Options
Teach me about Nationals!?!
Tookybandit
Posts: 3,411 ✭✭✭✭
Tonight I picked up this cool NOLA note! I'm a big fan of New Orleans food and music, and my wife and I have even spent a few nights inside the bank building!!! (It's now a hotel)
I noticed the doubled "Ee" plate letter and wanted to know, what's the deal? Was this plate repaired at one time? There are many survivors on this bank and I see many other notes have sold that were printed from this same plate.
Large size nationals are not my specialty and I hoped someone could shed some light on this for me!
0
Comments
Now, as to your question about the "Ee" plate, I know less than zero so can add Zero to your knowledge.
Looking for CU $1 FRN 20160523 - any series or block. Please PM
Retired
Laissez les bons temps rouler! (Let the good times roll!)
$5s were 4 position sheets. Notes produced from the first plate would have letters A-B-C-D. When that plate wore out it was replaced with plate E-F-G-H, I-J-K-L, etc until U-V-W-X. The Y and Z position letters were not used, the next plate would be Aa-Bb-Cc-Dd thru Uu-Vv-Ww-Xx. If additional plates were needed, the next would be A3-B3-C3-D3 thru U3-V3-W3-X3, then A4-B4-C4-D4, etc.
All 4 notes on the same printed sheet have the same bank serial number; the plate position letters made each note unique.
The National Bank of Commerce in STL was also an extremely large circulation bank, and reached plate A5-B5-C5-D5. Like a handful of other banks with large circulations, two plates were used simultaneously to print $5 notes, so the plate letter sequence gets a bit tricky in terms of which new plate followed which worn out one.
This is all dealt with in great detail in Huntoon's Large Size National book, chapter 21 an affordable must have for anyone with even a passing interest in nationals.
The next plate would have been A7, B7, C7, D7, but no notes have been reported with any of those plate numbers, though the last reported serial number produced was B123785, so it is possible there was a plate rollover and those notes haven't been reported yet.
Within the Smithsonian proofs there is an example for A7-B7-C7-D7 that was certified on December 10, 1928. I'm not on a device with editing software but here is a link to an image (I hope)
http://ids.si.edu/ids/delivery...4q000001-022963-000001
Here's the box that the proof was in, it's on page 4 and has an id number ending in 022963.
http://collections.si.edu/sear...of&list.name=&start=60
I have found some other proofs that never were placed into production so I'm not sure that this was ever used. One observation/caution is that the plate letters have always seemed to be under-reported in the census' especially when one got past the single letter. It seems to be getting better but there still seems to be legacy issues, as one might expect.
I have found some other proofs that never were placed into production so I'm not sure that this was ever used. One observation/caution is that the plate letters have always seemed to be under-reported in the census' especially when one got past the single letter. It seems to be getting better but there still seems to be legacy issues, as one might expect.
I know about that proof. That's why I was very careful as to how I phrased my comments about X6 being only highest known plate number. It is very possible a note will appear from the A7-B7-C7--D7 plate someday.
On the other hand, as you state, there are many, many plates with proof printings that never made it into production. That's why the proof collection is so interesting. STLNATS is a huge expert in this area for those who don't know.
One other little oddity about national plate numbers and serial numbers is that they are not always sequential as you would anticipate. This is because there are examples of where 2 or more plates were being utilized for note production simultaneously, or old plates were brought out of 'retirement' for production after a newer plate failed. In those situations you can see higher serial numbers associated with unexpectedly earlier plate numbers. Thus, while we might expect the possibility that a note from Plate A7-B7-C7-D7 with a very late serial number in the run (for example) B123000 might suddenly appear, there is therefore also a small possibility that that such a note with that high serial number could have been produced from an earlier plate like Q6-R6-S6-T6.
I am afraid this thread has taken a bit of an esoteric turn for many of the readers of this board. If so, I apologize.
So you do have readers that enjoy hearing about these lesser known facts about nationals.
Family, Neighborhood, Community,
make the World a better place.
Years ago I did a short and slightly strange Paper Money article on a pair of what seemed to be out of sequence plate letters on the $5s on 4178. A lot of fun to research and gave me some insight into not just taking "common knowledge" of things for granted.
At any rate, DocPaper is quite right to be very precise/careful in discussing this esoteria. Perhaps its terribly pedantic, but I much prefer the term reported to "known" since there are a lot of notes that exist and are known to someone - sometimes a lot of someones - but have not been reported to a census. Regarding bank 29, the highest reported bank serial number with the highest plate letter X6 is B107032 with plate X6. There is a higher number reported (B114175) but the plate letter is only given as 'X." This latter note was also in the last kelly census which only provided space for a single letter and no subscript (ie X vs X6). Very few banks needed extra plates to go go beyond the first run of the alphabet (ie A to X) so it's understandable, if unfortunate, that recording a single plate letter was thought to be enough. In any case, without actually seeing note B114175, it's not possible to be sure, but examining the sequence of notes reported, this was probably X6 as well.
Now also per Kelly, the last sheet of plain back $5s delivered to the bank was sheet B123785, about 9k sheets higher than the last note reported in the nbncensus. The A7...D7 plate was certified in mid December 1928 and per the Jan/Feb 2014 Paper Money article the first shipment of small sized notes was on June 22, 1929. I think that there is a good chance the A7...D7 plate was used for at least a few of the last notes delivered to the bank, but without actually seeing one I again don't think it's possible to be sure.
What fun!
Jim61
Looking for $1 CU FRN radar 16566561 - NOT ANY MORE, THANK YOU delistamps and TheRock!
Looking for $1 CU FRN radar 16977961.
Looking for $1 CU FRN 99999961 - NOT ANY MORE, THANK YOU delistamps!
Looking for $50 FRN 00000061
Even though this subject is not in my area of collecting or interest, I have read it all with great appreciation to those who posted the great educational replies. I have learned a lot. Does that mean I am going to get interested now - probably not. BUT when I am at a table at a show and get asked, I will be a lot more informed about this subject and may be able to answer the question vs saying I don't know. Thanks for the education.
I'm with Jim61, not my area of expertise nor collecting but I sure know a lot more than I ever thought I would. Knowledge is the key to success.
Thanks to all you who posted and shared your knowledge and expertise.
Looking for CU $1 FRN 20160523 - any series or block. Please PM
Retired
interesting on the plate numbers. How about the serials ? do they go 999999 then A000001 etc ? Is the highest national serial number known ?
No one has responded to your question because it is very complex. There are many series of nationals and multiple denominations making a simple answer difficult. I will give a superficial answer to the best of my ability and allow others to expand.
The most simple answer would be, when referring to bank serial numbers only (remember before around 1920 nationals has both a bank serial number and a different federal serial number), since the maximum digits a bank serial number could have is 6, the highest serial number would be 999999.
There is a single national reported in the national currency database with that serial, from charter #2370 Chase NB, a $5, type 1 note. Theoretically notes numbered 999999 could exist for 1902 large size notes of the $5, $10 and $20 denominations, but they have not been reported as yet. For 1929 type 1 notes, as stated above, there is a single reported 999999 and there could also be one 1929 $5 type 2 note with the 999999 serial. Small sized nationals of denominations other than $5 never got as high as 999999.
However, as noted elsewhere in this thread, with 1902 large size notes, once the bank serial 999999 was reached, the numbering was restarted at 000001, but a prefix letter change was utilized to document that rollover. In the case of 1902 Nationals, the first rollover was documented by putting an "A" in front of the bank serial (thus 999999 went to A1) and the next rollover went to "B" prefixed bank serials (thus A999999 went to B1). Because $5 notes were always produced in the greatest quantity, it was $5 notes that always went the furthest in bank serial progression. As stated previously, the highest possible bank serial for a 1902 type note, according to Treasury records, would be a $5 1902 Plain Back from Charter #29, FNB, NY, NY with the serial B123785. In fact, the highest serial reported to the National Bank Census is B114175. Therefore, in one sense, this would be the highest reported bank serial number for any large sized national. Incidentally, B prefixed notes were only printed for Charter #29, and while scarce, they are not rare. There are about 50 reported so far, and undoubtedly many more are out there.
The situation is similar, yet different for small sized serial 1929 notes. Type one notes used a 6 digit number with letter prefixes and suffixes. The prefix (A-F) denotes plate position on the 6 note sheets. The suffix letter was always "A" until after sheet 999999 was reached. Then the numbers reset and the suffix moved to "B" for the next 999999 sheets and then would have gone to "C," but no bank printed that many sheets. A single bank Charter #2370, Chase NB, NYC, NY, printed enough $5 sheets to get the B rollover to occur, so the serial number changeover on the top note on the two consecutive sheets went A999999A to A000001B. The highest serial number reported by treasury records would be $5 notes on this bank, with the serials A-F057756B (Remember there are 6 notes to a sheet with different prefixes when type 1 notes were printed). The highest numbered note in the system reported so far is a $5 note on the #2370/Chase NB is a note with the serial D057694B. There are about 50 "B" suffixed notes reported to the national database so far. There are likely many unrecognized ones out there. Who looks at suffixes, especially on common notes?
Type 2 1929 series notes are a different story. They went to a suffixless system when printing them. They are printed on 6 note sheets, but each note has a distinct, unique serial number preceded by an alphabetic prefix, starting with "A." Thus, sheet number 1 had notes A000001-A000006. This meant you could get up to note #999999 much faster. When that note was reached, the "A" prefix was rolled to "B." Thus, consecutive notes in the rollover would be A999999, then B000001. This happened on a single occasion because overall not many 1929 type 2 notes were printed. It happened only with $5 notes printed for Charter #13044, BOA in SF,CA. The highest possible serial possible, based on Treasury records would be a $5 type 2 on this bank with the serial B172602. The highest bank serial reported in the National Bank Database so far is B169467. B prefix notes are decidedly scarce, though note really rare. There are about 15 reported, but there are rumors of significantly more being held outside the reporting system, perhaps to boost their value.
This is a quick and dirty answer to what seems to be a simple question that isn't. I've probably made some mistakes that I'm sure others will pick up on. I'm also having trouble formatting on the Board. I hope this doesn't show up as one unreadable paragraph. Below I've attached a couple notes showing examples of rollover B prefixes and suffixes on type 1 and type 2 notes.
Great post!
Nice explanation indeed. It should be remembered that this only applies to the bank sheet or note #s. The treasury serials appearing on LS before 1924 (or thereabouts) incremented as "normal" note serial numbers and distinguished individual notes, even from the same sheets. The treasury serials can be used to roughly estimate when a note was printed and delivered to the Comptroller of the Currency altho it may have not been issued to the banks for several years later.
It's also interesting (to me at least) that a similar situation existed for LS FRBN aces for the NY district which used a B suffix to indicate serials of 100 million+. The prefix indicated the district (B for NY) and the first tranche of notes were numbered from B1A to B99999999A. The next note was numbered B1B. No other district issued so many notes, and this was unnecessary for any of the other denominations.
Always great to learn something new though.
It's also interesting (to me at least) that a similar situation existed for LS FRBN aces for the NY district which used a B suffix to indicate serials of 100 million+. The prefix indicated the district (B for NY) and the first tranche of notes were numbered from B1A to B99999999A. The next note was numbered B1B. No other district issued so many notes, and this was unnecessary for any of the other denominations.
Great piece of info. Didn't know that about NY $1 FRBN's.The pictures of uncut large size NBN sheets that I have seen show the same treasury number for all notes on the sheet. The only way to tell notes from the same sheet apart is to use the check letter for plate position..
Of course you are correct; I have no idea what I was thinking. Thanks for the correction!
"The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons." -Dostoevsky
Why do they both have "G" position?
Jim61
Looking for $1 CU FRN radar 16566561 - NOT ANY MORE, THANK YOU delistamps and TheRock!
Looking for $1 CU FRN radar 16977961.
Looking for $1 CU FRN 99999961 - NOT ANY MORE, THANK YOU delistamps!
Looking for $50 FRN 00000061
Jim61
Looking for $1 CU FRN radar 16566561 - NOT ANY MORE, THANK YOU delistamps and TheRock!
Looking for $1 CU FRN radar 16977961.
Looking for $1 CU FRN 99999961 - NOT ANY MORE, THANK YOU delistamps!
Looking for $50 FRN 00000061
Actually there were 6 changeover pairs. Plate positions G thru L.
I'm not sure how much anyone focuses on the plate letters since, as indicated by Tookybandit, they were basically random based on which half of a sheet was overprinted with bank info.
The sheet serial number prefix ran from A to F so sheet A999999A to F999999A was followed by A0000001B to F000000B. The pair of notes shown has been known for a long time but I don't think any other note from either sheet has ever been reported. Until type II notes, the sheet numbering used for large and type I nationals was very different than that used for other federal currency so it seems to me that technically there was only one true changeover pair - F999999A and A000001B (only the latter note being reported). That's probably just me being pedantic, and such details probably don't really matter for such a unique pair.
There is single bank (charter #733, Bank of Commerce, NY, NY) that issued $5 '02 Datebacks with an 'A' prefix, but so far only 4 of them have been reported to the National Bank Database. Those are downright tough to find.
Family, Neighborhood, Community,
make the World a better place.
note that Tookybandit posted I noticed that the PCGS holders does NOT correctly
identify the front plate number, which is Ee , the the holders says only E.
Perhaps a reholder fromPCGS? or keep the "error" holder. Just a few thoughts. And
am learning more than I ever thought I would about Nationals.
Looking for CU $1 FRN 20160523 - any series or block. Please PM
Retired
they warrant for 6500 press impressions. They charged 2 cents per 4 note sheet. They then charged $250.00 for "re-entering the images". I think this would be the standard life span of an engraved plate at that time. Some of those big banks went through a lot of plates. Nowadays with hardening technology and chrome the plates go miles further.
nobody gets it: "Cash Is King ! "
I thought forum members might like to see a close-up of the highest plate letter -- D7 -- from a proof of the FNB of the City of New York. As STLNATS mentioned, this one may not have seen circulation. But it was actually certified several months before the last X6 plate proof, so it might be possible. This is the first proof that I've seen which was rubber stamped "Chromed". Had it been put into use, it would likely have held out for quite some time, probably right up to the start of the small size era.
I've been watching for an escapee from plate A7-B7-C7-D7 for many years and have never seen one, although the inference from Kelly's book is that some might have actually been printed.
I've put together an ersatz collection of notes from the last plate (U6-V6-W6-X6) known (so far) to have actually been used.
Chroming would have been done to harden the plate and extend it's print life, probably not for display. I think this was a new process in the late 1920s that they were just starting to try it out. Does anyone have more info about this?