1933 Double Eagle 1 1

[Hoghead515]

On 11/29/2022 at 8:17 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

There wouldn't have been a need to go back and start from Bag #1 to do an updated inventory.  As long as each shelf or storage barrel or whatever was untouched, you just go by what changed "up front."  It was tough to get to the back of the cages...no walk room....so the only coins that tended to move were upfront.

With the cages locked and with the vault having time and combination locks, it's unreal that an entire bag of 1928's were stolen.  A few loose coins, I could see someone getting them out.  An entire bag....250 coins at one time....or worse, a few coins a day over a few weeks ?

Hard to believe. 

 

 

There may have been several employees in on that one together. 

Or one of those mission impossible or ocean 11 type deals.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 11/29/2022 at 9:01 PM, Hoghead515 said:

There may have been several employees in on that one together.  Or one of those mission impossible or ocean 11 type deals.

Unless you had 2 or more crooks working there, very risky to approach another employee about a potential theft and then find out you got reported.  Fired and jail time, no doubt.

What's amazing is that Mint officials today INSIST that the Mint's "meticulous record keeping" preclude any 1933 Saint from leaving "legally" :

• The gold books for the 1933 were in balance WITHOUT the Langbord Saints (which leads to the probability of an exchange)
• Their "meticulous" reocords had the date wrong on 1st production (March 15th, 1933) which we now know was March 2nd, 1933 (thanks to RWB for doing some "meticulous" research  ).
• They meticulously lost an entire bag of 1928 DEs.

Other than these miscues, these guys are Joe Accountant ! 

[Henri Charriere]

As Robert E. RIPLEY, a world-wide traveller In search of material for his "Believe It Or Not!" series pointed out, a pound of feathers weighs more than a pound of gold or silver [but not copper].  Twelve [troy] ounces for precious metals gold and silver, but sixteen [avoirdupois] ounces for copper and feathers.

[Henri Charriere]

In the link to the auction listing annotated by RWB beneath a series of double-hyphenated lines may be found a casual reference to a physical defect in the 1928 bag of DEs, as follows:

"As one would expect, the bag is slightly soiled after 80 years, and there is a small hole at the top of the front side."

My question:  What, if anything, is the significance of that hole?  Was it accidental and inadvertent or man-made and therefore purposeful? And if intentional, toward what end?  (Bear in mind, this has nothing to do with the unaccounted bag of DEs.)

[Hoghead515]

On 11/30/2022 at 7:15 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

In the link to the auction listing annotated by RWB beneath a series of double-hyphenated lines may be found a casual reference to a physical defect in the 1928 bag of DEs, as follows:

"As one would expect, the bag is slightly soiled after 80 years, and there is a small hole at the top of the front side."

My question:  What, if anything, is the significance of that hole?  Was it accidental and inadvertent or man-made and therefore purposeful? And if intentional, toward what end?  (Bear in mind, this has nothing to do with the unaccounted bag of DEs.)

Someone may have been trying to make a little hole in there to sneak a couple out at the right time. The bag may have been discovered before they got the nerve up. 

[VKurtB]

On 11/30/2022 at 6:15 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

In the link to the auction listing annotated by RWB beneath a series of double-hyphenated lines may be found a casual reference to a physical defect in the 1928 bag of DEs, as follows:

"As one would expect, the bag is slightly soiled after 80 years, and there is a small hole at the top of the front side."

My question:  What, if anything, is the significance of that hole?  Was it accidental and inadvertent or man-made and therefore purposeful? And if intentional, toward what end?  (Bear in mind, this has nothing to do with the unaccounted bag of DEs.)

Mousies. 

[Hoghead515]

On 11/30/2022 at 8:10 PM, VKurtB said:

Mousies. 

That was another thought that came to my mind. 

[VKurtB]

On 11/30/2022 at 7:13 PM, Hoghead515 said:

That was another thought that came to my mind. 

The rats were in upper management. 

[GoldFinger1969]

I just assumed the bag tore at that point as it was worn.

The entire BAG of coins was stolen -- not just the coins -- so nobody was stealing out of the bag over many hours/days/weels.

[GoldFinger1969]

Back to the 1933's.....I never saw this 2015 CoinWorld article but a friend who collects Saints sent it to me a few months ago.  Not sure who Ken Goldman is -- maybe some of the vets know -- but his story is fascinating, especially about the original owner of a 1932 DE who went to the mint to buy the 1933 DE...saw them stacked up....and they wouldn't give it to him (probably because of the EO pending, not because it hadn't been "officially" released, whatever that meant) so he bought a 1933 Eagle and 1932 DE. 

Kenneth Goldman is a longtime dealer, operating as Kenneth Goldman Inc. in Needham,Mass. He began collecting coins when he was 6 years old.

With all the recent news on the case of the 1933 gold $20 double eagles, I have decided to share some of my own experiences with these coins, including how I actually had one of these coins in my hand, some years ago.

One experience was a near miss in the late 1970s. Another coin dealer offered me a 1932 double eagle, which I bought for around $18,000 or so. In 1933, the past owner went to the U.S. Mint in Philadelphia. He wanted to buy a 1933 gold $10 eagle and a 1933 gold $20 coin from the Mint. He was able to buy the $10 coin and he saw the 1933 $20 coins piled up onthe back table. Unfortunately, the person at the Mint said that the $20 coins were not released yet; he was able to buy the 1932 double eagle, which I later bought.

A couple of years earlier, I actually had a 1933 $20 double eagle in my hands — for a couple of minutes. I remember quite clearly that this was at the Long Beach Expo in California. I was walking around the floor when a prominent dealer from Texas came over to me. I clearly remember his words to me: “Hey, Goldman. Do you want to see a coin that will make the entire coin show stop?”

I thought for a minute as to what this could be and said, “Sure, what do you have?” He promptly handed me an envelope which was typewritten with something like “1898-S $20Gold.” My thoughts were that I was being played here, so I continued on with what I thought was a joke. I opened up the envelope and out came a Saint-Gaudens double eagle, reverse facing up. Again, I thought, “What can be so special about an Unc. $20 Saint?” The entire process probably took less than two minutes, but it seemed things were going in somewhat slow motion.

Naturally I picked up the coin by the edge and turned it over. Imagine my surprise when I saw that this “ordinary coin” was dated 1933! I remember smiling and asking something like“Tell me about this” or similar. I never got an answer except advice to keep this quiet.

Certainly, I knew the history and the illegality of this coin, but I never thought I would have one in my hand. I walked away, thought for a minute, and continued on my way at the convention. I felt that I was very lucky to see one of these in person.

I have not relayed this story until David Tripp wrote the book Illegal Tender—Gold, Greed &the Mystery of the Lost 1933 Double Eagle where part of this story was told. In that book,you can see an undated photo of a 1933 double eagle and my comments that this coin in the photo was probably the coin I had in my hand, and this coin was different from the one that was sold in the Sotheby’s auction for over $7 million.

All was quiet for some time. Then the book produced another interesting part of this story. I was at home one day, when I got a phone call. It was from the FBI, asking about the 1933 double eagle. I related the story exactly as above and mentioned the name of the dealer who showed me the coin. Unfortunately, the dealer had passed away by the time of the FBI’s call to me. They asked if I had bought the coin. I related that I was in my 20s at that time and I did not have anywhere near the money that this coin would have been worth. As well, I knew of the questionable nature of owning such a coin, so I did not even attempt to ask a price on this. Where the coin is today is unknown to me, but I imagine that it is hidden in a collection somewhere. 

Further, David Akers always said that there were other 1933 $20 double eagles in Europe.  David was never one to make up stories, so my thoughts were that he was speaking from experience.

Edited December 1, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[Henri Charriere]

[Gentlemen:  Here's my entirely speculative guess on how that hole on the 1928 bag came to be...

These bags were made of heavy-duty canvas which are flexible but have little give. One end is over twice the length of the other.  To carry a "sack" like this, you can use two hands, or make do with one.  With one hand, you would very likely fold up the long end twice and your forefinger and other fingers will do most of the work digging into the fabric the better to maintain a grip, with your thumb and palm acting as a vice-like back-stop.

Look at the position of the hole. You can rule out mice; there's no food to be had, only metal.  The bag is not so much "worn" as it is "used," The printing on it is still legible and strong.  Shrinkage/pilfering/theft was not a factor. A small slit, not a hole, made elsewhere at a far less conspicuous location would have had a better chance of escaping detection if theft had been the motive. If these bags had handles like golf club carriers, there would be no holes.

If this the probable cause of the hole?  Only the U.S. Mint----and Ol'hoop, would know.]

Edited December 1, 2022 by Quintus Arrius
Usual die polishing

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/1/2022 at 12:20 AM, Quintus Arrius said:

[Gentlemen:  Here's my entirely speculative guess on how that hole on the 1928 bag came to be...These bags were made of heavy-duty canvas which are flexible but have little give.....If this the probable cause of the hole?  Only the U.S. Mint----and Ol'hoop, would know.]

They actually had a room of women who sewed bags for the coins.  Roger covers it in FMTM.

Not sure why they had to have them made there.

[GoldFinger1969]

It wasn't just the 1933 that was highly sought in the 1930's.  The 1931 and 1932 were also wanted. 

I have actual price transactions and some auction catalog ask/realized prices -- might take me a bit to find and compile but I will post it here when found -- for part of the Fab Five and 1933 Saint.  This would be the 1931, 1932, and the 1933 (I guess the 1931-D they didn't care about since it was a mint mark).

Year & Mintages:

1929	1,779,750
1930-S	74,000
1931	2,938,250
1931-D	106,500
1932	1,101,750
1933	445,500

Saints from 1931 and 1932 started showing up in 1936.  Before that, they were hard to find.  Like the 1933 Indian Head, because they were officially offered for release by the Coiner, none could be claimed to be an "illegal" coin to own.

In May 1936, 102 1931's and 175 1932's started to show up in New York City and Philadelphia.  They were considered super-scare before then with coin catalogs from 1936 showing $75/coin.

According to collector James Macallister none of these coins were in circulation among collectors for several years prior to May 1936, when Israel Switt began to distribute them.

It's very possible that Switt and all the collectors/dealers from the 1930's did NOT know that in fact the 1933 was NOT circulating outside of the coins that escaped the Philly Mint.  Those who said it was super-scarce or tought to find or expensive to own...may have been going from hearsay, rumour, and chit-chat with other dealers and collectors.  The 1931 and 1932 were believed just as rare but those WERE seen and owned and held by actual people so nobody had any reason to doubt they were out there.  The 1933 was in the same class -- nobody had actually seen one/them until 1936 but everyone just assumed others had seen them and/or had a few.

So....the 1931, 1932, and 1933 were in a group all together instead of the 1931 & 1932 with the 1933 off in its own rarified air.  To collectors and dealers, the 1933 wasn't considered THE coin to own or the rarest by itself, just one of a bunch of tough ones to get with infrequent sales.

Edited December 9, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/8/2022 at 9:52 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

To collectors and dealers, the 1933 wasn't considered THE coin to own or the rarest by itself, just one of a bunch of tough ones to get with infrequent sales.

Is it fair to say no one ever knows what the FMV of this coin is until it is sold?

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/9/2022 at 2:24 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

Is it fair to say no one ever knows what the FMV of this coin is until it is sold?

I think there may have been a game of chicken going on.  If you wanted a coin...cheap...you'd say you recently sold or heard of some sales at a nicely discounted price.  Maybe you panic the other guy into selling.  Certainly this was alot more true in the 1930's when information was scarce than today when prices are a few clicks away. 

 

Edited December 9, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[World Colonial]

On 12/9/2022 at 2:24 PM, Quintus Arrius said:

Is it fair to say no one ever knows what the FMV of this coin is until it is sold?

Yes.

FMV is at a specific point in time.  (More) Common coins sell more regularly, usually very regularly.  FMV for all other coins is a (wide) range.

There is no method to pre-determine FMV in advance.  When one of the most prominent coins comes up for sale, contributors here and on the PCGS Forum provide wide ranging estimates.

[VKurtB]

On 12/8/2022 at 8:52 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

It wasn't just the 1933 that was highly sought in the 1930's.  The 1931 and 1932 were also wanted. 

I have actual price transactions and some auction catalog ask/realized prices -- might take me a bit to find and compile but I will post it here when found -- for part of the Fab Five and 1933 Saint.  This would be the 1931, 1932, and the 1933 (I guess the 1931-D they didn't care about since it was a mint mark).

Year & Mintages:

1929	1,779,750
1930-S	74,000
1931	2,938,250
1931-D	106,500
1932	1,101,750
1933	445,500

Saints from 1931 and 1932 started showing up in 1936.  Before that, they were hard to find.  Like the 1933 Indian Head, because they were officially offered for release by the Coiner, none could be claimed to be an "illegal" coin to own.

In May 1936, 102 1931's and 175 1932's started to show up in New York City and Philadelphia.  They were considered super-scare before then with coin catalogs from 1936 showing $75/coin.

According to collector James Macallister none of these coins were in circulation among collectors for several years prior to May 1936, when Israel Switt began to distribute them.

It's very possible that Switt and all the collectors/dealers from the 1930's did NOT know that in fact the 1933 was NOT circulating outside of the coins that escaped the Philly Mint.  Those who said it was super-scarce or tought to find or expensive to own...may have been going from hearsay, rumour, and chit-chat with other dealers and collectors.  The 1931 and 1932 were believed just as rare but those WERE seen and owned and held by actual people so nobody had any reason to doubt they were out there.  The 1933 was in the same class -- nobody had actually seen one/them until 1936 but everyone just assumed others had seen them and/or had a few.

So....the 1931, 1932, and 1933 were in a group all together instead of the 1931 & 1932 with the 1933 off in its own rarified air.  To collectors and dealers, the 1933 wasn't considered THE coin to own or the rarest by itself, just one of a bunch of tough ones to get with infrequent sales.

Totally unsupported speculation with no basis in fact. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/9/2022 at 3:08 PM, World Colonial said:

Yes. FMV is at a specific point in time.  (More) Common coins sell more regularly, usually very regularly.  FMV for all other coins is a (wide) range. There is no method to pre-determine FMV in advance.  When one of the most prominent coins comes up for sale, contributors here and on the PCGS Forum provide wide ranging estimates.

And imagine this in the 1930's where most of the information is dealer-to-dealer talk, rumours, hearsay, whatever. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/9/2022 at 3:24 PM, VKurtB said:

Totally unsupported speculation with no basis in fact. 

What is ?  The rarity of the 1931s and 1932s alongside the 1933's as opposed to a separate category ?

[VKurtB]

On 12/9/2022 at 2:48 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

What is ?  The rarity of the 1931s and 1932s alongside the 1933's as opposed to a separate category ?

Yup. I never even CONSIDERED the possibility that the 1933 was seen as anything other than a world apart. Only those bent on criminal or tortious behavior would have PRETENDED that the 1933 was just another tough date. 
 

But you already know that about me. I am 100% utterly convinced that each and every step, from Mint to Switt’s possession, was a crime. How can I say that? Because I don’t believe any of the 1933’s went ANYWHERE until 1937, so parsing the 1933 dates is irrelevant. 

Edited December 9, 2022 by VKurtB

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/9/2022 at 3:50 PM, VKurtB said:

Yup. I never even CONSIDERED the possibility that the 1933 was seen as anything other than a world apart. Only those bent on criminal or tortious behavior would have PRETENDED that the 1933 was just another tough date. 

You obviously haven't read the advertisements and correpsondences among dealers, collectors, etc. from that time.  The 1933 was considered in a group of "tough" coins to obtain not some unique stand-alone.

It's really no different than the belief that the 1927-D was plentiful because many people who said they saw one or knew of a sale in fact were referencing 1927's or 1927-S's.  Confusion and lack of a central TPG-like counting mechanism made knowledge of how many coins were out there very difficult.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/9/2022 at 3:50 PM, VKurtB said:

But you already know that about me. I am 100% utterly convinced that each and every step, from Mint to Switt’s possession, was a crime. 

Maybe, althought I disagree.  And it's been established that many of the facts that the government & Tripp relied on were false.

[World Colonial]

On 12/9/2022 at 3:47 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

And imagine this in the 1930's where most of the information is dealer-to-dealer talk, rumours, hearsay, whatever. 

Yes, but this was more than offset by the much lower prices, adjusted for inflation too.

[RWB]

Nothing was reported missing either 1933 DE or bullion from melting them (the records exist), no investigation was made either internal to the Mint or via the USSS, there were no complaints. If one follows strict accounting using the US Mint's records, there is a surplus of gold equal to the number of 1933 destroyed in the 1950s or taken by court action in 2011.

 

$20 was a full week's pay for most--- and a full week's living expenses.

[VKurtB]

On 12/9/2022 at 3:04 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

You obviously haven't read the advertisements and correpsondences among dealers, collectors, etc. from that time.  The 1933 was considered in a group of "tough" coins to obtain not some unique stand-alone.

It's really no different than the belief that the 1927-D was plentiful because many people who said they saw one or knew of a sale in fact were referencing 1927's or 1927-S's.  Confusion and lack of a central TPG-like counting mechanism made knowledge of how many coins were out there very difficult.

Yeah, and the 1913 Liberty nickels were sought by a guy running an ad offering to buy them, when he already had all 5. There is plenty of “disinformation by advertisement” in this field. 

[VKurtB]

On 12/9/2022 at 3:13 PM, RWB said:

Nothing was reported missing either 1933 DE or bullion from melting them (the records exist), no investigation was made either internal to the Mint or via the USSS, there were no complaints. If one follows strict accounting using the US Mint's records, there is a surplus of gold equal to the number of 1933 destroyed in the 1950s or taken by court action in 2011.

 

$20 was a full week's pay for most--- and a full week's living expenses.

I don’t care if the “right amount” of gold from bags marked 1933 was melted. They are not all equivalent. In 1937, when melting happened, all 1933 DE’s were unambiguously illegal to hold in private hands. The entirety of the circumstances test shows that the most likely time for the exchange of 1933’s for something else of the same weight was during the 1937 melting. Can I prove that? I don’t have to. All the government needed to prove was that it was more likely than not. Preponderance. Look up its meaning. Civil case. No “beyond a reasonable doubt”, no “clear and convincing”, just “more likely than not”. The government met their admittedly not very tough burden. 

Edited December 9, 2022 by VKurtB

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/9/2022 at 4:29 PM, VKurtB said:

Yeah, and the 1913 Liberty nickels were sought by a guy running an ad offering to buy them, when he already had all 5. There is plenty of “disinformation by advertisement” in this field. 

Smart move...he created free publicity, driving up the price !! 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/9/2022 at 4:34 PM, VKurtB said:

I don’t care if the “right amount” of gold from bags marked 1933 was melted. They are not all equivalent. In 1937, when melting happened, all 1933 DE’s were unambiguously illegal to hold in private hands.

Define "illegal."  

Are you saying that the Mint higher-ups couldn't have exchanged a few (paid for in other gold coin) if they wanted them for numismatic reasons ?  There was NO OFFICIAL prohibition on the release of 1933 DEs -- they just never were because of what was happening in March and April 1933.  

If you wanted some 1933's once you realized they'd all be melted, who's to say that a Mint higher-up didn't let a mid-level Mint worker have that privilege ?  And if they had wanted to do it in 1933 or 1934 or 1935...but didn't have the $$$....maybe they were told they could do it up to the day of melting.  Or something like that.

Charles Barber and other Mint officials took advantage of their status, as long as everything was an arms-length transaction...ho harm, no foul. 

Also, the Coiner had 1933's at his cage.  Both from the assay commission plus the undercount of 1932's.

Edited December 10, 2022 by GoldFinger1969

[VKurtB]

On 12/9/2022 at 6:59 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Define "illegal."  

Are you saying that the Mint higher-ups couldn't have exchanged a few (paid for in other gold coin) if they wanted them for numismatic reasons ?  There was NO OFFICIAL prohibition on the release of 1933 DEs -- they just never were because of what was happening in March and April 1933.  

If you wanted some 1933's once you realized they'd all be melted, who's to say that a Mint higher-up didn't let a mid-level Mint worker have that privilege ?  And if they had wanted to do it in 1933 or 1934 or 1935...but didn't have the $$$....maybe they were told they could do it up to the day of melting.  Or something like that.

Charles Barber and other Mint officials took advantage of their status, as long as everything was an arms-length transaction...ho harm, no foul. 

Also, the Coiner had 1933's at his cage.  Both from the assay commission plus the undercount of 1932's.

I’m saying that nobody had a 1933 until 1937. And then relatively all hell broke loose very rapidly. That tells me they were all in the Mint vault until melting began in 1937. 

[VKurtB]

On 12/9/2022 at 9:27 PM, VKurtB said:

There was NO OFFICIAL prohibition on the release of 1933 DEs

I believe this is a lie. There was a prohibition, and people knew it. That’s why museum requests were repeatedly denied. Your version of the story asks me to believe the simply implausible - that Switt got all his 1933’s in the incredibly tight window of legality in 1933, then JUST BY COINCIDENCE happened to sit on them until 1937 when they just happened to start appearing among the in-crowd in the New York/New Jersey/Pennsylvania numismatic community. I don’t buy it. 

Edited December 10, 2022 by VKurtB