|This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies.|
|Locked on 02/26/2014 10:39:29 PM PST by Admin Moderator, reason:|
Skip to comments.Could newly discovered gold coins be the haul stolen by ... San Francisco Mint employee in 1901?
Posted on 02/26/2014 9:32:34 PM PST by Uncle Chip
Treasure hunting enthusiasts weigh in on origins of couple's $10 million find
The mysterious haul of gold coins discovered by a Northern California couple while out walking their dog and valued at $10 million may well be a previously undiscovered bounty that an employee of the San Francisco Mint was convicted of stealing in 1901.
The couple, who havent been named, stumbled across the haul of 1,427 rare, mint-condition gold coins, nearly all dating from 1847 to 1894, buried in the shadow of an old tree on their Gold Country property in February 2013. The face value of the Saddle Ridge Hoard, as theyve called it, added up to about $27,000, but some of the coins are so rare that experts say they could fetch nearly $1million apiece.
The couple went public with their amazing discovery on Tuesday, and treasure enthusiasts have been quick to suggest that the coins could be the same ones stolen by Walter Dimmick, an employee of the San Francisco Mint in the late 1800′s, reports Altered Dimensions.
Dimmick began working at the mint in 1898 and by 1901 was trusted with the keys to the vaults until an audit revealed a $30,000 shortage in $20 Double Eagle coins, six bags in all.
He quickly became the prime suspect as he was the last person to see the missing gold coins and had already been caught practicing how to forge the Superintendents name. After a month-long trial, Dimmick was convicted of stealing the coins and sentenced to nine years at the San Quentin prison in California.....
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Yep, I had a feeling something like this might happen. Hopefully the folks are well-represented and can stand up to any potential grab by the state/feds that might be coming.
Apparently the two people who found the coins didn’t.
I was just reading about this.
I didn’t. Finders keepers. But then I would have given serious thought to not telling a soul about what I found, too.
There is something to be said about our country boy living. “ Shoot, shovel, and shut up.”
You have to tell someone if you want to sell them (though not the 'how you found them' part).
Never tell nobody nothin about nothin.
Does anyone besides me have a problem with the following statement? I can’t make the math work right for some reason-
“There is certainly compelling evidence to link the two bounties. According to 1901 reports, 500 coins were stolen by Dimmick - only 73 coins less than the 1,427 discovered at Saddle Ridge.”
Posted at 10:49pm on 2/26
Don’t Freepers search before posting anymore?
The U S under Roosevelt criminally went off the gold standard in 1934 or so. This was a major violation of the Founding Father’s intent plus the intent of the Constitution. They have no right to put airs on this couple now!
Why, may I ask?
Wouldn’t the statute of limitations have run out by now?
I think the statute of limitations just keeps them from being able to prosecute you. It doesn’t transfer ownership.
Dunno, melt it down and become incredibly wealthy, and under the radar I might add, or preserve history?
I suppose it all depends upon the circumstances at hand.
“There is something to be said about our country boy living. Shoot, shovel, and shut up.
I like the way you think brother!
I would think so. I have sold gold American Eagles before, and I wasn’t asked where or how I got them.
If the coins are the ones stolen by Dimmick, why did’nt he come back for the coins after he had served his nine years?
The math would work out if there had not been a typo and “more” instead of a “less” in the sentence.
500 stolen - 73 = 427 found.
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.