J.T. Gerrity
Member
After reading the account in Wikipedia about the Tutt-Hickok fight, I had some real problems with several aspects of what had been written, especially the statement that Hickok "rested his pistol on his off arm, took aim and fired." Not only is this not mentioned in the eye-witness accounts I've read, but it just doesn't make sense that he would take the time to do this in a gun fight where seconds can be the difference between life and death. I contacted Marshall Trimble, of True West Magazine, regarding the fight and the authenticity of the Wikipedia article. Trimble has been a published author for over thirty years, taught Arizona and Western history at Scottsdale Community College since 1972, and he regularly lectures about the Old West. In 1977, the governor of Arizona appointed him Official State Historian.
My question was this:
"After reading an article regarding the Hickok-Tutt fight, I have some reservations with certain aspects of the account, primarily with the scenerio where Hickok "rests his pistol on his off arm", takes aim and fires. This just doesn't ring true, and doesn't hold with the accounts I've read. Did this actually happen?"
Today I received an E-mail from Trimble that reads as follows:
"Good question. If you'll send me your full name, city and state of residence
I will forward this on to True West. They require that info before they can
publish Q/A in the magazine.
Here's what the foremost expert on Wild Bill, Joe Rosa had to say:
'I do not know who started the story of the arm-rest hold, but
probably the same one who claimed that Hickok shot Tutt when using a Colt's
Dragoon.
In fact he used one of his Navy pistols from the holster and there was no "fast draw" but
rather a carefully aimed shot, from 75 yards away, while on the move. Tutt who had turned
sideways in dueling fashion, fired and missed, but Hickok did not.
I fear that too many people are misled by the crap about fast draw which
never existed in the Old West, at least by that name. Rather, it was
described as "quick" which means physically quick or "quick as thought" as
Hickok's actions were described when he shot Coe at Abilene after being shot
at twice.
All my best, old friend,
Joe'"
Other aspects of the Wiki article are suspect, such as where it is stated that Hickok "cocked his gun and returned it to his holster", that Tutt was hit in the "left side" (a right-handed person, standing sideways in a dueling stance would be hit in the right side), and that the two faced each other down in the classic "Mashall Dillon" gunfighter scenerio (they were actually walking towards each other when Tutt reached for his gun and Hickok responded).
I've made several attempts to correct the Wiki post, but each time my correction has been replaced with the same erroneous account that I originally questioned. Suffice to say that, without proper checks and balances, any Wikipedia article has to be considered suspect.
For a true account, see "Wild Bill, gunfighter" by Joseph G. Rosa. Rosa is considered the authority on Wild Bill, having spent a lifetime researching the gunfighter, and being the only one who actually was granted access to original source material by the Hickok family, including letters, diaries and other materials. I'd much rather go by what Rosa has to say before I trusted Wikipedia as a resource, especially regarding Wild Bill Hickok.
My question was this:
"After reading an article regarding the Hickok-Tutt fight, I have some reservations with certain aspects of the account, primarily with the scenerio where Hickok "rests his pistol on his off arm", takes aim and fires. This just doesn't ring true, and doesn't hold with the accounts I've read. Did this actually happen?"
Today I received an E-mail from Trimble that reads as follows:
"Good question. If you'll send me your full name, city and state of residence
I will forward this on to True West. They require that info before they can
publish Q/A in the magazine.
Here's what the foremost expert on Wild Bill, Joe Rosa had to say:
'I do not know who started the story of the arm-rest hold, but
probably the same one who claimed that Hickok shot Tutt when using a Colt's
Dragoon.
In fact he used one of his Navy pistols from the holster and there was no "fast draw" but
rather a carefully aimed shot, from 75 yards away, while on the move. Tutt who had turned
sideways in dueling fashion, fired and missed, but Hickok did not.
I fear that too many people are misled by the crap about fast draw which
never existed in the Old West, at least by that name. Rather, it was
described as "quick" which means physically quick or "quick as thought" as
Hickok's actions were described when he shot Coe at Abilene after being shot
at twice.
All my best, old friend,
Joe'"
Other aspects of the Wiki article are suspect, such as where it is stated that Hickok "cocked his gun and returned it to his holster", that Tutt was hit in the "left side" (a right-handed person, standing sideways in a dueling stance would be hit in the right side), and that the two faced each other down in the classic "Mashall Dillon" gunfighter scenerio (they were actually walking towards each other when Tutt reached for his gun and Hickok responded).
I've made several attempts to correct the Wiki post, but each time my correction has been replaced with the same erroneous account that I originally questioned. Suffice to say that, without proper checks and balances, any Wikipedia article has to be considered suspect.
For a true account, see "Wild Bill, gunfighter" by Joseph G. Rosa. Rosa is considered the authority on Wild Bill, having spent a lifetime researching the gunfighter, and being the only one who actually was granted access to original source material by the Hickok family, including letters, diaries and other materials. I'd much rather go by what Rosa has to say before I trusted Wikipedia as a resource, especially regarding Wild Bill Hickok.
Last edited:
Just funnin
