@EastonCollection said:
I always wondered how many 1933 DE are currently stored in any Swiss bank's vaults. I have no knowledge of any being stored but if i was a betting man, I would bet there are a few. Come to think about it, I wonder how many other "goodies" are stored in Switzerland.........
Since they were never released through the cashier, there should be zero in Swiss vaults. This is baseless speculation. All examples found were in numismatic hands. Dealers of the time did have back door access to the Mint's which is likely how they got out. Why would there be any in Swiss bullion holdings?
Perhaps some got shipped abroad since it was legal to own gold in foreign countries until 1961.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
@tcollects said:
I would too. I forced myself to read some of the Langbord pleadings and I found myself thinking that the Langbords' narrative could have been framed more simply and persuasively, with more relatable experts. Imho, anything could happen in a redo somewhere else.
The judge steered toward a certain decision, something we've seen of late. David Tripp was given tons of leeway, Roger Burdette not as much. Certain issues were not allowed to be brought up -- possibly the fact that NO GOLD was missing/stolen (though that may have been the Langbord's legal counsel's strategy to not focus on that).
I always thought that the KISS strategy was best on something like this with many complicated avenues in the field of numismatics and minting, which are above the heads of an average jury (unless it's comprised of 12 coin collectors !! ). Focus on the Froman Exchange Letter and the fact that NO GOLD was missing/stolen according to the official files. Keep it simple, let the jury ask themselves why the government lawyers keep saying the coins were stolen but no gold was missing.
It points to an exchange and even one done after the April 6 deadline would not necessarily be an illegal act.
@The_Dinosaur_Man said:
If we could steer this conversation back towards how the coins originally got out...
I was always under the impression that at least some coins were available at the Mint Cashier's window, or something like that, and dealers familiar with the staff could buy them at face value just as they might do for any other previous year. Perhaps the prohibition on issuing the coins wasn't confirmed before several examples left the Mint and no one thought it was going to become a serious problem.
Noone has ever been able to establish as a fact that any 1933 DE's left the mint legally. It was 1933. America was in the depths of the Great Depression. Some person or persons there at that time saw a golden opportunity to steal when they learned that the 1933 DE's that had already been struck, 445,500 of them, would not be released into the channels of commerce. The thief or thieves had an opportunity in those times to cash in with well-heeled collectors of the day and cash in they did.
No one has been able to establish as a fact that the coins left the Mint illegally either. And you’re continuing with speculation, now stating it as fact in your story. You don’t know who did what, who knew what or who thought what.
David Tripp's well-researched book, Illegal Tender, has some very keen observations that compel one who reads his book to put the thinking cap on. Look at the big picture is what I tried to do after reading Tripp's book. My belief is that no 1933 coins were ever available for purchase or trade at the public window. That's not to say that some 1933 coins weren't lifted while inside the Mint's walls, the '33 being lifted replaced with a pocketed common date like a '28. The act of substituting a few '33's for '28's or some other common date DE is how I think the '33's left the mint. Is Switt telling us through his pocketpiece that the '33 DEs he eventually acquired all left the mint in one or more employee pockets? A reasonable argument could be made that trading gold in this fashion by an employee for an equal amount of gold is not theft. Employee walks into the Mint with a '28 DE in one baggy pocket of the trousers that were the style in those days and leaves at the end of the day with a '33. Does the Mint really care about the date on the coins it makes? The pictures I saw of the storage vaults with their bags of Double Eagles, 250 to the bag, stacked on top of one another showed no markings on the outside of the bags indicating the date of the coins contained therein.
That sounds quite different from your previous post:
“Noone has ever been able to establish as a fact that any 1933 DE's left the mint legally. It was 1933. America was in the depths of the Great Depression. Some person or persons there at that time saw a golden opportunity to steal when they learned that the 1933 DE's that had already been struck, 445,500 of them, would not be released into the channels of commerce. The thief or thieves had an opportunity in those times to cash in with well-heeled collectors of the day and cash in they did.”
Have I made a false statement with "noone has ever been able to establish as a fact that any 1933 DE's left the mint legally"? Would a Mint employee's act of substituting the old gold coin in his pocket for a new one of equal value constitute a theft in 1933? Was permission quietly granted to some of the more trusted employees to help themselves to examples of a new issue as long as they could cover the substitution with another coin legally owned by the employee? What do you think was the mindset of top officials at the 1933 Mint regarding theft by employees?
Read YOUR last few posts that I quoted. One of them talks about “thieves” and “stealing”. Two others mention substituting coins of equal value (which at that time wouldn’t amount to theft). Make up your mind.
Two different speculative views coming from one individual, me. Now, that is extraordinary. L@@K, I wasn't there so I can only speculate, same as you, about HOW or WHEN or WHO. I have the ability to speculate from both sides of the coin, no pun intended. I will say that I believe David Tripp did identify the main player, the one who orchestrated the exodus of the 1933 DE's from the Mint, the pieces that eventually landed in the hands of Israel Switt.
I take the view now and have for some time, that Switt is kind of a hero for seeing to it that a few 1933 DE's escaped the melting pot. In his book, David Tripp takes a view about Switt that is over the top, in my opinion. Israel Switt is not the demon that Tripp portrayed him as in his book.
Finding new ways of looking at things and actually trying to learn from others is the mode I'm in.
Just one more thing and then I'm going to bag it here. You said, "...substituting coins of equal value (which at that time wouldn’t amount to theft). Make up your mind."
Substituting coins definitely was legal at the Mint window and I agree wouldn't amount to theft. But was it permitted for employees to substitute coins without having to use the public window? Is it "theft" if substitutions are not done at the window? Just some food for thought to leave you with.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
@CRHer700 said:
Perhaps some got shipped abroad since it was legal to own gold in foreign countries until 1961.
Beginning in late-1932, the government was watching on oveseas transfers of gold. Some people were told to bring shipped gold back to the States. While it wasn't against the law to already HAVE gold overseas.....new shipments were not given that leeway. Pressure was put on banks to not facilitate these transfers. If you had the $$$, I guess you could take a cruise to Europe and bring your stash.
A few stray 1933's could be sent overseas, but I doubt any sizeable quantity like a bag could be, if that's what you are driving at.
Using the precedent that the Treasury Department was told by the State Department to back off from Farouk because we needed to use the Suez Canal, I think that I can safely sell my 1933 $20 to the President of Panama!!!
😎
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@mr1931S said:
Substituting coins definitely was legal at the Mint window and I agree wouldn't amount to theft. But was it permitted for employees to substitute coins without having to use the public window? Is it "theft" if substitutions are not done at the window? Just some food for thought to leave you with.
This is the gray area that I thought the Langbord lawyer should have focused more on (and I believe RWB was not allowed to talk about).
It was customary for some Philly Mint employees to grab coins for wealthy collectors and make a few bucks. Some would even bring the coins to players in NY and Boston if it was worth a trip up there.
Suppose a Philly employee went to the Cashier and said he'd have some money in late-April, could he put aside 10 1933's for him and make sure they were available for him when he had the $$$. The cashier says "Sure" and then the prohibitions come into effect where you're not SUPPOSED to do transfers/exchanges but it's not clearly ILLEGAL and enforcement is non-existent (a 1933 DE is worth maybe $25-$30 only to rich collectors who want them first off the press). Could that person still do the transfer if a person with access to the 1933's was willing to do it, knowing the government would never know and the gold quantity was still in balance (10 new 1933's for 10 older Saints, equal switch) ?
Now.... what if that same transfer took place in late-1933 or 1934 ? What about if a person knew 1933's were gonna be melted in 1936 or 1937 and still wanted to do it then..... and found a willing person at the Mint to do it ? At this time, the 1933's were still not worth more than $75 or so. A nice payday for the employee but not a huge windfall like in the 1940's.
@CRHer700 said:
Perhaps some got shipped abroad since it was legal to own gold in foreign countries until 1961.
Beginning in late-1932, the government was watching on oveseas transfers of gold. Some people were told to bring shipped gold back to the States. While it wasn't against the law to already HAVE gold overseas.....new shipments were not given that leeway. Pressure was put on banks to not facilitate these transfers. If you had the $$$, I guess you could take a cruise to Europe and bring your stash.
A few stray 1933's could be sent overseas, but I doubt any sizeable quantity like a bag could be, if that's what you are driving at.
Not a bag, just one one or two that someone might have had.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
@CRHer700 said:
Not a bag, just one one or two that someone might have had.
Possible, maybe that's why a few 1933's were reportedly seen in Europe.
But while Europeans might want to stash gold and money in the U.S.....I am not sure outside of Switzerland (neutral country !) that Americans would want to bring their valuables over to the field of battle for coming conflicts if they sought safety. Unless it was a last resort....they owned land or a home in Europe....or they frequently stayed there.
@EastonCollection said:
I always wondered how many 1933 DE are currently stored in any Swiss bank's vaults. I have no knowledge of any being stored but if i was a betting man, I would bet there are a few. Come to think about it, I wonder how many other "goodies" are stored in Switzerland.........
Since they were never released through the cashier, there should be zero in Swiss vaults. This is baseless speculation. All examples found were in numismatic hands. Dealers of the time did have back door access to the Mint's which is likely how they got out. Why would there be any in Swiss bullion holdings?
I didnt mention Swiss Bullion Holdings. If I had 1 or 2 1933 DE I would be storing them in my Swiss bnak vault. Unfortunately, I dont have either.
In the 1947 Barnard case in Tennessee...the judge put the burden of proof on the collector to show how and why the coin was legal to own. I'm not a lawyer, not sure why this was so. Since when do Americans have to PROVE something is theirs unless an item was actually physically stolen in the first place ?
From my 1933 notes:
The Tennessee case involved Memphis collector L.G. Barnard. His attorney, Harry J. Stein, argued that the double eagles were obtained through legal channels and that the collector purchased his example from a reputable dealer. Stein would later explain to the Bronx Coin Club in New York on Aug. 20, 1947, that the loss of the case would give purchasers of 1933 double eagles the right to recover the purchase price from the dealers who sold them under their implied warranty of good title. The Barnard case effectively established the government’s title to 1933 double eagles.
Some people thought the Barnard case should not have been introduced in the recent 1933 case:
The jury was allowed to hear about the Barnard case, which is not directly relevant and is misleading. L. G. Barnard was a collector who was forced to relinquish title to his 1933 Double Eagle in 1947. Barnard should have argued his 1933 Double Eagle was never stolen. Instead, he erred by saying only that he bought it in good faith. Now in 2011, the jury may have gotten the impression that Barnard really accepted the point that his 1933 Double Eagle was stolen. He did not have access to enough information about it to draw a conclusion on this point whereas today collectors benefit from the work of sophisticated historical researchers, who know about coins and about history of coin collecting, especially R. W. Julian, Q. David Bowers and Roger Burdette. There were no equivalent researchers, and no analogous body of knowledge, available to Barnard and other collectors in the 1940s.
Langbord's lawyer Berke did mention the Froman Letter in closing but didn't emphasize it enough, IMO. Earlier in the trial, the judge actually helped out the defense and Berke by telling him to not get too complicated in his arguments as stuff he was saying was going over the jury's head (KISS !!!).
His other 2 closing points were on Mint procedures not being followed and the records being complete. This is "inside the Beltway" stuff that IMO should have been the final points after the major points were made, if they were mentioned at all. The legality of exchanges....the nominal premium for 1933's up to the 1940's....the customary exchange policies for other gold coins and Saints....and the fact that NO GOLD was missing were the strongest points. These weren't mentioned in closing AFAIK nor mentioned or emphasized in the trial (I don't have a transcript to confirm).
@EastonCollection said:
I always wondered how many 1933 DE are currently stored in any Swiss bank's vaults. I have no knowledge of any being stored but if i was a betting man, I would bet there are a few. Come to think about it, I wonder how many other "goodies" are stored in Switzerland.........
Since they were never released through the cashier, there should be zero in Swiss vaults. This is baseless speculation. All examples found were in numismatic hands. Dealers of the time did have back door access to the Mint's which is likely how they got out. Why would there be any in Swiss bullion holdings?
Perhaps some got shipped abroad since it was legal to own gold in foreign countries until 1961.
@EastonCollection said:
I always wondered how many 1933 DE are currently stored in any Swiss bank's vaults. I have no knowledge of any being stored but if i was a betting man, I would bet there are a few. Come to think about it, I wonder how many other "goodies" are stored in Switzerland.........
Since they were never released through the cashier, there should be zero in Swiss vaults. This is baseless speculation. All examples found were in numismatic hands. Dealers of the time did have back door access to the Mint's which is likely how they got out. Why would there be any in Swiss bullion holdings?
Perhaps some got shipped abroad since it was legal to own gold in foreign countries until 1961.
Threy were never released
Somehow some got released.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
@EastonCollection said:
I always wondered how many 1933 DE are currently stored in any Swiss bank's vaults. I have no knowledge of any being stored but if i was a betting man, I would bet there are a few. Come to think about it, I wonder how many other "goodies" are stored in Switzerland.........
Since they were never released through the cashier, there should be zero in Swiss vaults. This is baseless speculation. All examples found were in numismatic hands. Dealers of the time did have back door access to the Mint's which is likely how they got out. Why would there be any in Swiss bullion holdings?
Perhaps some got shipped abroad since it was legal to own gold in foreign countries until 1961.
Threy were never released
Somehow some got released.
The government would say stolen. Lol. But they were never officially released, not even the Farouk specimen.
@EastonCollection said:
I always wondered how many 1933 DE are currently stored in any Swiss bank's vaults. I have no knowledge of any being stored but if i was a betting man, I would bet there are a few. Come to think about it, I wonder how many other "goodies" are stored in Switzerland.........
Since they were never released through the cashier, there should be zero in Swiss vaults. This is baseless speculation. All examples found were in numismatic hands. Dealers of the time did have back door access to the Mint's which is likely how they got out. Why would there be any in Swiss bullion holdings?
Perhaps some got shipped abroad since it was legal to own gold in foreign countries until 1961.
Threy were never released
Somehow some got released.
The government would say stolen. Lol. But they were never officially released, not even the Farouk specimen.
Whatever, you get my point.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
I am admittedly not fully educated on all the legal proceedings, etc., but I see a few potential arguments in favor of the private owners.
For example, we know that there was a mechanism in place to sell coins across the counter at the mint. So, the theoretical possibility existed.
Also, the distinction between 1933 and other dates seems to have been erased or lost once they were all thrown into the vault together. If at any time a request for DEs had come to the mint they presumably would have just started pulling bags out of the safe without regard to dates.
What the government has on its side is a lack of any official "issuance" decree. However, I'd have to wonder wgat sort of similar documentation routinely occurred in prior years.
On a sidenote, the Mint's official records show only one 1933 $10 being sold over the counter, but because of that record all 1933 $10's are accepted as legal.
However, there are (according to estimates that I have heard, which may or may not be accurate) 30 to 40 1933 $10's known. The logical conclusion is that SOME 1933 $10's left the Mint after being swapped out for other coins after they were no longer available over the counter.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@JCH22 said:
Barnhard was not an impressive decision. The court there found “that such coin could only be issued and circulated legally by the Philadelphia Mint, upon receipt by said Mint of an order from the Treasurer of the United States; that the Mint did not, at any time, receive such an order except one to deliver two of these coins to the Smithsonian Institute.” I did not read it as shifting the burden of proof. The court merely found the lack of an order to release conclusive-- and absent same-- “though a bona fide purchaser, [Barnhard] acquired no title in the purchase of same against the United States Government, the rightful owner.”
But there was NEVER a determinative "release date/time" or procedure to make it official with earlier gold coins, as far as I can tell. The cashier got the coins once the Super said they passed the assay inspection. I believe the procedures for how the coins got from the striking press to a retail client's hands was discussed in Roger Burdette's FMTM. It may have also been covered in a thread here or ATS.
Again...it's not like the coins were PROHIBITED from release OR exchange. There was never any official "On your mark...Get set....GO !!" type of countdown.
BTW, the government (and Tripp) got the 1st strikings of 1933's wrong as RWB disclosed a letter from the coiner that they got struck on March 2nd 1933 and not March 15th.
The Froman Letter is interesting, but limited.
I think it just shows that Mint employees were on OK legal ground to make coin-for-coin exchanges for friends, family, or business contacts...as they had done in the past. I found it very interesting that Tripp didn't know about the letter since an exchange was certainly how these coins got out of the Philly Mint.
Point about FOIA request question is to see if anyone has ever gotten the 1940’s investigation files of the Secret Service/Treasury Department. As I understand it, that investigation started in 1944 with the Farouk example, expanded to Switt's turn in of 8 coins in 1944/45, the Barnhard example in 1947, and another coin in 1952.
We're fighting Nazis in 1944 and the Treasury Dept. and Secret Service are supposed to be on the lookout for sabotage....and the're out investigating coins !!
Much has been written. It is unclear whether many, or any, of those writings were based on complete Secret Service records (primary sources). No criminal case was ever brought. There is no requirement for the government to automatically/unilaterally turn over unfavorable evidence in a civil case. Even in a criminal case, that requirement was not recognized until 1963. Not clear to me whether the numismatic community has the same information as the government might have.
What kind of smoking gun do you think might be there ?
To me this case is pretty simple: there was no THEFT because there was no gold shortfall. This means that an exchange took place which was possibly/probably LEGAL and even if after the FDR "deadline" of April 6, 1933....there was a no harm, no foul policy in place with respect to exchanges of coin-for-coin (the Froman Letter). That's why the government lawyers kept yapping stolen stolen stolen....if the coins were NOT stolen, they have to defend and prove an "illegal" exchange took place that harmed no one and with NO EXPLICIT ORDERS (even the FDR edict had wiggle room) to not allow them, it was certainly possible.
Again....if these took place in 1937 (or earlier)....you're talking about coins valued at about $75 each, maybe $125 tops. The real explosion took place in the 1940's.
I believe if the coins never appreciated and they were worth face value that the original investigation never happens because the perception of political opponents of FDR making a "killing" isn't there. If they traded hands at $20 each or therabouts, nobody cares.
But at $1,000 a coin and on sale at Stack's, a ritzy dealer ? The Feds suddenly cared.
FWIW, I spent a lot of time reading through the Denver Mint correspondence in the 1921-1924 era while doing research for my book on the Cents of 1922, and there were numerous brief notes from the Mint's Washington office to the effect of: "OK to release (lot number or lot of date such-and-such or lot whatever) Standard Silver Dollars." They had literally been holding that lot aside while sample coins from that production lot were being tested by the Mint Lab in D.C. They did it for all gold an silver production lots.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@CaptHenway said:
On a sidenote, the Mint's official records show only one 1933 $10 being sold over the counter, but because of that record all 1933 $10's are accepted as legal.
Only 1, CH ? I thought it was 4 or 5 but I admittedly haven't studied this 1933 situation as much.
However, there are (according to estimates that I have heard, which may or may not be accurate) 30 to 40 1933 $10's known. The logical conclusion is that SOME 1933 $10's left the Mint after being swapped out for other coins after they were no longer available over the counter.
That total jibes with the estimated pop census I have seen. Again....I read a few places that there were 4-5 that were written in the official Philly Mint ledgers (I might even have a copy somewhere, not sure). But the notion that 40 of them are legal because they can't tell which is the legal one and which are the "illegal" 39 (or 35 or whatever) is somewhat comical.
Not legal advice! If you should happen to stumble upon a 1933 DE in your attic or basement, best to consult an attorney!
I would consult with a keenly interested buyer who I know has beaucoup bucks and has the ability to keep his or her mouth shut. The potential buyer of my astonishing 1933 DE find could be an attorney, of course.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
@CaptHenway said:
On a sidenote, the Mint's official records show only one 1933 $10 being sold over the counter, but because of that record all 1933 $10's are accepted as legal.
Only 1, CH ? I thought it was 4 or 5 but I admittedly haven't studied this 1933 situation as much.
However, there are (according to estimates that I have heard, which may or may not be accurate) 30 to 40 1933 $10's known. The logical conclusion is that SOME 1933 $10's left the Mint after being swapped out for other coins after they were no longer available over the counter.
That total jibes with the estimated pop census I have seen. Again....I read a few places that there were 4-5 that were written in the official Philly Mint ledgers (I might even have a copy somewhere, not sure). But the notion that 40 of them are legal because they can't tell which is the legal one and which are the "illegal" 39 (or 35 or whatever) is somewhat comical.
I was remembering the one piece cited in the Tripp book, but this article says that at the Langbord trial it was stated that there were four such exchanges, so I stand corrected. That said, there are a lot more known than 4.
The ANA Museum has one. I have handled it. Curiously, the 1933 $10's were struck from reverse dies made from a new reverse hub that is distinct in its appearance from the 1932's and earlier. The Curator who showed it to me while I was working at the ANA told me an interesting story about the piece.
After the new ANA Headquarters opened in 1967 it took a while before the ANA Museum opened down in the basement. Vertical display cases were mounted on the walls, and for the inaugural exhibit the Curator decided to put up a type set of U.S. coins showing obverse and reverses side by side. It so happened that for the $10 Indian With Motto the ANA only owned two coins, a common date and the 1933. Because the 1933 was rather valuable then as now, the Curator did not want to tempt thieves by displaying the 1933 with the date showing, so he used that coin as the reverse of the type, thus hiding the date.
The opening of the Museum was timed to coincide with a meeting of the ANA Board of Governors in Colorado Springs. A reception was held, a ribbon was cut and the Governors mingled with the guests viewing the exhibit. Suddenly Governor John Pittman, who owned a 1933 $10, recognized the date of the coin from the reverse hub and started bellowing something to the effect of "WHAT'S THIS 1933 DOING ON DISPLAY! IT NEEDS TO BE IN THE SAFETY DEPOSIT BOX WITH THE OTHER RARITIES." The next day the Curator moved the coin to the bank, and the spot sat empty until some collector felt sorry for the ANA and donated a common date to show the reverse of the type.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Receipt for 1933 Eagle exists but none for 1933 DE. Why is that? Could the reason for that be that not a single 1933 DE was available to buy or trade for at the cashier window?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
@mr1931S said:
I think the government should back off a bit from their "never" position and let loose of the only circulated 1933 DE they have in their possession. It's graded as NGC About Uncirculated and most probably was I. Switt's pocket piece, the '33 DE piece that he would show off to good friends and customers who visited his shop.
Of course, if that were to happen it would only be a matter of time before the gov would be looking at a lawsuit filed by the owner of the ex Farouk piece. Instead of a lawsuit, however, if it was up to me as an authorized government representative, I would offer the ex Farouk piece owner this deal, a trade:
Give up the ex Farouk piece in exchange for the finest known 1933 DE, an NGC 65 that was part of the Langbord holdings.
The owner of the ex Farouk piece would get the finest known 1933 DE and someone else would be able to acquire the worst known 1933 DE, the personal pocket piece of I. Switt.
The “ex Farouk” coin has already been graded 65 by PCGS and verified by CAC. And even if it hadn’t been, I believe that due to its history, it would be more valuable than any other example. So there wouldn’t be any incentive for its owner to make your proposed trade.
Edited to add: Additionally, Coin World had reported that NGC graded two of the Langbord 1933 Saints MS65 and one, MS66.
The ex Farouk piece is inferior to the nicest piece that NGC graded is the point. And really, how can anyone know that the only 1933 DE that is legal to own was actually owned by Farouk? Are there any photographs or is there videos in existence of King Farouk showing off his 1933 so we can be certain of it's provenance? No, there are not.
Let’s leave it to Rick on Pawn Stars to provide the definitive Say in this matter! 😄
@mr1931S said:
Receipt for 1933 Eagle exists but none for 1933 DE. Why is that? Could the reason for that be that not a single 1933 DE was available to buy or trade for at the cashier window?
Because the 1933 $10's were struck earlier in the year than the $20's.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
Numismatic Pop Quiz: Why were there no 1933-dated $2-1/2 and/or $5 gold pieces struck?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@mr1931S said:
Receipt for 1933 Eagle exists but none for 1933 DE. Why is that? Could the reason for that be that not a single 1933 DE was available to buy or trade for at the cashier window?
Do you save all your receipts? 🤔
It's a small miracle that any receipts for any of these transactions exist.
The existence of a receipt is proof of a transaction, but the absence of a receipt does not necessarily prove anything.
@mr1931S said:
Receipt for 1933 Eagle exists but none for 1933 DE. Why is that? Could the reason for that be that not a single 1933 DE was available to buy or trade for at the cashier window?
Do you save all your receipts? 🤔
It's a small miracle that any receipts for any of these transactions exist.
The existence of a receipt is proof of a transaction, but the absence of a receipt does not necessarily prove anything.
Mostly true. But the government has a tendency to keep all receipts... for centuries.
@mr1931S said:
I think the government should back off a bit from their "never" position and let loose of the only circulated 1933 DE they have in their possession. It's graded as NGC About Uncirculated and most probably was I. Switt's pocket piece, the '33 DE piece that he would show off to good friends and customers who visited his shop.
Of course, if that were to happen it would only be a matter of time before the gov would be looking at a lawsuit filed by the owner of the ex Farouk piece. Instead of a lawsuit, however, if it was up to me as an authorized government representative, I would offer the ex Farouk piece owner this deal, a trade:
Give up the ex Farouk piece in exchange for the finest known 1933 DE, an NGC 65 that was part of the Langbord holdings.
The owner of the ex Farouk piece would get the finest known 1933 DE and someone else would be able to acquire the worst known 1933 DE, the personal pocket piece of I. Switt.
The “ex Farouk” coin has already been graded 65 by PCGS and verified by CAC. And even if it hadn’t been, I believe that due to its history, it would be more valuable than any other example. So there wouldn’t be any incentive for its owner to make your proposed trade.
Edited to add: Additionally, Coin World had reported that NGC graded two of the Langbord 1933 Saints MS65 and one, MS66.
The ex Farouk piece is inferior to the nicest piece that NGC graded is the point. And really, how can anyone know that the only 1933 DE that is legal to own was actually owned by Farouk? Are there any photographs or is there videos in existence of King Farouk showing off his 1933 so we can be certain of it's provenance? No, there are not.
Let’s leave it to Rick on Pawn Stars to provide the definitive Say in this matter! 😄
@mr1931S said:
Receipt for 1933 Eagle exists but none for 1933 DE. Why is that? Could the reason for that be that not a single 1933 DE was available to buy or trade for at the cashier window?
Because the 1933 $10's were struck earlier in the year than the $20's.
Only one 1933 Eagle obtained at the cashier window has a receipt associated with it? Where are the rest of the receipts for the 1933 Eagles?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
@mr1931S said:
I think the government should back off a bit from their "never" position and let loose of the only circulated 1933 DE they have in their possession. It's graded as NGC About Uncirculated and most probably was I. Switt's pocket piece, the '33 DE piece that he would show off to good friends and customers who visited his shop.
Of course, if that were to happen it would only be a matter of time before the gov would be looking at a lawsuit filed by the owner of the ex Farouk piece. Instead of a lawsuit, however, if it was up to me as an authorized government representative, I would offer the ex Farouk piece owner this deal, a trade:
Give up the ex Farouk piece in exchange for the finest known 1933 DE, an NGC 65 that was part of the Langbord holdings.
The owner of the ex Farouk piece would get the finest known 1933 DE and someone else would be able to acquire the worst known 1933 DE, the personal pocket piece of I. Switt.
The “ex Farouk” coin has already been graded 65 by PCGS and verified by CAC. And even if it hadn’t been, I believe that due to its history, it would be more valuable than any other example. So there wouldn’t be any incentive for its owner to make your proposed trade.
Edited to add: Additionally, Coin World had reported that NGC graded two of the Langbord 1933 Saints MS65 and one, MS66.
The ex Farouk piece is inferior to the nicest piece that NGC graded is the point. And really, how can anyone know that the only 1933 DE that is legal to own was actually owned by Farouk? Are there any photographs or is there videos in existence of King Farouk showing off his 1933 so we can be certain of it's provenance? No, there are not.
Let’s leave it to Rick on Pawn Stars to provide the definitive Say in this matter! 😄
@mr1931S said:
Receipt for 1933 Eagle exists but none for 1933 DE. Why is that? Could the reason for that be that not a single 1933 DE was available to buy or trade for at the cashier window?
Because the 1933 $10's were struck earlier in the year than the $20's.
Only one 1933 Eagle obtained at the cashier window has a receipt associated with it? Where are the rest of the receipts for the 1933 Eagles?
Based on some posts in this thread, it sounds like there were receipts for 4 examples, not 1. Presumably, other receipts were either lost, destroyed or never created.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@CaptHenway said:
Numismatic Pop Quiz: Why were there no 1933-dated $2-1/2 and/or $5 gold pieces struck?
The last $2-1/2 and $5 pieces were struck in 1929. Production of these was discontinued after 1929.
But why weren’t Saints also discontinued after 1929 and why were $10 pieces produced in 1932 and 1933 but not $2.50 and $5 pieces?
The FED wanted us off gold , completely after the crash. Then some corrupt bankers and politicians forced the last hold outs into succumbing in the legislative and executive branches. The treasury's hands have always been tied. They just produced the stuff until they were given the directive to melt it. Government waste like the '64-D Peace dollars, continues today. They should have just laid those workers all off.
That's how I read it.
@mr1931S said:
I think the government should back off a bit from their "never" position and let loose of the only circulated 1933 DE they have in their possession. It's graded as NGC About Uncirculated and most probably was I. Switt's pocket piece, the '33 DE piece that he would show off to good friends and customers who visited his shop.
Of course, if that were to happen it would only be a matter of time before the gov would be looking at a lawsuit filed by the owner of the ex Farouk piece. Instead of a lawsuit, however, if it was up to me as an authorized government representative, I would offer the ex Farouk piece owner this deal, a trade:
Give up the ex Farouk piece in exchange for the finest known 1933 DE, an NGC 65 that was part of the Langbord holdings.
The owner of the ex Farouk piece would get the finest known 1933 DE and someone else would be able to acquire the worst known 1933 DE, the personal pocket piece of I. Switt.
The “ex Farouk” coin has already been graded 65 by PCGS and verified by CAC. And even if it hadn’t been, I believe that due to its history, it would be more valuable than any other example. So there wouldn’t be any incentive for its owner to make your proposed trade.
Edited to add: Additionally, Coin World had reported that NGC graded two of the Langbord 1933 Saints MS65 and one, MS66.
The ex Farouk piece is inferior to the nicest piece that NGC graded is the point. And really, how can anyone know that the only 1933 DE that is legal to own was actually owned by Farouk? Are there any photographs or is there videos in existence of King Farouk showing off his 1933 so we can be certain of it's provenance? No, there are not.
Let’s leave it to Rick on Pawn Stars to provide the definitive Say in this matter! 😄
@mr1931S said:
Receipt for 1933 Eagle exists but none for 1933 DE. Why is that? Could the reason for that be that not a single 1933 DE was available to buy or trade for at the cashier window?
Because the 1933 $10's were struck earlier in the year than the $20's.
Only one 1933 Eagle obtained at the cashier window has a receipt associated with it? Where are the rest of the receipts for the 1933 Eagles?
Based on some posts in this thread, it sounds like there were receipts for 4 examples, not 1. Presumably, other receipts were either lost, destroyed or never created.
Does anyone have an image of any one of the receipts that were issued and managed to survive getting lost or being destroyed?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
@CaptHenway said:
Numismatic Pop Quiz: Why were there no 1933-dated $2-1/2 and/or $5 gold pieces struck?
The last $2-1/2 and $5 pieces were struck in 1929. Production of these was discontinued after 1929.
Yes, but why were those two denominations officially discontinued?
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@mr1931S said:
Receipt for 1933 Eagle exists but none for 1933 DE. Why is that? Could the reason for that be that not a single 1933 DE was available to buy or trade for at the cashier window?
Good question....I wonder if $10 Eagles were given out in the previous years at Philly. 1932 and 1931 Saints were sent by mail-order, not sure about in-person at Philly.
I have to check the striking/release date for the 1933 $10 Eagle vs. the $20 Double Eagle. Maybe the former had more time to be claimed. Remember, things were CHAOTIC with the new FDR Administration coming in March....the new EO's and regulations....confusion about the gold standard, gold coins, the price of gold, who could hold/buy/maintain gold, etc.
@TwoSides2aCoin said:
But why weren’t Saints also discontinued after 1929 and why were $10 pieces produced in 1932 and 1933 but not $2.50 and $5 pieces? The FED wanted us off gold , completely after the crash. Then some corrupt bankers and politicians forced the last hold outs into succumbing in the legislative and executive branches. The treasury's hands have always been tied. They just produced the stuff until they were given the directive to melt it. Government waste like the '64-D Peace dollars, continues today. They should have just laid those workers all off. That's how I read it.
Lot of work to strike the smaller denomination coins and they were used mostly as gifts at year-end (Christmas) and for spending. The government knew the propensity to spend the smaller coins was much higher than for the $10 and $20 coins.
With regard to the Double Eagles, they were needed as backing for Gold Certificates....and they were used to settle international trade in bags of 250 ($5,000) each.
Here's an article from The New York Times in 1931 which notes that our friends overseas, in a settlment for gold, specifically requested DEs for their citizens (the central banks didn't care if it was coins, bars, or whatever):
@JBK said:
This thread is descending into nonsense.
The federal government's position has been quite clear for almost 100 years, and they have stuck to it. Only a messy court case was able to result in the legalization of one coin.
The government is under no pressure to propose or accept any kind of deal such as those proposed here. In fact, any attempt to do so would almost certainly result in legal action since they assured the buyer of the one legal coin that it was, and would be, the only one.
Sure, a Member of Congress or a Senator could slip a provision to legalize them all into a bill. Sure, some compelling new evidence proving that some 1933 DEs were legally sold to the public could surface. Sure, some future lawsuit could succeed in overturning the government's claims on these coins. Anything could theoretically happen. But it's all just wild fantasy and speculation.
You had me at "This thread is descending into nonsense." I agree and think it's a shame.
Read and try to understand what you want and dismiss the rest is what I try to do. Labelling this thread as having "descended into nonsense" is not useful. btw, I have yet to see "Agree" from anyone other than you. An "official" Agree is in order?
I see that this thread has gone back on topic, but I have to respond to this nonsense, as I'm the only person who can give a definitive response.
When I bid on this coin in auction, it was made very clear to me that this is the one and only 1933 DE that the government will EVER allow to be legalized if they can do anything about it. And this is the only reason why I was willing to bid so much for the coin. If there were 10+ 1933 DE's that were legal to own, the finest known would not be worth nearly as much as this Farouk 1933 DE. At least I would never have paid this much for it.
So the answer is a definitive NO. I would not be ok with the government legalizing all 10 other 1933 DE's and then trading the finest known for my Farouk specimen. It would be extremely dumb of anyone to be ok with a deal like this. It's exactly like trading a unicorn for the prettiest goat in the herd. Another thing to note is that the Farouk specimen has a lot of history attached to it. It's not just 1 of 10 random Longboard coins. Even if people don't think it deserves a MS 65 grade by PCGS/NGC/CAC, it doesn't matter because it's the only one legal to own with a super fascinating history behind its existence. Grades don't matter on unique coins. So trading a unique coin for a non-unique one that has a slightly higher grade makes no sense whatsoever.
There's also zero incentive for the government to do this and undermine their whole stance that all 1933 DE's (except Farouk specimen) are illegal to own. It's not like they need the money when they have a money printer!
@JBK said:
This thread is descending into nonsense.
The federal government's position has been quite clear for almost 100 years, and they have stuck to it. Only a messy court case was able to result in the legalization of one coin.
The government is under no pressure to propose or accept any kind of deal such as those proposed here. In fact, any attempt to do so would almost certainly result in legal action since they assured the buyer of the one legal coin that it was, and would be, the only one.
Sure, a Member of Congress or a Senator could slip a provision to legalize them all into a bill. Sure, some compelling new evidence proving that some 1933 DEs were legally sold to the public could surface. Sure, some future lawsuit could succeed in overturning the government's claims on these coins. Anything could theoretically happen. But it's all just wild fantasy and speculation.
You had me at "This thread is descending into nonsense." I agree and think it's a shame.
Read and try to understand what you want and dismiss the rest is what I try to do. Labelling this thread as having "descended into nonsense" is not useful. btw, I have yet to see "Agree" from anyone other than you. An "official" Agree is in order?
I see that this thread has gone back on topic, but I have to respond to this nonsense, as I'm the only person who can give a definitive response.
When I bid on this coin in auction, it was made very clear to me that this is the one and only 1933 DE that the government will EVER allow to be legalized if they can do anything about it. And this is the only reason why I was willing to bid so much for the coin. If there were 10+ 1933 DE's that were legal to own, the finest known would not be worth nearly as much as this Farouk 1933 DE. At least I would never have paid this much for it.
So the answer is a definitive NO. I would not be ok with the government legalizing all 10 other 1933 DE's and then trading the finest known for my Farouk specimen. It would be extremely dumb of anyone to be ok with a deal like this. It's exactly like trading a unicorn for the prettiest goat in the herd. Another thing to note is that the Farouk specimen has a lot of history attached to it. It's not just 1 of 10 random Longboard coins. Even if people don't think it deserves a MS 65 grade by PCGS/NGC/CAC, it doesn't matter because it's the only one legal to own with a super fascinating history behind its existence. Grades don't matter on unique coins. So trading a unique coin for a non-unique one that has a slightly higher grade makes no sense whatsoever.
Not that I think there’s any chance it would change your mind, but I believe the theoretical proposal was to make one additional 1933 Saint legal to own, not all 10. See the proposal copied below. That aside, it’s extremely easy to understand both the literal and historical value of your coin, compared to any and all of the other survivors.
“I think the government should back off a bit from their "never" position and let loose of the only circulated 1933 DE they have in their possession. It's graded as NGC About Uncirculated and most probably was I. Switt's pocket piece, the '33 DE piece that he would show off to good friends and customers who visited his shop.
Of course, if that were to happen it would only be a matter of time before the gov would be looking at a lawsuit filed by the owner of the ex Farouk piece. Instead of a lawsuit, however, if it was up to me as an authorized government representative, I would offer the ex Farouk piece owner this deal, a trade:
Give up the ex Farouk piece in exchange for the finest known 1933 DE, an NGC 65 that was part of the Langbord holdings.
The owner of the ex Farouk piece would get the finest known 1933 DE and someone else would be able to acquire the worst known 1933 DE, the personal pocket piece of I. Switt.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@Typekat said: @MFeld
I like your logical, rational thinking on this hypothetical swap.
But consider that Treasury has spent over 75 years and vast resources in being totally irrational and fixated on the 1933 DE history.
(a victimless ‘crime’ in which several 1933 DE escaped their possession via Treasury employees doing gold for gold swaps),
There is zero chance that ‘logic’ ‘rational’ and ‘thinking’ will overcome Treasury’s entrenched bureaucratic obstinacy.
Thank you. But I just want to be sure you saw that the theoretical swap I quoted was dreamed up by @mr1931s, not me. And that for a number of reasons, I don’t think it has merit.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Mark, no worries - i never meant to suggest that you originated this thread.
My broader point is that the Treasury has needlessly spent enormous amounts of time, money and manpower on 1933 DE for generations.
And after they confiscated the Langford coins a few years ago, at the ANA convention they displayed their ten trophies of feckless federal futility as if they were the spoils of a righteous war.
30+ years coin shop experience (ret.) Coins, bullion, currency, scrap & interesting folks. Loved every minute!
Comments
Perhaps some got shipped abroad since it was legal to own gold in foreign countries until 1961.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
The judge steered toward a certain decision, something we've seen of late. David Tripp was given tons of leeway, Roger Burdette not as much. Certain issues were not allowed to be brought up -- possibly the fact that NO GOLD was missing/stolen (though that may have been the Langbord's legal counsel's strategy to not focus on that).
I always thought that the KISS strategy was best on something like this with many complicated avenues in the field of numismatics and minting, which are above the heads of an average jury (unless it's comprised of 12 coin collectors !!
). Focus on the Froman Exchange Letter and the fact that NO GOLD was missing/stolen according to the official files. Keep it simple, let the jury ask themselves why the government lawyers keep saying the coins were stolen but no gold was missing.
It points to an exchange and even one done after the April 6 deadline would not necessarily be an illegal act.
Theft or not a theft that is the question.> @MFeld said:
Two different speculative views coming from one individual, me. Now, that is extraordinary. L@@K, I wasn't there so I can only speculate, same as you, about HOW or WHEN or WHO. I have the ability to speculate from both sides of the coin, no pun intended.
I will say that I believe David Tripp did identify the main player, the one who orchestrated the exodus of the 1933 DE's from the Mint, the pieces that eventually landed in the hands of Israel Switt.
I take the view now and have for some time, that Switt is kind of a hero for seeing to it that a few 1933 DE's escaped the melting pot. In his book, David Tripp takes a view about Switt that is over the top, in my opinion. Israel Switt is not the demon that Tripp portrayed him as in his book.
Finding new ways of looking at things and actually trying to learn from others is the mode I'm in.
Just one more thing and then I'm going to bag it here. You said, "...substituting coins of equal value (which at that time wouldn’t amount to theft). Make up your mind."
Substituting coins definitely was legal at the Mint window and I agree wouldn't amount to theft. But was it permitted for employees to substitute coins without having to use the public window? Is it "theft" if substitutions are not done at the window? Just some food for thought to leave you with.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Beginning in late-1932, the government was watching on oveseas transfers of gold. Some people were told to bring shipped gold back to the States. While it wasn't against the law to already HAVE gold overseas.....new shipments were not given that leeway. Pressure was put on banks to not facilitate these transfers. If you had the $$$, I guess you could take a cruise to Europe and bring your stash.
A few stray 1933's could be sent overseas, but I doubt any sizeable quantity like a bag could be, if that's what you are driving at.
Using the precedent that the Treasury Department was told by the State Department to back off from Farouk because we needed to use the Suez Canal, I think that I can safely sell my 1933 $20 to the President of Panama!!!
😎
This is the gray area that I thought the Langbord lawyer should have focused more on (and I believe RWB was not allowed to talk about).
It was customary for some Philly Mint employees to grab coins for wealthy collectors and make a few bucks. Some would even bring the coins to players in NY and Boston if it was worth a trip up there.
Suppose a Philly employee went to the Cashier and said he'd have some money in late-April, could he put aside 10 1933's for him and make sure they were available for him when he had the $$$. The cashier says "Sure" and then the prohibitions come into effect where you're not SUPPOSED to do transfers/exchanges but it's not clearly ILLEGAL and enforcement is non-existent (a 1933 DE is worth maybe $25-$30 only to rich collectors who want them first off the press). Could that person still do the transfer if a person with access to the 1933's was willing to do it, knowing the government would never know and the gold quantity was still in balance (10 new 1933's for 10 older Saints, equal switch) ?
Now.... what if that same transfer took place in late-1933 or 1934 ? What about if a person knew 1933's were gonna be melted in 1936 or 1937 and still wanted to do it then..... and found a willing person at the Mint to do it ? At this time, the 1933's were still not worth more than $75 or so. A nice payday for the employee but not a huge windfall like in the 1940's.
Not a bag, just one one or two that someone might have had.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
Possible, maybe that's why a few 1933's were reportedly seen in Europe.
But while Europeans might want to stash gold and money in the U.S.....I am not sure outside of Switzerland (neutral country !) that Americans would want to bring their valuables over to the field of battle for coming conflicts if they sought safety. Unless it was a last resort....they owned land or a home in Europe....or they frequently stayed there.
I didnt mention Swiss Bullion Holdings. If I had 1 or 2 1933 DE I would be storing them in my Swiss bnak vault. Unfortunately, I dont have either.
.
I’ve read all the post. @mr1931S is right And I know where in Europe they are. Gringots. The trolls are keeping them safe
Martin
In the 1947 Barnard case in Tennessee...the judge put the burden of proof on the collector to show how and why the coin was legal to own. I'm not a lawyer, not sure why this was so. Since when do Americans have to PROVE something is theirs unless an item was actually physically stolen in the first place ?
From my 1933 notes:
The Tennessee case involved Memphis collector L.G. Barnard. His attorney, Harry J. Stein, argued that the double eagles were obtained through legal channels and that the collector purchased his example from a reputable dealer. Stein would later explain to the Bronx Coin Club in New York on Aug. 20, 1947, that the loss of the case would give purchasers of 1933 double eagles the right to recover the purchase price from the dealers who sold them under their implied warranty of good title. The Barnard case effectively established the government’s title to 1933 double eagles.
Some people thought the Barnard case should not have been introduced in the recent 1933 case:
The jury was allowed to hear about the Barnard case, which is not directly relevant and is misleading. L. G. Barnard was a collector who was forced to relinquish title to his 1933 Double Eagle in 1947. Barnard should have argued his 1933 Double Eagle was never stolen. Instead, he erred by saying only that he bought it in good faith. Now in 2011, the jury may have gotten the impression that Barnard really accepted the point that his 1933 Double Eagle was stolen. He did not have access to enough information about it to draw a conclusion on this point whereas today collectors benefit from the work of sophisticated historical researchers, who know about coins and about history of coin collecting, especially R. W. Julian, Q. David Bowers and Roger Burdette. There were no equivalent researchers, and no analogous body of knowledge, available to Barnard and other collectors in the 1940s.
Langbord's lawyer Berke did mention the Froman Letter in closing but didn't emphasize it enough, IMO. Earlier in the trial, the judge actually helped out the defense and Berke by telling him to not get too complicated in his arguments as stuff he was saying was going over the jury's head (KISS !!!).
His other 2 closing points were on Mint procedures not being followed and the records being complete. This is "inside the Beltway" stuff that IMO should have been the final points after the major points were made, if they were mentioned at all. The legality of exchanges....the nominal premium for 1933's up to the 1940's....the customary exchange policies for other gold coins and Saints....and the fact that NO GOLD was missing were the strongest points. These weren't mentioned in closing AFAIK nor mentioned or emphasized in the trial (I don't have a transcript to confirm).
Threy were never released
Don't forget the dragon lairs. Dragons love gold.
Somehow some got released.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
Any interest here in a "Free the Langbord 1933 Double Eagles!" protest at the U.S. Department of the Treasury?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
The government would say stolen. Lol. But they were never officially released, not even the Farouk specimen.
.
Whatever, you get my point.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.
I am admittedly not fully educated on all the legal proceedings, etc., but I see a few potential arguments in favor of the private owners.
For example, we know that there was a mechanism in place to sell coins across the counter at the mint. So, the theoretical possibility existed.
Also, the distinction between 1933 and other dates seems to have been erased or lost once they were all thrown into the vault together. If at any time a request for DEs had come to the mint they presumably would have just started pulling bags out of the safe without regard to dates.
What the government has on its side is a lack of any official "issuance" decree. However, I'd have to wonder wgat sort of similar documentation routinely occurred in prior years.
On a sidenote, the Mint's official records show only one 1933 $10 being sold over the counter, but because of that record all 1933 $10's are accepted as legal.
However, there are (according to estimates that I have heard, which may or may not be accurate) 30 to 40 1933 $10's known. The logical conclusion is that SOME 1933 $10's left the Mint after being swapped out for other coins after they were no longer available over the counter.
But there was NEVER a determinative "release date/time" or procedure to make it official with earlier gold coins, as far as I can tell. The cashier got the coins once the Super said they passed the assay inspection. I believe the procedures for how the coins got from the striking press to a retail client's hands was discussed in Roger Burdette's FMTM. It may have also been covered in a thread here or ATS.
Again...it's not like the coins were PROHIBITED from release OR exchange. There was never any official "On your mark...Get set....GO !!" type of countdown.
BTW, the government (and Tripp) got the 1st strikings of 1933's wrong as RWB disclosed a letter from the coiner that they got struck on March 2nd 1933 and not March 15th.
I think it just shows that Mint employees were on OK legal ground to make coin-for-coin exchanges for friends, family, or business contacts...as they had done in the past. I found it very interesting that Tripp didn't know about the letter since an exchange was certainly how these coins got out of the Philly Mint.
We're fighting Nazis in 1944 and the Treasury Dept. and Secret Service are supposed to be on the lookout for sabotage....and the're out investigating coins !!
What kind of smoking gun do you think might be there ?
To me this case is pretty simple: there was no THEFT because there was no gold shortfall. This means that an exchange took place which was possibly/probably LEGAL and even if after the FDR "deadline" of April 6, 1933....there was a no harm, no foul policy in place with respect to exchanges of coin-for-coin (the Froman Letter). That's why the government lawyers kept yapping stolen stolen stolen....if the coins were NOT stolen, they have to defend and prove an "illegal" exchange took place that harmed no one and with NO EXPLICIT ORDERS (even the FDR edict had wiggle room) to not allow them, it was certainly possible.
Again....if these took place in 1937 (or earlier)....you're talking about coins valued at about $75 each, maybe $125 tops. The real explosion took place in the 1940's.
I believe if the coins never appreciated and they were worth face value that the original investigation never happens because the perception of political opponents of FDR making a "killing" isn't there. If they traded hands at $20 each or therabouts, nobody cares.
But at $1,000 a coin and on sale at Stack's, a ritzy dealer ? The Feds suddenly cared.
FWIW, I spent a lot of time reading through the Denver Mint correspondence in the 1921-1924 era while doing research for my book on the Cents of 1922, and there were numerous brief notes from the Mint's Washington office to the effect of: "OK to release (lot number or lot of date such-and-such or lot whatever) Standard Silver Dollars." They had literally been holding that lot aside while sample coins from that production lot were being tested by the Mint Lab in D.C. They did it for all gold an silver production lots.
.
Only 1, CH ? I thought it was 4 or 5 but I admittedly haven't studied this 1933 situation as much.
That total jibes with the estimated pop census I have seen. Again....I read a few places that there were 4-5 that were written in the official Philly Mint ledgers (I might even have a copy somewhere, not sure). But the notion that 40 of them are legal because they can't tell which is the legal one and which are the "illegal" 39 (or 35 or whatever) is somewhat comical.
Not legal advice! If you should happen to stumble upon a 1933 DE in your attic or basement, best to consult an attorney!
I would consult with a keenly interested buyer who I know has beaucoup bucks and has the ability to keep his or her mouth shut. The potential buyer of my astonishing 1933 DE find could be an attorney, of course.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
I was remembering the one piece cited in the Tripp book, but this article says that at the Langbord trial it was stated that there were four such exchanges, so I stand corrected. That said, there are a lot more known than 4.
https://coinweek.com/coin-rarities-related-topics-the-ten-leading-topics-of-2010/
The ANA Museum has one. I have handled it. Curiously, the 1933 $10's were struck from reverse dies made from a new reverse hub that is distinct in its appearance from the 1932's and earlier. The Curator who showed it to me while I was working at the ANA told me an interesting story about the piece.
After the new ANA Headquarters opened in 1967 it took a while before the ANA Museum opened down in the basement. Vertical display cases were mounted on the walls, and for the inaugural exhibit the Curator decided to put up a type set of U.S. coins showing obverse and reverses side by side. It so happened that for the $10 Indian With Motto the ANA only owned two coins, a common date and the 1933. Because the 1933 was rather valuable then as now, the Curator did not want to tempt thieves by displaying the 1933 with the date showing, so he used that coin as the reverse of the type, thus hiding the date.
The opening of the Museum was timed to coincide with a meeting of the ANA Board of Governors in Colorado Springs. A reception was held, a ribbon was cut and the Governors mingled with the guests viewing the exhibit. Suddenly Governor John Pittman, who owned a 1933 $10, recognized the date of the coin from the reverse hub and started bellowing something to the effect of "WHAT'S THIS 1933 DOING ON DISPLAY! IT NEEDS TO BE IN THE SAFETY DEPOSIT BOX WITH THE OTHER RARITIES." The next day the Curator moved the coin to the bank, and the spot sat empty until some collector felt sorry for the ANA and donated a common date to show the reverse of the type.
Receipt for 1933 Eagle exists but none for 1933 DE. Why is that? Could the reason for that be that not a single 1933 DE was available to buy or trade for at the cashier window?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Let’s leave it to Rick on Pawn Stars to provide the definitive Say in this matter! 😄
Because the 1933 $10's were struck earlier in the year than the $20's.
Numismatic Pop Quiz: Why were there no 1933-dated $2-1/2 and/or $5 gold pieces struck?
Do you save all your receipts? 🤔
It's a small miracle that any receipts for any of these transactions exist.
The existence of a receipt is proof of a transaction, but the absence of a receipt does not necessarily prove anything.
Mostly true. But the government has a tendency to keep all receipts... for centuries.
>
Only one 1933 Eagle obtained at the cashier window has a receipt associated with it? Where are the rest of the receipts for the 1933 Eagles?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Based on some posts in this thread, it sounds like there were receipts for 4 examples, not 1. Presumably, other receipts were either lost, destroyed or never created.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The last $2-1/2 and $5 pieces were struck in 1929. Production of these was discontinued after 1929.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
But why weren’t Saints also discontinued after 1929 and why were $10 pieces produced in 1932 and 1933 but not $2.50 and $5 pieces?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The FED wanted us off gold , completely after the crash. Then some corrupt bankers and politicians forced the last hold outs into succumbing in the legislative and executive branches. The treasury's hands have always been tied. They just produced the stuff until they were given the directive to melt it. Government waste like the '64-D Peace dollars, continues today. They should have just laid those workers all off.
That's how I read it.
Does anyone have an image of any one of the receipts that were issued and managed to survive getting lost or being destroyed?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Yes, but why were those two denominations officially discontinued?
Good question....I wonder if $10 Eagles were given out in the previous years at Philly. 1932 and 1931 Saints were sent by mail-order, not sure about in-person at Philly.
I have to check the striking/release date for the 1933 $10 Eagle vs. the $20 Double Eagle. Maybe the former had more time to be claimed. Remember, things were CHAOTIC with the new FDR Administration coming in March....the new EO's and regulations....confusion about the gold standard, gold coins, the price of gold, who could hold/buy/maintain gold, etc.
I think I do, I'll try and find it. If I forget, ping me.
Lot of work to strike the smaller denomination coins and they were used mostly as gifts at year-end (Christmas) and for spending. The government knew the propensity to spend the smaller coins was much higher than for the $10 and $20 coins.
With regard to the Double Eagles, they were needed as backing for Gold Certificates....and they were used to settle international trade in bags of 250 ($5,000) each.
Here's an article from The New York Times in 1931 which notes that our friends overseas, in a settlment for gold, specifically requested DEs for their citizens (the central banks didn't care if it was coins, bars, or whatever):
Duplicate post
Follow me on MyCollect!
I see that this thread has gone back on topic, but I have to respond to this nonsense, as I'm the only person who can give a definitive response.
When I bid on this coin in auction, it was made very clear to me that this is the one and only 1933 DE that the government will EVER allow to be legalized if they can do anything about it. And this is the only reason why I was willing to bid so much for the coin. If there were 10+ 1933 DE's that were legal to own, the finest known would not be worth nearly as much as this Farouk 1933 DE. At least I would never have paid this much for it.
So the answer is a definitive NO. I would not be ok with the government legalizing all 10 other 1933 DE's and then trading the finest known for my Farouk specimen. It would be extremely dumb of anyone to be ok with a deal like this. It's exactly like trading a unicorn for the prettiest goat in the herd. Another thing to note is that the Farouk specimen has a lot of history attached to it. It's not just 1 of 10 random Longboard coins. Even if people don't think it deserves a MS 65 grade by PCGS/NGC/CAC, it doesn't matter because it's the only one legal to own with a super fascinating history behind its existence. Grades don't matter on unique coins. So trading a unique coin for a non-unique one that has a slightly higher grade makes no sense whatsoever.
Follow me on MyCollect!
There's also zero incentive for the government to do this and undermine their whole stance that all 1933 DE's (except Farouk specimen) are illegal to own. It's not like they need the money when they have a money printer!
Follow me on MyCollect!
Thank you, @EliteCollection.
Not that I think there’s any chance it would change your mind, but I believe the theoretical proposal was to make one additional 1933 Saint legal to own, not all 10. See the proposal copied below. That aside, it’s extremely easy to understand both the literal and historical value of your coin, compared to any and all of the other survivors.
“I think the government should back off a bit from their "never" position and let loose of the only circulated 1933 DE they have in their possession. It's graded as NGC About Uncirculated and most probably was I. Switt's pocket piece, the '33 DE piece that he would show off to good friends and customers who visited his shop.
Of course, if that were to happen it would only be a matter of time before the gov would be looking at a lawsuit filed by the owner of the ex Farouk piece. Instead of a lawsuit, however, if it was up to me as an authorized government representative, I would offer the ex Farouk piece owner this deal, a trade:
Give up the ex Farouk piece in exchange for the finest known 1933 DE, an NGC 65 that was part of the Langbord holdings.
The owner of the ex Farouk piece would get the finest known 1933 DE and someone else would be able to acquire the worst known 1933 DE, the personal pocket piece of I. Switt.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld
I like your logical, rational thinking on this hypothetical swap.
But consider that Treasury has spent over 75 years and vast resources in being totally irrational and fixated on the 1933 DE history.
(a victimless ‘crime’ in which several 1933 DE escaped their possession via Treasury employees doing gold for gold swaps),
There is zero chance that ‘logic’ ‘rational’ and ‘thinking’ will overcome Treasury’s entrenched bureaucratic obstinacy.
30+ years coin shop experience (ret.) Coins, bullion, currency, scrap & interesting folks. Loved every minute!
Thank you. But I just want to be sure you saw that the theoretical swap I quoted was dreamed up by @mr1931s, not me. And that for a number of reasons, I don’t think it has merit.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@MFeld
Mark, no worries - i never meant to suggest that you originated this thread.
My broader point is that the Treasury has needlessly spent enormous amounts of time, money and manpower on 1933 DE for generations.
And after they confiscated the Langford coins a few years ago, at the ANA convention they displayed their ten trophies of feckless federal futility as if they were the spoils of a righteous war.
30+ years coin shop experience (ret.) Coins, bullion, currency, scrap & interesting folks. Loved every minute!