How the West was Faked: False Western Gold Bars and other Forgeries

John M. Kleeberg

Get a .pdf version of this document
Get a Word version of this document

Table of Contents

• I. Introduction
  
• II. Hodder's misinterpretation of the evidence about western gold bars.
  
• III. The Fake Mexican Gold Bars.
  1. The bars are not struck to a set weight standard, so they are false.
  2. Further evidence that the Mexican bars are false and Hodder's attempt at refutation.
  3. The Presence of Aluminum in the Mexican Gold Bars Indicates that they are Fake.
  4. The false stories surrounding the origins of the bars.
     
• IV. The Tubac Ingot.
  
• V. The fake coins and bars allegedly made by Augustus Humbert and the United States Assay Office of Gold that composed the “Franklin Hoard.”
  1. Technological Reasons for the Falsity of the USAOG “Franklin Hoard” Coins.
     1. Tests by proton induced x-ray emission analysis shows the items to be fake.
     2. A repeated pattern of nicks and gashes on the “Franklin Hoard” coins proves that they are forgeries.
     3. A higher density and a higher reed count prove that the USAOG $20 “Proofs” are fakes; the crude reeding on the round $50 USAOG pieces proves that those pieces are fake too.
  2. Contradictory design elements prove the falsity of the “Franklin Hoard” USAOG Items.
  3. The USAOG did not produce the $50 and $200 Denominations in 1853.
  4. None of the “Franklin Hoard” oddities was in Humbert's or Kellogg's collections.
  5. If the USAOG made use of proofing pieces, they would have been manufactured in the East, and not on the West Coast.
  6. Contradictory stories of the “Franklin Hoard” prove the pieces must be false.
     1. John Ford's story of the discovery of the “Franklin Hoard:” Version I.
     2. John Ford's story of the discovery of the “Franklin Hoard:” Version II (and assorted variants).
     3. An analysis of the “Franklin Hoard” discovery stories proves that none of the stories can be true.
• VI. Fake Western Private Coins.
  1. The Fake Blake & Co. Double Eagles and Fifty Dollar Pieces.
     1. Blake operated for only a few days in 1855 as Blake & Co. rather than as Blake & Agrell.
     2. Iconography proves that the Blake & Co. coin is false.
     3. Technological problems prove the Blake & Co. double eagles are false.
     4. The misspelling “Agnell” proves that the “Blake & Agnell” pieces are fake; as are the Blake & Co. coins they die link with.
  2. The False Bowie $5 Coin.
     1. Who was J. H. Bowie?
        1. Joseph Haskins Bowie of Maryland.
        2. John H. Bowie of New York.
     2. The lettering on the Bowie $5 is distinct from that on the well-pedigreed Bowie $1 copper pattern.
     3. The Bowie $5 coins differ in several important respects from the well-pedigreed Bowie $1 copper pattern.
     4. The skewed pattern of discovery of new Bowie $5s shows that a forger is at work.
     5. Technological reasons prove the Bowie $5 is a forgery.
        1. Problems with the fineness and non-destructive analysis prove the coin is a forgery.
        2. The oddly high rim is not typical of the early California issues.
  3. The Diana Gambling House $20.
     1. Technological evidence proves that the Diana Gambling House coins are fake.
     2. Iconographic evidence proves that the Diana Gambling House coins are fake.
     3. Legal and economic circumstances determine why a gaming establishment would not issue gold coins.
     4. The Diana Gambling House coins share a common pedigree with the phony USAOG pieces, the Mexican gold bars, and the Bowie coins.
  4. The George W. Hall double eagle.
  5. The J. J. Conway $5 without denomination (Breen 7949).
• VII. Fake U.S. Mint Bars.
  1. The False Southern Branch Mint proofing piece.
  2. Phony U.S. Mint Bars with a false provenance to the Brother Jonathan shipwreck.
• VIII. Fake Western Gold Bars.
  1. The skewed pattern of finds indicates that the western gold bars are false.
  2. Valuation problems: many of the bars do not value bullion at the par prices of $20.6718 (gold) and $1.2929 (silver), which proves they are false.
  3. Fineness problems indicate that the questionable gold bars are false; many are too pure to be genuine western unparted bars, and their fineness does not appear in a random pattern.
     1. Many of the bars are too pure to be genuine western unparted bars.
     2. On the questionable gold bars, the same fineness reappears on consecutively numbered bars; on the Central America bars, the fineness is a random pattern.
  4. The questionable gold bars weigh little, often less than five ounces; which does not correspond to what we know of real bars.
  5. Many of the gold bars, if genuine, must be monetary ingots; yet they lack security edges.
  6. Many of the questionable gold bars have the lettering applied with separate letter punches rather than logotypes, which would be an uneconomic way of producing bars.
  7. Tests by Proton Induced X-Ray Emission Analysis show the western gold bars to be fake.
  8. Assayers standardized their designs to a high degree; yet the questionable gold bars show wide variations in design by the same assayer.
  9. The questionable gold bars provide much irrelevant information.
  10. The incorrect use of the abbreviation “S.M.V.” proves the bars are false.
  11. On the questionable gold and silver bars, the Internal Revenue tax stamp appears on bars ostensibly minted outside the years 1864-68, and does not appear on bars that were ostensibly minted during the years 1865-67; which proves the bars are false.
  12. Problems with Individual Issuers.
      1. Baldwin & Co.
      2. G. W. Bell.
      3. Eagle Mining Co.
      4. Haraszthy, Uznay & Co.
      5. Hentsch & Berton.
      6. F. G. Hoard.
      7. Justh & Hunter.
      8. James King, of Wm.
      9. Knight & Co.
      10. F. D. Kohler.
      11. Meyer & Co.
      12. Moffat & Co.
      13. Naglee.
      14. Parsons & Co.
      15. Star Mining Company.
      16. Conrad Wiegand.
• IX. False Counterstamps.
  1. F. D. Kohler 1849.
  2. Republic of Texas, 1839.
  3. Union Mine.
• X. The Saudi Arabian 4 dinar gold discs.
• XI. Determining the authenticity of the silver bars.
  1. Genuine Silver Bars.
  2. False Silver Bars.
• XII. Gold and silver bars previously acknowledged as modern forgeries.
• XIII. Genuine bars - with phony stories.
• XIV. Paul Gerow Franklin (1919-2000), John Jay Ford, Jr. (1924-), and the Massapequa Mint: Careers in Forgery.
• XV. Conclusion.
• Tables
  1. GENUINE SILVER BARS
  2. SILVER BARS: AUTHENTICITY UNDETERMINED
  3. FAKE SILVER BARS
  4. FAKE U.S. MINT BARS
  5. FAKE HUMBERT/USAOG ITEMS
  6. FAKE COUNTERSTAMPS
  7. FAKE WESTERN PRIVATE COINS
  8. GENUINE WESTERN PRIVATE GOLD BARS
  9. FAKE WESTERN PRIVATE GOLD BARS
  10. DIE TRIALS IN LEAD FOR FAKE WESTERN BARS
• References

Return to main site index