An 1804 "Restrike" cent

[BillJones]

 

Here's an odd item I recently acquired for a want list customer. It's the so-called 1804 restrike cent. I label it "so-called" because the “coin” was not made from the original dies. Technically a restrike should be a piece that is struck from the original dies at a date after that shown on the coin. This piece was stuck outside the U.S. mint from a pair of genuine U.S. coins that were never used to strike the 1804 cents.

 

The origins of this piece are murky. The dies came from different lots of scrap metal that the first U.S. mint discarded. The obverse, which was from an 1803 large cent (Sheldon variety-261), was probably from a scrap metal lot that dated from 1816. The reverse, which is was used to strike 1820 large cents, was acquired at a latter date. It is known that famed early U.S. collector, Joseph Mickley, acquired the 1816 scrap metal lot. It is not known who got their hands on the reverse die. It is now believed that Mickley had no hand in the production of these pieces.

 

At any rate this piece was made to deceive early coin collectors into believing that they were acquiring a rare date in the large cent series. The last digit on the date was altered to a “4” and the reverse, which was never used on an 1804 cent, paired with it. These pieces seem to have come into numismatic circulation around 1860. Since then they have been a source of consternation, collector interest and speculation as to who made them.

 

The piece illustrated here was probably among a “second batch” after the dies had had a bit of the rust ground off of them. For that reason the “ONE CENT” on the reverse is a bit weak. Overall it is estimated that there are about 1,000 examples of this piece known.

 

I purchased this piece for a want list customer. He wanted to fill the 1804 slot in his date collection. He is unwilling to pay about the same money as what this costs for a genuine 1804 that would show little more than the shadow of a bust and an “04” in the date area.

 

[TomB]

I have always found the ingenuity that folks displayed when using discarded US Mint equipment to be amazing and this is one example.

[bsshog40]

Thanks for the info on that Bill. If you would have posted this with no information aboit it, I would have thought this to be a crude counterfiet!

[BillJones]

Thanks for the info on that Bill. If you would have posted this with no information aboit it, I would have thought this to be a crude counterfiet!

 

It is a cude counterfeit. It's just an OLD crude counterfeit made from genuine rusty U.S. mint dies.

[bsshog40]

Thanks for the info on that Bill. If you would have posted this with no information aboit it, I would have thought this to be a crude counterfiet!

 

It is a cude counterfeit. It's just an OLD crude counterfeit made from genuine rusty U.S. mint dies.

I guess then it just surprises me that there is that much history associated with this certain counterfiet. Thanks Bill.

[PerryHall]

Is this something the major grading services would slab?

[MikeKing]

First, thank you Bill for this interesting post.

For years I had a fascination with the Mickley 1/2 cent restrike.

I was so fascinated that I blocked the reality from my mind, that it was a forgery.

That kind of deflated my feelings about it, and I'm glad, because, now, my feelings about 'real' coinage, became all that richer. But that's just my personal feeling. Others may disagree. I still think the Mickley restrike IS fascinating AND valuable, because, you can see a really nice rendition of two rare coins, that when officially minted, were usually made on spoiled planchets, but now (later) muled in a 'sort of' PROOF rendering. Very neat. And historically, all these restrikes using original dies is very neat. I feel similarly about the famous Liberty nickel, which has a big following, but really, it's forged, and for me, this bursts the bubble. Obviously, there are enough millionaires who disagree with this.

 

But in answer to the above question, will the TPGs grade these?

I can't answer for all forgeries from original US Mint dies, but I can speak for the Mickley restrike, since I bought one raw, a few years ago and had it holdered and graded by NGC. It was previously owned by ? ? ? who purchased it from the Virgil Brand collection. Interestingly, I bought it at a Stack's auction, later sold it, with the help of Q. David Bower (who originally auctioned it off at Bower and Merena's Virgil Brand sale) through ANR before the two merged. I just find it kind of funny.

 

Anyway, PCGS did NOT holder Mickley restrikes at that time, and I'll quote David Hall's response to me when I asked him:

 

 

 

 

Hi Mike...I don't believe we grade the private unofficial restrikes such as the 1811 half cent or 1804 large cent...David

 

 

Since, however, they've started grading the Mickley restrike, and I assume then, others as well.

 

Edited to add: Interestingly, the New Haven 'restrike' of the Fugio, while not even a restrike, in the semi-official sense, as above, are celebrated and holdered by both NGC and PCGS, which just astounds me. I don't understand it.

[BillJones]

Is this something the major grading services would slab?

 

Probably. It's a very well known counterfeit which has been listed in the Red Book since the very first edition. The item has a long numismatic history, and has been a collectors' item at least since one was sold at auction in 1868.

[James_OldeTowne]

Although obviously much less expensive than an 1804 cent, it's surprising how much "nice" examples go for at auction. "Nice" being relative, of course....