| Author |
Replies: 16 / Views: 2,108 |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
954 Posts |
I have been following the story of the 10 new 1933 Double Eagles that have resurfaced recently. In Coin World this week it was noted that the government was asked to return the coins to their owner. Of course the government didn't. Standing on their long time claim that none were released therefore they are illegal. After the first one was made legal do you think the government will be forced to return the 10 coins to their owners..? catman 
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
980 Posts |
Well Catman, one thing is certain- the courts will be involved... A big difference with the "king Farouk" 33 $20 is that there was a valid export license, and as a foreigner, he wasn't required to return the coin when the feds mandated redemption of all gold coins and bullion. Also, the legal agreement for the "Farouk" 33 $20 specifically stated that no precednet was set should other 33s appear. I came across some interesting background on how Swett likely acquired the coins: https://goccf.com/t/2101Most of the reporting I've read don't include the fact that he previously (in 1944) sold some of the 33s which were subsequently confiscated and melted. Interesting too that this was done after the statute of limitations on theft I (in PA? federal? article doesn't specify) had exprired. What do folks think these would bring if sold legally? I don't see that they would bring $10M each, as some have speculated, just because the previous one went for 7M 3 yrs ago. Big differnce between a pop 1 coin and a pop 11 coin in value, it seems. However the mystique is worth alot! I'll say 3M eah- a complete WAG with no basis  An interesting story! Don
Edited by SFDukie 08/31/2005 1:46 pm
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
3147 Posts |
Well Catman, I will say the FAMILY, who ever they are, were crazy for ever surrendering those gold pieces in the first place! The government and the Mint has already made a huge error in judgement when they allowed the first one to be sold. PAST PRACTICE would come into play here and the family should have hired a high profile attorney and lived happily ever after, even if they did have to split the bounty with the mint!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
980 Posts |
quote: Originally posted by crystalk64
Well Catman, I will say the FAMILY, who ever they are, were crazy for ever surrendering those gold pieces in the first place! The government and the Mint has already made a huge error in judgement when they allowed the first one to be sold. PAST PRACTICE would come into play here and the family should have hired a high profile attorney and lived happily ever after, even if they did have to split the bounty with the mint!
Yeah, they had held on to the coins for what, 15 years after Swett's death? One would think that they'd test the water with one, rather than all 10. If the coin dealer friend of Swett's (referenced in PA article above) is correct, there is one 33 unaccounted for which the family might still have. What do you think they would bring at auction, Terry?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2724 Posts |
The government has to stand on this one. Let us think for a moment that they could return these 10 coins. It is a well known fact that the previous 9 melted coins were sold from this person in the 1940's and 1950's. So if the government allowed these 10 to exist in private hands, the original 9 owners could then sue the Mint for compensation. Also if these 10 were allowed to be owned, it would drop the value considerably. With 11 available, the price would probably fall to the 1 or 2 million mark. That would KILL the current legal owner that paid 7.59 million.
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
3147 Posts |
I think they will still bring considerable money but not near the over 7 million the last one brought. ND I still say "past practice" would stand up in a court of law as the U.S. has already made the mistake of letting one go, and as we all know quite recently, and a good legal team would tear the government up over that one. Still think they made a huge mistake turning them in. If nothing else, I would have tested the waters with one and kept my mouth shut on the other 9. Nothing is any more illegal than the 1913 Liberty "V" nickels nor more counterfeit and they are still out there. At least these gold coins were struck by the mint and they were AUTHORIZED to do so. Can't say that for those bogus nickels.
|
|
Rest in Peace
 United States
954 Posts |
The problem I have is this. Its my understanding that any coins that leave the mint are made legal tender before they do. I don't recall anyone saying or claiming that these coins were actually stolen from the mint property. This means that the mint released them and then tried to recall them. Translated the coins, were in fact, made legal tender and then removed from that status before they had all of them back.
The people who owned them at the time had a legal right to possesion and the government attempted to invalidate that right by demontizing the coins. I feel there is a real legal grounds for a lawsuit.
catman
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2724 Posts |
Technically the Federal Reserve is the agency that issues money. So until the Fed issues a particular coin or currency, it has NO LEGAL TENDER STATUS. Now of course, MANY coins fall under this catagory. 100% of all the patterns are techically illegal under the Mint guidelines, as NONE were ever issued. Other KEY coins, such as the 1894-S Dime, 1866 Dollar NO MOTTO coins, 1792 Half Dismes, 1792 Cents, 1792 Quarter, 1804 Dollar, 1804 Eagle, 1870-S $3 Gold, 1879 $4 Gold, and the list goes on and on. The Mint has a very funny way of determining what is legal and what is not. The rules have changed many times over the years, and without doubt will change again.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
89 Posts |
ND, I recall a story on another forum that a boatload of patterns became legal becuase a certain collector had some coins the Mint needed for the National Collection so they made a "trade".
Do you have any perspective on this, or can you cite a source?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
146 Posts |
These coin's seem like a lose lose situation. I imagine the owner's are never reinbursed for the coin's
|
|
Rest in Peace
 United States
954 Posts |
ND,
Would that mean that the proof sets. mint sets, and commemorative coins have no legal tender status? None of these is issued by the Federal Reserve.
catman
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2724 Posts |
quote: Originally posted by Connecticoin
ND, I recall a story on another forum that a boatload of patterns became legal becuase a certain collector had some coins the Mint needed for the National Collection so they made a "trade".
This is certianly true for the most part. A collector had several coins that the Mint wanted desperately, and they made the trade of several barrels of patterns, but alas, the time in which this was done, was before the Mint made rules regarding this type of transaction. You have to remember that the government makes and breaks rules almost daily, and it all depends on what suits them at the time. Mint sets and Proof sets, do not fall under the same catagory. This is also true of commemoratives. However, all the coins are Legal Tender under the provision of the law. I don't claim that this makes sense, as most of the laws do not. The government has a very funny way of deciding what is right and wrong, and when those rules apply.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
458 Posts |
Well I say to the owners sue!! sue!! hell I would. I do agree tho with terry, they made a HUGE, and I mean HUGE!! mistake turning in all 10--I woulda done 1 to test the waters and sue with just that one---especially if I already knew all 10 were legit--I donno who advised them to turn them in, but that guy should be ----ahhh-- hmmm--shot-- 
|
|
Valued Member
United States
458 Posts |
Can you believe it? I received my CW mag today and read that 1 of the 10 1933 saint was used as a "pocket peice"--Imagine, having a super rare coin being worn out and being used as a pocket peice.  The US Mint invited Mr. Mulvaney to come & photograph all the 10 saints for there detail inventory with high grade photos. In their eval, they found 1 to have been used as a pocket peice--  Can you imagine?I walk around with a 1997 SAE as a pocket peice, but a 1933 saint? wow thats a pocket peice LOL--Mr Switt had super high taste eh  Wish I woulda known the dude & been a close friend 
|
|
Rest in Peace
 United States
954 Posts |
You know gang. No ones knows how many they actually have. They turned in 10 but do they have 15 stashed..? Maybe they didn't turn in all that was in their hot little hands.
catman
|
|
Pillar Of The Community
3147 Posts |
All I got to say is if I manage to find some in some buried treasure the government doesn't have to worry about me turning them in as they will go up for sale! You are right about one thing Catman! The coins the Mint sells are not included in the Federal Reserves official money count and so it was NEVER released to the U.S. public! I guess if we spend a little now and then it will throw off all the government budget for an eternity? Boy, that would be a shame as the IRS can't keep track, right now, of what they took in just last week. They have no idea and if they did I will wager a weeks wages they don't have a clue where it is or where it went! Thats a fact!
|
| |
Replies: 16 / Views: 2,108 |