1942 and 1974 Aluminum Cents - Legal to Own?
Zoins
Posts: 34,186 ✭✭✭✭✭
Here's an interesting question. In the case of the 1974-D Aluminum Cent, according to Steve Roach of Coin World:
<< <i>The Mint’s position has been consistent: because Congress never issued an aluminum cent as legal tender, any example remains property of the federal government regardless of how long it has been in private hands. >>
That seems inconsistent with the 1942 Aluminum Cent (J2079) which appears to be legal to own and has been sold. Does J2079 contradict and defeat the government's position for the 1974-D Aluminum Cent?
Also, should the 1974-D Aluminum Cent have a different Judd number than the 1974 Aluminum Cent, or should they share the J2151 designation?
1942 Aluminum Cent - Judd-2079
grade: PCGS PR66
pedigree: Mike Byers
cert: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/12229741
archive: https://mikebyers.com/12229741.html
1974-D Aluminum Cent - Judd-J2153
grade: PCGS MS63
pedigree: Harry Edmond Lawrence; Randall Lawrence
cert: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/28544237
<< <i>The Mint’s position has been consistent: because Congress never issued an aluminum cent as legal tender, any example remains property of the federal government regardless of how long it has been in private hands. >>
That seems inconsistent with the 1942 Aluminum Cent (J2079) which appears to be legal to own and has been sold. Does J2079 contradict and defeat the government's position for the 1974-D Aluminum Cent?
Also, should the 1974-D Aluminum Cent have a different Judd number than the 1974 Aluminum Cent, or should they share the J2151 designation?
1942 Aluminum Cent - Judd-2079
grade: PCGS PR66
pedigree: Mike Byers
cert: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/12229741
archive: https://mikebyers.com/12229741.html
1974-D Aluminum Cent - Judd-J2153
grade: PCGS MS63
pedigree: Harry Edmond Lawrence; Randall Lawrence
cert: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/28544237
Tagged:
1
Comments
heck 1933 double eagles as the langbords would cry too...
that sac and quarter mule
strange dead end roads are found in this hobby of kings
i do think the 74 &74-d should bear different judd #'s for sure
Free Trial
Erik
That 42 is pretty and it has a slightly rotated reverse too!
he bought it raw in the 80's and introduced himself here when he decided to have it graded
made his 1st thread about it
thread titled..." 1942 Pattern Lincoln Cent (Big Pictures Included)"
original thread had edge image...that is one thick planchet it was struck on too
my computer no longer links so that title will have to do
<< <i>Here's an interesting question. In the case of the 1974-D Aluminum Cent, according to Steve Roach of Coin World:
<< <i>The Mint’s position has been consistent: because Congress never issued an aluminum cent as legal tender, any example remains property of the federal government regardless of how long it has been in private hands. >>
That seems inconsistent with the 1942 Aluminum Cent (J2079) which appears to be legal to own and has been sold. Does J2079 contradict and defeat the government's position for the 1974-D Aluminum Cent?
Also, should the 1974-D Aluminum Cent have a different Judd number than the 1974 Aluminum Cent, or should they share the J2151 designation?
Personally, I think that the Governments position is similar to the coin collectors position. That being, whatever seems popular art the time.
Specifically, 494,000 1909-SVDB coins were minted. They are fairly common if you really think about it since a bunch were saved and you can buy one just about anywhere yet, the prices can be HUGE!
Why? Because everybody wants one whether they are coin collectors or not. They just want them.
The Governments position on certain coins follows the same philosophy in that some are deemed illegal because they were never issued for circulation while others, which meet the exact same criteria, they just don't care about.
It really does not make any sense.
As for the Judd Numbers, I have no expertise in this area but I would assume that different date/mm combinations should have different Judd numbers. Especially this 1974-D since 95% of the folks who read the initial reports just "assumed" reference was being made to the 1974 cents. Nobody ever gave it a second thought until it was pointed out to them that this was new and technically unheard of.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>No 1942 cent was issued as legal tender. 1913 Liberty Nickels have nothing in common with the aluminium cents as to their legality. >>
i beg to differ...not duke it out or nothing
both are legal to own and sell
as proven by past and future auctions
so they share that current legal status
why the 13 nickel ever got free play is beyond me
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>
<< <i>No 1942 cent was issued as legal tender. 1913 Liberty Nickels have nothing in common with the aluminium cents as to their legality. >>
i beg to differ...not duke it out or nothing
both are legal to own and sell
as proven by past and future auctions
so they share that current legal status
why the 13 nickel ever got free play is beyond me >>
How can the government claim ownership of something they have never claimed they made? Regardless of that, no Liberty Nickel had legal tender status at the time it was minted, so it still has nothing in common with the 1974 or 1933 Saint and none of the arguments used for these apply.
For example, if a pattern coin was made, rejected, and sent for destruction, and Tommy the Mint Man steals it, sells it to WEBUYCOINS, then I would think the mint has a claim on it.
Same example, but the pattern is PRESENTED as a gift to a senior treasury person, then I would think they have ownership.
(I question the validity of the government giving something that has value to one of their own, but that is another issue).
If Tommy the Mint Man decides to crank out a few "specials" on his own, using Mint Tools, Material, etc., like missing letters, marks, wrong materials, etc., I would think the mint has a claim on them.
If the mint just opsies a coin, stamps a dime on a penny blank, and ships it out, then finders keepers.
I think about somewhat like the manufacturing plants I worked at, where we developed new integrated circuits (chips). We created a lot of scrap, devices that never made it to production, sample for customers, etc. Everything that was not paid for belonged to the company. If you take it home, you could be fired for theft, and the company had a claim to get it back. If it was given to you or sold as a sample to a customer, then it is free and clear.
So, back to the original question, how was ORIGINAL ownership obtained?
I don't believe that that has ever been the Mint's position. The 1974 is not illegal to own because it's aluminum, nor because it was never issued as legal tended, but because the only people with access to the coins - goveernment employees - were expressly instructed to return them. That was not the case with the 1942 or with the aluminum Indian Cent die trials.
The situation with the 74-D is more complicated.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
If there's a 72 in aluminum, it's probably struck on a foreign planchet. Very cool because of what happened in 74-75, but the coin would not be especially important, valuable or illegal.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
There was a Nepal 2 Paisa aluminum piece around this time that was about the size of a cent.
Bump
1974-S Aluminum Cent - Struck on Nepal 2 Paisa planchet
grade: PCGS PR68 CAM
pedigree: Stewart Blay
cert: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/43626249
This coin was just shown in at FUN in @RedCopper's Phenomenal Lincoln Cents collection:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1069059/the-exhibition-of-phenomenal-lincoln-cents-is-at-fun-and-open-for-viewing#latest
Imagine having this and the 1942 aluminum cent in the OP???