Rarity7 (Re)Discovers Unique 1851 $5 Schultz on 1847 Mexico 8R

PeakRarities · August 15, 2025 4:02PM

I just saw this ultra cool write-up was posted today, and thought I'd share it here on behalf of my friends Noah and Owen of Rarity7 (formerly Numismattack, Noah apparently came to his senses ), . The piece will be on display at his table in OKC, for all who want to stop by and have a look at this incredible rediscovery.

As a pioneer enthusiast, I especially appreciate mysterious and esoteric finds such as this, and the wheels have been turning, trying to imagine the circumstances surrounding its production. Though some questions remain unanswered for the time being, I believe there's still a plentiful amount of numismatic mysteries that will, one day, be answered with thoroughgoing research and soon-to-be-revealed documents patiently waiting to see the light of day.

By all means, discuss!

https://www.rarity7.com/blog/2025-08-rarity7-rediscovers-unique-1851-5-schultz-on-1847-mexico-8r

Aspie_Rocco · August 15, 2025 4:04PM

Interesting intentional overstrike

WildWestHalfDollars · August 15, 2025 4:06PM

Very cool!!! Any idea the value of such a coin?

rarity7 · August 15, 2025 4:11PM

Thank you for sharing Dan! @OwenSeymour put an insane amount of research effort into this one (and I helped!) and it's been a super fun project.

jmlanzaf · August 15, 2025 4:13PM

Dan Carr did it

lermish · August 15, 2025 4:13PM

Congrats again Noah, this is so beyond cool!

@FlyingAl hopefully worth the wait.

thebeav · August 15, 2025 4:17PM

That's a great piece !
Interesting story too......

FlyingAl · August 15, 2025 4:45PM

Very cool!

pursuitofliberty · August 15, 2025 5:15PM

What a fantastic piece!

And a great article too. Thanks for the link. Before I read it I thought, that's odd, it looks like the reverse die had a CUD.

Wow! What an absolutely phenomenal find. I'll definitely want to stop by and see that one!

CaptHenway · August 15, 2025 5:32PM

Way Kewl!

kaz · August 15, 2025 6:02PM

I like how they lined up the central designs, it works really well just on an artistic level.

Crypto · August 15, 2025 6:07PM

I wonder what is know of the die progressions. Natural curiosity makes me ask was it done as a trial strike with new dies or was it a play thing done with old dies that were all but discarded

TomB · August 15, 2025 6:28PM

That's freaking amazing!

WinLoseWin · August 15, 2025 6:47PM

The article is a must read.

Recalled seeing something like that in an auction catalog before but no idea where. Reading the article made it clear along with a lot of other interesting info.

AUandAG · August 15, 2025 9:15PM

Great coin, great write up. However, I fail to understand why this was made by Schultz. The 20g Mexican gold coin was already accepted and used in commerce, so why overstrike one? Did it make it more acceptable to San Franciscans?

bob

rarity7 · August 15, 2025 10:13PM

@AUandAG said:
Great coin, great write up. However, I fail to understand why this was made by Schultz. The 20g Mexican gold coin was already accepted and used in commerce, so why overstrike one? Did it make it more acceptable to San Franciscans?

bob

Our best guess and working theory is that this was struck at the Schultz shop either by or given to Kuner (the engraver), perhaps as a memento or thank-you, as it somehow ended up in a French collection (and Kuner took a trip to France in 1854 to get hitched.). Of course this is speculation and we can't know for sure how or why, but this seems plausible to us.

Aegis3 · August 15, 2025 10:14PM

@WinLoseWin said:
The article is a must read.

Recalled seeing something like that in an auction catalog before but no idea where. Reading the article made it clear along with a lot of other interesting info.

Clifford sale, B&R 1982. I knew it was either that, or a contemporary Apostrophe auction. Clifford it was. Lot 110, $8,250 plus 10%.

Typekat · August 16, 2025 3:52AM

Dan, thanks so much for the link to the excellent research.

A truly unique item, about which the question Why? will never be answered.

lermish · August 16, 2025 6:50AM

@AUandAG said:
However, I fail to understand why this was made by Schultz. The 20g Mexican gold coin was already accepted and used in commerce, so why overstrike one? Did it make it more acceptable to San Franciscans?

It seems extraordinarily improbable that this overstrike was made or intended for circulation. It certainly wouldn't have traded for $5 as it is still a silver 8 reales, Nobody would have accepted it for its weight in gold. The reason for the overstrike is unknowable but it seems likely to be a souvenir/memento as mentioned by @rarity7

In general, pioneer gold was struck to monetize all of the gold being found in the California gold rush. Having other existent circulating coinage does nothing to help dispose of a pouch of gold dust or a handful of nuggets.

CaptHenway · August 16, 2025 7:36AM

@AUandAG said:
Great coin, great write up. However, I fail to understand why this was made by Schultz. The 20g Mexican gold coin was already accepted and used in commerce, so why overstrike one? Did it make it more acceptable to San Franciscans?

bob

What gold coin are you talking about? These dies were struck on a silver 8 Reales, either as a test strike or to create a novelty.

skier07 · August 16, 2025 8:07AM

Great article.

Why would the owner of this coin sell it at a small local show? If the owner inherited it he should have known it was a rare and valuable coin. With the internet and a little elbow grease he should have been able to find out he had a coin which may be worth up to six figures if not more.

NumisOxide · August 16, 2025 8:17AM

Soo coool!

AUandAG · August 16, 2025 10:06AM

@CaptHenway said:

@AUandAG said:
Great coin, great write up. However, I fail to understand why this was made by Schultz. The 20g Mexican gold coin was already accepted and used in commerce, so why overstrike one? Did it make it more acceptable to San Franciscans?

bob

What gold coin are you talking about? These dies were struck on a silver 8 Reales, either as a test strike or to create a novelty.

Just a mind and fingers problem. Thanks for the cure!
bob

rarity7 · August 16, 2025 10:56AM

@skier07 said:
Why would the owner of this coin sell it at a small local show? If the owner inherited it he should have known it was a rare and valuable coin. With the internet and a little elbow grease he should have been able to find out he had a coin which may be worth up to six figures if not more.

Neither the owner (nor we) knew or understood what it was until a lot of research went into it -- the coin didn't show up in any google searches (and it's not even particularly easy to figure out what to google until you understand what you're looking at), and it took us months of research (and lots of evidence provided to PCGS) for it even to be certified as authentic.

So it's easy now to say "should have been able to find out" but in reality, it was not easy, and the owner just wanted to sell a few items from an old collection he inherited (the rest of which was not particularly valuable).

gonzer · August 16, 2025 11:52AM

Fascinating read!

qrt · August 16, 2025 6:06PM

.

rarity7 · August 16, 2025 7:11PM

@JCH22 said:
With respect, the write up is materially incorrect.

It is documented that Schultz's partner Garratt (correct spelling) retained the machinery and dies after private issues were regulated by the California Legislature and Schultz & Co was dissolved a couple months thereafter. Garratt himself so stated in a dictated statement. The machinery and dies survived the fire of 1851. They were retained by Garratt —and subsequently destroyed by a fire at Garratt’s later Fremont & Mission operation —almost 20 years later-- in 1870.

Garratt had the dies and machinery available for almost 20 years after to do with as he pleased.

Albert Kuner -- through Schulz & Co, was the engraver for most all private California issuers-- save for Moffit. He was not a principal of Schulz & Company, nor did he retain dies.

Coin appears to be an over-strike--- made by Garratt alone--- after Schultz & Company dissolved- but sometime before the 1870 fire.

Believe PCGS got it wrong by labeling a later Garratt over-strike as a "Schultz & Co." issue.

Duty Calls! - and you've answered Thank you!

I'd love to amend our article with some of this info. Would you mind sharing your sources? I will gladly credit you for pointing us in the right direction.

This is the wonderful thing about the Internet - we can easily amend publications as new info comes to light.

(BTW - it seems to me that it's still entirely speculative as to the exact origin date & source - but at the very least if we can definitively narrow the window to 1851-1870, that would be an excellent refinement.)

qrt · August 16, 2025 8:34PM

.

CaptHenway · August 16, 2025 10:03PM

I love the way the story is developing.

dcarr · August 16, 2025 11:34PM

Very interesting item.

That is obviously a later die state. Part of the die between "GOLD" and the rim has already broken completely off (forming a large cud die break). An earlier die state on a gold piece shows the crack, but the die piece hasn't yet broken away:
https://pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1851-5-schultz-co/10316

IkesT · August 17, 2025 12:18AM

CaptHenway · August 17, 2025 6:47AM

Excellent photographs!

rarity7 · August 17, 2025 6:47AM

@JCH22 said:

@rarity7

As a starting point, I would recommend--The Builders of a Great City: San Francisco's Representative Men, the City, Its History and Commerce, etc., Volume 1, p. 166, San Francisco Journal of Commerce, 1891.

An excellent resource - and we did see that one (but also thank you)

Garratt’s statement is paywalled behind a research database, otherwise I would post it here.

Could I trouble you to provide specifics? We will happily pay to get over the wall - I'd just love to read and learn from Garratt's full dictated statement.

PeakRarities · August 17, 2025 7:09AM

SeattleSlammer · August 17, 2025 7:14AM

Holy smokes. That overstrike is bananas!

@rarity7 — love your lengthy CAC reveal vids on YouTube … keep ‘em coming. 👍🏻

Crypto · August 17, 2025 7:29AM

@dcarr said:
Very interesting item.

That is obviously a later die state. Part of the die between "GOLD" and the rim has already broken completely off (forming a large cud die break). An earlier die state on a gold piece shows the crack, but the die piece hasn't yet broken away:
https://pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1851-5-schultz-co/10316

Thank you

Nic · August 17, 2025 11:45AM

Great thread!

qrt · August 17, 2025 2:31PM

.

rarity7 · August 17, 2025 3:34PM

@JCH22 said:
To be clear, you reviewed the materials cited-- prior to your blog post? If that is so, your reasoning behind the omission of any reference to Garratt’s post Schutz work from the write up?

No sorry to be unclear - after we published. We’re going to prepare some amendments and edits but I’d like to gather all the data, citations, etc first.

Would you mind sharing the paywall site where I can see Garratt’s full dictation? I want to make sure we’re working with all of the right source materials.

Thanks again!

PeakRarities · August 17, 2025 4:53PM

@rarity7

I haven't been able to find the specific source for this excerpt, but heres a snippet from a Stacks Bowers write up-

https://stacksbowers.com/coin-resource-center/territorial-gold/schultz-and-co/

-In later years, William T. Garratt furnished a description of the early activities:

"We made a great many dies for private coining. Albert Küner, who is still in business here, would do the engraving and I the turning — that is, the machine work on the dies, for which at the time we would get $100 per day per man on that special job. After that, Schultz took a notion to go into coining for Burgoyne & Co. and Argenti & Co. who were bankers here at the time. They would buy the dust and we would do the coining. We ran for a while, and then Schultz and I separated, he taking the coining establishment and I the foundry, he keeping the room over the foundry for his business. He continues only a short time before the Legislature passed a law prohibiting private coining. We took gold at $16 an ounce, and put it through the refining process, and then we would add 10% copper. That of course would take very little copper, just enough to make the coin hard enough to wear. I think the Legislature prohibited it altogether; I am not exactly clear on that point. Moffat was allowed to go ahead. We continued in the same place after Schultz had quit. We had moved from Clay Street down to Leidesdorff, near Sacramento [Street]. While we were there we separated. He continued coining until he was shut off by the Legislature; it might have been two months. From that he went up into the mountains and I continued with the business. Judge Schultz was connected with the Gold Mountain Quartz Mining Co."

Rarity7 (Re)Discovers Unique 1851 $5 Schultz on 1847 Mexico 8R

Comments

Leave a Comment