Mr. Lady Luck Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 Instead of focusing on "Tom" or "Thomas" Reilly, has anyone done a search of American servicemen who died in the Pacific in the year 1945 with the last name "Reilly"? Robert Beerbohm is not 100% sure the young man's first name was "Tom". And from looking at the signature, the first letter does not look like any "T" I've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Lady Luck Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 That said, i claim zero expertise in any "pedigree" collection except one concerning the size & scope of the books which came in three separate distinct batches from three different groups of relatives once the parents had died in Dec 1972. Tom Reilly comic books. First batch April 1973. Second batch May 1973. Third batch late June to early July 1973. Each batch was equal in size count. This Doctor Arnheim informed me the comic books were counted up and dealt out like cards. None of them had any inkling of "worth" so there was no rhyme nor reason as to what ended up with which batch of relatives. The young man whose parents bought all these comic books did not live in San Francisco. Doctor Arnheim said they lived in Piedmont which is the other side of the Bay so yes, if there was a Tom Reilly out of San Fran, he was definitely not the one attached to this fabulous once in a life time comic book find. The more I read about this, the more obsessed I become with this mystery. We have not been able to prove that "Reilly" served and died during WWII, but we haven't been able to disprove it either. Regardless of how accurate the "story" is, there is definitely an interesting story behind these books. The circumstances are just so strange. I don't understand why anyone would make up a story like that, but even if we assume that the Arnheim/Beerbohm story is false, there are a lot of truths that we know from the comics themselves - and these truths corroborate the story: 1) The comics from 1939 - 1941 are (in general) not as immaculate as the later comics. 2) The comics from 1942 - 1945 were in pristine condition (obviously unread) 3) The collection stops cold turkey during 1945. 4) The collection remained untouched for almost 30 years until the comics were split among three individuals. 5) The "Reilly" signature appears on several of the comics. Why would someone lie about the story? And if the story is not true, what else would explain the unusual facts we know about these comic books? I think the answer lies in his first name. I don't think it was Tom, and I don't think his first name even began with the letter "T". Also, someone mentioned that there is no trace of an Arnheim/Reilly marriage. But if Dr. Arnheim married a relative of "Tom" Reilly's mother (such as a younger sister), her maiden name wouldn't have been Reilly. I feel like a cold case detective. We need Bill Kurtis... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 Keep digging! Clearing up this mystery would be a great accomplishment . Has anyone approached Bud Plant lately to ask if he has any further thoughts? My recollection is vague, but I think his story about what the family said when selling them the collection was the same as Beerbohm's story. Still, perhaps he might have something to add. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfcityduck Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 I sort of hate this thread. Too much emotion. I know that there is animosity towards BLB on this site, but it is hard to see much justification for that on this thread. The guy has been very forthcoming with information. Apparently, it lines up with what others have said. And it's not like there was any incentive to make up a "pedigree story" back in 1973. So the suspicion seems out of whack. Far more likely that some of the details are a little off. Like that the soldier in question resided in Piedmont. Not a big town. Probably could search property records and find out if there was a Reilly living there in WWII. Probably could search other records and see if a Reilly died during WWII. But, my guess that the books originated elsewhere and the California connection was just the location of one of the three groups of relatives who ended up with the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Lady Luck Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 I'm trying to ignore the emotion to get to the facts. I suspect there is a lot of truth to this story, we just need to figure out who "Reilly" was. Before I rule out "Tom", I don't recall anyone mentioning a "Thomas G Reilly" from California who was killed during WWII. Is anyone a member of ancestry dot com? Here is a screen capture (see bottom entry). To get more info, you need to be a member: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primetime Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 Keep digging! Clearing up this mystery would be a great accomplishment . Has anyone approached Bud Plant lately to ask if he has any further thoughts? My recollection is vague, but I think his story about what the family said when selling them the collection was the same as Beerbohm's story. Still, perhaps he might have something to add. I posted this a few months back, but I did spend a good 90 mins talking to Mike Manyak at a small local show in December 2014. He remembers the aunt and uncle wheeling in a third of the collection on a dolley that Easter Sunday at the Berkeley Con 1973. Mike doesn't really recall any details of Reilly, but it was cool to hear him speak of the runs of Timely Torch and Subby he and Nick Marcus feasted their eyes upon. The Cap 1 was, interestingly, rolled up with a single rubber band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Lady Luck Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 Ancestry lists two other American Reilly's from California who were killed during WWII. Francis Stephen Reilly and John David Reilly This list is exclusive to Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard Casualties - which leads me to assume they were mainly from the Pacific Theater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tri-Color Brian Posted May 3, 2015 Share Posted May 3, 2015 Find a Mormon...they're really big into the ancestry thing and will probably be members... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robot Man Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 So a question for you guys. Since we are not really sure about Tom Riley should we just call them "San Francisco" books? What would be the right name for this pedigree? Obviously, someone ammased a killer comic collection! Like Edgar Church, I feel that the person who put them together should get the credit not necessarily the person who brought them to market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 So a question for you guys. Since we are not really sure about Tom Riley should we just call them "San Francisco" books? What would be the right name for this pedigree? Obviously, someone ammased a killer comic collection! Like Edgar Church, I feel that the person who put them together should get the credit not necessarily the person who brought them to market. Well, BLB objected to the SF designation on the grounds that Reilly (supposedly) lived in Piedmont in the east Bay. The collection had no direct connection with SF as such. It surfaced, if I understand the story, at the Berkeley con and, of course, Comics&Comix was in Berkeley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primetime Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 So a question for you guys. Since we are not really sure about Tom Riley should we just call them "San Francisco" books? What would be the right name for this pedigree? Obviously, someone ammased a killer comic collection! Like Edgar Church, I feel that the person who put them together should get the credit not necessarily the person who brought them to market. Well, BLB objected to the SF designation on the grounds that Reilly (supposedly) lived in Piedmont in the east Bay. The collection had no direct connection with SF as such. It surfaced, if I understand the story, at the Berkeley con and, of course, Comics&Comix was in Berkeley. yup Piedmont is in the Oakland east Bay. It's a strange pedigree location wise, as a third of the collection was with a relative in New Jersey. Also, comic dealer Redbeard (Ron Pussell) from Nevada first coined the pedigree "San Francisco" after he found out it originally was discovered in Berkeley. None of the books were ever physically in San Francisco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacentaur Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 I know that there is animosity towards BLB on this site, but it is hard to see much justification for that on this thread. The guy has been very forthcoming with information. Apparently, it lines up with what others have said. The clever con men know it's easier to dupe others with half-truths than pure fiction. So the suspicion seems out of whack. What you are missing out on is the totality of the circumstances - when someone has repeatedly proven themselves to be disingenuous, manipulative, and/or unethical in so many scenarios, then it's very difficult to believe anything that they say. As time marches on, the full truth about the San Francisco books likely will never be known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 So a question for you guys. Since we are not really sure about Tom Riley should we just call them "San Francisco" books? What would be the right name for this pedigree? Obviously, someone ammased a killer comic collection! Like Edgar Church, I feel that the person who put them together should get the credit not necessarily the person who brought them to market. Well, BLB objected to the SF designation on the grounds that Reilly (supposedly) lived in Piedmont in the east Bay. The collection had no direct connection with SF as such. It surfaced, if I understand the story, at the Berkeley con and, of course, Comics&Comix was in Berkeley. yup Piedmont is in the Oakland east Bay. It's a strange pedigree location wise, as a third of the collection was with a relative in New Jersey. Also, comic dealer Redbeard (Ron Pussell) from Nevada first coined the pedigree "San Francisco" after he found out it originally was discovered in Berkeley. None of the books were ever physically in San Francisco. Good clarification. For non-Californians: San Francisco is on the west side of San Francisco Bay and Oakland, Piedmont, and Berkeley are all on the east side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tri-Color Brian Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 So just call it the "Reilly collection". What's so difficult about that? We know the last name is Reilly from the stamp ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sqeggs Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 So just call it the "Reilly collection". What's so difficult about that? We know the last name is Reilly from the stamp ... As a practical matter, it would take a lot to move CGC off the "San Francisco" designation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timely Posted May 4, 2015 Author Share Posted May 4, 2015 So just call it the "Reilly collection". What's so difficult about that? We know the last name is Reilly from the stamp ... As a practical matter, it would take a lot to move CGC off the "San Francisco" designation. It is known (& has been known) as the San Francisco collection for over 30 years, no reason to change it now. It was the collecting community that accepted the name "San Francisco" for 30 years, not CGC. FYI, the Pennsylvania Copies were never in Pennsylvania either! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straw-Man Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 always was/will be s.f.'s for me, too; don't much care what name is on the stamp on the back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tri-Color Brian Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 Robot Man said: "So a question for you guys. Since we are not really sure about Tom Riley should we just call them "San Francisco" books? What would be the right name for this pedigree? Obviously, someone ammased a killer comic collection! Like Edgar Church, I feel that the person who put them together should get the credit not necessarily the person who brought them to market." So, when I said "call them Reilly books", I was just answering his question...not saying we "NEED" to rename them on an official basis. Geez...ya try ta help and everbody just dumps on ya... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markseifert Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 (edited) Why would someone lie about the story? And if the story is not true, what else would explain the unusual facts we know about these comic books? I think the answer lies in his first name. I don't think it was Tom, and I don't think his first name even began with the letter "T". Because I love comic book history mysteries: Even assuming good faith and good recollection on the part of everyone involved who has first hand knowledge of the matter, I still think you can assume there are probably significant inaccuracies in the story. (I don't think I've seen that any of the buyers dealt directly with Tom Reilly's parents, so if that's true then I'm mistaken about this) At the outset, even the original dealer-purchasers got the story third hand, and 30 years after the fact -- the husband of a relative of the family. Taking the idea that the comics were split among family at face value, that seems to imply that Tom Reilly's parents had passed, and that too is going to reduce the odds of an accurate story. Right there, you're probably sunk in terms of getting solid info. Longtime dealers, how many collections have walked into your store with a story attached that wasn't quite right when you looked into it? And if somebody walked in and said, "I'm looking into selling these comics for my wife's cousins, want to take a look?"... which, as far as I can follow is more or less the scenario... with all respect to the memory of the people who may have been involved, I think most would find it reasonable to have some healthy skepticism of that situation. It doesn't even necessarily require bad faith on the part of the seller. The seller is wary, doesn't know you, doesn't know what these things are worth, and might want to give you as little real info as possible as a result. **** That aside, the signature/stamp. Taking a good look: I do think that's an "A". I think that little loop on the right leg is an abbreviated version of what you do when you do an A like this. If it is an A, the next two loops are lower-case "ll". Visiting our nation's handy social security index of popular names, both "Allan" and "Allen" chart pretty well for boys of the 1930s and 1940s. I think you could make either case, looking at the sig. So... I think maybe ignoring the story, calling that "Allen" or "Allan", and making some assumptions about age and location is a pretty solid angle of attack on the problem. Edited May 4, 2015 by markseifert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronty Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 The trouble with that we can see plainly in the "reilly" part of the signature how he wrote two L's in a row as part of the last name. Its not consistent with what you are suggesting is a separate "LL" on the left side. The problem is the left side is such a mess that its hard to imagine what the heck that it might be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
