RWB

Privately produced "sucker" item. (PS: the top row cents are not "copper." They were 95% copper and 5% zinc, which is also called "brass." The row below are zinc, plated with pure copper.

Merely another cry for attention. Send it to FL for authentication.

Comment from PCGS board: RWB offers a succinct explanation that I can apply to figure out the rest. He states it makes shipping and accounting easier rather than the result of the planchet manufacturing and coining process. This still leaves some questions as to why mintages of halves are divisible by 200 and quarters by 400 in those years. In many other years, the coins appear to be minted in $1000 batches (final mintage for halves in 'even' thousands) rather than reaching a final round number for the year. They seemed to do these count intervals or batches throughout the mintage process. At least that's what I conclude from RWB's comments. US Mints accounted for coins in dollars, not pieces. Thus, both quarters and halves in the question were delivered in dollar sums divisible by “100.” Easier accounting. Treasury required dollar valuations because it was consistent with all other financial, accounts. It should also be understood that all of the Treasurer’s and Cashier’s daily reports were in dollars. Piece counts we see in reference books were derived from the dollar value. These were useful to the Mint Bureau because they emphasized the large amount of work necessary to make just a few thousand dollars in low denomination coins. This is actually the main reason so many Bust halves were struck – reporting production in dollars impressed Congress. The same piece count in half-dimes looked meek and paltry to men holding the purse strings. Here is an excerpt from an April 16, 1839 letter by New Orleans Coiner Rufus Tyler to Superintendent Bradford where he uses piece count to emphasize improvement of productivity under his administration. “It will be found on reference to the Treasurer’s books, that I delivered to him in the month of January 70,000 pieces [$7,000 dimes], in February 128,000 [$6,400 half-dimes], and in March 370,000 [$37,000] pieces in dimes and ½-dimes, and I have reason to believe the result of the present month’s labor will show a continued progressive increase in the effectiveness of the department under my direction.” [RG56 E-289 Box 4] ) Coins were not usually minted in “$1,000 batches,” silver dollars being an exception. The Treasurer of U.S. (and others) decided the dollar value of each denomination that was required for commerce. This varied from one region to another and with the time of year, such as spring planting, fall harvest, Christmas-New Year and so forth. The Treasurer, with agreement by the Secretary of Treasury and Comptroller of Currency, then ordered the Mint Bureau to manufacture, say $1,000,000 in half eagles by a certain date. The Mint Director then allotted production based on available capacity, regional demand, bullion availability and other influences such as equipment out-of-service. On completion the coins were delivered as instructed by the US Treasurer. Conversions of dollar value to piece counts were also used to compare cost of production at the mints, such as in this example from November 1898. (New Orleans costs seem low, but they are skewed because their large proportion of dollars increased the ration of pieces per dollar spent.) Here’s an example of Special Assay coins were value and quantity are used as a cross check, with value being the official number. The mintage results we now depend on in catalogues and guides are the somewhat confused mash of production (plus Philadelphia proof) scattered among several mints and in greatly varying quantities. My forthcoming book, Mine to Mint 2, has an extensive chapter about how coins were issued and distributed from 1793 to the beginning of FRB distribution in 1921. It’s something of an eye-opener and can be confusing for modern collectors to understand. I hope this helps answer your question.

These holders were made in Nashville, TN by a company owned by country music star Dolly Parton. A corruption of her name led to them being called "Doily Holders." A similar name was applied to women's foundation garments of above average dimensions. (Now -- about that large white mansion I have for sale in Washington DC....)

Question about mintages of '79 to '90 seated Liberty halves "Does anyone know why all of these mintages are divisible by 200? Did they strike halves in 'blocks' of 200 coins a block. I noticed that this also seems to be true for coins going back to 1874. My guess is that 200 planchets can be cut from a strip of 90% silver. Edited to add that the mintages of Philly quarters for those years are divisible by 400, i.e., seem to be struck in groups of 400 coins ($100) at a time." Answers: 1. See my column in CoinWeek for reasons for low quarter and half mintages for this period. 2. Coiners preferred to deliver in even dollar amounts -- especially for small mintages. This made calculations easier and reduced errors and discrepancies. If there was an odd amount of good coin after weighing, the Coiner would hold some so he could deliver an even amount, then deliver the leftovers next time. It had nothing to do with the number of blanks cut from a strip or any of the other conjectures in the original post.

Finding employees for specialty businesses such a TPGs can be very difficult. Few applicants likely have more than a passing acquaintance with a coin or any kind.

There are three surfaces: Satin - Normal surface of a new die. Smooth, metallic, little or no luster (as coin collectors describe it). For circulation coins these are the first few struck, but detail will vary depending on other press setup factors. For "proof coins" surface will be as describe but detail will be superior to circulation pieces due to higher pressure and slower metal movement in a hydraulic medal press. Sandblast - Begins as a satin proof, and then sandblasted in the manner of a medal. May or may not be antiqued for greater design contrast. Matte - A normal new die is sandblasted before final hardening and tempering. This is used to strike several hundred "matte proof" pieces with maximum detail on a medal press. All three terms are used only as described. Phony, misleading or outright lies were promulgated by Wally Breen and other numisperverts.

Shhhhh....Those are really Pogs.

Use interlibrary loan at your local library. Usual cost is about $3. The 2nd edition us updated, but the cameras & lenses are the least thing to consider. Lighting is your enemy, and Mark's book covers that very well.

Oh. Do they think I'm dead? That seems to be PCGS' hope. Since I'm not allowed to respond -- either to thank people, or assure them my death is highly exaggerated - it doesn't matter very much.

"Greed-A-Doodle" Wasting more money; collecting less; learning nothing.

Buy a copy of Mark Goodman's book "Numismatic Photography," 2nd edition. After you read it and begin to understand what you're doing, then ask questions. Kurt and I grew up with film photography and before the days of slabs interfering with lighting, etc.

Sorry about the coin -- Scrubbed and polished into junk. No collector value. Worth only silver.

A counterfeit is a counterfeit is a counterfeit no matter how you dress it up or lie about it.

Reminds me of something mashed together by a counterfeiter in a mountain state with 5th grade art talent.

Add some mushroom or pepperoni to that slice -- it'll be fine.

On his right hand, the gap between thumb and first finger it too large to allow both flexibility and the power needed to get full sound out of a colonial-era field drum (no snares). Maybe it's just artistic license on the coin. I taught my HS and college students (and played) only matched grip, except for marching band. Matched was consistent with other percussion techniques - keyboard, timpani, piano etc. - so it was quicker to develop good skills. Also, there was no practical reason of "parade grip" on an concert band or orchestra percussion instrument. (A persistent problem was un-learning snare drum technique from the college freshman who wanted to play timpani --- no bounce roll, and extensive used of back fingers to control the timpani mallets.)

As long as the drummer can hit the drum, it's OK. (PS: He's holding the right stick incorrectly.)

The following volumes have been added to NNP's available documents. These cover the New Orleans Mint from Jan 1839 to Dec 1858. Go to Entry 11 and click the appropriate year. RG104 E-11 Box 29 Jan 5 1839 - Sept 11 1841.pdf RG104 E-11 Box 30 Sept 17 1841 - Dec 12 1843.pdf RG104 E-11 Box 31 Jan 30 1843 - June 3 1846.pdf RG104 E-11 Box 32 June 4 1846 - Mar 28 1848.pdf RG104 E-11 Box 33 Mar 30 1848 - Jan 14 1851.pdf RG104 E-11 Box 34 Jan 3 1851 - June 9 1853.pdf RG104 E-11 Box 35 June 9 1853 - June 28 1854.pdf RG104 E-11 Box 36 June 30 1854 - June 12 1855.pdf RG104 E-11 Box 37 June 18 1855 - May 4 1857.pdf RG104 E-11 Box 38 May 8 1857 - Dec 10 1858.pdf All are from presscopy volumes which vary considerably in image quality and readability. Files are from 550 to 800 megabytes in size, so be patient when downloading.

mania -- Very nice coins and nice presentation!

Agreed. "Proof" is a method of manufacture. That occurs only once. The difficulty is relying on appearance alone to determine if a coin was struck as a proof or a circulation piece. This is also where the absence of published criteria and careful scientific examination prevent finding the truth. Added later: It's also the crux of the debates about early Master Coins, except the pieces before 1837 were made on the same type of equipment as post 1837. That is after 1836 circulation coins were struck only with Franklin Peale's toggle presses and Master Coins or Proof Coins were made only on a large screw (or "fly") press. Pre-1837 were have to relay a lot more on appearance, context and intent than technical details from documents (which are scarce).

A typically ignorant approach that never produces a reliable or consistent result. Every observer will "hear" something different when a "coin speaks for itself." We can obtain certain information from examination, but that is only part of the story.

Good information. Actually, your comment indicates it was not until the 2nd decade that coins were rolled and then it was by some FRBs. The equipment was too expensive for smaller private banks and did not come into more general use until the 1930s-40s. Rolled coins were intended for local businesses since they made life easier for bank tellers and business retail clerks. Community banks, such as those my family was involved with, used ordinary paper wrappers available at supply shops. These had generic printing such as "20 Dollars" or "10 Dollars - Halves" and the ends were folded over so no coin was visible. (Machines wrapped with tucked ends so that a coin was visible.) Historically, some of the mints put gold dollars (50 or 100) and 3-cent silver pieces in paper wrappers to make them easier to handle. New Orleans Mint packed Morgan dollars in rolls of 10 pieces as an accommodation for a railway line that used a lot of dollar coins.

Nice link !

A lot depended on the context of the work and prior discussions -- things that might have taken place a year or more before, or were part of a treaty, etc. But, yep, things were sometimes very fluid-- at least until money was required. The Saudi gold discs was an example of State going around Treasury's objections - a little unusual. (Look in my book "Saudi Gold.")