three for $1, but the attraction is in the greenbacks rolled in the packages before the eyes of the crowd. Smith's dexterous manipulation of the packages resulted always in the purchaser receiving nothing but the soap, the "cappers" being the only successful players at the game. With this very antiquated swindle Smith gathered in the pocket-money of pleasure-seekers on the ocean beach New Year's Day. He was arrested then and allowed to go on a promise that he would leave San Francisco.
Note that the article mentions "cappers," men (shills) working for Soapy. That's evidence that Soapy was not working alone. This was in question throughout this notebook as Soapy's cappers and shills are not often mentioned. All three newspapers reported that Soapy was allowed "to go on a promise that he would leave San Francisco." later newspapers state that he was arrested and had to appear in court. It seems he was arrested twice, perhaps even three times? Was he allowed to leave the city, but decided to continue working?
According to the newspapers, Soapy had been in San Francisco for several weeks, operating his "soap racket." This would match his signing the hotel register at the American Exchange hotel on October 31, 1883 (Daily Alta California and the San Francisco Chronicle)
According to the newspapers, Soapy had been in San Francisco for several weeks, operating his "soap racket." This would match his signing the hotel register at the American Exchange hotel on October 31, 1883 (Daily Alta California and the San Francisco Chronicle)
 |
| San Francisco Chronical "Jeff Smith" Hotel Arrivals October 31, 1883 |
(Click image to enlarge)
"Jeff Smith, do:" "Do" is an abbreviation for "ditto," a term meaning 'a duplicate,' in this case, of "Guernvl," short for Guerneville (California). As Guerneville is 75 miles north of San Francisco it is possible that he was there?
In the latter 19th century, the location around Guerneville was heavily timbered, and Guerneville was at the center of it with a big saw mill. It was linked by rail to ferry service in San Francisco Bay as it had become popular with people from the Bay Area wanting a getaway to the woods. Also there needed to be a way to move the lumber from the saw mill. So could it be that the four gentlemen who listed "Guerneville" before and after Soapy signed his name, be bunko-sharps that Soapy was working with? "Cappers" are mentioned working with Soapy in the San Francisco Examiner, January 4, 1884. The newspaper listing of "hotel arrivals" is not in alphabetical order, but rather in the order from which the men signed the hotel register. So what are the odds that five men who signed the register, one-after-another, were all coming from the same city? Were they together" Perhaps part of the wide-ranging soap-selling tour of California after leaving the northwest? The target clientele could have been visitors to the area as well as dirty loggers who could be made interested in soap with possible prize money. Or did Soapy simply copy what others above him registered under?
In the latter 19th century, the location around Guerneville was heavily timbered, and Guerneville was at the center of it with a big saw mill. It was linked by rail to ferry service in San Francisco Bay as it had become popular with people from the Bay Area wanting a getaway to the woods. Also there needed to be a way to move the lumber from the saw mill. So could it be that the four gentlemen who listed "Guerneville" before and after Soapy signed his name, be bunko-sharps that Soapy was working with? "Cappers" are mentioned working with Soapy in the San Francisco Examiner, January 4, 1884. The newspaper listing of "hotel arrivals" is not in alphabetical order, but rather in the order from which the men signed the hotel register. So what are the odds that five men who signed the register, one-after-another, were all coming from the same city? Were they together" Perhaps part of the wide-ranging soap-selling tour of California after leaving the northwest? The target clientele could have been visitors to the area as well as dirty loggers who could be made interested in soap with possible prize money. Or did Soapy simply copy what others above him registered under?
On January 8, 1884, after being held in jail for up to seven days, Soapy has his day in court, and his attorney is successful in getting the charges dismissed, but Soapy is "immediately rearrested on an amended complaint."
(Click image to enlarge)
Three days later the San Francisco Bulletin, January 11, 1884 published the following.
(Click image to enlarge)
Probable is that San Francisco in 1884 had lacking or vague information regarding the city ordinances pertaining to bunko-men and their games. At minimum, it was enough for Soapy's attorney to fight and win the case. Very possibly Soapy escaped prosecution through bribery, which may be a clue via line #4 below.
 |
| DISMISSED AND REARRESTED Soapy's day in court San Francisco Chronicle January 8, 1884 |
(Click image to enlarge)
The charge of conducting a lottery game against Jeff Smith, the soap vendor, was dismissed, but he was immediately rearrested on an amended complaint.So, who is the "amended complaint" from? A new grievance case, or the same case that was just dismissed?
Three days later the San Francisco Bulletin, January 11, 1884 published the following.
 |
| Jeff Smith, the "soap racket" man San Francisco Bulletin January 11, 1884 |
―Jeff Smith, the "soap racket" man arrested recently under the lottery ordinance, was discharged from custody yesterday by Police Judge Lawler, who held that the offense charged did not come under the provisions of the ordinance.
Probable is that San Francisco in 1884 had lacking or vague information regarding the city ordinances pertaining to bunko-men and their games. At minimum, it was enough for Soapy's attorney to fight and win the case. Very possibly Soapy escaped prosecution through bribery, which may be a clue via line #4 below.
- Line 4: "Cash $20.00:" Is this the fee for the attorney, or possibly the payoff amount to Police Judge Lawler?
ADDENDUM
Under the San Francisco Chronicle, October 31, 1883, newspaper clipping above, Soapy "Jeff Smith" has registered at the American Exchange Hotel. There is an ongoing possibility that four men listed in the "Hotel Arrivals" might be bunko operators traveling and working with Soapy. I asked, "So could it be that
(Click image to enlarge)
Two newspapers showed registrations at the American Exchange on Oct 31, the Call Bulletin and the Examiner. The Examiner has a longer list, and it shows another name from Guerneville, R. G. Langley. This name appears separate from the other four names. A later clipping from 1889 names Langley as a "prominent lumberman" from Guerneville. Note the use of "a" instead of an "o" (Langley/Longley). Was this just an error in spelling the surname, or did R. G. intentionally misspell it to aid in escaping any arrest? Maybe his name appearing separately among the names has significance because it strongly suggests that the other 4 from Guerneville were likely traveling together as they would seem to have registered together. This appearance doesn't prove they were together, but registering separate from the lumberman strengthens the suggestion.
(Click image to enlarge)
This "R. Langley" is a criminal thief, but, is this R. G. Langley? I could not find enough newspaper accounts to determine who this is, and whether it was just a coincidence that his name is listed with "Jeff Smith's" name in the hotel register.
W. McNeal:
the four gentlemen who listed 'Guerneville' before and after Soapy signed his name, be bunko-sharps that Soapy was working with? "Cappers" are mentioned working with Soapy in the San Francisco Examiner, January 4, 1884. Were they part of the wide-ranging soap-selling tour of California after leaving the northwest?"
Art Petersen and I researched our newspaper archives under the four names listed with Soapy, as arriving from "do" (ditto) indicating "Guerneville." They are R. G. Longley, W. McNeal, James Murdoch, and George Huntley. The searches covered years 1880-1895, all across the Western states and territories.
The names, which very well may be alias,' of the four men are
- R. G. Longley
- W. McNeal
- James Murdock
- George Huntley
R. G. Longley:
The first name, listed as arriving from "Guernvl" (Guerneville, California).
 |
| R. G. Langley/Longley San Francisco Chronicle October 14, 1889 |
(Click image to enlarge)
Two newspapers showed registrations at the American Exchange on Oct 31, the Call Bulletin and the Examiner. The Examiner has a longer list, and it shows another name from Guerneville, R. G. Langley. This name appears separate from the other four names. A later clipping from 1889 names Langley as a "prominent lumberman" from Guerneville. Note the use of "a" instead of an "o" (Langley/Longley). Was this just an error in spelling the surname, or did R. G. intentionally misspell it to aid in escaping any arrest? Maybe his name appearing separately among the names has significance because it strongly suggests that the other 4 from Guerneville were likely traveling together as they would seem to have registered together. This appearance doesn't prove they were together, but registering separate from the lumberman strengthens the suggestion.
 |
| R. Langley arrested Virginian-Pilot Norfolk, Virginia March 23, 1893 |
(Click image to enlarge)
R. Langley, petit larceny; ninety days in jail.Petit larceny (or petty larceny) is a legal term for the theft of property valued below a specific dollar amount set by state law. It is typically a misdemeanor offense, punishable by fines or a jail sentence, distinguishing it from grand larceny, which involves higher-value property and carries more severe felony penalties.
This "R. Langley" is a criminal thief, but, is this R. G. Langley? I could not find enough newspaper accounts to determine who this is, and whether it was just a coincidence that his name is listed with "Jeff Smith's" name in the hotel register.
W. McNeal:
 |
| J. W. McNeal arrested Dallas Daily Herald July 21, 1881 |
(Click image to enlarge)
J. W. McNeal, a notorious character and outlaw, was lodged in jail at Columbus Monday.Is J. W. McNeal and W. McNeal the same individual?
 |
| W. McNeal at the Antlers Hotel The Weekly Gazette September 5, 1885 |
(Click image to enlarge)
In early September 1885 W. McNeal arrives in Colorado Springs and registers at the Antlers Hotel, but no other appearances occur until 1889. There was another W. McNeal, an acclaimed actor who had a national reputation. This actor McNeal seems highly unlikely that he worked as a shill, capper, or gang member for Soapy.
 |
| W. McNeal registers at the Antlers Hotel Center of photo 1885 Colorado Springs, Colorado |
(Click image to enlarge)
 |
| McNeal arrested for swindling North Dakota Pioneer May 5, 1889 |
(Click image to enlarge)
R. W. McNeal is in court on a charge of swindling, with an accomplice, Cole Grant, in Hamilton county, Iowa. They were convicted of the charge. The question remains, is this the W. McNeal Soapy travelled with?
James Murdock:
In 1887 a James Murdoch is tried and convicted in Ohio of murder. He was sentenced to hang, but took his own life. Still could have been James Murdoch who arrived in San Francisco with Soapy Smith.
 |
| James Murdoch, murderer The Blade, (Toledo, Ohio) December 15, 1887 |
(Click image to enlarge)
Three years later, another James Murdock (Murdoch?), a gambler by trade and a member of the Nestlehouse gang, is arrested in Omaha, Nebraska on the charge of being a fugitive from justice in Davenport, Iowa. His crime there is unknown. I could not find anything on the Nestlehouse gang. It is not known if this James Murdock/Murdoch is the same man who may have been with Soapy in San Francisco.
 |
| James Murdoch ("Murdock") gambler, fugitive from justice Omaha Daily Bee (Omaha, Nebraska) February 16, 1890 |
(Click image to enlarge)
Eight months later, October 16, 1890, a James Murdoch is arrested in Omaha, Nebraska as a "suspicious character."
 |
| "As a highway robber" James Murdoch ["Murdock"] Omaha World-Herald Omaha, Nebraska October 17, 1890 |
(Click image to enlarge)
AS A HIGHWAY ROBBER.
The police detectives last night arrested James Murdoch as a suspicious character, but his friends soon bailed him out. The arrest was made on a letter received from Chief of Police Kessler of Davenport, Iowa, who in reply to a query, stated that Murdoch was under $500 bail there for committing highway robbery, and that he is a mean fellow capable of committing any crime.No more was found on James Murdoch.
George Huntley:
 |
| George Huntley Knights Templar Passenger list San Francisco Chronicle August 11, 1883 |
(Click image to enlarge)
When I read of George Huntley being a Knights Templar, my thoughts ran to soap gang member John L. Bowers and his glad-handing of victims with his collection of fraternal and organizational pins and knowledge of organization handshakes, as a means of luring in victims in Denver.
The George Huntley who showed up in SF twice, beyond the George Huntley with the Guerneville group, was reported coming to SF on 28 July 1883 and 11 August 1883. He is twice reported as a member of a Knights Templar group from Pennsylvania. Research in the Pennsylvania newspapers about the Kendron Commandery No 18, seems legit, with swords, regalia, and a history, but that doesn't mean it was rogue free. Probably, though, the Guerneville Huntley and the Pennsylvania Huntley are two G. Huntley's.
 |
| Major George Huntley Passenger Lists Omaha, Nebraska San Francisco Chronicle July 28, 1883 |
(Click image to enlarge)
The names of the four men and the newspaper articles will be saved for future reference as possible short-lived members of the early soap gang. There is just not enough evidence or information either way to make a definitive decision regarding these individuals.
PAGE 23 OF THE STAR NOTEBOOK WILL CONTINUE ON PAGE 24.
Notebook pages
April 24, 2017
Part #1
Part #2
Part #3
Part #4
Part #5
Part #6
Part #7
Part #8
Part #9
Part #10
Part #11
Part #12
Part #13
Part #14
Part #15
Part #16
Part #24 (not published yet)
"He made fortune after fortune and spent it all in riotous living and in good deeds, for it must be ever said of "Soapy" that no hungry man ever asked aid of him and was refused."
——San Francisco Examiner, February 25, 1898
