Anyone have the full skinny on Sheldon's alleged thefts??

ANACONDA

In the "For those of you who worship Walter Breen...." thread someone referenced Sheldon's alleged thefts.

I'm somewhat familiar with the story but have also heard (read?) that tweren't necessarily so.

Anyone have the full skinny on that one?

adrian

gemtone65

Was Sheldon's thefts from ANA or ANS? In any event, I hadn't heard that there was any doubt about his culpability. As I recall, he switched coins while allegedly doing research, substituting his own inferior pieces for those in the collection. It was some time before the switch was noticed and he was identified as the perpetrater. I can't recall whether he actually served any time in jail. Perhaps others can fill in the blanks or correct any misstatements I may have made.

ClarkOfKent

There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of info out there. Check out this page (at the bottom of the page):An Updated Report on Early U.S. Cents Previously Stolen from the ANS

keets

..........anybody ever hear of the term "muckraker" or are we just heading into another stir the pot weekend searching for some truth?

al h.

truthteller

Sorry to say, when you strip away the title of 'Dr' or 'Sir', many respected people are just two bit crooks.

TRUTH

Trime

Can you fill me in on the issues related to the Naftzger suit. Was he compelled to returned coins that had been stolen by Sheldon and sold to him?

Conder101

The Clapp collection was "donated" to the ANS in the early 1940's. However it was not actually turned over to them until I believe, 1949. During this period Dr Sheldon was researching the large cents and writing his book. Dr Sheldon knew Clapp and it possible that he may have acquired cents from the Clapp collection during this period by trade. After the ANS received the cents they were not cataloged until 1952 basicly by copying Clapp's inventory, (It should be mentioned here that many of the pedigrees on Clapps coins went back to early twentyith century auction sales where the coins were NOT plated and are identifiable by the written descriptions from the sales only.) and were not photographed until 1953. For the photograph all of the cents were laid out on a table, the photographer climbed a stepladder and shot a picture of the whole table from several feet away. (It seems to me that with this type of cataloging the ANS could never truly say exactly what was in the collection. It may have changed between the time it was donated and when they received it and the inventory and photographs probably could not be matched to each other or to the coins.)

Yes during the fifties Dr Sheldon did study the large cent collections on several occasions and he could have switched coins. Did the ANS know that something might have been amiss? Yes. On several occasions during the 50's, 60's, and 70's researchers questioned the ANS as to why some of the cents from the Clapp collection did not match the descriptions in Clapps notes. They were always assured that yes the ANS knew about it and it was being taken care of. In 1990 when Del Bland was examining the collection for his Condition Census notes he noted 129 coins that didn't match Clapp's notes. Del informed the ANS. By now everyone who may have been directly involved and might have known exactly what was going on was dead. The news of the missing cents was published in the hobby press, whether by Del or the ANS I do not know but I think it was by Del. Now it couldn't be hushed up. The missing coins was blamed on Sheldon so the ANS went after Ted Naftzger who had purchased the Sheldon collection.

Only some of the "stolen" coins were in the Sheldon collection. The ANS made an open offer to swap the coin in the ANS collection to any person who returned one of the Clapp coins. Several people took them up on this. RBS returned three coins, one of which was actually a lower grade than the replacement coin! The ANS forced RSB to pay them several thousand dollars in order to return the Clapp coin.

Once the case against Naftzger went to court the defense pointed out the shoddy inventorying, the doubts about what had been there in the first place and the lackof action on ANS's part even after it had been brought to their attention. They also brought up the possibility that some of the clapp coins may have been deassesed and that Sheldon could have gotten them that way. So they went to the ANS records and of all of the acquisition/deacqusition books the only one that is missing is the deacqusistion book for the period when Sheldon was researching at ANS.

Somehow after all that the jury still managed to find against Naftzger. Then comes the judgement!

They court ordered Naftzger to turn over to the ANS the "ANS" coins that were still in his possession (Which weren't too many as he had sold the Sheldon collection several years earlier.) plus monies not equal to the value of the other coins when they were stolen, or when they were purchased by Naftzger, or when they were sold by Naftzeger (In order to wipe out any profit he might have made from the sale of the "stolen" coins.) but their current value from several years AFTER he sold them. In addition he was required to turn over to the ANS some twenty to thiry high grade early date cents out of his own collection which were NOT part of the missing 129 Clapp coins. Naftzger has appealed the ruling and I do not know the present status of the case.

After this ruling the ANS has continued to chase the "Clapp coins" Several years ago I was the publisher of a national census of major early date large cent collections. The ANS approached me and another early date census publisher requesting copies of our publications and the names and addresses of the collectors listed so they go after others whomight have "Clapp coins". We both refused, and shortly thereafter I stopped publishing the census. I felt had to protect the collectors who were selflessly providing me with their information from a snooping outsider. Yes, some might have had a Clapp coin or two but I couldn't allow the possibility of the harrassment of the rest.

gemtone65

Condor: great story. Any idea why ANS was so late getting around to focusing on the missing coins? Perhaps the "responsible" members were embarassed that the theft took place on their watch.

By the way, you seem to give more credance to the possibility that Sheldon was not responsible for the thefts than I would, based on the information of the case.

In any event, the disgrace of Breeen and Sheldon is a blight on the hobby. I hope Bowers doesn't have any skeletons in his closet.

BillJones

A disgrace upon Sheldon?

How about the ANS? They have acted like the Broadway bullies though out this affair. Their conduct makes me proud that I AM NOT A MEMBER of their organization!

Conder101

<< <i>By the way, you seem to give more credance to the possibility that Sheldon was not responsible for the thefts than I would, based on the information of the case. >>



Innocent until proven guilty, and since it appears that the ANS can't prove that they ever actually had the coins in the first place, plus Sheldon had the opportunity to get the coins before the ANS ever had them, plus the oddity of the missing deacquisition book seem to me to add up to a reasonable doubt. After all the evidence against him seems to be that he looked at the ANS cents during the 1950's and that later it was found that there were cents in his collection that matched the Clapp descriptions.

Trime

Conder,
Thanks so much for the expansion of the story. Is this really still under appeal or was that an old quotation?
Was it implied that TN was aware of the nature of the Sheldon illegal acquisitions?

Conder101

Current quote, I don't know the status at this time. I also have no idea about what Ted knew or didn't know when he bought the collection.

I am surprised no one else seems to be shocked that the court would order him to turn over to the ANS coins that weren't part of the "missing" 129 coins.

wingedliberty

Adrian:
Conder101 is 100% correct. If you wish to get it in print, if you are an ANA member, contact the
ANA librarian, she has been very helpful to me with my research in the past. It will only cost you a
few dollars in postage and copies. The entire thing is well documented in the Numismatist and other
publications in the ANA library.


Best regards,
Brian.

nwcs

I would be shocked by the order to turn over coins that were never in dispute. And I'm sure that part will be overturned in an appeal. And if not, the easier way to dispose is to give them to someone else that cannot be reached.

Trime

Conder,
I am neither a lawyer nor informed of the details of the suit you described but if TN knew about stolen merchandise then he may be subject to penaly from the civil courts. In effect it is a judgement against him. If he didn't know then he was an unwiting victim of someone elses actions.

Mark

Conder: I am a "Johnny-come-lately" member of the ANS and so had not heard the other side of the case. Fascinating reading. But, check out my comment to BillJones.

BillJones: Keep in mind that either a jury heard the entire case and then ruled in favor of the ANS. I know that we don't always have to agree with a jury's decision (eg, the OJ case springs to mind) but in general I think most of us will agree that juries typically return reasonable decisions. In this case there must have been enough information presented on the behalf of the ANS's side of the situation so that the jury decided in favor of the ANS. Of course, this might be an "OJ case" but I think those cases tend to be rare. So, possibly aside from the issue of why the ANS did not explore what was going on in the 60s and 70s, I don't see where the ANS was doing anything other than pursuing its rights and self interest. But obviously reasonable and bright people (this means you and me!) can disagree and some can say the ANS was a bully. I think this disagreement is not a big deal and so all I say is: Shrug.

Mark