In 1932, did the public think the SLQ was ugly?

DHeath

I have read many times that the 1932 Washington commemorative was reintroduced in 1934 by popular demand. Can one assume from that statement that in 1932, the public thought the Washington design was better looking than the SLQ? It apparently became a popular theme, with roots in the Lincoln cent.

coinkat

There were issues associated with the SLQ in 1916 which lead to a design modification the following year. I have not read anything to suggest that the SLQ was unpopular or considered ugly by the public. The celebration associated with the 200th anniversary of Washington's birth was a big event in 1932 and the quarter design was continued. I always thought it was considered to be the perminent replacement for the SLQ (unfortunately...)

LanLord

With all due respect to Geo. Washington, dam that john flannigan! I don't know if the SLQ was considered ugly, but what a heck of a mistake to ever consider replacing it. The only thing that could have been worse would be to see it in a clad design.

Russ

I have a hunch that in 1932 people had more important things on their mind than the designs of coins.

Russ, NCNE

oreville

Keep in mind that the nickel was still the buffalo/indian, dime was a mercury dime, half was the walker, dollar was the Peace dollar, and gold was still gorgeous in 1932.

With that in mind, a second President on our coin was probably greeted warmly since most of our coins were still gorgeous. In fact, I remember reading that the public did not like the way the SLQ coins wore so quickly. I believe that the public found Washington to be a refreshing change and clamored for more and got Jefferson in 1938, etc.

Then too much of a good thing became the downfall of the variety and artistic beauty of our coinage .