petit service

[Jumpy]

Bonjour à tous,

J'aimerais savoir si quelqu'un possède le numero de septembre 1988 du Journal du RCNA. je cherche à consulter l'article de la page 316 deliberate and random errors de D.M. Cudahy.

[pienot]

Si personne l'a, essaie en contactant directement le journal à
http://www.rcna.ca/contact.php
... peut-être seront-ils en mesure de t'aider. j'ai regarder dans la page archive mais il ne donne que l'index du numéro pour 1988.

[castor]

[quote="Jumpy"]

Message "Éditer" voir l'article ici bas

[micro5]

Salut castor. Ton lien demande un nom d'utilisateur et un mot de passe.

[castor]

"Deliberate" and "Random" Errors
By D. M. Cudahy, P. Eng.
Vice-President, Manufacturing
Royal Canadian Mint
There has been a number of articles recently questioning why the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police, acting on the request of the Royal Canadian Mint, seized a proof 50C/$100
coin ("mule") before it was auctioned at the recent Torex Show. In addition, these articles
have also requested that the Mint provide a definition of a legitimte error coin.
Addressing this issue properly requires a review of the criminal code as it pertains
to counterfeits and the pertinent sections are included for review.
The coin in question was examined to determine if it conforms to the legal definition
of a counterfeit. Section 406 (a) and (c) are the appropriate sections, which state that
counterfeit money includes
"a fulse coin ... that resembles or is apparently intended to resemble
or pass for a current coin . .. " and "a genuine coin .. . that is
prepared or altered to resemble or pass for a current coin . .. of
a higher denomination".
Since this proof 50C/$100 coin was prepared to resemble a coin of higher denomination,
there are grounds to believe that it is a counterfeit. The manufucturing process for producing
numismatic coins (including striking, inspection and packaging) would preclude the
possibility of this being an accidental occurrence. Therefore when made aware of the proof
50C/$loo coin, the Mint as technical advisor on Canadian coinage matters formed the opinion
that it was counterfeit and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police discharged its responsibility
by seizing the coin and holding it on behalf of the Minister of Finance as required by Section
420 of the Criminal Code:
420. (1) Counterfeit money, counterfeit tokens of value and anything
that is used or is intended to be used to make counterfeit money
or counterfeit tokens of value belong to Her Majesty.
(2) A peace officer may seize and detain
(a) counterfeit money,
(b) counterfeit tokens of value, and
(c) machines, engines, tools, instruments, materials or things that
have been used or that have been adapted and are intended for use
in making counterfeit money or counterfeit tokens of value;
and anything seized shall be sent to the Minister of Finance to be
disposed of or dealt with as he may direct, but anything that is
required as evidence in any proceedings shall not be sent to the
Minister until it is no longer required in those proceedings. 1953-54,
c. 51, s. 405.
As mentioned the criminal code clearly defines counterfeit, but is silent on error coins.
The question then is: "What is an error coin?".
This can best be answered by defining quality. Quality for the Mint is any coin which
adheres to the legal specification for size, weight and alloy along with a visual appearance
that conforms to the approved design. Any coin with surface imperfections and which does
not meet the legal, physical or chemical requirements, would not be considered a quality
coin. There are some collectors, however, who devote a good deal of time to the study
of such coins.
In any manufucturing process, quality problems do occur. However, process and quality
control procedures minimize these occurrences. For example in the production of circulation
316
coin, statistical quality control techniques are used to control quality on the more than
one billion circulation coins produced annually. It is just not possible to examine every
coin on a coin-by-coin basis. In the case of numismatic coins, however, each coin is visually
inspected at least three times throughout the process so that only coins meeting our quality
standard are packaged. All coins identified as not meeting the quality standard are destroyed.
In rare instances, coins not meeting the quaity standards may have left the Mint as
part of a normal shipment.
Any coin which due to random and reasonable occurrence in production does not meet
the quality standard is nothing more than poor quality. Although coin collectors may wish
to retain coins not meeting quality standards (referred to by collectors as "Mint errors"),
the Mint stands ready to replace them.
In summary, any coin which is determined to have been deliberately produced or altered,
whether within Mint premises or not, so as not to meet the approved legal specification,
may fall within the definition set out in the Criminal Code an may be deemed to be
counterfeit. In the case of these coins, which are believed to be counterfeit, the Mint will
continue to request the appropriae authorities to seize them.

[Jumpy]

Merci beaucoup Castor, c'est vraiment très gentil de ta part.

[jfdes]

Bonjour à vous tous.

Je suis à la recherche d’un Journal CNA (RCNA) numéro 9 soit novembre de l’année 1999.

Si quelqu’un a ceci svp faites moi signe car je voudrais voir pour l’acquérir

Merci beaucoup

Jfdes