Great story. Thank you. I hate to be the skeptic, but ...
I am not able to match the pictures with those given by Wexler and Flynn (showing a weak second S in STATES as well as doubling on the reverse), however this may be too difficult to do without being able to inspect the coin itself.
However, let’s assume that the coin is legitimate, that the Secret Service ignores the coin, and that PCGS slabs it as a 65 or 66.
Question: what do you think the coin would bring at auction?
Wow! The Smithsonian example looks different. Was it struck from proof dies?
.....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
Two things that make the 1974 aluminum Lincoln different from the other coins mentioned (1913 Libnick, 1933 Saint, etc.) are:
1. It's known that the 1974 aluminum cents were distributed outside the mint. The Mint would have a difficult time saying these were stolen property. They didn't get them all back when they asked, and that's why they are snotty about it.
2. No one has tested the legality issue. As was mentioned, the government seems to be consistent about coin issues. Until push comes to shove, we won't actually know what the government's position is on this coin even though the Mint said the 1974 aluminum cents are subject to confiscation. That's their opinion - who knows what would stand up in court. But I certainly understand why nobody wants to pay big legal fees just to prove a point.
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.
The government has effectively abandoned its right to pursue the 1913 nickels. Same can be said of all early US patterns. (See definition of the "Doctrine of Laches" here) They still have the right to go after the 74 aluminum cents, 64-D Peace dollars and 33 Saints because they have always claimed the right to do so.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>The situation with the 1974 aluminum cent is similar as that for the 1933 double eagle and 1964D Peace dollar in that the cents were struck with the intent to circulate and a number of specimens were handed out to congressmen and the like, providing a window of opportunity to legally have one in one's possession until they were recalled. Again those who had them would have had to turn them back in, but of course not all of them were. >>
One more wrench to throw in. When the mint made their test runs on the 74 aluminum cent they used one of the production line presses and they have admitted that it would have been possible for some of the planchets or struck coins to have gotten "stuck" or been left in the press when the run was completed and then later been dislodged and gotten mixed in with the coins in a regular production run leaving the mint legally. In that case they WOULD be considered legal to own since they would have left the mint through regular channels.
(Anyone notice the mint has a big problem with these 74 aluminums but no problems at all with the Martha Washingtion pieces?)
I was chatting with a dealer, who specializes in error coins, at a local show today. He was at the Frederick show and we were talking about the coin. He says it's a plated copper cent (assuming we're talking about the same coin, purchased by a dealer from WV). He had the opportunity to weigh it, and it was 3.1g.
<< <i> The Mint would have a difficult time saying these were stolen property. >>
After what the Goverment did with the 1933 double eagle, I woudn't put anything past them. They demanded to be partners with the sale of the 1933 $20 and took half the money from the sale......That was cheesy.
I was one of the lucky few who got to hold this fantastic coin in my own hands. Since I didn't know much about it, I was educated about it and I then realized what I has holding onto. I was very lucky that the new onwer let me take a long look at it.
I'm sorry for those who expected me at the show around noon on Saturday. I went to a Big Bad Voodoo Daddy concert to Dewey Beach, DE on Friday night. I didn't expect to be up until 2am drinking beers with the band. I got up a bit later than what I wanted. On the way to Fredrick, I got stuck behind farm vehicles on rt 404 which slowed down traffic to about 15mph with no way to around these things. Then they closed 1 lane on the Chesapeake Bay Bridge wich casued even more delays. At least I got to talk to Don and Ken for a while. I did to get to talk to Mike Dixon for a second or two but he was reall busy with the auction. Hopefully the next Frederick show, I'll be able to get there alot earlier.
PCGS Currency: HOF 2013, Best Low Ball Set 2009-2014, 2016, 2018. Appreciation Award 2015, Best Showcase 2018, Numerous others.
Some on this board have question the authenticity of the coin in question.While admittedly I didn't weigh the coin,I did look at it closely.If it was fake,it was the best one I've ever seen.I have pics also of the real one,and it looked IMHO to be exactly the same! It did not appear thicker than normal.The strike was almost prooflike,and if there is anything I know is Proof Lincolns.As I said earlier on in this thread,I'd base my meager reputation that I looked at the real Mc Coy.For what ever that is worth.You all will have to be the judge of that.I for one hope the new owner has it authenticated by David Hall himself.I really don't know if it will happen.I also don't know if we here will ever hear about it even if it did.I would like to at least have my opinion ratified by the experts.There is no way to satisfy all of you,so I won't try.All I'll say is I counted this encounter as one of the most pleasurable in all my collecting years.
But I'd agree with Don. There was no "rush" to examine the coin. As far as weight, who can say what is correct as a comparision coin is not available. The outstanding strike.....would that be on an error coin? I doubt it.
Edited to add: The thickness appeared normal to me as well.
Wow super nice coin, I know there is another one floating around here in texas somewhere. Do any of you know what the coin sold for, Are we talking 5 or 6 figures?
That was an interesting post you made. The reason why I've always felt that at least a few 1964D Peace dollars are out there, are two: 1) It has been well documented that they were struck and 2) There have been rumors over the years of people who have actually seen one. It would be interesting to know how many people out there have at least one, and why none have exchanged hands "under the table" at a coin show, a la the aluminum cent. Of course all of this publicity and talk builds up the mystique and plays right in to the hands of any people who have one, or more. I have no doubt that one will surface eventually, at least long enough to get a photo of it.
One more comment, and hopefully I'm not straying too far off topic. There have been rumors of the existence of 1964 Franklins. The fact that there is no documentation that I know of, that any were struck and no rumors of anybody seeing one, leads me to believe that these don't exist. Of course I could be wrong.
A genuine Aluminum pattern will weigh about 0.94 grams or 30% of a 1974 copper Penny. Replica 1974 patterns have been made by electro-plating the copper cents to look like Aluminum.
It sure would be interesting to know the weight of the coin in those pictures...
Time sure flies when you don't know what you are doing...
<< <i>(Anyone notice the mint has a big problem with these 74 aluminums but no problems at all with the Martha Washingtion pieces?) >>
I was going to raise the same point. However, I remember reading that the Mint admitted it loaned out the Martha Washington dies to outside coin metal strip or planchet vendors, and that there is no way of telling whether a given MW piece was a Mint-made pattern or a test strike manufactured privately. Which also makes me wonder why people pay moon money for those coins.
Sean Reynolds
Incomplete planchets wanted, especially Lincoln Cents & type coins.
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
Sean, I've said that several times about the M Washington pieces. Not only can't you tell who made them, you can't tell WHEN they were made. For all we know they were made last week.
Don't think laches applies against the US Govt. But, the US Govt. is pretty inconsistent about these things. The reason why the 1933 $20 Saint was made legal (other than a smokin' lawsuit that Uncle Sam didn't want to lose) was that an export license had been issued to send the coin to King Farouk (who routinely polished his coins with lacquer to make them shine shine shine). I think the US Govt is missing a big earnings opportunity with these-- issue ten a year and acution them with the best auction houses. Let the collectors pay and the tax payers reap the benefit. The 1913 nickels were illegally made for God's sake; where is the Secret Service and Treasury Dept. when you need them. As for the old patterns, the Mint traded footlockers full of them legitimately to Woodin when they wanted something he had (which I forget what it was this moment).
<< <i>...King Farouk (who routinely polished his coins with lacquer to make them shine shine shine >>
Lawman, my understanding is that King Farouk cleaned his coins - that is far different from simply applying lacquer, which can often be removed without incident.
The 1913 nickels were illegally made for God's sake
They would have a tough time proving that. For every illegal scenario, a perfectly legal one can be professed. The truth is that no one actually knows exactly the circumstances behind the creation of the 1913 liberty head nickels. The theories put forth are just that - theories. Tough to sieze a coin off a theory..... especially a proof coin that was treated as a medal, not money, at the time of striking.
I'm not saying you're wrong, as a lot of what I've posted is my opinion (excluding the facts.) It's just that as I see it, the 1913 Liberty head nickels are "more illegal" (my term) than the 1933 Saint or the 1974 aluminum cent. The mint apparently had the dies ready if needed, but they were not needed and the mint had no plans to strike any '13 Liberties for circulation (what the mint should have done is destroy the dies as soon as they knew they weren't going to be used.) That wasn't the case with the '33 Saint and the aluminum cent. The mint did strike those with the intent to circulate them, and either A) gave them out (aluminum cent) or allowed them to be purchased legally ('33 Saint and '64D Peace.) And yet, the SS does nothing about the nickels. You can throw patterns into the mix, as well. As I said, it's a complex and crazy issue--one that can be debated for a looooong time.
The reason the 1933's were siezed is because they were never officially released as money [ie: monetized], the very reason for their existance. The reason the 1913's will never be siezed is because they didn't have to be monetized. They weren't even treated as money. They were proofs and were treated as medals.
Here are some verbatim excerpts from past issues of COINage, for what they are worth:
A) From "The Martha Washington Mystery Coin," by David T. Alexander, August 2000 COINage: "According to Jenkins (William A. Jenkins in the April 4, 2000 Numismatic News,) DuPont had been commissioned by the U.S. Mint to develop clad alloys, from which the copper-nickel-clad copper in use today was selected. Supervisor Jenkins recalled that his technicians prepared some 50,000 pounds of clad metal--a copper core clad with copper-nickel or silver--for testing at the skeptical Philadelphia Mint in May, 1965. From this mass of clad metal, between 500,000 and 600,000 Martha Washington pieces were struck in all three sizes."
"Jenkins told Numismatic News in a letter to the editor of May 2, 2000: 'Secret Service agents were clearly in evidence to insure that none of the patterns fell into errant hands.' "
From "The Noble 1913," by Ed Reiter, August 2003 COINage: "As far as the Mint was concerned, the last Liberty nickels were those dated 1912.....Official Mint records made no mention of 1913 Liberties."
"It's now known that dies had been prepared for a 1913 Liberty nickel, just in case the Buffalo design failed to pass muster for any reason."
"The 1913 Liberty nickel dies were locked in a vault at the Philadelphia Mint, along with the dies for the new Buffalo coin, and should have been destroyed once the latter went into production."
"Brown (Mint employee Samuel W. Brown), it turned out, had worked at the Philadelphia Mint from 1903 to 1913. What's more, he was thought to have had access to the dies for the 1913 (Liberty) nickels. Understandably, many collectors have concluded ever since that Brown either struck the coins himself or had them struck by someone else, then spirited them out of the Mint and held onto them until a respectful time had elapsed--till the heat was off, so to speak."
C) From "Saint Gaudens 'Saints:' Vindicated!," by Tom DeLorey, December 2002 COINage: "Numismatic researcher Robert W. Julian has now clearly established, in a copyrighted story that appeared in the October 1, 2002 issue of Numismatic News, that a legitimate window of opportunity for exchanging older date $20 gold pieces for 1933 $20s existed between the date that 1933 $20s were first struck, March 15, 1933, and the Executive Order of April 5, 1933, that called for American citizens to surrender all gold other than numismatic holdings, plus up to $100 face value in common gold coin."
"The first delivery of 1933 $20 gold pieces took place on March 15. For the next three weeks, anybody with the clout (as we call it here in Chicago) could have gone to the Mint and exchanged another $20 gold piece for a 1933 $20."
D) From "Forbidden Coins," by Tom DeLorey, September 2002 COINage: "Nothing happened for several months--and so, in the spring of 1965, (President Lyndon) Johnson ordered the Mint to prepare to stike new silver dollars. The Mint dutifully made several working dies, reportedly using the basic Peace dollar design and relief of the 1922-1935 issues, with the obverse dated 1964 (in keeping with the date freeze on the smaller denominations) and the reverse mint-marked 'D' since the striking would be done only at the Colorado facility."
"In May of 1965, the Mint struck a reported 316,076 1964D Peace dollars from multiple die pairs to test the striking characteristics of the dies and to derive a reasonable estimate of the expected die life should production commence, this much is fact."
"It is reliably reported that on the day the new dollars were struck, Denver Mint employees were allowed to buy two specimens of the coins from the Mint's cashier as they left the building. I (the author) have a letter from the late, great Denver-area coin dealer Dan Brown stating that Fern Miller, the Denver Mint superintendent in 1965, had told Brown that it was indeed true that Mint employees were allowed to buy samples of the coins."
"We chatted for awhile, and I asked him (a visitor to the ANA in the early 1980s) if he was working at the Mint when the 1964 Peace dollars were struck in 1965. He said that he was. I then asked him if it was true that on the day the coins were struck, the employees of the Mint were allowed to buy samples of them. He said that that was true, and that he did not bother to buy any since this was just another coin to him, but that several people did buy one or two. He then said that the next morning, when he got to work, all of the employees were told that anybody who had bought the coins the night before had to return them or be fired. He said that most people did bring them back, but that one guy he knew had said that he had spent the coins in a bar on his way home the night before, and that the man did not lose his job."
That "many collectors have concluded" how the 1913's were minted hardly contradicts anything I've said. Collectors often conclude many things that aren't necessarily true.....
Regardless of what one thinks of the various pieces mentioned in this thread (I happen to love the lore of the 1913 Liberty nickels), I'd sure feel a lot more secure that my 1913 Liberty nickel wouldn't be confiscated, than I would about some of the others.
The '33 Saints were released as money, if they weren't "monetized," why were they allowed to be purchased? As for the 1913 Liberties being proofs, I can't say they were or weren't. All I know is that dies were prepared for circulation strikes and no mention was made as to whether or not proof dies were also prepared.
if they weren't "monetized," why were they allowed to be purchased?
One of life's little mysteries....
As for the 1913 Liberties being proofs, I can't say they were or weren't. All I know is that dies were prepared for circulation strikes and no mention was made as to whether or not proof dies were also prepared
Proof is a method of manufacture that doesn't necessarily require separate dies to be produced. In fact, the low quality of the proof surfaces of the 5 specimens would point toward special dies NOT being involved in their creation. But they are proofs nonetheless....
Proof or not shouldn't matter. Proofs are monetized also. If the gov't decides that they didn't release the coins in a legal fashion they can take them back.
Proof or not shouldn't matter. Proofs are monetized also
I don't believe that you are correct in multiple areas: First of all, the rules in effect in 1913 govern the legitimacy of the 5 coins, not what is in effect today. Coins were not monetized until the Federal Reserve system was put into place, which occurred after the creation of the 5 coins. Also, proofs were indeed treated in a much different manner than circulation strikes on the books of the mint. That's why past directors of the mint were able to create so many fantasy pieces [none of which have been siezed, by the way!].
I think that if the government wanted to (the SS), they could make a decision to seize the 1913 Liberties also, but it appears they're not going to. It's been discussed in many an article. Again speculation. If coins are not "monetized" when they are purchased from the Mint, and there must have been many, many different coins purchased that way over the years past, how will the government know which ones to take back?
I talked to Mark Borchardt of Bowers And Merena Galleries, and he told me the 1913 nickels were "semi-proofs." Perhaps that meant that the coins used some, but not all, of the special methods of manufacture that were used to make Proofs in those days, or perhaps some of those manufacturing methods were only done halfway. Perhaps the mystery coiners were in a hurry to make the coins, or perhaps didn't know too well what they were doing.
Thanks for that info. Wow, that really muddies the waters, doesn't it? Semi-proof sounds like prooflike to me, which would imply not a proof. Sort of like semi-pregnant and pregnant, it either is or it isn't. But I really don't know, just curious.
Seriously though, I,m thinking the reason why would be the dies were never used before thus producing the few coins as PL. Doesnt that make since to anyone else?
Comments
I am not able to match the pictures with those given by Wexler and Flynn (showing a weak second S in STATES as well as doubling on the reverse), however this may be too difficult to do without being able to inspect the coin itself.
However, let’s assume that the coin is legitimate, that the Secret Service ignores the coin, and that PCGS slabs it as a 65 or 66.
Question: what do you think the coin would bring at auction?
My guess is at least $300,000.
You got it???
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
"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
Cameron Kiefer
Byron
My first YOU SUCK on May 6 2005
1. It's known that the 1974 aluminum cents were distributed outside the mint. The Mint would have a difficult time saying these were stolen property. They didn't get them all back when they asked, and that's why they are snotty about it.
2. No one has tested the legality issue. As was mentioned, the government seems to be consistent about coin issues. Until push comes to shove, we won't actually know what the government's position is on this coin even though the Mint said the 1974 aluminum cents are subject to confiscation. That's their opinion - who knows what would stand up in court. But I certainly understand why nobody wants to pay big legal fees just to prove a point.
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.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>The situation with the 1974 aluminum cent is similar as that for the 1933 double eagle and 1964D Peace dollar in that the cents were struck with the intent to circulate and a number of specimens were handed out to congressmen and the like, providing a window of opportunity to legally have one in one's possession until they were recalled. Again those who had them would have had to turn them back in, but of course not all of them were. >>
One more wrench to throw in. When the mint made their test runs on the 74 aluminum cent they used one of the production line presses and they have admitted that it would have been possible for some of the planchets or struck coins to have gotten "stuck" or been left in the press when the run was completed and then later been dislodged and gotten mixed in with the coins in a regular production run leaving the mint legally. In that case they WOULD be considered legal to own since they would have left the mint through regular channels.
(Anyone notice the mint has a big problem with these 74 aluminums but no problems at all with the Martha Washingtion pieces?)
I was chatting with a dealer, who specializes in error coins, at a local show today. He was at the Frederick show and we were talking about the coin. He says it's a plated copper cent (assuming we're talking about the same coin, purchased by a dealer from WV). He had the opportunity to weigh it, and it was 3.1g.
<< <i> The Mint would have a difficult time saying these were stolen property. >>
After what the Goverment did with the 1933 double eagle, I woudn't put anything past them. They demanded to be partners with the sale of the 1933 $20 and took half the money from the sale......That was cheesy.
bubble bubble bo bubble fana fana fo fana me mi mo mana
LOL
if real thats deff cool...but it appears plated..i really wish theyd get it authenticated.
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
I'm sorry for those who expected me at the show around noon on Saturday. I went to a Big Bad Voodoo Daddy concert to Dewey Beach, DE on Friday night. I didn't expect to be up until 2am drinking beers with the band. I got up a bit later than what I wanted. On the way to Fredrick, I got stuck behind farm vehicles on rt 404 which slowed down traffic to about 15mph with no way to around these things. Then they closed 1 lane on the Chesapeake Bay Bridge wich casued even more delays. At least I got to talk to Don and Ken for a while. I did to get to talk to Mike Dixon for a second or two but he was reall busy with the auction. Hopefully the next Frederick show, I'll be able to get there alot earlier.
Registry 1909-1958 Proof Lincolns
But I'd agree with Don. There was no "rush" to examine the coin. As far as weight, who can say what is correct as a comparision coin is not available. The outstanding strike.....would that be on an error coin? I doubt it.
Edited to add: The thickness appeared normal to me as well.
Free Trial
That was an interesting post you made. The reason why I've always felt that at least a few 1964D Peace dollars are out there, are two: 1) It has been well documented that they were struck and 2) There have been rumors over the years of people who have actually seen one. It would be interesting to know how many people out there have at least one, and why none have exchanged hands "under the table" at a coin show, a la the aluminum cent. Of course all of this publicity and talk builds up the mystique and plays right in to the hands of any people who have one, or more. I have no doubt that one will surface eventually, at least long enough to get a photo of it.
One more comment, and hopefully I'm not straying too far off topic. There have been rumors of the existence of 1964 Franklins. The fact that there is no documentation that I know of, that any were struck and no rumors of anybody seeing one, leads me to believe that these don't exist. Of course I could be wrong.
One more thing: when you go to see that collection, PLEASE try and get a good photo of that 1964D Peace!!
<< <i> As far as weight, who can say what is correct as a comparision coin is not available. . >>
This site:
http://lakdiva.org/coins/pattern/1974_US_01c_al_oms.html
says
A genuine Aluminum pattern will weigh about 0.94 grams or 30% of a 1974 copper Penny. Replica 1974 patterns have been made by electro-plating the copper cents to look like Aluminum.
It sure would be interesting to know the weight of the coin in those pictures...
CoinPeople.com || CoinWiki.com || NumisLinks.com
No, the coin was not purchased by a dealer from WV. Are we really talking about the same coin?
Free Trial
<< <i>(Anyone notice the mint has a big problem with these 74 aluminums but no problems at all with the Martha Washingtion pieces?) >>
I was going to raise the same point. However, I remember reading that the Mint admitted it loaned out the Martha Washington dies to outside coin metal strip or planchet vendors, and that there is no way of telling whether a given MW piece was a Mint-made pattern or a test strike manufactured privately. Which also makes me wonder why people pay moon money for those coins.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
<< <i>...King Farouk (who routinely polished his coins with lacquer to make them shine shine shine >>
Lawman, my understanding is that King Farouk cleaned his coins - that is far different from simply applying lacquer, which can often be removed without incident.
They would have a tough time proving that. For every illegal scenario, a perfectly legal one can be professed. The truth is that no one actually knows exactly the circumstances behind the creation of the 1913 liberty head nickels. The theories put forth are just that - theories. Tough to sieze a coin off a theory..... especially a proof coin that was treated as a medal, not money, at the time of striking.
Yes, I have noticed things like that, which touches on the point I was trying to make.
I'm not saying you're wrong, as a lot of what I've posted is my opinion (excluding the facts.) It's just that as I see it, the 1913 Liberty head nickels are "more illegal" (my term) than the 1933 Saint or the 1974 aluminum cent. The mint apparently had the dies ready if needed, but they were not needed and the mint had no plans to strike any '13 Liberties for circulation (what the mint should have done is destroy the dies as soon as they knew they weren't going to be used.) That wasn't the case with the '33 Saint and the aluminum cent. The mint did strike those with the intent to circulate them, and either A) gave them out (aluminum cent) or
Two cows of a different color.
A) From "The Martha Washington Mystery Coin," by David T. Alexander, August 2000 COINage: "According to Jenkins (William A. Jenkins in the April 4, 2000 Numismatic News,) DuPont had been commissioned by the U.S. Mint to develop clad alloys, from which the copper-nickel-clad copper in use today was selected. Supervisor Jenkins recalled that his technicians prepared some 50,000 pounds of clad metal--a copper core clad with copper-nickel or silver--for testing at the skeptical Philadelphia Mint in May, 1965. From this mass of clad metal, between 500,000 and 600,000 Martha Washington pieces were struck in all three sizes."
"Jenkins told Numismatic News in a letter to the editor of May 2, 2000: 'Secret Service agents were clearly in evidence to insure that none of the patterns fell into errant hands.' "
"It's now known that dies had been prepared for a 1913 Liberty nickel, just in case the Buffalo design failed to pass muster for any reason."
"The 1913 Liberty nickel dies were locked in a vault at the Philadelphia Mint, along with the dies for the new Buffalo coin, and should have been destroyed once the latter went into production."
"Brown (Mint employee Samuel W. Brown), it turned out, had worked at the Philadelphia Mint from 1903 to 1913. What's more, he was thought to have had access to the dies for the 1913 (Liberty) nickels. Understandably, many collectors have concluded ever since that Brown either struck the coins himself or had them struck by someone else, then spirited them out of the Mint and held onto them until a respectful time had elapsed--till the heat was off, so to speak."
C) From "Saint Gaudens 'Saints:' Vindicated!," by Tom DeLorey, December 2002 COINage: "Numismatic researcher Robert W. Julian has now clearly established, in a copyrighted story that appeared in the October 1, 2002 issue of Numismatic News, that a legitimate window of opportunity for exchanging older date $20 gold pieces for 1933 $20s existed between the date that 1933 $20s were first struck, March 15, 1933, and the Executive Order of April 5, 1933, that called for American citizens to surrender all gold other than numismatic holdings, plus up to $100 face value in common gold coin."
"The first delivery of 1933 $20 gold pieces took place on March 15. For the next three weeks, anybody with the clout (as we call it here in Chicago) could have gone to the Mint and exchanged another $20 gold piece for a 1933 $20."
D) From "Forbidden Coins," by Tom DeLorey, September 2002 COINage: "Nothing happened for several months--and so, in the spring of 1965, (President Lyndon) Johnson ordered the Mint to prepare to stike new silver dollars. The Mint dutifully made several working dies, reportedly using the basic Peace dollar design and relief of the 1922-1935 issues, with the obverse dated 1964 (in keeping with the date freeze on the smaller denominations) and the reverse mint-marked 'D' since the striking would be done only at the Colorado facility."
"In May of 1965, the Mint struck a reported 316,076 1964D Peace dollars from multiple die pairs to test the striking characteristics of the dies and to derive a reasonable estimate of the expected die life should production commence, this much is fact."
"It is reliably reported that on the day the new dollars were struck, Denver Mint employees were allowed to buy two specimens of the coins from the Mint's cashier as they left the building. I (the author) have a letter from the late, great Denver-area coin dealer Dan Brown stating that Fern Miller, the Denver Mint superintendent in 1965, had told Brown that it was indeed true that Mint employees were allowed to buy samples of the coins."
"We chatted for awhile, and I asked him (a visitor to the ANA in the early 1980s) if he was working at the Mint when the 1964 Peace dollars were struck in 1965. He said that he was. I then asked him if it was true that on the day the coins were struck, the employees of the Mint were allowed to buy samples of them. He said that that was true, and that he did not bother to buy any since this was just another coin to him, but that several people did buy one or two. He then said that the next morning, when he got to work, all of the employees were told that anybody who had bought the coins the night before had to return them or be fired. He said that most people did bring them back, but that one guy he knew had said that he had spent the coins in a bar on his way home the night before, and that the man did not lose his job."
See the excerpt from C and B above, it kind of contradicts what you're saying.
Wow. You own a 1913 Liberty nickel!!!!
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.
Not according to the treasury
if they weren't "monetized," why were they allowed to be purchased?
One of life's little mysteries....
As for the 1913 Liberties being proofs, I can't say they were or weren't. All I know is that dies were prepared for circulation strikes and no mention was made as to whether or not proof dies were also prepared
Proof is a method of manufacture that doesn't necessarily require separate dies to be produced. In fact, the low quality of the proof surfaces of the 5 specimens would point toward special dies NOT being involved in their creation. But they are proofs nonetheless....
I don't believe that you are correct in multiple areas: First of all, the rules in effect in 1913 govern the legitimacy of the 5 coins, not what is in effect today. Coins were not monetized until the Federal Reserve system was put into place, which occurred after the creation of the 5 coins. Also, proofs were indeed treated in a much different manner than circulation strikes on the books of the mint. That's why past directors of the mint were able to create so many fantasy pieces [none of which have been siezed, by the way!].
Linkified
Linkified
Thanks for that info. Wow, that really muddies the waters, doesn't it? Semi-proof sounds like prooflike to me, which would imply not a proof. Sort of like semi-pregnant and pregnant, it either is or it isn't. But I really don't know, just curious.
Seriously though, I,m thinking the reason why would be the dies were never used before thus producing
the few coins as PL. Doesnt that make since to anyone else?
We'll use our hands and hearts and if we must we'll use our heads.