OUPEL = LOUPE
DATGILI REMCAA = DIGITAL CAMERA
SEGVOL = GLOVES
DER BKOO = RED BOOK
SLBAUM = ALBUMS
GIFMINNAGY SASLG = MAGNIFYING GLASS
BSLAS = SLABS
LOFDERS = FOLDERS
POECOMCISR = MICROSCOPE
RECHRSAE = RESEARCH
KUJN VELSIR = JUNK SILVER
TOGASACL = CATALOGS
PEYT TES = TYPE SET
ALOYL = ALLOYS

Phrase: JANUARY IS NATIONAL HOBBY MONTH

Something’s rotten in the Kingdom of Spain.

Perhaps it’s the stench surrounding the 17 tons of gold and silver coins recently “repatriated” by Spain from the U.S. firm that recovered them from the floor of the Atlantic Ocean.

If so, the odor’s coming not from the coins themselves but from the Spanish government, which pressed a dubious claim to ownership of the coins, then—with help from a compliant U.S. court system—whisked all 17 tons out from under the noses of the people who spent millions finding and salvaging the coins.

The treasure is now in España, where it was hastily flown in two Spanish military planes after being spirited away from an Air Force base in Florida on Feb. 24—scant hours after a U.S. judge lifted the last legal barrier to its removal. The coins had been in Florida for more than four years, after being taken there by Odyssey Marine Exploration, the Tampa-based company that found the treasure in May 2007 off the coast of Portugal.

Odyssey said the coins, widely dispersed on the ocean floor, came from the wreckage of a ship whose identity couldn’t be conclusively determined. Spain staked an immediate claim, insisting that the remains were those of the Nuestra Señora de las Mercedes, a Spanish frigate that sank in 1804.

Under a law of the sea known as “the doctrine of sovereign immunity,” a nation never loses ownership of an active-duty warship that is sunk in an engagement with an enemy. But in this case, doubt exists as to whether this doctrine applied.

First, Odyssey steadfastly maintained that its salvage operations failed to confirm the name or nature of the ship, whose resting place, in international waters, was in an area known to be a graveyard for ill-fated vessels over the centuries. And despite Spain’s self-serving assertions, no conclusive evidence emerged that this was indeed the wreck of the Mercedes—and whether, if so, it was serving as a “warship” when it sank.

Then there’s the matter of those 17 tons of precious-metal coinage. What war-related purpose did this treasure serve? Perhaps Spain was arming itself to wage war on werewolves and needed a source for silver bullets. Incidentally, Odyssey estimates the value of the treasure in today’s marketplace at half a billion dollars, making it one of the richest troves ever found in a single shipwreck site.

Because of the questions about the ship’s identity, Odyssey gave the salvage operation the code name “Black Swan.” Even if the ship was the Mercedes, a vessel described by Spain as a warship, evidence suggests that its mission at the time was commercial, since more than two-thirds of the coins were bound for private merchants, not the King. Odyssey has argued that if it was commercial, the doctrine of sovereign immunity wouldn’t apply.

Historical documents show the Mercedes—part of a four-frigate convoy—was laden with New World treasure when it exploded and sank on Oct. 5, 1804, during an encounter with a squadron from the British Royal Navy. The British squadron intercepted the convoy as it was en route to the Spanish port of Cadiz. Britain and Spain weren’t at war at the time, but the British feared that Spain was allying itself with France, Britain’s foe in the Napoleonic Wars.

Among Spain’s most outrageous laments is that Odyssey stole property that was part of its national heritage. Given the source of the treasure on the Mercedes, this heritage is tainted, to say the least. If anyone “stole” the treasure, it was Spain, which enslaved native peoples in the Americas, plundered their wealth and forced them to supply new gold and silver over a span of centuries.

U.S. courts supported Spain at every step—and this gave rise to a credible conspiracy theory when WikiLeaks disclosed that the U.S. government had sought to arrange a secret deal whereby Spain would return a valuable painting to a California family in return for U.S. assistance in getting the coins.

As things turned out, Spain got the coins and kept the painting, too.

Its ship has come in—flying the Jolly Roger.

Big things are afoot in the world of coins.

In response to complaints from disgruntled consumers, the United States Mint has announced that it is slashing issue prices for proof sets and other collector products as a token of appreciation for its loyal customers.

Under the new price schedule, annual proof sets and “mint sets” can be purchased for face value plus a shipping and handling charge of just $2 per set. The price of silver proof sets includes an additional charge reflecting the Mint’s exact cost for the silver in the half dollars, quarters and dimes—and not a nickel more.

In a further expression of gratitude to collectors, the Mint is dispensing with fancy but costly packaging and housing the sets in simple pliofilm sleeves similar to those it used prior to 1965. This admittedly results in a loss of flashiness—in the packaging, that is. But those who buy the sets primarily for the coins will find those as collectible as ever.

The Mint has also announced a new initiative aimed at obtaining superior designs for futureU.S.coins. Encouraged by the success of its Artistic Infusion Program in attracting artists a cut below the best, the Mint has joined forces with the National Sculpture Society to establish an Artistic Exclusion Program intended to weed out less talented applicants and offer top commissions to the nation’s finest medalists whenever new coins are planned.

In a departure from the policy it followed in the 50 State Quarters program, the Mint plans to give full credit to these master medalists, rather than citing staff artists as “designers” of the coins even when they serve as only executioners—that is to say, merely execute designs by other people.

* * *

Big things are also afoot in the marketplace.

For starters, eBay has undertaken an aggressive campaign to identify and prosecute companies and individuals that use its website to peddle Chinese counterfeits and other deceptive coins. It also has banned users found to be selling coins that are misrepresented or grossly overpriced.

Home shopping TV networks have pledged to prohibit overblown pitches for overpriced modern coins. In fact, they have barred the sale of any such coins—especially those graded by substandard certification “services” whose misleading names are intended to sound like those of responsible, reputable companies and thereby confuse prospective purchasers.

TV stations across the country have served notice that they will no longer accept commercials from mail-order gold buyers claiming to pay “top dollar” when they’re really paying prices at the bottom of the barrel—prices that amount to very small fractions of true value. In a similar move, newspapers have begun rejecting full-page ads from itinerant coin buyers who go from town to town converting local hotel rooms into dens of inequity for hapless, unwary members of the public.

* * *

Back at the U.S. Mint, officials have revealed plans to discontinue the “America the Beautiful” program after a survey showed that none of the Washington quarters issued to date in the series was considered by respondents to be beautiful.

Thought was given to changing the program’s name to “Americathe Pitiful,” or perhaps “Artistic Confusion,” thus lowering expectations by people who had looked for the coins’ designs to be special, not outer-spacial. But in the end, it was decided that the most appropriate course would be to stop making new coins and consign the old ones to something that truly reflects the beauty of America—a melting pot.

In another illustration of the Mint’s newfound sanity, it imposed a moratorium on any further programs involving multiple issues over periods spanning 10 years or more.

Among the coming attractions left on the cutting-room floor were marathon series spotlighting gypsy moths, B-movie actors and dyslexic vice presidents. Dan Quayle was said to be particularly distressed by the last of these cutbacks.

* * *

Yes, big things are afoot. But, like Bigfoot, they’re only the concoction of an overactive imagination—specifically, mine. All these big events “took place,” you see, on the very same spring day—April 1^st.

April fool!

Looking for logic in Washington, D.C., is like looking for a needle in a haystack. More aptly, it’s like looking for a dollar— a metal one, that is—in pocket change.

The Obama Administration recently pulled the plug on the base-metal presidential dollars, announcing that they will no longer be produced for circulation. The stated reason: to save big money for the government—and, by extension, the American people.

At first blush, this sounds reasonable. Virtually no one has used the “mini-dollar” coins since they first appeared five years ago, so why keep spending tens of millions of dollars a year to mint new ones. Not to mention the high and growing cost of storing all the unwanted coins.

This would make perfect sense—if Congress and the Treasury hadn’t claimed earlier that Uncle Sam would save hundreds of millions of dollars by minting the coins in the first place. And made the same claim twice before that to justify production of Susan B. Anthony dollars in 1979 and Sacagawea dollars in 2000.

The argument, simply stated, is that while it’s somewhat cheaper to print dollar bills than to mint small dollar coins, the coins would last more than 15 times longer in circulation—an average of 25 years, compared with 18 months for dollar bills. The government’s costs would rise somewhat in the short term, dollar coin advocates have acknowledged, but it would save not just millions but billions of dollars in the long run.

Last year, the Government Accountability Office estimated that complete replacement of dollar bills with dollar coins would yield savings totaling $5.6 billion over a 30-year period.

That, of course, assumed two things: that the government would stop issuing dollar bills, and that the American people would accept and use the $1 coins in their place. And this is where the totally logical theory has always run afoul of bull-headed reality. Although Uncle Sam has tried three times to get the American people to use small size dollar coins, he has never discontinued dollar bills. As a consequence, people have continued to use paper dollars and simply ignored the dollar coins.

Other countries have faced similar resistance when they sought to introduce small-size, high-value coins into daily commerce. They overcame it, though, by cutting off the equivalent paper money.Britainhalted production of £1 notes in 1983, when it started issuing thick “round pound” coins.Canadastopped making $1 bills in 1987, when it launched the “loon” dollar coin. And after initial grumbling, people in both countries gradually began to use and even like the new coins. Today, consumers inBritainandCanadaspend them without a second thought.

The Anthony and Sacagawea dollars both were dropped from regular production after just two years because of public apathy. The Anthony dollar returned for a one-year curtain call in 1999 and Sacagawea dollars were revived as “circulating” coins in 2009, co-existing with presidential dollars, because of a witless political deal.

The presidential dollars would be different, we were told, because they would be components of an ongoing series honoringU.S.presidents in the order that they served. After all, that approach had been hugely successful with the 50-stateWashingtonquarters. Then-Congressman Michael Castle of Delaware, the coins’ chief congressional booster, made that point when the authorizing legislation was passed in December 2005.

“I fully expect that having the rotating images of presidents on the coin will vastly increase demand for the one-dollar coin and help it find its natural place inU.S.commerce,” Castle exclaimed.

Quite to the contrary, the series went nowhere fast—because dollar bills were never discontinued.

The U.S. Mint will continue making coins for the presidents not yet honored—but only for special products it sells to collectors at a premium. That will also be the case for the pointless Sacagawea dollars.

In pulling presidential dollars from its regular coinage lineup, the government is missing the point of its very own argument: that it could save a much bigger bundle by scrapping dollar bills instead. It’s not only dropping the dollars; it’s also making no sense.

Chester Alan Arthur was one of this country’s most fascinating presidents. After a middling career as an utterly undistinguished political hack, he was nominated for the vice presidency following a backroom deal in 1880—in the confident expectation that this would consign him to permanent obscurity.

Within a matter of months, an assassin’s bullet claimed the life of President James A. Garfield and placed the reins of power in Arthur’s hands—and to everyone’s surprise, he rose to the occasion by carrying out his duties with dignity and integrity no one ever imagined he possessed.

Sadly, our friends inWashingtonseem to have looked upon Arthur more as the disposable hack that he had been than the first-rate president he became. They did so by distorting the “First Spouse” coin that accompanies his presidential dollar into a billboard for misplaced political pandering.

I’m not a great admirer of the First Spouse program. As I wrote when this started five years ago, it makes little sense to strike base-metal coins honoring U.S. presidents and then produce bullion coins with half an ounce of gold apiece to showcase their first ladies. The U.S. Mint offers bronze medal duplicates of the First Spouse coins for far more affordable prices—so why make the coins at all, except to fatten the Mint’s hefty profits from selling all that gold for sizable markups.

In keeping with the Mint’s recent artistic output, the First Spouse coins have been predictably pedestrian up to now. Their designs have been dull but generally relevant—Abigail Adams penning a letter to John, for example, and Mary Todd Lincoln bringing books and flowers to wounded Union soldiers.

But now, on the First Spouse coin paired with Chester Arthur’s dollar, we find ourselves confronted with a woman and a theme that have little or nothing to do with either President Arthur or the precedents established by previous coins in the series.

Arthur’s wife, Ellen, died on Jan. 12, 1880, some 20 months before he became president. Four of his predecessors—Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson Martin Van Buren and James Buchanan—also entered the nation’s highest office without a first lady. To keep the spouse series continuous, the Mint issued substitute gold coins. The obverse of each bore an image ofLibertytaken from a coin that circulated during the president’s term and the reverse depicted a scene from the president’s life.

An obviousLibertyportrait for Arthur’s substitute First Spouse coin would have been the one on the Liberty Head nickel, which made its debut in 1883, while he was in the White House. The reverse could have shown a nattily dressed Arthur at the opening of theBrooklynBridgeon May 24, 1883, or signing the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act earlier that year. That, after all, is the piece of legislation for which he is best remembered and most universally hailed.

But in authorizing the program, Congress decreed that the First Spouse coin tied to Chester Arthur would be different. There would be no likeness ofLibertybased on a coinage portrait in use at the time he served. There would be no reverse vignette showing a pertinent scene from the president’s life.

Instead, we would get a coin “incorporating the name and likeness of Alice Paul, a leading strategist in the suffrage movement, who was instrumental in gaining women the right to vote upon the adoption of the 19<superscript>^{th</superscript>} amendment and thus the ability to participate in the election of future presidents.”

Never mind that civil service reform, not women’s suffrage, was the dominant issue of Chester Arthur’s presidency. Never mind that Alice Paul didn’t emerge as a women’s rights leader until the 20<superscript>^{th</superscript>} century’s second decade and the 19<superscript>^{th</superscript>} amendment didn’t become law until 1920.

The loose connection? Alice Paul was born in 1885, while Arthur was in the White House. Less than eight weeks passed between her birth on Jan. 11 and Arthur’s last day in office, March 4. So she was more “last baby” than first lady.

The linkage is preposterous—akin to using Jefferson’s First Spouse coin to spotlight the evils of industrial trusts, orJackson’s to focus on Prohibition.

This is a misguided effort to curry feminists’ favor. Alice Paul might very well deserve a coin—but this is not the one.

Americans can breathe easier as the new year begins.

The House of Representatives has passed a non-binding resolution reaffirming “In God We Trust” as the national motto.

I hadn’t been aware that the motto was in danger of being displaced. But then, that’s why we send our hard-working congressmen toWashington—to vigilantly safeguard the values that really matter for citizens who are sidetracked by such mundane concerns as saving their homes and finding jobs.

Let me stipulate at the outset that I am not an atheist and I’ve never found fault with the choice of “In God We Trust” as our national motto—even in the years when that status was informal, before being made official in 1956.

I do find it puzzling why so many of my countrymen get positively rabid at the slightest perceived affront to this inscription, flying into a rage before they’re even familiar with the facts—as happened several years ago when angry critics, including Sarah Palin, denounced the motto’s omission from the presidential dollars. It was there all the time, of course, inscribed on the edge of the coins—except, ironically, on small numbers of error coins that lacked all edge inscriptions and were, as a result, worth hundreds of dollars apiece as collector’s items.

Frankly, if the choice had been mine, I would have favored “Liberty” as this nation’s official motto. More than trust in God, the thirst for freedom was the motivating force that impelled the Founding Fathers to break with Mother England and start the American Revolution.

Speaking of those heroic Founding Fathers, there’s a common misconception that the motto “In God We Trust” dates back to the very beginning ofU.S.independence, when George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and other magnificent leaders transformed the 13 colonies into the building blocks of the greatest nation on Earth.

As most coin collectors are aware, the motto didn’t make its first official appearance until 1864—three-quarters of a century after the federal government first got down to business in 1789. It was not an appeal for divine intervention in the fight for independence, but rather an expression of strong religious fervor arising from repugnance at the horrors of the bloody Civil War.

From the outset, the motto has been identified closely withU.S.coinage. That’s because it made that first appearance on the two-cent piece and eventually came to be used—and required—on everyU.S.coin. The requirement was extended toU.S.paper money in 1955.

I’ve argued through the years that the mediocre designs of modernU.S.coins stem, at least in part, from the space limitations imposed by the many inscriptions they’re legally required to display. In this context, “In God We Trust” contributes to their often cluttered appearance.

There’s no chance, of course, that these particular words will ever be removed from any of our coins—or paper money, either—with so many ardent supporters ready to spring at once to their defense. Nor am I suggesting that this should be done.

But some way should be found to trim the thicket of verbiage that’s cloggingU.S.coins and taking up space that could otherwise be devoted to bigger—and hopefully better—artwork.

It would be unthinkable to do away with “Liberty.” Besides being long on significance, it’s short in length and takes up little space. But surely we could dispense with “E Pluribus Unum.” Many Americans don’t even know what it means (“Out of many, one”), and it neither stirs the emotions nor provides essential information. Besides, “E Pluribus Unum” is just another way of saying “United States of America”—and that, too, already appears on every one of our coins.

“Liberty,” “In God We Trust,” “United States of America,” the coin’s denomination and the date. That’s more than enough inscriptions to squeeze into the space available on mostU.S.coins.

An alternative would be to move some inscriptions to the edge—but that would entail added costs and it’s causing complications with the presidential dollars even now.

In any case, I hope the Mint can come up with a solution on its own. God help us all if Congress gets into the act.

[Sarasota, Florida] Numismatic Guaranty Corporation (NGC), http://www.ngccoin.com, the world leader in third-party coin grading, announced the opening of a new European branch office in Konstanz, Germany. The new location will address growing demand for NGC’s expert services throughout Europe, while offering coin dealers and collectors a faster, more efficient method to submit coins to NGC’s U.S. headquarters for certification and grading.

“We are very excited about the location in Konstanz and the opportunity to connect with more hobbyists in Europe,” said Steve Eichenbaum, NGC CEO. “Offering a straightforward submission process out of Germany will hopefully make a big difference for dealers and collectors throughout the EU. Mostly, we’re looking forward to seeing some beautiful European rarities surface in the coming year.”

European dealers and collectors currently rely on NGC’s Switzerland location to submit coins to NGC’s headquarters in Sarasota, Fla., USA. While the current office is reliable, efficient and cost effective for dealers and collectors in Switzerland, the new location will benefit customers in EU member states.

“The new Germany location will no doubt generate excitement throughout the EU member states,” said Richard Stein, director of NGC European operations. “NGC grading — not to mention the NGC holder — is in high demand here in Europe, and we’re thrilled to think of the many great World coins we’ll be able to certify. I can’t help but think the auction prices will be impressive, as well, with so many NGC-graded World coins going to market.”

NGC brings 25 years of experience certifying and grading collectible coins in the popular and growing numismatic marketplace. The U.S.-based company employs a large staff of full-time coin graders, many of whom are among the most skilled and acclaimed in their field, making NGC the world’s largest third-party coin grading company. The knowledge, integrity and dedication of NGC’s grading team ensure a level of accuracy and consistency unparalleled among grading services, allowing hobbyists around the world to collect with confidence.

About Numismatic Guaranty Corporation (NGC)
Founded in 1987, NGC has become the global leader in rare coin authenticating and certifying, having graded more than 24 million coins. With a presence in the U.S., Switzerland, Germany, Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea and China (Guangzhou and Hong Kong), NGC provides customers with an independent, impartial source of grading integrity and guarantee of authenticity. The trusted choice for thousands of collectors and dealers worldwide, NGC’s record of uncompromising standards has helped to foster greater stability throughout the rare coin marketplace.