Conder101

And the values in neither one bear any relationship to real-life.

And the values in neither one bear any relationship to real-life.

I wonder how NGC identified it as coming from the hoard considering the hoard was disbursed almost ten years before NGC existed and as far as I know no company used any special holders for them.

I wonder how NGC identified it as coming from the hoard considering the hoard was disbursed almost ten years before NGC existed and as far as I know no company used any special holders for them.

Small correction, the GSA sales were 1972 - 1980.  The period up to 1964 was simply the Treasury redeeming silver certificates with silver dollars.  The GSA had nothing to do with that.  After they stopped redeeming for silver dollars they took inventory of what remained and then spent the 1964 to 1970 period trying to decide how to dispose of the remaining coins.  The plan for the GSA sales were what they came up with.  The sales were conducted 1972 - 74 and then discontinued.  The final sale that got rid of the last of them took place in early 1980.

The GSA used four different holder types, three large hard plastic, one small soft plastic.

But would NGC put that it was from the hoard just because someone said it was?  Provenance needs to be supported.  I remember a case ATS involving a Norweb Hibernia.

Nope  British colonial India English  meaning "in good order"

Really?  I spend more time there than on any other forum, and I have been there for over 18 years with over 20,000 postings.  

Because from the images it appears to me to be about 3 1/2 steps with bridging below both columns 2 and 3.

The time was the Great Depression, Unemployment was skyrocketing, businesses were closing  and government revenues were way down both Federally and locally.  At the same time there was greater demand for governments to do more and that meant they needed more revenue.  The answer for most was a sales tax applied to ALL purchases. (News flash up until there there was no sales tax.)  Most states set their tax rate at 1%. 
Now at that time, Great Depression remember, an income of a dollar a day was often a good rate of pay.  So a great many purchases were for LESS than $1, but a 1% tax applied to sales of less than $1 meant a tax of less than one cent had to be collected.  How do you collect the  $0.002 tax on a 20 cent purchase?  The solution was to create tokens with values in mils or 1/10 of a cent.  Merchants purchased these tokens from the state and used them to return change to their customers for the tax.  Buy that 20 cent item, give the merchant 21 cents and get 8 mils back in tokens, or give him 20 cent and 2 mils in tokens.  And it still worked for larger purchases.  Say you mad a $2.25 purchase, the tax would be 2.25 cents or 2.3 cents.  So you would pay $2.27 and 3 mil tokens. and so on.
As time passed and income, prices, and sales tax rates rose the fraction of a cent gained or lost by rounding meant less to people and the tax tokens were phased out.  The last state to do away with them was Missouri sometime around 1961 to 64, not sure exactly when.

No, that was the design on the Standing Liberty quarters.  All the "U's" were made using V's.  Just a matter of artistic license,  In the latin alphabet the U and V were the same letter and in art or government buildings you will often see the use of the V in replace of the U.  It is best known on Peace dollars with IN GOD WE TRVST.  Most people notice on the dollar, many fewer notice it on the standing quarter.

You only show one side so I don't know exactly which token it is, but it is from the county of Norfolk England.  It is either D&H 23 or 24,  Dies were by Thomas Wyon of Birmingham, and they were struck by Peter Kempson also of Birmingham.  They were produced for a Merchant named Dinmore, and they struck 51,500 pieces of the two varieties combined.  Both are considered common so assume a roughly even distribution or about 26,000 of each die pair variety, but each comes with more than one edge variety.

Would they fit?
Reading the Slave Narratives  turns up several references by former slaves mentioning earning small sums of money or receiving money and being allowed to keep it.
For those that don't know one of the projects in 1937 in Roosevelt's make work WPA was to locate as many living former slaves as they could find and interview them about their life as slaves.  These were typed up and grouped by state where the former slave now lived.  Some of them are true narratives that even reproduce the actual "dialect" of the former slave while others are obviously the interviewer paraphrasing the subject.

It would depend on the new owner.  Some would have insisted they hand it over, but other. did allow their slaves to keep their money if they earned some.  That is why some slaves were able to buy their own freedom.
 
Because they were valuable property.  The Amish treat their horses well, but they don't just free them.  They need them for the work they do.  And in this case Butler needed them to pay off his creditors.
 
Dred Scott decision would not have had any bearing in this situation.  These were slaves in a slave state that had probably never been in a free state.  Dredd Scott basically said that a slave that lived in a free state did not automatically become a free person, that negros were not and could never be citizens of the US, and the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional.
 
Parking meters?  In 1859?  You're about 75 years early.

Would they fit?
Reading the Slave Narratives  turns up several references by former slaves mentioning earning small sums of money or receiving money and being allowed to keep it.
For those that don't know one of the projects in 1937 in Roosevelt's make work WPA was to locate as many living former slaves as they could find and interview them about their life as slaves.  These were typed up and grouped by state where the former slave now lived.  Some of them are true narratives that even reproduce the actual "dialect" of the former slave while others are obviously the interviewer paraphrasing the subject.

Probably because the Lincoln Memorial reverse always seemed to me to just be trying to present an "impression" of steps (even on proofs) rather than actually trying to indicate the actual steps the way the Monticello does.

You're right about the boxed sets, but I believe you have the size of the boxes a little large.  I think closer to 2 1/2 inches square.  They were sold in those boxes by the Mint from 1936 to 42 and from 1950 to mid 1955, and then they went to the flat pack pliofim sets that continued through 1964.  The 1955 sets came both ways.
This came up because you said you distinctly remember the 52 and 54 sets you bought as being flat packs. They had to be box sets, and your later description is that of boxed sets.

So they are going to exchange a much higher lost package rate for faster delivery..  Personally I'd rather have the slower speed and be sure they would arrive eventually..

So they are going to exchange a much higher lost package rate for faster delivery..  Personally I'd rather have the slower speed and be sure they would arrive eventually..

Flat pack proof sets did not begin until mid 1955.

That is probably true.  A LOT of people confuse rarity and value.  They will consider that if the price goes up it got "rarer"
 
The scale is still pertinent, an SVDB is still an R-1+ coin.  There are a LOT of them around  But there are also a LOT more collectors of Lincoln cents than of half cents, so that R-1+ coin is expensive.  I suppose you could try to come up with a rarity scale that would apply to Lincolns but I have no idea how you would quantify it.  You could use the Universal Rarity Scale but there would be no way to come up with reasonable survivor figures for the scale.
 
Price is a function of availability and demand, rare is more of an absolute and is dependent on survivorship.  But you are correct, if the demand isn't there even extremely rare pieces aren't worth much.  I would assume your putting rare in quote equates to the average person confusion of rarity and value.

And why did you bid on the one you did and not on the one that ended up selling for less?  Probably because you liked the one you bid on better.  Well guess what you competitors liked it better to.  So there was less competition on the other coin and it sold for less.

I also like the statement that if the date is outside the 1873 to 1885 that it is probably a fake.  Probably?  And then they go on to say that one of the most common trade dollars is the 1847 S.  And that is in there twice.

It was, and just a little larger than the 5 kopeck.  About 56.5 grams compared to 51.2 grams.  You want something a little larger go for the Siberian 10 Kopeck 65.5 grams