U.S. Mint Strikes Proof Coins From Defective Dies! by JAA USA/Philippines Collection

[CSJournals-migration]

Modern U.S. proof coins are gorgeous creations that reflect the height of the mint makers' art. Of course that is what you would expect for specimen coins struck specifically for collectors. The High quality of Modern Proof U.S. proof coins is a testament to the stringent quality controls standards used in the production of modern proof coins. At the beginning of the Twentieth Century things were very different. Without a doubt the poster child for a poorly made proof coin is the 1908 USA/Philippines Fifty Centavos.

 

Most Philippine experts believe that the 1908 Fifty Centavos proof issue was struck from defective, probably rusted, dies. All 1908 Fifty Centavos proof coins display considerably flat frontal hair just above the ear and most specimens have dull non reflective fields. This lack of detail is not seen in other denominations of 1908 USA/Philippines proof coins which are generally well struck.

 

Even specimens with the highest technical grades (The NGC/PCGS Top Pop is PF66) lack detail in the hair just above the ear and may have poor eye appeal. This makes it extremely challenging to find an attractive high grade specimen.

 

Until recently the example of this coin that I used in both my USA/Philippines Type Set and 1908 Proof Set was a NGC certified PF62 with nice eye appeal for the grade. For several years now I have been searching for a nice looking example of this coin with a higher technical grade. I have looked at several PF64 and PF65 specimens and to put it charitably I have not been impressed by what I have seen. To put it more bluntly the coins have been just plain UGLY.

 

I had just about given up hope that I would find a specimen with a higher technical and at least average eye appeal when I spotted a 1908 PR64 specimen in Teletrade Auction number 3407 (Sunday 12/30/2012) Lot # 3776. While the picture did not portray an especially attractive coin it had better than average hair detail for the date and the best eye appeal that I have seen so far on a 1908 Fifty Centavos proof.

 

The Allen catalog lists the 1908 Fifty Centavos in PF64 at $575.00. In the real world the FMV for PF64 specimens of this date is considerably higher. Dealers that specialize in USA/Philippines coins typically list PF64 specimens at $800.00 - $880.00.

 

To my surprise I was able to purchase this coin for a hammer price of $450.00 ($517.50 with buyer's premium).

 

When the coin arrived it was considerably more attractive than the picture suggested. The fields which appeared dull in the picture have a medium mirror surface and the specimen has relatively high eye appeal for the typically unattractive 1908 Fifty Centavos proof issue. Overall I am very satisfied with this coin and it will do quite nicely until I can find a better specimen.

 

The only negative feature of this coin is that it is in a PCGS holder. I definitely plan to submit it to NGC for crossover and will hold off on adding it to my award winning (2011 Best Presented Set) USA/Philippines Type Set until it is in an NGC holder. http://coins.www.collectors-society.com/registry/coins/SetListing.aspx?PeopleSetID=51257&Ranking=all

 

The coin pictured is my newly acquired 1908 Fifty Centavos, PR64.

 

The 1908 Fifty Centavos is a PROOF ONLY ISSUE with a mintage of only 500. The NGC population for this coin in PF64 is 4 specimens with 18 graded higher. The PCGS population is 12/26. A 1908 Fifty Centavos in PF64 receives 1163 Registry Points.

 

This coin was used to upgrade the Fifty Centavos slot in my award winning (2012 Best Classic Set) 1908 USA/Philippines Proof Set. http://coins.www.collectors-society.com/registry/coins/SetListing.aspx?PeopleSetID=143079&Ranking=all

 

See more journals by JAA USA/Philippines Collection

[coin928]

Most Philippine experts believe that the 1908 Fifty Centavos proof issue was struck from defective, probably rusted, dies. All 1908 Fifty Centavos proof coins display considerably flat frontal hair just above the ear and most specimens have dull non reflective fields. This lack of detail is not seen in other denominations of 1908 USA/Philippines proof coins which are generally well struck.

 

I have read this too, and it is certainly true of my PF63 1908 50C.

 

Has anyone speculated as to why this happened with the 50 Centavo dies and not to any of the other denominations in the set? It also seems to be much more noticeable on the figure side of the coin. With the exception of the 9 in 1908, the date side seems completely unaffected. Also, with only 500 minted, I assumed that only one die pair was used, so it would seem like all coins should have very similar strike characteristics. Your new PF64 does appear to have more hair detail than my PF63 though, so do you think there may have been more than one die pair used to mint these 500 proof coins?

[JAA]

You bring up a very good point. With a mintage of only 500 coins it is highly unlikely that more than one die pair was used. If this is true then differences in strike must be due to other factors such as adjustments in strike pressure during the mint run. As you know 1908 was the first (and only) year that the reduced size and weight Fifty Centavos was struck in proof. It is also the first year that the Philadelphia Mint struck proof coins of any denomination in .750 silver. Since .750 silver is a harder alloy than the .900 silver that was used in prior years it seems reasonable that the mint may have experimented with various strike pressures during the mint run for this coin. If they did it obviously didn’t help much as the hair detail is not that much better on my specimen. It’s too bad that 1908 was the last year for USA/Philippine Proof Sets. Now we will never know if the mint would have been able to successfully resolve the strike issues with the Reduced Size and Weight Fifty Centavos in later proof issues.

 

Given the lack of detail in the frontal hair above the ear typically seen on business strikes of the Reduced Size and Weight Fifty Centavos it is my opinion that there probably wasn’t much that the mint could do to improve the strike short of changing the size, alloy, or design of the Fifty Centavo. Of course changing the alloy would have required congressional authorization. Perhaps a slightly thinner larger diameter coin would have helped. That would have allowed the obverse design to be re-engraved so that the figures head would not be so close to the coins rim. At any rate we will never know as none of these modifications were ever attempted.

 

[JAA]

Coin928:

 

I took a good look at your 1908 Fifty Centavos Proof 63 and agree that there is a noticable difference in hair detail between our specimens. I also noticed a difference in detail on the figure's left bosom.

 

If you own a copy of "United States Territorial Coinage For The Philippine Islands" by Neil Shafer turn to page 61. On this page you will find an illustration of the 1907-1921 Fifty Centavos with arrows pointing out the High Points of Wear for this issue. The High Points of Wear correspond to the high points in the coins design. Shafer lists four obverse check-points: 1) Figure's left thigh and lower leg, 2) Mid-drapery, 3) Figure's left bosom, and 4) Edge of anvil.

 

There is certainly no signs of wear on your specimen at Mid-drapery or the Edge of the anvil so the lack of detail on the Figure's left bosom is most likely due to variations in strike quality within the mint run for this issue.

 

As I stated in my origional Journal posting the 1908 Fifty Centavos Proof Issue is the undisputed poster child for poor quality control at the U.S. Mint.

[RWB]

Are their any known circumstances that might have contributed to poor quality proof 50 centavos?