GoldFinger1969

Bags of DE trundled around Europe for decades -  but only by weight. Unbagged-counted-rebagged-unbagged-counted-weighed-rebagged-unbagged-weighed-consolidated into 22.2 Kilo bags-etc.,etc. This accounts for the appearance of most DE, which resemble Miss Liberty after a street brawl with NBA players.

MTB's archival records were largely destroyed in flooding from Hurricane Sandy. Documents were in an underground storage facility that flooded.
Scoby.
Dave Bowers and the Stacks are the prime go-to sources for past business anecdotes.

Aluminum is too soft, dies have to be harder than the material they are striking, also heat dissipation probably isn't that big a problem.  Tungsten is too difficult to work which is why it is typically formed as a powdered metal and then sintering or fusing.  Iron, well that's what steel is iron with other trace elements.  With dies the problem is the material has to be capable of being made soft enough to work an also to be made hard enough to last striking coins.  And it used to be the dies would have to be capable of being resoftened multiple times and then finally made hard enough for use.  Steel is pretty much ideal for this.

This bid summary shows the price range of large and small coinage presses in 1900. Manufacturers checked with the Mint Bureau before accepting coinage press orders from foreign governments or businesses. These were specialty machines and built to order.

The so-called "high quality" was really just normal production for the US Mints. MS-65 or better would have been typical for coins kept in their original bags and not shipped around a lot.

Translation:
Dear Mr Steele,
Here are a few nuts and bolts and some tools. Fix it yourself.
Oh, and when you get finished, send our tools back. And pay for the return freight.
Have a nice day.

Yes. I was there when they were first produced. There are several "progress strike" sets of medals available on the hobby market. They make eye-catching exhibits and also show the diminishing returns from multiple strikes - even with annealing between blows.

Walter Breen (possibly known as "Uncle Wally" to the little boys he raped) regularly invented actions, events and "information" in his publications - particularly the latter ones. For example, the story of CC dies being sent back to Philadelphia in 1899 has no supporting evidence at all. Real data and contemporary operating procedures all speak against such an event. However, such was Breen's reputation that many other writers simply accepted his lies and continued to present them as facts. Similar situations involving many US coins and Colonials has so confused things that it is difficult to trust anything that Breen published from the First Coinvesters' period forward. The slow work of examining, evaluating and correcting is uncoordinated and poorly reported.
He also invented names for things that already were identified, partly to satisfy his own ego and partly to cover his poor research. Glaring examples include "Roman" proof gold for the existing "satin" proof, and "Matte proof" for the accepted "sandblast proof."
[If the above sounds angry or frustrated, it's because whenever I research something on which Breen has a published article, I commonly have to take extra time to lay out the facts to both show what really happened and separately treat Breen's accumulated sewage.]

Multiple strikes must be perfectly aligned.
There has to be enough striking pressure to force planchet metal into all parts of the die. If there is insufficient force the design might be incomplete or lack high-point detail and roundness. (See 1921 Peace dollars as a premier example.)
The gold effect you note is from incomplete metal flow.

Presumably, world mints have tried many materials for coinage dies. I know of no mint using anything except various steel alloys.

None of the old toggle presses exist in original configuration. All of them used by museums and counterfeiters have been extensively modified over the years. At a normal running speed of 80 silver dollars per minute, a slow motion video would be best.

Regarding Chapter 4:
(1)  I didn't know that there was pressure from gold miners to raise the gold price to $40/oz. to improve profitability.  That kind of information gets skipped over when you have a macro view of the Gold Standard. 
When the US raised its price of fine gold, many western and Alaskan gold mines reopened because the owners could now make a profit. Huge amounts also flowed into the USA.
(2)  Didn't realize how few Saints (Liberty's too ?) actually circulated.
DE were seldom encountered in circulation except on the US and Canadian west coast (19th century).  The prevailing opinion in the late 1840s when they were proposed, was they were completely useless in getting gold to circulate in lieu of paper.
(3)  Die cracks and die breaks analysis was very informative.  Now I understand what they are, the differences, etc…. I suspect we don't have these problems today.
Die cracks still frequently occur. Modern steels are better and more consistent, but dies still crack during use. Die collapse is much less common today. There are multiple causes of coins with inferior detail: poor planchet annealing and incorrect (too low) striking pressure are the most common. Toggle presses produced uniform force with each blow, so actual striking pressure was determined by placement of one or two steel wedges that changed the distance between dies.
 (4)  The re-striking of a nation's coins.
Once a gold or silver coin left the country of issue (where it was legal tender), it was just bullion and used for local coins and other purposes.
RE: Smithson legacy. Original US Mint correspondence regarding the legacy and its conversion to US coin are available on NNP. Free.
RE: Sovereigns in US holdings. The New York Assay Office (now the Federal Reserve Bank of New York) holds a supply of sovereigns. We don’t know the dates or mints. Maybe some 1916 or 1917 or 1947 pieces are there…?

I'm surprised any country would use a generally unpopular (i.e., not used widely in commerce) coin like the Sac dollar.  Still, nice to see it used SOMEWHERE. 

This 1893 letter from Philadelphia Mint Coiner William Steele provides specific insight into one cause of misaligned (one side) strikes. The press in question, made by Ferracute Company (Oberlin Smith), was used for striking Morgan dollars and double eagles.

Following Mr. Steele's letter is the response from Ferracute. The letter is addressed to Mark Cobb, Chief Clerk.

Mint of the United States at Philadelphia
Coiner’s Office

May 11, 1893
Hon. O. C. Bosbyshell,
Superintendent

Sir:
The thread in the holes in the cast iron head of the Ferracute coining press, where the long bolts run through the arch to hold the upper die, has torn out – this permits the die holder to move about and consequently the die does not strike the center of the planchet. The thread seems to have been too short in length to hold. A new head will have to be furnished and the Ferracute Company had better send here and see what is needed.
Very Respectfully
William Steele,
Coiner

Detailed illustrations and information on Ferracute's coinage press are available in Journal of Numismatic Research (JNR), Issue #1 available from Wizard Coin Supply. This issue also includes original Janvier reducing lathe patents in French with English translation by one of my daughters.

Reminting of a countries coins into a host country currency or bars is common. As for Sovereigns, two examples of this happening are:
the James Smithson gift that was used to create the Smithsonian. It's interesting that Smithson never visited the United States. 
The Smithson bequest consisted of 104,960 gold Soveriegns. The coins were melted down, reminted as American coins - according to his will (if there were no children) all of Smithson’s assets—worth 104,960 gold sovereigns—would go "to the United States of America, to found at Washington, under the name of the Smithsonian Institution, an establishment for the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men." The U.S. government melted down almost all of the coins (worth $508,318.46) and re-struck them as 10 dollar Eagles.    Another example of Sovereigns being melted down are the 1916 and 1917 Sovereigns that were paid to the U.S. by England to pay for their war debt. The 1917 Sovereign was not released for circulation and the entire year's production was paid, mainly to the U.S., but also some other countries in small amounts for war debts. The 1917 is a very rare Sovereign as most were melted down upon receipt. There are many counterfeits out there - some very good ones and some very obvious ones.   On the other side - other countries would either store double Eagles as struck or melt them and re coin them into their currency. In the case of England - would melt them down and produce sovereigns of of them.   

RE: "I am curious for your book, do you go into depth with DE counterfeits or what happens after mint production stops? I have noticed that when one country uses popular coins from another country (like the way Ecuador uses Sacagawea coins), you start getting counterfeits or stockpiling of certain years. Similar happened to US gold in Europe, and apparently a lot of countries as I understand. "
The Saint-Gaudens DE book barely touches counterfeiting - that's a massive subject by itself.
Ecuador uses US dollars as a way of stabilizing their economy. It helps avoid political interference with money supply. As noted elsewhere above, sovereigns were the primary international gold piece. However, locally they were not coins. They were pieces of stabilized gold. Lebanese counterfeit sovereigns were usually of full gold weight. Their purpose was to profit from the exchange and private market rates versus various currencies. Other, non-sovereign pieces were later counterfeited to fool buyers outside of middle eastern economies and, of course, coin collectors.
US DE were not an important target for counterfeiters. Demand in the gold trade was low, and DE primarily went through the hands and very sharp eyes of banking and bullion specialists who were highly suspicious of DE. Counterfeit US gold - modern full gold versions - were purpose-made to fool collectors. Old 19th century pieces - were made to fool small merchants by having reduced gold content.

Thanks GoldFinger1969, but you keep on reading the book.  I'll just chill out and see what you and others bring up. I like the parts about the Gold Standard section and the details on various issues of corruption and playing loose with rules you bring up. Carry on. 
"Drop me a PM (or post here) with the main questions you have. I might be able to point you to sources. Are you comfortable reading French and German ? That would help. "
Thanks Roger, I'll shoot over a PM on the side. Heh...Google Translate is my friend. It's promising to me you aren't getting your research off FOIA requests and sitting in libraries for hours. I am curious for your book, do you go into depth with DE counterfeits or what happens after mint production stops? I have noticed that when one country uses popular coins from another country (like the way Ecuador uses Sacagawea coins), you start getting counterfeits or stockpiling of certain years. Similar happened to US gold in Europe, and apparently a lot of countries as I understand. 

"As they left the dies" all DE would have been MS-70 unless damaged during striking. The 2009 bullion imitations were handled individually as are most other modern gold bullion pieces.

I did not use a specific magnification for the details. It depended of availability of good photos and specific coins. I simply tried to use the clearest images. I then cropped them so they were reasonably consistent in the area shown in the tables. As with most things, reality dictated that compromises were necessary (A couple of months ago a new mm variety for 1916-S DE showed up; bottom of page sample. I took more than 60 photos to get the overall best photo of the mm area. See below - this was photo #47.)
 

Yes. The Cashier's vault was more like a normal bank vault than a storage vault. The door was within the Cashier's office. It held money for payroll, payment of depositors, small purchases of Mint supplies, and other working cash plus bars awaiting pickup by customers such as jewelers and dentists. Depending on space available and the time era, the Coiner's deliveries passed through the Cashier's office on their way to either the working vault or sometimes long-term storage.
Much of the operating system in a US Mint resulted from necessity, and not deliberate planning.

Ok - great!! Starting a log on some batching with all the suggestions so far. 
 
 

Not quite.... The Cashier's vault was controlled by the Cashier as representative of the Superintendent. The Vault Custodian was subservient to the Cashier but also reported, in theory, to the Superintendent. The Vault Custodian and his assistant controlled the "working vault" that was opened and closed each day. The other vaults were under seal and required special permission to open and were then sealed by a committee or 3 or 4 people.
The 1928 DE were in  what was once a working vault but was later a sealed vault.

My error - it was McKernan's assistant who was dead. McKernan retired Oct 31, 1936 and died Feb 22, 1950.

By the time of the 1933 DE fiasco, McKernan was dead. Remember - there were no reports of anything missing except the bag of 1928 DE.
Regulations required 2 people present to enter a vault, but not necessarily Mint Officers. In daily work the vault custodian and his assistant came and went largely at-will and it appears that the 2-person rule was often ignored. The Cashier's vault was different and the Cashier controlled access because of the frequent need to pay out cash for deposits and take in deliveries before they went to the Vault Custodian for longer term storage.

A very good thread with lots of information useful to anyone trying to understand and sell a large collection/accumulation.