Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 2565888, member: 112&quot;]Maybe they were, but so what ? All those witnesses could have seen is what they assumed were original seals. But that doesn&#039;t mean they really were original seals.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>The mint themselves carelessly added them in ? <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie11" alt=":rolleyes:" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />&nbsp; C&#039;mon now ! Coins bagged and sealed by the mint are bagged and sealed by the mint when the coins are minted - in this case, 1887 in other words. And then, <u>24 years later</u>, the mint <u>carelessly </u>opened a sealed bag of 1887 coins, removed some of the original coins that were in the bag, and replaced them with coins <u>from an entirely different mint</u>, and then put a &quot;new original seal&quot; on that bag ? </p><p><br /></p><p><u>This</u>, and this is a fact not conjecture or an opinion, all by itself, discounts your first comment about the witnesses.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m not implying that I think anything. I&#039;m merely reporting what more than a few other knowledgeable people think.[/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