RWB

Bill's anecdotes are on the nose and were once common discussion among collectors. Now, I guess they have become new insights for new collectors. They can also be a reminder for collectors to examine any coin of interest closely -- What might appear to be a "proof like" of limited value, could also be one of the proofs put into circulation by the Philadelphia Mint. This kind of find requires a thorough understanding of how proof coins were made, the kind of presses used, die treatment, handling, and mechanical details - the "big find" would be any circulated proof gold coin. To begin preparation for the hunt, read all the MODERN books you can about mint machinery, equipment and mechanics. (A little - hint: look in my books, especially From Mine to Mint, for facts and details. Add my Numismatist article, "A Brief History of United States Proof Coins" [2022] on the basics of proof coins. Also, get familiar with language relating to 19th/early 20th century proofs by searching on NNP. For example you'll find RG104 E-6 Box 28 Vol 2 Jan 2 1885- Dec 27 1886-Medal Clerk.pdf RG104 E-6 Box 29 Vol 3 June 16 1888- Mar 2 1889-Medal Clerk.pdf RG104 E-6 Box 29 Vol 1 Dec 14 1887- June 16 1888-Medal Clerk.pdf RG104 E-6 Box 30 Vol 2 Nov 23 1892-Nov 18 1893 Medals-Proofs.pdf RG104 E-6 Box 31 Vol 1 Oct 18 1893-Aug 1 1894 Medals Proof.pdf RG104 E-6 Box 31 Vol 2 Aug 2 1894-July 1 1895 Medals Proof.pdf All of these describe proof coin and medal orders by collectors, and include occasional complaints. Here's a little technical detail about the screw press used for medals and proof coins. It's damaged and not clear but it's a little more we didn't have: [On back of letter] Sept 1, 1860. The diameter of eccentric shaft is 4-3/4 inches. Face of arch 26-inches. Distance from center of eccentric shaft to point of striking is 30-1/4 inches. Width of slide -- 6-3/4 inches. W. depositing other moving pieces slide moves – 6-1/4 inches. Distance between uprights supporting [xxx] sections – 19-5/8 inches. Which are the trapped pivot [xxx] to which is attached the carriage motion rod.

It's worth $1.00 on this thread, also.

It is worth $1.00

As others have mentioned, your reverse photo suggests there is a small raised defect between the left base of final A in America and the eagle's wing. This was likely the result of a small piece of the die breaking off -- commonly called a "die chip." This kind of defect is not especially rare or unusual, and it is only the location that has any interest. FYI, any damaged die is "unique" since these are random events, but a die can strike hundreds of thousands of coins all with nearly identical defects. In summary, your pictured coin might be "unique," but the type of error is so common, and of so little interest, that the coin is not worth a premium to collectors. If you elect to have the coin authenticated and certified, you will spend about $50 and still have a coin worth face value. (This is the kind of item often found for sale on Etsy, ebay, Craig's List and other bastions of numismatic ignorance.)

No. Try this site: https://www.m-dv.ru/en/catalog/

Yep. It's a typo my chubby fingers make with amazing regularity....I also add an 'o' to "siolver". RE" "Petard" -- Yes, that was the Captain of the starship "Enterprise" on TV

A common interlocking method is to give the inside of the outer ring a " < " shape and the outside of the inner disc a "< " shape so that the two iinterlock during the strike. The interlocking areas are left rough so that the disc will not rotate after striking. (There's brief section on this in the book Fads, Fakes and Foibles.

Very nice video. Especially good that it shows some of the steps no longer practiced by US Mints.

This is explained in From Mint to Mint. After reading the section, let me know if there are further questions. (Detailed toggle press patent drawings are available in Journal of Numismatic Research (JNR) issue #1.)

Quite common for cheaply made medals and tourist tokens.

Congratulations! I'm sure you will have lots of enjoyment and maybe a few nice discoveries among the collection.

Automatic color balance - overcompensating for the red background.

The fabric used was "cotton Duck" of various weights - not actual "linen."

The "standard silver dollar" was of unlimited legal tender value. All of the silver coins had limits topping out at $5 for Trade dollars (until repealed).

We commonly think of all forms of legal tender money as being equivalent and exchangeable from one to the other. But that concept only became standard in 1934. Here's a short letter from the Acting Mint Director explaining the silver coin situation in 1878. R. Maclay ,Esq. Pres. Knickerbocker Ice Co. 432 Broad St., New York. July 29th 1878. Sir, I have received your letter of the 27th inst. relating to exchanging silver fractional coins for standard silver dollars. There is no provision of law under which silver fractional coins can be exchanged for silver dollars or legal tender notes. A bill was introduced at the last session of Congress for the redemption of these coins but it failed to become a law. U.S. trade dollars and foreign silver coins not being legal tenders can be refused. I enclose herewith Treasury Circulars relates to the redemption of the nickel and bronze minor coins, and to the value of the Mexican and trade dollar. Very respectfully, R. E. Preston Act’g Director.

H. L. Dodge Esq. Supt. Mint San Francisco. July 27, 1878. Sir, In a lot of merchandise recently sent from this Dept. to the U. S. Mint at Philadelphia was a quantity of linen bags in which silver coin had been shipped from your Mint to the [Treasury] Dept. [in Washington D.C.] In answer to a letter from the Supt. of the Philad’a Mint I have directed him to deliver these bags to Maj. Dana, Quartermaster, U. S. A. for shipment to your Mint. Very respectfully, R. E. Preston Act’g Director

Total fake. Did you find that in a junk box in Colorado?

It is very easy to grade reverse proof NCLT. All NCLT things begin as "P-1" and go up from there --- just the reverse of real coins. There, wasn't that simple?

Initial production of new Standard Silver Dollars in 1878 did not get off to as smooth a start as Mint Director Linderman had hoped. Silver brokers and miners in Western states and territories saw a bonanza in government money awaiting them, and insisted on higher prices and double shipping expenses. Treasury and Linderman were will to pay only the London market price, as commonly used elsewhere. The result was a temporary shortage of silver bullion, and pressure on individual mints. The following letter is typical of many sent to the Mints about the silver situation. At Carson, by the end of 1878 there was little silver available and this led to 1879-CC's low mintage. Jas. Crawford, Esq. Supt. U. S. Mint Carson, Nev. July 5th, 1878. Sir, The Secretary of the Treasury has decided, in a general order, that silver bullion will be purchased at the different mints, at a price not exceeding the London rate, computed on the basis of sterling exchange in New York on the day of sale, payable in silver dollars. Whilst you will no doubt be able to purchase some small lots of silver on these terms and pay for the same at the counter of the mint, it is doubtful whether any large lots can be purchased on the same terms, unless payment be made in San Francisco, and it may be that sellers will insist on receiving in addition to the equivalent of the London rate, the cost of transportation of silver from San Francisco to your mint especially if the silver be fine bars purchased in the San Francisco Market. As we do not know the terms which holders will ask for silver to be delivered at your mint, it does not appear worth while to decide the question of the cost of transportation in advance. If you should at any time, be able to secure an offer for any considerable amount of silver in San Francisco deliverable at your Mint at the equivalent of the London rate, the Mint to pay the cost of transportation to Carson, and payment in silver dollars to be made in San Francisco, you will please communicate the same to this Office in order that the instructions of the Secretary may be taken. Unless we can procure a reasonable supply of silver for coinage at your Mint, your working force will have to be materially reduced. It will be well for you to confer with the holders and producers of bullion as early as may be practicable, reporting the result to this Office.

You have a phone call from Mr. Oscar Meyer......

These and others indicate that the surface quality of ordinary DE coming from a US Mint was consistent with what "graders" now call "MS 66-67" or something similar. These were coin that never we in circulation and were not banged around in bags of kegs very much. That is also consistent with the self-styled "Wells Fargo" DE --- minted, bagged, keged or boxed, put on ship, sunk, found in undisturbed stacks.

It's not even that easy....The colors mentioned in copper coin grades could be easily given empirical standards -- so too could "proof-like" and several other opinions. It merely requires using objective and consistent measurements of specimens, and one-time human assignment of specific colors. The color of gold, as I mentioned earlier, was also affected by the fuel used in annealing and even the temperature, so alloy is not the sole determinant. The entire situation is easily corrected by dropping the "looks like" bias, and preparing openly and objectively defined standards.

Sorry, Franz. But your ignorance is showing. Please pull up your trousers. Now, where are "red" and "yellow" in the RGB/CMYK color wheel shown below?

Few want to spend large sums for sloppy made and uninteresting coins. There's no "hype" value on which to stick an absurd markup.

The difference is in using treasure and hoards to provide a baseline for "straight from the mint" conditions. If one looks at the stacked coins from the Central America wreck, their configuration is consistent with new coins stacked much as they left the Mint. The surface conditions of these pieces for abrasions, nicks, scrapes, etc. (and ignoring stains), are consistent with MS66-67. The Saddle Ridge hoard is another example where a large proportion of DE were in 66-67 condition, not by deliberate collection but by random hoarding of coins acquired from banks or a mint or an Assay Office in payment of deposits.