Research Update - Patterns, Restrikes and Related Pieces - Teaser Added 0

[RWB]

I've been researching U.S. patterns, restrikes and related pieces (1836-1895) for at least the past 10 years. Finally, I have located enough original materials to begin compilation and roughing out the draft(s).

I take the liberty of mentioning this on the message board in hopes that anyone who might have information on the subject will contact me. This includes letters, diaries, memoranda, and similar original materials from Mint Officers, collectors and others who possibly had first-hand knowledge.

My research process is oriented toward original materials and observations. Therefore, I do not bother with most published items unless they can point to original sources.

Please feel free to send me a PM if anyone can direct me to items of possible interest; or if you simply have questions, please post them here.

Thanks!

Edited April 29, 2021 by RWB

[GoldFinger1969]

Any Double Eagle patterns in that time period ?  Liberty's ?

I guess the UHR's wouldn't be discussed until 1906, and I know you covered this in-depth in RoAC and the SG DE book....so not sure if you have anything new to add even if you move the date forward.

[DWLange]

I imagine the Paquet Reverse double eagles of 1861 would qualify for inclusion. I've had the pleasure of handling both of the Philadelphia Mint pieces.

[RWB]

The research is focused on restriking and distribution rather than specific designs. There will be some discussion of designs were variations were used (half cent proofs for example), or where "impossible" metals were introduced at the request of certain collectors. The overall goal is to better understand how, who and why the pieces were issued outside of the Mint Cabinet.

(Eventually there will be a new 2-Vol "Judd" but on the depth and scale of Pollock's book. That is a project handled by others.)

[GoldFinger1969]

Sounds interesting, Roger, keep this thread alive and us posted.

[GoldFinger1969]

1 hour ago, DWLange said:

I imagine the Paquet Reverse double eagles of 1861 would qualify for inclusion. I've had the pleasure of handling both of the Philadelphia Mint pieces.

They are raw or graded ? 

Ever seen or handled the 1849 DE ?

[RWB]

2 hours ago, DWLange said:

I imagine the Paquet Reverse double eagles of 1861 would qualify for inclusion. I've had the pleasure of handling both of the Philadelphia Mint pieces.

Mint letters refer to this as a diameter problem.

[DWLange]

The San Francisco Mint did have difficulty with the Paquet reverse dies and found that they'd fit in the press only after being turned down slightly in a lathe. This diminished the border enough that the coins looked strange and didn't stack well. New Orleans didn't get around to using its dies before word had been received from Philadelphia to not do so. There was as yet no telegraph service between Philly and SF (that went into service the following year), so more than 19,000 1861-S Paquet coins had been released already before production was halted.

The two Philadelphia coins are from a reverse that doesn't exactly match the design of the S-Mint coins. I recall an article stating that they evidently were coined three years after the fact, about the time that Paquet left mint employment. I believe this article was one of the entries in the ANA Anthology in 1991.

[RWB]

Good info!

[GoldFinger1969]

Info on the Paquet Reverse at HA:

https://coins.ha.com/itm/liberty-double-eagles/double-eagles/1861-s-20-paquet-reverse-au58-ngc-pcgs-8936-/a/1223-4460.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515

Patterns.com also has information.

[RWB]

RE: "The curious, tall, narrow letter font that Paquet favored on this issue exhibits an archness, an unusual piquant, archaic air that is instantly identifiable by collectors familiar with the Liberty Head series. It was clearly not readily identified by the noncollecting public of the day, however, as most examples of the Paquet Reverse twenties circulated extensively."

Double eagles, or any gold coins, were not collected on the western coasts of Canada, US or Mexico. They were circulating coins and "standardized gold" (kind of like "Regulated gold" of the 18th century). No one cared about slight differences. The small San Francisco output went right out the door in payment for bullion/dust deposits. Had they made it back east they would certainly have been noticed right away - quite a few coin collectors were employed by banks, bullion merchants and others who dealt with coins on a daily basis.

[RWB]

8 hours ago, GoldFinger1969 said:

Ever seen or handled the 1849 DE ?

Yes. It's a sorry looking coin - cleaned and scrubbed several times. I once owned an 1850 PL that was far more attractive, although not a proof.

[RWB]

Currently available, published, material is nearly all conjecture with a couple of historical documents tossed in and repeated ad nauseam. After multiple layers of this stuff, the truth, if there ever was any, has been crushed into mush.

What I've learned so far - at a very high level - is that there were distinct periods and causes of discrepancies in patterns and restrikes. This opens up some of the reasons for actions and insights into the persons involved, and their motivations. It also occasionally exonerates some individuals often accused of malfeasance or profiteering.

Anyway -- that's the direction of the work. I don't know what the final product will be; only data and analysis will tell.

[DWLange]

Ever seen or handled the 1849 DE ?

Yes, and I don't remember it being quite as bad as Roger described. The Smithsonian's gold coins were mostly spared the repeated harsh cleanings that befell the silver pieces. The National Numismatic Collection's silver proofs from the 19th Century are nearly ruined as far as market value is concerned, but they won't be for sale in any case.

This photo was taken when I visited with Curator Richard Doty specifically to evaluate the NNC's proofs. I was on assignment from NGC along with then-NGC grader Jeff Isaac. In the photo I'm holding one of the two gold impressions of the 1877 half union patterns. These coins had been sold to prominent collector William Woodin around 1909, which caused a scandal that saw the U. S. Mint demanding their return. A deal was struck to trade several boxes of other patterns held by the Mint for the return of the unique half union pieces. The coin closest to me on the round pad is the 1849 double eagle, which I'd examined moments before.

[Conder101]

I have seen the 49 DE (displayed at the ANA show in Chicago) I don't remember a harsh cleaning but it does have a fairly bad scratch on the obv.

[RWB]

Here's a little data teaser relating to some of the later pattern pieces. Notice that many patters of 1879 did not show up in the Mint Cabinet of Coins until several years later. And -- there are some nickels in various metals dated 1866. Were these restruck by Superintendent Snowden for trading stock?

Edited April 29, 2021 by RWB