An Analysis of San Francisco Liberty Seated Quarters

Manifest_Destiny

There are 24 issues of San Francisco Liberty Seated quarters plus two major varieties. They were first minted in 1855 which was the second year of operation at the San Francisco mint, and then minted continuously until 1878, except 1863 and 1870, and then again in 1888 and 1891.

23,999,300 total were minted over the 24 issues, with 1876 and 1877 accounting for more than 17 million of those. If you add in the mintages for 1888 and 1891, those four years account for over 21 million of the nearly 24 million minted.

Ranking them by mintage, they would be in the following order:

1864 - 20,000
1866 - 28,000
1871 - 30,900
1865 - 41,000
1867 - 48,000
1860 - 56,000
1862 - 67,000
1869 - 76,000
1859 - 80,000
1857 - 82,000
1872 - 83,000
1861 - 96,000
1868 - 96,000
1858 - 121,000
1878 - 140,000
1873 - 156,000
1856 - 286,000
1874 - 392,000
1855 - 396,400
1875 - 680,000
1888 - 1,216,000
1891 - 2,216,000
1876 - 8,596,000
1877 - 8,996,000

Looking at PCGS and NGC pop reports gives us the overall rarity of surviving examples relative to each other. PCGS plus NGC numbers are the total and then each is listed individually in parenthesis. The two major varieties, 1856-S/s and 1877-s/s, are included in the populations for the respective year. The second set of parenthesis is the overall rank, PCGS rank, and NGC rank.

PCGS has graded a total of 4705 San Francisco quarters and NGC has graded 2370.

1872 - 90 (P63, N27) (1-1-2)
1867 - 115 (P93, N22) (2-3-1)
1871 - 117 (P82, N35) (3-2-5)
1866 - 144 (P111, N33) (4-5-4)
1878 - 146 (P98, N48) (5-4-11)
1860 - 148 (P118, N30) (6-6-3)
1859 - 173 (P136, N37) (7-11-6)
1864 - 173 (P125, N48) (8-7-9)
1865 - 173 (P128, N45) (9-8-7)
1855 - 182 (P136, N46) (10-10-8)
1857 - 182 (P133, N49) (11-9-12)
1869 - 192 (P144, N48) (12-15-10)
1868 - 195 (P139, N56) (13-12-15)
1858 - 207 (P144, N63) (14-14-17)
1861 - 213 (P157, N56) (15-16-14)
1873 - 213 (P140, N73) (16-13-18)
1856 - 216 (P166, N50) (17-17-13)
1862 - 225 (P168, N57) (18-18-16)
1875 - 296 (P177, N119) (19-19-19)
1888 - 415 (P251, N164) (20-20-20)
1874 - 493 (P326, N167) (21-21-21)
1891 - 561 (P332, N229) (22-22-22)
1876 - 948 (P570, N378) (23-23-23)
1877 - 1258 (P768, N490) (24-24-24)

My subsequent posts will focus on individual dates and more specific analysis. Feel free to post anything related to San Francisco seated quarters.

The_Dinosaur_Man

I like this post, excellent analysis and write up.

Namvet69

Interesting study and statistics. Thanks for sharing. Looking forward to more.

jfriedm56

While not in my mainstream of collecting, found your post interesting and informative. My one example in my type set.

fastfreddie

What's your though as to why there were no mintages for 1863 and 1870 when there was such demand for western coinage.

fastfreddie

p35

Manifest_Destiny

One thing that stood out to me was the 1867-s ranking. I own 2 and there are 11 listed on ebay right now, 6 raw and only one straight graded. Numbers like that don't exist for issues like the 64-s and 66-s. There's no way the 67-s is the second rarest SF seated quarter overall.

Manifest_Destiny

@fastfreddie said:
What's your though as to why there were no mintages for 1863 and 1870 when there was such demand for western coinage.

1870 was a strange year at San Francisco with several rarities and unreported mintages. That one is hard to explain.

Overall though, quarter mintages are generally low at all mints for any issues before 1875, with some exceptions of course. Of all the circulating silver denominations, quarters are consistently the scarcest and the seated quarter set is often called the hardest silver set to put together.

Why though? I think the fact that 2 reales coins were plentiful and legal tender until 1857 has something to do with it. The quarter is an odd denomination for a decimal system, which should contain a 20c piece instead, and is a direct substitute for a 2 reales. The quarter is still known as "two bits" which is a direct reference to the 2 reales piece.

Were 2 reales coins still a factor out west in the 1860's and 70's? I'm not sure how many were still around but they probably weren't a huge factor by then.

All that to say, I'm not sure why western quarter mintages weren't larger than they were but it's a good question and maybe others with more knowledge can add to the discussion.

Copperindian

Thanks for the interesting writeup/analysis. This is not a series I’ve done much with, but am looking into doing so.

lermish

WCC

@Manifest_Destiny said:
One thing that stood out to me was the 1867-s ranking. I own 2 and there are 11 listed on ebay right now, 6 raw and only one straight graded. Numbers like that don't exist for issues like the 64-s and 66-s. There's no way the 67-s is the second rarest SF seated quarter overall.

Have you seen this consistently? I agree this observation supports your point, but it could be partly coincidence.

On a more general note, I'm very interested in this topic too, because I use equivalent Liberty Seated denominations as the baseline for availability of my primary series, Spanish colonial pillar coinage. No not exact, but as a US series, I think it's the best comparison available. For LS quarters, i compare it to the 2R which had about the same FV.

Manifest_Destiny

@WCC said:

@Manifest_Destiny said:
One thing that stood out to me was the 1867-s ranking. I own 2 and there are 11 listed on ebay right now, 6 raw and only one straight graded. Numbers like that don't exist for issues like the 64-s and 66-s. There's no way the 67-s is the second rarest SF seated quarter overall.

Have you seen this consistently? I agree this observation supports your point, but it could be partly coincidence.

On a more general note, I'm very interested in this topic too, because I use equivalent Liberty Seated denominations as the baseline for availability of my primary series, Spanish colonial pillar coinage. No not exact, but as a US series, I think it's the best comparison available. For LS quarters, i compare it to the 2R which had about the same FV.

I search around a dozen on line sites almost daily and see hundreds of coins each week, and have done so consistently for the past couple of years. The 67-s shows up far more than the pop reports would indicate, although most are problem coins and wouldn't straight grade. Even at that, it seems like any 67-s would be worth grading. The 64-s and 66-s are almost never seen at all, raw or certified.

I think the 60-s is overrated too, and the 71-s is underrated in my opinion.

WCC

@Manifest_Destiny said:

@WCC said:

@Manifest_Destiny said:
One thing that stood out to me was the 1867-s ranking. I own 2 and there are 11 listed on ebay right now, 6 raw and only one straight graded. Numbers like that don't exist for issues like the 64-s and 66-s. There's no way the 67-s is the second rarest SF seated quarter overall.

Have you seen this consistently? I agree this observation supports your point, but it could be partly coincidence.

On a more general note, I'm very interested in this topic too, because I use equivalent Liberty Seated denominations as the baseline for availability of my primary series, Spanish colonial pillar coinage. No not exact, but as a US series, I think it's the best comparison available. For LS quarters, i compare it to the 2R which had about the same FV.

I search around a dozen on line sites almost daily and see hundreds of coins each week, and have done so consistently for the past couple of years. The 67-s shows up far more than the pop reports would indicate, although most are problem coins and wouldn't straight grade. Even at that, it seems like any 67-s would be worth grading. The 64-s and 66-s are almost never seen at all, raw or certified.

I think the 60-s is overrated too, and the 71-s is underrated in my opinion.

Makes sense

I've looked at Coin Facts and the TPG data for this series multiple times, but never compiled the data.
Looked occasionally on Heritage, Collectors Corner, and eBay too.

Have you performed the same review for higher grade coinage, AU or MS? There are or can be large variations in relative scarcity between lower and higher grades.

In the mint I buy most often for all pillar denominations (Lima, Peru), the Charles III dates (1760-1772) are much scarcer or at least much harder to buy versus Ferdinand VI (1752-1760). it's not correlated to the mintage, so I don't know the cause behind it.

There is also a noticeable variation on occasion between lower and higher grades. The 1761 and 1771 have five (or six) and seven in an MS grade (with likely no duplicates) which is very unusual for a coin of this type. Yes, not a US series but don't want to derail your thread.

Just commenting on the scarcity difference by quality, as it depends upon where in the distribution someone is trying to collect.

Walkerguy21D

Excellent analysis and information; this is the kind of post I love this forum for!

As a fairly high mintage and last year of issue, I’m surprised the pops aren’t even higher than they are. I guess a lot of them reside in albums like mine, mint mark side intentionally shown first:

Crepidodera

@Manifest_Destiny said:
One thing that stood out to me was the 1867-s ranking. I own 2 and there are 11 listed on ebay right now, 6 raw and only one straight graded. Numbers like that don't exist for issues like the 64-s and 66-s. There's no way the 67-s is the second rarest SF seated quarter overall.

Great topic Don!

As I stated in an earlier thread, I believe the 1867-S quarter was hoarded in the 80's and 90's, and those
coins have been coming up for sale the last 15 or 20 years. Back in the 90's I never saw a decent 1867-S
for sale.

Here are my current rarity rankings for S mint liberty seated quarters:
1. 1872
2. 1864
3. 1871
4. 1866
5. 1860
6. 1867
7. 1878
8. 1859
9. 1865
10. 1861
11. 1855
12. 1858
13. 1856
14. 1857
15. 1869
16. 1862
17. 1868
18. 1873
19. 1875
20. 1874
21. 1888
22. 1891
23. 1876
24. 1877

291fifth

I wonder how many hoards of unslabbed examples exist? Does anyone know of any?

WCC

@291fifth said:
I wonder how many hoards of unslabbed examples exist? Does anyone know of any?

One long-time collector on another forum claims he recently bought five UNC of some LS date (recall as a quarter but could be a half) with zero currently graded as MS. I don't know his actual name, but he is known to others. He lives in the NE where there seems to be a higher proportion of active affluent collectors. He didn't provide any specifics.

CaptainBlunt

1861-S Seated Quarter
mintage 96,000
Coins delivered from the SFBM Coiner
Aug 3rd 20,000
Oct 16th 28,000
Dec 28th 28,000
this total is 76,000 or 20,000 short

1862-S Seated Quarter
mintage 67,000
Coins delivered from the SFBM Coiner
Jan 13th 1862 20,000
May 28th 12,000
May 31st 12,000
July 15th 12,000
August 9th 4,000
Sept 9th 20,000
Nov 20th 7,000
total 87,000 or 20,000 too many

So I suppose the 20,000 coins delivered from the Coiner to the Treasurer on Jan 13th 1862 bore the date of 1861?

Manifest_Destiny

@CaptainBlunt Awesome research info. Where did you get it? Do you have it for all the years?

Fugio1787

I know this is the most plentiful one out there but I got this cheap and I hope this is a natural one and not one made by someone hoping for a PO-1 when its graded FR-02

ARCO

Great write-up. This is the kind of numismatic goodies I love to read. The 1860-S of yours is just outstanding as is the 72-S.

I once owned an 1860-S in G6 or VG8 (I don't even remember) . it was quite lovely. I actually bought it unholdered then later sent it into PCGS.

CRHer700

@CaptainBlunt said:
1861-S Seated Quarter
mintage 96,000
Coins delivered from the SFBM Coiner
Aug 3rd 20,000
Oct 16th 28,000
Dec 28th 28,000
this total is 76,000 or 20,000 short

1862-S Seated Quarter
mintage 67,000
Coins delivered from the SFBM Coiner
Jan 13th 1862 20,000
May 28th 12,000
May 31st 12,000
July 15th 12,000
August 9th 4,000
Sept 9th 20,000
Nov 20th 7,000
total 87,000 or 20,000 too many

So I suppose the 20,000 coins delivered from the Coiner to the Treasurer on Jan 13th 1862 bore the date of 1861?

Also, in the 1862-S report that you posted, there were 12,000 coins minted from January 14th to May 28th. Then they made the same amount again in the next three days.

Manifest_Destiny

@ARCO said:
Great write-up. This is the kind of numismatic goodies I love to read. The 1860-S of yours is just outstanding as is the 72-S.

Thanks! I think the 60-s is overrated overall but it's definitely rare in higher grades. Mine is #4 in the condition census.

Manifest_Destiny

The 1858-s is in the middle of the pack in both original mintage (14th) and population (14th). But it's the first of four consecutive issues with either zero or only one mint state example known.

In this case, the 1858-s has one known in mint state (MS62). Both NGC and PCGS show an MS62 in their pop reports, but they represent the same coin which was originally graded by NGC, then crossed to PCGS.

That leaves AU58 coins in the number 2 slot of the condition census. PCGS shows two AU58's in their pop report and NGC shows 12. One of the NGC coins is the Eliasberg coin, and I have no doubt it was probably submitted multiple times in an effort to get an MS grade. There's no chance that there are 12 NGC AU58 coins.

I can only account for one other NGC AU58 and it was crossed to PCGS and represents one of the two PCGS AU58's.

Out of a reported population of 14 coins, only 3 can be accounted for and I would bet that only 3 exist. There are only 13 other coins in the remaining AU grades in both pop reports combined.

The 1858-s is definitely a condition rarity and a scarce coin no matter the grade.

CaptainBlunt

The information I provided was taken from the actual S.F.B.M.’s surviving record books. These particular records are scattered at best. In addition to the years 1861 and 1862, they have 1855, 1860, 1864, 1865 and 1866 through June. They are located at the Federal Archives-S.F. - San Bruno CA.

erwindoc

Are the seated liberty quarters a series that can be finished? I have never really paid very much attention to it other than one for my 7070. I think they look very good in VF and XF.

Crepidodera

@erwindoc said:
Are the seated liberty quarters a series that can be finished? I have never really paid very much attention to it other than one for my 7070. I think they look very good in VF and XF.

It's a difficult series that be completed with patience and a sizable bank account. If you include the 1873-CC no arrows as part of the set, that's a different matter, as only six are known.

Doug

erwindoc

Why did you focus on San Franciso mint marks and not any of the others?

Manifest_Destiny

@erwindoc said:
Why did you focus on San Franciso mint marks and not any of the others?

It's just a focused topic for this thread. I might do threads on other mints later.