[atomic_dog]

Pretty dishonorable, IMHO.

Not at all. There is an absolutely brilliant book, Illegal Tender that reconstructs the events surrounding these coins. There is no doubt whatsoever that they were stolen. It does not matter who they were stolen from, it is tenet of American Law inherited from the English Common Law that title to stolen property cannot be perfected. That means that ownership of stolen property remains with the person from whom it was stolen. This is why people are getting works of art back (or compensation in lieu of) that were looted by the Nazis. I learned this lesson when I bought some currency on eBay from a pawnshop in Florida that turned out to have been stolen from a dealer in North Carolina. I had to send it back to him and eat the loss myself.

[1rudeboy]

Thank you. Finally. I wonder how some of these folks would feel if these coins belonged to them and they were stolen decades ago?

As an aside, please note that all this article really states is that the attorney representing Langbord claims that the Mint cannot "prove" the coins are stolen. Well, that's for the court to decide. The knee-jerk reactions on this thread are astounding.

[andyk]

Not at all.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion. The method in which they "recovered" the stolen property is completely dishonorable.

[Ichneumon]

There is no doubt whatsoever that they were stolen. It does not matter who they were stolen from, it is tenet of American Law inherited from the English Common Law that title to stolen property cannot be perfected. That means that ownership of stolen property remains with the person from whom it was stolen.

So we have to give most American land back to the "Native Americans"?