RWB

PRIVATE Mint of the United States December 8, 1848 Hon. R. S. Walker, Secretary of the Treasury Dear Sir, We have received, this morning, the first deposit of gold from California. It weighed 1,804.59 ounces, of which 1,623.80 was from the lower surface mines, and 350.79 from this is Feather River. It seems to be of excellent quality, but its true fineness has not yet been ascertained. When it is assayed, I will let you know the result. It is composed entirely of grains and dust. It was deposited by Mr. David Carter, who brought it from San Francisco by the Isthmus route. Most truly and respectfully, Your friend and servant R. M. Patterson

It is an improvement largely because the auction companies do not have the advantage of manipulating the stated condition of the coin. The good ones now put more time into better descriptions. But it also greatly reduces the need for buyer knowledge in coin grading. Plastic holders also limit complete examination of coins by bidders.

Or shoot first....

USAuPzlBxBob - Excellent list, but I fear many coin dealers cannot count that high -- without a "$" being present.

That's very telling.

Seems really simple for "In-Security" to flip up all the table skirts after the show closes. An upgrade might be to have those sharp-eyed exhibit judges work the night shift to spot miscreants hiding under the hot dog stand or in the restroom ceiling.

A bargain!

Auctions are for selling. Long ago auction companies graded and examined coins before listing them. Today, a glance at a slab label is about it. The rest is a seller's job of building a story and enticing potential buyers.

Time does not care how it is reckoned....

The coins are strange. I don't know if each is unique, never having examined the 2nd one.

RE: This statement, "... Saint experts like John Albanese were also very definitive in saying if you didn't see the date you'd swear it was a 1909 Proof," falls apart in and over itself. I compared coin detail, striking characteristics, edge and the remaining physical features of one of the 1921s to original 1909, 1910 and 1911 proof DE. I also compared the 1921 to other circulation 1921 DE. The 1921 subject coin had far less detail than any of the proofs, plus lacked the edge, rim and other characteristics common to satin proofs DE. The 1911 comparison demonstrated nothing because of sandblasting. 1921-to-1921 comparison showed detail similar to ordinary circulation pieces; however, the surfaces were abnormal with the appearance of light overall polish. Conclusion: strange looking surfaces, not made on a medal press, nor from satin proof dies, coin not altered. There are other things discovered, but they must remain unspoken. Interestingly, no one bothered to contact me about the one coin. Owners of the other coin refused to allow independent examination. Read the DE book. That's the last I have to say on the matter.

I've examined one of the two 1921 DE in question. My opinion is in complete disagreement with the "proof" or "specimen" labels. That is fairy tale-driven absurdity.

The correct grade of the coin is entirely separate from any tarnish. Their causes are unrelated and they should not be conflated into a meaningless mess. Using only the photo above, the coin is MS-65 or possibly 66 due to the prominent damage to GW's nose, bump on his cheek and field scratches. Toning, which I happen to like in this case, is a market/individual valuation factor. The $20,000 reserve sounds like etsy or some other slime pit.

At that "level" photos are not a lot of help unless of high resolution and multiple lighting angles.

There were other simple historical and factual errors in the competitive exhibits. This is something I expect the exhibit judges to include in their notes to exhibitors. To me, accuracy (educational aspect) is a critical factor. Decorated pigs don't get awards, except at the county fair. Maybe the resident exhibit judge, festooned with ribbons and key to the executive washroom, can speak to the imporance of historical accuracy.

Charmy Harker's ANA photo report is interesting and a good "read" ("look" ?) for those who have never attended a large show. There were also many educational presentations not shown, but one person (and her cat) can't do everything! It was disappointing, however, to see so many factual mistakes on the competitive exhibits. With so many modern resources for accurate numismatic information, There has to be real concern when exhibitors continue to use ancient copy-cat material, or than anyone would claim there were "1921 special proof" coins.

If you predecease your wife, she will need help in preparing the Estate. So your task might be to identify a good local law firm to help her, make accurate lists of your assets (all types, not merely coins) with values. Generally, everything will transfer to her unless you stipulate otherwise in your Will. The attorney can help her get a contemporary appraisal of numismatic assets.

Yes, that's the example I was thinking of. There are others with almost identical requests. It was impossible to provide small change for the citizenry if parts were not publicly distributed.

VF, although the rim/edge gouge might kill it.

Communities, and the banks within them, needed small change: cents, half dimes and dimes. Many bank requests are for that combination of coins. The basic problem was that the Mint did not coin silver for its own account as it did cents so it officially had no small silver coins to distribute if they legally could. However, Moore and Patterson made occasional exceptions for distant rural banks and the feisty Postmasters who carried considerable influence. In an instance I recall, a Bank in rural Ohio got abut $50 in cents and the same amount in half dimes and dimes - everything was packed into one keg and shipped at Treasury expense (which was only for copper coins). The director made sure to insure the keg for only the cent value, telling the Bank Cashier that the rest was at his risk.

I put "Rogaine" on all the slabs so they would have a nice head of heir. But now I can't read some of the labels -- and red heir'd ones are always arguing about their grades. Geeezzz.

"coins" are not a logical collection. It is almost entirely emotional and historical connection. Investors (who are not really collectors) are financially "logical" about the subject, and feel no more remorse about selling than they would selling a building.

Keep them to remind you and your family of an interesting time a fascinating personal story.

It's a minor rotated die, as Mr. Bill mentioned. The awful scratched render the almost worthless to a collector. There are no errors visible.

From mid-1795 copper coins were issued by the mint treasurer to the Treasurer of the US. From 1800 forward, the Purveyor of Public Supplies did this from his office in Philadelphia. He sold them to banks with the government paying transportation, insurance, packing, etc. by water plus 1% to the Treasury Agent. This continued to 1812 when the position was abolished. Treasury stopped most distribution beginning in Nov. 1811. The Agent approach was revives in 1816 but with the Mint Treasurer doing this and collecting a separate 1% commission. A New York City shipping agent was engaged in 1821 with several companies doing this. When Crocker Bros. won the Mint planchet contract in December 1837, they also forwarded kegs of coins in addition to those sent by the Mint Treasurer, NY forwarding Agent, and the Bank of the United States.