Home U.S. Coin Forum
Options

$100 Union

rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

I was going through my coin cabinet (one of them) this morning and saw this.... had it since about 2010...

A beautiful design... never get tired of it.... Cheers, RickO

Comments

  • Options
    OldEastsideOldEastside Posts: 4,602 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That's neet

    Steve

    Promote the Hobby
  • Options
    CascadeChrisCascadeChris Posts: 2,517 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Love Morgan's Union. Fyi RickO, only the obverse is a Morgan design he didn't have a sketch of the reverse in his sketchbook.

    The more you VAM..
  • Options
    AUandAGAUandAG Posts: 24,538 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I enjoyed owning one for a few years. Don't know why I sold it but probably to purchase something else I don't have anymore either.

    bob :)

    Registry: CC lowballs (boblindstrom), bobinvegas1989@yahoo.com
  • Options
    rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @CascadeChris.... Thanks for that detail....Now to find out where that came from.... Cheers, RickO

  • Options
    ZoinsZoins Posts: 33,888 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @CascadeChris said:
    Love Morgan's Union. Fyi RickO, only the obverse is a Morgan design he didn't have a sketch of the reverse in his sketchbook.

    Is the artist for the reverse known?

  • Options
    JimnightJimnight Posts: 10,818 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2, 2017 4:26PM

    .

  • Options
    RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 22, 2017 8:59AM

    Objectively, it is a counterfeit coin. It includes both a legal denomination and statement of the issuing authority, and the word "COPY" is missing as required by HPA for replicas. Also the name "$100 Union" cannot be trademarked since it is a government name and design used in historical documents. Further, a trademark cannot be registered for an illegal item or process.

    Morgan made sketches of this design, but it appears nothing more was done. There is a small amount of Congressional discussion available along with US Mint letters.

  • Options
    CascadeChrisCascadeChris Posts: 2,517 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Zoins said:

    @CascadeChris said:
    Love Morgan's Union. Fyi RickO, only the obverse is a Morgan design he didn't have a sketch of the reverse in his sketchbook.

    Is the artist for the reverse known?

    I'm not sure. I can check the paperwork for my gold union. Maybe it says it.

    @ricko said:
    @CascadeChris.... Thanks for that detail....Now to find out where that came from.... Cheers, RickO

    His sketchbook was found in the Smithsonian in the early 2000's I believe. There is now a hardcover coffee table book that replicates it. I have one around here somewhere

    The more you VAM..
  • Options
    rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    According to what I have found... the reverse design was in George T. Morgan's sketchbook, but not necessarily intended for use with the Union obverse.
    Also, New York Mint obtained a license to produce the coin with a portion of the profit going to the Smithsonian, where Jeff Garrett, the person who discovered Morgan's sketch, was doing his research.
    Cheers, RickO

  • Options
    CascadeChrisCascadeChris Posts: 2,517 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ricko said:
    According to what I have found... the reverse design was in George T. Morgan's sketchbook, but not necessarily intended for use with the Union obverse.
    Also, New York Mint obtained a license to produce the coin with a portion of the profit going to the Smithsonian, where Jeff Garrett, the person who discovered Morgan's sketch, was doing his research.
    Cheers, RickO

    Interesting. I'll have to dig out the book. It's been awhile since I read through it.

    The more you VAM..
  • Options
    ashelandasheland Posts: 22,694 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Those are cool!

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @RogerB said:
    Objectively, it is a counterfeit coin. It includes both a legal denomination and statement of the issuing authority, and the word "COPY" is missing as required by HPA for replicas. Also the name "$100 Union" cannot be trademarked since it is a government name and design used in historical documents. Further, a trademark cannot be registered for an illegal item or process.

    Morgan made sketches of this design, but it appears nothing more was done. There is a small amount of Congressional discussion available along with US Mint letters.

    It's not a copy as the coin was never issued. Dan Carrs 1964 peace dollar seems to also exploit this loophole.

    What I don't understand is the denomination. I thought you couldn't legally use denominations, or is there some loophole like intrinsic value?

  • Options

    ricko I wish I had coins like that I had forgot about. I really like the one you posted as it definitely has eye appeal.

  • Options
    KnellKnell Posts: 453 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I still have this $100 Union design. Used to be my favorite in my box of 20 but has been replaced especially when I started collecting medal/tokens as well. I think they made more of this but in 1 once of silver instead of the 2005 issue of 1.5 once. I'm keeping mine for a while because I like the design.

  • Options
    mt_mslamt_msla Posts: 815 ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 22, 2017 7:01PM

    Whoa whoa whoa what is happening? @ricko posted a photo ...?? ?? Are we in the Twilight Zone? ;) Cool coin or medal, whatever it is by the way!

    Insert witicism here. [ xxx ]

  • Options
    dcarrdcarr Posts: 8,007 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @RogerB said:
    Objectively, it is a counterfeit coin. It includes both a legal denomination and statement of the issuing authority, and the word "COPY" is missing as required by HPA for replicas. Also the name "$100 Union" cannot be trademarked since it is a government name and design used in historical documents. Further, a trademark cannot be registered for an illegal item or process.

    Morgan made sketches of this design, but it appears nothing more was done. There is a small amount of Congressional discussion available along with US Mint letters.

    It's not a copy as the coin was never issued. Dan Carrs 1964 peace dollar seems to also exploit this loophole.

    What I don't understand is the denomination. I thought you couldn't legally use denominations, or is there some loophole like intrinsic value?

    There is one difference between this "$100 Union" piece and my "1964-D" over-strike Peace.
    The planchet that the Union was struck on never had any legal tender standing.

  • Options
    oih82w8oih82w8 Posts: 11,900 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 23, 2017 3:23AM

    I just saw the Five ounce gold version of this at northeastcoin;

    **Type Date Service Grade Description Price
    Territorial Gold 1876 (2010) $100 Gold Union NGC Gem Proof UCAM This private issue displays a proposed design by George T. Morgan in 1876. Five ounces of pure gold.

    Inventory Id: 12232772 $7,750**

    That is one thing that I do not care for their, northeastcoin's website is that I cannot post a direct link to a listing.

    oih82w8 = Oh I Hate To Wait _defectus patientia_aka...Dr. Defecto - Curator of RMO's

    BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore...
  • Options
    HadleydogHadleydog Posts: 1,585 ✭✭✭

    @mt_msla said:
    Whoa whoa whoa what is happening? @ricko posted a photo ...?? ?? Are we in the Twilight Zone? ;) Cool coin or medal, whatever it is by the way!

    Yup......Twilight zone for sure. You must have missed his post of a toner from his collection just recently. :o
    Another very cool coin, ricko!

  • Options
    mt_mslamt_msla Posts: 815 ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 23, 2017 4:30AM

    :'(@Hadleydog I did miss that post.

    Insert witicism here. [ xxx ]

  • Options
    nencoinnencoin Posts: 1,222 ✭✭✭✭

    @oih82w8 said:
    I just saw the Five ounce gold version of this at northeastcoin;

    **Type Date Service Grade Description Price
    Territorial Gold 1876 (2010) $100 Gold Union NGC Gem Proof UCAM This private issue displays a proposed design by George T. Morgan in 1876. Five ounces of pure gold.

    Inventory Id: 12232772 $7,750**

    That is one thing that I do not care for their, northeastcoin's website is that I cannot post a direct link to a listing.

    @oih82w8 We noticed your comment about not being able to post a direct link to our listings. While we've had an option to email someone about a particular listing, it never really occurred to us that people aren't able to copy/paste links to specific coins. We have now added that feature. On each individual coin screen, you will see the option to copy a link to that particular item. Thank you for the idea!

  • Options
    DIMEMANDIMEMAN Posts: 22,403 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @RogerB said:
    Objectively, it is a counterfeit coin. It includes both a legal denomination and statement of the issuing authority, and the word "COPY" is missing as required by HPA for replicas. Also the name "$100 Union" cannot be trademarked since it is a government name and design used in historical documents. Further, a trademark cannot be registered for an illegal item or process.

    Morgan made sketches of this design, but it appears nothing more was done. There is a small amount of Congressional discussion available along with US Mint letters.

    It's not a copy as the coin was never issued. Dan Carrs 1964 peace dollar seems to also exploit this loophole.

    What I don't understand is the denomination. I thought you couldn't legally use denominations, or is there some loophole like intrinsic value?

    I don't see this a a counterfeit at all. This a a bullion medal of something that was proposed. And there never was a 100 Dollar coin. The 1964-D Peace Dollar on the other hand to me is a counterfeit as it was a coin minted by the U.S. Mint.

    JMHO

  • Options
    ElKevvoElKevvo Posts: 4,064 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nice piece, thanks for posting! Reverse is very Trade Dollar like...

    K

    ANA LM
  • Options
    gripgrip Posts: 9,962 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nice obverse, reverse not so much.

  • Options
    jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 31,935 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DIMEMAN said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @RogerB said:
    Objectively, it is a counterfeit coin. It includes both a legal denomination and statement of the issuing authority, and the word "COPY" is missing as required by HPA for replicas. Also the name "$100 Union" cannot be trademarked since it is a government name and design used in historical documents. Further, a trademark cannot be registered for an illegal item or process.

    Morgan made sketches of this design, but it appears nothing more was done. There is a small amount of Congressional discussion available along with US Mint letters.

    It's not a copy as the coin was never issued. Dan Carrs 1964 peace dollar seems to also exploit this loophole.

    What I don't understand is the denomination. I thought you couldn't legally use denominations, or is there some loophole like intrinsic value?

    I don't see this a a counterfeit at all. This a a bullion medal of something that was proposed. And there never was a 100 Dollar coin. The 1964-D Peace Dollar on the other hand to me is a counterfeit as it was a coin minted by the U.S. Mint.

    JMHO

    Counterfeit may not be exactly the correct word. Fraudulent? The point is: Could I issue $3 bills? No, Feds would be all over me. Could I issue a $1000 coin? $2 coin?

    Again, I thought that you weren't allowed to use $ as a denomination. BUT, it does seem that you see silver dollars, silver $10, the Dan Carr $s, etc. So, is the exception a question of intrinsic value? Could I issue a $1000 coin as long as it had more than a $1000 in intrinsic value? Is that why I can't print my $3 bills?

  • Options
    DIMEMANDIMEMAN Posts: 22,403 ✭✭✭✭✭

    To me you can make anything and sell it for what it is as long as it doesn't resemble an actual coin that was minted by the U.S Mint such as the 1964-D Peace Dollar which is even stamped on a real Peace Dollar. How this was allowed is way beyond me! This is out and out counterfeit to me.

  • Options
    dcarrdcarr Posts: 8,007 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DIMEMAN said:
    To me you can make anything and sell it for what it is as long as it doesn't resemble an actual coin that was minted by the U.S Mint such as the 1964-D Peace Dollar which is even stamped on a real Peace Dollar. How this was allowed is way beyond me! This is out and out counterfeit to me.

    Now we are back to the original debate about a minted coin versus an issued coin.
    1964-D Peace dollars, although minted, were never issued and they no longer exist according to the government.

    There are a lot of coins that the US Mint could have produced that we don't know about today. But what counts is the coins that were actually issued.

  • Options
    DIMEMANDIMEMAN Posts: 22,403 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @dcarr said:

    @DIMEMAN said:
    To me you can make anything and sell it for what it is as long as it doesn't resemble an actual coin that was minted by the U.S Mint such as the 1964-D Peace Dollar which is even stamped on a real Peace Dollar. How this was allowed is way beyond me! This is out and out counterfeit to me.

    Now we are back to the original debate about a minted coin versus an issued coin.
    1964-D Peace dollars, although minted, were never issued and they no longer exist according to the government.

    There are a lot of coins that the US Mint could have produced that we don't know about today. But what counts is the coins that were actually issued.

    Issued doesn't matter to me. If it was minted it should not be copied. Besides the 1964-D this would include the 1913 Nickels, the 1894-S Dimes and the 1804 Dollar. They were all minted but not issued.

  • Options
    SkyManSkyMan Posts: 9,493 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nice one Ricko!

  • Options
    rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thank you @SkyMan.....I really do like it... Cheers, RickO

  • Options
    dcarrdcarr Posts: 8,007 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DIMEMAN said:

    @dcarr said:

    @DIMEMAN said:
    To me you can make anything and sell it for what it is as long as it doesn't resemble an actual coin that was minted by the U.S Mint such as the 1964-D Peace Dollar which is even stamped on a real Peace Dollar. How this was allowed is way beyond me! This is out and out counterfeit to me.

    Now we are back to the original debate about a minted coin versus an issued coin.
    1964-D Peace dollars, although minted, were never issued and they no longer exist according to the government.

    There are a lot of coins that the US Mint could have produced that we don't know about today. But what counts is the coins that were actually issued.

    Issued doesn't matter to me. If it was minted it should not be copied. Besides the 1964-D this would include the 1913 Nickels, the 1894-S Dimes and the 1804 Dollar. They were all minted but not issued.

    I would count the official gifting of one 1804 dollar to the King of Siam as an "issuance".
    But I get what you are saying.
    However, there is a significant difference between the three coins you cited and the 1964-D Peace Dollar. Your three coins all are documented to exist at present, and the US Government has never issued a statement that they don't exist.

  • Options
    TurboSnailTurboSnail Posts: 1,668 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Oh wow, dcarr is working over time to make a 2009 ASE proof that I was cheated out off from a ebay seller last month. ;)

  • Options
    ZoinsZoins Posts: 33,888 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 21, 2017 9:13AM

    The 5oz version would be the rough size of the $100 Union. A $20 St. Gaudens has 0.9675 oz of gold so, back then a $100 coin would have 4.8375 oz of gold.

    Here's a photo of the 5oz gold version that sold on Dec 6, 2014 in the MBA Seattle Auction for $5,200 plus 19% BP. It's serial number 143 so there are at least that many of them struck.

    https://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/32507304_george-t-morgan-2005-100-gold-union-5-ounce-pure

  • Options
    CoinCrazyPACoinCrazyPA Posts: 2,899 ✭✭✭✭

    @TurboSnail said:
    Oh wow, dcarr is working over time to make a 2009 ASE proof that I was cheated out off from a ebay seller last month. ;)

    What?

    Positive BST transactions: agentjim007, cohodk, CharlieC, Chrischampeon, DRG, 3 x delistamps, djdilliodon, gmherps13, jmski52, Meltdown, Mesquite, 2 x nibanny, themaster, 2 x segoja, Timbuk3, ve3rules, jom, Blackhawk, hchcoin, Relaxn, pitboss, blu62vette, Jfoot13, Jinx86, jfoot13,Ronb

    Successful Trades: Swampboy,
  • Options
    rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Now that would be a good coin for Dan to strike... 2009 ASE.....fill that hole people... :D Cheers, RickO

  • Options
    CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 31,554 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @DIMEMAN said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @RogerB said:
    Objectively, it is a counterfeit coin. It includes both a legal denomination and statement of the issuing authority, and the word "COPY" is missing as required by HPA for replicas. Also the name "$100 Union" cannot be trademarked since it is a government name and design used in historical documents. Further, a trademark cannot be registered for an illegal item or process.

    Morgan made sketches of this design, but it appears nothing more was done. There is a small amount of Congressional discussion available along with US Mint letters.

    It's not a copy as the coin was never issued. Dan Carrs 1964 peace dollar seems to also exploit this loophole.

    What I don't understand is the denomination. I thought you couldn't legally use denominations, or is there some loophole like intrinsic value?

    I don't see this a a counterfeit at all. This a a bullion medal of something that was proposed. And there never was a 100 Dollar coin. The 1964-D Peace Dollar on the other hand to me is a counterfeit as it was a coin minted by the U.S. Mint.

    JMHO

    Ahem:

    https://www.apmex.com/product/52/1-oz-platinum-american-eagle-bu-random-year?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=New - No-Brand - Google Shopping&utm_term=4580840319526242&utm_content=Tier 2 Google Shopping

    Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
  • Options
    CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 31,554 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @RogerB said:
    Objectively, it is a counterfeit coin. It includes both a legal denomination and statement of the issuing authority, and the word "COPY" is missing as required by HPA for replicas. Also the name "$100 Union" cannot be trademarked since it is a government name and design used in historical documents. Further, a trademark cannot be registered for an illegal item or process.

    Morgan made sketches of this design, but it appears nothing more was done. There is a small amount of Congressional discussion available along with US Mint letters.

    I would not go so far as to call it a counterfeit, as there seems to be no intent to defraud.

    However, the Hobby Protection Act of 1973 puts restrictions on "Imitation Numismatic Items," not "Counterfeits," and the updates and clarifications to the law issued over the years make it very clear that a piece does not have to exactly resemble a legal tender coin to qualify as an "Imitation Numismatic Item" that is required to be marked with the word "COPY."

    The use of the term "DOLLARS" on the piece is more of a problem, IMHO. Remember the Nothaus "Liberty Dollars" that were seized for using the word "Dollar?" I once had somebody come into the coin shop and demand that I take his one ounce silver "Ten Dollars" piece at full face value (silver was about $7 at the time) because that is what the piece said on it. I could see somebody taking this "One Hundred Dollars" piece into an Apple store and trying to spend it at its full "Face Value."

    TD

    Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
  • Options
    RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Making something in the likeness or similitude of a coin is by legal definition an intent to defraud. Making or possessing dies to make the pieces is the same. The US Code offers no "wiggle room" just as there is none in sticking an automatic rifle out a window and pulling the trigger, then claiming innocence because "I didn't intend to kill people."

    Counterfeit is the only term that applies unless they comply with HPA.

    Unfortunately for the hobby (and business) of coin collecting, the volume of infestation is too low and diffuse for the Secret Service to have the resources to catch the perpetrators. A box of fake Gucci handbags garners more attention.

  • Options
    ZoinsZoins Posts: 33,888 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 21, 2017 12:39PM

    @RogerB said:
    the name "$100 Union" cannot be trademarked since it is a government name and design used in historical documents.

    Both "$100 Union" and "$100 Gold Union" have been granted US trademarks by the USPTO in 2005 with serial numbers 78594411 and 76627980.

  • Options
    dcarrdcarr Posts: 8,007 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 22, 2017 1:41AM

    @CaptHenway said:
    The use of the term "DOLLARS" on the piece is more of a problem, IMHO. Remember the Nothaus "Liberty Dollars" that were seized for using the word "Dollar?" I once had somebody come into the coin shop and demand that I take his one ounce silver "Ten Dollars" piece at full face value (silver was about $7 at the time) because that is what the piece said on it. I could see somebody taking this "One Hundred Dollars" piece into an Apple store and trying to spend it at its full "Face Value."

    TD

    The VonNothaus Liberty Dollars were not seized just because they had "Dollar" on them. A lot of casino tokens (like the ones you mentioned) have "One Dollar" (or similar) on them and they haven't been seized.

    VonNothaus got into trouble because he actively promoted his Liberty Dollars as legal tender and as something that should be used in general circulation, in place of Federal Reserve notes and US Treasury coins.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file