I read about this today, but other than the details from a pretty brief documentary show and a meager interest in numismatics, I know very little.
Most of the following is from this Wikipedia article:
On April 5, 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt signed this presidential executive order, effectively making the hoarding of gold illegal, punishable by fines and potential ten year prison sentences, thus requiring American citizens to turn over all monetary gold to the US government: bullion, coins, and gold certificates. (Exceptions: jewelry, industry, etc.) All was essentially bought by the gov't, at "spot" or "melt" value, but with all but some of the vast American people's bulk of gold, FDR double the price of gold.
All this was done to spur US economy out of the Great Depression; the logic is relatively sound, but it strikes me as rather extreme. Today, and although the dollar is always fluctuating, the US economy is more stable than back then. And still, many people invest directly in precious metals, converting their salaries into grams and ounces and pounds gold, silver, platinum for the stability of the metals themselves.
If the President of the US were to pass such a law today, I'd hope there would be some outrage or at least conversation. Maybe people no longer hoard gold or silver at the same level they did before 1933 (remember that before 1965, dimes and quarters and halves and dollar coins were made of 90% silver: almost sterling), but I know many people who keep old coins and bullion in safety deposit boxes, and I "know" tons of Internet friends who invest directly in precious metals: see /r/silverbugs and /r/coins.
QUESTION : What was the reaction to FDR's executive order 6102? Of general people, of the hoarders, of state governors and of rest of the federal government? Was such a thing passed without much blowback, and were people angered at a rather totalitarian move? Or was it justified by the far-reaching darkness of the Great Depression?
^^^^^edit: ^^^^^formatting
What I'm gonna do is try to go over as much as I can. This is a hard topic to find things about, but let's begin.
On April 14, 1933, the Chicago Tribune wrote that "The Administrations anti-gold hoarding campaign slid into senility last week as the return of gold to the reserve banks fell to the lowest level in recent weeks and the government still remained uncertain about its action against hoarders".
They actually only took in $36 million in that week (according to the Federal Reserve board), which was $7 million less than the week before. They also noted that Attorney General Cummings admitted that only general plans were decided on how to deal with the hoarders. He indicated that "...the administration is hoping that it will never be called on to act and that hoarding will evaporate". To put that amount in perspective, by the way, over a billion dollars of gold was still in the country, and not circulating outside of it, but being held by presumably private citizens (I believe banks were excluded from that count).
The issue only got more contentious as time went on.
The LA Times reported on April 11, 1933, that from the end of February to the end of March, gold in circulation had dropped roughly $200 million in amount.
On May 3, 1933, the New York Times reported that gold hoarders were challenging the constitutionality of the order (the time limit for returning the gold expired the day before). This issue had more to do with the refusal to allow foreign residents and non-residents to get export licenses and send the gold abroad. They couldn't send it abroad, and refused to turn it in, leading to the court case.
On September 19, 1933, the New York Times put out a report saying "Deadline Passed on Gold Hoarding". They were referring to some events going on at the time. Essentially, the Federal Government gave hoarders 15 days (from midnight on the 18th) to turn in their gold after filing their reports with the IRS. See, a week or two earlier, the administration issued another executive order, telling people they had to file their gold returns. If people chose not to, they could be prosecuted for failure to report lawfully (similar to income tax procedure), rather than directly for hoarding gold (which was far more difficult to prosecute for). While even as early as June, suspects were being investigated for hoarding, the new policy made it reportedly much easier to deal with. Attorney General Cummings now said that those who did not turn in gold would be prosecuted. At this point, roughly $700 million more in gold was in the Federal Reserve bank, judging from March 1 to September 1.
Evidently, the policy was getting somewhere. But that wasn't the end of it. On September 27, 1933, the New York Times reported that a gold owner was suing the government and testing the constitutionality of the rules. The owner, an attorney, was trying to get Chase bank to return him 27 bars of gold worth $5,000 each, which he had given them to take care of as custodians. They said they couldn't give them back, as it would be hoarding the gold. He insisted they had to. He also was facing indictment for hoarding and not reporting that gold.
On November 17, 1933, the New York Times again reported on the case. They noted that the gold hoarding ban was upheld as constitutional in court (US District Court), and sustained his indictment on hoarding the gold, but said that he could not be indicted for not turning it over. The judge said the Treasury had to issue the order for turning over the gold, not the President, but that the anti-hoarding act was still valid. The case didn't end there.
The man, a Mr. Campbell, attempted to take the case to the US Supreme Court. However, it chose not to rule on the subject, dismissing the case at the bidding of the administration. The Solicitor General (James C. Biggs) argued that the gold had been turned over to the government, meaning nothing was left to be litigated, since Campbell had turned it over himself (protesting all the while).
Cases like this were common, insofar as I can tell, with people pleading not guilty, being forced to turn over the gold, or testing its constitutionality and failing to get rulings in their favor. The government, in all cases (even Supreme Court ones that followed in 1935) upheld the constitutionality and kept the trend of turning in gold going as much as they could. People were unhappy, and there was blowback in terms of hoarders, general people, and such, but the US government mostly stuck together. Congress passed a similar act that essentially said the executive orders were fine and should be followed, but I can't find anything on state governors.
Hope this gives you an idea of how it all went down at first in a little more detail than that Wiki article!
Sources:
Return of gold from hoarding drops sharply. (1933, Apr 14). Chicago Daily Tribune (1923-1963)
Treasury data show effect of hoarding war. (1933, Apr 11). Los Angeles Times (1923-Current File)
Special to THE NEW,YORK TIMES. (1933, Jun 06). GOLD HOARDING LIST SENT TO CUMMINGS. New York Times (1923-Current File)
Special to THE NEW,YORK TIMES. (1933, Sep 19). DEADLINE PASSED ON GOLD HOARDING. New York Times (1923-Current File)
GOLD OWNER SUES ON HOARDING RULES. (1933, Sep 27). New York Times (1923-Current File)
GOLD HOARDING BAN UPHELD BY COURT. (1933, Nov 17). New York Times (1923-Current File)
By The, A. P. (1934, Feb 13). RULING IS BLOCKED ON GOLD HOARDING. New York Times (1923-Current File)
Special to THE NEW,YORK TIMES. (1933, May 03). TREASURY DEFIED ON GOLD HOARDING. New York Times (1923-Current File)