@IkesT said:
Breaking Mint rules didn't necessarily mean breaking the law. Although the rule requiring old obverse dies to be destroyed had been in place since 1866 (under Director James Pollock), it wasn't written into law until it was included in the Coinage Act of 1873.
Yup. And restrikes were still regularly appearing in 1874 and on.
@tradedollarnut said:
40 years of medal press technology improvement?
When the mint fully switched to the new Thonnelier-type "steam" presses in 1839, records show the mint's two most powerful screw presses, the Howell and Rush-Muhlenberg presses, were moved to the medal dept. and the die room. These two presses had been used for decades to strike medals and proofs and hub dies. The continued to be used for those purposes into the 20th century when they were eventually replaced by hydraulic presses. In fact, the pic of the Die Room in the 1902 mint report shows one of the presses, probably the RM press given the design.
The new stem presses were not used to strike proofs and patterns since they could not make a single-strike. Thus, all of the proofs, patterns, and the restrikes were produced on the screw presses.
Yes, we have the S.K. Harzfeld statement which is actually a statement given him by A. Loudon Snowden.
There is only one "Class of Classes," as you put it. Die stating and the obv to rev die alignment shows that the known Class II and III pieces were all struck at the same time.
It is unlikely the Hill machine was used. The .obv is the orig 1804. The revs may have been sunk from existing punches at the time the pieces were made.
NO, I do not think the Paris Exposition had any relevance. The motive was solely profit.
Thank you. Forgive the stream of consciousness like flow of the following:
How are you able to rule out Hill's machine given its capabilities? That device was noted to be capable of turning specimen indistinguishable even to the original engraver. It was capable of making a perfect copy of the obv---and any reverse, Think a date antedating the machine's arrival at the Mint would be needed for striking of all the Class II & IIIs to definitely rule its use out. And some compelling direct evidence for that date and number struck. Whether it did, or did not, the machine gave the Mint the capability to continue to strike indistinguishable copies, even if prior year dies were destroyed. Of pretty much anything. At pretty much any date following the machine's arrival in 1867. Not sure how you can prove no (additional) re-strikes were made after its arrival, but you do sound confident you will, so will wait !
Random aside---seems a bit serendipitous a number of Class IIIs were noted in Europe, from which Hill's machine originated (and for which the Mint opted not to buy the patent for)....
Legend says Class IIs were first struck in 1858. If as you theorize, Class IIIs were as well, what explains the 20 year gap between striking, and their sudden appearance en mass around 1878? The examples confiscated in 1868, were they in the Mint Cabinet up until that time--or in other hands--or pockets? Exactly how many ClassII/IIIs were struck in the single run? Why include a Thaler--test strike of sorts, or last one for the heck of it....
Is the the outstanding strike of the newly surfaced example touched upon in your upcoming piece? Looks far superior to others to my unqualified grading eyes.
You stated you will be publishing some definitive information, the support for which is to be disclosed on publishing. Understandable, but that makes it a bit difficult for the community in the meanwhile to test/ evaluate the weight of the evidence upon which you will rely for so definitive a statement. I truly hope you solve this mystery, and look forward to reading your work.
BTW, respectfully disagree about the cutoff date for a bona fide Mint issue --which is probably controlled by the Circular(s), and other existing regulations/laws.. Low's scheduled 1887 estate sale of Lindderman's coin holdings was enjoined by a federal court And that his wife was only able to get his Class III freed up with a story that Linderman actually purchased his from "a dealer on time," rather than getting it from the Mint itself? (catalogue attached as a pdf). That is, um, certainly an unusual story ...
Deeper I look, more murkie the waters get.... Secret Service was involved---but its records are a slow go.... one agent was killed during an investigation of what turned out to be a fake 1804.....
Above are just some outstanding--very rambling questions-- I myself have about the Class IIIs. Please do not take them as some sort of list of questions your are in any way obliged to answer.
@JCH22 said:
How are you able to rule out Hill's machine given its capabilities?
Legend says Class IIs were first struck in 1858. If as you theorize, Class IIIs were as well, what explains the 20 year gap between striking, and their sudden appearance en mass around 1878? The examples confiscated in 1868, were they in the Mint Cabinet up until that time--or in other hands--or pockets? Exactly how many ClassII/IIIs were struck in the single run? Why include a Thaler--test strike of sorts, or last one for the heck of it....
BTW, respectfully disagree about the cutoff date for a bona fide Mint issue --which is probably controlled by the Circular(s), and other existing regulations/laws..
As far as excluding Hill's engraving Machine, Reverse Y was used for both the Class II and Class III dollars. The Class II dollars appeared circa 1859 to 1860 and were confiscated by the mint by 1861. The Class III dollars first appeared in `1864. Thus, both appeared prior to the arrival of the Hill machine.
Further, the Hill machine was not used to reproduce full dies. Rather, it was used to produce the central device with peripheral devices such as letters, numerals, stars, etc. being added by hand to the master dies. Further, none of the reducing machines, including the improved Janvier, produced a "read-to-use die." It still had to be hand-touched by the engraver where necessary and then lapped to remove metal pushed up by machining and set the final basin. Those are two of the key ways die specialists are able to identify new master dies and new working dies.
One should be careful reading period statements by mint officials which often tend to be quite hyperbolic. Politics was the same back then as now and officials routinely made utterly lofty statements about the great improvements they introduced.
In this vein, the 1867 circular you cited is by none other than Henry Linderman, the most prolific restriker the mint has ever seen. The number of "cabinet coins" he had struck and that he sold via various agents is legendary. For example, Judd-80 and 81 using an 1838 obv and a reverse that did not exist until the 1860s. The first one appeared at auction in 1875. Pattern and Seated researchers, including Andrew Pollack, attribute these strikes to dies made from pattern hubs discovered by A. Loudon Snowden and noted in his letter published in the January 1872 issue of Mason’s Monthly Coin Collectors Magazine.
Then we have pattern 1863 one-cent pieces, Judd-301 through 304, struck in bronze, copper-nickel, oroide, and aluminum using a reverse that did not exist until 1871. We also have have several 1864 pattern half dollars, Judd-396 (silver) and Judd-397 (copper) which use a “With Motto” reverse that was first used on 1871 proofs and patterns. Additionally, there is at least one 1864 “No Motto” pattern restrike, Judd-395, with the obverse fields bulging as on the latest 396 and 397 strikes, so that too was struck sometime circa 1871 or 1872.
Finally, we have the 1887 mint report by then Director James Kimball. Beginning on page 180, Kimball cites numerous examples of post-1867 and 1873 restrikes including an illegally produced encased set of 1868 of regular issue coins in aluminum had “passed into other hands.” Those “hands” obviously belonged to Henry Linderman since the set was listed in Lyman Lowe’s 1887 sale catalog of his collection. It was subsequently seized with other aluminum and off-metal pieces.
Kimball's report also specifically cited three lists, one compiled by the curator of the Mint Cabinet, another by Robert Coulton Davis, Curator of Numismatics for the Numismatic and Antiquarian Society of Philadelphia, with the third being an unnamed “printed list of another collection.” Kimball went onto state that the lists showed numerous examples of off-metal strikes from both pattern and regular issue dies, mules, and other “whim pieces” that did not exist in the Mint Cabinet. He specifically stated that one of the lists showed 57 different pieces dated 1873 through 1885 and that the third list contained 78 different off-metal strikes dated 1873 through 1885.
Simply put, criminals do not pay attention to laws or rules or regulations, even ones they write themselves as a smoke screen for their own illicit activates. That's why they are criminals. They break the law.
As an aside, Henry Linderman was under investigation for several improprieties while he was in office including a pump-and-dump stock swindle which included placing false statements in an official mint report, kickbacks, paying relatives to perform mint work that could have been done by employees, and manipulating and misreporting official accounts to cover up excess expenditures and excess bullion wastage at some mints. He died before formal charges could be brought.
His partner in crime, A. Loudon Snowden was also under investigation for misuse of funds, etc., but he left office and took off for Europe before he could be indicted.
Comments
Yup. And restrikes were still regularly appearing in 1874 and on.
When the mint fully switched to the new Thonnelier-type "steam" presses in 1839, records show the mint's two most powerful screw presses, the Howell and Rush-Muhlenberg presses, were moved to the medal dept. and the die room. These two presses had been used for decades to strike medals and proofs and hub dies. The continued to be used for those purposes into the 20th century when they were eventually replaced by hydraulic presses. In fact, the pic of the Die Room in the 1902 mint report shows one of the presses, probably the RM press given the design.
The new stem presses were not used to strike proofs and patterns since they could not make a single-strike. Thus, all of the proofs, patterns, and the restrikes were produced on the screw presses.
Thank you. Forgive the stream of consciousness like flow of the following:
How are you able to rule out Hill's machine given its capabilities? That device was noted to be capable of turning specimen indistinguishable even to the original engraver. It was capable of making a perfect copy of the obv---and any reverse, Think a date antedating the machine's arrival at the Mint would be needed for striking of all the Class II & IIIs to definitely rule its use out. And some compelling direct evidence for that date and number struck. Whether it did, or did not, the machine gave the Mint the capability to continue to strike indistinguishable copies, even if prior year dies were destroyed. Of pretty much anything. At pretty much any date following the machine's arrival in 1867. Not sure how you can prove no (additional) re-strikes were made after its arrival, but you do sound confident you will, so will wait !
Random aside---seems a bit serendipitous a number of Class IIIs were noted in Europe, from which Hill's machine originated (and for which the Mint opted not to buy the patent for)....
Legend says Class IIs were first struck in 1858. If as you theorize, Class IIIs were as well, what explains the 20 year gap between striking, and their sudden appearance en mass around 1878? The examples confiscated in 1868, were they in the Mint Cabinet up until that time--or in other hands--or pockets? Exactly how many ClassII/IIIs were struck in the single run? Why include a Thaler--test strike of sorts, or last one for the heck of it....
Is the the outstanding strike of the newly surfaced example touched upon in your upcoming piece? Looks far superior to others to my unqualified grading eyes.
You stated you will be publishing some definitive information, the support for which is to be disclosed on publishing. Understandable, but that makes it a bit difficult for the community in the meanwhile to test/ evaluate the weight of the evidence upon which you will rely for so definitive a statement. I truly hope you solve this mystery, and look forward to reading your work.
BTW, respectfully disagree about the cutoff date for a bona fide Mint issue --which is probably controlled by the Circular(s), and other existing regulations/laws.. Low's scheduled 1887 estate sale of Lindderman's coin holdings was enjoined by a federal court And that his wife was only able to get his Class III freed up with a story that Linderman actually purchased his from "a dealer on time," rather than getting it from the Mint itself? (catalogue attached as a pdf). That is, um, certainly an unusual story ...
Deeper I look, more murkie the waters get.... Secret Service was involved---but its records are a slow go.... one agent was killed during an investigation of what turned out to be a fake 1804.....
Above are just some outstanding--very rambling questions-- I myself have about the Class IIIs. Please do not take them as some sort of list of questions your are in any way obliged to answer.
As far as excluding Hill's engraving Machine, Reverse Y was used for both the Class II and Class III dollars. The Class II dollars appeared circa 1859 to 1860 and were confiscated by the mint by 1861. The Class III dollars first appeared in `1864. Thus, both appeared prior to the arrival of the Hill machine.
Further, the Hill machine was not used to reproduce full dies. Rather, it was used to produce the central device with peripheral devices such as letters, numerals, stars, etc. being added by hand to the master dies. Further, none of the reducing machines, including the improved Janvier, produced a "read-to-use die." It still had to be hand-touched by the engraver where necessary and then lapped to remove metal pushed up by machining and set the final basin. Those are two of the key ways die specialists are able to identify new master dies and new working dies.
One should be careful reading period statements by mint officials which often tend to be quite hyperbolic. Politics was the same back then as now and officials routinely made utterly lofty statements about the great improvements they introduced.
In this vein, the 1867 circular you cited is by none other than Henry Linderman, the most prolific restriker the mint has ever seen. The number of "cabinet coins" he had struck and that he sold via various agents is legendary. For example, Judd-80 and 81 using an 1838 obv and a reverse that did not exist until the 1860s. The first one appeared at auction in 1875. Pattern and Seated researchers, including Andrew Pollack, attribute these strikes to dies made from pattern hubs discovered by A. Loudon Snowden and noted in his letter published in the January 1872 issue of Mason’s Monthly Coin Collectors Magazine.
Then we have pattern 1863 one-cent pieces, Judd-301 through 304, struck in bronze, copper-nickel, oroide, and aluminum using a reverse that did not exist until 1871. We also have have several 1864 pattern half dollars, Judd-396 (silver) and Judd-397 (copper) which use a “With Motto” reverse that was first used on 1871 proofs and patterns. Additionally, there is at least one 1864 “No Motto” pattern restrike, Judd-395, with the obverse fields bulging as on the latest 396 and 397 strikes, so that too was struck sometime circa 1871 or 1872.
Finally, we have the 1887 mint report by then Director James Kimball. Beginning on page 180, Kimball cites numerous examples of post-1867 and 1873 restrikes including an illegally produced encased set of 1868 of regular issue coins in aluminum had “passed into other hands.” Those “hands” obviously belonged to Henry Linderman since the set was listed in Lyman Lowe’s 1887 sale catalog of his collection. It was subsequently seized with other aluminum and off-metal pieces.
Kimball's report also specifically cited three lists, one compiled by the curator of the Mint Cabinet, another by Robert Coulton Davis, Curator of Numismatics for the Numismatic and Antiquarian Society of Philadelphia, with the third being an unnamed “printed list of another collection.” Kimball went onto state that the lists showed numerous examples of off-metal strikes from both pattern and regular issue dies, mules, and other “whim pieces” that did not exist in the Mint Cabinet. He specifically stated that one of the lists showed 57 different pieces dated 1873 through 1885 and that the third list contained 78 different off-metal strikes dated 1873 through 1885.
Simply put, criminals do not pay attention to laws or rules or regulations, even ones they write themselves as a smoke screen for their own illicit activates. That's why they are criminals. They break the law.
As an aside, Henry Linderman was under investigation for several improprieties while he was in office including a pump-and-dump stock swindle which included placing false statements in an official mint report, kickbacks, paying relatives to perform mint work that could have been done by employees, and manipulating and misreporting official accounts to cover up excess expenditures and excess bullion wastage at some mints. He died before formal charges could be brought.
His partner in crime, A. Loudon Snowden was also under investigation for misuse of funds, etc., but he left office and took off for Europe before he could be indicted.
Those guys were gems.