@CaptHenway said:
Indeed an excellent imitation of the regular issue devices, but there are numerous differences feather to feather or hair strand to hair strand.
If you took a Federal half eagle reverse die and over-lapped it, the result would be practically an exact feather-to-feather match to the Smith die.
Can anybody do an overlay? I do not have photographic skills.
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.
A genuine coin that has been altered (or over-struck) to have fantasy elements (such as a date that does not exist for the type) has never been found by a court to be an "imitation numismatic item".
As I understand the matter, it has never been found to NOT be an "imitation numismatic item" either.
The FTC keeps ignoring the issue hoping it will go away. Some day the sleeping giant may rouse enough to swat at we flies tickling its nose.
That said, my original question posited whether a modern striking from the Union obverse/ Smith reverse dies would be an "imitation numismatic item." I never mentioned the overstrikes in that question.
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.
Wow, this all again? I am not understanding how it is a problem to strike up a fantasy coin of which there are no known "genuine" specimens. Just what is being imitated?
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
Re-reading the auction lot description, the markings on the "lightly used" Smith die (reeding marks on the shank from cycling up and down in a collar; chuck key digs on the side; gold flake in a recess) indicate that the die was used to strike SOMETHING. Whether or not it was full weight gold coins or base metal patterns or splashers, the die struck something. Any of those options would be a highly prized numismatic rarity. Note the informed report that obverse splashers have sold in excess of $50,000. A striking from the reverse, with the "COL. TER." inscription, would presumably be worth more.
None are known AT THIS MOMENT. That does not mean that they do not exist. The die itself was essentially unknown until the auction sale. The 1870-S Half Dime did not exist until it was discovered.
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.
Ah, grasshopper, speculation comes cheap. Also, I'm still not sure how something that is not known to exist can be imitated; no doubt Dan would have a date change and/or another distinguisher.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
Ah, grasshopper, speculation comes cheap. Also, I'm still not sure how something that is not known to exist can be imitated; no doubt Dan would have a date change and/or another distinguisher.
Did you not read the auction description? There are clear and convincing signs that it was clearly used to strike gold coins (tokens, medals, etc. choose your preferred term - all are explicitly covered by the HPA). Extant pieces need not remain. Imitations need not be exact per GBI.
There are none so blind, as those who will not see.
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.
Getting back to numismatics, has anybody ever tried matching up the punches on the Smith die with other contemporary tokens? The ampersands might be distinctive. How many Civil War tokens have ampersands?
I assume that the punches are different than on the Conway dies, which by coincidence have a variety of ampersands.
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.
Doing an overlay was difficult due to the differences in the lighting of the two pictures.
Here is the best I could do by contouring the image brightness. Blue contour lines for the Smith coin, red contour lines for the Federal coin:
Ah, grasshopper, speculation comes cheap. Also, I'm still not sure how something that is not known to exist can be imitated; no doubt Dan would have a date change and/or another distinguisher.
Did you not read the auction description? There are clear and convincing signs that it was clearly used to strike gold coins (tokens, medals, etc. choose your preferred term - all are explicitly covered by the HPA). Extant pieces need not remain. Imitations need not be exact per GBI.
Does anyone know for sure if the George Morgan sketch for an 1876 Union coin was ever produced in physical form ?
Since none were known to exist as of 2006, the Smithsonian and NGC weren't concerned about the possibility of any pre-existing coins when they endorsed this piece that was produced by the private New York Mint:
Sorry that some residual gold in a die crevice DOES NOT mean a coin was struck. And what if it was a splasher? The point is you, sir, are interpreting.
"There are none so blind as those who will not see"> Really? What have you seen? NOT a coin certainly. You, grasshopper, are confusing the observation with a conclusion. Not the same if I need remind you.
Love that Milled British (1830-1960) Well, just Love coins, period.
@7Jaguars said:
Sorry that some residual gold in a die crevice DOES NOT mean a coin was struck. And what if it was a splasher? The point is you, sir, are interpreting.
"There are none so blind as those who will not see"> Really? What have you seen? NOT a coin certainly. You, grasshopper, are confusing the observation with a conclusion. Not the same if I need remind you.
I have seen the Hobby Protection Act. You, apparently, will not.
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.
@7Jaguars said:
Sorry that some residual gold in a die crevice DOES NOT mean a coin was struck. And what if it was a splasher? The point is you, sir, are interpreting.
"There are none so blind as those who will not see"> Really? What have you seen? NOT a coin certainly. You, grasshopper, are confusing the observation with a conclusion. Not the same if I need remind you.
Imitation numismatic items are not limited to coins.
Ah, grasshopper, speculation comes cheap. Also, I'm still not sure how something that is not known to exist can be imitated; no doubt Dan would have a date change and/or another distinguisher.
Did you not read the auction description? There are clear and convincing signs that it was clearly used to strike gold coins (tokens, medals, etc. choose your preferred term - all are explicitly covered by the HPA). Extant pieces need not remain. Imitations need not be exact per GBI.
Does anyone know for sure if the George Morgan sketch for an 1876 Union coin was ever produced in physical form ?
Since none were known to exist as of 2006, the Smithsonian and NGC weren't concerned about the possibility of any pre-existing coins when they endorsed this piece that was produced by the private New York Mint:
Relevance? Who said the government is perfect? The statute gives the government special exemptions that do not apply to private parties. It is as simple as that.
Ah, grasshopper, speculation comes cheap. Also, I'm still not sure how something that is not known to exist can be imitated; no doubt Dan would have a date change and/or another distinguisher.
Did you not read the auction description? There are clear and convincing signs that it was clearly used to strike gold coins (tokens, medals, etc. choose your preferred term - all are explicitly covered by the HPA). Extant pieces need not remain. Imitations need not be exact per GBI.
Does anyone know for sure if the George Morgan sketch for an 1876 Union coin was ever produced in physical form ?
Since none were known to exist as of 2006, the Smithsonian and NGC weren't concerned about the possibility of any pre-existing coins when they endorsed this piece that was produced by the private New York Mint:
Relevance? Who said the government is perfect? The statute gives the government special exemptions that do not apply to private parties. It is as simple as that.
Only Congress can authorize the production of a legal tender coin. But that didn't stop the Smithsonian from participating in a product that stated "United States of America" and "One Hundred Dollars" on it. This is probably because the Smithsonian realized that the Union coin did not exactly resemble any current money and a reasonable person would know not to take one as such.
The relevance is that IF the following were true, the New York Mint (with the blessing of NGC and the Smithsonian) violated it:
Extant pieces need not remain. Imitations need not be exact per GBI.
There are thousands of other private mint items that would fall into this same category of pieces that resemble previous numismatic items or rumored numismatic items. But items such as this follow generally accepted practices in the industry (some more examples below) :
There are indeed 50 shades of grey areas when determining what to call an "imitation numismatic item." The Humbert piece clearly spells out on its reverse when it was made and from what. If the FTC did give a rat's patoot about enforcing the HPA and run an "HPA Supreme Court," it would probably have given it the thumbs up.
The $100 Union, on the other hand, appears to be in violation of the HPA, IMHO. That may be why the makers cleverly co-opted the Smithsonian into the project, giving them a powerful partner in the Land of Clout. We all know what Clout is. At the end of the movie "Shakespeare in Love," the Beadle, the public enforcer of morals, is about to arrest Gwyneth Paltrow for daring to appear on stage as Juliet. Suddenly Dame Judi Dench appears as Queen Elizabeth the First, who walks around Juliet and then looks the Beadle in the eye and says "HE plays a woman well, DOES HE NOT?" The Beadle, sincerely interested in keeping his head, agrees with her. Now that's Clout!
But, as my Mother would have said before she passed away in January, "Two wrongs do not make a right." Earlier on I raised the philosophical question of whether or not a hypothetical Union/Smith dies "restrike" would be subject to the terms of the HPA. The existence of earlier-made possible or probable violations to the HPA does not negate the HPA, and so the question is still worthy of debate.
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.
Does anyone know for sure if the George Morgan sketch for an 1876 Union coin was ever produced in physical form ?
Since none were known to exist as of 2006, the Smithsonian and NGC weren't concerned about the possibility of any pre-existing coins when they endorsed this piece that was produced by the private New York Mint:
That sketch did not become a coin; however, it appears to have had some influence on the 1876 Centennial Medal, which was struck in gold (with precisely $100 worth of gold in it!)...
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
@dcarr said:
Thanks to a forum member I was recently able to get a copy of the American Numismatic Rarities auction catalog from the August 2006 Denver sale of the "Old West" and "Franklinton" collections.
If anyone personally knows the buyer and/or current owner of either of the two Colorado Territorial dies from that sale, if you would, please pass along to them that I would be interested in undertaking a minting project involving the J.J. Conway die and especially the P & R.R. Smith die.
Below are cropped scans from the auction catalog for both die lots. I "photo-shopped" and image of what the P & R.R. Smith gold coin would have looked like, and I pasted that onto the catalog scan.
The scans seem to have gone away. Could you repost them, please?
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.
@dcarr said:
Thanks to a forum member I was recently able to get a copy of the American Numismatic Rarities auction catalog from the August 2006 Denver sale of the "Old West" and "Franklinton" collections.
If anyone personally knows the buyer and/or current owner of either of the two Colorado Territorial dies from that sale, if you would, please pass along to them that I would be interested in undertaking a minting project involving the J.J. Conway die and especially the P & R.R. Smith die.
Below are cropped scans from the auction catalog for both die lots. I "photo-shopped" and image of what the P & R.R. Smith gold coin would have looked like, and I pasted that onto the catalog scan.
The scans seem to have gone away. Could you repost them, please?
I know who owns the P. & R.R Smith die.
I do not know who owns the J.J. Conway die.
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.
@dcarr count me in on the Smith & Co. restrikes in whatever option you are able to accomplish! They would be welcome additions to the Colorado portfolio.
Comments
Can anybody do an overlay? I do not have photographic skills.
As I understand the matter, it has never been found to NOT be an "imitation numismatic item" either.
The FTC keeps ignoring the issue hoping it will go away. Some day the sleeping giant may rouse enough to swat at we flies tickling its nose.
That said, my original question posited whether a modern striking from the Union obverse/ Smith reverse dies would be an "imitation numismatic item." I never mentioned the overstrikes in that question.
Wow, this all again? I am not understanding how it is a problem to strike up a fantasy coin of which there are no known "genuine" specimens. Just what is being imitated?
Well, just Love coins, period.
Re-reading the auction lot description, the markings on the "lightly used" Smith die (reeding marks on the shank from cycling up and down in a collar; chuck key digs on the side; gold flake in a recess) indicate that the die was used to strike SOMETHING. Whether or not it was full weight gold coins or base metal patterns or splashers, the die struck something. Any of those options would be a highly prized numismatic rarity. Note the informed report that obverse splashers have sold in excess of $50,000. A striking from the reverse, with the "COL. TER." inscription, would presumably be worth more.
None are known AT THIS MOMENT. That does not mean that they do not exist. The die itself was essentially unknown until the auction sale. The 1870-S Half Dime did not exist until it was discovered.
Ah, grasshopper, speculation comes cheap. Also, I'm still not sure how something that is not known to exist can be imitated; no doubt Dan would have a date change and/or another distinguisher.
Well, just Love coins, period.
.> @7Jaguars said:
Did you not read the auction description? There are clear and convincing signs that it was clearly used to strike gold coins (tokens, medals, etc. choose your preferred term - all are explicitly covered by the HPA). Extant pieces need not remain. Imitations need not be exact per GBI.
There are none so blind, as those who will not see.
Getting back to numismatics, has anybody ever tried matching up the punches on the Smith die with other contemporary tokens? The ampersands might be distinctive. How many Civil War tokens have ampersands?
I assume that the punches are different than on the Conway dies, which by coincidence have a variety of ampersands.
TD
The Smith die fonts seem to intentionally mimic the Federal style.
Doing an overlay was difficult due to the differences in the lighting of the two pictures.
Here is the best I could do by contouring the image brightness. Blue contour lines for the Smith coin, red contour lines for the Federal coin:
Does anyone know for sure if the George Morgan sketch for an 1876 Union coin was ever produced in physical form ?
Since none were known to exist as of 2006, the Smithsonian and NGC weren't concerned about the possibility of any pre-existing coins when they endorsed this piece that was produced by the private New York Mint:
Sorry that some residual gold in a die crevice DOES NOT mean a coin was struck. And what if it was a splasher? The point is you, sir, are interpreting.
"There are none so blind as those who will not see"> Really? What have you seen? NOT a coin certainly. You, grasshopper, are confusing the observation with a conclusion. Not the same if I need remind you.
Well, just Love coins, period.
I have seen the Hobby Protection Act. You, apparently, will not.
Imitation numismatic items are not limited to coins.
Relevance? Who said the government is perfect? The statute gives the government special exemptions that do not apply to private parties. It is as simple as that.
Only Congress can authorize the production of a legal tender coin. But that didn't stop the Smithsonian from participating in a product that stated "United States of America" and "One Hundred Dollars" on it. This is probably because the Smithsonian realized that the Union coin did not exactly resemble any current money and a reasonable person would know not to take one as such.
The relevance is that IF the following were true, the New York Mint (with the blessing of NGC and the Smithsonian) violated it:
There are thousands of other private mint items that would fall into this same category of pieces that resemble previous numismatic items or rumored numismatic items. But items such as this follow generally accepted practices in the industry (some more examples below) :
There are indeed 50 shades of grey areas when determining what to call an "imitation numismatic item." The Humbert piece clearly spells out on its reverse when it was made and from what. If the FTC did give a rat's patoot about enforcing the HPA and run an "HPA Supreme Court," it would probably have given it the thumbs up.
The $100 Union, on the other hand, appears to be in violation of the HPA, IMHO. That may be why the makers cleverly co-opted the Smithsonian into the project, giving them a powerful partner in the Land of Clout. We all know what Clout is. At the end of the movie "Shakespeare in Love," the Beadle, the public enforcer of morals, is about to arrest Gwyneth Paltrow for daring to appear on stage as Juliet. Suddenly Dame Judi Dench appears as Queen Elizabeth the First, who walks around Juliet and then looks the Beadle in the eye and says "HE plays a woman well, DOES HE NOT?" The Beadle, sincerely interested in keeping his head, agrees with her. Now that's Clout!
But, as my Mother would have said before she passed away in January, "Two wrongs do not make a right." Earlier on I raised the philosophical question of whether or not a hypothetical Union/Smith dies "restrike" would be subject to the terms of the HPA. The existence of earlier-made possible or probable violations to the HPA does not negate the HPA, and so the question is still worthy of debate.
That sketch did not become a coin; however, it appears to have had some influence on the 1876 Centennial Medal, which was struck in gold (with precisely $100 worth of gold in it!)...
What is now proved was once only imagined. - William Blake
I would be interested in one of the pieces if they are ever made
+1
The scans seem to have gone away. Could you repost them, please?
I know who owns the P. & R.R Smith die.
I do not know who owns the J.J. Conway die.
Pictures mirrored for easier viewing as a coin:
Thanks.
@dcarr count me in on the Smith & Co. restrikes in whatever option you are able to accomplish! They would be welcome additions to the Colorado portfolio.
Ditto that for me as well. Very nice appearing there!
Well, just Love coins, period.
For those that missed out on these, a few are up on Ebay for low prices. I am not the seller.