Sandon

I stand corrected. Ronjovi's coin is not designated from the Redfield Hoard but is simply a "generic 1879 Morgan dollar in Paramount's holder with a red insert similar to that found on most Redfield coins. No discovery coin here.

The 1991 third edition of the Van Allen and Mallis Comprehensive Catalog and Encyclopedia of Morgan and Peace Dollars ("VAM" book) includes a table (p.406) listing the dates and mints known to the authors to have been included in the Redfield Hoard. The 1879 minted in Philadelphia--relatively common among Morgan dollars--is not among the listed dates, although "many" or at least "a couple dozen" bags each of 1889, 1890, 1896, 1897 and 1898 Philadelphia coins were included, as well as smaller quantities of 1892, 1893 and 1903. The NGC registry set for "Redfield Holders, Morgan and Peace Dollars, 1878-1935, Including Varieties", includes slots for several date and mint combinations not in the VAM book table, but none for an 1879-(P). Ronjovi may have a stray, unlisted coin--perhaps a discovery specimen--that would be of interest (and possibly a high price) to a specialist in Redfield holder coins. He may also have a coin in a holder that is counterfeit or has been opened and another coin substituted for the one placed in it. (While the coins in the vast majority of Redfield holders don't grade "MS 65" by today's standards, this one, featuring a huge obverse scratch, seems inconsistent even with these looser 1970s standards.) Perhaps he should submit it for NGC certification--I don't think PCGS grades coins in Redfield holders--and see if it authenticates as a Redfield coin.

Originally, the major grading services wouldn't encapsulate genuine coins that couldn't be numerically graded due to any impairment (cleaning, scratches, damage, corrosion, etc.). All such pieces were returned ungraded in flips, which became derisively known as "body bags". This policy made it impossible to obtain third party authentication or grading for a large percentage of older coins, including pieces that are quite valuable notwithstanding their impairments. As I recall, ANACS was the first service to offer "Details" adjectival grading, and PCGS began putting impaired pieces in holders marked "Genuine" with no grade. (I own two U.S. coins in old PCGS "Genuine" holders.) I'm not sure how the situation evolved at NGC. Ultimately, both NGC and PCGS offered "Details" adjectival grading for "problem" coins.

While I would recommend certification for such a rare coin, this one is so obviously a crude replica that anyone who has taken more than a passing glance at a genuine specimen of a 1916 (or 1917 Variety One) Standing Liberty quarter or a good photograph of one should realize that this isn't the real thing! If you want to collect coins, you have to learn what they look like. Looking at them is what's fun about them, anyway.

I have an idea for a new set under the "Multi-Denominational" U.S. category, which currently has only one set. It would be a "One Coin Per Year Collection" with slots for one U.S. coin for each year from 1793 to date. The coins could be any pieces accepted in other U.S. sets, including circulation strike, proof, commemorative and bullion issues. They would be scored as in date and mint series sets, with "Autobuild" selecting the highest scoring pieces in the collector's registry list. This would be fun for those who collect both classic and modern series. Would NGC have any interest in placing such a category in the Registry?