Destruction of 1908 Indian and Saint-Gaaudens half eagle patterns 0

[RWB]

This letter orders destruction of all 1908 pattern half eagles of both designs. It's curious that Dir Leach did not have one or two pieces saved for the Mint's Cabinet of Coins. No Saint-Gaudens half eagles survive and only 1 Indian half eagle pattern survives. This was the coin given to President Roosevelt who then presented it to William BIgelow. In turn, Bigelow donated the coin to the Boston Museum, who sold it - unattributed - as an ordinary coin when they deaccessioned their numismatic collection. The coin likely sits in some anonymous collection awaiting a keen-eyed numismatic discovery. (A description is in my book Renaissance of American Coinage 1905-1908, and the master hub is at the Philadelphia Mint.

[Henri Charriere]

If the unique Indian Half-Eagle pattern survived, and were posted to a forum by a newbie today, here are some of the comments it would likely elicit. [Names of members are redacted to protect the guilty].

I found this coin in a hidden compartment of my grandfather's desk while refurbishing it. Anybody know what it is and what it might be worth?

Definitely a fake. And not even a good one.

It's got Counterfeit written all over it. Looks like brass.

You'll be lucky if you get melt for it if it's even gold.

If it ain't in the Red Book, it doesn't exist.

I see some doubling -- oh, never mind.

The color is off.  If you submit it, it'll come back in a body bag. If it is real, it will come back Details-Cleaned.

C'mon Quintus!  Don't get me started.  It's not an error! It's not even real. There were no 1908's made using either the S-G or Indian designs. 

I don't want IT, whatever IT is, out there. There are enough fakes out there!

In the future please take pictures of both sides that are focused, well-lit and closely cropped.

This should be posted in the Newbies Forum.  I would recommend you read the "Basic Resources" and "What you need to know" topics.

If you submitted it, you would only be throwing good money after bad.

            

Posted at the discretion of Moderation.

 

 

 

[RWB]

Quite likely responses. 

If someone had read the 1905-1908 book, they would have a shot at identifying it. Corroboration would have to come from the US Mint since there are no photos known.

[Zebo]

Sure would be nice to find it! Interesting - I might have to pick up that book as well.

[GoldFinger1969]

I wanna throw up......

[GoldFinger1969]

You guys think this pattern is accidentally in someone's collection ?  Or that someone knowingly has it and doesn't want to divulge ownership -- maybe beause he/she thinks it will be confiscated ?

[Henri Charriere]

On 3/28/2024 at 10:01 PM, GoldFinger1969 said:

You guys think this pattern is accidentally in someone's collection ?  Or that someone knowingly has it and doesn't want to divulge ownership -- maybe beause he/she thinks it will be confiscated ?

I do not believe fear of confiscation would be a consideration. I also do not believe it is in anybody's collection.  I do know, wherever it is, it would command a sky's-the-limit price at auction.

[VKurtB]

The ultimate fate was the melting pot, apropos of the American experience. 

[GoldFinger1969]

Roger, when did the Boston Museum sell the coin ?

[VKurtB]

On 3/28/2024 at 10:40 PM, VKurtB said:

The ultimate fate was the melting pot, apropos of the American experience. 

So @GoldFinger1969, what is so sad about obeying the direct order of the Director of the Mint? His instructions are not ambiguous. Or is it your contention that numismatics is entitled to engage in lawlessness and skulduggery? What is the reason it would have evaded the 1933 Roosevelt ordered surrender? Or are holders of gold entitled to be criminals?

Edited March 29 by VKurtB

[RWB]

On 3/29/2024 at 12:31 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Roger, when did the Boston Museum sell the coin ?

I don't recall exactly --- 1980s maybe ?

The "received Holy Wisdom" prior to my research was that no S-G half eagles were made. This was accompanied by many 'learned' guesses, assumptions and blather based entirely on hot air and BS.

Edited March 29 by RWB

[GoldFinger1969]

On 3/29/2024 at 11:30 AM, VKurtB said:

So @GoldFinger1969, what is so sad about obeying the direct order of the Director of the Mint? His instructions are not ambiguous. Or is it your contention that numismatics is entitled to engage in lawlessness and skulduggery? What is the reason it would have evaded the 1933 Roosevelt ordered surrender? Or are holders of gold entitled to be criminals?

My understanding was that purchasing patterns was legal and customary since the late-1800's.   Didn't Charles Barber have 8 of the MCMVII UHRs ?? 

I'm not sure if this letter would supersede that practice.  Maybe, maybe not.  At the same time these were happening, you had the legitimate transfer/purchase of the UHRs.  Maybe because they were continued with the MCMVII HR and then the actual SG DEs it was different whereas these patterns never saw the light of day production-wise.

But if this letter applies to the Superintendent it would surely apply to the Chief Engraver, right ?

Edited March 29 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

On 3/29/2024 at 11:30 AM, VKurtB said:

What is the reason it would have evaded the 1933 Roosevelt ordered surrender? 

It's certainly a numismatic rarity from a collector's POV.  Whoever had it -- it certainly wouldn't have had to be surrendered, either with the $100 gold limit and/or the numismatic exception, right ? 

[RWB]

Pattern pieces were and are entirely legal, despite attempts by Dirs Kimball and Andrew to claim otherwise. (There is no relationship between pattern pieces and 1933 DE.)

[RWB]

Bigelow donated his pattern piece to the Museum, which held it in its collection until most of the collection was sold 70 years later.

If collectors will simply read modern research books they can find the answers themselves.

[VKurtB]

On 3/29/2024 at 11:12 AM, RWB said:

Pattern pieces were and are entirely legal, despite attempts by Dirs Kimball and Andrew to claim otherwise. (There is no relationship between pattern pieces and 1933 DE.)

But only if they knew what they had.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 3/29/2024 at 12:17 PM, RWB said:

Bigelow donated his pattern piece to the Museum, which held it in its collection until most of the collection was sold 70 years later.

If collectors will simply read modern research books they can find the answers themselves.

So if the Boston Museum sold this piece in the last 35 years, no way someone getting that piece didn't know about the value and history.  It's not like it disappeared 90 years ago when it was only marginally worth more than the nominal FV.  You buy anything from a museum, you're gonna check out the prices.

[GoldFinger1969]

I do wonder why the Mint Director's letter focused on destroying them.  Maybe he meant assuming it wasn't wanted/sold to someone at the Mint ?

As we know, if you paid for a pattern it was (apparently) OK.  So if the Mint Director wanted these patterns destroyed without exception (for whatever reason), I would think he would have said in the letter:  destroy them...not to be sold or stored....melted upon receipt. 

I would think the chances of these being used as counterfeits may have played a part.

[RWB]

Frank Leach had replaced George Roberts as director. Each might have held different views on pattern pieces and each might have been influenced by unknown conversations. Leach "should" have ordered the S-G HE and Pratt HE patterns put in the mint cabinet of coins, and he had previously acted to preserve the $10 knife edge patterns, and small diameter DE, but..... we'll likely never know.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 3/30/2024 at 11:20 AM, RWB said:

Frank Leach had replaced George Roberts as director. 

How would you compare each as far as being "friendly" to numismatists and coin collectors ?

I realize that's a subjective question, just asking if you see any particular daylight between them that might carryover to the pattern issue.

[RWB]

Roberts had more opportunities to preserve historical specimens than did Leach.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 3/30/2024 at 3:51 PM, RWB said:

Roberts had more opportunities to preserve historical specimens than did Leach.

Some of these guys may really love coins and the artistry associated with them....for others, it may have simply been a job to get a paycheck.

Also, political appointees. 

[olympicsos]

On 3/10/2024 at 6:57 PM, RWB said:

Quite likely responses. 

If someone had read the 1905-1908 book, they would have a shot at identifying it. Corroboration would have to come from the US Mint since there are no photos known.

I’ve also heard in some places that there were patterns that had the striding Liberty obverse but the standing eagle reverse. 
 

On a side note regarding the coinage renaissance, would you consider coins which series started after 1921 including various classic commemoratives such as  the Oregon Trail, Texas or Connecticut half dollars also designed by outside artists to be part of the coinage renaissance? Or the Washington quarter which was designed by John Flanagan who was one of Saint Gaudens assistants as an extension of the coinage renaissance? This is of course a broad definition, but there was a whole tradition of outside artists started that the renaissance books don’t necessarily cover and outside artists that did work that isn’t covered. 

[RWB]

On 4/21/2024 at 7:00 PM, olympicsos said:

I’ve also heard in some places that there were patterns that had the striding Liberty obverse but the standing eagle reverse. 

No such critter as a pattern or proposal.

On 4/21/2024 at 7:00 PM, olympicsos said:

On a side note regarding the coinage renaissance, would you consider coins which series started after 1921 including various classic commemoratives such as  the Oregon Trail, Texas or Connecticut half dollars also designed by outside artists to be part of the coinage renaissance? Or the Washington quarter which was designed by John Flanagan who was one of Saint Gaudens assistants as an extension of the coinage renaissance? This is of course a broad definition, but there was a whole tradition of outside artists started that the renaissance books don’t necessarily cover and outside artists that did work that isn’t covered.

The 3 volumes deal only with circulating US coinage, plus a side-trip about the PPIE souvenir coins and gold $1, $3 and MCMVII $20s used as political treats.

The quantity and quality of information is almost immeasurably beyond anything previously written on the subject.

[zadok]

..."almost immeasurably beyond"...voyager 1 did u copy that?....

[RWB]

On 3/30/2024 at 10:08 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

So if the Boston Museum sold this piece in the last 35 years, no way someone getting that piece didn't know about the value and history.

I overlooked the above.

No one knew about the pattern Pratt HE until my research was published in RAC 1905-1908. Differences are subtle, except for the medal-turn die orientation.

[RWB]

On 4/22/2024 at 3:55 PM, zadok said:

..."almost immeasurably beyond"...voyager 1 did u copy that?....

Certainly beyond your capabilities.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 4/21/2024 at 7:00 PM, olympicsos said:

I’ve also heard in some places that there were patterns that had the striding Liberty obverse but the standing eagle reverse. 

I love the Eagle-in-Flight pose better.  It's very majestic. 

As I recall (I'm sure it's in Roger's RoAC books)...Teddy Roosevelt said that the eagle on the Liberty Head DE looked like a grilled squab. 

[zadok]

On 4/22/2024 at 4:06 PM, RWB said:

Certainly beyond your capabilities.

...careful u dont want to throw out ur typing shoulder while patting urself on the back....

[RWB]

In newspapers the $10 reverse got more complaints than all the other designs combined. It was the first depiction of a standing eagle on a US coin and not entirely realistic. One of the things Pratt was asked to do on the Half Eagle was to adjust the bird to a more natural appearance.

Members might like to compare an accurate American Bald Eagle illustration with those on US coins, beginning with Hughes' 1836 flying eagle, and Longacre's versions.