Options
For Trade Dollar experts: are there any incredible rarities in the Trade Dollar series
afford
Posts: 1,723 ✭✭✭✭✭
other than the 1876-s DDO and the 1878-cc chop mark and the 1876 PR I/I and 1975-S No period after FINE (might exist or might not)?
IE are there any rarities in the Trade Dollar series that very few Trade Dollar specialists are aware of and LOL might be keeping to themselves?
It is good to tell of new discoveries, it brings more attention to a series that might be losing its momentum.
0
Comments
Pssst...1884&1885
I saw an 1875-S/CC FS-502 with chopmark at Baltimore. Wasn't for sale but was owned by a very happy collector. With only 5 graded non-chopmarked FS-502's, this one with a chopmark has to be incredibly rare. If it had been for sale I definitely would have bought it.
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.
I did see an 1877-CC Type 1 reverse on eBay once. That was a new discovery, at least to me.
Not sure what you mean by "a series that might be losing it's momentum"...
Don't mind me as I apply a chopmark to my piece...
Very few Trade Dollar specialists are aware of those two dates and might be keeping their existence to themselves?
You must be a Thaler guy
1875-CC "Wide CC"; the same reverse die as the 1873, 1874 and 1876 "Wide CC". Only a couple that I have heard of...
mbogoman
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/classic-issues-colonials-through-1964/zambezi-collection-trade-dollars/7345Asesabi Lutho
I've seen about as many with chopmarks as without. The chopmarked examples weren't attributed with the variety so wouldn't show up in the pops.
Another reason the pop is so low for this variety...apparently the PCGS variety attribution "department" is unable to properly attribute this variety. Don't ask me how I know this
I don't know about one that "few Trade Dollar specialists are aware of", but I would like to throw in the 1875-P with chop marks, particularly the Type 1/1. Finding an example without chops damaging the mintmark area is extremely difficult, I would argue it is actually rarer than the 78-CC w/ chops.
I saw the same example, believe it was a solid AU58.
Yup. The 1.2mm wide variety
mbogoman
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/classic-issues-colonials-through-1964/zambezi-collection-trade-dollars/7345Asesabi Lutho
Quick Q&A on the 1884 and 1885 Trade Dollars
Were there Trade Dollar working dies created in 1884 or 1885?
Who is believed to have struck, or had these struck?
What year did them come out?
Whose collection did the first come out of?
The 1884 is a legitimate Mint creation that was never issued - all were melted but ten. The 1885 is a horse of a different color
What makes a coins a legitimate Mint creation? How does a coin become legal?
When a coin is sold/distributed through the back door, is it a legitimate Mint creation?
The line is as blurry as Jackson Pollock painting.
First question above.
Were there proof trade dollar working dies created for 1884 and 1885.
For the dies destroyed in 1884, this included proof trade Dollar working dies.
No Trade dollar working dies were listed as created or destroyed in 1885.
The obviously culprit on who probably struck them was A. Loudon Snowden, who was the chief coiner from 1866 through 1877, and Superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint from 1879 through 1885, the same year that Kimball became director of the Mint, Kimball was known for his no BS attitude and that patterns should not be struck for collectors, most likely Snowden saw the writing on the wall.
I believe the 1884 and 1885 trade dollars, if I remember right first came out as part of the Coin Dealer William Idler's estate, and were handled by his son-in-law and partner Capt John Hasiltine, who also handled most of the 1804 Type III Dollars and a few other rarities he got from Snowden and Mint Director Linderman. Idler died in 1901.
They were legitimately produced in normal fashion from dies authorized and created in normal fashion. Little different than the 1876-CC twenty cent piece (or 1933$20 for that matter)- they just changed their mind about issuing them and decided to melt them all.
How they were saved and left the Mint is a different matter
Actually, I believe based upon the Mint Act of 1873, a coin became official when it passed from the hands (or on paper) from the coiner to the Superintendent/ sometimes Clerk.
So if a coin is struck illegally, such as the 1804 Type III dollars, 1885 Trade Dollar, it is not officially a Mint product.
In addition, a coin becomes legal by first being authorized by Congress, also also approved by the Mint Director/Secretary of the Treasury during that period.
I thought 1875-P chop mark TD could be the rarest one. One the paper pop is one and I am not sure TDN agreed it is 75-P
Proof coins are completely different animals
The 1876-CC Twenty cent piece was entirely legit, they were struck, delivered to the Clerk, sat in a barrel for distribution, which they already had a great number of coins from earlier years, nobody in CC wanted them, the counts barely went down over the years, and finally the director decided to melt all twenty cent coins left over. Some of the 1876-CC twenty cent pieces were distributed to the public.
I agree that they are closer to the 1933 $20, and also perhaps the 1964-D Peace, as they were not suppose to be distributed or released.
Creating a coin, IMO, does not make it a legit Mint coin. I agree they were still authorized to make the dies and strike the coins, but they were not intended to be distributed and never officially released, therefore IMO, they are not legit.
Kevin
Actually there are many more rules governing the production and distribution of proof coins that cons for circ
Are restrikes genuine Mint coins, that is grey area
For example, 1859, Snowden gets permission to strike restrikes from earlier years, has them struck and distrubutes,
others have made make restrikes clandestinely,
these are two entirely different scenarios I have been studying and trying to make sense of all of the corner cases.
The 1884 and 1885 are in this grey area.
A legitimate mint creation simply means they were created under legitimate circumstances - similar to the Class I 1804 dollars.
From that point on I profess no current opinion other than the fact that things could be done with proof coinage then that can't be done today. How did the non presentation set 1804s leave the Mint? Who knows....
Look at the quality differences between the 1884 and 1885 trade dollars. If they were created by the same personnel at the same time, the coins would be similar in appearance. But no - the 1884s all have full strikes and full mirrors whereas the 1885s have varying strikes and mirrors.
The 1884s were struck as a normal proof run by the Mint's normal processes and personnel. The 1885s were struck on the sly by persons not quite as adept.
@tradedollarnut posted, "Pssst...1884&1885."
Heck, how rare can these two Trade Dollar dates be as Col. Green had four 1884 Trade Dollars and two 1885 Trade Dollars at one time!!!
They are extremely rare, of course.....
W. David Perkins Numismatics - http://www.davidperkinsrarecoins.com/ - 25+ Years ANA, ANS, NLG, NBS, LM JRCS, LSCC, EAC, TAMS, LM CWTS, CSNS, FUN
So in 1860, Director Snowden locks all the rare dies in his safe. In 1866, Linderman becomes director, A.L. Snowden becomes Chief Coiner. Linderman opens box of old dies, make lists (in archives), including 1804 Dollars.
In 1912 or 13, Haseltine states that he was in the Mint in 1868, when there was a fire, and the 1804 Dollar dies
were by the coining presses. Surprise, Linderman has an 1804 Type III and a few of the other great rarities from
the die list in his safe, and Haseltine handles most of the other Type III, he spent the next 10 years creating long
stories of where he got them. One of the people who purchased, requested William DuBois to determine if one
is original, which DuBois does, as DuBois was having restrikes made for years himself........
The Type III is obvious, Linderman authorized, A.L. Snowden struck, Haseltine distributed.
The Type III 1804 were taken out in 1860 as that is when a midnight minter made tons of restrikes and was selling them
between Boston and Phila, including an 1804 Dollar, which collectors were complaining to the Director about.
If you send me an email, I will send you the white paper I wrote on proofs and patterns, and tried to cover all of the
grey areas and mint laws that covered these.
Practically common! I myself have owned four 1884s and three 1885s at different times over the years...
I agree, 1884 were struck and not distributed, all but 10 were melted, and somehow given to Idler
The 1885 they had to make an obverse working die (if they struck at the end of 1884 before the melted the 1884 reverses)
and they had to clandestinely strike the coins. Most proofs before 1894 were struck on a screw press in the Medal Room
which of course took more people. Plus you had to polish the planchets. Snowden, who was the Superintendent, was the
chief coiner form 66 to 77 so obviously he would know the machinery and technique, but probably was rushed, and
as done clandestinely, probably wanted to keep the number of people involved to min, so probably was sloppy as compared
to the 1884.
I agree that the 1884 and 1885 Trade dollars were not struck at the same time. More than likely, when it was decided to melt, Snowden took 10, and then decided to strike a few for 1885.
Counterstamped Trade Dollars are rare! This is one of the few listed in the Brunk book on Countermarked coins. It recently turned up at a small coin show in the Chicago area.
.....
....
Photo courtesy of W. David Perkins
W. David Perkins Numismatics - http://www.davidperkinsrarecoins.com/ - 25+ Years ANA, ANS, NLG, NBS, LM JRCS, LSCC, EAC, TAMS, LM CWTS, CSNS, FUN
Of the main varieties, I think the 75-P I/I and 76-P II/II are the rarest.
There is an interesting 76-P I/II transition piece that has the ribbon on the obverse pointing to the left (like a Type I) but Miss Liberty has four fingers (like a Type II). That one is also rare.
As for chopmarked Trade Dollars, the 75-P and 78-CC are the rarest. I think the 75-P is the rarer of the two. Also extremely tough to find is a chopmarked 73-P.
Complete Set of Chopmarked Trade Dollars
Carson City Silver Dollars Complete 1870-1893http://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/showcase.aspx?sc=2722"
With regards to 1804s leaving the Mint, it was the Class I coins under discussion (i.e.: legitimately produced but unused for intended destination and retained by the Mint). Most likely distribution was for trade in return for desired Mint Collection coins....but who is to say they didn't do the same with the 84s, 85s, 1801-1803 proof novodels, etc.
It's hard to judge when there are zero standards at all! Lol
Bruce, you've displayed your Seated Dollars and Bust Dollars in the last year. When do we get to see the Trade Dollars? For those of you who haven't had the pleasure of seeing his set intact, it is truly insane! Although I've seen Gem Bust dollars and Seated Dollars over the last several years, I haven't seen ANY Trade dollars on the market to rival what he has in his MS set.
I think Pcgs has had enough of displaying my sets for a while - but we shall see
It's definitely the highest quality set with 15 pop 1/0 out of 18 coins...and has never been resubmitted either.
How about this series? I've got a horse in the game.
http://www.pcgscoinfacts.com/CoinImages.aspx?s=145696
Ron Guth: The 1877 Double Die Obverse Trade Dollar is a distinctive variety caused when the die was hubbed twice, with each punch slightly out of rotation from the other. The doubling is most visible on the letters of LIBERTY, on the top of the cotton bale upon which Liberty sits, the right end of the scroll (particularly under TRUST), and on the final star. Surprisingly, this variety does not command much of a premium despite its scarcity. PCGS has graded only four examples as of March 2011, three of which are Mint State, and the finest of which is a single MS-63.
i have seen in hand or in pictures many/most of the graded or claimed 75p chops and I have never
-seen one with convincing Chops that matched the die diagnostics of a real 75p
-or one that was clearly a 75p that had obviously real & period chops
I have seen one or two problem 75p's that had damage that maybe, sort of might be chops.
A vote for the 75cc wide that was featured in the last issue of the LSCC Journal. That and a 76s DDO are the keys to a variety set. Here are the two known examples of the 75cc and a decent 76s ddo
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
That surprising considering it was featured in the last LSCC Journal and has been in my showcase and mentioned in multiple threads. IMO I would say it is the most significant discovery in the series in years and was made by Stealer of this forum before passing the coin on to Joe. Considering the 1.2mm coins have had a following over a few generations of collectors and people have been looking and speculating about their existence for decades and only just found them. Both coins reside in XF details holders for the rim ding and over dipping respectively.
A few of us have been pouring over the 75cc's for about a year now and have only found one extra, i would suspect there maybe a couple more but not many. In all honesty the 73cc is almost as rare as I haven't seen one in the wild in 5 or so years and the few that are passed around were from the initial discovery and pull form population/supply period including your XF. Creates a interesting mini-set of 4 coins.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
Previously owned an AU Details ANACS 1876-CC with small, wide MM.
Traded it before having been aware of the significance.
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.americanlegacycoins.com
Interesting set. I've got a couple of the 1877-S 'No Periods' varieties w/ chopmarks, including the standard Large S, no period after FINE:
As well as the variety to which you seem to be referring, the No Periods after FINE, AMERICA, or DOLLAR, the true version of which also features a blunted R in DOLLAR, as well as a tapering arrowshaft:
The more typical period example without a period after FINE only does not seem to be excessively rare, but the example lacking all three periods seems to be quite scarce to rare, and extremely rare with chopmarks.
Nice coin Taylor, The 77s blunt R no peiord is one of the multiple of 77s varieties I inspect for when I look over any 77s that comes my way manly because Joe taught me about it early. I have never squeezed the trigger as they don't really fit my set but for reference I have seen multiple dozens over the years all the way from fine to mid range UNC. Not common but not rare. I have seen maybe 2-3x more of those than the 77s RPD for comparison and that isn't incredibly rare either.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
Those are roughly the same ratios that I've seen; over the past 12 months or so I've probably seen about ten or so examples of the no period, and roughly half that many RPDs.
Yes and I have seen around that many as well to include a highend UNC at a recent HA auction.
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
TLeverage, I like that 1877-S with no periods, I especially like that tapered arrow shaft!
An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.