Did the Mint strike Proofs of the Isabella quarter?
Dentuck
Posts: 3,820 ✭✭✭
I've read that the Isabella quarter had an official mintage of 103 Proofs.
Is there, in fact, any official Mint record of Proofs being struck? And in that particular quantity?
Is there, in fact, any official Mint record of Proofs being struck? And in that particular quantity?
0
Comments
Empty Nest Collection
Linque
Empty Nest Collection
From LeeG's Commem posting:
Estimates of somewhere between 40 to 100 proof struck coins were made in addition to the 3 special documented proof quarters. The three special documented proofs were coins #400 (for the 400th anniversary of Columbus discovering America), #1492 (the year of Columbus’s discovery), and #1892 (for the anniversary year). These special proofs were presented to the ‘Board of Lady Managers.’
-Paul
<< <i>Production of the Isabella quarter dollars began at the Philadelphia Mint on June 13, 1893. The 1st, 400th, 1492nd, and 1892nd strikings were reserved with certificates, and the same were sent to the Board of Lady Managers in Chicago. Unlike the Columbian half dollars, the Isabella quarters seem to have been handled with a degree of care at the Mint, for contact marks and abrasions were minimal on specimens delivered to the distributor. At the Exposition they were offered for sale for $1 each. >>
To me, this suggests that, as with many other issues, it might be difficult to distinguish between proofs and business strikings. If several dies were used to produce the entire quantity of coins issued, it could be that one die in particular was more carefully prepared than the others, and could be the source for the "proofs". It would seem to me that a careful study should reveal proof characteristics not present in business strikes, but the history of this issue and the care taken to produce it may suggest that it would be impossible to tell. Your original question about official mint records really cuts right to the heart of the matter.
Empty Nest Collection
Proofs: Like the Columbian Half Dollars, 100 coins were struck as brilliant proofs. It is not known if the 1st, 400th, 1492nd, and 1892nd, coins were struck as proofs. It is believed that these coins were documented by the Mint and sent to the Board of Lady Managers in Chicago. There is little in the way of archive documents regarding the Isabella Quarter proofs, whereas there was several documents regarding the Columbian Half Dollars. Genuine proofs show evidence of a deep impression, they should have wire rims, squared edges, and proof-like surfaces.
Mint Director Leech in a letter to Ms. Palmer, dtd April 24, 1893, writes in part: I feel quite sure that the designs selected will be both suitable and artistic and will make a very beautiful coin. It is my intention to have these pieces struck specially - in as high relief as possible - and on polished planchets, so as to give as beautiful a lot of coins as the mint is capable of executing.
Supt of Phil Mint, O. C. Bobbyshell in a letter to Ms. Palmer, dtd May 18, 1893, writes in part: Replying to your telegram of this date I beg to state that we will gladly comply with your wish to keep separate the first five, the 400th, 1492nd, and the 1892nd Souvenir Quarters, and we will also reserve the last one of the 40,000th.
There were two Obverse and two Reverse dies used during the production run.
<< <i>Doesn't it seem odd that no official Mint records exist, though? >>
yes and no. Let's not for get that they were the first comm issue and it takes the government a little while to perfect a process. I bet the money came form a different pot and they were handled differently then reg coinage
Compare an 1893 mirror proof quarter with an alleged proof Isabella. Medal press Isabella would be identical in physical characteristics on all three sides.
Just some random thoughts.
As for documentation, I wouldn’t expect much since the “mirror proofs” if any, created no extra revenue that had to be tracked. The half dollar documents sometimes refer to “proof” and sometimes to “specimen” and other terms implying something “special” but not necessarily a real mirror proof.
Lastly, as to the reserved coins for “… the 1st, 400th, 1492nd, and 1892nd…” coins struck. Coining dept staff would not necessarily have counted to “one,” or “four hundred,” etc. That specific coin might have been defective (as noted in other situations), so a different strike would have been selected and placed in a numbered envelope. It is only the envelope notation that supports the coin being a particular strike number. ( I seem to recall the first Columbian half being defective and discarded. The next coin was then designated “#1.”)