1900-S VDB Die List - from the Coiner's Report

[RWB]

Thought this might be of interest to Lincoln cent collectors.

 

Here's a list of dies used for Lincoln VDB cents at San Francisco. Note that dies were not necessarily used in numerical order. They were also removed for repair from time to time, so a specific reverse is not always paired with only one obverse. All VDB reverse dies were returned to Philadelphia for destruction before new dies were received.

 

1909-S VDB 486,480 struck; 484,000 net.

 

Obverse dies, Lincoln cent.

San Francisco Mint, CY 1909

 

#199 140,400 (all VDB)

#200 222,380 (all VDB)

#201 81,000 (all VDB)

#202 308,390 (42,700 VDB, balance plain)

#203 209,747 (all plain)

 

Reverse dies, Lincoln cent.

San Francisco Mint, CY 1909

 

#248 63,800

#249 137,880

#250 76,600

#251 127,200

#252 81,000

 

[source: NARA-CP RG 104 entry 229 box 287. “Statement of the Life of Dies for 1909, U.S. Mint, San Francisco, California” Signed by William M. Cutter, Coiner and Edward Sweeney, Superintendent. January 5, 1910. Note: Cutter's statement includes all denominations for San Francisco Mint for CY 1909.]

[ldhair]

1900 was a really cool year.

[James_OldeTowne]

#202 308,390 (42,700 VDB, balance plain)

#203 209,747 (all plain)

So... was #202 used to strike "plain" coins first, and then had the VDB added? That would almost have to be the case, wouldn't it?

[Coindude]

I believe that the VDB was filed off if I'm not mistaken. Those same dies were used in 1910 and 1911 at a minimum. There are coins from those years with faint VDB's on them.

 

Perhaps someone here owns one? Any pics?

[RWB]

So... was #202 used to strike "plain" coins first, and then had the VDB added?

 

No. Look at the annotation. They used it to strike VDB cents, then stopped. After they got new reverse dies, they put the same obverse back into service paired with a non-VDB reverse.

 

Re: Filing off VDB

 

No. No one “filed off” the initials on dies. Once SF got the order to stop producing VDB cents, they pulled the VDB dies and returned them to Philadelphia (on Aug 5). They did not resume cent production until they had new reverse dies.

 

[DWLange]

Nice data, Roger. Thanks for sharing.

[Coindude]

I know I've heard reports of later dates with the VDB on the reverse, the same as the '09. I have never seen them, but I've heard more than one person talk of them. Of course seeing is believing and maybe I shouldn't believe everything I hear!

 

As for the "filed off" comment... I guess I just assumed they did that since I heard of the later date VDB's. Any possibility that the philly mint kept some of the same reverse dies in service after the VDB's? Can you get the die pairing info on those?

[Coindude]

Some interesting 1910 VDB articles.

 

http://www.scvhistory.com/scvhistory/signal/coins/soltaylor051008.html

 

Our own DW Lange is referenced in this article.

 

http://www.coinbooks.org/esylum_v08n15a19.html

[RWB]

In August 1909 engraver Charles Barber removed VDB from the working hubs. A few weeks later he also made a new master hub w/o initials in order to reduce the relief of the reverse design.

 

On removing the initials from working dies: this is not possible. The initials are raised on a coin and thus incuse on the working die. To abrade the die sufficiently to remove initials would grind a depression the depth and length of the initials into the working die. The result would be a huge blob where the initials had once been on a struck coin. (The same applies to claims of “grinding off the date” on early overdate dies. They could have been overstruck with a different digit punch, or repaired by undercutting and filling the old digit, then punching in the new digit. Repair is clearly what occurred in Morgan dollars and the 1900-O/CC, etc. – now if I can just find the “smoking gun.”)

 

For 1910-VDB. Have never seen anything that was convincing.

 

Regarding using VDB dies later in 1909. Highly unlikely. The Philadelphia Mint stopped making cents when Sec MacVeagh gave the order, and did not produce any for about a week until Barber had made a new set of working reverse dies. These started with #300 and up. Would you risk getting fired to strike a few more cents when the Sec of Treasury said not to? – from a design the Sec had specifically rejected a few days earlier?

 

[Coindude]

Hmmm... where do you think the 1913 Liberty nickels came from... how bout those proof 1917 "clandestine" pennies? Just food for thought. I really appreciate your insight... I just wanna know where you're getting all your info! It's like you were there!!!!!

[RWB]

Hmmm... where do you think the 1913 Liberty nickels came from... how bout those proof 1917 "clandestine" pennies? Just food for thought. I really appreciate your insight... I just wanna know where you're getting all your info! It's like you were there!!!!!

 

Skepticism noted and understood.

 

You can find the story of the removal of Brenner’s initials (and how they got there in the first place) in the book Renaissance of American Coinage 1909-1915 published in 2007. This also has source citations to original mint and treasury documents that were discovered during research for the book.

 

See the original post for the source of the 1909-S VDB dies. I have a complete set for SF and fragments for other mints and other years. R.W. Julian has published articles giving die usage and life for some other years.

 

A great deal of other information was uncovered during research for books covering 1905-1908 and 1916-1921. As well as examining files for the New Orleans Mint, gold dollars, Peace dollars, proof coins & production, 1895 dollars, etc., etc. It is common to find all sorts of unexpected things in mint and other archives. This is because the files are not well organized and there is no index (except for the one I am slowly building for my own research use). Reading the introductions to these 3 books will give you a good idea of my research approach. Your question is answered by all of the footnotes – more than 500 per book – that show readers exactly where to find the originals. In one instance, the author of another book used my 1905-1908 book almost like an index to help him locate related material. He also confirmed the accuracy of every one of 816 footnotes (except for one typo).

 

1913 nickels – 1913 Liberty nickel dies had been created well before the new design was adopted in mid-December 1912. (This was normal procedure.) It was not until Feb 1913 that Barber suggested destroying them. How the coins were struck is a mystery.

 

1917 “clandestine” pennies – don’t know what these are. If you are referring to alleged proofs dated 1917, none have ever passed close examination and there is no record of them being made. Walter Breen’s “authentication” is worthless…he would authenticate Granny’s overshoes as coming from the Titanic if he could make a few dollars off it.

 

[DWLange]

I'm certain that no one intentionally used dies still showing the VDB after the order came through to discontinue it, but intent and result are not always on the same page at the U. S. Mint. A few 1917-S half dollars are known with the mintmark on the reverse but with signs of another mintmark having been polished off of the obverse die quite crudely. While the die record indicates that no working dies bearing the VDB remained in use after August 1909, it is possible that a reverse working hub was not fully effaced before being used to sink additional working dies. I've never been convinced by the several 1910-S "VDB" cents shown to me, but the possibility exists in theory that faint traces could be found.

[Coindude]

Thank you Mr. RWB and Mr. DWL for your insight on this subject. I've always wanted to see some of these coins in hand to make my own mind up instead of taking others words for it, but as of this moment I've not had the opportunity.

 

This has been a very lively and informative topic for me.

 

I agree with Mr. Lange that if there were VDB's out there... they were not intentionally used, they were just matter of facts and mistakes... if they were at all.

[RWB]

Coindude (and others):

The possibility of a 1910 or 1911-VDB is one of many interesting “what if” speculations in numismatics. When engaged in this pursuit for Lincoln cents keep a few things in mind:

1) reverse dies for 1909-VDB were from the original master hub.

2) the initial set of 1909 plain reverse dies were from a VDB working hub that had the initials removed.

3) since both of the above had the same source, they both exhibit somewhat higher than intended relief characteristic of a genuine 1909-VDB reverse. This caused complains from some vending machine manufacturers and change making machines (such as the Brandt Cashier) about the new cents sticking in their devices.

4) approximately three weeks after the initials were removed, Barber made a new hub in lower relief and w/o the initials.

 

• Since the 2nd hub never had initials on it, no subsequent hubs or dies made from it could have vestiges of “VDB.”

• Thus, any 1910 or 1911 “VDB” must have come from the first hub and would exhibit reverse relief identical to genuine 1909-VDB coins.

• Further, existence of “vestigial VDB” would have to be attributable to incomplete effacement of VDB from either master or working hub. (Remember – you cannot grind off the incuse initials on a working die w/o leaving a pronounced depression in the die.)

• Lastly, no 1909 plain cents have surfaced with claims to “vestigial VDB.” [is that correct, Dave?]

 

Ergo - One must conclude that VDB was effaced from a) the working hub, and b) the work was incompletely performed and working dies made but had traces of initials; a second treatment removed remaining vestiges, and c) these working dies with “vestigial VDB” were not used in 1909, but somehow were saved and used in 1910 and/or 1911.

 

Considering that no 1910 VDB cent has ever been authenticated or verified by independent experts, such as Dave Lange, although examples occasionally pop up, it is likely they simply don’t exist any more than do 1964 Franklin halves and 1931 Standing Liberty quarters.

 

Just an opinion….

 

[physics-fan3.14]

1964 Franklin halves

 

Just an opinion….

 

Are there rumours of these, or are you just using this as an example of unknown and impossible coins?

[RWB]

There have been rumors of 1964 Franklin halves since 1964. None have ever surfaced but the myth persists - one cannot “prove” their absence.

[Coindude]

How bout the 59 wheat cent and the 1933 Washington quarters! Just rumors... although I do believe there is one 59 wheat cent that was really discovered... or am I wrong?

[prudden]

How bout the 59 wheat cent and the 1933 Washington quarters! Just rumors... although I do believe there is one 59 wheat cent that was really discovered... or am I wrong?

 

Well according to this article? there is such a thing.

 

http://www.coinfacts.com/small_cents/lincoln_cents/wheat_ear_cents/1959d_one_cent_wheat_ears.htm

[RWB]

Re: 1959 wheat cent & 1933 Washingtons.

 

None have ever surfaced but the myth persists - one cannot “prove” their absence.

 

In 1958 the memorial reverse dies were ready well before the start of the next year. All old reverse were listed as destroyed. The example mentioned in the article has never been authenticated by modern professionals. Secret Service authentication is about as good a Walter Breen authenticating 1921 Peace dollar proofs by the roll. In the 1880s counterfeit minor coins were being made that could fool the Philadelphia Mint's coiner, according to A. Loudoun Snowden. (“Coinfacts” is not always “factual” but the owners don’t care to correct it.)

 

As for 1933 quarters. No silver coins were needed in commerce due to the depression. Only halves were struck plus $10 and $20 (intended mostly for export trade).

 

Collectors like to "fill the holes," and a year when a particular denomination was not produced is a tempting target for speculation and fakery.

 

[DWLange]

There is absolutely no reason to believe in the existence of 1931 or 1933 quarters. Roger may turn up proof that no dies were shipped, but even if that doesn't happen, the fact remains that there existed absolutely no demand for additional coins of this denomination in those years. There would have been no 1932 coinage of quarters had it not been for the commemoration of Washington's bicentennial. As it is, the mints made just enough coins to provide three-piece sets for collectors and extra singles (P-Mint) for the general public, the same scenario used for many 1930s commemorative halves.

 

Given the timing of the Kennedy assassination, it's likely that working hubs and dies for the 1964 Franklin Half Dollar had already been made. At the very least, that year's master die had been created. I don't believe any such coins were struck, as the decision to place Kennedy on the 1964 halves was made within days of his death.

 

Finally, regarding the 1959 Wheat Cent, I've examined this piece on two occasions, but the threat of legal actual precluded me from publishing my findings.

[Conder101]

There would have been no 1932 coinage of quarters had it not been for the commemoration of Washington's bicentennial. As it is, the mints made just enough coins to provide three-piece sets for collectors and extra singles (P-Mint) for the general public,

Excuse me? You're saying the made 408,000 three piece sets for collectors of the 1932 quarters? And then the general public needed another 5 million coins even though there was no demand for coins for circulation?

[Coindude]

Finally, regarding the 1959 Wheat Cent, I've examined this piece on two occasions, but the threat of legal actual precluded me from publishing my findings.

Is it just me? Or can you only infer one thing from this comment?

[RWB]

One of the things Treasury learned from the 1920s commemorative mania was that insufficient supply led to speculation and price gouging. In 1932 they consciously decided to make the new quarter in large quantities so that it would never be rare and anyone who wanted one could get one at face value. They used the same approach in 1938, 1948, 1959, 1964 and 1975/76.

[DWLange]

The 1932-D and S mintages were indeed greater than the number of coin collectors at the time. Had the mints made just enough coins for each collector to have one, the result would have been the speculative mania to which Roger refers. The mintages for 1932 were proportional to the relative demand from collectors and the public; they did not fit it exactly.

[RWB]

One other interesting bit that had an impact on quantities struck and where coins were minted is that the mint was effectively run by two women who had the institutional knowledge of the place in their heads. One was Mary O’Reilley who served a special assistant and acting director from 1912 to 1937. Mary knew the place inside out and basically ran things regardless of who was the official director. Nellie Ross learned everything she knew about running the mint from Mary.

 

The other was Virginia Carpenter, secretary to every Superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint from about 1900 through 1933. She kept the place operating smoothly, ordered equipment, hired and fired people, and stuck reports under the noses of the various superintendents for signature. She was rarely called on to be acting superintendent, but it didn’t matter – she ran the place.

 

Mary ran the Bureau and Virginia ran production.