Posted on 12/06/2006 1:51:05 PM PST by grjr21
The family of a late Center City jeweler sued the federal government yesterday seeking the return of 10 extremely rare 1933 gold U.S. coins that could fetch millions each at auction.
The daughter and grandsons of Israel Switt contend the government illegally seized the "double eagle" coins after they brought them to the U.S. Mint to be authenticated in 2004.
The 1-ounce coins, each with a face value of $20, were among more than 445,000 that were minted but never circulated after the United States went off the gold standard in 1933. The entire supply - except for these 10 and at least 10 others known to exist - was melted into bullion.
The government contends the coins - considered the Holy Grail among some collectors - were stolen property of the United States.
Michael White, a spokesman for the U.S. Mint, said government lawyers had not seen the suit and could not comment immediately.
In their court filing, Joan Langbord, 79, who still runs her father's business, I. Switt, on South Eighth Street, and her sons Roy and David noted that the government in the previous seizure of another 1933 double eagle split the proceeds with its owner, Stephen Fenton, after the coin sold for a record $7.59 million at auction in 2002.
In 1944, the government also allowed King Farouk of Egypt to own and export a 1933 double eagle without questioning how it came into circulation, said the suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia.
Nine other coins, which were traced back to Switt, were seized over the years, not returned and melted. The government later also sought - unsuccessfully - the return of the Farouk coin.
The Langbords do not say how Israel Switt obtained the double eagles but said he collected coins and that it was common practice at the time for collectors and jewelers to exchange old coins and gold for new coins at the mint.
"The Langbord family was forced to bring this case to vindicate one of the most basic principles of American law: that the government cannot permanently confiscate property from its citizens without proving its right to do so in court," said their attorney, Barry H. Berke of New York.
"Here, the mint's lawless position is that by merely claiming the coins were somehow removed from the mint unlawfully in the 1930s, they can take the Langbord family's property without proving it in a court of law," said Berke, who represented Fenton in the earlier case. "The mint has taken that position because it knows it cannot prove how the 1933 double eagles left the mint over 70 years ago."
He said the government would not have known about the 10 coins if the Langbords, aware of the Fenton case, had not brought them to the attention of the mint and delivered them for authentication in 2004.
Israel Switt died in 1990 and his daughter found the coins while inspecting a safety deposit box at a Center City bank in 2003, the suit said.
Since confiscating the coins, the government has not filed any legal claim for them, a violation of federal law, said the suit, which seeks a jury trial.
Read the lawsuit via http://go.philly.com/coins
Like I said, arguably. The prohibition you speak of only applied to Americans. It may not have applied to the government itself, and it certainly didn't apply to people outside the jurisdiction of the United States. Now that the prohibition has been lifted, the coins are arguably money again. The logic the government must use is that ALL US gold coins are illegal and are subject to confiscation.
ML/NJ
Are those in government our servants, or our masters? If they are our masters, why are they called "public servants"? If they are our sevants, then who are the sovreigns?
Those in government are employees hired to write, execute and deliberate on the laws.
When those who write, execute, and deliberate on the laws carve exceptions for themselves and others like them, it becomes harder to argue that we are a nation of laws, not men.
Not at all.
The government decides which of the bills and coins it issues are currency and which aren't.
The government is certainly not compelled to use this "all or nothing" policy you've invented.
The government has designated 1933 US gold Double Eagles as non-currency.
And it really doesn't matter whether they are currency or not, since every single one of them not in government custody is, by definition, stolen goods.
... which is a tough argument to make when the Constitution states that money shall ONLY be coins of gold or silver.
The law is the law and diplomatic immunity is part of the law and always has been.
Are you unclear on the concept that if we arrest and imprison other countries' diplomats we expose our own diplomatic corps to arrest and imprisonment?
The government has a history of issuing, through normal channels, items which it had not intended to release. Consider the inverted 24 cent airmail stamp. All were supposed to have been destroyed, but yet a sheet or two got through. Gold was paid to foreigners who demanded gold for their gold certificates after the prohibition on US gold ownership went into effect. I don't know how these transfers took place, but I would guess that coins (which after all were really just a means certifying weight and fineness) were the normal medium for small transfers. So if any gold coins were ever paid out by the government after these coins were minted, then it cannot be proved that these specific coins were not among them.
ML/NJ
I did a little looking around and all I saw was that these coins along with all other goid coins were no longer considered "legal Tender." Legal Tender has a very specific legal meaning, and not being legal tender does not necesarily mean that something is "non-currency." For example Federal Reserve Notes were not legal tender from 1913 through 1933, but they were US Currency.
ML/NJ
Art. 1 Sec. 10, Clause. 1: No State shall ... coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts
So, states can't coin money, but must pay in silver or gold coin for its debts. Gee, who made those coins, if not the states?
A treasury employee stealing coins, replacing them surreptitiously with decoys and secretly selling them to a dealer is hardly "normal channels."
Gold was paid to foreigners who demanded gold for their gold certificates after the prohibition on US gold ownership went into effect.
Because the US signed a contract with foreign parties which it was obliged to honor according to the terms of international law. Domestic law is another matter entirely.
I don't know how these transfers took place, but I would guess that coins (which after all were really just a means certifying weight and fineness) were the normal medium for small transfers.
They were not satisifed with 1933 Double Eagles, but with bullion and perhaps other gold coinage of an earlier mintage. The 1933 Double Eagle was never currency and was never used to satisy any debt.
It most certainly can be proved, with great ease.
445,500 were struck.
445,498 were slated for melting down into bullion and 2 were placed as museum pieces in the US Numismatic Collection, a federally-owned museum collection.
Then, as far as the US Government was aware, the other 445,498 were bullionized.
However, a Treasury employee by the name of George McCanin apparently smuggled out at least 20 of them by replacing them with Double Eagles minted in prior years to avoid suspicion.
He then sold them as collectables to a man named Israel Switt.
All existing 1933 Double Eagles besides the two museum pieces are illegally obtained contraband procured by McCanin and Switt.
Each one of them is stolen goods and not one of them was used by the federal government in satisfaction of any debt.
Wrong. Read it again.
States cannot "make anything but gold and silver coin a tender for payment of debts."
I.e. the states could not coin money, nor could they authorize anything other than gold and silver coin as legal tender in their territory.
It says nothing about the payment of the state's own public debts.
This restriction on the ststes from issuing their own state money does not preclude the federal government in any way from issuing paper money and declaring it legal tender in every state.
The decision of what is legal tender is not up to the states, but the federal government.
"The daughter and grandsons of Israel Switt contend the government illegally seized the "double eagle" coins after they brought them to the U.S. Mint to be authenticated in 2004."
I would think a coin dealer would know not to bring this to the gov and instead, go to PGS or the like for authentication and grading.
Of course they were.
I think this is a supposition, but even if it is a fact, it cannot be proved that "The 1933 Double Eagle was never currency and was never used to satisy any debt," if any coins were paid after they were minted. It's just not possible to prove. And because the coins are fungible it doesn't even matter if they were stolen. They could have been legally exchanged outside of the country.
ML/NJ
"Would you have to prove in court that it was yours before you held onto it?
"Not at all."
"If the iPod finder disputed your claim they would have to take you to court to recover it."
That's pretty funny, considering you know the SerNo and thus, probably already have the document showing the SerNo also. That's proof so it would be moot.
But then, you say the Finder could take you to court. And possibly get it back.
Doubt that will happen here against the too-powerful US Gov.
That only means US states shall pay debts in gold and silver.
Nothing to do with whether anything other than gold or silver can be used for currency.
If so, I guess all the large Cents that the US was making in the 1790s from copper were illegal.
Likewise, unless these people discover a document from the US government allowing Israel Switt to own and deal 1933 Double Eagles, they're not getting the stolen goods back either.
And the British dealer who went to court with the US government did get a favorable outcome, mostly because the coin he possessed was authorized for export as personalty (not as currency) by a US customs agent.
None of the other Switt coins can claim the benefit of that customs snafu.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.