Home U.S. Coin Forum

A novice question....

Mission16Mission16 Posts: 1,413 ✭✭✭
Just recently, I have been helping two young coin enthusiasts learn about their hobby. They question that got me to think was related to why does the government want to confiscate some coins but not others?
The Feds seem to spare no expense to recover some: 1933 $20, 1964 Peace $, Aluminum Lincolns, but ignore 1913 nickels and manufactured errors.
So why is that?

Comments

  • TopographicOceansTopographicOceans Posts: 6,535 ✭✭✭✭
    Good question.

    I don't have an answer, other than it's the government. It probably depends on who's in charge at the time.
  • braddickbraddick Posts: 24,629 ✭✭✭✭✭
    You may find the answer within this thread:

    https://forums.collectors.com/messageview.aspx?catid=26&threadid=448693&title=Why did the US mint confiscate the 1933 Saints and not the 1913 nickels?

    Sorry, I can't get that thread to link, if you search under the keywords, "confiscate" it should populate. Lots of good info. within that thread.

    peacockcoins

  • TommyTypeTommyType Posts: 4,586 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Originally posted by: TopographicOceans

    Good question.



    I don't have an answer, other than it's the government. It probably depends on who's in charge at the time.




    Yeah, it seems that "momentum" has something to do with it too.



    - Once a coin changes hands, and is ignored by the authorities, it is essentially legal for eternity.



    - Once a coin is deemed illegal to own, the legal system will latch onto that ruling for eternity.



    So, you pretty much have to know the history and story for each questionable issue.
    Easily distracted Type Collector
  • Mission16Mission16 Posts: 1,413 ✭✭✭
    Originally posted by: TommyType
    Originally posted by: TopographicOceans
    Good question.

    I don't have an answer, other than it's the government. It probably depends on who's in charge at the time.


    Yeah, it seems that "momentum" has something to do with it too.

    - Once a coin changes hands, and is ignored by the authorities, it is essentially legal for eternity.

    - Once a coin is deemed illegal to own, the legal system will latch onto that ruling for eternity.

    So, you pretty much have to know the history and story for each questionable issue.



    Interesting. The coins that were most perplexing to us were modern "errors".

    Such as why the drama about the Sac/state quarter mules being fought for but hardly any qualms about multiple-coin die cap strikes.
  • RichieURichRichieURich Posts: 8,547 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Logic has a lot less to do with it than stubbornness, in my opinion.

    An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.

  • drwstr123drwstr123 Posts: 7,045 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Originally posted by: RichieURich
    Logic has a lot less to do with it than stubbornness, in my opinion.



    Ahhh. the beauty of unlimited resources.
  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭
    They are like children, upset that certain inconsequential issues that violate their territorial

    purvey dare to be possessed by the masses. Those of noted significance (i.e. '33 Saints, '64 Peace) will be fought as if it meant the downfall of humanity. Other issues, while of similar consequence, are ignored. Cheers, RickO
  • LindeDadLindeDad Posts: 18,766 ✭✭✭✭✭
    May have something to do with living up to the fact that their own agents are the cause in many cases?
  • 1Mike11Mike1 Posts: 4,422 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Not to hijack the thread, but does the government destroy the coins they confiscate to eliminate the possibility of them of ever reaching the public again?
    "May the silver waves that bear you heavenward be filled with love’s whisperings"

    "A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,682 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Such as why the drama about the Sac/state quarter mules being fought for but hardly any qualms about multiple-coin die cap strikes.


    There is considerable evidence to believe that the Sacajawea / quarter strikes were made intentionally by crooked mint employees and smuggled out of the facility. If that's true it sets a bad precedent which makes it profitable for mint employees to engage in misconduct and profit from it through payments from collectors who could encourage them to do it.

    Although it might seem impossible that a major error, like a die cap, could get out of the mint legitimately, it's still possible. With annual mintages that run into the billions, it's simply impossible to catch every miss struck cent that is made in a mass production facility. Such things can end up among bags of cents, and that's where they are most often found.

    As for other pieces, like the 1913 Liberty Nickel, I don't know why the government never went after the former mint employee, Brown, who made them. The evidence is clear that he clandestinely made them and stole them from the mint after he used mint facilities.

    Certainly the fact the Col. Ned Green, who had a lot of influence with people in the government when he was alive has something to do with it. Green was the first collector who owned all five of the coins. Once the pieces had changed hands it would have be hard to have prosecuted the subsequent owners because the government never did anything with Brown or Ned Green.

    The situation with the 1933 double eagle is politically motivated in my opinion. Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the surrender of the coins, and he is a huge historical and political icon among liberal politicians and government workers. The government has unlimited resources, and the people who implement government policy don't care how much it costs to prosecute the case to get the coins back. As a practical matter the government would get a flow of tax money almost every time these coins were sold at auction, but from the political sense, the U.S. Justice Department does not care about that.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,193 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The evidence is clear that he clandestinely made them and stole them from the mint after he used mint facilities.


    Kindly present said 'clear evidence'
  • goldengolden Posts: 9,972 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Originally posted by: RichieURich
    Logic has a lot less to do with it than stubbornness, in my opinion.


    image
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,682 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Originally posted by: tradedollarnut
    The evidence is clear that he clandestinely made them and stole them from the mint after he used mint facilities.


    Kindly present said 'clear evidence'


    Samuel Brown was mint employee from December 18, 1903 until November 14, 1913. From 1903 until 1907 he was an assistant curator of the U.S. Mint cabinet and after that he was a storekeeper. During that time he had access to the mint equipment.

    After he left the mint's employ in 1913 he lived in North Tonawanda, New York and served several terms as mayor of the city. He was also once a member of the U.S. Assay Commission. You needed some "pull" to get that appointment. The man had political connections.

    In December 1919 he ran an ad in The Numismatist. He offered to $500 for a 1913 Liberty Nickel in Proof "if possible." In early 1920 he raised the offer to $600. He knew he wouldn't have anyone take him up on that because he had all five of them. He displayed on them at the 1920 ANA Convention. Late in the year he again made his $600.

    After that the coins went into numismatic circulation. A Philadelphia coin dealer, August Wagner advertised them for sale and Col. Green bought them. It was now obvious that Brown's offer to buy the 1913 nickels had been a scheme to create a market for them so that he could line his pockets.

    It's obvious that these coins were not an official U.S. Mint issue. They got out of the mint at a time when the mint cracking down on stuff "going out the backdoor" because of the deal that William Wooden had made. For the two 1877 $50 gold piece patterns, Wooden got "a trunk load" of U.S. patterns. That deal did not sit well with a lot of people. It's obvious that Brown or a group surrounding him got those coins out of the mint illegally.

    I know that you have bought and sold one these coins, TDN, so you feel obligated to circle the wagons around it. But that does not obscure the fact that the coins got out of the mint on an unofficial basis and that Brown the access and means to do it.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • keyman64keyman64 Posts: 15,521 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The OP's question is one that many have asked for a loooooong time and there has never been a clearly defined answer. A lot of others have alluded to good answers though. Lawyers will frequently take on cases that they can WIN and seldom does it matter if their client was in the right or not. Same in this situation. If the government has allowed certain pieces to be publicly sold over and over again, a presedence has been set in a way so it becomes much more difficult for the government to change their mind and go after something like the 1913 V Nickels. Evidence and the case would be much more difficult for the government lawyers to win.
    "If it's not fun, it's not worth it." - KeyMan64
    Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners. :smile:
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,193 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Actually, I've bought and sold two of them. But your so called clear evidence is little more than supposition. There is ZERO evidence of how they were struck or how they left the mint. Just conjecture.
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,193 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Iirc, the Hobby Protection Act made all coins except 1933$20 and 1964$1 legal to own.
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,682 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Originally posted by: tradedollarnut
    Actually, I've bought and sold two of them. But your so called clear evidence is little more than supposition. There is ZERO evidence of how they were struck or how they left the mint. Just conjecture.


    And there is no evidence to support your position that they were issued legally. You have a dog in the hunt, and you need to defend it.

    Some of the rest of us have little respect for the 1913 Liberty Nickels. If I had one I'd sell it for the best price I could get, without belaboring the point, and buy some REAL coins.

    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,193 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I have no dog in the hunt - the coins are long gone. I just don't like people flat out making stories up and calling it 'clear evidence'.

    Just because you have no respect for something is no excuse to represent conjecture as fact
  • IrishMikeyIrishMikey Posts: 1,561 ✭✭✭
    Not to interrupt your discussion, but there are a few rather condemning points concerning the 1913 Liberty nickel:

    1) the coin was never authorized. Although at least one set of dies was produced, all Mint correspondence I have seen states pretty clearly that the Buffalo nickel would be replacing the Liberty nickel, beginning in 1913.

    2) the 5 pieces were poorly made -- they are kind of a hybrid between a Proof and a business strike. A comparison of the known 1913 Liberty nickels to other 20th century Proof Liberty nickels shows that the 1913's were not produced via the normal process, indicating a lack of coinage press expertise.

    3) there is no official mention in any documents. If the 1913 Liberty nickels had been made for assay purposes, or any other legitimate reason, it would have been documented somewhere.

    4) Samuel Brown did take out ads wanting to purchase 1913 Liberty nickels. Up to that point, there had been no mention of them in any numismatic literature I am aware of.

    5) shortly afterwards, Samuel Brown showed up with all 5 pieces. He then sold them for less than the $600 each he offered to pay in his ads.

    While there is no absolute proof that Mr. Brown either made these himself or had some help striking them, this seems well above the level of "conjecture." I would be fairly comfortable obtaining a conviction had I been prosecuting this case as "theft of government property."

    I have to side with Bill on this one.
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,193 ✭✭✭✭✭
    For decades it was presumed the 1884 trade dollars were made on the sly and spirited out of the mint for profit. Recently, correspondence came to light showing they were minted under normal processes and the survivors were kept from the melting pot when sales were halted. The fact that mint connected individuals were involved in later sales HAD ABSOLUTELY NO CONNECTION WITH THEIR ACTUAL PRODUCTION.

    Point being that while Brown may have ended up with them, any and all inferences about their production are just guesses, not clear facts.
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,682 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Things changed from 1884 to 1913. The Wooden deal I mentioned was still fresh on people's minds. It put a big damper on collectors obtaining pattern and "insider" coins after that. Those 1913 nickels did not get out of the mint legitimately. If they had Brown or whoever would not have waited six years before he started peddling them.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,193 ✭✭✭✭✭
    That's a significantly different issue than stating "The evidence is clear that he clandestinely made them and stole them from the mint after he used mint facilities."
  • CharlotteDudeCharlotteDude Posts: 3,146 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Compelling points, Mr Jones.

    'dude
    Got Crust....y gold?
  • Mission16Mission16 Posts: 1,413 ✭✭✭
    Very interesting! The kids are reading up on the 1913 Nickels now.
  • derrybderryb Posts: 37,560 ✭✭✭✭✭
    How they escaped the mint is the determining factor.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file