Scratchy Proof Coins from US Mint; Customer Service was incompetent and arrogant….......….from 1886
WinLoseWin
Posts: 1,668 ✭✭✭✭✭
Scratchy Proof Coins from US Mint; Customer Service was incompetent and arrogant….......….from 1886
The discussion in the “Some Morgan proofs have hairlines, correct?” thread reminded me of this interesting story found in the lot description for an 1886 Proof $5 from the 1982 Eliasberg gold collection auctioned by Bowers and Ruddy. Over the years Q. David Bowers has occasionally added some interesting extra tangential info like this to an auction lot description.
Something like this could also be a less common reason for hairlines, and other marks, showing up on classic proof coins even when not messed with after receiving direct from the mint.
https://archive.org/details/unitedstatesgoldcoincollection1982bowe/page/n279/mode/2up
.
.
.
.
.
.
Text from part of the lot description image and the 1886 deposition is here for easier reading.
“...an 1886 deposition attesting to the poor handling given to Proof issues. Smith was one of the prominent numismatists of the day and owned one of the greatest collections of his era. The document follows: ”
"Harlan P. Smith, being duly sworn, says that he resides in the City of New York and that he called on the United States Mint in Philadelphia in June 1886 and went to the Coin and Medal Clerk and requested to be furnished with a Proof gold dollar of the current year. The clerk opened a small writing desk and took out a round paper box which contained numerous gold Proofs. He scraped them over with his fingers and rubbed them together, upon which proceeding deponent looked with utter astonishment as it defaced the coins with pinmarks and scratches. Deponent had always believed and still believes that Proof coins are struck by the Government for the benefit of coin collectors who are required to pay a premium for such perfect coins, and that from the improper manner in which they were handled by this clerk they were blemished and therefore collectors ought not to be compelled to pay a premium for such ignorance and incompetence displayed by the clerk in charge of that department.
"Deponent further states that the clerk informed him that there were no Proof gold dollars to be had and that he [deponent] then requested to be furnished with two silver Proof sets and 20 minor Proof sets, and when said request was made the clerk made some remark which left the impression in deponent's mind that the clerk was conferring a great favor upon him and acted as though he owned the entire Mint and the contents thereof. Deponent therefore claimed that the Government should not employ clerks unless they are fully competent for such a position and said clerk, having been shown to be clearly incompetent, should be removed.
"Sixth day of December 1886. (signed) H. P. Smith.
"To Be Esteemed Be Useful" - 1792 Birch Cent --- "I personally think we developed language because of our deep need to complain." - Lily Tomlin
Comments
Fascinating comments by H.P. Smith from whom I subsequently owned many of his better coins.
I see nothing has changed since 1886. Federal workers for centuries have felt their positions to be permanent “ for life “ and inviolable for any reason including incmpetence. Only in the past few months has this proven not to be true. Unfortunately the good and competent were thrown out with the bad & incompetent.