Anyone have a link to facts about the 1794 "SP-66" dollar to be sold in October? 1 1

[Moxie15]

3 hours ago, kbbpll said:

Here is an article from 2004. I assumed all of this was already known but perhaps useful. A lot of history about who looked at what, opinions, etc. Apparently it got the SP66 "later in 2003".

I see two people saying "there is no doubt in my mind" and "clues that this is the first". The rest hedge with "may be", "conceivable", "conjecture", "not possible to precisely ascertain", "leads me to believe", "suggests".

I would not say hedge at all. There is plenty of evidence it is one of the earliest, but no proof it is the first one. They are being professional and honest.

[Endgame]

Condor, there are 2 1794 Dollar varieties: B-1 Blundered Reverse and B-2 Perfect Reverse. The Perfect Reverse coins were struck on the first silver dollar screw press in mid 1795. Following Nysoto's logic, the Sp66 was a die trial for the production of the St. Oswald presentation pieces.

[RWB]

Let's remove the "St. Oswald" bologna -- no such critter/collection. See William Strickland and David Tripp's modern research on the subject.

"Die trials" and tests were made in copper - not silver alloy - when there were any made at all. In effect, every coin struck on a large screw press was a trial of dies, planchet, press, weights and manual force applied. "Testing" a new die of the same design would yield no information - the entire operation was too inconsistent for that to happen. Each of 1,758 1794 dollars was a "test" of something new for the Philadelphia Mint. Think late 18th century, backwater technology.

Edited June 24, 2020 by RWB

[WFN]

Whoa! There was one obverse die and one reverse die used to strike the silver 1794 dollars, per Haseltine-1, Bolender B-1, and Bowers Borckardt BB-1. There is a unique copper no-stars 1794 dollar pattern J-18/P-27 that had a different obverse die not used again. There is also a unique 1794 copper die trial J19/P28 struck from the BB-1 die pair.

There are three 1794 BB-1 dollar die states identified by Bowers/Borckardt.

edit - the 1794 BB-1 reverse working die was only used in 1794, and not used for 1795 dollars.

Edited June 24, 2020 by Nysoto1
added note

[Endgame]

There are clear differences in the reverses. Original 1794 dollars struck on the half dollar press have blundered reverses. The SP66 and William Strickland coins have a normal reverses meaning they were were made on the silver dollar press which was delivered in mid 1795. I think your analysis was right on a few years back. The SP66 is the die trial for the Strickland presentation pieces.

[WFN]

I will post my 2013 analysis in a while, I saved it on word. 

For the early dollar die marriages, I use the reference book The Encyclopedia of United States Silver Dollars 1794-1804, by Q. David Bowers, 2013, which incorporates previous work by Borckardt, Bolender, and others.

@Endgame, can you please give the reference source for the 1794 "blundered reverse" ? Thanks.

[Endgame]

It refers to the weakness of the strike and letters on the left reverse starting with TED STATE. 

[WFN]

R.W. Julian 2019 article on 1794-1795 dollars  https://www.numismaticnews.net/article/silver-dollars-of-1794-1795-were-illegal

Edited June 24, 2020 by Nysoto1
typo

[WFN]

Mint Director De Saussure in a report dated October 27, 1795:

"Great delays were incurred in obtaining the heavy iron work, particularly the rollers; and these were not always fit for use, when obtained. Those which are now in use being almost worn out, I have been striving in vain to replace them with fine Andover iron."

The above sentence explains the need for adjusting and plugs on dollars. The diameter of the blanks could be controlled consistently by a blanking die, but the thickness of the blanks could not be accurately controlled by the final rolling and drawing of strips. Thus every blank varied in weight, those too heavy were adjusted, and too light would need silver plugs for dollars and a few half dollars. The Mint employed five adjusters by October of 1795.

Congressman Elias Boudinot reported on February 9, 1795:

"The works consist of two rolling machines, one for hot and the other for cold metal, worked by four horses, and require five hands constantly to attend them, while in operation. There is a third, nearly completed, to be appropriated to the smaller coinage. A drawing machine for the purpose of equalizing the strips for cutting the planchettes, and are worked by the same hands as are last mentioned. Three cutting presses for the planchettes of larger and smaller coins, which are worked by one man each."

The "fine Andover iron" probably was not obtained, unless on the secondary market, as the Andover Iron Works had shut down by 1795. I corresponded with the author of The History of the Andover Iron Works: Come Penny, Go Pound, and he found no record of any steel deliveries to the US Mint.

The SP-66 is the only 1794 dollar with a plug, and the only planchet in the 1794-95 flowing hair dollar series that has adjustment marks on both the obverse and reverse along with a silver plug. 

 

[RWB]

Seems to be a very long "stretch" to use a plugged and filed planchet for making a "special" coin....especially when it's the only such example for the date. Calling the coin a "Specimen" seems in the same unfounded speculative category as that Barber dime recently touted for $181k. There MUST be confirming evidence for the claim, otherwise it is bogus.

[Endgame]

53 minutes ago, RWB said:

Seems to be a very long "stretch" to use a plugged and filed planchet for making a "special" coin....especially when it's the only such example for the date. Calling the coin a "Specimen" seems in the same unfounded speculative category as that Barber dime recently touted for $181k. There MUST be confirming evidence for the claim, otherwise it is bogus.

It is special as it is the earliest example of a 1794 Restrike Dollar minted on the first US silver dollar coining press. 

[RWB]

"It is special as it is the earliest example of a 1794 Restrike Dollar minted on the first US silver dollar coining press."

How it is a "restrike?" What is the evidence for the balance of the comment?

[Endgame]

 

23 minutes ago, RWB said:

"It is special as it is the earliest example of a 1794 Restrike Dollar minted on the first US silver dollar coining press."

How it is a "restrike?" What is the evidence for the balance of the comment?

I've pointed out that there are 2 different reverses on 1794 Silver Dollars. B-1 is the blundered or weak reverse struck in October 1794 on the half dollar press. B-2 is the normal or perfect reverse restruck on the first silver dollar press in 1795. The SP66 and the Strickland/St.Oswald are part of the second striking so they need to be moved to B-2. Please note that Strickland also took back a beautiful perfect strike 1795 silver plug silver dollar.

[kbbpll]

You're going to have to explain how it was evaluated to be the same die state as the 1794 copper trial piece in the Smithsonian.

Tangential to this discussion, I ran across this 1792 half disme, graded SP67. Also touted as "it could very well be the first 1792 half disme struck", but die cracks on the reverse indicate it "was among the final examples produced in July 1792". The detailed auction description is interesting. To me it demonstrates how these numismatic "myths" get perpetuated. It also seems to indicate that they could have been trying to make a "special" coin any time during a coinage run.

https://coins.ha.com/itm/patterns/1792-h10c-judd-7-pollock-7-sp67-pcgs-secure-cac-r4-as-a-business-strike-unique-as-a-specimen-pcgs-11024-/a/1208-5545.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515

[Endgame]

11 minutes ago, kbbpll said:

You're going to have to explain how it was evaluated to be the same die state as the 1794 copper trial piece in the Smithsonian.

Tangential to this discussion, I ran across this 1792 half disme, graded SP67. Also touted as "it could very well be the first 1792 half disme struck", but die cracks on the reverse indicate it "was among the final examples produced in July 1792". The detailed auction description is interesting. To me it demonstrates how these numismatic "myths" get perpetuated. It also seems to indicate that they could have been trying to make a "special" coin any time during a coinage run.

https://coins.ha.com/itm/patterns/1792-h10c-judd-7-pollock-7-sp67-pcgs-secure-cac-r4-as-a-business-strike-unique-as-a-specimen-pcgs-11024-/a/1208-5545.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515

The copper dollar is also a B-2 variety so it too was struck in 1795 on the new machinery. 

[kbbpll]

So... they minted 1,758 dollars in 1794, then had virgin dies in 1795 for a 1794 copper trial piece, then this SP66 in the same die state, then the Oswald-Strickland "restrike" gets the die clashes? I like to keep an open mind and learn new things, but this seems like quite a stretch. Is this published somewhere or your own speculation?

[gmarguli]

1 hour ago, kbbpll said:

To me it demonstrates how these numismatic "myths" get perpetuated. It also seems to indicate that they could have been trying to make a "special" coin any time during a coinage run.

There is no myth to this dollar being the first one struck. It is pure wildly_fanciful_statement marketing. When pumping the grade doesn't create enough excitement, create a story around it and work your way backwards to "prove it". It's an awesome coin, but a stupid gimmick. 

10 Years from now: Up for auction the Brand/Carter 1794 $ in NGC SP67+ * CAC Early Releases. Not only the first 1794 dollar struck, but also the dollar that George Washington threw across the Potomac River where Martha Washington caught it in between her bosom. The silver plug was made from silver from the ring Marie Antoinette wore while under the guillotine. If you don't believe the story, it's up to you to prove it wrong. 

[RWB]

4 hours ago, Endgame said:

Please note that Strickland also took back a beautiful perfect strike 1795 silver plug silver dollar.

Yep. Before he left in July 1795. And the coin was not from a filed planchet, if i recall correctly.

Again - one must think in terms of available technology and operations of the time.

Kppbll notes: "So... they minted 1,758 dollars in 1794, then had virgin dies in 1795 for a 1794 copper trial piece, then this SP66 in the same die state, then the Oswald-Strickland "restrike" gets the die clashes? I like to keep an open mind and learn new things, but this seems like quite a stretch. Is this published somewhere or your own speculation?"

I also note that Kppbll also blew a hole the the same company's phony attribution of a 1942 experimental piece last August. They thanked him for his honesty and service by banning him.

I started this thread with the express purpose of getting facts out in public and crush the BS that has been plastered on by greed, ignorance and mindless acceptance of lies. Eventually, the truth can be compiled and published both as reliable information and a warning to those bent on destroying a hobby to line their coffers.

[Endgame]

Kbb, yes Robert Scot got a second opportunity to produce 1794 silver dollars on the new screw press. Not only did he mint the special dollars for Strickland, but it looks he also made other silver plug 1794 dollars for the Mint. I counted at least 20 coins in Martin's book that show evidence of a silver plug and unsurprisingly they all have strong reverses. I am a long time observer of '94 dollars and honestly I could not accept that they made 3 spectacular well struck coins(SP66 and the two Strickland coins) on a half dollar press. There had to be a different answer.

 

 

[kbbpll]

@Endgame OK so now Scot minted coins specifically for Strickland? I enjoy interesting theories but evidence is the key. You haven't addressed how virgin 1794 dies showed up in 1795 after minting 1,758 dollars in 1794 on those same dies, or why the Strickland coins (at least one of them anyway) are from a die state with clashes. They made plugged coins in 1792 so that part of your argument is a bit meaningless to me. As you see in my post above, they minted a "spectacular well struck" half disme well after the die cracked, so what they could or couldn't do with the coin press seems like pure conjecture to me.

@RWB yeah that "high relief" thing was fun. I'm not as much of a stickler as you seem to be, but I haven't published a dozen books either. I really couldn't care less if someone wants to believe their $10 million coin was the first one ever (the first dozen were probably negative-word-replaced-with-this and melted, but whatever).

[RWB]

According to Tripp's article, Strickland left before the large dollar press was installed.....hmmmmm.

Real data

Facts

Truth

Only then can speculation have any purpose except for emptying a gin bottle.

[Starting to sound a lot like cut-and-paste of the Brasher "doubloon" with EB on chest...unfounded speculation and lies: $10 million, $15 million -- who's counting? At least if one shoots a moose it can be stuffed and not sucked through a strawberry 'Favor Straw.']

Edited June 25, 2020 by RWB

[Endgame]

RWB, Tripp's article says he left the US late July 1795. The silver dollar press was delivered in May 1795. Kbb, Robert Scot became chief engraver in 1793 and had no involvement with the 1792 Patterns. Can you please tell me which Strickland Dollar has the die clashes? I cannot answer your question about the dies; the first striking in October 1794 produced coins with weak areas on the reverse. Coins minted the second time on the correct screw press are fully struck. 

[Endgame]

RWB, here is a question for you regarding the 1795 silver plug silver dollar that Strickland took back. Was it made on the half dollar press or the silver dollar press?

[RWB]

If I recall correctly, the press was delivered in late May but not in use until mid-July. Sadly, much of the early correspondence was destroyed in the Treasury Dept fire of 1833 (?).

Let's start with some basic physical data on this 1794 dollar, and the others.

Diameter:        39 to 40.00 millimeters

Weight:           26.96 grams +/-

Mintage:          1,758

Alloy:              0.900 silver, 0.100 copper

Edge:               HUNDRED CENTS ONE DOLLAR OR UNIT [with separator symbols]

First, diameter.

Are there measurements of the vertical and horizontal axis – not a range as given above.?

Second, weight.

What is the actual weight of this coin? Measurement should be in grains (as used in 1794) then converted to grams. Both numbers should be given.

Third, alloy.

Use of 900 fine silver/copper is amply documented in contemporary letters and the Vaughn complaint. However, most silver for U.S. coins came from melted Spanish American and European coins. Refining was done with fluxes and this method never removed all the residual gold and other trace elements. (The secondary source is immaterial – we need to understand where that person got the silver.) The silver plug should be assayed separately.

Now, can anyone fill in the above holes for this coin, or other 1794 dollars?

Edited June 25, 2020 by RWB

[kbbpll]

11 hours ago, Endgame said:

Can you please tell me which Strickland Dollar has the die clashes?

Both of them. Both are die state II (Bowers-Borckardt).

11 hours ago, Endgame said:

Coins minted the second time on the correct screw press are fully struck. 

The Strickland MS64 is weakly struck - "The often-seen softness of detail along the left obverse and reverse borders is noted".

My comment about plugs had nothing to do with Scot, merely an observation that it was common practice prior to 1795, so whether a coin is plugged or not, to me doesn't have much to do with anything.

The SP66 subject coin seems to have a lot of "hype" about how the plug is "unique". It isn't. The Strickland MS66+ coin is also plugged. ("Like the Carter-Cardinal 1794 dollar, this specimen shows a central plug of silver" - straight from the auction description, and plainly visible in the reverse image). I guess this goes to the subject at hand - facts.

@RWB The 2004 article I linked earlier says "At 416.24 grains, its weight is almost textbook perfect". That's all I've seen on precise measurements.

[RWB]

19 hours ago, Endgame said:

Coins minted the second time on the correct screw press are fully struck. 

The Strickland MS64 is weakly struck - "The often-seen softness of detail along the left obverse and reverse borders is noted".

Are we to believe that the Coiner put defective struck coins into a new press, making certain that dies were in perfect alignment and 100% matching rotation of the original coin(s), and accounting for planchet distortion from the first striking; and then sanctioned having filed and plugged coins sold to VIPs to take to England to show how crude the BEST coinage workmanship in the Colonies was?

Further, does anyone propose that David Rittenhouse, member of the Royal Society of London and highly regarded by its members, would permit a filed/plugged coin into VIP hands where colleagues in London were certain to see it?

[Endgame]

There were also 2 1795 half dollars in Strickland's collection: a regular strike and a re-cut date. So the answer to your speculation is 'yes' they gave Strickland some silver coins with striking issues. Regarding the Strickland MS64 the reverse lettering is full whereas on the original striking the tops of many letters are not there because pressure could not be evenly applied on the half dollar press.

[Endgame]

Final thoughts on the matter.

Instead of a festive event portrayed in many books, the original coining of 1794 silver dollars was a disaster. All of a sudden Mint Director Rittenhouse was stuck with over 1700 defective silver dollars than could not be distributed to the states because the words United States were missing the tops of too many letters. After all, a half dollar is 80% of the size of a silver dollar and miracles do not occur during the minting process. However the problems were resolved by the middle of the following year with the silver dollar coin press.

The two varieties of 1794 silver dollars are:

B-1 no silver plug, weak US letters

B-2 silver plug, strong US letters

It is also clear that Mint Director melted a substantial number of defective original 1794 dollars and the metal was used to produce B-2 coins, as evidenced by the high number of silvers plug dollars in the survivor pool.

I was incorrect on two points in my previous posts: there are no 1795 silver plug half dollars and the survival rate is much higher than I initially believed.

 

[kbbpll]

Speculation is fun, but you're stating all this like it's fact. The dies didn't magically revert to Die State I for your 1795 "restrikes" of the copper trial and the SP66, and like I said, the Strickland coins are both Die State II. These coins have been studied as extensively as any coin ever, the evidence of die "lapping" for the various die states is well documented, and your scenario is just not possible.

[Endgame]

2 hours ago, kbbpll said:

Speculation is fun, but you're stating all this like it's fact. The dies didn't magically revert to Die State I for your 1795 "restrikes" of the copper trial and the SP66, and like I said, the Strickland coins are both Die State II. These coins have been studied as extensively as any coin ever, the evidence of die "lapping" for the various die states is well documented, and your scenario is just not possible.

The die state order may change similar to what recently happened with chain cents. Previous research featured obverse differences but I think the reverse explains the timing better. The missing features on the reverse lettering most likely prohibited Rittenhouse from using most of that first mintage as the words United States did not strike up completely. Evidence from the Logies' book reveals that the majority of distinguishable images have silver plugs...very few originals, by my definitions. So yes, there is so much more to learn.