Anyone have more info about the 1970-S Quarter overstruck on a Barber, that was confiscated from QDB

Longacre

I was reading QDB’s Washington Quarters book. Although I don’t collect these, it is amazing the tidbits of information that he puts in these books to keep it fresh and interesting. I was looking at the information about the 1970’s quarters (my birth year). In the section on the 1970-S, QDB writes,

“The writer purchased a 1970-S proof quarter plainly struck over a 1900 Barber quarter. The coin was publicly offered and was seized by the Treasury Department. Apparently the concoction of a creative Mint employee, the piece somehow escaped into a 1970-S proof set, no doubt initially baffling its discoverer.”


Does anyone have additional information on this? I have never heard of it before. Specifically,

(1) Was the quarter “quietly” confiscated, or was there a big public outcry at the time?
(2) Did QDB fight the confiscation with any sort of legal proceedings?
(3) How much did QDB pay for the quarter, and when it was confiscated, did he seek reimbursement from the seller?
(4) Under what authority did the US Treasury confiscate the coin?


PS. Note to QDB-- the footnotes in Chapter 4 are a little messed up. The numbers are one footnote number ahead of what they should be (for example, footnote 5 in the back of the book really corresponds to footnote reference number 4 in the text, and so on).

MrEureka

I remember seeing a picture of that coin when it was first offered for sale. Sounds like you might find it an an old B&R Rare Coin Review. Anyway, I always wondered where that coin went. I guess now we know.

Hugegut

Very interesting. Maybe the treasury was concerned that perhaps it was struck outside of the Mint by someone who had managed to make themselves a pair of dies and were thus treating it as a counterfeiting case? I have access to a pretty good newspaper archive so if anyone knows the appx dates this happened I can see if there was anything in the news about it.

FredWeinberg

I believe that coin came out in the early/mid 1970's, at the
Jack Tar Show in San Francisco......

CoinRaritiesOnline

If I'm not mistaken - there is a photo of that very coin in my favorite coin book of all time -- the Breen Encyclopedia of Proof Coins, published in 1977.

BillJones

The is a picture of this coin on page 231 of Walter Breen's Encyclopedia of United States and Colonial Proof Coins. 1722 - 1977. There is a notation that it was sold by New England Rare Coin Galleries (Jim Halprin's old Boston firm) Cambridge sale, lot 1440, 12/76. In the Wintrop sale, held earlier, it sold for $3,000.

There no way that this could have been an ordinary error. It more than likely an inside mint job.

Longacre

Great info. You guys are amazing. Does anyone have a link to a picture?

CaptHenway

This is the first that I ever heard that the coin was seized.
TD

FredWeinberg

Tom,

My memory recalls that the coin was put into a Bowers and Ruddy Auction,
but "seized" before the auction took place.

I don't know any of the details of the seizure.

There was pretty good publicity at the time, and that tended to
cool down some of the Proof errors that were coming out of the
SF Mint at that time.

A few years later, the faucets opened up again..........

CaptHenway

I think that the Bowers Winthrop sale was in 1975, and the New England sale in 1976, so I don't think it was seized out of the early sale.
TD

BillJones

<< <i>Great info. You guys are amazing. Does anyone have a link to a picture? >>



Here's the best I can do ...

FredWeinberg

Maybe it was seized from the
Third Auction Sale that it
appeared in..?

savoyspecial

bump

melvin289

I saved the picture as a document and magnified it until the pixels started breaking down. I see nothing to make one think it is anything other than a normal quarter? Does anyone else see something I am missing?

Ron

CaptHenway

The catalogue pictures are quite clear. It was struck over a well-worn Barber quarter.

Gemini

I can't see anything at all either suggesting that it is a Barber Quarter from the photo in the book that can't be the quarter or is it?

ajman

<< <i>I can't see anything at all either suggesting that it is a Barber Quarter from the photo in the book that can't be the quarter or is it? >>

gonzer

I can imagine the rationale that a Mint emplyee gave at the time..."What? This is a Mint! Sure there's bound to be a coupla stray Barbers floatin' around."

jessecarlk

<< <i>

<< <i>I can't see anything at all either suggesting that it is a Barber Quarter from the photo in the book that can't be the quarter or is it? >>

>>



i have the book. you can see the top of liberty's head and make out the day from the picture in the book.

IrishMikey

I remember hearing a story about a numismatist that would go on Mint tours, and whenever
the opportunity arose, he would toss a struck coin (Liberty nickel, Indian cent, etc) into a bin
full of blanks. The Mint's security was set up to keep people from taking things OUT, not bringing
things IN. I have no idea if he was in San Francisco in 1970, but this is always a possibility.

I was on a Denver Mint tour with the ANA Summer Seminar in the early 1980's, and I remember
on two occasions that a person in our group picked up a blank that was lying on the floor of the
press room, and tossed it into a bin with different sized blanks. This probably happened often
with Mint employees, who would just select the closest bin instead of deliberately picking one
that would result in an error coin.

CaptHenway

<< <i>I remember hearing a story about a numismatist that would go on Mint tours, and whenever
the opportunity arose, he would toss a struck coin (Liberty nickel, Indian cent, etc) into a bin
full of blanks. The Mint's security was set up to keep people from taking things OUT, not bringing
things IN. I have no idea if he was in San Francisco in 1970, but this is always a possibility.

I was on a Denver Mint tour with the ANA Summer Seminar in the early 1980's, and I remember
on two occasions that a person in our group picked up a blank that was lying on the floor of the
press room, and tossed it into a bin with different sized blanks. This probably happened often
with Mint employees, who would just select the closest bin instead of deliberately picking one
that would result in an error coin. >>



That would be more plausible if it were not a Proof, which theoretically gets looked at after being struck.
I am sure it is one of the many Proof "errors" deliberately made and smuggled out of the Mint in this era.
TD

lordmarcovan

That's pretty fascinatin'. Hadn't heard that story before.

SullivanNumismatics

Too bad it's not still around. A bit "extreme", but very neat all the same.

StrikeOutXXX

I know this is an old thread, but what ever became of the coin seized?

This was in Heritage's gallery as "Not Sold" in August of 2011 - is this the coin?

braddick

Impressive would be a Barber quarter overstruck on a 1970 quarter.

ricko

Interesting....had not heard about this...obviously not a standard mint error...Cheers, RickO

CaptHenway

@Strikeout The alignment looks the same.

ProofArtworkonCircs

So 1970 quarters have caught your eye.
There are several reverse varieties in that year.
In 1968 S the mint made two different proof only dies. CPG calls them types G and H. That was the on;y proof year for G. Both G and H showed up on a few 1969 D and 1970 D quarters.
G also showed up on the 1970 Philly quarter. That was the only year it appeared at Philly. In addition both Philly and Denver struck class III doubled dies with both type F and G artwork.
Usually they also show minor doubling.


Oops. This was supposed to be a private message, but I guess it does no harm to let it ride for now.

lostincoins

Seems like someone got it back or there are more to be had. If more are to be had I don't know if I would say anything about it as the SS will come and take them as not officially produced coins? Could someone be making overstrikes of this coin and putting them in the market, someone who got a hold of a press? Edit to add: the coin pictured in the holder looks like a light etching of the surface as the metal movement does not look right but that is JMO.

Treashunt

Strikeout

Thanks for reviving the thread.

TopographicOceans

Enlarged

TwoSides2aCoin

Freak of (un)Nature, but cool

CaptHenway

Just as an aside, I remember this piece coming up for sale in the 70's when I was at Coin World and noticing that the cataloguer had given the weight, which was approximately the weight of a new clad quarter (5.67 grams), and declaring based on this fact that it must have been struck on a new or nearly uncirculated Barber quarter!

I called the auction house and spoke with one of their cataloguers and pointed out that an uncirculated Barber quarter weighed 6.25 grams, and he said "Oh. Then it must have been struck on a well-worn quarter!" Don't know if they made a correction at the sale or not.

winky

They took it because we all know it was not real and like coins made in china, they're not real and I know that could not be real.

StrikeOutXXX

Thanks for the replies - my question is more about what process this coin went through.

If it was seized at least on/before 2006 - and Heritage had it in an auction in 2011, and... assuming this is the same coin, what journey did the coin have after it was seized?

Did it go through some sort of hearing/litigation - was it studied and released back to the owner at that time, etc.

We all know 70 years is a long time for a barber quarter to be stuck in a hopper somewhere, so this obviously had some help in being created, but... would it be considered a 1970-S Washington versus a 1900 Barber?

Coins were reused all the time, albeit supposedly melted to create new planchets - I don't know of any period where we intentionally overstruck existing coins (Except maybe Mr. Carr's creations).

If this was originally found in a 1970 Proof set, was that set verified legit (meaning the mint overstruck it and packaged it versus someone placing it into the set afterwards).

It just seems we have so many miniscule details of most things today that this one is missing "The rest of the story".

7Jaguars

Those "packages" can readily be tampered with...

asheland

Interesting thread! First that I have heard of this..

Timbuk3

Great story. Brings back memories.
Wondered what ever happened to
that coin !!!

BLUEJAYWAY

These examples of historical intrigue, like the 1913 Liberty nickels etc. never cease to interest me whether true or not.

Longacre

Thanks for bumping a Longacre Classic™ thread.

FredWeinberg

There were lots of cool Proof Error coins coming
out of the San Francisco Mint back in the late
60's, and especially during the 1974-1977 period.

I myself bought large quantities of proof error
coins at the Jack Tar Shows, which was in San
Francisco for many years.

The coin in question was struck on a Barber Quarter
that someone brought into the SF Mint. It was not
sitting around there for 70 years, imo.

I have never heard that the coin seized by the SS
was returned (although it might have been), but
I find it hard to believe that someone had TWO
1900 Barber Quarters brought into the Mint - maybe
two different dates - who knows. I'll assume it's the
same coin.

Ethan

Interesting read...thanks

ckrakowski

can someone superimpose a barber quarter over the washington quarter so we can get a better idea of what which side is which.

feeter277

Tomthecoinguy

>>



...Coins were reused all the time, albeit supposedly melted to create new planchets - I don't know of any period where we intentionally overstruck existing coins (Except maybe Mr. Carr's creations)... >>



In the early 1790's and early 1800's I understand the mint used cut-down tokens, and cut-down spoiled large cents to make half cents. Perhaps others have more examples.

ckrakowski

<< <i> >>





thank you do you have the other side?

feeter277

EagleEye

The Heritage coin is not the same coin as the Winthrop sale coin. The Winthrop sale coin has the head struck on the obverse while the Heritage coin has the tail struck on the obverse.

Sonorandesertrat

"I don't know of any period where we intentionally overstruck existing coins..."

This has happened before. One of the 1804 silver dollars (Class II) was struck over a Swiss shooting thaler. Many of the 1795 half cents were struck over cut-down Talbot, Allum & Lee tokens.

seanq

<< <i>"I don't know of any period where we intentionally overstruck existing coins..."

This has happened before. One of the 1804 silver dollars (Class II) was struck over a Swiss shooting thaler. Many of the 1795 half cents were struck over cut-down Talbot, Allum & Lee tokens. >>



There are also 18th century half cents struck on cut down planchets from mis-struck large cents, I recall seeing at least one of them where the undertype was not only still visible but could be attributed by Sheldon number.


Sean Reynolds

nycounsel

Listed on ebay:
1970-S Proof 25C Struck on a Silver Barber 25C NGC PF 65


Also, a 1970-s Proof Quarter struck on a 1941 Canada Quarter that's been getting a bit of press: 1970s proof 25c struck on 1941 Canadian 25c

Seller's write up:

Proof coins are struck by technicians who had feed the blanks into special presses. They are produced, examined and packaged using extreme quality control. It is very unusual to find major proof errors. A few broadstrikes, off-centers, double strikes in collars and off-metals have been known to be found in sealed proof sets. Proof errors are aggressively sought after by many error collectors.

A very small group of Proof errors recently came from a collection that was auctioned by the State of California. The U.S. Secret Service inspected and released this collection to the State of California determining that it was legal to own. The State of California then auctioned the collection and it has been dispersed since the sale.

This unique 1970-S Proof Quarter from the United States was over struck on a 1941 Quarter from Canada. This mint error was originally discovered in group of San Francisco Proof Errors that was auctioned by the State of California. There is a significant amount of detail on both sides showing the design of the Canadian Quarter. This is one of the most fascinating and intriguing proof mint errors ever discovered.