Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on October 19, 2016 at 11:36am

If I had an original Button Gwinnett no way would I let it go for that without having a reserve on it too.  Did they have any provenance on it? 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Trazom1 on October 19, 2016 at 7:29pm

I agree with you, Scott.  I did inquire about provenance.  They sent me some the attached items.

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• Screen Shot 2016-10-19 at 7.25.45 PM.png, 427 KB
• Screen Shot 2016-10-19 at 7.26.24 PM.png, 495 KB
• Screen Shot 2016-10-19 at 7.26.09 PM.png, 578 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Trazom1 on October 19, 2016 at 7:30pm

...and these

Attachments: No photo uploads here

• Screen Shot 2016-10-19 at 7.26.38 PM.png, 348 KB
• Screen Shot 2016-10-19 at 7.26.50 PM.png, 422 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Trazom1 on October 19, 2016 at 7:41pm

The unsigned letter from the North Missouri Historical Society has the sender redacted, and may simply be fake.  I tried searching online for the North Missouri Historical Society, and couldn't find anything.

I think the auction house is offering the item in good faith, but I think it's a fake with no convincing provenance or documentation.  A real Gwinnett signature would have proper documentation and expert opinion support.  The fact that they have none one year after it already failed to sell is very telling.

There is no proof that the item offered is the cut signature referred to in the Gwinnett autograph census, nor that the authenticity of the item referred to in the census is established.  You'd think that a census of Gwinnett signatures would have plates illustrating all of the listed exemplars. 

That letter signed "Ralph" in a shaky hand is not very helpful or convincing (and is rather laughable, in fact).

That's my opinion...what do you think?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on October 20, 2016 at 5:53am

I am by no means an expert on Button Gwinnett especially without seeing it in person but this leaves me will tons of questions.   So I cannot comment on if the autograph is legitimate or not.  For the money it will bring I am certain there will be authenticators coming out of the wood work to look at it.  Looking now only at the provenance as given I find some things unsettling in my mind.

I knew of Mr. Newman back in the mid-1970s when I was really interested in collecting Revolutionary and Civil War item. I need to check my books I think I have one of his books but not sure if it is signed or not. As for his "LOA" that is meaningless in my opinion. The letter is dated 1971 I cannot comprehend a book seller of the magnitude of Newman not having printed letterheads. The handwriting of Newman looks like he was 97 at the time!  I would want to see examples of his signature also from 1971.   It does not appear to have visible folds one would expect either.  If I was giving up all the Lincoln material plus $25,000 I would have requested Mr. Newman get himself to a notary public and put something more in writing.  So if I were a serious buyer that particular letter would not be a major part of my consideration.

I have never read the "census" but would assume anyone making it would have at least seen photographs as you say.  I see the author is given in the notes.  I assume he made a point of making sure all the autographs were legitimate.  I kind of doubt the author could have seen it in person if it was more or less missing at the time.  There must have been a reason they believed the Newman example authenticate to begin with.

For the sake of argument let us say it is legitimate the letter from the historical society is troubling to me since it is contradictory. It states: "This item is now part of the North Missouri Historical Society and will go into the archives as such. As president, I still retain ownership of the item until my liquidation discretion." If the item were "on loan" it should have been clearly stated in the acquisition form. Personally I would want legal advice before purchasing on the basis of that alone! Is the owner actually the "president" of the society or the society itself? Is the society made up of one person the owner? The Clark County Historical Society is in the same town by the way maybe they had a name change years ago. Why didn't he say the autograph was "housed in the NMHS archives but I retain ownership." I would want clarification before I spent a bundle on the autograph.

The census states they do not know what happened to the Newman example. Do you know when the "census" was taken?  There is a lot missing with this same that should be one of the most important historical autograph sales of the decade.  I for one hope that the autograph is 100% legitimate since it is such an important one.   Have any recent TPA's put their two cents in yet?  My questions I think any legitimate buyer would also want to know before shelling out 500 or 600 thousand dollars (or more).  Hopefully there is more provenance than they have given.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Trazom1 on October 20, 2016 at 6:27pm

Thanks, Scott, for your thoughtful and insightful reply.  The census was by Ryan Speer and published by the Manuscript Society (Manuscripts, Vol. 60, No. 4, 2008: "Button Gwinnett Signatures: A Census"), and is apparently the best published reference on Gwinnett signatures.  I don't have a copy of it.  It reportedly lists 51 known Gwinnett autographs with 40 residing in institutional collections and 10 in private hands (or unaccounted for).

I believe this particular example failed to sell for the minimum one year ago.  I would have to think that if it were real it would have easily sold for £5000! 

If someone were to try to fabricate a Gwinnett fake they would either add his "signature" to a genuine period document signed by others or would sell a very poor condition cut signature, with fabricated damage and aging to limit proper analysis...as I suspect is the case here. 

Again, after it didn't sell last year, if it were real the consignor would no doubt have obtained some third party expert opinion or other additional supportive evidence if he thought it was real (or would have offered it at Sotheby's, Christie's, RR, Heritage, or some other appropriate venue). 

The supportive documents in this case are, at best, very shaky.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James Stone on October 21, 2016 at 11:03am

I honestly don't know, but I have collected a few DOI signers and I know I wouldn't touch that with a 10ft pole unless there was something more. Gwinett's signature sold for what $700K? It should shoot up huge red flags when it can't sell for 5000 euros.

There is no way some of the more reputable dealers who hunt auctions would have passed that up if it was real. Doesn't seem like you have discovered a diamond in the rough, just seems very fishy IMO.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scott Paul on October 21, 2016 at 11:11am

I used to collect Revolutionary War and Civil War a lot back around the time of the Bicentennial and even then Gwinnett was considered unattainable.   I think there was something like 25 or so thought to exist. There is more now known but still very few.  To see one not sell for that price or even appear to get any great interest in the media is a big red flag.  If I had a Button Gwinnett to sell I would be contacting CNN, FOX, NBC, ABC, CBS etc. it would be big news I think.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Trazom1 on October 22, 2016 at 7:04am

Interestingly, and perhaps not unrelated to this discussion, the auction house has raised their minimum bid to £20,000!

• ▶ Reply