RWB

To search for possible foreign planchet strikes for a 1953-D cent, look for a copy of this book on-line. There are PDF versions available from Google Books, St Louis Federal Reserve Bank (“Fraser” database), and probably others. Domestic and Foreign Coins Manufactured by Mints of the United States, 1793-1980. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of the Mint. 1981. Any experimental use will not be in the reference to WW-II era materials, United States Pattern and Experimental Pieces of WW II since the year 1953 is beyond the book’s scope, and no experiments were undertaken at the Denver Mint. The coin referred to in Rww’s Numismatic News link is known to me and is as described by NGC; however, it was part of the WW-II experiments and has no relevance to 1953, or indeed, any period beyond 1942-43. The most likely explanation for the cent’s weight is that the planchet started out on the low-range of tolerance and then abraded during circulation. The lone obverse photo suggests no other cause. (Cents are not measured individually, but weighed in bulk to determine compliance with legal weight. Samples are taken for assay.) XRF analysis would disclose the surface alloy down to a few micrometers, but would likely cost $150. NGC can do that work, but expect the total bill to exceed $200 and a result of about 95% copper and 5% zinc with a trace of tin; that is, a normal 1953-D cent.

This was later rescinded and Longacre got his regular pay and the commission. He did the Navy work on personal time, just as predecessors had done.

The arrows seem to point to a stain or discoloration, not a "3" undertype. Also, the more common situation would be 3 over 2, not 2 over 3.

Just drag a JPG, PNG, TIF, BMP or other standard image file into your reply window.

From a coinage perspective, the mint's concerns about DE were connected to demand for export markets. Short reports, monthly coinage allocations, and NYAO transfers of refined bullion to Philadelphia for coinage and return to NYAO and common subjects. However, they rarely mention how the coins are used after leaving the NYAO or SF Mint for export. The closest thing might be monthly reports of gold Ex/Im by the Commerce Dept. (summaries are in most Annual Reports) and exchange of gold bars for coin at P, SF and NYAO. Users will have to search the available files. Regarding Branch Mint volumes, as above, this series (E-216) includes a lot of Philadelphia Mint data which seems pout of place. I suspect the volumes were assembled in the 1950s/60s, and are thus not original context for the documents they contain. (I have not reviewed all the documents in detail -- it took 2 days to scan the pages.

Those searching for Branch Mint information from the mid-1850s can now view approx 2,000 new pages on the subject on NNP. The volumes are Record Group 104, Entry 216, volumes 14, 15, and 16. These were scanned June 26 and 28 at College Park, Maryland. Here's a sample page image regarding Engraver James Longacre.

With this fee does your Unc coin come back to you as "AU?" Handling does that, ya know....

Ohhhh...my mistake. I thought that stale pancakes became waffles, and stale waffles, became omelets. Be patient -- I'll eventually get it right!

Research by the Royal Mint in the latter 19th century revealed that the initial surface of British sovereigns was actually harder than of silver. Only after slight wear did gold coin alloy test a little softer than silver. There is no rationale for "grading" silver or gold coins differently. Pure copper is softer, but not by a lot.

The waffle marks are from IHOP. It's made by the machine they use to convert stale pancakes into fresh waffles. Looks like someone accidentally dropped their tip money.

Look in David W Lange's books on coin folders, holders and albums. His books are definitive.

Stacks-Bowers is handling the sale in August. The URL is: https://auctions.stacksbowers.com/auctions/3-13PV75/auction-preview-the-fairmont-collection-rhone-set-featured-in-the-upcoming-august-2023-auction?limit=36&coin_finish=1-11DJZ In my opinion (others will disagree) almost all of the coins are overgraded. Here's an example that is supposed top be "MS-65." You can decide if a common date Eagle of that grade should have deep cuts and bumps in prominent visual areas -- or, in fact, anywhere. [Lot Description - 1926 Indian Eagle. MS-65 (PCGS). No lot number assigned at present.]

RE: "Is this coin a double stamp????" Well, it might have been run over twice by a dump truck, but that's as close to a "double strike" as it ever got.

Here are the minor coin redemption rules. Coins supposed to be paid at face (nominal) value.

In the 1870s the Mint redeemed millions of minor coins. Here's a letter from 1878 which suggests there was confusion about paying for the coins. What do you think? [Mint of the United States at Philadelphia] July 12, 1878 W. M. Pyle, P.M. Wilmington, Del Sir: I enclose herewith Counter’s report of the count of your deposit of 3¢ nickel coin, for redemption. In all cases the deposit is weighed before it is counted, and if the amount claimed by the depositor does not agree with our count, a calculation is made from the weight. In this case the weight was 237 Troy oz. and the calculation found the count to be $107-64/100 for which amount you state you received draft. The error seems to be in your count. Very respectfully, James Pollock, Superintendent Per J. C. Eyster, Redemption Clerk [Ed Note: A 3¢ copper-nickel coin weighed 30 grains when new. Payment of $107.64 is equal to a piece count of 3,588 coins. Assuming full weight coins (that is, ignoring wear) this was 107,640 grains or 224.25 Troy ounces. The Mint’s reported weight was “237 Troy oz.” equal to 113,760 grains. If this is divided by the 3¢ coin’s nominal weight of 30 grains, the deposit contained 3,792 pieces or $113.76. Thus, the minimum face value of the coins was $6.12 greater than the amount paid the depositor. Worn coins would weigh less, meaning that there were more worn coins per ounce than new coins.]

The 1898 dollar is MS-62 at best. Far too many scrapes and deep cuts above her eye. Not worth the money to "grade."

In the research I've completed so far, most of the "monkey business" took place during the latter part of Pollock's 1st term and his 2nd, plus Linderman's before 1873. A.L. Snowden's term as Superintendent at Philadelphia, and Linderman's as Director in Washington saw mules and restrikes of mules. The House Coinage Committee was complicit in some of this. Dir Kimball put an end to most of it. It's worth adding that many of the pattern alloys have never actually been tested -- the "experts" merely guessed.

In another letter Snowden mentions using a half cent die to make sample cents in different alloys.

How about running a test on some scruffy copper (not bronze) coins -- dealer junk box material. Put one in low quality Extra Virgin Olive Oil and another similar looking coin in the premium version. Leave 'em for 3 months like you did, above. (Or -- if you're feeling destructive, cut them in half and put the halves in your two EVOO mixes.) I wonder how that Olive Salad from Costco would work?

This is similar to the material used by TPGs to upgrade really rare coins, such as 1804 dollars. The longer they "soak in the elixir" the higher the grade -- AND -- the smaller become edge dings, scratches, etc. Nice results for that half cent.

Their goal is to make as much money as possible. Nothing else is important. There is no "long view" or "advance of knowledge" perspective. Britain's "Treasure Act" and the "Portable Antiquities Scheme" recognize the long-term value of metal detector hoards and other antiquity finds. This places information and national interest above immediate individual profit. Once the find has been properly recorded by the British Museum, its content is made available to museums via a bidding scheme. In coin finds, only a very small portion are actually of museum interest and the balance goes to the finders. The owners can do what they want in selling coins and promotion. (It's a little bureaucratic, but it places historical information of immediate money-making.)

This letter describes some of the alloy options for a small-size cent and the opinions of Mint Director Snowden. Mint of the United States Philadelphia Hon. James Guthrie, Secretary of the Treasury Washington City March 25, 1856 Sir, By reference to the 5th Section of the bill “relative to foreign coins and the coinage of cents,” which I prepared at the request of the Chairman of the Committee on Finance in the Senate, it will be seen that it was proposed not to fix authoritatively at present the metal and alloy for the same. But the Chairman of the Committee has subsequently requested that I should so modify the Section as to define its constituent parts. If a bronze or copper cent of reduced weight is preferred, the 5th Section of the proposed law may be modified as follows: Sect. 5. That from and after the passage of this act, the standard weight of the cent coined at the Mint shall be ninety-six grains, or two tenths of one ounce troy, with no greater deviation than four grains in each piece; that said cent shall be composed of copper with an admixture not exceeding 5 percent in weight of metals which may render it more suitable for the purposes of coinage, and of such shape and device as may be fixed by the Director of the Mint, with the approbation of the Secretary of the Treasury. And that said cent piece shall pass current as money and be a legal tender at the value of one hundredth of a dollar for sums not exceeding ten cents. If the nickel or german [sic] silver cent is preferred, then the 5th section should be amended as follows: Sect. 5. That from and after the passage of this act, the standard weight of the cent coined at the Mint shall be forty-eight grains, or one tenth of one ounce troy, with no greater deviation than two grains in each piece; to be composed of two-fifths by weight of pure nickel and of three-fifths of an alloy which alloy shall be of copper, or of copper and zinc in the proportions best adapted to the operations of coinage, and of such shape and devices, etc., (as in the above Section). Remarks. The intrinsic value of the nickel or german silver cent would be about 7/10 of a cent; allowing for the expense of coinage and transportation the net profit on the issue would be about 28 percent. This profit is somewhat below that which would arise from the bronze or copper cent, but would be sufficient for the purposes embraced in the proposed law. The size of the piece would be about that of the gold dollar in diameter, and of about 3 times the thickness, having thus in point of lightness and portability an advantage over any coins composed of copper. If the Committee should desire or expect from me an expression of preference, I would frankly avow a difficulty at present in doing this, for the reasons stated in my communication of the 12th ulto. The judgement of a few persons, however mature, might, after all, be opposed by the taste or predilections of the public at large. It may in a few words be said, that on the one hand, copper is familiarly known, and generally used, in coinage, that, on the other, the nickel alloy admits of a greater reduction in size, and is more likely to maintain a clean surface and uniform color. Either metal is well adapted so far as the working is concerned. In case the copper coin is made legal, there can be no doubt of its going into circulation at once, without any doubt; there would be some doubt as to the other, which is new and unusual – a somewhat similar alloy having only been tried in one country, Switzerland, by a statute, and an experimental issue of pieces in accordance. Specimens of the copper or bronze cent and of the nickel cent are, I believe, in the possession of the Department and of the Committee on Finance. These will show the color and appearance of the different mixtures but are not fair specimens of the coin because it would be desirable to make the devices on the nickel cent as distinctive as possible in order to prevent an observing person from mistaking it for silver. The size of this coin is also much too large in the sample. I send herewith a specimen of the Swiss coinage which is of german silver containing a larger proportion of zinc than of nickel, and inferior in quality to the alloy herein proposed. As this is the only specimen we have at the Mint, I have to request that it be returned, after it has been inspected. I have the honor to be, with great respect, Your faithful servant, James Ross Snowden, Director

Yes. No.

We don't know enough about the find and its contents to learn anything useful. (Each coin came from someplace else. What are the known trade routes to the find area. How far did each coin have to travel from its Mint? Etc. etc.

Dates, mints and condition. These can demonstrate the dispersion of coins from specific mints or sub-Treasuries, and the approximate length of time each coin took to arrive in the hoard. When the same is done for other hoards, patterns begin to develop in how the coins moved and that can inform us about commerce, migration, and population changes before the Civil War; do the same post-War and we have a snapshot of some changes caused by the war on local, or state-wide levels. Burial depth and circumstances of the find can tell us about the person(s) who hid the coins and sometimes a little about their economic status. The coins were found in a "cornfield" but what was the area like when they were buried? It might have been woodland, or cleared pasture, or swamp.... As you can see, a full and accurate description can be part of widening our understanding of people, commerce and society.