Home› U.S. Coin Forum
Options

Have article on 1873-S Seated Dollars in July issue of The Numismatist

CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 34,202 ✭✭✭✭✭

Please pardon the shameless self-promoting, but Dan Owens and I have an article on the 1873-S Seated Liberty Dollars in the July issue of The Numismatist that just went up online. The gist of the article is that the 700 1873-S Seated Dollars officially recorded as having been struck, but only unofficially presumed to have been melted, can more logically be presumed to have been 1872-S Dollars that were quietly issued in February of 1873.

Dan dug into the San Francisco Mint records and found that in late 1872 and early 1873 various quantities of silver were deposited by various companies and individuals that were specifically tagged at the time of the deposits for settlement in Standard Silver Dollars. The Mint even charged a special fee for payment in silver dollars, and reported this fee in their books in a specific account. The amount of silver so deposited would have generated a little over 9,800 coins, less melting, refining and coining wastages and losses.

The Mint issued 9,000 dollars in late 1872, and reported 700 dollars coined in 1873. None of the depositors of the silver earmarked for coinage into 9,800 or so dollars show any indication that they received half dollars or any other fractional coin instead of dollars. None of them show that the special fee they paid was refunded.

Mathematically this means that the 700 dollar coins were delivered to depositors, fulfilling all dollar obligations other than the wastages and roundings. The records show that the 1873 deliveries were dispersed to several small depositors, in precise quantities such as 87 or 117. This dispersal greatly minimizes the chance that all of the 700 coins were later somehow rounded up and exported or melted.

If those 700 coins were issued as part of the recorded 1873 deliveries, and they had been dated 1873-S, then a few of them should have survived to modern times. It is our contention that they were not dated 1873-S, and that the Redbook should be changed to eliminate the line listing for them, just as other phantom entries in the Mint's records (such as 1858-S Quarter Eagles) have been deleted from modern numismatic literature.

Please read the article and decide for yourself. Comments here are welcome.

TD

Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.

Comments

  • Options
    amwldcoinamwldcoin Posts: 11,269 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Curious what you think of the reports or rumor that an 1873-S was shown to someone(can't remember the details) back in the 70's????

  • Options
    CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 34,202 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @amwldcoin said:
    Curious what you think of the reports or rumor that an 1873-S was shown to someone(can't remember the details) back in the 70's????

    Just a rumor.

    Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
  • Options
    koynekwestkoynekwest Posts: 10,048 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I just read it a couple of hours ago.

  • Options
    RogerBRogerB Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited June 20, 2019 3:15PM

    Just be sure the roomers pay their rent in advance....

    Looking forward to the article!

  • Options
    kbbpllkbbpll Posts: 542 ✭✭✭✭

    If the listing is eliminated, doesn't the 1872-S $1 mintage also have to go up to 9,700?

  • Options
    CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 34,202 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @kbbpll said:
    If the listing is eliminated, doesn't the 1872-S $1 mintage also have to go up to 9,700?

    An excellent suggestion.

    Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
  • Options
    rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Very interesting... Thanks for the research.... Cheers, RickO

  • Options
    OldhoopsterOldhoopster Posts: 2,930 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Read it last night. Nice article

    Member of the ANA since 1982
  • Options
    CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 34,202 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thanks!

    Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
  • Options
    1northcoin1northcoin Posts: 5,560 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nice sleuthing. Maybe depositor records at the San Francisco Mint will be able to provide some clues as to the name(s) of the depositors who buried their minted gold in what became known as the Saddle Ridge Hoard.

  • Options
    TommyTypeTommyType Posts: 4,586 ✭✭✭✭✭

    My only thought, (of limited use):

    It would seem to me that IF "official" mintages are modified in a reference book based on best available research, the "official" numbers, and how the new documented number was arrived at, should probably be documented in the text, or footnote, or something. You can't assume that 50 years from now, a fresh and motivated young researcher won't "discover" the official mintage, and undo your good work because they just don't know any better....

    Unfortunately, that probably makes for a longer and hard to manage book, filled with "trivial" footnotes. (You know...like Breen's opus).

    Easily distracted Type Collector
  • Options
    carabonnaircarabonnair Posts: 1,483 ✭✭✭✭✭

    First article I read when I opened the issue online yesterday. Well done!

  • Options
    CaptHenwayCaptHenway Posts: 34,202 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @TommyType said:
    My only thought, (of limited use):

    It would seem to me that IF "official" mintages are modified in a reference book based on best available research, the "official" numbers, and how the new documented number was arrived at, should probably be documented in the text, or footnote, or something. You can't assume that 50 years from now, a fresh and motivated young researcher won't "discover" the official mintage, and undo your good work because they just don't know any better....

    Unfortunately, that probably makes for a longer and hard to manage book, filled with "trivial" footnotes. (You know...like Breen's opus).

    This is one reason why I wanted the article published in "The Numismatist," as it is the publication of record that hopefully will survive into the future. I wrote a lot of good stuff for COINage Magazine, and where is it now? Likewise Bob Julian's writings in COINage, Coins and other publications.

    Some of this stuff will be saved in the Newman Numismatic Portal, but I personally find it very difficult to use.

    Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.

Leave a Comment

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