It looks like these people had possession of about 10 ounces troy of gold that didn't belong to them.
There is NO guarantee that if the ten 1933 double eagles had been in the custody of the government, that they wouldn't have been melted down for bullion.
If the gruberment was entirely fair, it would have offered the Langbord woman some significant amount of "consideration" for the maintenance of these pieces in a safe place, in pristine condition.
Instead, the gruberment tried to steal them back. It's kind of like the property tax on a home that you've completely paid for.
You pay the insurance, you pay for maintenance and upkeep, you pay for the utilities to keep the place warm/cool/mold free, and liveable, you own the place free and clear, and the gruberment is standing there waiting for you to fail to pay a couple hundred bucks of the King's Rent, so it can sell "its property" and get its 200 bucks - be damned to you.
Why be reasonable when you can be heavy-handed? Seems to be standard fare lots of time with governments.
Isn't it a common law burden for those holding assets that don't belong to them to take reasonable steps to maintain them with the costs to be repaid by the rightful owners?