The Confident Carson City Coin Collector- Rusty Goe
HillbillyCollector
Posts: 535 ✭✭✭✭✭
I did a search before creating this thread and could find no past references to it, so I decided to create my own. If it’s been covered in the past and I missed it, please advise and I’ll delete the thread.
>
I ordered and received these books ( 3 large hard bound volumes) a couple of weeks ago and the more I read, the more impressed I am!
There are three “massive” volumes, every one as large or larger than any college text book I used back in the day, covering the backstory of the Carson City Mint as well as detailed analysis of each CC minted coins.
>
Initially I was hoping to find them used but finally had to take the plunge and order them new. At the time I thought they were quite expensive ( over $300 ) but the level of work to compile this information would have been a monumental task. Personally, I wouldn’t even consider such a project ( if I were even skilled enough- which I’m not!😂) in hopes of selling them for this price!
>
Anyone seriously interested in Carson City coins would find these books invaluable, in my opinion. One of the best purchases I have made in awhile. Oh, they were released in 2020, just 3 years ago.
>
Disclaimer: I received no compensation in any form to “plug” these books on here, just adding my .02 cents!😂
Comments
Agree, there is a monumental amount of history in those three volumes and that they are also pricey but worth it IMO. One could stream a multi-season mini-series about the Carson Mint from those books.
If you spend more than a few thousand dollars on CC coins, there is no excuse not to have this set of books.
Sounds like excellent reference material- does it contain any info regarding the striking of Morgan Dollar Branch Mint Proofs? I’m trying to gain a little knowledge in this area.
I'd personally doubt it - that info would likely be found in a book about the Philadelphia Mint (BMPs were struck at Philly with mintmarked dies).
Coin Photographer.
That’s interesting- and I was not aware. So all BMP Morgans are Philly products? I know there was some controversy regarding the 1838-O CBH…
>
Tonight I only have access to the first volume. If you can provide me the proof dates you are interested in, I’ll check and let you know , and I’ll have access to all 3 volumes tomorrow!👍
83, 84, 85, 93
And my apologies for hijacking your thread- it’s just been on my mind lately:
Writing in the 1982 book The Morgan and Peace Dollar Textbook, Wayne Miller enumerates five classes of branch Mint proof Morgan Dollars. The claim that an individual issue has to branch mint status decreases as the class # increases; the Class V pieces, in fact, being described by Miller as, "coins rumored to be branch mint proofs which the author has seen and which are definitely not proofs."
On the other end of the scale are the Class I branch mint proofs, which Wayne Miller describes as, "authorized, definite branch mint proofs. These are the...dates for which proofs were authorized and subsequently issued [emphasis author's]." Only four branch mint proof Morgan Dollars qualify as Class I: 1879-O; 1883-O; 1893-CC; and 1921-S.
Another thread on 84 O I tracked down some Morgan BMP information. Of course some of it is what you have already mentioned from Wayne Miller. Here is the link to the comment which only by coincidence has 83cc and 84cc stuff in it from HA sale. The link to Breen has little on them, Sorry nothing for the 85cc except it is in NGC as PFCA.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/comment/13568513/#Comment_13568513
https://youtube.com/watch?v=2YNufnS_kf4 - Mama I'm coming home ...................................................................................................................................................................... RLJ 1958 - 2023
@Floridafacelifter said:
No, what you ask is very relevant to this thread and I want to know the answer as well. Unfortunately tonight I only have Volume 1, which covers 1870-1874.
I will look tomorrow in the applicable Volume and get back with you when I find what’s actually there.
Coins in question:
83, 84, 85, 93
>
>
I know, a little O/T but inquiring minds ( me) want to know!😉
>
So does this also apply to the fabulous 1844-O Eagle and Half Eagle proofs that are “floating around “ somewhere in the world?
Yes - all true Branch Mint Proofs were struck using a medal press at Philadelphia. The only difference between them and a "standard" Proof what that mintmarked dies were used - usually to test an element of the design.
Here is what someone quoted Roger saying in a thread years ago (I will probably reach out to him and ask fro some more info - I discuss this topic with him fairly often and I have no reason to doubt this statement:
.
.
"Proof Coins – 19th Century
A “proof coin” was deliberately manufactured through the application of specific processes, materials and machinery.
The only U.S. mint that possessed all of the materials, equipment and processes to do this was at Philadelphia, PA.
Ergo: all proof coins for this era were manufactured at the Philadelphia Mint.
This conclusion does not require that proof dies necessarily conform to all conventional criteria for a regular issue Philadelphia Mint coin. Thus, a die possessing a mintmark could have been used at the Philadelphia Mint to make one or more proof coins. There was no legal prohibition in doing this.
“Branch Mint Proof Coins”
No proof coin could have been manufactured at any mint of the United States except at Philadelphia.
Any coin possessing all of the characteristics of normal proof coins of the same date or period, but which include a mintmark as part of the design, must have been made at the Philadelphia Mint."
.
.
To me, the 1844-O gold coins are convincing Proofs. The Proof Morgans, no so much.
Granted, this whole premise teeters on your definition of Proof - if you think a coin struck on a circulation press at high speed with what happened to be newly polished dies as they reentered service at Carson City is a Proof, then the Branch Mint Morgans are Proofs.
I take a more conservative stance - it has to be struck at Philadelphia on a medal press with high tonnage and slow speed, with dies prepared specially for the purpose of striking Proofs.
Coin Photographer.
So the 1894-S Barber Dime minted in San Francisco is actually not a Proof?
>
………………………………………………………………
Thank you!
For years I have wondered if indeed those ‘44-O’s weren’t actually produced in Philly, not because I had read it somewhere, but just using some “common sense,” deducting reasoning. These ‘44-O proof coins are PF65 DCAM ( Eagle ) and PF67 DCAM (Half Eagle.)
>
So my thoughts goes something like this. How in the world could NO turn out such spectacular proof coins and then have many weakly struck, inferior examples of circulating strike coins existing! I just couldn’t reconcile the huge difference!
So I have learned something tonight that has put to rest a question that has stumped me for quite a while.
Appreciate you bringing me up to speed.👍
@HillbillyCollector
Obviously, some will disagree with that stance.
For me, what makes a convincing Branch Mint Proof is when you can put the obverse head to head with a Philadelphia Proof and not be able to tell which is which.
For the 1844 $5s, this is absolutely true.
For the 1893 $1s, not so much.
Coin Photographer.
What books are we talking?
Interested in learning/ reading about the CC mints
>
The thread’s title is the actual name of the book(s) and the author is Rusty Goe.
Does this sell as a set or can you just buy one book?
@seatedlib3991
If buying new, I only had the option to buy the three as a set.
Perhaps the only way to get one volume, would be as a used book.
Since I initially didn’t want to spend over $300 for 3 books, I really looked around for used books.
>
I think that most people that decided to purchase the books are well satisfied and would not really want to part with any volume, at least I wouldn’t. And they’re only three years old. If they were 10 plus years old, one could see them possibly passing through estates of the original owner/purchaser.
@FlyingAl said:
Seems like you’re suggesting that the 93-CC above was not struck on the medal press at Philly but instead was struck in Carson City- which means these issues could very well appear in a comprehensive tome like the one in this thread- I’m hopeful!
Thanks for that information. You are probably spot on about finding a single used book, but i have been learning unbridled optimism from my dog. James
Correct - which is why I would not classify them as a Branch Mint Proof. Unless they were struck for some special ceremony like the "Proof" Columbian halves, I see no reason other than to call them high quality DMPLs.
I think we can break it down like this:
1) Proof - a coin struck once at Philadelphia on a medal press. The coin is struck with specially prepared planchets, dies, and is individually handled after striking. Either the coiner or engraver recognizes the coin as a Proof.
Four conditions have to be met for a coin to be a Proof - high tonnage medal press, new dies, specially selected Planchets, and defined as Proof by Mint Officials.
Several Branch Mint Proofs meet this criteria (I'd imagine the 1844-O coinage), so my Branch Mint Proof definition remains the same.
The question remains of what we call the "Branch Mint Proofs" like the 1893-CC dollars.
There are two possible ways that the coins look the way they do.
1) The coin was struck on a toggle press at normal pressure with mechanical feeding. The coins immediately before and after it were struck in the same way and were ejected into the same bin. By sheer chance, the dies were placed in such a manner to attain exceptional detail, and those dies just happened to be freshly polished, likely after a defect was removed. No one at the mint would have taken any care to produce these coins, but after thousands of dies, eventually a special looking coin would be produced. The coiner and engraver would certainly not qualify these coins as Proof.
2) The coins were struck on a toggle press by hand. Special handling was taken before and after striking, and the dies were prepared in order to create a distinctive appearance. Such coins may have been prepared for a special ceremony, but still fall far short of the quality of a true Proof. The engraver and or coiner will not see the coins as Proofs, but will recognize the special characteristics. The "Proof" Columbian Halves were struck in this way. I believe these coins should be designated Specimen, but only if the special circumstances surrounding the striking surface - or else the coins will fall into category #1 above.
Coin Photographer.
@Floridafacelifter said:
Volume 2 covers the 1883, 1884, and 1885 CC Morgan Dollars.
>
1883cc Morgan Proof
>
Starting with 1883, the author makes it crystal clear their is much controversy concerning a actual proof Morgan of that year struck at Carson.
He contends that there is no way to explain the existence of the coin (coins) in the proof category and there is no way to verify that the Carson Mint ever struck such a proof in 1883.
My interpretation as to how he thinks the coin(s) received the proof status comes from year’s old auctions where the coin was advertised as a proof and it became generally accepted by collectors ( and dealers) as fact! Then to finally “seal the deal” NGC designated the coin as a actual proof. He does agree that the coin’s characteristics give every indication that it indeed looks like a Proof specimen.
That being said, the tone which he writes gives me the impression that he is quite skeptical that it indeed a true proof. It seems he concurs with Wayne Miller as to the status of no valid 1883-cc proof Morgan was ever struck, at least at Carson.
>
1884cc Morgan Proof.
The author goes into great detail when it come to the ‘84cc DMPL coins but again doesn’t seem to embrace the fact that there are any true ‘84cc Morgan Proofs. All of the certified examples are NGC and apparently Heritage handled many of the auctions, whereas several didn’t actually sell as they didn’t meet the minimum bid requirement. Again, my interpretation from his writings style is he doesn’t believe there are any actual ‘84cc Morgan Proofs that were struck at Carson.
>
1885cc Morgan Proof.
So for this year, the author actually shows pics of a single 1885cc NGC PF64 CAM, in both stand alone and slab shot. Apparently this was certified in late 2014 or early 2015.The author was contacted by Coin World writer Paul Gilkes to comment on this coin.
Perhaps this is the clearest the author comes to address the status of actual Proof Morgan’s struck at Carson saying, “there was no precedent for such a coin and that no documentary evidence exists to confirm that the Carson City Mint’s coiners ever stamped Proof ( or Presentation Strike) specimens of the 1885-cc silver dollars ( or of any date-denomination for that matter.)” Here, he makes it quite clear that he’s in the Wayne Miller camp!
>
1893cc Morgan Proof.
From Volume 3.
For 1893, the author goes into GREAT detail for the Morgan dollar ( non-proof.) He believes there are around 12 true Proofs but still has questions, mainly that they’re not reflected on the ledger and perhaps were struck after all the other dollars were finished.
>
So, this is a “quick and dirty “ interpretation of the four coins in question. Keep in mind, I just scanned the pages only stopping to read the parts where “Proof” was actually mentioned. If I would have read the full descriptions on theses coins, it would have probably taken me at least a half day, perhaps much longer!
>
Also bear in mind that Morgan’s are WAY out of my comfort zone. So if I misinterpreted anything, I apologize in advance.
Hope this helps!
I think books like these are what captures an individual to focus on a particular series. You start reading the history, the interest builds and before you know it the searching begins.
>
Sure agree with that. These books are almost like reading a college level History class! I read a couple pages and then re-read to make sure I understand what I just read.😂
The author goes into an amazing level of detail. Very well written and very interesting!
That’s great info- thank you so much for taking the time!
>
You’re certainly welcome!👍
"perhaps were struck after all the other dollars were finished."
This is impossible, as all BMPs were VAM-2, and there are at least ten thousand 1893-CCs with the die progressing later and later in die state (VAM-2A).
Coin Photographer.
Please keep in mind that Morgan’s are WAY, WAY out of my comfort zone and this was the very last thing I read, so I quite possibly misinterpreted what I wrote.
Perhaps when I have a little more free time, I’ll re-read that section again. For that particular year/issue there were so, so many pages that my eyes started to glaze over!😂
>
And to make it still worse, I have never really been interested in Morgan’s or really any silver dollars. I’m strictly a gold guy but do enjoy GTGs for silver coins, especially CBHs, which I do really like.
Sorry for any confusion I may have caused.
From HA on the die and state (cracking)
This is most recent Nov 2020
https://coins.ha.com/itm/proof-morgan-dollars/1893-cc-1-branch-mint-pr65-pcgs-pcgs-7347-/a/1321-3070.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515
1893-CC Morgan Dollar
Branch Mint PR65+
Branch Mint Rarity, About 12 Coins Struck
The Carter Example
1893-CC $1 Branch Mint PR65+ PCGS. Ex: Amon Carter-Simpson. The Carson City Mint finally closed its doors on June 1, 1893. Gold and silver deposits had been waning for years, and rumors swirled that the Nevada facility would be shuttered. When speculation became reality, Carson City Mint officials decided to mark the cessation of coinage production with a small striking ceremony. According to Wayte Raymond, 12 proof 1893-CC Morgan dollars were reportedly struck. Walter Breen clarifies in his Proof Encyclopedia that these proofs were "souvenirs given out at some ceremony associated with the closing of the mint."
All known 1893-CC proof dollars were struck from the VAM-2 dies, which show a die chip on the right side of the 3 in the date between the loops, and the CC titled strongly to the right. According to VAMWorld.com: "Late die stage specimens are particularly desirable as these are believed to be among the very last coins struck at the Carson City Mint. Twelve branch mint proofs are reported and were struck from a strongly re-polished stage of this marriage."
PCGS reports 10 1893-CC branch mint proof grading events in non-Cameo, plus three in Cameo, while NGC lists seven non-Cameo submissions and three in Cameo. While those numbers are slightly higher than expected considering the reported mintage, it is almost certain that they merely reflect resubmissions and crossovers of the same coins.
This Gem Carson City proof dollar is about as good as it gets, from its technical and visual quality to its impressive pedigree. The coin is a hands-down, no-questions proof that looks like it should have been made at Philadelphia. Flashy mirrors and partially frosted devices reside beneath original golden patina. The borders deepen to eye-catching shades of cobalt-blue and magenta. Virtually fully struck, with a touch of incompleteness over Liberty ear. As the Amon G. Carter cataloger aptly noted in 1984, this is "a most historic rarity." Population: 2 in 65 (1 in 65+), 1 finer in non-Cameo (6/20).
Ex: Amon G. Carter, Jr. Family Collection (Stack's 1/1984), lot 365; Regency Auction X (Legend Rare Coin Auctions, 12/2014), lot 284.
This from Aug 2011
https://coins.ha.com/itm/proof-morgan-dollars/1893-cc-1-pr64-cameo-pcgs-cac-pcgs-7347-/a/1158-7386.s?ic4=ListView-ShortDescription-071515
1893-CC Branch Mint Proof Morgan Dollar, PR64 Cameo
Later Striking and a Previously Unknown Coin
1893-CC $1 PR64 Cameo PCGS. CAC. Over the years we have seen perhaps half a dozen branch mint proof 1893-CC dollars. In 1995 the characteristics of these pieces were published in a Coin World article, along with the characteristics of seven other branch mint proof dollars from the Anita Maxwell Trust.
When this coin is compared to the notes taken at that time, it is apparent that this piece is a later striking. This is evident from the lack or diminished lumps of die rust noted on the Maxwell coin, as well as other proof 1893-CC dollars seen since. Additional evidence of the lateness of the strike is seen from the extensive die cracking around the obverse periphery. Initially die cracks were noted as only extending from stars 2-3, 5-7 and 8-11. On this piece, however, the initial crack begins faintly on the inside of star 1 and extends through all the stars and letters through the R in PLURIBUS; another faint crack then starts from the left of the B through the top of that letter and ends in the denticles between B and I. In addition to the expected crack through stars 8-11, another crack begins in the denticles between stars 9-10 and terminates at star 11. The reverse cracks are the same as noted in the 1995 article.
It is not known for certain how many proof 1893-CC dollars were struck or exist today. Allegedly Wayte Raymond stated that a dozen were produced, but there is no documentation to support this claim. That number would seem to be a reasonable estimate of the number struck, but may be slightly high in terms of the number extant when one examines the coins offered at public auctions over the past 15 years.
The surfaces on this piece are brilliant throughout. One of the known examples shows pronounced roller marks over Liberty's ear. On this piece, strong magnification reveals just the faintest trace of roller marks. By way of an identifier for pedigree purposes, there is a small, double checked planchet lamination in the reverse field to the right of the eagle's right (facing) wing. As PCGS indicates, the devices and fields are noticeably contrasted on each side. It is a rare occurrence when a branch mint proof dollar is available for purchase. The astute collector will recognize this as a major collecting opportunity. Population: 2 in 64, 3 finer
https://youtube.com/watch?v=2YNufnS_kf4 - Mama I'm coming home ...................................................................................................................................................................... RLJ 1958 - 2023