Has anyone researched the National Archives re: Saddle Ridge Hoard find?

northcoin · March 21, 2014 4:04AM

My guess is that most of us here on this forum are satisfied that the coins making up the Saddle Ridge Hoard were not from a single date theft from the U.S. Mint - especially given the statement of the present day San Francisco mint representative. However, that statement was given with the caveat that the actual records that might be informative are squirreled away in distant archives. Has anyone been informed that any effort at all has been made to go to those source records? (I know from personal experience in trying to obtain records from the same or similar archives, it can take over six months so I am not surprised that nothing has been reported back yet.)

Here is the relevant quote from the San Francisco mint representative:

"Surviving agency records from the San Francisco Mint have been retired to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), under Record Group 104. Access to the records is under NARA’s jurisdiction: http://www.archives.gov/”"

Since one of the more plausible explanations for the hoard's creation was that a person in "the mining industry" regularly converted gold dust from mining operations into gold coin by exchanging same at the San Francisco mint, there could well be records in those archives identifying who came in regularly to make such exchanges. That information could then be compared to the dates and amounts of coinage for those dates in the found Saddle Ridge Hoard.

Coinosaurus · March 21, 2014 5:31AM

I am not an expert on this part of the archives but that won't stop me from speculating

I believe that the list of the depositors to SF Mint in the archives is incomplete. I recently watched "the great debate" videotape from the ANA (very worthwhile to borrow from the library, by the way) and they had the same problem, they needed to look at the list of bullion depositors. For some reason I don't recall now, they could only get data from 1855 or something like that.

If I had an ancestor who I believe deposited bullion into the Mint over a long period of time I would certainly look at this further. But the best you could do would be this - you could show some correlation of the dates of the coins to the deposits made. Would that be enough to get a court to award you the coins? I doubt it. The *absence* of records here is a problem. Your ancestor may have just happened to make deposits corresponding with the dates on the coins, but you have no way of proving the deposits weren't simply a regular pattern of deposits over an extended period of time.

Note, in this case the burden of proof doesn't lie with the finder of the coins - it would lie with the person claiming title as a descendant of the original depositor. Which means you have to prove a particular person buried them a hundred years ago. Very difficult.

WillieBoyd2 · March 21, 2014 6:26AM

You're as likely to find this:

DaveG · March 21, 2014 8:52AM

Given the substantial amount of California bullion that was deposited in the SF Mint every year, you'd be looking for a very tiny needle in a very big haystack.

For example, I understand that a large number of the coins are dated 1894. In the fiscal year ending June 30, 1894, $2.0 million of California bullion was deposited in the SF Mint; in FYE 6/30/95, $3.1 million was deposited.

How would you even determine if the mythical "person in the mining industry" even deposited his gold directly? There were other refiners in California or, possibly, Wells Fargo could have acted as his agent.

Plus, presuming that the Saddle Ridge Hoard represents only a portion of his wealth (or at least his revenues), how would you choose among any repeat depositors you did discover?

Frankly, I doubt the Mint was even involved - probably the original owner of the Hoard got his gold at a bank; just like most everyone else did.

shorecoll · March 21, 2014 9:00AM

I think this whole thing came from Izzy Switt's other SDB, and the rest is a cover story.

ricko · March 21, 2014 9:23AM

I seriously doubt that any real explanation or path of ownership will ever be established for the Saddle Ridge trove. If it were me that discovered it, no one would even know about it. Cheers, RickO

Unknown · March 21, 2014 10:32AM

This content has been removed.

19Lyds · March 22, 2014 3:06AM

<< Since one of the more plausible explanations for the hoard's creation was that a person in "the mining industry" regularly converted gold dust from mining operations into gold coin by exchanging same at the San Francisco mint, there could well be records in those archives identifying who came in regularly to make such exchanges. That information could then be compared to the dates and amounts of coinage for those dates in the found Saddle Ridge Hoard. >>

Ahhh! Since this was a common practice I think that this might narrow the list down to 500 or more folks.

But, then the question would be "What relationship did those 500 or more individuals have with the specific Land where the coins were found?"

I'm thinking that the attorney's for both Kagins and the coin owners have already researched historical records regarding the lands ownership and its conveyance to others. But then, perhaps the individual(s) that buried the coins didn't own the land at the time? Maybe it started out as a convenient location?

edit for spelling lost wrong! Doh! I did it again!

19Lyds · March 22, 2014 3:10AM

<< Given the substantial amount of California bullion that was deposited in the SF Mint every year, you'd be looking for a very tiny needle in a very big haystack.

For example, I understand that a large number of the coins are dated 1894. In the fiscal year ending June 30, 1894, $2.0 million of California bullion was deposited in the SF Mint; in FYE 6/30/95, $3.1 million was deposited.

How would you even determine if the mythical "person in the mining industry" even deposited his gold directly? There were other refiners in California or, possibly, Wells Fargo could have acted as his agent.

Plus, presuming that the Saddle Ridge Hoard represents only a portion of his wealth (or at least his revenues), how would you choose among any repeat depositors you did discover?

Frankly, I doubt the Mint was even involved - probably the original owner of the Hoard got his gold at a bank; just like most everyone else did. >>

All very likely possibilities.

Regarding the original post (OP), to what end would such a search be enacted? To identify an owner?

Obviously, whoever buried these left no legal record of their existence so, to me, it appears to be finders keepers.

Edit for SP

CaptHenway · March 22, 2014 3:31AM

<< 

<< Since one of the more plausible explanations for the hoard's creation was that a person in "the mining industry" regularly converted gold dust from mining operations into gold coin by exchanging same at the San Francisco mint, there could well be records in those archives identifying who came in regularly to make such exchanges. That information could then be compared to the dates and amounts of coinage for those dates in the found Saddle Ridge Hoard. >>

Ahhh! Since this was a common practice I think that this might narrow the lost down to 500 or more folks.

But, then the question would be "What relationship did those 500 or more individuals have with the specific Land where the coins were found?"

I'm thinking that the attorney's for both Kagins and the coin owners have already researched historical records regarding the lands ownership and its conveyance to others. But then, perhaps the individual(s) that buried the coins didn't own the land at the time? Maybe it started out as a convenient location? >>

I have just submitted an article to COINage in which I suggest ways that groups of new coins of the same date and mint could come into the hands of an individual without him going to the San Francisco Mint.

DaveG · March 22, 2014 6:05AM

But, doesn't "He probably got it at the bank, like anyone else." make for a pretty short article?

CaptHenway · March 22, 2014 6:11AM

There are other ways........

northcoin · March 22, 2014 6:31AM

<< There are other ways........ >>

OK, I'll play along. Is one of those ways a mint employee doing some laundering by making sure his 6 bags of same date coinage are exchanged for less traceable coins of differing dates?

CaptHenway · March 22, 2014 9:57AM

<< 

<< There are other ways........ >>

OK, I'll play along. Is one of those ways a mint employee doing some laundering by making sure his 6 bags of same date coinage are exchanged for less traceable coins of differing dates? >>

Nope.

TheBigB · March 22, 2014 10:10AM

Isn't the distribution of dates consistent with someone who may have spent 15-20 years accumulating their wealth?

northcoin · March 22, 2014 11:15AM

<< Isn't the distribution of dates consistent with someone who may have spent 15-20 years accumulating their wealth? >>

Guess the real question though is how that wealth was accumulated. Either a miner going in to the San Francisco Mint directly to exchange his gold dust for minted coins or someone slipping a few coins a day from the mint on a regular basis are equally possible given the lack of security that has been reported with regard to loss of coinage from the mint during the 1800s. The "smoking gun" of course being the pristine quality of the majority of the coins including coins that strongly suggest they never even made it into the bags (where they would have been bag marked) to end up in the banks.

TheBigB · March 22, 2014 12:15PM

<< 

<< Isn't the distribution of dates consistent with someone who may have spent 15-20 years accumulating their wealth? >>

Guess the real question though is how that wealth was accumulated. Either a miner going in to the San Francisco Mint directly to exchange his gold dust for minted coins or someone slipping a few coins a day from the mint on a regular basis are equally possible given the lack of security that has been reported with regard to loss of coinage from the mint during the 1800s. The "smoking gun" of course being the pristine quality of the majority of the coins including coins that strongly suggest they never even made it into the bags (where they would have been bag marked) to end up in the banks. >>

I would like to think that they would have detected a thieving employee over a 20 year period. I like the miner theory.

DaveG · March 22, 2014 12:40PM

Of course, working against northcoin's theory of a thieving employee taking pristine coins from the mint is the excellent condition of the coins recovered from the Central America, which (unless they were boxed at the mint) had been bagged and boxed exactly once. In addition, there are the extremely high-quality coins of the Wells Fargo Hoard, which are reported to have lain untouched for many years.

One has to keep in mind that most of the double eagles we see today have been bagged/re-counted/shipped many times.

I think this "smoking gun" is simply the mist of a mirage.

northcoin · March 22, 2014 2:48PM

<< Of course, working against northcoin's theory of a thieving employee taking pristine coins from the mint is the excellent condition of the coins recovered from the Central America, which (unless they were boxed at the mint) had been bagged and boxed exactly once. In addition, there are the extremely high-quality coins of the Wells Fargo Hoard, which are reported to have lain untouched for many years.

One has to keep in mind that most of the double eagles we see today have been bagged/re-counted/shipped many times.

I think this "smoking gun" is simply the mist of a mirage. >>

Dave - your point about the condition of the SS Central America coins is actually one I had considered, having one myself along with recalling the multiple photos of the stacked coins as they were photographed under water. I agree it does suggest that at least back in 1857 there were at least some coins that left the San Francisco mint that were not thrown into bags. It would certainly merit further inquiry as to whether similar care was afforded coins leaving the mint later in the century, and in particular how they were amassed and transported to banks years later. (We do know that by the end of the 1800s it was BAGS of gold coins that were being stolen per the transcripts from the Walter Dimmick trial regarding the six bags of gold coins that went missing from the mint by 1901.)

The condition of the gold coins that made it onto the SS Central America does interestingly suggest another intriguing source of the coins found in the Saddle Ridge Hoard as having been pilfered on a regular basis from the gold coins that were being transported from the San Francisco mint to the ships in the San Francisco Bay for transport.

As to the referenced alternative "theory" I claim no ownership. SethChandler deserves full credit for revealing the lack of security at the San Francisco mint that allowed coins to disappear over time during the 1800s including another specifically identified theft by a San Francisco Mint cashier fleeing the country in an account "that you just couldn't make up." It is worth a reread and ponder per link below. Here is Seth's introductory commentary which interestingly includes the fact that there was a large quantity of gold being shipped out of the country on a regular basis from the San Francisco mint!

"Here are the things I was most moved by and learned about:

-The excitement of building many assay offices throughout the West (never ending sources of gold!)

-Early discussions about the building of the Carson City Mint

-The urgent need of building a new SF mint, details of their heavy burden

-The process at which gold is exchanged for coins

-Of course, the theft by the cashier

-The staggering amount of coins that were shipped overseas"

Lax Security at the San Francisco Mint in the 1800s

19Lyds · March 22, 2014 5:02PM

<< 

<< Of course, working against northcoin's theory of a thieving employee taking pristine coins from the mint is the excellent condition of the coins recovered from the Central America, which (unless they were boxed at the mint) had been bagged and boxed exactly once. In addition, there are the extremely high-quality coins of the Wells Fargo Hoard, which are reported to have lain untouched for many years.

One has to keep in mind that most of the double eagles we see today have been bagged/re-counted/shipped many times.

I think this "smoking gun" is simply the mist of a mirage. >>

Dave - your point about the condition of the SS Central America coins is actually one I had considered, having one myself along with recalling the multiple photos of the stacked coins as they were photographed under water. I agree it does suggest that at least back in 1857 there were at least some coins that left the San Francisco mint that were not thrown into bags. It would certainly merit further inquiry as to whether similar care was afforded coins leaving the mint later in the century, and in particular how they were amassed and transported to banks years later.

The condition of the gold coins that made it onto the SS Central America does interestingly suggest another intriguing source of the coins found in the Saddle Ridge Hoard as having been pilfered on a regular basis from the gold coins that were being transported from the San Francisco mint to the ships in the San Francisco Bay for transport.

As to the referenced alternative "theory" I claim no ownership. SethChandler deserves full credit for revealing the lack of security at the San Francisco mint that allowed coins to disappear over time during the 1800s including another specifically identified theft by a San Francisco Mint cashier fleeing the country in an account "that you just couldn't make up." It is worth a reread and ponder per link below. Here is Seth's introductory commentary which interestingly includes the fact that there was a large quantity of gold being shipped out of the country on a regular basis from the San Francisco mint!

"Here are the things I was most moved by and learned about:

-The excitement of building many assay offices throughout the West (never ending sources of gold!)

-Early discussions about the building of the Carson City Mint

-The urgent need of building a new SF mint, details of their heavy burden

-The process at which gold is exchanged for coins

-Of course, the theft by the cashier

-The staggering amount of coins that were shipped overseas"

Lax Security at the San Francisco Mint in the 1800s >>

Interesting that the SS Central America went down in a hurricane yet some of the coins remained stacked together.

What could they have been in to cause this? Wooden racks?

As for the theft theory, folks will do anything within their imaginations to validate their theory that the coins were stolen which is the only way they could have come into existence. This being regardless of the fact that there were many successful mining operations in the area which attracted literally hundreds of thousand of people from all ethnic backgrounds. They pulled nearly 12 million ounces of gold from California in the first 5 years of the Gold Rush. That's $240 Million Dollars between 1848 and 1853 alone.
It is NOT unreasonable to figure that some buried a total of $27,000 worth of gold coins away from prying eyes, banks, and thieves.

That's all I really need to know.

northcoin · March 22, 2014 6:12PM

For those following the chronology, the coins that boarded the SS Central America in 1857 emanated from a different mint building with likely different methods of disbursement and transport. The "Granite Lady" mint building did not come into existence until 1874, 20 years prior to the last of the Saddle Ridge Hoard coins dated 1894. The fact that gold coins may have been stacked for transport aboard ships back in 1857 really tells us very little about how the coins were assembled and transported after 1874. What we do know is that the coins subject of the mint theft at the end of the 1800s were being kept in bags. We also know that the pristine "smoking gun" coins subject of the Saddle Ridge Hoard did not have bag marks.

northcoin · March 22, 2014 6:14PM

<< 

<< Of course, working against northcoin's theory of a thieving employee taking pristine coins from the mint is the excellent condition of the coins recovered from the Central America, which (unless they were boxed at the mint) had been bagged and boxed exactly once. In addition, there are the extremely high-quality coins of the Wells Fargo Hoard, which are reported to have lain untouched for many years.

One has to keep in mind that most of the double eagles we see today have been bagged/re-counted/shipped many times.

I think this "smoking gun" is simply the mist of a mirage. >>

Dave - your point about the condition of the SS Central America coins is actually one I had considered, having one myself along with recalling the multiple photos of the stacked coins as they were photographed under water. I agree it does suggest that at least back in 1857 there were at least some coins that left

the San Francisco mint that were not thrown into bags. It would certainly merit further inquiry as to whether similar care was afforded coins leaving the mint later in the century, and in particular how they were amassed and transported to banks years later. (We do know that by the end of the 1800s it was

BAGS of gold coins that were being stolen per the transcripts from the Walter Dimmick trial regarding the six bags of gold coins that went missing from the mint by 1901.)

The condition of the gold coins that made it onto the SS Central America does interestingly suggest another intriguing source of the coins found in the Saddle Ridge Hoard as having been pilfered on a regular basis from the gold coins that were being transported from the San Francisco mint to the ships in the San

Francisco Bay for transport.

As to the referenced alternative "theory" I claim no ownership. SethChandler deserves full credit for revealing the lack of security at the San Francisco mint that allowed coins to disappear over time during the 1800s including another specifically identified theft by a San Francisco Mint cashier fleeing the country

in an account "that you just couldn't make up." It is worth a reread and ponder per link below. Here is Seth's introductory commentary which interestingly includes the fact that there was a large quantity of gold being shipped out of the country on a regular basis from the San Francisco mint!

"Here are the things I was most moved by and learned about:

-The excitement of building many assay offices throughout the West (never ending sources of gold!)

-Early discussions about the building of the Carson City Mint

-The urgent need of building a new SF mint, details of their heavy burden

-The process at which gold is exchanged for coins

-Of course, the theft by the cashier

-The staggering amount of coins that were shipped overseas"

Lax Security at the San Francisco Mint in the 1800s >>

For those following the chronology, the coins that boarded the SS Central America in 1857 emanated from a different mint building with likely different methods of disbursement and transport. The "Granite Lady" mint building did not come into existence until 1874, 20 years prior to the last of the Saddle Ridge

Hoard coins dated 1894. The fact that gold coins may have been stacked for transport aboard ships back in 1857 really tells us very little about how the coins were assembled and transported after 1874. What we do know is that the coins subject of the Walter Dimmick mint theft at the end of the 1800s were being kept in bags.

We also know that the pristine "smoking gun" coins subject of the Saddle Ridge Hoard did not have bag marks.

THIS IS STRONG EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE CONTENTION THAT THE SADDLE RIDGE HOARD WAS NOT FROM THE THEFT OF BAGS OF COINS BUT DOES KEEP OPEN THE PROSPECT THAT THE PRISTINE "SMOKING GUN" COINS FOUND IN THE SADDLE RIDGE HOARD WERE EITHER FROM A MINER TURNING IN

HIS GOLD DUST FOR COINS DIRECTLY AT THE SAN FRANCISCO MINT OR FROM PILFERED COINS OVER A PERIOD OF TIME BY SOMEONE AT THE SAN FRANCISCO MINT. BOTH ARE EQUALLY LIKELY IF ONE ACCEPTS THE PREMISE THAT GOLD COINS IN THE LATE 1800s THAT WERE LEAVING THE SAN FRANCISCO

MINT WERE BY THAT TIME LEAVING IN BAGS. …. and no, people were not showing up at the San Francisco mint in the late 1800's to "collect coins" asking for pristine specimens. It wasn't until close to 1930 that collecting gold double eagles came into vogue as we know from the fact that it wasn't until then

that the unique Paquet Reverse 1861-S $20 Gold Double Eagle was first discovered and appreciated with its unique reverse as evident in my specimen pictured below.

DaveG · March 22, 2014 11:53PM

Those of us who have taken the time to read RWB's "From Mine to Mint" are familiar with how gold coins were shipped during the 19th century.

What Roger doesn't discuss is that interestingly (or perhaps understandably), insurance companies and shipping companies had fairly strict rules about how gold coins were to be packed for shipment - some of which you can read on the web.

The coins on the Central America were probably placed in stacks in rectangular boxes, with the spaces between the stacks of coins filled tightly with sawdust to prevent the coins from moving (and acquiring bag marks). The boxes would have remained in placed when the ship sank and disintegrated over time, leaving the stacks of coins that the recoverers found.

By the last third of the century or so, gold coins leaving the mint were placed in bags - packed tightly again, so they wouldn't move - which were placed into kegs or boxes and the spaces between the bags filled with sawdust.

Now, while the articles that Roger cites in the book deal specifically with how coins were shipped from the Philadelphia mint or from the port of New York, the sources I found on the web were British, which suggests that methods of shipping gold coins were fairly similar around the world.

rmpsrpms · March 23, 2014 1:11AM

From my understanding, the sawdust was used less to ensure the coins were tightly-packed and more to capture the gold dust released from contact/vibrations during shipping. Collect the sawdust, burn it off, and the dust can be recovered. Without the sawdust, whoever opened the box could simply poor the gold dust from the bottom of the box and pocket it.

I love this Saddle Ridge story because it is so improbable. Very few folks living in the California foothills around 1900 would have had the financial resources to squirrel away $27000 worth of gold. I have not yet formulated my Occam's Razor explanation, but so far none of the explanations I've heard are simple enough to meet the criteria.

DaveG · March 23, 2014 1:35AM

I suppose it's possible that loss from abrasion led to the mint packing the coins in bags (which were typically burned to recover the gold that had rubbed off from the coins onto the bags), but I think "pouring the gold dust from the bottom of the box" is a pretty fanciful notion.

MacCrimmon · March 23, 2014 2:41AM

<< and no, people were not showing up at the San Francisco mint in the late 1800's to "collect coins" asking for pristine specimens. It wasn't until close to 1930 that collecting gold double eagles came into vogue ..... - northcoin >>

I can't find my C.F. Childs catalog now, but IIRC he had many coins which were "hand selected" directly from the mint. My own 1870 Bertie florin (from the BRM) was one such coin which a collector/banker hand selected as an annual Christmas present for his child over a 16 year period. So yes, there were forward thinking collectors on both sides of the pond in the late 1800s; maybe not thousands or even hundreds, but enough.

DaveG · March 23, 2014 2:58AM

I think the Philly Mint had more interactions with the public than the branch mints did.

We know that the Philly mint had tours and a coin collection that the public could view in the second half of the 19th century; I don't know if it also had a "cash window" where members of the public could obtain individual coins.

But, I'm not aware that the branch mints had similar activities at the time.

I'm pretty sure that the New Orleans mint did not offer tours, for example.

I haven't read anything that gives details about whether the SF mint gave tours or had a cash window at the time.

Unknown · March 23, 2014 8:57AM

This content has been removed.

northcoin · March 23, 2014 2:43PM

<< I think the Philly Mint had more interactions with the public than the branch mints did.

We know that the Philly mint had tours and a coin collection that the public could view in the second half of the 19th century; I don't know if it also had a "cash window" where members of the public could obtain individual coins.

But, I'm not aware that the branch mints had similar activities at the time.

I'm pretty sure that the New Orleans mint did not offer tours, for example.

I haven't read anything that gives details about whether the SF mint gave tours or had a cash window at the time. >>

Vary salient points.

northcoin · March 24, 2014 4:29AM

<< You're as likely to find this:

>>

No wonder it took over six month for them to get back to me the last time I tried to get records from them. One guy and one million plus boxes to dig through.

DaveG · May 7, 2014 12:41PM

While this isn't from the National Archives, it does shed some light on commercial practices of the time:

The following is from a brochure on San Francisco prepared by the Santa Fe Railroad, dated 1901:

"This [the San Francisco Mint] is the largest mint in the United States, and visitors are admitted to view the process of coining, and the immense stores of money in the vaults every day (except Sundays and holidays), between the hours of 9 and 11:30 a.m..

It may be noted here that in San Francisco and California generally, little paper money of any kind is in circulation, all business transactions being conducted with gold and silver coin. Paper money is apt to be regarded with the same suspicion which follows the offer of a twenty-dollar gold piece in most of the States of the Union. So the gold and silver piled up in the mint, and the work of turning out the coins do not strike the average Californian as they do the Easterner. But the figures of coinage will impress anybody, for from $25,000,000 to $35,000,000 in "good hard coin" is turned out by this mint annually. The nickel is the smallest coin in general use in San Francisco, copper cents having no circulation whatever, except in a limited use for the purchase of postage stamps, so the coinage of the San Francisco Mint is practically all silver and gold.

Down at the United State Sub-Treasury, on Commercial street, above Montgomery, are to be seen other piles of gold and silver, and here is carried the only considerable store of paper money in the State.

yosclimber · May 7, 2014 5:48PM

DaveG,

Thanks for sharing this.
It does refute one critique of my thread on "how to launder $30k in gold",
namely the supposed shortage of gold $20s in favor of paper money in San Francisco, 1901.

(Of course other critiques of that theory remain).

Has anyone researched the National Archives re: Saddle Ridge Hoard find?

Comments

Leave a Comment