Earlier this year, PCGS started certifying 1815 and 1825 “E” and “L” Capped Bust Quarters with numerical grades noting the counterstamp.
PCGS should also consider certifying nineteenth century gold coins counterstamped "L" as these were stamped by the nine Subtreasuries as part of the process for redemption of lightweight gold coins. This was reported in the February 1909 Numismatist and other sources.
"The redemption clerk first takes it and gives a receipt for the amount the bag is said to contain. Then it is counted. All the light pieces are thrown to one side and so stamped across their face. The counterfeits are cut in halves; and, in fact, all pieces which are not fit to again place in circulation are deducted from the original sum brought here." (1890 quote by redemption clerk).
The process for gold coinage redemption and recoinage of subsidiary silver was not consistent, and some of the Subtreasuries such as New York were stamping gold coins for years prior to 1886. Coins equivalent or in excess of weight were sorted separately. The placement and font size varied with the Subtreasury. Yesterday I went to a regional National Archive branch to search microfilm of subtreasury records (and other projects), the reels that I wanted were not in place and they will have to be loaned. The original Subtreasury records are in Maryland, which I plan to visit.
The CHG is from my collection:
Robert Scot: Engraving Liberty - biography of US Mint's first chief engraver
@spacehayduke said:
Something to keep in mind as to who had access and could afford to have these quarters used as tokens if indeed that is what they were. Let's take the year 1828 as the year that a 'School' for example used say 100 quarters as counterstamped tokens to give away to students.
"In other words, $100 in 1828 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $2,707.45 in 2020, a difference of $2,607.45 over 192 years".
So 100 quarters is $25. That purchasing power in current dollars would be $676, or $6.76 each. That is simply based on inflation.
Maybe somehow the quarters were saved as uncirculated and stamped just before they were first noticed in the 1880's, say in 1878.
"In other words, $100 in 1878 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $2,572.08 in 2020, a difference of $2,472.08 over 142 years."
No too different..........
Looking at the value of money:
1825
-Ten pounds of sugar cost $0.20 (1822)
-One acre in a tract of land of over 400 acres cost $2.00 (Sumter, SC, 1823)
-One bushel (35.2 liters) of potatoes cost $0.12 (1829)
-One set of blue china cost $8.00 (1828)
-One cow cost $12.00 (1829)
-One Pound of Coffee Cost $0.17
1875
-A necktie “designed to supersede all other methods for fastening the bow to a turndown collar” cost $0.10
-A dozen pairs of Levi Strauss blue jeans cost $13.50 (1874)
-One pair of shoes cost $0.98 (1875)
-One suit cost $10.00 (1875)
-One opera ticket for “The Marriage of Figaro” cost $1 (San Fransisco, 1875)
-One pound of Coffee cost $0.25
So during those times, a quarter would have been alot of money. Who would have access to these quarters to use in a frivolous way as a token for voting, or as rewards at a school, or? I think this consideration removes alot of the hypotheses. If not mint produced, it would seem that perhaps the Economite hypothesis is best supported when considering the value of the token used - they had a large hoard and hence using the quarters in this way would not have been a big deal.
So a school would shell out that kind of money as freebies to their students? No public school today would have that kind of money, I am pretty sure they would not have in 1828 or 1878.
Best, SH
@spacehayduke said:
Something to keep in mind as to who had access and could afford to have these quarters used as tokens if indeed that is what they were. Let's take the year 1828 as the year that a 'School' for example used say 100 quarters as counterstamped tokens to give away to students.
"In other words, $100 in 1828 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $2,707.45 in 2020, a difference of $2,607.45 over 192 years".
So 100 quarters is $25. That purchasing power in current dollars would be $676, or $6.76 each. That is simply based on inflation.
Maybe somehow the quarters were saved as uncirculated and stamped just before they were first noticed in the 1880's, say in 1878.
"In other words, $100 in 1878 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $2,572.08 in 2020, a difference of $2,472.08 over 142 years."
No too different..........
Looking at the value of money:
1825
-Ten pounds of sugar cost $0.20 (1822)
-One acre in a tract of land of over 400 acres cost $2.00 (Sumter, SC, 1823)
-One bushel (35.2 liters) of potatoes cost $0.12 (1829)
-One set of blue china cost $8.00 (1828)
-One cow cost $12.00 (1829)
-One Pound of Coffee Cost $0.17
1875
-A necktie “designed to supersede all other methods for fastening the bow to a turndown collar” cost $0.10
-A dozen pairs of Levi Strauss blue jeans cost $13.50 (1874)
-One pair of shoes cost $0.98 (1875)
-One suit cost $10.00 (1875)
-One opera ticket for “The Marriage of Figaro” cost $1 (San Fransisco, 1875)
-One pound of Coffee cost $0.25
So during those times, a quarter would have been alot of money. Who would have access to these quarters to use in a frivolous way as a token for voting, or as rewards at a school, or? I think this consideration removes alot of the hypotheses. If not mint produced, it would seem that perhaps the Economite hypothesis is best supported when considering the value of the token used - they had a large hoard and hence using the quarters in this way would not have been a big deal.
So a school would shell out that kind of money as freebies to their students? No public school today would have that kind of money, I am pretty sure they would not have in 1828 or 1878.
Best, SH
Unfortunately SH is not taking into consideration that school awards were usually
privately funded in the 19th century and this may well be true even today in certain
circumstances. A counter-stamped quarter would have had special meaning to a
young scholar and was meant to be kept by the recipient as a memento. The
Economite theory fails the common-sense test as it would have been pointless to
use coins when pieces of paper could have readily been used; in addition it would
have been equally pointless to do this on two separate occasions (1815 and 1825)
if the 1815 pieces were still on hand.
@spacehayduke said:
Something to keep in mind as to who had access and could afford to have these quarters used as tokens if indeed that is what they were. Let's take the year 1828 as the year that a 'School' for example used say 100 quarters as counterstamped tokens to give away to students.
"In other words, $100 in 1828 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $2,707.45 in 2020, a difference of $2,607.45 over 192 years".
So 100 quarters is $25. That purchasing power in current dollars would be $676, or $6.76 each. That is simply based on inflation.
Maybe somehow the quarters were saved as uncirculated and stamped just before they were first noticed in the 1880's, say in 1878.
"In other words, $100 in 1878 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $2,572.08 in 2020, a difference of $2,472.08 over 142 years."
No too different..........
Looking at the value of money:
1825
-Ten pounds of sugar cost $0.20 (1822)
-One acre in a tract of land of over 400 acres cost $2.00 (Sumter, SC, 1823)
-One bushel (35.2 liters) of potatoes cost $0.12 (1829)
-One set of blue china cost $8.00 (1828)
-One cow cost $12.00 (1829)
-One Pound of Coffee Cost $0.17
1875
-A necktie “designed to supersede all other methods for fastening the bow to a turndown collar” cost $0.10
-A dozen pairs of Levi Strauss blue jeans cost $13.50 (1874)
-One pair of shoes cost $0.98 (1875)
-One suit cost $10.00 (1875)
-One opera ticket for “The Marriage of Figaro” cost $1 (San Fransisco, 1875)
-One pound of Coffee cost $0.25
So during those times, a quarter would have been alot of money. Who would have access to these quarters to use in a frivolous way as a token for voting, or as rewards at a school, or? I think this consideration removes alot of the hypotheses. If not mint produced, it would seem that perhaps the Economite hypothesis is best supported when considering the value of the token used - they had a large hoard and hence using the quarters in this way would not have been a big deal.
So a school would shell out that kind of money as freebies to their students? No public school today would have that kind of money, I am pretty sure they would not have in 1828 or 1878.
Best, SH
@spacehayduke said:
Something to keep in mind as to who had access and could afford to have these quarters used as tokens if indeed that is what they were. Let's take the year 1828 as the year that a 'School' for example used say 100 quarters as counterstamped tokens to give away to students.
"In other words, $100 in 1828 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $2,707.45 in 2020, a difference of $2,607.45 over 192 years".
So 100 quarters is $25. That purchasing power in current dollars would be $676, or $6.76 each. That is simply based on inflation.
Maybe somehow the quarters were saved as uncirculated and stamped just before they were first noticed in the 1880's, say in 1878.
"In other words, $100 in 1878 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $2,572.08 in 2020, a difference of $2,472.08 over 142 years."
No too different..........
Looking at the value of money:
1825
-Ten pounds of sugar cost $0.20 (1822)
-One acre in a tract of land of over 400 acres cost $2.00 (Sumter, SC, 1823)
-One bushel (35.2 liters) of potatoes cost $0.12 (1829)
-One set of blue china cost $8.00 (1828)
-One cow cost $12.00 (1829)
-One Pound of Coffee Cost $0.17
1875
-A necktie “designed to supersede all other methods for fastening the bow to a turndown collar” cost $0.10
-A dozen pairs of Levi Strauss blue jeans cost $13.50 (1874)
-One pair of shoes cost $0.98 (1875)
-One suit cost $10.00 (1875)
-One opera ticket for “The Marriage of Figaro” cost $1 (San Fransisco, 1875)
-One pound of Coffee cost $0.25
So during those times, a quarter would have been alot of money. Who would have access to these quarters to use in a frivolous way as a token for voting, or as rewards at a school, or? I think this consideration removes alot of the hypotheses. If not mint produced, it would seem that perhaps the Economite hypothesis is best supported when considering the value of the token used - they had a large hoard and hence using the quarters in this way would not have been a big deal.
So a school would shell out that kind of money as freebies to their students? No public school today would have that kind of money, I am pretty sure they would not have in 1828 or 1878.
Best, SH
Unfortunately SH is not taking into consideration that school awards were usually
privately funded in the 19th century and this may well be true even today in certain
circumstances. A counter-stamped quarter would have had special meaning to a
young scholar and was meant to be kept by the recipient as a memento. The
Economite theory fails the common-sense test as it would have been pointless to
use coins when pieces of paper could have readily been used; in addition it would
have been equally pointless to do this on two separate occasions (1815 and 1825)
if the 1815 pieces were still on hand.
Comments
@PCGS_SocialMedia stated:
PCGS should also consider certifying nineteenth century gold coins counterstamped "L" as these were stamped by the nine Subtreasuries as part of the process for redemption of lightweight gold coins. This was reported in the February 1909 Numismatist and other sources.
"The redemption clerk first takes it and gives a receipt for the amount the bag is said to contain. Then it is counted. All the light pieces are thrown to one side and so stamped across their face. The counterfeits are cut in halves; and, in fact, all pieces which are not fit to again place in circulation are deducted from the original sum brought here." (1890 quote by redemption clerk).
The process for gold coinage redemption and recoinage of subsidiary silver was not consistent, and some of the Subtreasuries such as New York were stamping gold coins for years prior to 1886. Coins equivalent or in excess of weight were sorted separately. The placement and font size varied with the Subtreasury. Yesterday I went to a regional National Archive branch to search microfilm of subtreasury records (and other projects), the reels that I wanted were not in place and they will have to be loaned. The original Subtreasury records are in Maryland, which I plan to visit.
The CHG is from my collection:
Unfortunately SH is not taking into consideration that school awards were usually
privately funded in the 19th century and this may well be true even today in certain
circumstances. A counter-stamped quarter would have had special meaning to a
young scholar and was meant to be kept by the recipient as a memento. The
Economite theory fails the common-sense test as it would have been pointless to
use coins when pieces of paper could have readily been used; in addition it would
have been equally pointless to do this on two separate occasions (1815 and 1825)
if the 1815 pieces were still on hand.
Actually the dude that did these is getting a kick outta watching you guys go back and forth over this!