Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;dcarr, post: 1001653, member: 4781&quot;]They <i>can</i> be both.&nbsp;&nbsp; Is a legal-tender instrument, once defaced, still legal tender for the original face value ?</p><p>Is a &quot;hobo&quot; nickel (with little or nothing from the original design showing) still legal-tender for five cents ?</p><p>I think it is.&nbsp;&nbsp; A hobo nickel <i>is</i> the product of the US Mint AND a coin carver.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>The designs on &quot;my&quot; coins are a product of the Mint&#039;s original stamping, AND my over-stamping.&nbsp;&nbsp; According to the US Mint, 1964-D Peace Dollars do not exist.&nbsp;&nbsp; So I can&#039;t be making a &quot;replica&quot; of one if they don&#039;t exist.&nbsp;&nbsp; A &quot;re-creation&quot; of one is a better term, perhaps.</p><p><br /></p><p>The &quot;parent coin&quot; does make a huge difference - the difference between altering an existing legal-tender instrument, vs. creating a legal-tender instrument out of something that wasn&#039;t to begin with (the latter is the traditional meaning of &quot;counterfeit&quot; in currency terms).</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>I realize we are going around and around in circles here.&nbsp;&nbsp; The same thing happened (on a much larger scale) when this was discussed over on the PCGS CU coin forum.</p><p><br /></p><p>I don&#039;t know if you are familiar with the artist JSG Boggs (of &quot;Bogg&#039;s Bills&quot; fame).&nbsp;&nbsp; He drew currency on scraps of paper by hand (with pen and straight-edge).&nbsp;&nbsp; But that was only part of the &quot;art&quot;.&nbsp;&nbsp; The other part of the art was a &quot;performance&quot; where he would attempt to spend the note at face value in exchange for something.&nbsp;&nbsp; He would tell the intended recipient that he drew the note himself.&nbsp;&nbsp; Many of the bills looked very much like legal-tender US currency.&nbsp;&nbsp; Sometimes they were accepted and saved by the recipient as a piece of art.&nbsp;&nbsp; Sometimes they were flatly refused.&nbsp;&nbsp; It was all part of the &quot;performance&quot;.</p><p><br /></p><p>One of the &quot;art&quot; aspects of my &quot;1964-D&quot; fantasy Peace Dollars (and one of the reasons people are so intersted in them), is the legal grounds which seemingly allow them and disallow them at the same time.&nbsp;&nbsp; The original laws were not written with the idea in mind that someone would take a genuine coin and alter it to make it look like another version of that same coin type (but one that was never issued), and then sell it as such with full disclosure of the alterations.</p><p><br /></p><p>Obviously, from my point of view, the law allows it.&nbsp;&nbsp; Those privately-modified &quot;reverse proof&quot; Silver Eagles from a couple years ago were legal.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in