Hoard of Iron Age gold Staters
The UK Government Department for Digital, Culture,
Media and Sport, which is ultimately responsible for the Treasure Act and Code
of Practice, has produced a consultation document outlining proposed
changes. While much of the proposals are
little more than housekeeping there are some material changes that are of some
concern.
At present, treasure is defined, under the Act,
as any object other than a coin, at least 300 years old when found, which has a
metallic content, of which at least 10% by weight is gold or silver. And all
coins that contain at least 10% by weight of gold or silver that come from the
same find consisting of at least two coins, at least 300 years old. And all
coins that contain less than 10% by weight gold or silver that come from the
same find consisting of at least ten coins at least 300 years old. And any
associated objects (e.g. a pot or other container), except unworked natural
objects, found in the same place as treasure objects. And any objects or coin
hoards less than 300 years old, made substantially of gold and silver that have
been deliberately hidden with the intention of recovery and for which the owner
is unknown. From 1 January 2003 the definition of treasure was extended on
prehistoric (i.e. up to the end of the Iron Age) finds to include all multiple
artifacts, made of any metal, found together and single artifacts deliberately
containing any quantity of precious metal.
It is now proposed to add:
·
Any found object over 200 years old with a value
over £10,000
·
All single gold coins dated between 43 and 1344
·
Two or more base metal objects of Roman date
believed to have been intentionally buried together
There is also a proposal to
impose a legal duty on the acquirer of a possible treasure find to report it
and to impose a presumption that acquired treasure finds were found after the
Treasure Act. This is fraught with
difficulties. Under the Treasure Act rewards are split equally between finder
and landowner (unless there is a different agreement in place) so will private
acquirers report potential treasure if they stand to lose half its value if it
is declared treasure? Potential treasure items were being found for 25 years
before the Treasure Act, so assuming half of today’s find rate, that amounts to
some 12,000 exempt treasures somewhere, many probably in inherited collections.
The presumption of found since the Treasure Act seems contrary to English Law –
innocent until proven guilty. Does the acquirer take the seller’s word for when
the item was found? It is often impossible to PROVE when and where an item was
found. Surely it is up to the State to prove it was found after the Treasure
Act. The findspot is held up to be vitally important but in these cases, it is
likely to be erroneous or completely lacking, so what is the point?
