Director Kimball's attempt to confiscate patterns -1887 1 1

[RWB]

Here is a copy of Mint Director James Kimball's letter claiming more than 160 lots of pattern pieces in the Linderman Auction were U.S. government property, and attempting to confiscate them. Something similar was attempted in 1910 by Director Andrew. Both failed, although Andrew had dozens of pattern dies and hubs destroyed.

 

Edited December 26, 2021 by RWB

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/26/2021 at 11:16 AM, RWB said:

Here is a copy of Mint Director James Kimball's letter claiming more than 160 lots of pattern pieces in the Linderman Auction were U.S. government property, and attempting to confiscate them. Something similar was attempted in 1910 by Director Andrew. Both failed, although Andrew had dozens of pattern dies and hubs destroyed.

 

Respectfully, I fail to see how a matter of  time-sensitive, urgent importance could be expected to reach its destination, some 240 miles away, via the post office on such short notice.

[RWB]

At that time the Post Office had specific deadlines for overnight delivery to major cities. I don't have a complete schedule, but there was a 7pm pickup in Washington (Treasury Building) for delivery in Philadelphia and New York the next morning. Mail was collected and sorted en route over night. A day shift took over in NYC for the trip to Washington DC.

A close look shows that Kimball’s letter was entirely bluster. He cited no law, regulation or other violation, and presented no authority on his part to take any action at all. Bangs & Co. could have reasonably ignored it.

Edited December 26, 2021 by RWB

[RWB]

To excerpt a little more from my draft about restrikes, novodels, and pattern pieces:

The singular numismatic-related act of James Kimball’s term was his attempt to prevent sale of pattern and experimental pieces owned by the heirs of late director Henry R. Linderman. His demand letter to auctioneer Bangs & Company, dated just four days before the scheduled auction, claimed that lots number 55 through 171 – 118 pieces in all – were United States property and demanded their return “to the custody of the United States government.”

This action, and subsequent response by the United States Attorney and the Linderman family, exposes several core elements of manufacture, issuance and distribution of pattern pieces. However, before we look closely at the Linderman sale, we have to understand how director Kimball came to his personal opinion about these pieces.

---

 

Edited December 26, 2021 by RWB

[Henri Charriere]

No way I'm going to be able to go to sleep to-nite without knowing the outcome...   🐓 

[RWB]

You might have to have a few more sleepless nights....the research is several years from being complete.

[StrikeOutXXX]

Judging by the auction catalog - with prices annotated - it's likely the outcome was they were sold.

https://archive.org/details/catalogueofvalua00lowl_2/mode/2up?q=june+28+1887+auction

[RWB]

The coins were eventually sold, but the information disclosed during the legal squabbling tells us much about the process and attitudes relating to pattern pieces.

[Henri Charriere]

🐓:  More sleepless nites, boss!

Q.A.:  That's okay.  The ends justify the intermittent intervening means.  

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/26/2021 at 6:32 PM, RWB said:

To excerpt a little more from my draft about restrikes, novodels, and pattern pieces:

The singular numismatic-related act of James Kimball’s term was his attempt to prevent sale of pattern and experimental pieces owned by the heirs of late director Henry R. Linderman. His demand letter to auctioneer Bangs & Company, dated just four days before the scheduled auction, claimed that lots number 55 through 171 – 118 pieces in all – were United States property and demanded their return “to the custody of the United States government.”

Seems to have some overlap with the 1933 Saint DE's, no ?

[RWB]

No. Totally different. 1933 DE were regular issue US coins.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/28/2021 at 9:03 AM, RWB said:

No. Totally different. 1933 DE were regular issue US coins.

But if higher-ups were allowed to "help themselves" to patterns, wouldn't the same be expected of a forthcoming regular issue that just jumps the gun by a few days or weeks or is awaiting the mass release of a coin produced in bulk and still being produced ?

On a related subject, do you think that ALL of the Barber MCMVII UHR's were obtained legally via arms-length transactions for fair market value ?

[RWB]

We presently have no information to indicate that any of the pattern pieces owned by Charles Barber were obtained illegally. Everyone who got one paid face value for it including Augusta S-G.

On 12/29/2021 at 2:16 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

But if higher-ups were allowed to "help themselves" to patterns, wouldn't the same be expected of a forthcoming regular issue that just jumps the gun by a few days or weeks or is awaiting the mass release of a coin produced in bulk and still being produced ?

Nope. You're making a long string of assumptions that lead to a false analogy.

[RWB]

There's nothing wrong with speculations --- but they do not result in sound conclusions unless backed with facts.

Edited December 29, 2021 by RWB

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/29/2021 at 9:24 AM, RWB said:

Everyone who got one paid face value for it including Augusta S-G.

Very shabby, if true.  I would have placed it in a be-ribboned holder and pinned one to his chest at a public ceremony.

[numisport]

Just imagine if Pattern coins were produced today....... which dealers or TPG associates would be selected to qualify for purchasing rights ? And then imagine what a mess there would be when usmint.gov crashed. 

Actually sales of such Patterns could never be disclosed for obvious reasons.

[RWB]

Pattern and experimental pieces continue to be made for internal US Mint use. During the past century, accounting for planchets, dies, hubs and other materials has become increasingly rigorous. Information about most of them only appears decades later when documents find their way to NARA.

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/30/2021 at 11:18 AM, numisport said:

Actually sales of such Patterns could never be disclosed for obvious reasons.

[Patterns? Right now I'm churning out Chiquita-brand stickers from Guatemala for my brand-new EPQ double-sawbucks. Next up: patterns!]  😉 

[numisport]

On 12/30/2021 at 11:51 AM, RWB said:

Pattern and experimental pieces continue to be made for internal US Mint use. During the past century, accounting for planchets, dies, hubs and other materials has become increasingly rigorous. Information about most of them only appears decades later when documents find their way to NARA.

I've always suspected such pieces exist but why all the secrecy ? Beyond anti-counterfeit measures what would be the harm with offering these at auction ?

[RWB]

The initial policy of selling patterns and proof coins was intended to suppress speculation. The same applied to small circulation mintages in the 1880s. That never worked. Changes to Mint Regulations dated October 10, 1887 were generally effective at suppressing pattern piece sales. (1896 and 1907 being the primary exceptions.) Here's the most active section of revised regulations:

4. Experimental pieces of proposed designs or of new coins for the official use of the
Director of the Mint under Section 3510 R.S., and on his written requisition, shall be
struck in such metal or alloy only, and of such weight and fineness, as prescribed by
law for coins of the same denomination. Such experimental pieces will be receipted
for by the Director, and if not adopted for regular coinage during the same year, shall
be defaced by him as soon as the use is subserved for which they were struck, and
forthwith returned to the superintendent, who shall cause them to be melted in his
presence, and that of the melter and refiner, when both of these officers shall join in a
written statement to that effect, which statement, to be sent to the Director of the
Mint, shall be a voucher to the Director of the Mint, and so put upon record in the

regular archives of the Bureau of the Mint. Such pieces, if adopted for coinage, will
be returned by the Director, and receipted for by the superintendent.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 1/1/2022 at 10:13 AM, numisport said:

I've always suspected such pieces exist but why all the secrecy ? Beyond anti-counterfeit measures what would be the harm with offering these at auction ?

There was an infamous (famous ?) thread over ATS that dealt with the history of the Omega MCMVII's and the central thesis was uncancelled dies from the Philly Mint that were then used years/decades later to make the original and subsequent Omegas.

Active discussion over at CT right now with someone involved in that CU thread ans also in the 1970's as a grader who saw the original Omegas.

[RWB]

Many in the hobby/business have seen "Omega" counterfeits. They are not from government dies. The old PCGS thread was kind of like "Head Cheese" - a mixture of scraps, inedible byproducts, and imagination.