<< <i>I still wonder though why no receipts can be found for any trades involving 1933 Double Eagles yet there are receipts for some of the 1933 Eagles. >>
<< <i>Does anyone know what evidence the government provided to establish that the release of the coins by cashier was unauthorized? It would seem that government would have the burden of showing that:
A. There was a directive from either the Dept of the Treasury or the Director of the Mint not to release the coins and that it was issued prior to the coins being delivered to the cashier; or
B. There was an established written regulation or policy governing the release of coins by the cashier that required approval from the Director of the Mint or the Treasury to release of newly minted coins, and no such approval was issued (or no written approval can be found perhaps permitting an inference that none was given); or
C. The standard operating procedures in A or B involved oral directives or approvals and there was some credible evidence that either an oral directive prohibiting release was issued, or oral approval to release the coins was required and none was given. This would seem to require the testimony of someone who was in a position of authority at the Mint or Treasury at the time or some written memo evidencing that in the case of A above an oral directive was issued, or in the case of B above, no oral approval was given.
Otherwise, a jury can only speculate as to what occurred and whether the cashier was acting within standard operating procedures in releasing the coins.
CG >>
A number of coins was removed for assay purposes. Wouldn't release be pending the results of the assays?
I've been doing some reading in my book,ILLEGAL TENDER-GOLD,GREED,and the MYSTERY of the LOST 1933 DOUBLE EAGLE.Here's David Tripp's short story of what was going on at the mint with eagles and double eagles during March,1933.These are excerpts from his book:
"On March 1,1933,Hibberd Ott, the assistant cashier of the Mint,recorded an over-the-counter transaction.One of the few visitors to the Mint came to the Cashier's window,to exchange and old ten-dollar gold piece or ten dollar gold certificate for one of the freshly made 1933 ten-dollar gold pieces,or "new coin," as it was termed then.
"The 1933 eagles were struck and delivered to the Cashier between January 19 and March 3,1933-all before FDR's March 6 proclamation beginning the recall of privately held gold.One hundred had already been sent to the Treasurer for sale to the public and so,in the eyes of the government,had been issued for circulation."
"Historically,trading an old,worn coin for a bright new coin had been an integral part of a Mint tour,and whoever was manning the Cashier's window would have thought nothing of it.Over the years, whether it was a humble cent or an elegant double eagle,the clerk who made the transfer would have duly noted it in the Cashier's Daily Statement.The brilliant 1933 eagle,now exchanged,was but one coin from a total mintage of more than three hundred thousand.The striking of its big sister,the double eagle,would not begin until the next day.The clerk could not have known that this eagle would be the last United States gold "new coin" ever to pass through his grille. Assistant Cashier Hibberd Ott dutifully recorded the transaction,made by Mr. J. Pomerantz of Philadelphia,in his daily records."
Tripp says that double eagle striking was to commence on March 2.On page 59 he shows an image of The United States Mint's Coiner's Record,indicating that the first 1933 double eagles were in fact struck (but not delivered) on March 2,1933. Tripp goes on,
"The physical process of making money was precise.Every separate act was carefully scripted,each dependent on the other yet independently executed.All along the way differences were carefully noted in the Coiner's record."
By the end of business on Wednesday,March 8, approximately twenty-two thousand 1933 double eagles had been made-not yet enough to pass on to the cashier.Coiner William Bartholomew recalled in 1945 that "it was always customary to deliver gold in $500,000 or $1,000,000"(groups of twenty-five or fifty thousand coins).And so,ever patient,the bags once again went into the Coiner's Vault."
Finally,a week later, on March 15,1933,the magic number was fulfilled.With no fanfare,with nothing more than clerks scribbling away in ledgers and on receipts,the 1933 Gold Delivery Number 7 was made from the Coiner to the Cashier: twenty-five thousand shimmering new 1933 double eagles."
"To ensure that coins reaching the public were of the value and purity guaranteed by the government,a two-tier system of testing existed.The first,and arguably the more important,was the Mint's own "special assay." The second,more formal and to some degree more ceremonial,was the annual meeting of the Assay Commission."
"As required by the Mint's Rules and Regulations,Cashier Harry Powell selected one of the sacks of the newly received double eagles at random,slit the cord,opened the bag,and took out two coins.He placed them in a heavy,linen-backed envelope and sealed it with wax.These he "forwarded to the Director of the Mint by registered mail for assay by the Assayer of the Bureau of the Mint." This was an essential part of the internal fail-safe system to make sure that no errors,honest or otherwise,had been made in Philadelphia."
"These two specials,as they were known,would be tested by the chief assayer,Timothy J. Quirk,in Washington,D.C.,to ensure that the gold was of the stipulated weight and purity.If they failed,the entire group from which they had been removed-all twenty-five thousand pieces-would be sent back to the superintendent of the Melting and Refining Department and destroyed. Until they were tested and approved,the just-struck coins were in limbo.Under the Mint's regulations,the coinage from which the samples were taken could not be released into circulation until the specials passed their test."
"The process that had begun on February 18 with the first rolling and cutting of the double eagle blanks was concluded on May 19,1933,when the last group of finished product was delivered to the Cashier."
"The first six special coins,representing the first three deliveries in March,were tested together by Assayer Quirk,and his report confirming they met the stipulated requirements was signed and forwarded from Washington to Philadelphia on March 29,1933.The day that report was physically received in Philadelphia was the first day that in normal circumstances the law would have permitted the issuance of 1933 double eagles."
"But did it ever happen?"
Roosevelt's recall of gold had begun three weeks earlier,on March 6. Tens of thousands of Americans,responding heroically to their president's repeated urging and his view that "hoarding [had] become an exceedingly unfashionable pastime," had already turned in nearly a half-billion dollars in gold to the government. In such a charged,warlike atmosphere,in which gold returns and patriotism were whispered in the same breath,the cashier would hardly have considered blithely paying out one of the new coins.Within a week of Quirk's report on the specials being submitted,on April 5,FDR issued his formal edict commanding the return of all privately held gold.Whatever crack in the door might have existed for the issuance of a 1933 double eagle was slammed shut.And even if the Cashier had thought to do so,the Cashier's Daily Records indicate that he never did."
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
According to David Tripp,the release of 1933 double eagles,under normal circumstances, could begin once the letter from Assayer Quirk was received by the Mint in Philadelphia.
March 29,1933.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
So why would the Mint strike gold coins in May if they were being recalled starting March 6th? Were common date DEs considered to be collectibles back then? Was there a date after which the Mint cashier could not exchange new gold coin for old gold coin?
Human nature being what it is, most gold was likely not turned in but hoarded.
This move on gold was widely expected even a year before. Remember that when the Lindbergh baby was kidnapped in March 1932, the ransom was paid in gold certificates because they were expected to be out of circulation shortly.
So why would the Mint strike gold coins in May if they were being recalled starting March 6th? Were common date DEs considered to be collectibles back then? Was there a date after which the Mint cashier could not exchange new gold coin for old gold coin?
Good questions.
I think it's entirely possible that some freshly minted 1933 double eagles were removed from their bags and replaced with coins from another year.The activity was not logged.The coins were spirited out of the mint and sold to individuals who,shall we say,had a keen interest in the 1933 coins and were willing to pay a premium for them.
Even though the Mint had precise procedures in place it doesn't mean that an individual or individuals working inside the mint wouldn't be clever enough to exploit the system,without being detected,for their own personal gain.
Really,is a mint employee who has access to bags of freshly minted double eagles that were not supposed to be released until a later time,if ever,going to record in the daily record something like,"two 1933 coins removed from bag 3,shipment 7.Replaced with two coins dated 1928" ?
Technically,no gold has been stolen.It's merely been replaced.That's justification to some for an act like this.
Roosevelt's proclamation on March 6 might have fallen on deaf ears to the mint employee who was offered an opportunity to make a quick buck.
The two specials taken from each bag for assay in Washington,D.C. were not the only coins removed:
"From this same bag,an additional twenty five coins(one piece for every thousand in the delivery) were taken at random.They were to be placed in the Pyx Box for the official testing the Annual Assay Commission-an honored trial,the roots of which extend back to medieval England,and which was part of the law establishing the Mint in 1792-which would meet almost a year later.Two keys were required to open the massive padlocks that sealed the three-foot-square rosewood Pyx Box;one was held by the Cashier, the other by the Assayer." ILLEGAL TENDER,p. 62.
It's mid-March 1933.How easy would it be for a mint worker "on the take" to replace a freshly minted 1933 coin with a shiny 1928 during this process?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Great thread. For anyone who hasn't taken the time to read Tripp's book "Illegal Tender", I highly it. Even if the book were on a non-numismatic subject, you'd find it a great read. From my standpoint this is the most fascinating numismatic book I've ever read. The research is extremely thorough and, even if one is able to poke some holes in to the facts that are presented, this will give you a very solid understanding of why the government has been so keenly interested in these coins since 1937... (read the book to figure that part out).
Many of my coin dealer friends think they know this story (as I did) without reading the book but that's not the case. For example, Tripp lays out a vey solid argument for why the Fenton coin (now legal) is likely from the Farouk Collection. I always assumed this was a flimsy fall-back position for the gov't. Not so.
With all of that said, I too wish there was a way to approach the government and negotiate a settlement for legalization of the Langbord coins. The numismatic community at large would benefit and perhaps the government could realize part of the profits, as they did in the first case. However, based on what I read in "Illegal Tender" it doesn't sound like anyone will ever convince the Tresury dept that these were legitimately exchanged over the counter. Tripp has that argument pretty well locked up.
(are there any persons who truly do not support private property rights, including their own property?). only those that are too niave to believe that it could happen to them. frankly, i dont agree with the government being "allowed" to confiscate any property from any US citizen without proof of wrongdoing... and an 80 year old crime that was never even proven to have occured, is just not enough proof of wrongdoing in my opinion.
regardless of how many posts I have, I don't consider myself an "expert" at anything
<< <i>(are there any persons who truly do not support private property rights, including their own property?). only those that are too niave to believe that it could happen to them. frankly, i dont agree with the government being "allowed" to confiscate any property from any US citizen without proof of wrongdoing... and an 80 year old crime that was never even proven to have occured, is just not enough proof of wrongdoing in my opinion. >>
Assuming that the coins were never officially approved for release, is it stealing to exchange one approved coin for one unapproved coin?
No matter how I look at this, and having read all the arguments (pro and con), I still do not believe the government has proven their case - there is simply no evidence to prove that they were not obtained legally through exchange. Cheers, RickO
<< <i>No matter how I look at this, and having read all the arguments (pro and con), I still do not believe the government has proven their case - there is simply no evidence to prove that they were not obtained legally through exchange. Cheers, RickO >>
Agreed, but the simple point is were they ever officially approved as being available for exchange? If they were then the Government is SOL, if not then case closed.
Approved or not, if the Government can't provide a document that says distribution was restricted or forbidden, then again they are SOL.
Would the Mint be acting illegally to continue the practice of exchanging new gold for old after Roosevelt's Proclamation 2039 and 2040?
2039 was for declaring a 3-day bank holiday and 2040 on March 9 a continuance; "...of all the terms and provisions of said Proclamation of March 6, 1933, and the regulations and orders issued thereunder are hereby continued in full force and effect until further proclamation by the President.
The double eagles should not have been available for distribution until March 29,so any trade with the mint,before that time, for 1933 double eagles would definitely be illegal.
If any 1933 double eagles were distributed to the public by the Cashier after March 29,it seems that the Cashier would note the distribution in the daily record.No record of Mint distribution of 1933 double eagles exists.That tells me that there was no distribution of 1933 double eagles between March 29,1933 and April 5,1933 because they were not available for the Cashier to distribute or noone showed up at the window to do a trade of old gold for new.
After the April 5,1933 Executive Order 6102 would the government want the Mint resuming to business as usual,ie trading new gold for old? After April 5,would the Mint have the new gold 1933 double eagles in the Cashier's drawer,available for exchange?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
The executive order itself authorized ownership of collectible coins in the aggregate of $200.
I read this from the Order:
(b) Gold coin and gold certificates in an amount not exceeding in the aggregate $100 belonging to any one person; and gold coins having a recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coins.
It's no wonder to me why a rich collector or dealer would go to lengths to be "anonymous" at the Mint Cashier window in 1933.
"Hey kid,I give you a silver dollar if you take this gold coin in there and get me a new one for it."
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>No matter how I look at this, and having read all the arguments (pro and con), I still do not believe the government has proven their case - there is simply no evidence to prove that they were not obtained legally through exchange. Cheers, RickO >>
Agreed, but the simple point is were they ever officially approved as being available for exchange? If they were then the Government is SOL, if not then case closed.
Approved or not, if the Government can't provide a document that says distribution was restricted or forbidden, then again they are SOL. >>
I will throw this out there! What makes the government immune from employee mistakes? I and many others have had to eat it so to speak if an employee makes a mistake!
I say the Langford's are being screwed and why is our government allowed to be like Stalin! OBAMA! That's WHY!...Obamamite view:.. What a Sin that the Langford's or anybody else can have that much more than those who voted for the destruction of America as we know it. I'm sure I'm breaking the rules with this post but I couldn't keep biting my lip!
<< <i>No matter how I look at this, and having read all the arguments (pro and con), I still do not believe the government has proven their case - there is simply no evidence to prove that they were not obtained legally through exchange. Cheers, RickO >>
Agreed, but the simple point is were they ever officially approved as being available for exchange? If they were then the Government is SOL, if not then case closed.
Approved or not, if the Government can't provide a document that says distribution was restricted or forbidden, then again they are SOL. >>
I will throw this out there! What makes the government immune from employee mistakes? I and many others have had to eat it so to speak if an employee makes a mistake!
I say the Langford's are being screwed and why is our government allowed to be like Stalin! OBAMA! That's WHY!...Obamamite view:.. What a Sin that the Langford's or anybody else can have that much more than those who voted for the destruction of America as we know it. I'm sure I'm breaking the rules with this post but I couldn't keep biting my lip! >>
Langbord case has been going on since 2004. Government has been after 1933 double eagles since at least 1944.
On February 25,1944, Mr. Fahim from the Egyptian Royal Legation was in Washington,D.C. In his pocket was a 1933 double eagle that his monarch had recently purchased for $1,575 from dealer B. Max Mehl:
"Mr. Fahim had come to the Treasury to fill out paperwork.Under the Gold Reserve Act of 1934,gold coins could be exported from the United States only if they met certain criteria defined as having had "a recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coin" prior to FDR's April 5,1933 Executive Order.The form that had to be completed was Treasury Gold License Number 11-better known as "Form TGL-11." ILLEGAL TENDER,p.78-79
Question: Prior to April 5,1933 would a 1933 double eagle have been recognized to a collector of rare and unusual coin as having special value?
Tripp goes on:
"Initially a simple,two-page affair that had been created from the afterbirth of the 1934 Act,the form had been updated,improved,and complicated in 1937 at the behest of (Mint Director) Nellie Tayloe Ross. At first the form required no more than the name and address of the applicant,a basic description of the coin-including the denomination,date,and country of issue,from where it was to be exported,and to whom it was to be sent.The revision insisted on greater detail,including the coin's condition,its mint mark,its design,and a "representation that the particular coin is to be exported for a historical,scientific or numismatic purpose."
"The responsibility for authorizing the export rested solely with the Bureau of the Mint,which originally specified that a duplicate of the form be filed with the director of the Mint. Mrs. Ross,exposing herself as a political appointee and not a career civil servant,was ever mindful of excessive paperwork and eliminated this last requirement.The legation would have been well aware of all the nuances,as their monarch had been collecting coins for years,and all major American dealers conducted their business directly through Farouk's representatives in Washington,D.C."
"Two weeks later,on March 11,1944,Mr. Fahim returned to the Mint offices,where the 1933 double eagle was returned to him along with the newly issued License TGL-11-170."
Ah yes,the nuances.
There you have it.A major mistake by the top Mint employee;allowing the 1944 export of a gold coin that should have been melted down in 1937 with the other 445,500,minus the two set aside for the people of the United States Collection.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>but the simple point is were they ever officially approved as being available for exchange? >>
Good point Bajjerfan, however, I would say it differently....Could they have been available through normal product movement in the mint prior to the 'Stop' order being given?? They could well have move some to the release facility prior to the word being passed down. And, if Switt's exchange was made during this brief period - voila'...legal coins. Cheers, RickO
I would like to see another proclamation.Not sure who could,would,or should make it but President Obama comes to mind.The proclamation is a deal that would call for the temporary forfeiture to the government of any other 1933 double eagles that might be in existence by such and such a date.
All 1933 double eagle coins that surface,to include the Langbord coins,would be specially inscribed with identifying marks, to include a mark identifying the owner,that would be virtually impossible to counterfeit.After inscription,the coins would all be encapsulated by a third party grading service of the government's choice and returned to the owners.If the coin is ever sold by the owner or heirs to another,the government shall share to the extent of 50% of the selling price.The sale of the 1933 coin would need to be fully documented.
Any subsequent-to-initial-sale owner would not be subject to having to give the government half of any sale proceeds occurring at a later time.
Any 1933 double eagles that might surface after the such and such date above would be deemed illegal to possess and subject to seizure without compensation.Said coins would be destroyed and the gold they contained would go into Ft. Knox.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
I stand corrected. Joan had $200 worth. That would probably give cause for the government to own 5 in the end. And five go to the people for playing a great game of hide and seek. It's a fascinating story and would make for a Hollywood Movie.
"Many persons look at the Langbord case as one where the subject matter of the dispute is merely "who gets the 10 double eagles", the government or the Langbord family". The case has more significance than that. The case raises issues that place before the court of appeal questions regarding the nature of and the extent of the power of the government to take property; and how the provisions of CAFRA [the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act] are to be applied.
To those persons who support a society that recognizes and promotes "private property rights" and who value their own "property", the ultimate outcome of the Langbord case should be of interest. To those persons who are not supporters of "private property rights" the outcome of the Langbord case should also be of interest (are there any persons who truly do not support private property rights, including their own property?)."
I look at this in different terms, i.e. has the government been consistent in its actions and rulings, or does it act politically. IMO they have been very consistent since the first 1933 Saint was found outside the Mint's possession. The only exception would be with regard to the King Farouk specimen, which the government admitted they made a mistake in granting an export license for the coin.
To me the government has been the consistent baseball umpire, players don't care if the strike zone is a little different from one umpire to the next, they care that the individual umpire is consistent. In this case the umpire has been very very consistent, and just remember "there's no crying in baseball," so there shouldn't be much here either.
"It's far easier to fight for principles, than to live up to them." Adlai Stevenson
Assuming no more 33's surface,any estimates on what each of the Langbord coins would bring at auction in today's market?
I've heard estimates that the ten pieces would fetch upwards of $80M but I think that is hopelessly unrealistic.
Eleven pieces total 1933 doubles is about the same number as known to exist 1894-S dimes.The '94-S dime is a $1M coin so I wouldn't think that a 1933 double eagle would bring much more than about $1M give or take a few hundred thou.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>Assuming no more 33's surface,any estimates on what each of the Langbord coins would bring at auction in today's market?
I've heard estimates that the ten pieces would fetch upwards of $80M but I think that is hopelessly unrealistic.
Eleven pieces total 1933 doubles is about the same number as known to exist 1894-S dimes.The '94-S dime is a $1M coin so I wouldn't think that a 1933 double eagle would bring much more than about $1M give or take a few hundred thou. >>
The $80 million number came from the government, which multiplied the $7.5 million that the Fenton coin sold for, times ten.
No one thinks they would bring $80 million.
There is an offer on the table for $20 million for the ten coins. I think they would go for $25 million to $30 million.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
The ten sold as a lot could fetch as much as $25M I suppose.I was trying to find some good images of the Langbord group last evening but was unsuccessful in that endeavor.
The pick of the litter might bring $5M from deep pockets on a good day? That's just a wag. My understanding is that the Langbord coins are not all that nice overall, most of them showing evidence of having been carelessly handed after leaving the Mint.
Is one of the coins at least as nice as the ex Farouk specimen? I did see image of all ten of them lined up next to each other but the image was too small to see imperfections on the individual coins.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>The ten sold as a lot could fetch as much as $25M I suppose.I was trying to find some good images of the Langbord group last evening but was unsuccessful in that endeavor.
The pick of the litter might bring $5M from deep pockets on a good day? That's just a wag. My understanding is that the Langbord coins are not all that nice overall, most of them showing evidence of having been carelessly handed after leaving the Mint.
Is one of the coins at least as nice as the ex Farouk specimen? I did see image of all ten of them lined up next to each other but the image was too small to see imperfections on the individual coins. >>
I'm mostly glad that the government has so much money to fight the people with...I think one would have to sell for about a trillion dollars to put a dent in the deficit.
I like to think this case is mostly about principle;what is right and what is wrong.Or do we just forget about deciding right from wrong because the original players,excepting 10 pieces of gold standing in mute testimony of wrongdoing,are long gone?
The preponderance of evidence showed that wrongdoing was done.The government met the challenge and proved their case.Government lawyers deserve kudos for their work in this case which is mostly about principle,in my opinion.
A few million in gold coin numismatic value is nothing compared to a trillion dollars but what price justice?
David Tripp testified that there was a window of opportunity from March 15 to April 5,1933 for one to obtain 1933 double eagle legally.There is no record,despite the dutiful government accounting that was the order of the day,that shows that anyone took advantage of this window of opportunity to acquire 1933 double eagle legally.
Is that not sufficient proof,in and of itself,that any 1933 double eagle,excepting the two that reside in the National Collection,left the Mint illegally and are rightfully U.S. Government property regardless of who is found to be in possession of them?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>There is no record,despite the dutiful government accounting that was the order of the day,that shows that anyone took advantage of this window of opportunity to acquire 1933 double eagle legally >>
The fact that there is no such record is not evidence that anything illegal happened. I'd be willing to bet it wouldn't take anyone more than a few minutes at most to find something in your possesion for which no records exist proving that you acquired the item legally. Does that mean you acquired the item illegally? According to your argument, it does.
<< <i>There is no record,despite the dutiful government accounting that was the order of the day,that shows that anyone took advantage of this window of opportunity to acquire 1933 double eagle legally >>
The fact that there is no such record is not evidence that anything illegal happened. I'd be willing to bet it wouldn't take anyone more than a few minutes at most to find something in your possesion for which no records exist proving that you acquired the item legally. Does that mean you acquired the item illegally? According to your argument, it does. >>
Plus when the 33's were melted, all were accounted for, indicating that the survivors must have have been replaced with earlier dates -- thus not stolen.
Frank Provasek - PCGS Authorized Dealer, Life Member ANA, Member TNA. www.frankcoins.com
I can see 1933 Mint Cashiers as being dutiful recorders of transactions."I got the paper,I got the pen,I write it down.That's what Uncle Sam wants me to do."
"Over the years,whether it was a humble cent or an elegant double eagle,the clerk who made the transfer would have duly noted it in the Cashier's Daily Statement." ILLEGAL TENDER,p.56
The fact that there is no such record is not evidence that anything illegal happened. I'd be willing to bet it wouldn't take anyone more than a few minutes at most to find something in your possesion for which no records exist proving that you acquired the item legally. Does that mean you acquired the item illegally? According to your argument, it does.
The dutifully kept Coiner's Record that doesn't show any trades for 1933 double eagles is a key piece of the preponderance of evidence. Perhaps I misspoke a bit when I used the line,"in and of itself."
No entries to be found in the Coiner's Record for new coin transfers of double eagle to any member of the public,to include I. Switt,doesn't cause your eyebrows to raise?
Plus when the 33's were melted, all were accounted for, indicating that the survivors must have have been replaced with earlier dates -- thus not stolen.
When the '33's were melted they could have had among them coins from other years that were swapped for the 11 known survivors. Technically,the gold was accounted for but the coins all bearing the date 1933 to the extent of 445,448 in number were not.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>no entries to be found in the Coiner's Record for new coin transfers of double eagle to any member of the public,to include I. Switt,doesn't cause your eyebrows to raise? >>
Unless there is proof that every transaction ever made was recorded, lack of a record is not proof no transaction was made.
Tripp found information in the daily record about a tranfer of a 1933 eagle to J. Pomeranz on March 1,1933.mrpotatohead,you have aroused my interest in finding out how many recordings were made of eagle coin transfers from Jan 18 through March 1,1933.
According to Tripp there were 100 1933 eagles available for transfer beginning Jan 18. I would expect that there were not many transfers of the new eagle coins since the country was in the grips of the Great Depression.Paying the rent and feeding the family would have been a much higher priority than accumulating gold or getting a shiny new gold coin for most people.Ten dollars was several days wages for those lucky enough to have a job in 1933.
Thirty to forty 1933 eagles are known to exist so comparing the daily record to these numbers should provide some insight as to how dutiful the Cashier's were in making the record.If we can see "dutiful" there can we assume that there would be "dutiful" about the double eagles?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Before confiscating a person's property, I would hope more than just assumptions were considered by the government. Am I hoping for too much?
I looked in the index of the book under "eagles" and while doing so,rediscovered chapter 12 entitled,The Red-Headed Philadelphia Sucker and the Deacon.This story fascinates me but I don't want to spoil it for you all who intend to buy the book or read it anew.
Fair warning:Turn your eyes away from what follows if you want to read it for yourself after you get your new copy of ILLEGAL TENDER:
"Between October 16,1931,when one hundred 1931 double eagles had been issued to the Treasury,and February 23,1933,only eighteen had been purchased by collectors,dealers,and museums around the country,and all their names were recorded.The American Numismatic Society sent in its twenty dollars and got a new 1931 double eagle on December 11,1931;the Connecticut State Library bought two on February 1,1932;and the last one had been sent to Clarence N. Reynolds of Morgantown,West Virginia,on February 23,1933,nine days before FDR's inauguration..."
"The records on the 1932s told a similarly direct tale.One hundred were sent to the Treasury and thirty-two were sold.The American Numismatic Society and Connecticut State Library were again purchasers,as was C.F. Childs,a well-known collector in Chicago;and Clarence Reynolds purchased the last example in February,1933,just before the fulminating over gold in Washington began...
"...the '31 and '32 double eagles had been rare,hardly if ever seen in the marketplace until 1936.Then like worms after a quick downpour, they started popping up everywhere,and Israel Switt had been the source."
"Max Berenstein had got the best deal of all,perhaps because of his offer in the February,1936,Numismatist to buy the two dates.Switt had shambled into the classy shop on Madison Avenue in May,1936 and sold a half-dozen of each date.Max had paid Izzy forty dollars a coin-dirt cheap,only barely more than the most common,beat-up double eagles on the market and only six dollars above their gold value."
"Berenstein hadn't been able to contain his good fortune and had crowed to Jack Rubin,a gregarious runner for the Forty-seventh Street jewelry and gold trade,that Israel Switt was " a 'red-headed Philadelphia sucker'" for having sold him the coins for "their bullion instead of their numismatic value." Rubin,a known receiver of stolen goods,with a long,thin face and a Jimmy Cagney (part of word not allowed to post here),stirred things up by passing the comment on to Switt."
"The cantankerous "sucker" Switt had learned his lesson and when it came to business,seldom made the same mistake twice. He upped the price on the '31s and '32s from then on. Rubin himself bought a few,Brooklyn dealer Joseph Barnet some,Reed others,and Maccallister remembered buying one each "from Switt for $75 apiece" in July,1937,selling them on to Max Mehl for a hundred dollars each."
"These dates had been legally issued by the government and were not subject to confiscation,but they did form a golden link among the 1933 double eagles,George McCann,and Israel Switt,who once again met with Strang and his partner."
<< <i>. . . ",but they did form a golden link among the 1933 double eagles,George McCann,and Israel Switt,who once again met with Strang and his partner."
My opinion,FWIW, is that the government will keep the coins because they have long been considered contraband.According to CAFRA,no person can have a property interest in contraband. I doubt they will ever be melted or sold by the government,however.
Possibly a deal could be made where the government keeps five coins and the Langbords keep five but given the history of what has gone down the past 80 years with these coins,it's not likely a deal like this will happen in my view.
If a deal is made,I will be wrong for the first time in my life...
sort of wrong...not likely doesn't mean impossible...
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>Tripp found information in the daily record about a tranfer of a 1933 eagle to J. Pomeranz on March 1,1933.mrpotatohead,you have aroused my interest in finding out how many recordings were made of eagle coin transfers from Jan 18 through March 1,1933.
According to Tripp there were 100 1933 eagles available for transfer beginning Jan 18. I would expect that there were not many transfers of the new eagle coins since the country was in the grips of the Great Depression.Paying the rent and feeding the family would have been a much higher priority than accumulating gold or getting a shiny new gold coin for most people.Ten dollars was several days wages for those lucky enough to have a job in 1933.
Thirty to forty 1933 eagles are known to exist so comparing the daily record to these numbers should provide some insight as to how dutiful the Cashier's were in making the record.If we can see "dutiful" there can we assume that there would be "dutiful" about the double eagles? >>
Just to clarify this point for others, as you explained in the excerpt the Switt connection handled other late-date but legal Philly gold, including 1933 Eagles, that never made it into the sales record book.
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.
Comments
<< <i>I still wonder though why no receipts can be found for any trades involving 1933 Double Eagles yet there are receipts for some of the 1933 Eagles. >>
So what do the receipts say/show?
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
<< <i>Does anyone know what evidence the government provided to establish that the release of the coins by cashier was unauthorized? It would seem that government would have the burden of showing that:
A. There was a directive from either the Dept of the Treasury or the Director of the Mint not to release the coins and that it was issued prior to the coins being delivered to the cashier; or
B. There was an established written regulation or policy governing the release of coins by the cashier that required approval from the Director of the Mint or the Treasury to release of newly minted coins, and no such approval was issued (or no written approval can be found perhaps permitting an inference that none was given); or
C. The standard operating procedures in A or B involved oral directives or approvals and there was some credible evidence that either an oral directive prohibiting release was issued, or oral approval to release the coins was required and none was given. This would seem to require the testimony of someone who was in a position of authority at the Mint or Treasury at the time or some written memo evidencing that in the case of A above an oral directive was issued, or in the case of B above, no oral approval was given.
Otherwise, a jury can only speculate as to what occurred and whether the cashier was acting within standard operating procedures in releasing the coins.
CG >>
A number of coins was removed for assay purposes. Wouldn't release be pending the results of the assays?
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
<< <i>A number of coins was removed for assay purposes. Wouldn't release be pending the results of the assays? >>
I have no idea. What was the practice? When were the assay results available?
CG
"On March 1,1933,Hibberd Ott, the assistant cashier of the Mint,recorded an over-the-counter transaction.One of the few visitors to the Mint came to the Cashier's window,to exchange and old ten-dollar gold piece or ten dollar gold certificate for one of the freshly made 1933 ten-dollar gold pieces,or "new coin," as it was termed then.
"The 1933 eagles were struck and delivered to the Cashier between January 19 and March 3,1933-all before FDR's March 6 proclamation beginning the recall of privately held gold.One hundred had already been sent to the Treasurer for sale to the public and so,in the eyes of the government,had been issued for circulation."
"Historically,trading an old,worn coin for a bright new coin had been an integral part of a Mint tour,and whoever was manning the Cashier's window would have thought nothing of it.Over the years, whether it was a humble cent or an elegant double eagle,the clerk who made the transfer would have duly noted it in the Cashier's Daily Statement.The brilliant 1933 eagle,now exchanged,was but one coin from a total mintage of more than three hundred thousand.The striking of its big sister,the double eagle,would not begin until the next day.The clerk could not have known that this eagle would be the last United States gold "new coin" ever to pass through his grille. Assistant Cashier Hibberd Ott dutifully recorded the transaction,made by Mr. J. Pomerantz of Philadelphia,in his daily records."
Tripp says that double eagle striking was to commence on March 2.On page 59 he shows an image of The United States Mint's Coiner's Record,indicating that the first 1933 double eagles were in fact struck (but not delivered) on March 2,1933. Tripp goes on,
"The physical process of making money was precise.Every separate act was carefully scripted,each dependent on the other yet independently executed.All along the way differences were carefully noted in the Coiner's record."
By the end of business on Wednesday,March 8, approximately twenty-two thousand 1933 double eagles had been made-not yet enough to pass on to the cashier.Coiner William Bartholomew recalled in 1945 that "it was always customary to deliver gold in $500,000 or $1,000,000"(groups of twenty-five or fifty thousand coins).And so,ever patient,the bags once again went into the Coiner's Vault."
Finally,a week later, on March 15,1933,the magic number was fulfilled.With no fanfare,with nothing more than clerks scribbling away in ledgers and on receipts,the 1933 Gold Delivery Number 7 was made from the Coiner to the Cashier: twenty-five thousand shimmering new 1933 double eagles."
"To ensure that coins reaching the public were of the value and purity guaranteed by the government,a two-tier system of testing existed.The first,and arguably the more important,was the Mint's own "special assay." The second,more formal and to some degree more ceremonial,was the annual meeting of the Assay Commission."
"As required by the Mint's Rules and Regulations,Cashier Harry Powell selected one of the sacks of the newly received double eagles at random,slit the cord,opened the bag,and took out two coins.He placed them in a heavy,linen-backed envelope and sealed it with wax.These he "forwarded to the Director of the Mint by registered mail for assay by the Assayer of the Bureau of the Mint." This was an essential part of the internal fail-safe system to make sure that no errors,honest or otherwise,had been made in Philadelphia."
"These two specials,as they were known,would be tested by the chief assayer,Timothy J. Quirk,in Washington,D.C.,to ensure that the gold was of the stipulated weight and purity.If they failed,the entire group from which they had been removed-all twenty-five thousand pieces-would be sent back to the superintendent of the Melting and Refining Department and destroyed. Until they were tested and approved,the just-struck coins were in limbo.Under the Mint's regulations,the coinage from which the samples were taken could not be released into circulation until the specials passed their test."
"The process that had begun on February 18 with the first rolling and cutting of the double eagle blanks was concluded on May 19,1933,when the last group of finished product was delivered to the Cashier."
"The first six special coins,representing the first three deliveries in March,were tested together by Assayer Quirk,and his report confirming they met the stipulated requirements was signed and forwarded from Washington to Philadelphia on March 29,1933.The day that report was physically received in Philadelphia was the first day that in normal circumstances the law would have permitted the issuance of 1933 double eagles."
"But did it ever happen?"
Roosevelt's recall of gold had begun three weeks earlier,on March 6. Tens of thousands of Americans,responding heroically to their president's repeated urging and his view that "hoarding [had] become an exceedingly unfashionable pastime," had already turned in nearly a half-billion dollars in gold to the government. In such a charged,warlike atmosphere,in which gold returns and patriotism were whispered in the same breath,the cashier would hardly have considered blithely paying out one of the new coins.Within a week of Quirk's report on the specials being submitted,on April 5,FDR issued his formal edict commanding the return of all privately held gold.Whatever crack in the door might have existed for the issuance of a 1933 double eagle was slammed shut.And even if the Cashier had thought to do so,the Cashier's Daily Records indicate that he never did."
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
March 29,1933.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
This move on gold was widely expected even a year before. Remember that when
the Lindbergh baby was kidnapped in March 1932, the ransom was paid in gold certificates
because they were expected to be out of circulation shortly.
Good questions.
I think it's entirely possible that some freshly minted 1933 double eagles were removed from their bags and replaced with coins from another year.The activity was not logged.The coins were spirited out of the mint and sold to individuals who,shall we say,had a keen interest in the 1933 coins and were willing to pay a premium for them.
Even though the Mint had precise procedures in place it doesn't mean that an individual or individuals working inside the mint wouldn't be clever enough to exploit the system,without being detected,for their own personal gain.
Really,is a mint employee who has access to bags of freshly minted double eagles that were not supposed to be released until a later time,if ever,going to record in the daily record something like,"two 1933 coins removed from bag 3,shipment 7.Replaced with two coins dated 1928" ?
Technically,no gold has been stolen.It's merely been replaced.That's justification to some for an act like this.
Roosevelt's proclamation on March 6 might have fallen on deaf ears to the mint employee who was offered an opportunity to make a quick buck.
The two specials taken from each bag for assay in Washington,D.C. were not the only coins removed:
"From this same bag,an additional twenty five coins(one piece for every thousand in the delivery) were taken at random.They were to be placed in the Pyx Box for the official testing the Annual Assay Commission-an honored trial,the roots of which extend back to medieval England,and which was part of the law establishing the Mint in 1792-which would meet almost a year later.Two keys were required to open the massive padlocks that sealed the three-foot-square rosewood Pyx Box;one was held by the Cashier, the other by the Assayer."
ILLEGAL TENDER,p. 62.
It's mid-March 1933.How easy would it be for a mint worker "on the take" to replace a freshly minted 1933 coin with a shiny 1928 during this process?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Many of my coin dealer friends think they know this story (as I did) without reading the book but that's not the case. For example, Tripp lays out a vey solid argument for why the Fenton coin (now legal) is likely from the Farouk Collection. I always assumed this was a flimsy fall-back position for the gov't. Not so.
With all of that said, I too wish there was a way to approach the government and negotiate a settlement for legalization of the Langbord coins. The numismatic community at large would benefit and perhaps the government could realize part of the profits, as they did in the first case. However, based on what I read in "Illegal Tender" it doesn't sound like anyone will ever convince the Tresury dept that these were legitimately exchanged over the counter. Tripp has that argument pretty well locked up.
Link to the Illegal Tender on Amazon.com
<< <i>(are there any persons who truly do not support private property rights, including their own property?). only those that are too niave to believe that it could happen to them. frankly, i dont agree with the government being "allowed" to confiscate any property from any US citizen without proof of wrongdoing... and an 80 year old crime that was never even proven to have occured, is just not enough proof of wrongdoing in my opinion. >>
Assuming that the coins were never officially approved for release, is it stealing to exchange one approved coin for one unapproved coin?
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
<< <i>No matter how I look at this, and having read all the arguments (pro and con), I still do not believe the government has proven their case - there is simply no evidence to prove that they were not obtained legally through exchange. Cheers, RickO >>
Agreed, but the simple point is were they ever officially approved as being available for exchange? If they were then the Government is SOL, if not then case closed.
Approved or not, if the Government can't provide a document that says distribution was restricted or forbidden, then again they are SOL.
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
2039 was for declaring a 3-day bank holiday and 2040 on March 9 a continuance; "...of all the terms and provisions of said Proclamation of March 6, 1933, and the regulations and orders issued thereunder are hereby continued in full force and effect until further proclamation by the President.
The double eagles should not have been available for distribution until March 29,so any trade with the mint,before that time, for 1933 double eagles would definitely be illegal.
If any 1933 double eagles were distributed to the public by the Cashier after March 29,it seems that the Cashier would note the distribution in the daily record.No record of Mint distribution of 1933 double eagles exists.That tells me that there was no distribution of 1933 double eagles between March 29,1933 and April 5,1933 because they were not available for the Cashier to distribute or noone showed up at the window to do a trade of old gold for new.
After the April 5,1933 Executive Order 6102 would the government want the Mint resuming to business as usual,ie trading new gold for old?
After April 5,would the Mint have the new gold 1933 double eagles in the Cashier's drawer,available for exchange?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
I read this from the Order:
(b) Gold coin and gold certificates in an amount not exceeding in the aggregate $100 belonging to any one person; and gold coins having a recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coins.
It's no wonder to me why a rich collector or dealer would go to lengths to be "anonymous" at the Mint Cashier window in 1933.
"Hey kid,I give you a silver dollar if you take this gold coin in there and get me a new one for it."
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>
<< <i>No matter how I look at this, and having read all the arguments (pro and con), I still do not believe the government has proven their case - there is simply no evidence to prove that they were not obtained legally through exchange. Cheers, RickO >>
Agreed, but the simple point is were they ever officially approved as being available for exchange? If they were then the Government is SOL, if not then case closed.
Approved or not, if the Government can't provide a document that says distribution was restricted or forbidden, then again they are SOL. >>
I will throw this out there! What makes the government immune from employee mistakes? I and many others have had to eat it so to speak if an employee makes a mistake!
I say the Langford's are being screwed and why is our government allowed to be like Stalin! OBAMA! That's WHY!...Obamamite view:.. What a Sin that the Langford's or anybody else can have that much more than those who voted for the destruction of America as we know it. I'm sure I'm breaking the rules with this post but I couldn't keep biting my lip!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>No matter how I look at this, and having read all the arguments (pro and con), I still do not believe the government has proven their case - there is simply no evidence to prove that they were not obtained legally through exchange. Cheers, RickO >>
Agreed, but the simple point is were they ever officially approved as being available for exchange? If they were then the Government is SOL, if not then case closed.
Approved or not, if the Government can't provide a document that says distribution was restricted or forbidden, then again they are SOL. >>
I will throw this out there! What makes the government immune from employee mistakes? I and many others have had to eat it so to speak if an employee makes a mistake!
I say the Langford's are being screwed and why is our government allowed to be like Stalin! OBAMA! That's WHY!...Obamamite view:.. What a Sin that the Langford's or anybody else can have that much more than those who voted for the destruction of America as we know it. I'm sure I'm breaking the rules with this post but I couldn't keep biting my lip! >>
Langbord case has been going on since 2004. Government has been after 1933 double eagles since at least 1944.
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
"Mr. Fahim had come to the Treasury to fill out paperwork.Under the Gold Reserve Act of 1934,gold coins could be exported from the United States only if they met certain criteria defined as having had "a recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coin" prior to FDR's April 5,1933 Executive Order.The form that had to be completed was Treasury Gold License Number 11-better known as "Form TGL-11."
ILLEGAL TENDER,p.78-79
Question: Prior to April 5,1933 would a 1933 double eagle have been recognized to a collector of rare and unusual coin as having special value?
Tripp goes on:
"Initially a simple,two-page affair that had been created from the afterbirth of the 1934 Act,the form had been updated,improved,and complicated in 1937 at the behest of (Mint Director) Nellie Tayloe Ross. At first the form required no more than the name and address of the applicant,a basic description of the coin-including the denomination,date,and country of issue,from where it was to be exported,and to whom it was to be sent.The revision insisted on greater detail,including the coin's condition,its mint mark,its design,and a "representation that the particular coin is to be exported for a historical,scientific or numismatic purpose."
"The responsibility for authorizing the export rested solely with the Bureau of the Mint,which originally specified that a duplicate of the form be filed with the director of the Mint. Mrs. Ross,exposing herself as a political appointee and not a career civil servant,was ever mindful of excessive paperwork and eliminated this last requirement.The legation would have been well aware of all the nuances,as their monarch had been collecting coins for years,and all major American dealers conducted their business directly through Farouk's representatives in Washington,D.C."
"Two weeks later,on March 11,1944,Mr. Fahim returned to the Mint offices,where the 1933 double eagle was returned to him along with the newly issued License TGL-11-170."
Ah yes,the nuances.
There you have it.A major mistake by the top Mint employee;allowing the 1944 export of a gold coin that should have been melted down in 1937 with the other 445,500,minus the two set aside for the people of the United States Collection.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
obtained.
I still think there is a hoard of 1993 Double Eagles somewhere, waiting to come out of the shadows.
<< <i>but the simple point is were they ever officially approved as being available for exchange? >>
Good point Bajjerfan, however, I would say it differently....Could they have been available through normal product movement in the mint prior to the 'Stop' order being given?? They could well have move some to the release facility prior to the word being passed down. And, if Switt's exchange was made during this brief period - voila'...legal coins. Cheers, RickO
All 1933 double eagle coins that surface,to include the Langbord coins,would be specially inscribed with identifying marks, to include a mark identifying the owner,that would be virtually impossible to counterfeit.After inscription,the coins would all be encapsulated by a third party grading service of the government's choice and returned to the owners.If the coin is ever sold by the owner or heirs to another,the government shall share to the extent of 50% of the selling price.The sale of the 1933 coin would need to be fully documented.
Any subsequent-to-initial-sale owner would not be subject to having to give the government half of any sale proceeds occurring at a later time.
Any 1933 double eagles that might surface after the such and such date above would be deemed illegal to possess and subject to seizure without compensation.Said coins would be destroyed and the gold they contained would go into Ft. Knox.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
To those persons who support a society that recognizes and promotes "private property rights" and who value their own "property", the ultimate outcome of the Langbord case should be of interest. To those persons who are not supporters of "private property rights" the outcome of the Langbord case should also be of interest (are there any persons who truly do not support private property rights, including their own property?)."
I look at this in different terms, i.e. has the government been consistent in its actions and rulings, or does it act politically. IMO they have been very consistent since the first 1933 Saint was found outside the Mint's possession. The only exception would be with regard to the King Farouk specimen, which the government admitted they made a mistake in granting an export license for the coin.
To me the government has been the consistent baseball umpire, players don't care if the strike zone is a little different from one umpire to the next, they care that the individual umpire is consistent. In this case the umpire has been very very consistent, and just remember "there's no crying in baseball," so there shouldn't be much here either.
I've heard estimates that the ten pieces would fetch upwards of $80M but I think that is hopelessly unrealistic.
Eleven pieces total 1933 doubles is about the same number as known to exist 1894-S dimes.The '94-S dime is a $1M coin so I wouldn't think that a 1933 double eagle would bring much more than about $1M give or take a few hundred thou.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>Assuming no more 33's surface,any estimates on what each of the Langbord coins would bring at auction in today's market?
I've heard estimates that the ten pieces would fetch upwards of $80M but I think that is hopelessly unrealistic.
Eleven pieces total 1933 doubles is about the same number as known to exist 1894-S dimes.The '94-S dime is a $1M coin so I wouldn't think that a 1933 double eagle would bring much more than about $1M give or take a few hundred thou. >>
The $80 million number came from the government, which multiplied the $7.5 million that the Fenton coin sold for, times ten.
No one thinks they would bring $80 million.
There is an offer on the table for $20 million for the ten coins. I think they would go for $25 million to $30 million.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
The pick of the litter might bring $5M from deep pockets on a good day? That's just a wag. My understanding is that the Langbord coins are not all that nice overall, most of them showing evidence of having been carelessly handed after leaving the Mint.
Is one of the coins at least as nice as the ex Farouk specimen? I did see image of all ten of them lined up next to each other but the image was too small to see imperfections on the individual coins.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>The ten sold as a lot could fetch as much as $25M I suppose.I was trying to find some good images of the Langbord group last evening but was unsuccessful in that endeavor.
The pick of the litter might bring $5M from deep pockets on a good day? That's just a wag. My understanding is that the Langbord coins are not all that nice overall, most of them showing evidence of having been carelessly handed after leaving the Mint.
Is one of the coins at least as nice as the ex Farouk specimen? I did see image of all ten of them lined up next to each other but the image was too small to see imperfections on the individual coins. >>
Are there images on the NGC site?
MY COINS FOR SALE AT https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/other/bajjerfans-coins-sale/3876
I like to think this case is mostly about principle;what is right and what is wrong.Or do we just forget about deciding right from wrong because the original players,excepting 10 pieces of gold standing in mute testimony of wrongdoing,are long gone?
The preponderance of evidence showed that wrongdoing was done.The government met the challenge and proved their case.Government lawyers deserve kudos for their work in this case which is mostly about principle,in my opinion.
A few million in gold coin numismatic value is nothing compared to a trillion dollars but what price justice?
David Tripp testified that there was a window of opportunity from March 15 to April 5,1933 for one to obtain 1933 double eagle legally.There is no record,despite the dutiful government accounting that was the order of the day,that shows that anyone took advantage of this window of opportunity to acquire 1933 double eagle legally.
Is that not sufficient proof,in and of itself,that any 1933 double eagle,excepting the two that reside in the National Collection,left the Mint illegally and are rightfully U.S. Government property regardless of who is found to be in possession of them?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Rotflmao!
<< <i>There is no record,despite the dutiful government accounting that was the order of the day,that shows that anyone took advantage of this window of opportunity to acquire 1933 double eagle legally >>
The fact that there is no such record is not evidence that anything illegal happened. I'd be willing to bet it wouldn't take anyone more than a few minutes at most to find something in your possesion for which no records exist proving that you acquired the item legally. Does that mean you acquired the item illegally? According to your argument, it does.
<< <i>
<< <i>There is no record,despite the dutiful government accounting that was the order of the day,that shows that anyone took advantage of this window of opportunity to acquire 1933 double eagle legally >>
The fact that there is no such record is not evidence that anything illegal happened. I'd be willing to bet it wouldn't take anyone more than a few minutes at most to find something in your possesion for which no records exist proving that you acquired the item legally. Does that mean you acquired the item illegally? According to your argument, it does. >>
Plus when the 33's were melted, all were accounted for, indicating that the survivors must have have been replaced with earlier dates -- thus not stolen.
"Over the years,whether it was a humble cent or an elegant double eagle,the clerk who made the transfer would have duly noted it in the Cashier's Daily Statement." ILLEGAL TENDER,p.56
The fact that there is no such record is not evidence that anything illegal happened. I'd be willing to bet it wouldn't take anyone more than a few minutes at most to find something in your possesion for which no records exist proving that you acquired the item legally. Does that mean you acquired the item illegally? According to your argument, it does.
The dutifully kept Coiner's Record that doesn't show any trades for 1933 double eagles is a key piece of the preponderance of evidence.
Perhaps I misspoke a bit when I used the line,"in and of itself."
No entries to be found in the Coiner's Record for new coin transfers of double eagle to any member of the public,to include I. Switt,doesn't cause your eyebrows to raise?
Plus when the 33's were melted, all were accounted for, indicating that the survivors must have have been replaced with earlier dates -- thus not stolen.
When the '33's were melted they could have had among them coins from other years that were swapped for the 11 known survivors.
Technically,the gold was accounted for but the coins all bearing the date 1933 to the extent of 445,448 in number were not.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
" ...the coins all bearing the date 1933 to the extent of 445,498in number were not."
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>no entries to be found in the Coiner's Record for new coin transfers of double eagle to any member of the public,to include I. Switt,doesn't cause your eyebrows to raise? >>
Unless there is proof that every transaction ever made was recorded, lack of a record is not proof no transaction was made.
According to Tripp there were 100 1933 eagles available for transfer beginning Jan 18. I would expect that there were not many transfers of the new eagle coins since the country was in the grips of the Great Depression.Paying the rent and feeding the family would have been a much higher priority than accumulating gold or getting a shiny new gold coin for most people.Ten dollars was several days wages for those lucky enough to have a job in 1933.
Thirty to forty 1933 eagles are known to exist so comparing the daily record to these numbers should provide some insight as to how dutiful the Cashier's were in making the record.If we can see "dutiful" there can we assume that there would be "dutiful" about the double eagles?
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
I looked in the index of the book under "eagles" and while doing so,rediscovered chapter 12 entitled,The Red-Headed Philadelphia Sucker and the Deacon.This story fascinates me but I don't want to spoil it for you all who intend to buy the book or read it anew.
Fair warning:Turn your eyes away from what follows if you want to read it for yourself after you get your new copy of ILLEGAL TENDER:
"Between October 16,1931,when one hundred 1931 double eagles had been issued to the Treasury,and February 23,1933,only eighteen had been purchased by collectors,dealers,and museums around the country,and all their names were recorded.The American Numismatic Society sent in its twenty dollars and got a new 1931 double eagle on December 11,1931;the Connecticut State Library bought two on February 1,1932;and the last one had been sent to Clarence N. Reynolds of Morgantown,West Virginia,on February 23,1933,nine days before FDR's inauguration..."
"The records on the 1932s told a similarly direct tale.One hundred were sent to the Treasury and thirty-two were sold.The American Numismatic Society and Connecticut State Library were again purchasers,as was C.F. Childs,a well-known collector in Chicago;and Clarence Reynolds purchased the last example in February,1933,just before the fulminating over gold in Washington began...
"...the '31 and '32 double eagles had been rare,hardly if ever seen in the marketplace until 1936.Then like worms after a quick downpour,
they started popping up everywhere,and Israel Switt had been the source."
"Max Berenstein had got the best deal of all,perhaps because of his offer in the February,1936,Numismatist to buy the two dates.Switt had shambled into the classy shop on Madison Avenue in May,1936 and sold a half-dozen of each date.Max had paid Izzy forty dollars a coin-dirt cheap,only barely more than the most common,beat-up double eagles on the market and only six dollars above their gold value."
"Berenstein hadn't been able to contain his good fortune and had crowed to Jack Rubin,a gregarious runner for the Forty-seventh Street jewelry and gold trade,that Israel Switt was " a 'red-headed Philadelphia sucker'" for having sold him the coins for "their bullion instead of their numismatic value." Rubin,a known receiver of stolen goods,with a long,thin face and a Jimmy Cagney (part of word not allowed to post here),stirred things up by passing the comment on to Switt."
"The cantankerous "sucker" Switt had learned his lesson and when it came to business,seldom made the same mistake twice. He upped the price on the '31s and '32s from then on. Rubin himself bought a few,Brooklyn dealer Joseph Barnet some,Reed others,and Maccallister remembered buying one each "from Switt for $75 apiece" in July,1937,selling them on to Max Mehl for a hundred dollars each."
"These dates had been legally issued by the government and were not subject to confiscation,but they did form a golden link among the 1933 double eagles,George McCann,and Israel Switt,who once again met with Strang and his partner."
from ILLEGAL TENDER-GOLD,GREED,and the MYSTERY of the LOST 1933 DOUBLE EAGLE,Copyright ©2004 David Enders Tripp.
Like Mr. Lawrence says,buy this book.It's a definite "must have" for the serious numismatist's library.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>. . . ",but they did form a golden link among the 1933 double eagles,George McCann,and Israel Switt,who once again met with Strang and his partner."
from ILLEGAL TENDER-GOLD,GREED,and the MYSTERY of the LOST 1933 DOUBLE EAGLE,Copyright ©2004 David Enders Tripp. >>
Nothing in the paragraph quoted (which I omitted for brevity's sake) supports the italicized statement above.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
Hoard the keys.
Possibly a deal could be made where the government keeps five coins and the Langbords keep five but given the history of what has gone down the past 80 years with these coins,it's not likely a deal like this will happen in my view.
If a deal is made,I will be wrong for the first time in my life...
sort of wrong...not likely doesn't mean impossible...
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
<< <i>Tripp found information in the daily record about a tranfer of a 1933 eagle to J. Pomeranz on March 1,1933.mrpotatohead,you have aroused my interest in finding out how many recordings were made of eagle coin transfers from Jan 18 through March 1,1933.
According to Tripp there were 100 1933 eagles available for transfer beginning Jan 18. I would expect that there were not many transfers of the new eagle coins since the country was in the grips of the Great Depression.Paying the rent and feeding the family would have been a much higher priority than accumulating gold or getting a shiny new gold coin for most people.Ten dollars was several days wages for those lucky enough to have a job in 1933.
Thirty to forty 1933 eagles are known to exist so comparing the daily record to these numbers should provide some insight as to how dutiful the Cashier's were in making the record.If we can see "dutiful" there can we assume that there would be "dutiful" about the double eagles? >>
Just to clarify this point for others, as you explained in the excerpt the Switt connection handled other late-date but legal Philly gold, including 1933 Eagles, that never made it into the sales record book.