Bust Quarter Experts, I need your help on some info I just read

STONE · June 28, 2008 7:27AM

Well, today was just a gorgeous day out here in the Windy City (was until is just started to sprinkle a light summer shower).
In not wanting to miss a nice day, which has been tough since it has been on-and-off raining for the past few weeks, I decided to spend the afternoon
outside reading some of my numismatic books (also working on my tan!). Anyway, I started off, and subsequently ended with, the book I started with:

Mint Records
and
Type Table
United States Coins

By C.E. Green

(The book, as I can figure out dates to 1936, as mentioned by the Copyright)
I was able to read pretty much the entire book before the rain came in (ok, that's enough whining about the rain from here on out

).
When I reached the Bust Quarter section, I read some puzzling facts, of which I would like the Bust Quarter experts' help in solving.

The first refers to the 1807 DBQ's which it states: (There is a unique piece with plain edge)
I was wondering if there has been any known existance of an 1807 DBQ with a plain edge, or have all accounted pieces been with reeding?

My second question refers to 1815 CBQ's, which the book states the following:
The coin is frequently offered in
auction sales counterstamped R. This
was put on at New York Sub-Treasury
to indicate "Refused" or "Rejected"
due to light weight or slight mutilation

My question has to do with the "R" counterstamp on these coins. I know of the "E" and "L" counterstamp, but I don't recall ever seeing one with an "R" counterstamp.
What do the experts know about this "R" counterstamp that C.E. Green mentions in this reference?

Are either of these two questions referenced/referred to in the upcoming Early United States Quarters book being published by Tompkins?
I have sent Tompkins an email asking him if he has heard of either of these before, and if they are in his book.
I've attached images of the book and page for reference.

Thanks for any help.

Quarternut · June 28, 2008 7:53AM

Stone,
Both of these items are to be found in my new book.

The 1807 plain edge example is listed in the appendixes under error coins known and their pedigrees. Our own Firstmint (Karl) owned this coin for a time so I will let him add any info he might want to on this enigmatic coin.

There is also a section in the appendixes that deals with the E & L countermarks. The example you have found is one of the reasons that there has been so much confusion about these mysterious pieces.

My belief is that either the listing of an "R" was a mistake by a printer in a previous auction catalog listing somewhere or that it was inaccurately reported to the author and never verified. The author evidently took it upon himself to invent the therory of "refused or re-jected" and added the NY Sub-Treasury for validity. Walter Breen was known to embelish and add "facts" to fit one of his theories and I am sure others did as well. Also we need to keep in mind that there are many items listed in older coin references that are not quite accurate or are out-right wrong. I took this to heart when doing research for the new Quarter book and tried to go back to source materials whenever possible to prove or disprove what I stated.

Up to the present time there are no examples known or verified with any letters other than the E & L.

Hope this answers your questions for now. Although I didn't address the background of every historical reference such as this (as some have stated, 448 pages is a lot already!), hopefully when you read the new book other items will make more sense.

QN

LoveMyLiberty · June 28, 2008 7:54AM

"The first refers to the 1807 DBQ's which it states: (There is a unique piece with plain edge)
I was wondering if there has been any known existance of an 1807 DBQ with a plain edge, or have all accounted pieces been with reeding?"

Per Browning's book:

Variety No. 1, die state IV,,,"One of the State IV's has a plain edge: apparently, this planchet never went
through the upsetting or edge-making machine, which imparted edge reeding or lettering,,,

Page 46

STONE · June 28, 2008 8:03AM

QN,
Thanks for the excellent answers.

For the 1807, my initial guess was that a fairly well worn specimen was found (VG or lower) where the edges were also subsequently worn down.
My other theory, before posing this question, was that someone shaved the edges carefully to leave no trace of reeding; I have an example of a CBH where this was done.

For the 1815, I really didn't know what to think. My only guess was that the "R" counterstamped coins were melted down.
I never really thought of the discrepency for the "E" or "L" counterstamp, but it certainly makes a-heck-of-a lot of sense.

I look forward to reading your book when it arrives and discovering other numismatic quarks about Bust Quarters which I had not known before.
(Oh, and I agree that 448 is VERY LONG, and will take me a while to get through)

There are plenty more discrepencies within this book that I would like to ask board members about in further threads.

LoveMyLiberty,
Thanks for the info regarding the 1807 DBQ. I never got around to picking up Browning's book, therefore my knowledge has been limited to what I find elsewhere.

DaveG · June 28, 2008 8:05AM

Green's comment about the 1815 quarter being "rejected" by the New York sub-treasury is pretty funny considering that (as far as I know), sub-treasuries weren't created until the Independent Treasury Act of 1846, so any "non-current" coins (such as an 1815 quarter) that were received by the sub-treasury would have been sent to the Mint for recoinage anyway - as many old-tenor (pre-1834) gold coins were, for example.

Quarternut · June 28, 2008 8:12AM

The 1807 referred to is not a low grade coin. When it was last sold at auction (2004), it was graded MS-60.

I have some theories about how this coin came to be, but will wait to comment on them until I finish some research I am currently working on.

QN

Quarternut · June 28, 2008 8:16AM

Breen also read Green's reference to an "R" and added it to the E &L's when he worked on Wayte Raymonds "Standard Catalogue of United States Coins". The 17th edition from 1954 that I own has it listed.

QN

numisma · June 29, 2008 3:45AM

I agree with Quarternut that the "R" c/m notation by Green was just an unfortunate typo. We know that the E&L countermarks were well known to numismatists since the late 1800s........so why wouldn't Green have mentioned that as well?

edited for typos

firstmint · June 29, 2008 8:12AM

In my book about Henry Voigt, I offer some background about the "E & L" counterstamped quarters of 1815 and 1825 which first appeared in 1881.

There are also verbatim lot descriptions from the auction catalogues from the first two years after they appeared.

To date, the references and probable theory (unfortunately there are no exact records of their production) I put forth are the only ones relating directly to the United States Mint.

edited to add - the 1807 plain edge quarter came from the collection of H. O Granberg and was first publicly displayed at the impressive February 1914 ANS exhibit in NYC. It had been purchased by Granberg at the September 9, 1909 Rose sale by Lyman Low who was the first one to notice that the edge was not reeded. It later re-appeared in the 1952 ANA sale in the New Netherlands segment.

Interestingly, it was at the 1914 exhibition that early quarter dollar collector and author Ard W. Browning joined the ANA (not ANS). Browning lived in the NYC area and was already collecting these by variety.

As for 1807 quarters in general, I doubt if there is a single example that shows the entire edge reeding.

1Bustcollector · July 5, 2008 4:13AM

Stone,

I have tried for many years to obtain a "R" counterstamp if it ever existed but never had an opportunity to even see one. I have spoke with larry Briggs over the years concernig the R and as he has stated to me on three seperate occassions he actually owned one many years ago and it was sold to a collector, but cannot remember who. If it exists we really don't know how and if it ties in to the other E and L's. Larry owned a complete set of counterstamps.

Rory

numisma · July 5, 2008 4:25AM

<< <i>Stone,

I have tried for many years to obtain a "R" counterstamp if it ever existed but never had an opportunity to even see one. I have spoke with larry Briggs over the years concernig the R and as he has stated to me on three seperate occassions he actually owned one many years ago and it was sold to a collector, but cannot remember who. If it exists we really don't know how and if it ties in to the other E and L's. Larry owned a complete set of counterstamps.

Rory >>

Rory,

Did Larry state if the "R" was of the same size, shape, style and position as the E and L countermarks? I have many counterstamped coins (not bust quarters -- sold those) that contain stray letters or initials. I wonder if the coin that Larry sold was just a maverick c/m bust quarter, or somehow ties in with the E and L's. If Larry sold it, it is out there and will one day resurface, hopefully in my lifetime.

doh · July 5, 2008 4:48AM

QN,

Here's a bit of an offshoot question, but which are scarcer, 1815 CBQs with counterstamps or without?

Quarternut · July 5, 2008 5:47AM

Doh,
Although the 1815 quarters seem to be very scarce, there are many examples known. In fact there are probably more uncirculated examples of the 1815, than many if not all of the other dates from 1815 - 1828, and they were certainly hoarded at some point. The countermarked 1815's however, are certainly more scarce than their unmarked bretheran.

Out of over 150 auction appearences of the 1815 quarter that I have documented for the last 10 years, there are only 31 coins that were countermarked (this includes both E & L's and multiple appearences of the same piece). I of course do not know exactly how many pieces exist in collectors hands, but this is a good way to try and reach a probable ratio between the two.

As to the "R" countermark, I am in agreement with Numisa that it is probable that the coin is just struck with a random punch that has nothing to do with the E & L's. I personally own an 1805 B-2 with an "I" and an 1821 B-3 with an "H". Both of these stamps are nothing like the E & L's either in size, font, or location. It is doubtful that we will ever find another countermark that matches the E & L's in location or placement and in a matching style of punch. There has been ample time and effort spent in searching for other countermarked coins, and if they really existed we should know by now. I am not ruling out anything, but think we should move forward with what we have.

QN

1Bustcollector · July 5, 2008 5:53AM

I cannot locate my notes at this time...............I've moved and much is still in boxes. I remember asking Larry this same question and if I recall he stated it was in the same position and style but I don't want to mix things with facts. My gut says it may have been different but there have been many times we all discount things due to whatever reason and then come to find out that person was pretty much on the mark. I will make a point to ask larry once I see him again or maybe one of the quarter guys might try. You are correct in stating a possible maverick as I too have seen many stray letters punched.

Bust Quarter Experts, I need your help on some info I just read

Comments

Leave a Comment