This is just about the most bizarre, insane mint error I've ever seen!

[James_OldeTowne]

Check out this insane 1795 half-cent!

 

I quote, from the Heritage catalog:

 

1795 1/2 C Plain Edge, Punctuated Date--30% Off-Center with 25% Curved Clip--Corroded, NCS. XF Details. C-4, B-4, R.3. Usual die state with HALF CENT mostly illegible. This is a stunning and spectacular double error, either of which would be extremely important in its own right. The substantial curved clip is positioned at 4 o'clock. This clip is larger than any we recall seeing on a half cent of any date, let alone this 18th century date. Similarly, the off-center strike, positioned to 9 o'clock, is further off-center than we recall on any other examples. The combination is nothing short of amazing. Any combination of two or more error types on a single coin essentially makes that coin unique. It is completely unreasonable to think that another identical error combination could have been produced, unless someone at the Mint was making these intentionally, and during the 1790s, that was probably not the case.

 

[RGT]

That is an incredible coin. I wonder how it made it through the intense quality control at the mint in 1795. I'm sure they have gotten better and wouldn't let something like that slip through today.

 

Along those same lines, check out these listings I came across last night. Not quite half cents, but...

 

Half dimes???

 

Ok, not really half dimes either.

[HaydenTubbs]

Wow! That has got to be one of the most interesting errors I have seen,what premium do you think it will bring?

[Hoot]

When I saw that coin in the LB catalog, I thoight that the Mint had to have produced this coin rather intentionally at the time. The flans were punched by hand, they were stamped on a screw press that had no automatic ejection, and they only made about 140,000 half cents in 1795. That makes me think that if someone was asleep at the wheel until the thing was brushed out of the press, then they hadto have noticed it when it went flying into the hopper. Also, given the level of detail remaining and the overall condition of the coin, it had to have been snagged by a collector (even a collector of novelties, not necessarily coins) very early on, if not straight out of the Mint. The coin seems too perfect to me to have not been intentionally made and snagged, but it's all speculation.

 

Very interesting piece that will sell for a high four figures, if not more.

 

Hoot

[michael]

it is really cool but the reverse kills it for me

[truthteller]

When I saw that coin in the LB catalog, I thoight that the Mint had to have produced this coin rather intentionally at the time. The flans were punched by hand, they were stamped on a screw press that had no automatic ejection, and they only made about 140,000 half cents in 1795. That makes me think that if someone was asleep at the wheel until the thing was brushed out of the press, then they hadto have noticed it when it went flying into the hopper. Also, given the level of detail remaining and the overall condition of the coin, it had to have been snagged by a collector (even a collector of novelties, not necessarily coins) very early on, if not straight out of the Mint. The coin seems too perfect to me to have not been intentionally made and snagged, but it's all speculation.

 

Very interesting piece that will sell for a high four figures, if not more.

 

Hoot

 

 

I have to agree with you. The coining process was so slow back then, a clipped planchet would not go unnoticed. The clip just looks weird.

 

TRUTH

[kranky]

I would also suspect that didn't escape the mint completely unnoticed, but it's very, very cool.

[MikeKing]

looks to me like somebody had a bad case of the munchies

[Stanley]

How about the human factor….Are there any accurate records of the workers mind set.

When this coin was minted weren’t the conditions more like an old time, hole in the wall machine shop. And it would have been easy for employees to drink whisky during working hours.

[IGWT]

How about the human factor….Are there any accurate records of the workers mind set. When this coin was minted weren’t the conditions more like an old time, hole in the wall machine shop. And it would have been easy for employees to drink whisky during working hours.

 

The work rules were pretty tough. I've attached a copy of the work rules published in 1825, a few years later, but rules of this sort likely were in place at the time that this error was minted. I didn't embed the attachment in this post because it's quite large (and please overlook the quality of the scan -- a lot of compression was necessary). Excerpt from G. Evans, History of the United States Mint and Coinage at 15-16 (1891 reprint S. Durst 1977)

 

Spider -- You'll note the rule that deals with drinking on the job . . . the need for the rule suggests that it might have been a problem.

[midwest]

How about the human factor….Are there any accurate records of the workers mind set. When this coin was minted weren’t the conditions more like an old time, hole in the wall machine shop. And it would have been easy for employees to drink whisky during working hours.

 

The work rules were pretty tough. I've attached a copy of the work rules published in 1825, a few years later, but rules of this sort likely were in place at the time that this error was minted. I didn't embed the attachment in this post because it's quite large (and please overlook the quality of the scan -- a lot of compression was necessary). Excerpt from G. Evans, History of the United States Mint and Coinage at 15-16 (1891 reprint S. Durst 1977)

 

Spider -- You'll note the rule that deals with drinking on the job . . . the need for the rule suggests that it might have been a problem.

 

Didn't Hoot write an article that mentioned giving the workers whisky rations

[James_OldeTowne]

I'll guess $6,000.

 

James