You are poignant, indeed. People's responses are just too funny. I didn't want to unfairly boost Ricko's thread It's got a little bit of something for everyone .
Well worth watching. Answers some of the questions raised here.
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.
<< <i>It's important to remember that the contemporary reports say that there were six bags stolen from the SF mint. The reports about the Saddleridge Hoard say that there were six cans found. >>
The Mint website says that Dimmick stole 6 bags; the PCGS story says that the Saddleridge coins were in 8 cans, not 6. You do not know the dates of the coins stolen from the Mint You do not know the dates and number of the $20s found in the Saddleridge hoard The Mint says that Dimmick stole $20s; the Saddleridge coins includes $5's and $10s You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints You do not know what the Mint procedures were for bagging, or not bagging, old coins received in exchange for new coins You do not know who found the Saddleridge coins You do not know where the property is You do not know if there is any family connection between Dimmick and the people who found the coins You do not know if there is any connection between Dimmick and the property where the coins were found.
Aside from that you haven't jumped to any conclusions. >>
Well said.
And I had another thought. The Treasury Department operated a Subtreasury within the San Francisco Mint building. I would speculate that this was because it had wonderful security; what better place to run a Subtreasury?
I would further speculate that the Subtreasury had its own vault or vaults. I would further speculate that older, circulated coins coming into the Subtreasury in the normal course of business would be stored in its own vault(s), and not comingled with the coins in the Mint's vaults. If this speculation is correct, then the S.F. Mint would not have had any older, circulated coins in its control, just solid bags of new coins all of the same date and mint, plus the leftovers of any production runs that were insufficient to make up solid bag at that moment.
Dimmick worked for the Mint, and the contemporary accounts state that he stole from the Mint. The 1901 Mint Report, published late in that year, mentions that the San Francisco Mint was short $30,000 in its accounts, not the U.S. Subtreasury in San Francisco.
There is no logical reason to connect the Saddleridge Hoard with the Dimmick theft.
TD >>
Upon further research, I have determined that in 1901 the U.S. Subtreasury in San Francisco was located in its own building at 608 Commercial St., and no longer sharing space with the U.S. Mint at 88 Fifth St. as it had when that building was first built in the early 1870's. Therefore, there is no reason for older, circulated coins to have been in the Mint building in 1901.
The Subtreasurer did move into the Mint for a while after the Subtreasury Building was damaged or destroyed by the earthquake of 1906, but he was not there in 1901. Thanks to Roger Burdette for information on this period.
TD
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.
I wrote this in another thread (not having read through this one) and I see no reason to believe that this hoard was nothing other than some hard-working man's savings plan. The dates of the coins show a steady stashing of coins over a long time, not from a one-time event such as a heist or embezzlement. The San Francisco mint/assay office was set up to process all the newly-found gold in the region, so wouldn't it make sense that someone went there regularly to process his nuggets or dust and was paid out in freshly-minted coin?
.....GOD
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
I'd like to see a video of the conservation process that these coins went through from being buried in rust soil for decades to being in great pristine and lustrous condition afterwards, truly amazing clean up work.
BST references: jdimmick;Gerard;wondercoin;claychaser;agentjim007;CCC2010;guitarwes;TAMU15;Zubie;mariner67;segoja;Smittys;kaz;CARDSANDCOINS;FadeToBlack; jrt103;tizofthe;bronze6827;mkman;Scootersdad;AllCoinsRule;coindeuce;dmarks;piecesofme; and many more
Now that we have dispelled the Dimmick Theft connection, did anybody go by Kagins table and look at the coins?
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.
You can certainly tell that David's enthusiasm and excitement were 100% genuine. "It's... every coin collector and coin dealer's dream."
No doubt about that!
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
<< <i>Now that we have dispelled the Dimmick Theft connection, did anybody go by Kagins table and look at the coins? >>
Yup. The no motto was ridiculous. They all were blazing fresh to me. >>
pics? >>
I did not take any. I'm sure somebody will post some though, saw a bunch being taken. >>
It appears that some of the better examples are now available on CoinFacts, to wit:
I noted that these Saddle Ridge gold coins tend to have a different yellow hue than other gold coins of similar grades in CoinFacts; different lighting perhaps?
Anyway, most of the Saddle Ridge pieces would seem to be identifiable by looking for the similar matching hues in the TrueView images.
===============================================
===============================================
Anyone wishing to continue to 'hunt-and-poke" can proceed backs wards from PCGS Certification Number, 28824720. Have Fun!
Thanks for posting those images. Will follow the image extravaganza on the other thread.
TD
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.
[CalGold] >> You do not know ... >> You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints >> ...
[TD] > Well said. >... > the S.F. Mint would not have had any older, circulated coins in its control, just solid bags of new coins all of the same date and mint, > plus the leftovers of any production runs that were insufficient to make up solid bag at that moment.
I think most of us would agree with this. Such "leftovers" would explain the range of dates, and the pristine condition for the S mint coins.
So I wouldn't dismiss the Dimmick theft connection so easily.
The "leftovers" does not explain the nice CC mint examples. If there are just a handful of CCs, they might not need an explanation. But as CalGold said, we don't know all the components of the inventory of the SF Mint. We might speculate that the SF Mint could have some of the output of the CC mint for them to independently assay? Or would the main US mint do this sort of thing?
<< <i>[CalGold] >> You do not know ... >> You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints >> ...
[TD] > Well said. >... > the S.F. Mint would not have had any older, circulated coins in its control, just solid bags of new coins all of the same date and mint, > plus the leftovers of any production runs that were insufficient to make up solid bag at that moment.
I think most of us would agree with this. Such "leftovers" would explain the range of dates, and the pristine condition for the S mint coins.
So I wouldn't dismiss the Dimmick theft connection so easily.
The "leftovers" does not explain the nice CC mint examples. If there are just a handful of CCs, they might not need an explanation. But as CalGold said, we don't know all the components of the inventory of the SF Mint. We might speculate that the SF Mint could have some of the output of the CC mint for them to independently assay? Or would the main US mint do this sort of thing? >>
The term "Leftovers" as I used it refers to the coins in a production run over and above the multiple of coins in a bag. In mass producing coins you make up odd-numbered batches of planchets and run them through coin presses. Subtract the odd number of rejects, and you end up with another odd number of acceptable coins. Only then do you start to make up bags of specific counts.
Look at the mintage figures for silver S-mint coins in this era. The numbers for silver dollars are almost always multiples of 1,000; the numbers of half dollars are almost always multiples of 2,000; the numbers of quarter dollars are almost always multiples of 4,000. That is because they made up $1,000 bags of coins and delivered those to the Cashier while holding back the odd numbers of leftovers until they made more coins. The leftovers on hand at the end of one calendar year would simply be included in the first bags of the next calendar year.
There is no reason to have older coins from any year other than the previous one. The idea of a Mint bag of numerous earlier years is just silly.
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.
I agree with your explanation of how leftovers originate.
Say at the end of 1880 the mint has 25 $20s which didn't fit into the last bag, so they are leftover. In 1881 they start making 1881 dated $20s. What happens to the 25 1880s at this point? Do they stay in an inventory of leftovers? Or do they go into one of the first bags in 1881?
It doesn't seem silly to me to only ship 1881 dated coins in 1881.
However, one might think they would distribute the leftovers at some point also. But "we don't know" if they had some procedures which might seem silly to us at this point. Such as possibly putting the leftovers for each year into partial bags and tossing them into a corner of the vault, or some special location where they accumulated.
Having the full list of $20s by date, mintmark and grade would help in evaluating theories on their origin. So far the best I've seen is: "About a third of the coins, including this 1866 piece, were found to be in pristine condition when cleaned. Most were minted in S.F., and many were never circulated." from the caption of photo#8 in http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Gold-Country-couple-discovers-10-million-in-5266314.php#photo-5937211 I think this implies about 500 Uncs. The other 900 or so might be circulated, or might have been originally Unc but are now non-pristine / damaged from the crude storage.
The main facts consistent with Dimmick theft are the total face value, proximity to SF, sizable quantity of Uncs, and no dated coins past 1901. Facts not consistent are the older dated coins, and no coins dated after 1894. Other theories could be formed to fit the date distribution, such as money laundering. I.e. swap the coin bags for paper money, deposit the paper money in a few banks, withdraw gold coins, bury them. Although getting assistance from criminals for the first step might cost a good percentage of the face value. Maybe easier to melt the stuff and sell that for step one.
<< <i>[CalGold] >> You do not know ... >> You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints >> ...
[TD] > Well said. >... > the S.F. Mint would not have had any older, circulated coins in its control, just solid bags of new coins all of the same date and mint, > plus the leftovers of any production runs that were insufficient to make up solid bag at that moment.
I think most of us would agree with this. Such "leftovers" would explain the range of dates, and the pristine condition for the S mint coins.
So I wouldn't dismiss the Dimmick theft connection so easily.
The "leftovers" does not explain the nice CC mint examples. If there are just a handful of CCs, they might not need an explanation. But as CalGold said, we don't know all the components of the inventory of the SF Mint. We might speculate that the SF Mint could have some of the output of the CC mint for them to independently assay? Or would the main US mint do this sort of thing? >>
While I am currently leaning on the dismiss Dimmick theft connection myself, I do think another viable explanation could be that the thief may have exchanged some of his gold Double Liberties for coins of other denomination and mint origin. After all the found hoard is "missing" something like 78 Double Eagles from the total stolen.
Q. David Bowers' book on silver dollars lists under the 1893-S a report from Wayne Miller of 20 BU 1893-S dollars being found in a BU bag of 1894-S dollars. The logical assumption is that the "leftovers" were just put in the first bag made up of the next year's coins.
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.
<< <i>Q. David Bowers' book on silver dollars lists under the 1893-S a report from Wayne Miller of 20 BU 1893-S dollars being found in a BU bag of 1894-S dollars. The logical assumption is that the "leftovers" were just put in the first bag made up of the next year's coins. >>
Just finding an unopened bag of 1894-S would be a treat in itself.
<< <i>Earlier I said that I thought it more likely that the hoard was buried in the 1930's than the 1890's (or 1901).
Here is a speculative sequence of events:
1840's to 1895 ... the coins are collected by an individual who has some numismatic knowledge but who is not a part of the mainstream collecting fraternity of the era. He dies about 1895 and leaves the coins to relative(s) who, not needing money, keep them largely intact but who, lacking in numismatic interest, do not expand the set.
1933 ... the coins have now been passed down to another relative who, lacking any numismatic knowledge, simply regards them as gold coins. The order to turn in gold coins is issued in 1933. The current holder of the coins decides to hide the coins rather than turn them in. At some later time the holder dies without ever telling anyone else of the coins.
2013 ... the coins are found. >>
I think somebody beat you to that notion 291fifth
<<Tuesday February 25, 2014 11:05 PM
The large can appears to be a resealable can. Not soldered or swap-top. I'm thinking maybe 1920-1935 from the condition and design. Those are tin plated steel I think and are from sometime in the first quarter of the century or so. Aluminum (not) would be C. 1950/later, steel alone would place this much earlier - all steel and I don't think we be looking at cans.
Eric>> >>
The Sherwin-Williams website mentions "tin cans" being available in 1875. One of the cans looks like a paint can. >>
<< <i>Q. David Bowers' book on silver dollars lists under the 1893-S a report from Wayne Miller of 20 BU 1893-S dollars being found in a BU bag of 1894-S dollars. The logical assumption is that the "leftovers" were just put in the first bag made up of the next year's coins. >>
Thanks for sharing that. That refutes my leftovers theory. The Dimmick match is looking much less likely to me now.
The mint could easily push "leftovers" aside and to the back in the vault to make room for new coin each year.Isn't this kind of thing more or less what happened with many silver dollars produced in the 1870's and '80's?
You gotta have some place for storing heavy, valuable leftovers.Another thing to keep in mind is that the Superintendent of the Mint could have issued instructions to workers with vault access to not disturb a relatively small amount of certain coins that have been set aside to reside in there until further notice.
What date is most represented in the hoard? Take these away from the total and what you have left are the leftover coins that were in the vault with the new ones.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
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.
<< <i>Or, the simplest answer, that the Mint quite logically got rid of its leftovers at the start of the next year, may be the correct answer. See this:
<< <i>Now that we have dispelled the Dimmick Theft connection, did anybody go by Kagins table and look at the coins? >>
I first cited Occam's. NOW....those pictures of the coins...If those GEM+++ coins didn't come right from the mint nothing did. Those are pristine, as nice as the finest Saints that were hand-picked for the Ct. Library.
Maybe YOU have dispelled but I stand by my answer, my final answer.
The "leftover inventory" theory got a boost from a retired detective with special SF Mint knowledge, who said that an inventory of old coins did exist (whether these were "leftovers" is not clear):
<< <i>U.S. Mint theft Another explanation put forth by hundreds of Internet commenters is that the cache is from a 1901 theft of 1,500 gold Double Eagle coins with a face value of $30,000 from the U.S. Mint in San Francisco. The number and face value is about the same as the Saddle Ridge Hoard, and though the mint's chief clerk, Walter Dimmick, was convicted of the crime, the booty was never recovered.
Kagin, however, said the mint explanation is unlikely because the coin dates are too spread out for a single haul like that. The coins are also too old for a 1901 heist, he said.
"It wouldn't be a mint robbery if it didn't have coins from at least the previous seven years, and the most recent coin in the hoard is from 1894," said Kagin, who in addition to being a dealer wrote the definitive "Private Gold Coins and Patterns of the United States."
Not so fast, says Dennis O'Donnell, an 86-year-old retired detective for the U.S. Mint in San Francisco who specialized in researching and solving coin thefts.
"Downstairs, we had vaults where we kept old coins that hadn't been put into circulation," he said. "Sometimes the auditors didn't see all the inventory. I wouldn't rule anything entirely out." >>
<< <i>Q. David Bowers' book on silver dollars lists under the 1893-S a report from Wayne Miller of 20 BU 1893-S dollars being found in a BU bag of 1894-S dollars. The logical assumption is that the "leftovers" were just put in the first bag made up of the next year's coins. >>
Just finding an unopened bag of 1894-S would be a treat in itself. >>
A dealer at the Greater Chicago Show this past weekend had over 100 1890 certified Morgans that he said came from a recent found bag.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>Nonsense to believe the SF vault didn't contain older mint state gold. Look at how much older gold Philadelphia possessed up to the EO in 1933.
All roads lead to Dimmick imo. >>
Just too coincidental that an anonyamous hoarder's "stash" was a few dozen shy of 1,500 coins.
But we will see -- if these really are the Dimmick coins, the government should have much more evidence than they do with the Langboard Saints (which I think should stay with the Langboards).
If the government does prove they were stolen by Dimmick, it would be nice if the couple were given a couple dozen of nice ones as a "finders fee", one of each date (including the rare ones) would go to the Smithsonian, and the rest could be sold to the public, perhaps through the Kagin/Amazon arrangement already in place.
I believe the law in California states that if you find "treasure" on your property exceeding either $250 or $500 you have so many days to turn it over to the police and publish the find for claims to be made against the item found.
<< <i>Nonsense to believe the SF vault didn't contain older mint state gold. Look at how much older gold Philadelphia possessed up to the EO in 1933.
All roads lead to Dimmick imo. >>
You Sir are of knowledge.
Once more let me make a case as to why I am convinced that these are stolen coins based on logic and circumstance:
Mints were primary holding depositories. There was no Federal Reserve nor any Central Banks. Before the 1933 Gold Act millions of coins of ALL mintages stayed in the mint vaults because there was no reason to move them. There was no call for "centralization" of deposits. They held all kinds of coins, many millions of coins. There could have been hundreds of other mint-marked coins as well as any year mintage or denominations. Simply consider someone walking to the cashier and asking for an exchange, mostly for a new coin. This was more prevalent that one would think. Sealed mint bags were the norm but a few over-flow bags were commonplace.
I don't understand why one would look for exotic reasons why the coins were 1) mixed dates, 2) in six cans or 3) buried. Look for the most OBVIOUS reasons. The theory that a collector buried his coins is far more unbelievable than a thief burying coins. To assume that a thief would take bags with one date is to not think like a thief. It's much easier to get rid of random mixed dates than a very tell-tale date of record. Would a thief today rather get consecutive numbered new bills or mixed random bills? And again, as a numismatist, my mind is piqued by the extraordinary quality of the coins. these aren't just new coins. These are EXCEPTIONAL untouched coins. The top 1% of the top 1%. To me that says MINT coins.
Dimmick was a BAD GUY. He was convicted of forging the Mint Director's signature. He was the man who would close the vaults and was responsible for the inventory reconciling. He had ACCESS. This is not a Perry Mason case. Johnny Cochran couldn't get this guy out because "the glove do fit".
I, as much as anyone, would love to have believed that Scrooge McDuck buried the coins. Clearly these coins did not show up in any will. Why was that? That's a significant question.
I love the thought that a cache of amazing "top pops" would be discovered and rock the world of that series. I love the idea that this kind of treasure chest is possible in the coin world. But I see a odorous, highly dubious situation emerging here, and the case "against" is way beyond any small degree of circumstantial. The man took the coins, (and likely an accomplice) ditched them in a remote area, knowing full well that his footsteps were not invisible and hoped to fly under the (yet to be invented) radar to recover the booty. I don't yet say guilty but if I found these coins I wouldn't be spending any money I didn't already have. I think by the time the Feds look deeply into this a lot more damning evidence will be uncovered. Sad but true.
<< <i>Nonsense to believe the SF vault didn't contain older mint state gold. Look at how much older gold Philadelphia possessed up to the EO in 1933.
All roads lead to Dimmick imo. >>
Just too coincidental that an anonyamous hoarder's "stash" was a few dozen shy of 1,500 coins.
But we will see -- if these really are the Dimmick coins, the government should have much more evidence than they do with the Langboard Saints (which I think should stay with the Langboards).
If the government does prove they were stolen by Dimmick, it would be nice if the couple were given a couple dozen of nice ones as a "finders fee", one of each date (including the rare ones) would go to the Smithsonian, and the rest could be sold to the public, perhaps through the Kagin/Amazon arrangement already in place. >>
There were 1,373 $20's in the hoard, way more than a "few dozen" shy of 1,500 coins.
Of that number, not all were S-Mints, and not all were Uncirculated.
As I said elsewhere, I once purchased over 1,000 $20's out of a hoard that was just one heir's portion of the hoard. If you wanted to hide a large quantity of gold, $20's were the way to do it. Dimmick wasn't the only person out West that ever had occasion to hide gold.
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.
So because there was a hundred less coins than reported stolen you think that is a defense? If there was more than 1500 that would barely create a shred of doubt. But less coins meNs nothing. It's money...the possibility that a few bucks were spent is very high. Come on, Tom. You're creating doubt with highly illogical theory.
The money could have come from a lot of different places. Consider this:
In 1894, $50,000 was stolen in a robbery of a Southern Pacific Overland Express robbery out of Sacramento. One half of this hoard was buried near Sheep Camp, a hobo jungle that was close to the city at the time of the robbery. It was yet to be recovered.
A miner named Mayberry took over $40,000 in gold from his claim at Bloody Run and buried it near his cabin. Robbers attempted to learn where his gold was buried and, when Mayberry refused to tell them where it was, they killed him. His gold has never been found.
In 1895, two outlaws stole $50,000 in gold coins from a Wells Fargo shipment in a Union Pacific RR train robbery and buried the cache in the area of a hobo jungle just outside Washington. A hobo named John Harmons witnessed the burial, dug it up and took $5,000 from the sacks, reburying the rest a short distance away. Harmons went on a long drinking spree and when he returned for more money, he was unable to relocate the burial site and the $45,000 was never recovered.
A man by the name of Hines lived in the area of Strawberry Valley area in the late 1800's. He is known to have accumulated about 30 pounds of gold from his prospecting trips which he buried somewhere in or near his house. Hines died in 1897 and his cache of gold was never found.
Between $18,000 and $22,000 in gold coins was buried by a Basque sheepherder about 7 miles from Loyalton, a short ways up Six Mile Canyon near a large, tall pine tree. The cache has never been found.
Buried in it, or nearby, is the life savings of an old man who died suddenly from food poisoning. The miner was known to have had several thousand dollars in coins and bills which was never found after his death.
"Big Jim" Fisher built a cabin in the late 1890's at the big bend of Canyon Creek, about 200 yards up the hillside. Fisher took on a mining partner, Frank Keenan, who built a cabin on the lower end of Keenan Ditch, and a third partner named Frank Howell who moved into a cabin at the mouth of Fisher Gulch.
The men worked the rich placer area and acquired many lard and tobacco cans full of gold nuggets which they hid at various spots around their respective cabins. They enlisted a blacksmith to construct 3 copper boxes, each 10 x 12 x 12 inches, and each man had his own chest.
Fisher buried his gold-filled chest in the blue slide below the ditch near his cabin. Keenan buried his box near his cabin in Butcher Gulch, near the end of the ditch. Howell's chest was buried in the rocks behind his cabin. Howell died of a rattlesnake bite a short time later and his chest of nuggets was never found.
Fisher and Keenan continued to work the rich creek for years afterwards and there is no record of these frugal partners ever having spent, or removing, their chests of gold. The two died of natural causes and their chest of gold were never recovered.
It's also believed that many smaller caches of gold remain hidden in the same area, about 20 miles northwest of Weaverville and just north of the Canyon Creek Bridge.
These are just stories people know about... there are undoubtedly others no one knows about.
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
<< <i>So because there was a hundred less coins than reported stolen you think that is a defense? If there was more than 1500 that would barely create a shred of doubt. But less coins meNs nothing. It's money...the possibility that a few bucks were spent is very high. Come on, Tom. You're creating doubt with highly illogical theory. >>
I have not proposed any theory. I have stated facts.
The highly illogical theory is that two totally different groups of coins MUST be one and the same just because people want them to be!
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.
<< <i>The money could have come from a lot of different places. Consider this:
In 1894, $50,000 was stolen in a robbery of a Southern Pacific Overland Express robbery out of Sacramento. One half of this hoard was buried near Sheep Camp, a hobo jungle that was close to the city at the time of the robbery. It was yet to be recovered.
A miner named Mayberry took over $40,000 in gold from his claim at Bloody Run and buried it near his cabin. Robbers attempted to learn where his gold was buried and, when Mayberry refused to tell them where it was, they killed him. His gold has never been found.
In 1895, two outlaws stole $50,000 in gold coins from a Wells Fargo shipment in a Union Pacific RR train robbery and buried the cache in the area of a hobo jungle just outside Washington. A hobo named John Harmons witnessed the burial, dug it up and took $5,000 from the sacks, reburying the rest a short distance away. Harmons went on a long drinking spree and when he returned for more money, he was unable to relocate the burial site and the $45,000 was never recovered.
A man by the name of Hines lived in the area of Strawberry Valley area in the late 1800's. He is known to have accumulated about 30 pounds of gold from his prospecting trips which he buried somewhere in or near his house. Hines died in 1897 and his cache of gold was never found.
Between $18,000 and $22,000 in gold coins was buried by a Basque sheepherder about 7 miles from Loyalton, a short ways up Six Mile Canyon near a large, tall pine tree. The cache has never been found.
Buried in it, or nearby, is the life savings of an old man who died suddenly from food poisoning. The miner was known to have had several thousand dollars in coins and bills which was never found after his death.
"Big Jim" Fisher built a cabin in the late 1890's at the big bend of Canyon Creek, about 200 yards up the hillside. Fisher took on a mining partner, Frank Keenan, who built a cabin on the lower end of Keenan Ditch, and a third partner named Frank Howell who moved into a cabin at the mouth of Fisher Gulch.
The men worked the rich placer area and acquired many lard and tobacco cans full of gold nuggets which they hid at various spots around their respective cabins. They enlisted a blacksmith to construct 3 copper boxes, each 10 x 12 x 12 inches, and each man had his own chest.
Fisher buried his gold-filled chest in the blue slide below the ditch near his cabin. Keenan buried his box near his cabin in Butcher Gulch, near the end of the ditch. Howell's chest was buried in the rocks behind his cabin. Howell died of a rattlesnake bite a short time later and his chest of nuggets was never found.
Fisher and Keenan continued to work the rich creek for years afterwards and there is no record of these frugal partners ever having spent, or removing, their chests of gold. The two died of natural causes and their chest of gold were never recovered.
It's also believed that many smaller caches of gold remain hidden in the same area, about 20 miles northwest of Weaverville and just north of the Canyon Creek Bridge.
These are just stories people know about... there are undoubtedly others no one knows about. >>
All interesting possibilities, or it could just be some guy that did not trust banks.
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.
I see. And who here "wants" this find to be a result of a crime? I believe I was, as Colonel Jessup (movie, not Cu Forum) said "crystal clear".
I love the thought that a cache of amazing "top pops" would be discovered and rock the world of that series. I love the idea that this kind of treasure chest is possible in the coin world.
"Bless those who cannot see due to affliction. Teach those who cannot see because of conjecture." ~saintguru
<< <i> These are just stories people know about... there are undoubtedly others no one knows about. >>
All interesting possibilities, or it could just be some guy that did not trust banks. >>
Exactly. The point is that there are lots of places this gold could have come from. The fact that that it was a lot of money 120 years ago doesn't mean it was stolen, much less that it was stolen from the government. Not only were there people with that kind of money, but there were people in that region who are known to have BURIED that kind of money. 1890s America was largely a cash economy, a place with no income tax, and a healthy skepticism of banks... this could easily have been the profits of a long-running business. That to me is far more likely than claiming it's the gold Dimmick stole -- a claim for which there is absolutely no evidence.
"Men who had never shown any ability to make or increase fortunes for themselves abounded in brilliant plans for creating and increasing wealth for the country at large." Fiat Money Inflation in France, Andrew Dickson White (1912)
Comments
<< <i>Link by JakeSherlock does not work..... Cheers, RickO >>
Watching / listening to the vid here - youtube coolest thing in the booth
<< <i>
<< <i>Link by JakeSherlock does not work..... Cheers, RickO >>
Watching / listening to the vid here - youtube coolest thing in the booth >>
Well worth watching. Answers some of the questions raised here.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It's important to remember that the contemporary reports say that there were six bags stolen from the SF mint. The reports about the Saddleridge Hoard say that there were six cans found. >>
The Mint website says that Dimmick stole 6 bags; the PCGS story says that the Saddleridge coins were in 8 cans, not 6.
You do not know the dates of the coins stolen from the Mint
You do not know the dates and number of the $20s found in the Saddleridge hoard
The Mint says that Dimmick stole $20s; the Saddleridge coins includes $5's and $10s
You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints
You do not know what the Mint procedures were for bagging, or not bagging, old coins received in exchange for new coins
You do not know who found the Saddleridge coins
You do not know where the property is
You do not know if there is any family connection between Dimmick and the people who found the coins
You do not know if there is any connection between Dimmick and the property where the coins were found.
Aside from that you haven't jumped to any conclusions. >>
Well said.
And I had another thought. The Treasury Department operated a Subtreasury within the San Francisco Mint building. I would speculate that this was because it had wonderful security; what better place to run a Subtreasury?
I would further speculate that the Subtreasury had its own vault or vaults. I would further speculate that older, circulated coins coming into the Subtreasury in the normal course of business would be stored in its own vault(s), and not comingled with the coins in the Mint's vaults. If this speculation is correct, then the S.F. Mint would not have had any older, circulated coins in its control, just solid bags of new coins all of the same date and mint, plus the leftovers of any production runs that were insufficient to make up solid bag at that moment.
Dimmick worked for the Mint, and the contemporary accounts state that he stole from the Mint. The 1901 Mint Report, published late in that year, mentions that the San Francisco Mint was short $30,000 in its accounts, not the U.S. Subtreasury in San Francisco.
There is no logical reason to connect the Saddleridge Hoard with the Dimmick theft.
TD >>
Upon further research, I have determined that in 1901 the U.S. Subtreasury in San Francisco was located in its own building at 608 Commercial St., and no longer sharing space with the U.S. Mint at 88 Fifth St. as it had when that building was first built in the early 1870's. Therefore, there is no reason for older, circulated coins to have been in the Mint building in 1901.
The Subtreasurer did move into the Mint for a while after the Subtreasury Building was damaged or destroyed by the earthquake of 1906, but he was not there in 1901. Thanks to Roger Burdette for information on this period.
TD
<< <i>
<< <i>Link by JakeSherlock does not work..... Cheers, RickO >>
Watching / listening to the vid here - youtube coolest thing in the booth >>
Cool video.. too bad the audio was recorded with a potato
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." -Luke 11:9
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might." -Deut. 6:4-5
"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; He will save us." -Isaiah 33:22
jdimmick;Gerard;wondercoin;claychaser;agentjim007;CCC2010;guitarwes;TAMU15;Zubie;mariner67;segoja;Smittys;kaz;CARDSANDCOINS;FadeToBlack;
jrt103;tizofthe;bronze6827;mkman;Scootersdad;AllCoinsRule;coindeuce;dmarks;piecesofme; and many more
<< <i>Now that we have dispelled the Dimmick Theft connection, did anybody go by Kagins table and look at the coins? >>
Yup. The no motto was ridiculous. They all were blazing fresh to me.
<< <i>
<< <i>Now that we have dispelled the Dimmick Theft connection, did anybody go by Kagins table and look at the coins? >>
Yup. The no motto was ridiculous. They all were blazing fresh to me. >>
pics?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Now that we have dispelled the Dimmick Theft connection, did anybody go by Kagins table and look at the coins? >>
Yup. The no motto was ridiculous. They all were blazing fresh to me. >>
pics? >>
I did not take any. I'm sure somebody will post some though, saw a bunch being taken.
My January 31 visit to the San Francisco Subtreasury and First Mint museum (pictures):
http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=26&threadid=909398
The Mysterious Egyptian Magic Coin
Coins in Movies
Coins on Television
<< <i>
<< <i>Link by JakeSherlock does not work..... Cheers, RickO >>
Watching / listening to the vid here - youtube coolest thing in the booth >>
You can certainly tell that David's enthusiasm and excitement were 100% genuine. "It's... every coin collector and coin dealer's dream."
No doubt about that!
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
Havent used a Detector in over 35 years. One thing I do recall very well, that was work using that thing.
Not an easy task at all.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Now that we have dispelled the Dimmick Theft connection, did anybody go by Kagins table and look at the coins? >>
Yup. The no motto was ridiculous. They all were blazing fresh to me. >>
pics? >>
I did not take any. I'm sure somebody will post some though, saw a bunch being taken. >>
It appears that some of the better examples are now available on CoinFacts, to wit:
I noted that these Saddle Ridge gold coins tend to have a different yellow hue than other gold coins of similar grades in CoinFacts; different lighting perhaps?
Anyway, most of the Saddle Ridge pieces would seem to be identifiable by looking for the similar matching hues in the TrueView images.
===============================================
===============================================
Anyone wishing to continue to 'hunt-and-poke" can proceed backs wards from PCGS Certification Number, 28824720. Have Fun!
TD
<< <i>Now that we have dispelled the Dimmick Theft connection, did anybody go by Kagins table and look at the coins? >>
I don't think so.
<< <i>
<< <i>Now that we have dispelled the Dimmick Theft connection, did anybody go by Kagins table and look at the coins? >>
I don't think so. >>
...you must have been having the time of your life if you can't remember whether or not you stopped by Kagins table to look at the coins
Erik
>> You do not know ...
>> You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints
>> ...
[TD]
> Well said.
>...
> the S.F. Mint would not have had any older, circulated coins in its control, just solid bags of new coins all of the same date and mint,
> plus the leftovers of any production runs that were insufficient to make up solid bag at that moment.
I think most of us would agree with this.
Such "leftovers" would explain the range of dates, and the pristine condition for the S mint coins.
So I wouldn't dismiss the Dimmick theft connection so easily.
The "leftovers" does not explain the nice CC mint examples.
If there are just a handful of CCs, they might not need an explanation.
But as CalGold said, we don't know all the components of the inventory of the SF Mint.
We might speculate that the SF Mint could have some of the output of the CC mint for them to independently assay?
Or would the main US mint do this sort of thing?
<< <i>[CalGold]
>> You do not know ...
>> You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints
>> ...
[TD]
> Well said.
>...
> the S.F. Mint would not have had any older, circulated coins in its control, just solid bags of new coins all of the same date and mint,
> plus the leftovers of any production runs that were insufficient to make up solid bag at that moment.
I think most of us would agree with this.
Such "leftovers" would explain the range of dates, and the pristine condition for the S mint coins.
So I wouldn't dismiss the Dimmick theft connection so easily.
The "leftovers" does not explain the nice CC mint examples.
If there are just a handful of CCs, they might not need an explanation.
But as CalGold said, we don't know all the components of the inventory of the SF Mint.
We might speculate that the SF Mint could have some of the output of the CC mint for them to independently assay?
Or would the main US mint do this sort of thing? >>
The term "Leftovers" as I used it refers to the coins in a production run over and above the multiple of coins in a bag. In mass producing coins you make up odd-numbered batches of planchets and run them through coin presses. Subtract the odd number of rejects, and you end up with another odd number of acceptable coins. Only then do you start to make up bags of specific counts.
Look at the mintage figures for silver S-mint coins in this era. The numbers for silver dollars are almost always multiples of 1,000; the numbers of half dollars are almost always multiples of 2,000; the numbers of quarter dollars are almost always multiples of 4,000. That is because they made up $1,000 bags of coins and delivered those to the Cashier while holding back the odd numbers of leftovers until they made more coins. The leftovers on hand at the end of one calendar year would simply be included in the first bags of the next calendar year.
There is no reason to have older coins from any year other than the previous one. The idea of a Mint bag of numerous earlier years is just silly.
Say at the end of 1880 the mint has 25 $20s which didn't fit into the last bag, so they are leftover.
In 1881 they start making 1881 dated $20s.
What happens to the 25 1880s at this point?
Do they stay in an inventory of leftovers?
Or do they go into one of the first bags in 1881?
It doesn't seem silly to me to only ship 1881 dated coins in 1881.
However, one might think they would distribute the leftovers at some point also.
But "we don't know" if they had some procedures which might seem silly to us at this point.
Such as possibly putting the leftovers for each year into partial bags and tossing them into a corner of the vault,
or some special location where they accumulated.
Having the full list of $20s by date, mintmark and grade would help in evaluating theories on their origin.
So far the best I've seen is:
"About a third of the coins, including this 1866 piece, were found to be in pristine condition when cleaned.
Most were minted in S.F., and many were never circulated."
from the caption of photo#8 in
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Gold-Country-couple-discovers-10-million-in-5266314.php#photo-5937211
I think this implies about 500 Uncs.
The other 900 or so might be circulated, or might have been originally Unc but are now non-pristine / damaged from the crude storage.
The main facts consistent with Dimmick theft are the total face value, proximity to SF, sizable quantity of Uncs, and no dated coins past 1901.
Facts not consistent are the older dated coins, and no coins dated after 1894.
Other theories could be formed to fit the date distribution, such as money laundering.
I.e. swap the coin bags for paper money, deposit the paper money in a few banks, withdraw gold coins, bury them.
Although getting assistance from criminals for the first step might cost a good percentage of the face value.
Maybe easier to melt the stuff and sell that for step one.
<< <i>[CalGold]
>> You do not know ...
>> You do not know what the Mint procedures were for handling gold coins struck at other Mints
>> ...
[TD]
> Well said.
>...
> the S.F. Mint would not have had any older, circulated coins in its control, just solid bags of new coins all of the same date and mint,
> plus the leftovers of any production runs that were insufficient to make up solid bag at that moment.
I think most of us would agree with this.
Such "leftovers" would explain the range of dates, and the pristine condition for the S mint coins.
So I wouldn't dismiss the Dimmick theft connection so easily.
The "leftovers" does not explain the nice CC mint examples.
If there are just a handful of CCs, they might not need an explanation.
But as CalGold said, we don't know all the components of the inventory of the SF Mint.
We might speculate that the SF Mint could have some of the output of the CC mint for them to independently assay?
Or would the main US mint do this sort of thing? >>
While I am currently leaning on the dismiss Dimmick theft connection myself, I do think another viable explanation could be that the thief may have exchanged some of his gold Double Liberties for coins of other denomination and mint origin. After all the found hoard is "missing" something like 78 Double Eagles from the total stolen.
<< <i>Q. David Bowers' book on silver dollars lists under the 1893-S a report from Wayne Miller of 20 BU 1893-S dollars being found in a BU bag of 1894-S dollars. The logical assumption is that the "leftovers" were just put in the first bag made up of the next year's coins. >>
Just finding an unopened bag of 1894-S would be a treat in itself.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Earlier I said that I thought it more likely that the hoard was buried in the 1930's than the 1890's (or 1901).
Here is a speculative sequence of events:
1840's to 1895 ... the coins are collected by an individual who has some numismatic knowledge but who is not a part of the mainstream collecting fraternity of the era. He dies about 1895 and leaves the coins to relative(s) who, not needing money, keep them largely intact but who, lacking in numismatic interest, do not expand the set.
1933 ... the coins have now been passed down to another relative who, lacking any numismatic knowledge, simply regards them as gold coins. The order to turn in gold coins is issued in 1933. The current holder of the coins decides to hide the coins rather than turn them in. At some later time the holder dies without ever telling anyone else of the coins.
2013 ... the coins are found. >>
I think somebody beat you to that notion 291fifth
<<Tuesday February 25, 2014 11:05 PM
The large can appears to be a resealable can. Not soldered or swap-top. I'm thinking maybe 1920-1935 from the condition and design. Those are tin plated steel I think and are from sometime in the first quarter of the century or so. Aluminum (not) would be C. 1950/later, steel alone would place this much earlier - all steel and I don't think we be looking at cans.
Eric>> >>
The Sherwin-Williams website mentions "tin cans" being available in 1875. One of the cans looks like a paint can. >>
Weren't those solder top cans?
Eric
<< <i>Q. David Bowers' book on silver dollars lists under the 1893-S a report from Wayne Miller of 20 BU 1893-S dollars being found in a BU bag of 1894-S dollars. The logical assumption is that the "leftovers" were just put in the first bag made up of the next year's coins. >>
Thanks for sharing that.
That refutes my leftovers theory.
The Dimmick match is looking much less likely to me now.
You gotta have some place for storing heavy, valuable leftovers.Another thing to keep in mind is that the Superintendent of the Mint could have issued instructions to workers with vault access to not disturb a relatively small amount of certain coins that have been set aside to reside in there until further notice.
What date is most represented in the hoard? Take these away from the total and what you have left are the leftover coins that were in the vault with the new ones.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Occam's Razor
<< <i>Or, the simplest answer, that the Mint quite logically got rid of its leftovers at the start of the next year, may be the correct answer. See this:
Occam's Razor >>
Tho as my major Professor in Grad School used to say. A good scientist considers all possibilities!
<< <i>Now that we have dispelled the Dimmick Theft connection, did anybody go by Kagins table and look at the coins? >>
I first cited Occam's. NOW....those pictures of the coins...If those GEM+++ coins didn't come right from the mint nothing did. Those are pristine, as nice as the finest Saints that were hand-picked for the Ct. Library.
Maybe YOU have dispelled but I stand by my answer, my final answer.
<< <i>U.S. Mint theft
Another explanation put forth by hundreds of Internet commenters is that the cache is from a 1901 theft of 1,500 gold Double Eagle coins with a face value of $30,000 from the U.S. Mint in San Francisco. The number and face value is about the same as the Saddle Ridge Hoard, and though the mint's chief clerk, Walter Dimmick, was convicted of the crime, the booty was never recovered.
Kagin, however, said the mint explanation is unlikely because the coin dates are too spread out for a single haul like that. The coins are also too old for a 1901 heist, he said.
"It wouldn't be a mint robbery if it didn't have coins from at least the previous seven years, and the most recent coin in the hoard is from 1894," said Kagin, who in addition to being a dealer wrote the definitive "Private Gold Coins and Patterns of the United States."
Not so fast, says Dennis O'Donnell, an 86-year-old retired detective for the U.S. Mint in San Francisco who specialized in researching and solving coin thefts.
"Downstairs, we had vaults where we kept old coins that hadn't been put into circulation," he said. "Sometimes the auditors didn't see all the inventory. I wouldn't rule anything entirely out." >>
from page 2 of:
http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Black-Bart-Jesse-James-Who-hid-10-million-5279157.php#page-2
The very high grade set of S mint $20s could have been a SF Mint collection of their output, just like the main US mint collection.
<< <i>
<< <i>Q. David Bowers' book on silver dollars lists under the 1893-S a report from Wayne Miller of 20 BU 1893-S dollars being found in a BU bag of 1894-S dollars. The logical assumption is that the "leftovers" were just put in the first bag made up of the next year's coins. >>
Just finding an unopened bag of 1894-S would be a treat in itself.
A dealer at the Greater Chicago Show this past weekend had over 100 1890 certified Morgans that he said came from a recent found bag.
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
gold. Look at how much older gold Philadelphia possessed up to
the EO in 1933.
All roads lead to Dimmick imo.
<< <i>Nonsense to believe the SF vault didn't contain older mint state
gold. Look at how much older gold Philadelphia possessed up to
the EO in 1933.
All roads lead to Dimmick imo. >>
Just too coincidental that an anonyamous hoarder's "stash" was a few dozen shy of 1,500 coins.
But we will see -- if these really are the Dimmick coins, the government should have much more evidence than they do with the Langboard Saints (which I think should stay with the Langboards).
If the government does prove they were stolen by Dimmick, it would be nice if the couple were given a couple dozen of nice ones as a "finders fee", one of each date (including the rare ones) would go to the Smithsonian, and the rest could be sold to the public, perhaps through the Kagin/Amazon arrangement already in place.
Whoops.
<< <i>Nonsense to believe the SF vault didn't contain older mint state
gold. Look at how much older gold Philadelphia possessed up to
the EO in 1933.
All roads lead to Dimmick imo. >>
You Sir are of knowledge.
Once more let me make a case as to why I am convinced that these are stolen coins based on logic and circumstance:
Mints were primary holding depositories. There was no Federal Reserve nor any Central Banks. Before the 1933 Gold Act millions of coins of ALL mintages stayed in the mint vaults because there was no reason to move them. There was no call for "centralization" of deposits. They held all kinds of coins, many millions of coins. There could have been hundreds of other mint-marked coins as well as any year mintage or denominations. Simply consider someone walking to the cashier and asking for an exchange, mostly for a new coin. This was more prevalent that one would think. Sealed mint bags were the norm but a few over-flow bags were commonplace.
I don't understand why one would look for exotic reasons why the coins were 1) mixed dates, 2) in six cans or 3) buried. Look for the most OBVIOUS reasons. The theory that a collector buried his coins is far more unbelievable than a thief burying coins. To assume that a thief would take bags with one date is to not think like a thief. It's much easier to get rid of random mixed dates than a very tell-tale date of record. Would a thief today rather get consecutive numbered new bills or mixed random bills? And again, as a numismatist, my mind is piqued by the extraordinary quality of the coins. these aren't just new coins. These are EXCEPTIONAL untouched coins. The top 1% of the top 1%. To me that says MINT coins.
Dimmick was a BAD GUY. He was convicted of forging the Mint Director's signature. He was the man who would close the vaults and was responsible for the inventory reconciling. He had ACCESS. This is not a Perry Mason case. Johnny Cochran couldn't get this guy out because "the glove do fit".
I, as much as anyone, would love to have believed that Scrooge McDuck buried the coins. Clearly these coins did not show up in any will. Why was that? That's a significant question.
I love the thought that a cache of amazing "top pops" would be discovered and rock the world of that series. I love the idea that this kind of treasure chest is possible in the coin world. But I see a odorous, highly dubious situation emerging here, and the case "against" is way beyond any small degree of circumstantial. The man took the coins, (and likely an accomplice) ditched them in a remote area, knowing full well that his footsteps were not invisible and hoped to fly under the (yet to be invented) radar to recover the booty. I don't yet say guilty but if I found these coins I wouldn't be spending any money I didn't already have. I think by the time the Feds look deeply into this a lot more damning evidence will be uncovered. Sad but true.
<< <i>
<< <i>Nonsense to believe the SF vault didn't contain older mint state
gold. Look at how much older gold Philadelphia possessed up to
the EO in 1933.
All roads lead to Dimmick imo. >>
Just too coincidental that an anonyamous hoarder's "stash" was a few dozen shy of 1,500 coins.
But we will see -- if these really are the Dimmick coins, the government should have much more evidence than they do with the Langboard Saints (which I think should stay with the Langboards).
If the government does prove they were stolen by Dimmick, it would be nice if the couple were given a couple dozen of nice ones as a "finders fee", one of each date (including the rare ones) would go to the Smithsonian, and the rest could be sold to the public, perhaps through the Kagin/Amazon arrangement already in place. >>
There were 1,373 $20's in the hoard, way more than a "few dozen" shy of 1,500 coins.
Of that number, not all were S-Mints, and not all were Uncirculated.
As I said elsewhere, I once purchased over 1,000 $20's out of a hoard that was just one heir's portion of the hoard. If you wanted to hide a large quantity of gold, $20's were the way to do it. Dimmick wasn't the only person out West that ever had occasion to hide gold.
In 1894, $50,000 was stolen in a robbery of a Southern Pacific Overland Express robbery out of Sacramento. One half of this hoard was buried near Sheep Camp, a hobo jungle that was close to the city at the time of the robbery. It was yet to be recovered.
A miner named Mayberry took over $40,000 in gold from his claim at Bloody Run and buried it near his cabin. Robbers attempted to learn where his gold was buried and, when Mayberry refused to tell them where it was, they killed him. His gold has never been found.
In 1895, two outlaws stole $50,000 in gold coins from a Wells Fargo shipment in a Union Pacific RR train robbery and buried the cache in the area of a hobo jungle just outside Washington. A hobo named John Harmons witnessed the burial, dug it up and took $5,000 from the sacks, reburying the rest a short distance away. Harmons went on a long drinking spree and when he returned for more money, he was unable to relocate the burial site and the $45,000 was never recovered.
A man by the name of Hines lived in the area of Strawberry Valley area in the late 1800's. He is known to have accumulated about 30 pounds of gold from his prospecting trips which he buried somewhere in or near his house. Hines died in 1897 and his cache of gold was never found.
Between $18,000 and $22,000 in gold coins was buried by a Basque sheepherder about 7 miles from Loyalton, a short ways up Six Mile Canyon near a large, tall pine tree. The cache has never been found.
Buried in it, or nearby, is the life savings of an old man who died suddenly from food poisoning. The miner was known to have had several thousand dollars in coins and bills which was never found after his death.
"Big Jim" Fisher built a cabin in the late 1890's at the big bend of Canyon Creek, about 200 yards up the hillside. Fisher took on a mining partner, Frank Keenan, who built a cabin on the lower end of Keenan Ditch, and a third partner named Frank Howell who moved into a cabin at the mouth of Fisher Gulch.
The men worked the rich placer area and acquired many lard and tobacco cans full of gold nuggets which they hid at various spots around their respective cabins. They enlisted a blacksmith to construct 3 copper boxes, each 10 x 12 x 12 inches, and each man had his own chest.
Fisher buried his gold-filled chest in the blue slide below the ditch near his cabin. Keenan buried his box near his cabin in Butcher Gulch, near the end of the ditch. Howell's chest was buried in the rocks behind his cabin. Howell died of a rattlesnake bite a short time later and his chest of nuggets was never found.
Fisher and Keenan continued to work the rich creek for years afterwards and there is no record of these frugal partners ever having spent, or removing, their chests of gold.
The two died of natural causes and their chest of gold were never recovered.
It's also believed that many smaller caches of gold remain hidden in the same area, about 20 miles northwest of Weaverville and just north of the Canyon Creek Bridge.
Saddle Ridge Gold not connected to 1901 SF Mint Heist
These are just stories people know about... there are undoubtedly others no one knows about.
<< <i>So because there was a hundred less coins than reported stolen you think that is a defense? If there was more than 1500 that would barely create a shred of doubt. But less coins meNs nothing. It's money...the possibility that a few bucks were spent is very high. Come on, Tom. You're creating doubt with highly illogical theory. >>
I have not proposed any theory. I have stated facts.
The highly illogical theory is that two totally different groups of coins MUST be one and the same just because people want them to be!
<< <i>My posts are my FINAL ANSWER.
Revisit this in 3 months, 6 months and a year and we'll see what happens.
Again...Kiss them goodbye.
...well this seems to be the fastest 3 months I have ever seen
Erik
<< <i>The money could have come from a lot of different places. Consider this:
In 1894, $50,000 was stolen in a robbery of a Southern Pacific Overland Express robbery out of Sacramento. One half of this hoard was buried near Sheep Camp, a hobo jungle that was close to the city at the time of the robbery. It was yet to be recovered.
A miner named Mayberry took over $40,000 in gold from his claim at Bloody Run and buried it near his cabin. Robbers attempted to learn where his gold was buried and, when Mayberry refused to tell them where it was, they killed him. His gold has never been found.
In 1895, two outlaws stole $50,000 in gold coins from a Wells Fargo shipment in a Union Pacific RR train robbery and buried the cache in the area of a hobo jungle just outside Washington. A hobo named John Harmons witnessed the burial, dug it up and took $5,000 from the sacks, reburying the rest a short distance away. Harmons went on a long drinking spree and when he returned for more money, he was unable to relocate the burial site and the $45,000 was never recovered.
A man by the name of Hines lived in the area of Strawberry Valley area in the late 1800's. He is known to have accumulated about 30 pounds of gold from his prospecting trips which he buried somewhere in or near his house. Hines died in 1897 and his cache of gold was never found.
Between $18,000 and $22,000 in gold coins was buried by a Basque sheepherder about 7 miles from Loyalton, a short ways up Six Mile Canyon near a large, tall pine tree. The cache has never been found.
Buried in it, or nearby, is the life savings of an old man who died suddenly from food poisoning. The miner was known to have had several thousand dollars in coins and bills which was never found after his death.
"Big Jim" Fisher built a cabin in the late 1890's at the big bend of Canyon Creek, about 200 yards up the hillside. Fisher took on a mining partner, Frank Keenan, who built a cabin on the lower end of Keenan Ditch, and a third partner named Frank Howell who moved into a cabin at the mouth of Fisher Gulch.
The men worked the rich placer area and acquired many lard and tobacco cans full of gold nuggets which they hid at various spots around their respective cabins. They enlisted a blacksmith to construct 3 copper boxes, each 10 x 12 x 12 inches, and each man had his own chest.
Fisher buried his gold-filled chest in the blue slide below the ditch near his cabin. Keenan buried his box near his cabin in Butcher Gulch, near the end of the ditch. Howell's chest was buried in the rocks behind his cabin. Howell died of a rattlesnake bite a short time later and his chest of nuggets was never found.
Fisher and Keenan continued to work the rich creek for years afterwards and there is no record of these frugal partners ever having spent, or removing, their chests of gold.
The two died of natural causes and their chest of gold were never recovered.
It's also believed that many smaller caches of gold remain hidden in the same area, about 20 miles northwest of Weaverville and just north of the Canyon Creek Bridge.
Saddle Ridge Gold not connected to 1901 SF Mint Heist
These are just stories people know about... there are undoubtedly others no one knows about. >>
All interesting possibilities, or it could just be some guy that did not trust banks.
<< <i>The highly illogical theory is that two totally different groups of coins MUST be one and the same just because people want them to be! >>
...This
Erik
I love the thought that a cache of amazing "top pops" would be discovered and rock the world of that series. I love the idea that this kind of treasure chest is possible in the coin world.
"Bless those who cannot see due to affliction. Teach those who cannot see because of conjecture."
~saintguru
<< <i> These are just stories people know about... there are undoubtedly others no one knows about. >>
All interesting possibilities, or it could just be some guy that did not trust banks. >>
Exactly. The point is that there are lots of places this gold could have come from. The fact that that it was a lot of money 120 years ago doesn't mean it was stolen, much less that it was stolen from the government. Not only were there people with that kind of money, but there were people in that region who are known to have BURIED that kind of money. 1890s America was largely a cash economy, a place with no income tax, and a healthy skepticism of banks... this could easily have been the profits of a long-running business. That to me is far more likely than claiming it's the gold Dimmick stole -- a claim for which there is absolutely no evidence.