RWB

Cameo proofs of this era are incidental to introduction of new dies - one that have had only one polishing. The relief frost quickly wore off and was not deliberately renewed. Thus, cameo coins were made only by new dies, which had been polished just once, and retained most of the original low detail. (See United States Proof Coins 1936-1942 for details, etc.)

Compare the area between nose and eye on the mirror proofs, with the same area on satin proofs. Notice how polishing degraded detail. Also compare the ground on each version and bison's prepuce.

If you concentrate on coins used by merchants, your should be able to establish a reasonable boundary. Cons used by the general public, would, of course, be different and exclude most gold.

It's easy to miss the detail if you don't have high quality examples for comparison. NGC has a photo gallery of coins by date/mint with some excellent pictures. Keep looking and keep asking questions.

Here's a typical MS-64 1891-O dollar. High point detail is flat as is commonly the case with New Orleans dollars. (Photos from Heritage Auctions.)

As Fenntucky Mike noted, the coin grades Fine or so, and is not remotely close to uncirculated. It has also been scrubbed as shown by the fine scratches on the obverse (front). It's not something for which a coin collector would pay a premium over its silver content.

Was his set draped in the ANA flag and wheeled out on a Gerbil-drawn caisson? Some of the prices, such as the 21-D, I think were higher long ago.

There is current chatter on other sites about some war nickels being attracted to a magnet. Before this gets out of hand and into the “LQQK – MAGNETIC NICKELS – HUGE ERROR – WORTH THOUSANDS !!!!!” realm of stupidity, here’s the reality. We are familiar with ordinary magnetic materials, primarily iron, nickel and cobalt. These elements are attracted to a magnet and also can hold a magnetic field. No US coinage metals are magnetic except 1943 zinc coated steel cents. But there are other elements and molecules that are weakly attracted to a magnet. These are called “paramagnetic materials,” and include uranium, platinum, tungsten, aluminum, oxygen gas, and under certain conditions copper and silver. With an ordinary iron or iron-cobalt magnet paramagnetism is too weak to detect. Its primary coin use is in slug rejection mechanisms in vending machines. (See the upcoming article in Coin World.) However, modern “super magnets” have much stronger magnetic fields and can attract (pick up) coins containing copper and or silver. That is, the modern magnets are so strong that they attract things not normally thought of as being attracted. This is the situation with “magnetic war nickels.” It is normal, varies considerably, and is not an error or special variety. Here’s a helpful tabular summary of magnetism, and link to a web site with basic information for further reference. https://msestudent.com/magnetic-materials-types-of-magnetism-applications-and-origin-of-magnetism/

It's nice to see the coins your Dad enjoyed and the obvious pleasure you take in having them. It would be helpful if you posted sharp, clear photos -- collectors like detail.

Sorry, it was printed only in soft cover to reduce both weight and cost. [PS: It was sold only with a CD of fully searchable content - use it like an index.]

Why not post on VAMworld.com?

Will it surprise you that Dictator Putin is coming to your house for dinner? Is there parking for his tank?

Keith, Looking at the quarter photo Woods020 posted, I agree it is from a damaged die. In this instance, a small part of the steel failed due to mechanical stress and fell out of the die. Usually, these "die chips" are irregular shapes. The shape results from crystal boundaries in the steel, and can follow a line (or circle) created in the metal by poor annealing cycles as the die is made. (Annealing cycles are heating and cooling necessary to make the steel soft enough for die cutting, but the hard for use.) The Washington quarter is unusual in shape and the nickname is certainly evident. Its interest to most collectors is limited because it is a defect and not actually a die variety. Certainly keep it for its unusual shape and the fun part of coin collecting.

When I have a longer post, I prepare it in a wordprocessor, then paste into the on-line editor. I still make typos, though.

“I thought I did explain in the minting process about the earring on Washingtons ear. Its a little smaller then that circle. But it was perfectly placed on his ear it was almost like it was done on purpose. Apparently it was left behind from making the die they didn’t grind it down. As for the 1 no clue. My thought if it’s a raised 1 and there didn’t appear to be any damage to the reverse then it must of been struck on to the coin. Look I’m still a newbie here and that’s why I ask these questions. I’ve seen a lot of strange errors and I don’t work or never had for the US mint or any other mint. So me asking myself questions is pointless on this one. So just because I can’t explain it to myself the rest doesn’t matter?” Keith Dee – OK. Let’s back up a little and see if we can straighten out what happed with your 1901 cent. First, lets start with your comment about the minting process: “…it was perfectly placed on his ear it was almost like it was done on purpose. Apparently it was left behind from making the die they didn’t grind it down.” Since you are new to coin collecting no one here expects you to understand the minting process; and it appears you’ve assumed a lot of things that are simply incorrect. Here’s how it goes – a coin is struck from hard steel dies, one for the obverse (front) and one for the reverse (back). These “working dies” are made by the Engraving Department and are exact copies of master dies that contains all the lettering, portrait, wreath, date, etc. No changes are made to the working dies – there is no “grinding down” or addition of “ear rings” or anything else. Mistakes can occur when a die is made, but most of these are caught during inspection and are very small in scale. Briefly – no parts of the design are altered intentionally. The most common die defects are doubling of the design due to shifting of the die as it’s being made, and partial transfer of design from obverse to reverse die (and vice versa) due to dies hitting each other without a coin planchet between them. (Usually called "clashing.") Steel dies can also crack and these cracks are visible as raised irregular lines usually between the tops of letters. (Often seen on Morgan-type silver dollars.) Second, coining errors. As coins are struck in the press, mechanical problems can occur and these create coins with certain types of errors. These include striking a planchet more than once because the ejector mechanism failed, striking a coin off-center, and many other mistakes. You’re a “newbie” and trying to figure out how certain things you see on a coin could have happened. But what you want to avoid, is assuming you understand enough of the coining process to make a valid assumption. In the case of your 1901 cent, none of the marks you see were possible when the coin was struck, or by any process at the Philadelphia Mint. Logically, they must have occurred after the coin left the Mint, and that is the reason for members’ comments about damage. For your next coin, I suggest you post good photos and describe what you see. Don’t try to explain how it might have happened – let the members help you understand possibilities. That will prepare you to examine your coins with more and better knowledge. Hope this helps a little. Don’t hesitate to ask questions!

Was it run over by a "moon buggy?"

Try refreshing your page. The comments should reappear, and then you can press enter again. (Comments are stored in a temporary 'editor' which is cleared when your comment posts. If it does not post, the comment remains in the editor until you log out.)

Possibly. The shipping wagons were always guarded. Making some of the information public, usually after the event I suspect, might have also been a protective device to warn the bad guys not to come near. Also, guns were not commonly seen in cities, so anyone with one near a gold shipment was either a "Pinkerton Man" up to no good and an immediate target. There was no "Miranda Rights reading" back then and temporary detention and arrest were used to avoid problems rather than as administrative procedures.

I would not be surprised to see it come back EF.

I was goin' to go, but fell out of the turnip wagon this morning and stubbed my toe on my ear....Par Sipany golf will have to wait.

Is that a 1921 obverse? Maybe it's the very flat lighting....

Scratches. I think it will be OK. The scratches through O and VS look old and acceptable. But, I'm usually very strict, so the opinion is not worth a cup of common coffee.

The Mint was under persistent requests to determine the specie value of foreign coins - silver and gold. Here's one for the India rupee. I'll send you a PM with pages for some 1805 assays.

Shipping and finance news was important to businesses and travelers. That is why ship manifests and sailing dates/times were daily features of newspapers. Large gold transfers were often reported in business articles, even including which banks provided the gold, its purpose, source, and where on a ship the gold was being stowed. Telegraphic transfers via ear-marks were not usually reported - there was no physical movement to report. Treasury internal reports might include these transactions or just lump everything together as "ear-marks." Here's a sample from May 1928.

Yep, you got it right.