So, I made an impulse buy and I want to know more about it... 0

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

I thought I was done buying braided hair half cents, but saw this 1855 in NGC62, and liked it a lot.  It's been counter-stamped, "G. Clark Phila".  Further research pulled up a January 3, 2021 Stacks Auction listing with the following description (not my exact coin, but the exact counterstamp on another 1855 HC):

"1855 Half Cent, G. CLARK / PHILA., AU Host; AU Counterstamp. Brunk C-508, Rulau Pa 713. Curved prepared punch. A dozen coins are listed, all on 1855 half cents. G. Clark counterstamps are remarkably high-quality for a blacksmith mark. Most examples were counterstamped on Uncirculated or nearly Uncirculated 1855 half cents; subsequently, most of those coins circulated in the local Philadelphia economy. Ex: Van Ormer Collection (Bowers and Merena, 9/1985), lot 2590."

This has me curious to learn more about the merchant.  Does anyone know more about G.Clark?  Address? Years in business?  All I know is what was found in Stacks listing.

 

Edited September 26, 2023 by The Neophyte Numismatist

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

[powermad5000]

I Googled this and this is all that came up. Could be the guy. Might not be either. It is typically difficult if not impossible to find out about who counterstamped coins.

George M Clark
Birthdate:	circa 1834
Birthplace:	Pennsylvania United States
Death:	August 01, 1872 (33-42) Philadelphia, PA
Immediate Family:	Husband of Mary Jane Pitts Father of William George Clark
Managed by:	Janne Hermanni Mäkinen
Last Updated:	June 19, 2021

[powermad5000]

While on this topic, I have a question myself. Is not the act of counterstamping a coin considered defacing currency and hence not a crime?

[Just Bob]

From Russell Rulau's U.S Merchant Tokens 1845-1860: "George Clark was a blacksmith at 118 Wistar St., listed 1857-1875

[VKurtB]

On 9/26/2023 at 4:20 AM, powermad5000 said:

While on this topic, I have a question myself. Is not the act of counterstamping a coin considered defacing currency and hence not a crime?

Not really, no. The entire field of elongates would be illegal. The governments view is MOSTLY, “you own it, do what you like”, with a few exceptions. 

[Fenntucky Mike]

I like to look through the City Directories, if one exists, newspapers of the period, and genealogy if available. 

Below is a listing for a George Clark, blacksmith, 1118 Wister, from the Philadelphia 1860 Directory. 

I'd be curious as to how the references determined it was G. Clark the blacksmith and not G. Clark machinist, hatter, butcher, etc.. Information on tokens can be fickle. 

[Fenntucky Mike]

Here's a page from the 1855 directory listing a George Clark, blacksmith at a different address. Same person different location? 

1856 Directory listing.

Edited September 26, 2023 by Fenntucky Mike

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

You all are amazing.  

@powermad5000 I do not believe that defacing money is illegal until you try to spend it.  Most of these coins were spent and circulated, so... as I think more, you do have a point.  Don't worry, I will make sure that I do not spend this one. 

 

FYI - I casted a wide net on my OP (NGC, PCGS and MyCollect).  I will bring back any info that people bring.

Edited September 26, 2023 by The Neophyte Numismatist

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

This was posted ATS:

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

@Fenntucky Mike - I think that with the Brunk information above, it is very plausible that the addresses you have circled are, in fact, tied to this merchant. 

[Fenntucky Mike]

On 9/26/2023 at 8:39 AM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

I think that with the Brunk information above, it is very plausible that the addresses you have circled are, in fact, tied to this merchant. 

The Philly directories list a G. Clark blacksmith at the 52 Wistar address up until the 1858 edition, starting in '59 a G. Clark blacksmith is listed at the 1118 Wistar address, then in '60 the street name spelling in the directory was changed from Wistar to Wister, with the latter being an actual street in Philly today. Not sure if it's actually the same St. though. Have to take the dates and timing with a grain of salt, who knows how diligent they were with updating. Complete conjecture on my part but, possibly he moved down the road, or the city just changed his address, and these were produced and distributed at that time due in part to a change of address or location. Or not. The further you get from '55 the less likely the availability of uncirculated half cents from that year I would think, but I believe the '55 is one of the more available in unc?  This will be a fun one for you to research, makes me wish I had one now. 

[zadok]

On 9/25/2023 at 11:20 PM, powermad5000 said:

While on this topic, I have a question myself. Is not the act of counterstamping a coin considered defacing currency and hence not a crime?

...not a crime...usually the crime aspect comes into play associated with the intent of the defacement, much too long of a subject to address here....

[zadok]

On 9/26/2023 at 8:39 AM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

@Fenntucky Mike - I think that with the Brunk information above, it is very plausible that the addresses you have circled are, in fact, tied to this merchant. 

...counterstamped/counterstruck coins add an entirely new arena in which to expand ur existing collections...plus the added historical aspects, geographical,occupational,financial, international...the list is only limited to ur imagination...even coins stamped by blacksmiths etc...plus there r several excellent reference works on the subject...i have long collected US coins with counterstamps of US silversmiths akin to their hallmark stamps on silver flatware...if u want to let ur imagination run wild just think of Ephraim Brasher n his EB counterstamp on coins....

[Sandon]

    Merchants' counterstamps are common on nineteenth century U.S. coins and are avidly collected by some.  I don't know what the law was at that time relating to this practice, but I do know that half cents and large cents were not legal tender--they were issued for convenience--and could be lawfully refused as payment. However, these counterstamps are also found on silver and occasionally even gold coins.

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

On 9/26/2023 at 10:13 AM, zadok said:

...counterstamped/counterstruck coins add an entirely new arena in which to expand ur existing collections...plus the added historical aspects, geographical,occupational,financial, international...the list is only limited to ur imagination...even coins stamped by blacksmiths etc...plus there r several excellent reference works on the subject...i have long collected US coins with counterstamps of US silversmiths akin to their hallmark stamps on silver flatware...if u want to let ur imagination run wild just think of Ephraim Brasher n his EB counterstamp on coins....

I think what is strange is the price of this coin/token.  This coin was priced below what an MS62 example is without the counterstamp*.  According to Brunk, there were only 12 known to him at the time of his writing, and according to Stacks - most of those circulated.  This may mean that I fell backward into buying one of the nicer examples of a pretty rare counterstamp.  I do understand that rarity and price are not always correlated, but just found it interesting.

*I understand that there may be some who see this MS62 as "damaged" and not worth the price of an unmarked MS62.  Not looking to debate whether counterstamped coins should be straight-or-details graded.  However, I will call-out the nuance to note my appreciation and understanding.

Edited September 26, 2023 by The Neophyte Numismatist

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

On 9/26/2023 at 9:36 AM, Fenntucky Mike said:

I would think, but I believe the '55 is one of the more available in unc?  This will be a fun one for you to research, makes me wish I had one now. 

The 1855 is one of the easier dates to find in UNC, and definitely the easiest to find with original red color.  Here is my example for the date:

Edited September 26, 2023 by The Neophyte Numismatist

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

The files are too big to get them in one post.  Here is the reverse:

[RWB]

On 9/25/2023 at 11:20 PM, powermad5000 said:

Is not the act of counterstamping a coin considered defacing currency and hence not a crime?

Defacing a coin is not necessarily criminal, but through most of the 19th century placing an unremoveable advertisement on a coin was illegal. If someone grinds off all or part of a legal tender coin's design, then stamps it with a facsimile of a coin that is de facto fraud and counterfeiting.

Edited September 26, 2023 by RWB

[zadok]

On 9/26/2023 at 10:25 AM, Sandon said:

    Merchants' counterstamps are common on nineteenth century U.S. coins and are avidly collected by some.  I don't know what the law was at that time relating to this practice, but I do know that half cents and large cents were not legal tender--they were issued for convenience--and could be lawfully refused as payment. However, these counterstamps are also found on silver and occasionally even gold coins.

...no crime committed on any of those....

[Fenntucky Mike]

Images of three more for comparison. The one in the 2x2 is listed as a BIN currently. Neo, how distorted and/or bent is yours?

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

@Fenntucky Mike The leaves at the top of the wreath are crushed, but it really doest look bent at all (maybe very slightly).  I will try to post some pictures lates today at angles to better see any distortion.  It's harder for me to tell in the holder.

Edited September 27, 2023 by The Neophyte Numismatist

[Fenntucky Mike]

On 9/27/2023 at 7:46 AM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

@Fenntucky Mike The leaves at the top of the wreath are crushed, but it really doest look bent at all (maybe very slightly).  I will try to post some pictures lates today at angles to better see any distortion.  It's harder for me to tell in the holder.

Just curious, no problem if you don't have time. The top and bottom coins in the image I posted look like the counterstamp was applied very enthusiastically, really crushing the leaves in the wreath and the letters in "HALF", and causing the rev to bow out. The middle coin and yours don't seem as bad, less force applied. None seem to have any rim damage from counterstamping, so they were probably laid on a nice flat, even surface but I would expect all to display similar traits, smashed leaves/letters, slightly bowed, no rim damage, etc.. Even though the coins are probably work/tool hardened to some extent after coining copper is soft so no surprise in seeing this, I just hadn't noticed, or didn't remember, similar traits on some of my counterstamped pieces but they are completely different in comparison now that I'm thinking about it. Sorry, didn't mean to drag you down a rabbit hole. 

[RWB]

Side Note: Merchant stamps on old coppers do not have to be contemporary with the coin's date. Copper cents and half cents were available for bullion value once Treasury stopped redeeming them for small cents. Even before, many were never redeemed due to the cost of shipping and were sold "cheap" -- as in the Randall hoard kegs.

Edited September 27, 2023 by RWB

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

@Fenntucky Mike I have been messing with this coin for the past 15 mins or so, and I don't see a bend at all.  It looks even in the holder.  I am more and more inclined to say it is not bent or distorted past what you see in what I already posted.

@RWB - I do think that this one is contemporary, as Brunk has listed this merchant listed from 1857 - 1875.

 

[RWB]

On 9/27/2023 at 12:47 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

@RWB - I do think that this one is contemporary, as Brunk has listed this merchant listed from 1857 - 1875.

It might be. Not implying it is not contemporary. I was only tossing about a little info that confuses the counterstamp situation.

[World Colonial]

On 9/26/2023 at 12:50 PM, The Neophyte Numismatist said:

*I understand that there may be some who see this MS62 as "damaged" and not worth the price of an unmarked MS62.  Not looking to debate whether counterstamped coins should be straight-or-details graded.  However, I will call-out the nuance to note my appreciation and understanding.

I think it's more than "some".  I'd say "most" and it's not limited to this coin or series either.

Somewhat different, but I consider chop marked coins damaged while I understand it's more widely collected or at least accepted now versus previously, including at least in some instances by the TPG.

In my series, it's substantially who did it.  So, when Britain did it with 1758 undated Jamaican coinage, it's not damage.  Since these are collected by both British and pillar collectors and the counterstamped (or countermarked) coin is usually scarcer, it's worth noticeably more.

I'd like to have a denomination set as a supplement, eventually.

[The Neophyte Numismatist]

@World Colonial I agree, and I would not have this coin as my sole example for the date.  But, I do like this one a lot.  I made the disclaimer to stop potential mud fights before they start.  We do love a good mud fight.