Help on expanding the provenance of this 1842 $5

Boosibri

I have posted this 1842 $5 Small Letters N65 ex. milas a few times before. It is likely the finest or second finest known depending on ones perspective of the P66 which exists.


The coin is plated in the Garrett Guth Encyclopedia for the date. I have been working this week on adding to the provenance of the coin starting with David Akers analysis of auction records from 1975. This reference shows 5 instanced of an MS coin being auctioned:

Pierce 1965, Wolfson 1962, At.water 1946, WGC (Boyd) 1946, Flanagan 1944 (The forum fliters won't let me post At.Water without the period)

I have the Wolfson catalong and this does not sound like the piece which is noted as "uncirculated, mostly brilliant. A few barely visible signs of mishandling in field. Rare, seldom obtainable, especially this choice..." With the description of mishandling in the fields I think I can rule out the Wolfson piece.

The At.water catalog notes the following: "Uncirculated with full mint luster, rare variety in rare condition." While not very telling, the description could certainly fit the coin in question.

WGC (Boyd) ""392 -- 1842. Small letters. Uncirculated. Rare." Thanks to Pistareen for the reference. Unfortunetely not much to go on.

I cannot find my copy of Flanagan (anyone have one handy?) and I just bought the Pierce catalog from Bryce Brown with the hope of a lead but I am not optimistic. It is unlikely in my opinion that the coin in question is not one of the five noted. Current census is PCGS 66: 1, no others in MS, NGC: 65: 1 (this coin), 62: 2, 61: 2. Given this I would have to assume that either the PCGS 66 or my coin is the At.water specimen.

Here is a picture of the PCGS 66:
1842 $5 MS66

Where would you go next? I thought about talking to Ron Guth. Any thoughts or advice or is the trail just dead?

ricko

I cannot help with the provenance, but that certainly is a beautiful coin... congratulations on such a fine piece. Cheers, RickO

Broadstruck

That's the bad part of tracing provenance as sometimes you drop a couple hundred on older catalogs and go bust

For your coin in the 1940's I wouldn't expect much more then a few word description so before spending more try the following...

Post another thread titled "Anyone have a copy of Catalogue of the Col. James W. Flanagan collection of gold coins March 23-25, 1944 Stack's New York?"

Good luck!

RYK

What's wrong with Atwater?

Broadstruck

I just sent you the instructions lordmarcovan sent me on how to post forbidden words.

Words like Atwater, Peacock are no longer an issue

Quarternut

I would check all of the more prominent & famous collections from the 1880's through the 1920's that have plated catalogs. The pictures or plates for those years are generally very good and can be used to match up with a coin even today.

The catalogs produced after that time until more recent sales (1980's to today) were notorious for poor quality plates and even stock or repeated plates from other sales that did not represent the coins being sold.

It is probable that the coin wound up in either the Virgil Brand collection or the Colonel Green collection, as they purchased heavily for several decades including buying duplicates of rare coins. There are journals listing their collections, but they are not exactly in the public access. Plus they do not have extensive description or photographs.

Just a few thoughts off the top of my head...

QN

JustMe2

I never owned it so you can cross my name off the list...

shorecoll

Flanagan should be reasonably available, at least to get someone to copy the description. You then might want to check with George Kolbe/David Fanning or Charlie Davis to see if they know the whereabouts of prior provenance or bidder lists. You might get lucky and find a reference that exists at ANA or ANS.

1Bustcollector

You have a forbidden word in your message post. Please click the back button in your browser and remove this word from your post. The words that are forbidden are highlighted for you.

I have the Mehl Frederick W. Gross sale 2-18-47. Lot 1708: 1842 Small letters on reverse. Beautiful uncirculated specimen with full mint luster. Just about as perfect as the day it was minted. Rare variety in very rare condition. This identical specimen is from the celebrated At. Water Collection at $77.50. It is far more rare than its price would signify. No plate. If you are going to Chicago.....I'll take a cup of coffee!😉 just kiddin! I hope this helps. Rory Oh, it sold for $92.50

1Bustcollector

Correction on my last post:

Frederic W. Geiss, not Gross.

commoncents05

1842- US Mint, Philadelphia.

Hope that helps!

-Paul

asheland

<< <i>1842- US Mint, Philadelphia.

Hope that helps!

-Paul >>



Well that's a start!

numisma

Do you have the 5/1995 Stack's auction catalog?

Boosibri

Update from Pistareen regarding Flanagan: Lot 1120: 1842 Small date and letters, brilliant uncirculated, very rare in this condition.

Given the descriptions of the three 1940's era auctions, it seems likely that this piece is either Flanagan or Atwater. I ordered the Pierce catalog so hopefully the 1965 sale will feature more detail or a plate of the coin.

My 1842 $5 Large Letters is ex. Jimmy Hayes/Milas. Im tempted to find his email and drop him a note to see if he recalls any further history on the coin.

Boosibri

<< <i>Do you have the 5/1995 Stack's auction catalog? >>



Yes, nothing noted on the coins history. My 42 $5 LL also from that sale is noted as being ex. Jimmy Hayes (private treaty)

DeliaBug

Here's the info for Stack's Pierce sale.
Stacks - Pierce:1331. Brilliant Uncirculated. Bag marks in obverse field. Lovely luster, rare in this condition. (not plated.) Realized $200.

Also, in The Numismatist Vol. 22, April 1909, this variety was first reported (it states 'reported in print'). Prior to that I'm guessing you would need to start checking all 1842's.

The earliest listing I found for you was from Sep, 1910. Elder - Mougey:1093. 1842 $5 Small Letters. Uncirculated. (not plated). Realized $12.

BG

The ANA Library has "NIPS" where you can search The Numismatist, Coin Collector's Journal, as well as others. Your answer may be found in these?

Much Luck.

steveben

<< <i>Here's the info for Stack's Pierce sale.
Stacks - Pierce:1331. Brilliant Uncirculated. Bag marks in obverse field. Lovely luster, rare in this condition. (not plated.) Realized $200.

Also, in The Numismatist Vol. 22, April 1909, this variety was first reported (it states 'reported in print'). Prior to that I'm guessing you would need to start checking all 1842's.

The earliest listing I found for you was from Sep, 1910. Elder - Mougey:1093. 1842 $5 Small Letters. Uncirculated. (not plated). Realized $12. >>



very cool!

Boosibri

Update 12/30: I found in an annotated copy of Cleneay that lists Peter Mougey as the buyer of the proof $5 from that sale. In the Mougey sale the coin was however noted as uncirculated as referenced above. The lone proof in private hands is this coin and is linked previously from Cleneay to Woodin, Green, Farouk, Pittman, Bass, now add Mougey to that list after Cleneay.



My request for help: Does anyone have any documentation of the buyers from the Wolfson, WGC or Atwater sales? Big ask but I have found bigger diamonds in the rough recently.