1861 Clark Gruber $20 - Are they fakes?

MrEureka

There are some research projects that require larger libraries than most of us can possibly own. This is one of those projects. I'm convinced that we can find an answer if we work together with our combined libraries.

The question that needs to be solved is as follows: There are two varieties of 1861 Clark Gruber $20 gold pieces. The first has flat fields and non-PL surfaces. It looks like this:






The second variety has slightly concave surfaces and semi-PL surfaces. It looks like this:




Some people have argued that one of the two varieties is a semi-modern fabrication. Others strongly disagree. Here's what we need to do to solve the mystery:

Go through your auction catalogs and report auction records (Auction Company, Date of Sale, Lot #) for this coin, noting whether it is variety one (flat fields, non-PL) or variety two (concave fields, semi-PL). If you're not sure of the variety, just post the auction record and let someone else check it out.

If the auction records indicate that all of one or the other variety is of much more recent vintage than the other, well, then we've probably solved the mystery.

I'll periodically compile the findings. I wonder how long it will take us to figure this out...

JrGMan2004

Hey Andy. Interesting project. And your first set of pictures are very lovely Red-Xs

JrGMan2004

I searched my only Auction catalog, and only came up with an 1861 Clark Gruber $10 piece.

MrEureka

And your first set of pictures are very lovely Red-Xs

Placid

Auction:2002 September Long Beach Signature Sale
Lot: 9007
Sale: 300
Link to picture

MrEureka

Auction:2002 September Long Beach Signature Sale

Thanks, Placid. That's variety (edited to say) 1. Same coin as in the Kagin ad. I'll use the link to update my initial post.

Placid

Ira & Larry Goldberg Coins & Collectibles,January 25-28, 2004, The Pre-Long Beach Coin & Currency Auction
Lot 3501 1861 Clark, Gruber & Co (Denver, Colorado) $20 Gold. ANACS graded EF Details, Repaired, net VF-20.
Perhaps the same coin in my previous post.

MrEureka

Perhaps the same coin in my pervious post.

It is. As before, this is variety #1. BTW, that's a planchet flaw to the right of the date. (Yes, I've seen it in person.)

oreville

Andy: Does the ANS have older auction catalogues?

I have only saved my auction catalogues for the past 6 years.

Also what about Dave Bowers library. He has an incredible library.

Last but not least what about Stacks library?

Placid

Garrett had one. The bulk of the Garrett Collection was sold in several auctions during 1979 and 1980 by Bowers and Ruddy Galleries.

BigMoose

Andy, lot #1957 in the Chapman Brothers Sale of the Stickney collection in June, 1907 is a Clark, Gruber & Co. 1861 Twenty Dollar gold piece. This coin is plated and it looks prooflike to me. TomT.

MrEureka

Garrett had one. The bulk of the Garrett Collection was sold in several auctions during 1979 and 1980 by Bowers and Ruddy Galleries.

Garrett I, lot 545, was variety #1. It has a provenance dating to 1922.

Interestingly, Garrett I, lot 543 is a copper example of the same coin. It appears to be variety #2 - I'm not 100% sure from the photo - with a provenance to 1937. That's especially interesting to me because I didn't recall an example of variety #2 with such an old provenance. (Lot #544 is another copper example of variety #1, but with an older provenance!) We need more data before coming to a conclusion, of course.

MrEureka

Oreville -

The ANS, Dave Bowers and Stack's all have great libraries with older auction catalogs. Unfortunately, they don't seem to participate in this forum.

oreville

MrEureka: But you are around the corner from the ANS library?

I was planning a visit to ANR and Bowers this summer. Perhaps I could request permission to search through his library?

Stacks might be intriqued by a query into this one?

MrEureka

Oreville -

If the ANS did not stick to bankers' hours I would be there right now. Unfortunately, I work when they work.

I'm sure Bowers would be glad to help.

I'd encourage you to request Stack's assistance.

farthing

Andy - Bowers & Merena June 13-15 1988, The Everson and Faught Collections lot 593 is a gilt copper version of the $20. Unsure as to which type as this is not my area.



So far I've found several listings for $2 1/2, $5 and $10 versions.

Conder101

A member of the Fort Wayne club scanned the entire ANA collection of auction catalogs to CD's a few years back (Formatted and searchable). If I see him Thursday I'll ask him to do a search. I may not be able to determine the varieties but I should at least be able to get a list of all of the auction appearances through at least the early 1990's. ten a requst to the ANA Librarians should be able to turn up a lot of the information you need.

MrEureka

A member of the Fort Wayne club scanned the entire ANA collection of auction catalogs to CD's a few years back (Formatted and searchable).

That must have taken, what, maybe hours?

Excellent, looking forward to seeing the list. Thanks!

MrEureka

Bowers & Merena June 13-15 1988, The Everson and Faught Collections lot 593 is a gilt copper version of the $20. Unsure as to which type as this is not my area.

Farthing - That coin, lot 593, looks like Type #1. The lot description refers to a survey of 500 catalogs. I wonder who did that?

farthing

Andy, I was going to post the statement in the lot description but was unsure if they were refering to the gilt copper version or the gold version of the coin.

boyhowdy

This is a good site for that type of research.

Great for everything except 20s or territorial gold.

Steve

http://www.davidhall.com/auctionrecords/index.chtml
Text

MrEureka

Andy, lot #1957 in the Chapman Brothers Sale of the Stickney collection in June, 1907 is a Clark, Gruber & Co. 1861 Twenty Dollar gold piece. This coin is plated and it looks prooflike to me. TomT.

Tom - Thanks for bring the Stickney plate to Baltimore. That coin is "Variety 1". I'm still waiting for someone to provide an early provenance for any of the second variety, but I'm definitely not holding my breath.

BTW, the Breen plate coin is Variety 2.

shylock

Here's a couple, plus a copper version from Stacks (that references 2 others from 1997).

This NGC MS62 Gilt version was advertised on the Collectors Clearing House site.

B & M July 2000 Paul S. Mory Sr. collection: "Lot 1070, 1861 Clark, Gruber & Co. $20 gold. K-8. Rarity-5+. AU-50 (PCGS). Reeded edge. TERRITORIAL" (no on-line image and I don't have the catalog).

Jan. 2002 Stacks, copper K-12

MrEureka

Shylock - Both of those copper pieces are of the first variety. Come to think of it, I've never seen a copper (or copper gilt) specimen of variety 2. So let's limit our attention to the gold coins.

Anyone else have an auction record and image for a gold piece?

MrEureka

ttt

commemguy

Stacks, Gaston DiBello Collection, May 1970, Lot 1407. Plated and looks to be Var. 1, flat fields. Also mentions examples in the Walton Collection (Stacks 1968, right?) and Bolt collection. Sorry, Andy, I don't have those catalogues.

MrEureka

Also mentions examples in the Walton Collection

I have Walton. The coin is a Variety 1 with a disgusting obverse planchet flaw.

Anyone have Bolt?

commemguy

Just for thoroughness. Heritage auction this example, struck over an Assay $20 in their 2002 September 26-28 Long Beach Signature Sale.

Obv:


Rev:


and Mike Byers has a double struck example in inventory:

1861 Clark Gruber $20 Gold Double Struck in Collar PCGS XF 45

Types?

MrEureka

Here's another auction record:

American Art Association / Anderson Galleries Sale of the Giulia P. Morosini collection, 10/10/32, lot 279. Variety 1, probably gem AU.

Wicked cool sale for Darksiders, BTW!

MrEureka

Commemguy - Betcha you can't find any overstrikes offered before WW2! BTW, there are probably 4 or 5 different overstrikes. All are semi-PL uncs.

MrEureka

Type 1

kieferscoins

On a more serious note () I found their building still intact:



Cameron Kiefer

1798CentCollector

Here's a few auction sales to research - could not pull up your second coin photos. It's tough to find decent photographic representations with the earlier sales. Keep us posted

Rarcoa N.M. Kaufman. 08-4-5-1978; lot 116 color plate provided

Stacks Raymond J. Wyman Collection, 09-10-1981; lot 431 list an AU specimen with Prooflike surfaces - color plate is provided.

Stacks 06-11-1997; lot 1010 - color plate is provided

Bowers and Merena Paul S. Mory, 06-22-23-2000; lot 1070

ANA 1973 (Jess Peters) and 1983 (Kagins) auctions contain some selectioins albeit very poor photos

Jerry Kimmels 1990 Pioneer Gold Auction Analysis p 129 lists auction records and lot numbers from 1907 to 1990

Aegis3

Hey Andy, you need to update the pics for the type 2 variety. Is this one of them, admitedly a copper-gilt "die trial": Heritage's November 2005 sale, lot 5013. The lot description is also kind of intriguing.

MrEureka

Aegis - You are quite the troublemaker. This one looks like a T2.

CalGold

B&M Denver ANA 2006 Double Struck in Collar. No provenance given.






CG

Aegis3

Here's the Heritage 11/05:5013 die trial.

This die trial is Heritage 11/03:8145

These are the same variety. Note the strong die scratches above CLARK. Also look at DENVER. I shall call this "type 2a" right now.

Now compare that to basically any other coin posted here. There are no die scratches above CLARK, and just past the V of DENVER, there is a die gouge or a misplaced letter. The die gouse variety is the origianl type 1 posted at the beginning of the thread. As such, the upcoming Archangel specimen is apparently a type 1 specimen. My perusal of the ANR and Heritage archives have not found a "type 2a" in gold. I'll check my print catalogs tonight, as I am now intrigued with this thread.

MrEureka

I believe the Heritage die trials would qualify as Type 3.

MrEureka

The die gouse variety is the origianl type 1 posted at the beginning of the thread. As such, the upcoming Archangel specimen is apparently a type 1 specimen.

The Type 2's have many of the same die characteristics as the Type 1's. I believe that it's either because the Type 2 is a later die state than the Type 1, or because the Type 2 is a counterfeit of a Type 1. We await proof, one way or the other.

GoldenEyeNumismatics

This is a topic that interests me a lot and I have done quite a bit of research on (Clark, Gruber & Co that is). I wrote an article on them that was published in the July 2006 Numismatist, and personally, I believe these coins are counterfeit

First off, it is important that everyone keeps in mind that ALL ERROR CLARK, GRUBER $20 COINS ARE THAT OF THE CONCLAVE FIELD TYPE. Doesn't this seem a little suspicious? Clark, Gruber and Company was well established in Denver by Winter 1860. They had just opened their Central City, CO branch bank and were probably very busy with it (even though it closed only a few months later). Clark, Gruber and company placed an order to the east for new $10 and $20 dies during this winter. They could not use the dies of the previous year for these 2 denominations because the design was not well received by the public, therefore new dies were needed. Whoever engraved the original Clark, Gruber $20 dies would not have made 2 copies of the same desgin, but most likely would have made one master hub then produced working dies from it. There would be no reason to make 2 separate dies with slightly different designs and features. Furthermore, Clark, Gruber & Co were producing several times as many $10 pieces as they were $20 pieces, so it would make sense that if there was 2 vaireties of the 1861 $20 then there would be at least that of the 1861 $10, but there is not.

Hope this has shed some light on this topic

CalGold

I don't understand the overstamped US Assay Office pieces. If you were in the business of assaying newly mined gold and striking your own coinage from the gold you assayed why would you strike over US Assay Office pieces? What profit would there have been in doing that? Presumably those pieces would have traded at full face value.

CG

MrEureka

I have done quite a bit of research on (Clark, Gruber & Co that is)

Goldeneye - Have you tried to locate early auction records? I still believe that this would be revealing.

MrEureka

I don't understand the overstamped US Assay Office pieces. If you were in the business of assaying newly mined gold and striking your own coinage from the gold you assayed why would you strike over US Assay Office pieces? What profit would there have been in doing that? Presumably those pieces would have traded at full face value.

I don't think that you can assume that 1853 USAO gold traded at face in Denver in 1861. At that point, they were probably all being melted down and recoined. However, it's not much of a stretch to think that Clark Gruber could have tried overstriking the coins. That said, I'd be very surprised to learn that these coins were truly overstruck in Denver in 1861.

CoinRaritiesOnline

Andy, IMHO this is likely to be a BLOCKBUSTER when you draw and finalize your conclusions.

It takes guts -- some people are going to be VERY, VERY unhappy with the results of this research. Bravo, my good man!

CalGold

<< <i>Whoever engraved the original Clark, Gruber $20 dies would not have made 2 copies of the same desgin, but most likely would have made one master hub then produced working dies from it. There would be no reason to make 2 separate dies with slightly different designs and features. >>




From the pictures posted here, all seem to have the same blundered legend on the reverse--looks like the V in Denver was repunched over an N. Were the legends on a master hub or did they punch those separately? If the legend was pucnhed into the dies separately with individual letter punches, there could not have been two identical blundered dies.

Edited to note that the die trial specimens do not show the repunched V so those must be a different die-- or a lapped die maybe?

CG

MrEureka

some people are going to be VERY, VERY unhappy with the results of this research.

Dave - Let's not jump to conclusions. The research needs to speak for itself.

GoldenEyeNumismatics

<< <i>I have done quite a bit of research on (Clark, Gruber & Co that is)

Goldeneye - Have you tried to locate early auction records? I still believe that this would be revealing. >>


All I know is that this second type of CG $20 started appearing in auctions in the 1940's.

MrEureka

All I know is that this second type of CG $20 started appearing in auctions in the 1940's.

Goldeneye - How many different specimens of the T1 did you find in pre-40's auction catalogs? I'd guess that there are at least a dozen plated T1's that appeared in those earlier sales, but I've never spent the time looking.

Regulated

Here is another nice type one image:

Regulated

Interestingly, I have seen a prooflike Type-1.

MrEureka

Interestingly, I have seen a prooflike Type-1.

Wow! What grade? How PL?