Major announcement on 1841 Quarter Eagle

homerunhall

After two years of research PCGS has decided to recognize both proof and circulation strikes for the previously "proof only" 1841 Philadelphia Quarter Eagle. Note that the expert community was very divided on this subject: me, David Akers (the inspiration for all of this), Doug Winter, QDB, Harvey and Larry Stack, Jeff Garrett, Tony Terranova, Jim Halperin, Gordon Wubel, Steve Contursi, Don Kagin, David McCarthy and others thinking both proofs and circulation strikes were minted. PCGS founder John Dannreuther, CoinFacts President Ron Guth, PCGS Director of Grading Mike Sargent and others feeling that only proofs were struck. Here's the press release.

link

Here's link to lengthy report and photo images (it's big file)

link

hrh

magikbilly

This should be interesting reading. Thanks.

Eric

crypto79

I love this part of the hobby

Lakesammman

Looks like an All-Star cast on both sides - thanks for the link.

TwoSides2aCoin

Some extensive work and study went into this. I like that comment : "Just look at the coins"

NeoStar

That was definitely a very interesting read with very compelling arguments on both sides. Thank you so much for sharing this with us.

denga

The internet title of the essay reads

http://www.pcgs.com/pdf/PCGS_1941QuarterEagleBooklet.pdf

Presumably 1941 is a typo for 1841.

As I am quoted in the work perhaps some further caveats should be added.
There is no discussion, in this 1841 quarter eagle essay, of the proof coinage
prior to Franklin Peale assuming office in early 1839; these earlier pieces were
done under Chief Coiner Adam Eckfeldt. So far as is known at present Eckfeldt
did not charge a premium for proof coins.

It is also mentioned that Peale made a profit from selling proof coins. There is
no known contemporary source for such a statement. It is worth noting that
the public complaints that I have found, primarily by Professor R.S. McCulloh,
mention only medals.

One statement suggests that 1841 quarter eagles were distributed as examples
of a new design to influential officials. It wasn’t a new design, the artwork having
first been used in 1839 on the half eagle and 1840 on the quarter eagle. No such
distribution was made for the simple reason that the expenditure would have
required a formal warrant by the director and none was issued.

OnlyGoldIsMoney

Another stopper in a series loaded with stoppers.

OchoReales

Great news! Now I can send my examples in!

EagleEye

Nice read. They should start (or resume) calling 1856 Flying Eagle cents their proper format too.

Coinosaurus

Great article. I think they should have defined "proof" on page one, though.

Sholley touches on the some of the ambiguity - if they were all made at the same time from the same dies, but maybe some of the planchets weren't as polished as others, are they still "proof?"

It's kinda like the AT/NT thing, sometimes the definition goes to the intention of the perpetrator, and not to the characteristics of the object itself.

Interestingly, the Redbook already allows for 1841 biz strikes.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

MikeInFL

Having read the article, it seems to me that Mr. Dannreuther's argument against business struck coins using die alignment shoots a very valid hole in the argument of the other side of the equation.

Said simply (and if I've understood it), Mr. Dannreuther states if the coins were struck at two different times, once for proofs and the other for business strikes, the die alignment would be different between issues. Yet it is not. I can't get past that fundamental observation, personally, and I see no explanation offered by Hall et al who argue for separate business struck coins.

That said, I'm anything but an expert in these coins. Heck, I've never even seen one in-hand, but that was my opinion based on the information provided -- the subjective evidence suggests one proof striking and their different appearance was a circumstance of strike variance typical of the screw press as well as what happened to them after leaving the mint.

So if this were a poll, I'd vote "all proofs".

Respectfully...Mike

ricko

Great article... Thanks for posting this... Cheers, RickO

Analyst

Crypto79: << I love this part of the hobby.>> !

Denga: << It is also mentioned that Peale made a profit from selling proof coins. There is no known contemporary source for such a statement. >>

I know. This is one of many reasons why my theory in part 2 makes more sense. Casual collectors who were accustomed to receiving business strikes each year ‘ended up’ with Proofs because (it is likely that) no business strike 1841 Quarter Eagles were minted in 1841. So, more Proofs than usual were made in advance to accommodate people who may be asking for 1841 Quarter Eagles. I suggest that the Philadelphia Mint released 1841 Quarter Eagles at face value, while the supply of 20 to 35 lasted.

Denga: << No such distribution [of 1841 Quarter Eagles to influential officials] was made for the simple reason that the expenditure would have required a formal warrant by the director and none was issued.>>

My impression is that the researchers who contributed directly or indirectly to the PCGS publication maintain that there are no Mint records of the strikings of Proof gold coins during the 1840s. It follows that, if there was a distribution to influential people, the distribution would have occurred without being precisely documented as well, certainly without a warrant.

CoinOsaurus: <<… if they were all made at the same time from the same dies, but maybe some of the planchets weren't as polished as others, are they still Proof? >>

I discuss this point in part 3 of my three part series.

TwoSides2aCoin<< I like that comment: "Just look at the coins" >>

I like this comment, too, and I have seen six or seven of them. John Albanese, Matt Kleinsteuber and I interpret some 1841 Quarter Eagles differently from way that David Hall does. Please read.

The Controversy over 1841 Quarter Eagles, Part 1

Part 2, Casual Collecting in the 1840s

The Controversy over 1841 Quarter Eagles, Part 3, The physical characteristics of Proof coins

keyman64

Very interesting.

braddick

I keep checking CoinStar machines and have yet to find either one.