A novice question....
Mission16
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?
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?
0
Comments
I don't have an answer, other than it's the government. It probably depends on who's in charge at the time.
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
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.
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.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
Logic has a lot less to do with it than stubbornness, in my opinion.
Ahhh. the beauty of unlimited resources.
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
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
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.
Kindly present said 'clear evidence'
Logic has a lot less to do with it than stubbornness, in my opinion.
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.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
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.
Just because you have no respect for something is no excuse to represent conjecture as fact
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.
Point being that while Brown may have ended up with them, any and all inferences about their production are just guesses, not clear facts.
'dude
ZeroHedge makes debut at White House press corps briefing