| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 1,851 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4691 Posts |
Were 1928 FRN notes with the payable in gold clause also illegal to own after 1933 like the gold certificates? If legal to own, I presume the gold clause was considered null and void. So what was the purpose of issuing both these notes and the gold certificates?
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7015 Posts |
Where's Cionfrog and SteveinTampa?
|
|
Moderator
 United States
188091 Posts |
Patience. They will come around eventually.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4637 Posts |
I saw this thread yesterday, but wanted to check some dates.
Beginning in 1933, the Treasury Department took the position that Gold Certificates of any sort could not legally be held by anyone, including numismatics. Banks were directed to turn in any they received. Currency collectors and dealers considered the regulations to be unfair. Then, through the intervention of paper money collector Amon G Carter Jr. on April 24, 1964, Secretary of the Treasury Douglas Dillon removed all restrictions. Notes came out of hiding and since then have been openly bought and sold.
I'm sorry, What was the question ?
Edited by SteveInTampa
05/19/2019 04:33 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4409 Posts |
I may be wrong in my thinking but here is my thought:
The Federal Reserve notes were obligations of that particular branch whereas Gold Certificates were obligations of the Treasury.
Others may disagree with my reasoning.
-MV
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
959 Posts |
After a quick search of the definition of both branches.....  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Quote:
The Federal Reserve notes were obligations of that particular branch whereas Gold Certificates were obligations of the Treasury. Currency was not so simple back then. From Dismal Facts: Federal Reserve Notes on the Fed's FRASER economic history website Quote:
When Federal Reserve notes debuted in 1914 (when the 12 regional Federal Reserve Banks opened), they were just one more option in the American currency market. Other parties issuing currency were the U.S. Treasury (which issued United States notes, silver certificates, and gold certificates) and nationally-chartered private banks (which issued national bank notes secured by U.S. bonds). Some of these were legal tender—money that can be used to legally discharge any debt—and Federal Reserve notes technically weren't. The Federal Reserve Act specified that the notes could be used to pay "taxes, customs, and other public dues" without saying anything about private debt. Plus the Federal Reserve Act specifically tied the Fed and any FRNs it issued to the gold standard whereas other forms of currency were not. All of which changed in '33-'34 when FDR took the US off of the gold standard (sort of, but that's another story)  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Sorry, gang - just back after a storm-induced 3-day loss of telephone service, whch for us means TV and internet as well.  Good input from several on this point. The situation with gold coins was much different, with the original law allowing ownership of not just collector gold coins and rarities, but (seldom mentioned fact) also up to $100 face value of common gold for almost everyone! Edited by Coinfrog
05/20/2019 4:12 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Quote:
The situation with gold coins was much different, with the original law allowing ownership of not just collector gold coins and rarities, but (seldom mentioned fact) also up to $100 face value of common gold for almost everyone! but, the Dec 28, 1933 order from the acting Treasury Secretary indicated Quote:
...THEREFORE, I, HENRY MORGENTHAU, JR., ACTING SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY, do hereby require every person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States forthwith to pay and deliver to the Treasurer of the United States all gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates situated in the United States, owned by such person except as follows:
(a) Gold bullion owned by a person now holding such gold under a license heretofore granted by or under authority of the Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to the executive order of August 28, 1933, relating to the hoarding, export and earmarking of gold coin, bullion, or currency and to transactions in foreign exchange;
(b) Gold coin having a recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coin (but not including quarter eagles, otherwise known as $2.50 pieces);
(c) Unmelted scrap gold and gold sweepings in an amount not exceeding in the aggregate $100 belonging to any one person; and gold which has been put through a process of fabrication for a specific and customary industrial, professional, or ornamental use;
(d) Gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates owned by a Federal Reserve Bank or the Reconstruction Finance Corporation; and
(e) Gold bullion and foreign gold coin now situated in the Philippine Islands, American Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, Panama Canal Zone, Puerto Rico, or the Virgin Islands of the United States, owned by a person not domiciled or doing business in the continental United States.
so, just what did they have against the lowly quarter eagle  |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4691 Posts |
But was the 1928 frn with gold clause required to be turned in?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
It's a good question, and one I don't believe I've ever heard discussed before.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Quote:
But was the 1928 frn with gold clause required to be turned in? Apparently not  Again from the FRASER website, here's an excerpt (bottom of pg.3 to top of pg. 4) from DOCUMENTS AND STATEMENTS PERTAINING TO THE BANKING EMERGENCYFederal Legislation, Executive Orders, Regulations, and Official Statements pertaining primarily to gold, currency, and foreign exchange PART II APRIL 5-JUNE 5, 1933 Quote:
To facilitate the identification of gold certificates, as distinguished from other currency, the Treasury points out, that gold certificates may be identified by the words 'Gold certificate' appearing thereon. In the case of gold certificates of the small-size currency, which were first issued in 1929, the title 'Gold certificate' appears on the face of the certificate, and in the case of gold certificates of the large-size currency (the issue of which was discontinued in 1929), the title 'Gold certificate' appears on the back. The serial number and the Treasury seal on the face of a gold certificate are printed in yellow. While Federal reserve notes and United States notes are re-deemable in gold and bear a provision to that effect, they are not 'gold certificates/ and are not, therefore, required to be surrendered. where I added the bold emphasis. The GPO printed posters that were displayed in Post Office's informing the public of exactly what had to be turned in. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4637 Posts |
My guess would be no.
I consider the obligation to be "fine print" and not subject to the same scrutiny given to paper money with the the words Gold Certificate in large writing over a Gold Seal and Gold serial numbers. Easy to spot and pull.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4691 Posts |
Thanks for the info Baddog.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
BadDog - Good digging, thanks.
|
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 1,851 |
|
Posted 05/19/2019 01:21 am
