Something of interest for pattern & experimental piece collectors

RogerB

The following letter was written in response to a request from Mint Director Linderman for a descriptive list of all pattern and experimental dies held at the Philadelphia Mint. A blank cell in the tables indicates there was no data in the original. A "?" indicates an illegible entry. (It's OK to repost this elsewhere, if members desire.)

PocketArt

Great information Roger! Thanks for sharing.

sparky64

I wonder if all of those dies were made during the year 1877 or roughly within a calendar year.
Averaging a pair of patterns every two weeks seems very respectable to me.
I assume all of those dies were considered complete.

Also looks like they were working on most everything except for the 1, 3 & 5 cent denoms.

Good stuff, thanks.

MrEureka

Are we to infer that the Mint no longer had any dies from earlier years?

RogerB

Andy,
"Are we to infer that the Mint no longer had any dies from earlier years?" I suspect that was what Linderman wanted to know.

CaptHenway

Too bad they were not placed into the National Numismatic Collection for future generations to appreciate.

Zoins

@CaptHenway said:
Too bad they were not placed into the National Numismatic Collection for future generations to appreciate.

It seems like it was a fun time when the Mint threw away old dies, first without being defaced and then being defaced, both being used to create restrikes later.

Another option is for old dies is to be in private collections like many cancelled US Mint dies are today. Either way, it's nice when they can be enjoyed by the public instead of being destroyed.

ricko

Nice historical document Roger....You must find a lot of interesting tidbits while researching files.... Also a lot of not so interesting stuff...likely the majority. Cheers, RickO

RogerB

There actually were many more dies and hubs at the Mint. In 1910 mint director Andrew had all of them destroyed. There's a descriptive list in Renaissance of American Coinage 1909-1915.

Rittenhouse

Cool find. It would be interesting to find Linderman's letter to Pollock. I suspect Linderman asked what current design pattern dies were on-hand. We do know there were more dies than listed as Linderman, Pollock, and A. Loudon Snowden were actively selling restrikes to collectors at that time, and Snowden continued doing so during his time as superintendent.

I suspect the little roach wanted to know what Pollock had on hand so he could offer stuff to collectors.

RogerB

Here is a transcript of the fair copy requested by Rittenhouse:

"December 17, 1877
From Linderman
To Pollock

I have to request that you will furnish this office with a full descriptive list of all pattern or experimental dies now in possession of the Mint both of those bearing current date of year and of previous years.
You will not cause any of these dies to be defaced until advised by this office to do so."

[NARA-CP. RG104, entry 235, vol 14]

sparky64

So Pollock only listed those for the current year and confirmed that he wouldn't deface any until told to do so. He just chose ignore the "previous year" part.
Apparently, according to you guys, there were other dies on hand but not reported.

I'm just trying to keep up.

"I suspect the little roach wanted to know what Pollock had on hand so he could offer stuff to collectors."
That's funny.....

RogerB

A follow-up letter from Linderman has not been located, as yet. It's possible Linderman thought there were more pattern dies, or maybe he accepted Pollock's list. However, note that Linderman's original request was for "dies" and not "hubs" or "master dies" or "matrices."

Rittenhouse

@sparky64 said:
So Pollock only listed those for the current year and confirmed that he wouldn't deface any until told to do so. He just chose ignore the "previous year" part.
Apparently, according to you guys, there were other dies on hand but not reported.

I'm just trying to keep up.

"I suspect the little roach wanted to know what Pollock had on hand so he could offer stuff to collectors."
That's funny.....

Linderman, Pollock, and A Loudon Snowden were unbelievable. I wouldn't be surprised to read that jewelry went missing at open casket viewings these guys attended. In his 1887 report, Mint Director George Kimball went on a ten page diatribe denouncing the collector coins these guys struck and sold for personal profit. You can check it out here (it starts on page 130): https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pst.000068053017;view=1up;seq=138

Linderman was under investigation when he died in Dec 1879, so this may be a precursor to that. Perhaps they were trying to cover their tracks. I also wouldn't put it past Pollock to "creatively interpret" Linderman's letter (possibly in collusion). By this time, the Mint is on a fiscal year ending in June, so Pollock may have chosen to interpret current year and previous years as the current and past fiscal year.

You really can't trust anything these guys say; they'd lie to their own mothers. In one particularly revealing instance, Linderman wrote to the treasury Secretary on May 18, 1867 informing him that he had "found" a sealed box of dies in the Director's (his!) safe, which it was claimed that JR Snowden had sealed in 1860. A list of dies "found" was enclosed, and that list included, among others, dies for the Gobrecht dollars (1836,38, and 39), 1840's proof half cents, and the dies for the 1804 dollar!

Linderman went on to claim thagt he resealed the box. Musta done a pretty bad job as auction records clearly show the appearance of additional restrikes of these pieces after that date! Or perhaps he forgot to mention that the bottom was still conveniently open.

Justacommeman

@Rittenhouse said:

@sparky64 said:
So Pollock only listed those for the current year and confirmed that he wouldn't deface any until told to do so. He just chose ignore the "previous year" part.
Apparently, according to you guys, there were other dies on hand but not reported.

I'm just trying to keep up.

"I suspect the little roach wanted to know what Pollock had on hand so he could offer stuff to collectors."
That's funny.....

Linderman, Pollock, and A Loudon Snowden were unbelievable. I wouldn't be surprised to read that jewelry went missing at open casket viewings these guys attended.

Or the bodies

mark

RogerB

Rittenhouse: Can you point to the "A list of dies 'found' was enclosed, and that list included, among others, dies for the Gobrecht dollars (1836,38, and 39), 1840's proof half cents, and the dies for the 1804 dollar!"..? Preferably the original document or a transcript. Thanks!

Rittenhouse

@RogerB said:
Rittenhouse: Can you point to the "A list of dies 'found' was enclosed, and that list included, among others, dies for the Gobrecht dollars (1836,38, and 39), 1840's proof half cents, and the dies for the 1804 dollar!"..? Preferably the original document or a transcript. Thanks!

Kevin Flynn quotes the letter, along with many others, in the appendix to his Seated dollar book. I strongly recommend that those who are interested in the goings on at the Mint in 1835 to 1873 get a copy of Kevin's book. The appendix containing his transcriptions of Mint letters is worth twice the price.

RogerB

Thanks!

StrikeOutXXX

@RogerB said:
Rittenhouse: Can you point to the "A list of dies 'found' was enclosed, and that list included, among others, dies for the Gobrecht dollars (1836,38, and 39), 1840's proof half cents, and the dies for the 1804 dollar!"..? Preferably the original document or a transcript. Thanks!

Not sure if this helps, but the last 2 paragraphs on the linked page also alludes to this. The 1st paragraph on the next page references the 1804 die.
http://www.pcgs.com/books/silver-dollars/Chapter06Listings-023.aspx

Bibliography simply references the National Archives letters.
http://www.pcgs.com/books/silver-dollars/Bibliography-001.aspx