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

[Endgame]

The proper die state order would put die state 3 first followed by die state 1 and the 2. I've explained that I believe the silver plug dollars were minted on the silver dollar press in 1795.

 

[Endgame]

In last week's comments RWB and Kbb correctly pushed me for facts. Here they are:

1 There were no more 1794 silver dollars paid out on warrants after October 15, 1794.

2 There is no 1794 silver dollar in President Washington's Last Will and Testament.

3 There are at least 3 1794 silver plug silver dollars.

4 The 1795 silver plug silver dollar proves Strickland was at the mint in June 1795.

5 The  Columbian Centinel describes a weakly struck coin.

6 Reports of circulating 1794 dollars did not appear until late 1795.

I want to correct one part of last week's comments. The main varieties are:

B-1 Original, no silver plug, weak US letters

B-2 Restrikes, silver plug and no silver plug, strong US letters

I feel positive that aditional new research will confirm the direction that has been laid out. The criticism would have been withering if they had released a quantity of defective originals. The Mint was already on a short string with Alexander Hamilton.

A whole new die state order is required for 1794 Silver Dollars and I hope someone will take up the task. 

[kbbpll]

It sure seems like you're trying to pound a square peg into a round hole here, all because you're convinced that they could not have produced well-struck coins on the press they had in 1794. "Of the approximately 135 1794 silver dollars known, all but this example [the SP66] show evidence of clashing or die lapping designated as Die State II or higher" (article ATS). It does not seem reasonable to me that you can just rearrange the die state order to fit your narrative, when evidence of the lapping is right there on the coins. You're going against people who've spent many years studying these coins in hand, compared them with the trial piece in the Smithsonian, etc etc. It seems like an uphill battle to me, but you could put your evidence together into an article and see if anyone would publish it I guess. Meanwhile, I'm a firm believer in Occam's razor. They could, and did, produce a few well-struck coins on that 1794 press, and then we don't have to go through all these gyrations trying to make the evidence fit the theory.

[Moxie15]

7 hours ago, Endgame said:

In last week's comments RWB and Kbb correctly pushed me for facts. Here they are:

1 There were no more 1794 silver dollars paid out on warrants after October 15, 1794.

2 There is no 1794 silver dollar in President Washington's Last Will and Testament.

3 There are at least 3 1794 silver plug silver dollars.

4 The 1795 silver plug silver dollar proves Strickland was at the mint in June 1795.

5 The  Columbian Centinel describes a weakly struck coin.

6 Reports of circulating 1794 dollars did not appear until late 1795.

I want to correct one part of last week's comments. The main varieties are:

B-1 Original, no silver plug, weak US letters

B-2 Restrikes, silver plug and no silver plug, strong US letters

I feel positive that aditional new research will confirm the direction that has been laid out. The criticism would have been withering if they had released a quantity of defective originals. The Mint was already on a short string with Alexander Hamilton.

A whole new die state order is required for 1794 Silver Dollars and I hope someone will take up the task. 

I have some questions concerning your listed facts

1 There were no more 1794 silver dollars paid out on warrants after October 15, 1794.

This statement cause me to think that prior to October 15, 1794 there were 1794 dollars paid out on warrants, so there were 1794 dollars circulating reported or not. Therefore the statement in #6 proves nothing other that that is the first written report known of circulating 1794 dollars. So how does this report prove the dollar mentioned in this thread was minted in any particular day or year, or its order off of the press?

2 There is no 1794 silver dollar in President Washington's Last Will and Testament.

This is a verifiable fact, but the only thing it shows is he did not own one at the time of the will's drafting. Were any other mint coins listed in the will?

4 The 1795 silver plug silver dollar proves Strickland was at the mint in June 1795.

How does this prove he was at the mint? It very well could have been presented to him after he left.

I have never had a 1794 in my hands so I have no first hand knowledge of what they look like. Some have stated that some 1794 dollars show signs of die clashes  and perhaps other signs of die use, and that only one die pair was used on this year's dollars.

So...

If all the known coins with weak letters were struck on the old press in 1794 and some of them show the marks of  die wear and clashing and this nearly perfect coin was struck on the new press in 1795 with the old dies: then why does it not show the signs of die wear and clashing that were on the old dies?

 

[RWB]

A medium size screw press can strike dollar coins just as well as a large screw press. Everything depends on the force applied to the dollar planchet by the dies. BUT -- a medium size press would not survive very long because its parts could not withstand the mechanical forces.

I'll remind folks again - you must think in 18th century mechanics.

Edited June 30, 2020 by RWB

[Endgame]

I split Martin's die state 3 into 2 parts. The first part are the 15 coins (including his former ms64) that show weak US letters. I believe they minted 1758 silver dollars like that and only a small quantity were released. Rittenhouse was forced to sit on them as releasing them would have been embarrassing to the government. Then the proper machinery arrived in mid-1795, they strike Martin's die state 1 and then for whatever reason change back to the original 1794 dies. That explains why there are silver plugs in two different on two different  die states. 

There is no documentation supporting a silver plug in 1794. All of the silver plug activity took place in 1795.

We have to remember that authors are creative. Edmund Randolph's one liner describes a neat and simple coin for the President and I do not believe the heavily adjusted silver plug matches that.

 

[Endgame]

And yes, my phrase die trial for St.Oswald dollars was incorrect. I meant the SP66 was a predecessor for the St. Oswald silver plug dollars.

[kbbpll]

Sorry, you're really losing me. So now there were TWO die pairs for 1794 dollars? You're kind of getting a little "out there" with this.

[RWB]

Sorry I started this thread - the bologna is getting very deep and moldy. Lots of speculations to fit preconceived notions. [BTW - Objectivity is birth control for preconceived notions.]

[gmarguli]

2 hours ago, RWB said:

Lots of speculations to fit preconceived notions.

So you claim. Um, maybe you allege. 

[RWB]

Without facts, my "claim" is entirely valid. The proposes of preconceived notions and other hogwash, must prove their contentions, and so far, little evidence has been presented to do that.

:)

 

[VKurtB]

He who makes extraordinary claims, has the obligation to produce extraordinary evidence. I've always TRIED to live by that motto.

[Henri Charriere]

On 6/19/2020 at 6:50 AM, MarkFeld said:

You’re talking about “claims”, not “allegations”. You’re the one making “allegations”.😉

I love the word-play here. Reminds me of the FBI Special Agent's oft-quoted rejoinder to a suspect: "you are not being 'accused,' you are simply being 'charged.' "  Nice!

[RWB]

So my late wife's credit card was "accused" --- hmmm.

[Big Nub numismatics]

[Henri Charriere]

FROM MY VIRTUAL TRASH BASKET.

[What is it, cherie?  Quick, come look at this... Grown men all worked up about coins minted over two hundred years ago, replete with impeccable references, as though their very lives depended on it! J'accuse! Wow, can't we all just get along?]