The registration between the first strike and the second strike(s) is flawless. I tried to find any evidence of close double striking and there is none. The coiner must have put one die (I am guessing the obverse) in a medal press, fit the coin into that die, fit the other die atop the coin with perfect registration except for the protruding O, and caused the press to strike the coin.
TD
Tom,
Looking at the blown-up PCGS photos - if they lined up the previously struck coin as you suspect, they were spot on. There are a few places that kind of looks like what we today would call slight machine doubling. I guess given your theory, it could also be taken as the very, very, very slight difference in the placement, or perhaps the different dies themselves. For instance, a few cross-sections:
Nothing that you could not find on a twice-struck Proof of the era.
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.
This is one of my favorite US coins. I had the privilege of examining it twice: once, when I was writing catalog descriptions for the Goldbergs in 2003 (you can read my lengthy description in their 9/2003 catalog, lot 535) and, a second time when it came through PCGS for a regrade a few years later. What a coin!
In my opinion, StrikeOutXXX hit the nail on the head in matching the coin to the 1906 Chapman brothers sale.
And Roger, congratulations on adding even more information. You always come up with great stuff.
According to the priced copy of the Smith catalog on the Newman Numismatic Portal, the purchaser of this coin in 1906 was A.F. Eno. Does anyone know who he is? He was a big buyer at the sale and he was outspent only by John Story Jenks, J.M Clapp, and Virgil Brand!
Thank God for the Internet. A.F. Eno is most likely Amos F. Eno of New York, son of the real estate scion Amos R. Eno. Google "Amos F. Eno" for more info.
Even more...it appears that a grandson, another Amos Eno, bought a block of eight inverted Jenny stamps from the Col. Green sale.
Die manufacturing note.
During the era in question, working dies nearly always distorted slightly in radius during hardening and final tempering. Dollars likely took 6 to 8 squeezes from the hub to fully bring up the design, and between each there was a softening heat process. Final hardening was done at higher temperature with rapid face cooling. That was followed by lower temperature and slower tempering to reduce crystal stress in cold working tool steels available. (Most US Mint die steel came from England.)
This is one of my favorite US coins. I had the privilege of examining it twice: once, when I was writing catalog descriptions for the Goldbergs in 2003 (you can read my lengthy description in their 9/2003 catalog, lot 535) and, a second time when it came through PCGS for a regrade a few years later. What a coin!
In my opinion, StrikeOutXXX hit the nail on the head in matching the coin to the 1906 Chapman brothers sale.
And Roger, congratulations on adding even more information. You always come up with great stuff.
I enjoyed the auction listing, but I take it you were not familiar at that time with our 1992 meeting. That established that the piece was indeed an overstrike from known restrike dies on an O-Mint dollar, and that our ANACS certificate was in error.
I am surprised that nobody else deduced that the date of the host coin had been removed prior to the strike. I wonder how much an “1859” weighs?
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.
@Realone said:
I believe I see remnants of an underrate on the pcgs blow up of the obverse. Maybe someone here can blow up the date for final conformation if there is or isn't and if there is what the date might be.
Well, I looked for an under date with the coin in hand under a stereo microscope and could not find one.
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.
@tradedollarnut said:
FYI: the coin went to The Fund after I sold it my seated dollar set. When I bought the set back, it included the 1851-O. I quickly wholesaled it off for $200k as in my mind it is nothing more than a restrike over an O mint host coin.
Did you see any remnant of an underrate?
Why did you ask the above question then?
I assumed that he had the coin in hand to look at, not internet pictures.
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.
@ExpertNumismatics said:
Thank God for the Internet. A.F. Eno is most likely Amos F. Eno of New York, son of the real estate scion Amos R. Eno. Google "Amos F. Eno" for more info.
Even more...it appears that a grandson, another Amos Eno, bought a block of eight inverted Jenny stamps from the Col. Green sale.
Amos F Eno
Birth 13 Jun 1836 in New York, USA
Death 21 Oct 1915
He served in the Civil War on the staff of his uncle General John Phelps of Missouri, retiring with the rank of Colonel. He invested in real estate in New York City and left the majority of his estate to Collumbia University. This caused a huge controversy in the family and it took years to settle it.
===
I can't find anything like a auction of his coins or even much mention of his coin collection. Looks like his estate was hung up in court with his nieces and nephews protesting his will primarily over the huge amount he left to Columbia University. There were still court proceedings going on into the 1920's to resolve it. During the trial, there was an exhibit listing the appraisal of personal property, including coins as exhibit 50, but I can't find that specific exhibit to see if the 1851 was listed specifically. If the coin had still been in his possession upon his death, it likely wouldn't have been transferred/sold until at least 1922 as that is when the case was settled.
@StrikeOutXXX said:
Here is the date area from the PCGS photo of the overstruck coin. Hard to tell much with the shadowy outline.
Excellent picture. Once again I see no trace of an underdate, not even in the toning. The entire exergue must have been scraped smooth prior to the overstriking, which I assume would have allowed it to tone uniformly afterwards.
So very strange that the date area was so properly prepared but the mint mark was ignored. The tooling away of the date would probably have been beyond the skill of Theodore Eckfeldt, my favorite suspect for the "Midnight Minter," but ignoring the mint mark might fit the work of a doofus that would strike an 1804 silver dollar on a Swiss Shooting Thaler!
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.
This would be critical to the assumption that a date was effaced from a host New Orleans dollar prior to polishing the host coin and striking with polished dies. Removing the date by cutting or abrasion would have reduced the coin's weight considerably.
(Suggestion: Do not think of the host coin as a "coin" - rather, it is analogous to a metal "preform" that has most of the desired shapes and contours, but not the details. Using a preform would have permitted making a coin that looked like any other proof, but avoided the problem of retained under type. In this instance, that seems to have worked extremely well except for the mintmark, which was an anomalous detail not in the proof reverse die.)
Dear Sir,
I have heard it repeated that the Mint have restruck some of the rare pattern coins and also the 1851 and 1852 dollars, if so, could I get one of each and at what price. I do not want them to sell. If not, could you give me [a] list of them and the number struck; also are the 3 cent pieces of 1859 issued yet? If not could you spare me one of two proof ones? Please have the above answered and you will greatly oblige.
Yours truly,
[Irving] R. Curtis
Two 3-cent pieces enclosed.
DM circular July 8, 1859
Roger - Did you ever find anything to nail down the actual dates of the restriking?
All the articles I found and websites list several dates/possible dates, but no sources. Some reference two restriking periods.
First seen at auction in 1859
Known since the 1860's
Restrikes made from 1858-1859 and again 1865-1867
1860's to 1870's
Spring 1859
Later in the 1850's and again 1865-1866
Must be nice to just have a couple 3-cent proofs sent to you.
What is "DM circular"? Did Snowden have a "Catalog" of some sort with his restriking ventures to order? LOL
Details, sources and other bits will be in my research book on U.S. Mint restriking of circulation, proof and pattern pieces. There is no deadline for completion - it's a huge task. Research is very time consuming and expensive. I have a good overview and details (including names of participants) for some time periods. I can say with confidence that the old "midnight minter" story is false in nearly all respects.
Restriking from circulation/proof dies and some patterns took place largely between January and August 1859 and was sanctioned by the Director. Additional patterns were restruck and/or muled from September 1868 into January 1869. It further appears, but I have only circumstantial evidence so far, the A. L. Snowden had off-metal pieces made from pattern dies while he was Superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint.
Roger, a bit of physical evidence to keep an eye out for is that regular Proofs from the late 1860's, as well as some patterns such as certain "Standard Silver" issues, often show some crude die polish lines on them from somebody in that department not knowing their job. Many of the restrikes made in this time period show the same types of die polish.
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.
Thanks! That's useful information. I have all the employee names and most of their actual jobs (versus their job titles), so your observations will be helpful.
Andy did his homework on his page below citing an early auction record:
These were often offered in the pattern sections of sales by Cogan, Woodward and Mason & Company who were well aware of their restrike status. The earliest occurrence for one of these was lot 134 of Cogan's May 1859 Simon Gratz sale.
Nice picture of another 1851 struck over an 1846 dollar too.
He also had a reference for the possible first Copper auction record
These were also struck in copper as J132/P159 and nickel J133/P160. Its first occurrence may have been lot 1995 of Cogan's October 1865 F.S. Edwards sale.
I found 2 more of the 1906 Chapman Brothers (Smith sale) catalogs on the ANA site - seemed to have decent scans of the plate to add for future researchers.
One of the auction pages were pretty bare, but did have $85 marked next to lot 454 - the other one is quite verbose - marked "Cord".
If you look on the back pages of this particular catalog (I think this is the same copy @ExpertNumismatics found a few days ago) Cord was code for Eno as he suggested:
Eno Bought $405 worth of coins with a $40.50 commission. Was billed 5/14 and paid 5/17 1906.
Like I said a few posts back - if Amos F. Eno kept the coin until his death in 1915, it likely wouldn't have been seen again until mid-late 1922 at the earliest. His relatives sued to keep his last will from being executed, and the case battled on and on through appeals until they finally settled in early 1922. Many of the benefactors finally received their gifted amount in mid-late 1922.
The whole Eno estate fiasco was in the paper as costing the heirs over $1,000,000 just in attorney fees.
Amos F. Eno died without direct descendants - his 10+ Million dollar estate was left about 1/3 to nieces, nephews, friends, and servants, 1/3 to various charities, museums and such, and 1/3 to Columbia University.
His coins were not specifically mentioned in the will, the only mention of them was during the many trials and appeals, there was an exhibit submitted regarding an appraisal of coins among other things.
It is doubtful the universities, museums, charities received the coins, right now if I had to guess, one or some of the family members ended up with them. There were many males still with the last name of Eno, and some of the married nieces now had last names of Pinchot or Graves. No immediate results of any coin auctions under those names.
More really interesting material. You are now getting beyond just the basic "coin" and into the real provenance and reasons for events.
I can image an author or catalog writer drooling over this wealth of new information- especially when combined with what was already known! If thread participants can get it all assembled and published in one place, think of the advancement in our understanding, and the choice research available for future collectors - and dealers!
Commercial Message: Yet another example of the powers of collaboration in discovery and solving research problems.
In Volume 10 is reference to Exhibit 50. I'm curious if that can be accessed if it's a lump value (Like: 50 coins - $XYZ) or lists them separately, perhaps showing the 1851 Proof Dollar still in his possession when Eno passed.
Most of his donations to charities, museums, or the University was money, real estate, or a collection of New York prints/art - no mention of coins specifically.
May not have much to go forward on from here - does anyone have information on the owner of the coin during the 1983 secret examination? If anyone was there or we know who the owner was then, maybe we can work backwards as well.
1983 - "Heritage added, “A conversation with Kenneth Bressett revealed that he had examined the coin along with several other prominent numismatists in 1983. At that time the owner swore everyone to secrecy who examined the piece""
And Roger - I just like to dig... part of me is still a criminal investigator at heart.
@StrikeOutXXX The piece was submitted to ANACS by a dealer. He later organized that 1983 secret meeting. It is my understanding that he owned it for quite some time afterwards.
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.
Thanks Capt - That is likely when it was first encapsulated as the ANACS PF62 (1983) You mentioned in an earlier post that Tommy Acker and yourself examined this coin in 1983 - Ken was the Director of ANACS then - is this the "Secret" meeting so to speak? If not, were you involved in it at a later time? If any of the other folks are still with us, you care to reach out to them to see if they remember anything else of the coin's history, or even better if you remember who that owner was if they care to share with us the details.
Was that submitter still the owner when you, Gray and Roach again examined it at the ANA in '92?
The next mention of the coin is when it was in the Heritage auction in 1998 still in the ANACS slab (reserve not met of $250k)
We have 1.5k views of this thread - I have to assume we have some guests who perhaps are not message board members reading along as we go. If you have any other info on this coin that would help fill in some blanks - or if you're a lawyer with access to "Exhibit 50" posted a few posts back - send me an e-mail: StrikeOutXXX (at) stny.rr.com you can remain anonymous of course.
I think that ANACS received it in 1982. There were no slabs then. Paper certificate era.
Don't think Bressett was there yet. That secret meeting was definitely later.
Don't know if submitter was still owner in 1992, but I would say probably.
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.
RE: Estate filings.
Anyone can go to the appropriate courthouse and request a copy of the documents. It is unlikely to have been digitized, so it could take several months to locate the paper files and photocopy the pages....provided they have not been inadvertently destroyed.
400.3 grains ("grams" being a typo)....Which suggests removal of some parts of the base coin before striking. Never having weighed the digits "1-8-5-1" on a silver dollar, I don't know that 12.2 grains is what the little buggers might weigh - but I suspect it's something close, especially if the base coin were also polished.
What about the reeding of this 1851-O proof vs a normal proof or a New Orleans mint dollar?
Side Comment: This also returns to comments others have made in the past about authentication of very rare or unusual coins. To me, authentication implies a careful, complete examination of the physical object as well as past literature. Yet the coin holder has nothing about weight or diameter, edge, etc, and the various descriptions (auction and otherwise) seem incomplete in this respect....most seemingly content to repeat chopped liver rather than serve prime filet minion.
I can't find that issue of The Numismatist on the NNP - anyone have a link to this article?
The 1st letter I'm pretty sure is quoted in another thread, more curious about the 2nd letter to Curtis.
“Semiofficial Restrikes of the Philadelphia Mint,” The Numismatist, Vol. 66, No. 10 (October 1953), pp. 1038-1039.Examines two letters written by Mint Director James Ross Snowden, which together demonstrate that while Snowden requested permission of the Secretary of the Treasury to sell restrikes of rare patterns and issues, he had already agreed to do so before requesting said permission. The earlier letter, which offers to restrike 1851 dollars, is written to early collector and dealer John K. Curtis.
Numismatist articles are available through WWW.money.org Just use your ANA membership number as your password. Capitalize the letter(s) and no hyphen between the letters and the numbers.
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.
So back in March I submitted the article for the Gorbrecht Journal's July issue. It came out a few weeks ago. I attached the article in .PDF if anyone wishes to read it. (With Bill's permission)
I have received a few e-mails from readers which was nice.
Some gave a few more details surrounding the secret meeting time frame in the early 80's
Dennis Garstang gave permission to share his findings of the host coin of: _Very much enjoyed the article on the 1851-0 dollar in the latest GJ. I have a small bit of info to offer. You opine that the host coin is probably 1859-0 with slight possibility of 1850-0. I have examined the 51-0 and it does not have the reverse die lump of metal under the left wing (facing) as seen on all known examples of 1850-0 dollars. We can therefore rule out 1850-0 as being the host coin. Hope you find this of interest. _
Be nice if anyone has pictures of reverse die lump, most past research believed the host coin was the 1859-O but there was a slight chance of it being an 1850-O. If Dennis' observation eliminates the 1850-O that would further solidify the 1859-O as the host.
If there is any more info out there, please feel free to share!
@tradedollarnut said:
A case could be made that those are NOT the same coins. Different conclusions might be drawn
Do you think today's known example is not the coin referenced in H.P. Smith's 1877 letter and thus sold when his collection was sold in 1906? Given the photo comparisons in the thread plus the circumstantial evidence of ownership, I truly believe it is. Or were you referencing something else?
I think the mint mark area looks totally different and thus they could be separate examples. It’s not too much of a stretch to think if they did it once that they could have done it twice.
Nice article. Puts everything in one place and that, in turn, allows readers to offer additional information, speculations, or even facts.....
RE: "...51-0 and it does not have the reverse die lump of metal...."
Unless something very odd happened, damage to the 1851-O die had to occur while in use at the New Orleans Mint. Therefore, some coins should exist without the lump.
Comments
Never held it in hand
Tom,
Looking at the blown-up PCGS photos - if they lined up the previously struck coin as you suspect, they were spot on. There are a few places that kind of looks like what we today would call slight machine doubling. I guess given your theory, it could also be taken as the very, very, very slight difference in the placement, or perhaps the different dies themselves. For instance, a few cross-sections:
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
Nothing that you could not find on a twice-struck Proof of the era.
This is one of my favorite US coins. I had the privilege of examining it twice: once, when I was writing catalog descriptions for the Goldbergs in 2003 (you can read my lengthy description in their 9/2003 catalog, lot 535) and, a second time when it came through PCGS for a regrade a few years later. What a coin!
In my opinion, StrikeOutXXX hit the nail on the head in matching the coin to the 1906 Chapman brothers sale.
And Roger, congratulations on adding even more information. You always come up with great stuff.
According to the priced copy of the Smith catalog on the Newman Numismatic Portal, the purchaser of this coin in 1906 was A.F. Eno. Does anyone know who he is? He was a big buyer at the sale and he was outspent only by John Story Jenks, J.M Clapp, and Virgil Brand!
Thank God for the Internet. A.F. Eno is most likely Amos F. Eno of New York, son of the real estate scion Amos R. Eno. Google "Amos F. Eno" for more info.
Even more...it appears that a grandson, another Amos Eno, bought a block of eight inverted Jenny stamps from the Col. Green sale.
Die manufacturing note.
During the era in question, working dies nearly always distorted slightly in radius during hardening and final tempering. Dollars likely took 6 to 8 squeezes from the hub to fully bring up the design, and between each there was a softening heat process. Final hardening was done at higher temperature with rapid face cooling. That was followed by lower temperature and slower tempering to reduce crystal stress in cold working tool steels available. (Most US Mint die steel came from England.)
I> @ExpertNumismatics said:
I enjoyed the auction listing, but I take it you were not familiar at that time with our 1992 meeting. That established that the piece was indeed an overstrike from known restrike dies on an O-Mint dollar, and that our ANACS certificate was in error.
I am surprised that nobody else deduced that the date of the host coin had been removed prior to the strike. I wonder how much an “1859” weighs?
Well, I looked for an under date with the coin in hand under a stereo microscope and could not find one.
I assumed that he had the coin in hand to look at, not internet pictures.
Here is the date area from the PCGS photo of the overstruck coin. Hard to tell much with the shadowy outline.
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
Amos F Eno
Birth 13 Jun 1836 in New York, USA
Death 21 Oct 1915
He served in the Civil War on the staff of his uncle General John Phelps of Missouri, retiring with the rank of Colonel. He invested in real estate in New York City and left the majority of his estate to Collumbia University. This caused a huge controversy in the family and it took years to settle it.
===
I can't find anything like a auction of his coins or even much mention of his coin collection. Looks like his estate was hung up in court with his nieces and nephews protesting his will primarily over the huge amount he left to Columbia University. There were still court proceedings going on into the 1920's to resolve it. During the trial, there was an exhibit listing the appraisal of personal property, including coins as exhibit 50, but I can't find that specific exhibit to see if the 1851 was listed specifically. If the coin had still been in his possession upon his death, it likely wouldn't have been transferred/sold until at least 1922 as that is when the case was settled.
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
Excellent picture. Once again I see no trace of an underdate, not even in the toning. The entire exergue must have been scraped smooth prior to the overstriking, which I assume would have allowed it to tone uniformly afterwards.
So very strange that the date area was so properly prepared but the mint mark was ignored. The tooling away of the date would probably have been beyond the skill of Theodore Eckfeldt, my favorite suspect for the "Midnight Minter," but ignoring the mint mark might fit the work of a doofus that would strike an 1804 silver dollar on a Swiss Shooting Thaler!
TD
RE: CaptHenway's question about weight.
This would be critical to the assumption that a date was effaced from a host New Orleans dollar prior to polishing the host coin and striking with polished dies. Removing the date by cutting or abrasion would have reduced the coin's weight considerably.
(Suggestion: Do not think of the host coin as a "coin" - rather, it is analogous to a metal "preform" that has most of the desired shapes and contours, but not the details. Using a preform would have permitted making a coin that looked like any other proof, but avoided the problem of retained under type. In this instance, that seems to have worked extremely well except for the mintmark, which was an anomalous detail not in the proof reverse die.)
This might add a little to the discussion:
83 Necker Street
New York
July 4, 1859
Col. J. R. Snowden
Dear Sir,
I have heard it repeated that the Mint have restruck some of the rare pattern coins and also the 1851 and 1852 dollars, if so, could I get one of each and at what price. I do not want them to sell. If not, could you give me [a] list of them and the number struck; also are the 3 cent pieces of 1859 issued yet? If not could you spare me one of two proof ones? Please have the above answered and you will greatly oblige.
Yours truly,
[Irving] R. Curtis
Two 3-cent pieces enclosed.
DM circular July 8, 1859
Roger - Did you ever find anything to nail down the actual dates of the restriking?
All the articles I found and websites list several dates/possible dates, but no sources. Some reference two restriking periods.
Must be nice to just have a couple 3-cent proofs sent to you.
What is "DM circular"? Did Snowden have a "Catalog" of some sort with his restriking ventures to order? LOL
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
Details, sources and other bits will be in my research book on U.S. Mint restriking of circulation, proof and pattern pieces. There is no deadline for completion - it's a huge task. Research is very time consuming and expensive. I have a good overview and details (including names of participants) for some time periods. I can say with confidence that the old "midnight minter" story is false in nearly all respects.
Restriking from circulation/proof dies and some patterns took place largely between January and August 1859 and was sanctioned by the Director. Additional patterns were restruck and/or muled from September 1868 into January 1869. It further appears, but I have only circumstantial evidence so far, the A. L. Snowden had off-metal pieces made from pattern dies while he was Superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint.
Roger, a bit of physical evidence to keep an eye out for is that regular Proofs from the late 1860's, as well as some patterns such as certain "Standard Silver" issues, often show some crude die polish lines on them from somebody in that department not knowing their job. Many of the restrikes made in this time period show the same types of die polish.
Thanks! That's useful information. I have all the employee names and most of their actual jobs (versus their job titles), so your observations will be helpful.
Andy did his homework on his page below citing an early auction record:
These were often offered in the pattern sections of sales by Cogan, Woodward and Mason & Company who were well aware of their restrike status. The earliest occurrence for one of these was lot 134 of Cogan's May 1859 Simon Gratz sale.
http://uspatterns.com/18resdol4.html
Nice picture of another 1851 struck over an 1846 dollar too.
He also had a reference for the possible first Copper auction record
These were also struck in copper as J132/P159 and nickel J133/P160. Its first occurrence may have been lot 1995 of Cogan's October 1865 F.S. Edwards sale.
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
This is a cool thread!
I found 2 more of the 1906 Chapman Brothers (Smith sale) catalogs on the ANA site - seemed to have decent scans of the plate to add for future researchers.
One of the auction pages were pretty bare, but did have $85 marked next to lot 454 - the other one is quite verbose - marked "Cord".
https://archive.org/details/catalogueofmagni00chap_2/page/28
If you look on the back pages of this particular catalog (I think this is the same copy @ExpertNumismatics found a few days ago) Cord was code for Eno as he suggested:
Eno Bought $405 worth of coins with a $40.50 commission. Was billed 5/14 and paid 5/17 1906.
https://archive.org/details/catalogueofmagni00chap_2/page/142
Like I said a few posts back - if Amos F. Eno kept the coin until his death in 1915, it likely wouldn't have been seen again until mid-late 1922 at the earliest. His relatives sued to keep his last will from being executed, and the case battled on and on through appeals until they finally settled in early 1922. Many of the benefactors finally received their gifted amount in mid-late 1922.
The whole Eno estate fiasco was in the paper as costing the heirs over $1,000,000 just in attorney fees.
Amos F. Eno died without direct descendants - his 10+ Million dollar estate was left about 1/3 to nieces, nephews, friends, and servants, 1/3 to various charities, museums and such, and 1/3 to Columbia University.
His coins were not specifically mentioned in the will, the only mention of them was during the many trials and appeals, there was an exhibit submitted regarding an appraisal of coins among other things.
It is doubtful the universities, museums, charities received the coins, right now if I had to guess, one or some of the family members ended up with them. There were many males still with the last name of Eno, and some of the married nieces now had last names of Pinchot or Graves. No immediate results of any coin auctions under those names.
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
More really interesting material. You are now getting beyond just the basic "coin" and into the real provenance and reasons for events.
I can image an author or catalog writer drooling over this wealth of new information- especially when combined with what was already known! If thread participants can get it all assembled and published in one place, think of the advancement in our understanding, and the choice research available for future collectors - and dealers!
Commercial Message: Yet another example of the powers of collaboration in discovery and solving research problems.
The evidence that it's the same coin in the historical photos is compelling. Perhaps the 1906 photos were retouched to remove the remnants of the O?
Are there any lawyers here that perhaps have access to some type of Legal Portal with old cases and such, maybe from New York?
Here's a link of the Amos F. Eno case:
https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/008593776
In Volume 10 is reference to Exhibit 50. I'm curious if that can be accessed if it's a lump value (Like: 50 coins - $XYZ) or lists them separately, perhaps showing the 1851 Proof Dollar still in his possession when Eno passed.
Most of his donations to charities, museums, or the University was money, real estate, or a collection of New York prints/art - no mention of coins specifically.
May not have much to go forward on from here - does anyone have information on the owner of the coin during the 1983 secret examination? If anyone was there or we know who the owner was then, maybe we can work backwards as well.
1983 - "Heritage added, “A conversation with Kenneth Bressett revealed that he had examined the coin along with several other prominent numismatists in 1983. At that time the owner swore everyone to secrecy who examined the piece""
And Roger - I just like to dig... part of me is still a criminal investigator at heart.
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
That's good!
It is threads like this that make Forum watching worthwhile. This has been an interesting read. Keep it up.
@StrikeOutXXX The piece was submitted to ANACS by a dealer. He later organized that 1983 secret meeting. It is my understanding that he owned it for quite some time afterwards.
Thanks Capt - That is likely when it was first encapsulated as the ANACS PF62 (1983) You mentioned in an earlier post that Tommy Acker and yourself examined this coin in 1983 - Ken was the Director of ANACS then - is this the "Secret" meeting so to speak? If not, were you involved in it at a later time? If any of the other folks are still with us, you care to reach out to them to see if they remember anything else of the coin's history, or even better if you remember who that owner was if they care to share with us the details.
Was that submitter still the owner when you, Gray and Roach again examined it at the ANA in '92?
The next mention of the coin is when it was in the Heritage auction in 1998 still in the ANACS slab (reserve not met of $250k)
We have 1.5k views of this thread - I have to assume we have some guests who perhaps are not message board members reading along as we go. If you have any other info on this coin that would help fill in some blanks - or if you're a lawyer with access to "Exhibit 50" posted a few posts back - send me an e-mail: StrikeOutXXX (at) stny.rr.com you can remain anonymous of course.
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
I think that ANACS received it in 1982. There were no slabs then. Paper certificate era.
Don't think Bressett was there yet. That secret meeting was definitely later.
Don't know if submitter was still owner in 1992, but I would say probably.
RE: Estate filings.
Anyone can go to the appropriate courthouse and request a copy of the documents. It is unlikely to have been digitized, so it could take several months to locate the paper files and photocopy the pages....provided they have not been inadvertently destroyed.
I know that John McCloskey viewed this coin early on (c. 1980s). Whether he was part of the "secret meeting" I'm not sure.
JD commented on the coin here--
https://archive.org/details/grobechtjournalfn089libe/page/26
400.3 grains ("grams" being a typo)....Which suggests removal of some parts of the base coin before striking. Never having weighed the digits "1-8-5-1" on a silver dollar, I don't know that 12.2 grains is what the little buggers might weigh - but I suspect it's something close, especially if the base coin were also polished.
What about the reeding of this 1851-O proof vs a normal proof or a New Orleans mint dollar?
Side Comment: This also returns to comments others have made in the past about authentication of very rare or unusual coins. To me, authentication implies a careful, complete examination of the physical object as well as past literature. Yet the coin holder has nothing about weight or diameter, edge, etc, and the various descriptions (auction and otherwise) seem incomplete in this respect....most seemingly content to repeat chopped liver rather than serve prime filet minion.
I can't find that issue of The Numismatist on the NNP - anyone have a link to this article?
The 1st letter I'm pretty sure is quoted in another thread, more curious about the 2nd letter to Curtis.
“Semiofficial Restrikes of the Philadelphia Mint,” The Numismatist, Vol. 66, No. 10 (October 1953), pp. 1038-1039.Examines two letters written by Mint Director James Ross Snowden, which together demonstrate that while Snowden requested permission of the Secretary of the Treasury to sell restrikes of rare patterns and issues, he had already agreed to do so before requesting said permission. The earlier letter, which offers to restrike 1851 dollars, is written to early collector and dealer John K. Curtis.
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
Numismatist articles are available through WWW.money.org Just use your ANA membership number as your password. Capitalize the letter(s) and no hyphen between the letters and the numbers.
If anyone wants help in writing an updated article concerning this coin, please let me know.
Trying to wrap up an article on this coin.
If any past or present owners or anyone with further details have anything else to add about the coin or its history please post or send me a PM.
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
Super !
So back in March I submitted the article for the Gorbrecht Journal's July issue. It came out a few weeks ago. I attached the article in .PDF if anyone wishes to read it. (With Bill's permission)
I have received a few e-mails from readers which was nice.
Some gave a few more details surrounding the secret meeting time frame in the early 80's
Dennis Garstang gave permission to share his findings of the host coin of:
_Very much enjoyed the article on the 1851-0 dollar in the latest GJ. I have a small bit of info to offer. You opine that the host coin is probably 1859-0 with slight possibility of 1850-0. I have examined the 51-0 and it does not have the reverse die lump of metal under the left wing (facing) as seen on all known examples of 1850-0 dollars. We can therefore rule out 1850-0 as being the host coin. Hope you find this of interest. _
Be nice if anyone has pictures of reverse die lump, most past research believed the host coin was the 1859-O but there was a slight chance of it being an 1850-O. If Dennis' observation eliminates the 1850-O that would further solidify the 1859-O as the host.
If there is any more info out there, please feel free to share!
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
A case could be made that those are NOT the same coins. Different conclusions might be drawn
Do you think today's known example is not the coin referenced in H.P. Smith's 1877 letter and thus sold when his collection was sold in 1906? Given the photo comparisons in the thread plus the circumstantial evidence of ownership, I truly believe it is. Or were you referencing something else?
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
I think the mint mark area looks totally different and thus they could be separate examples. It’s not too much of a stretch to think if they did it once that they could have done it twice.
Just finished reading the article in the Gobrecht Journal. Very interesting.
Complete Set of Chopmarked Trade Dollars
Carson City Silver Dollars Complete 1870-1893http://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/showcase.aspx?sc=2722"
Nice article. Puts everything in one place and that, in turn, allows readers to offer additional information, speculations, or even facts.....
RE: "...51-0 and it does not have the reverse die lump of metal...."
Unless something very odd happened, damage to the 1851-O die had to occur while in use at the New Orleans Mint. Therefore, some coins should exist without the lump.
I believe this is Dennis' "Die Lump" which shows on all the Coinfacts images for 1850-O
It definitely does not present on the 1851-O, but I am not sure if the overstrike would have obliterated/flattened it or not.
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101