1884-CC Morgan $ with Reverse of 1878 - not a counterfeit
dcarr
Posts: 9,124 ✭✭✭✭✭
... or is it ?
This item was struck in the Carson City Mint circa 2005, using Carson City Mint dies, on anonymous non-monetary "silver disks" (as Capt' Henway would say). They are not marked "COPY".
The issuer (Nevada State Museum) has no legal authority to strike legal-tender coins. And yet this piece clearly says "United States of America" and "One Dollar" on it.
So, dislikers of the "1964-D" fantasy over-struck Peace dollars (and the similar test strikes on blank disks that were not released), do you hate this one too ?
PS:
The piece shown above has medal-turn orientation (180 degrees from normal Morgan Dollar orientation).
This item was struck in the Carson City Mint circa 2005, using Carson City Mint dies, on anonymous non-monetary "silver disks" (as Capt' Henway would say). They are not marked "COPY".
The issuer (Nevada State Museum) has no legal authority to strike legal-tender coins. And yet this piece clearly says "United States of America" and "One Dollar" on it.
So, dislikers of the "1964-D" fantasy over-struck Peace dollars (and the similar test strikes on blank disks that were not released), do you hate this one too ?
PS:
The piece shown above has medal-turn orientation (180 degrees from normal Morgan Dollar orientation).
0
Comments
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
I'm thinking they shouldn't have done that.
<< <i>You are being disingenuous. That piece was struck using cancelled dies, an oversize blank, no collar, and will fool no one. >>
If the museum struck it, what business did they have using any old mint dies, cancelled or otherwise?
<< <i>What big "X"? >>
The dies were cancelled long time ago.
Here is an image of mine:
<< <i>
<< <i>You are being disingenuous. That piece was struck using cancelled dies, an oversize blank, no collar, and will fool no one. >>
If the museum struck it, what business did they have using any old mint dies, cancelled or otherwise? >>
They own the dies.
<< <i>And could they now set-up a booth where you coin your own cancelled die coins? >>
I think that's distateful, but probably not illegal. At one time, the U.S. Mint sold cancelled dies to collectors.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>You are being disingenuous. That piece was struck using cancelled dies, an oversize blank, no collar, and will fool no one. >>
If the museum struck it, what business did they have using any old mint dies, cancelled or otherwise? >>
They own the dies. >>
They're ex-mint dies.
I'm suggesting they shouldn't be using them for any purpose other than display.
<< <i>And could they now set-up a booth where you coin your own cancelled die coins? >>
No, they would not risk damage to the dies again.
There were many strikes done on soft metals as a test. Like this:
I had a copper bar at my house last week struck with both sides of the cancelled morgan dies. Only about 3/8th of an inch thick. Very cool.
<< <i>... That piece ... will fool no one. >>
Exactly. Some people didn't like my "1964-D" test strikes on various blanks that were broadstruck on oversize or undersize blanks or tokens (I released none of them). Regardless, they wouldn't fool anyone (anyone willing to pay money for one is going to see the obvious).
I agree with you... are you offering to buy back all your 1964-D Peace dollars and canceling them with a big X? You have earned my respect!
<< <i>
<< <i>And could they now set-up a booth where you coin your own cancelled die coins? >>
No, they would not risk damage to the dies again. >>
hypothetically.
if they could make 1, they could make thousands.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>And could they now set-up a booth where you coin your own cancelled die coins? >>
No, they would not risk damage to the dies again. >>
hypothetically.
if they could make 1, they could make thousands. >>
Or 1,884 to be exact!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>And could they now set-up a booth where you coin your own cancelled die coins? >>
No, they would not risk damage to the dies again. >>
hypothetically.
if they could make 1, they could make thousands. >>
Take a die that old, clean it up make it workable.... then one breaks. That stops the process.
Hypothetically there may have been an issue with one of the dies.
<< <i>I'm just asking if you're ok with 1 would you be ok with 1,000? hypothetically speaking. >>
1,000 of these... why would anyone be concerned with a 2 ounce silver blob with a large X on both sides? If DCarr struck his fantasy 1964-D Peace dollars on a 2 ounce round canceled with a large X, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
(perhaps they even contacted the secret service in advance
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm just asking if you're ok with 1 would you be ok with 1,000? hypothetically speaking. >>
1,000 of these... why would anyone be concerned with a 2 ounce silver blob with a large X on both sides? If DCarr struck his fantasy 1964-D Peace dollars on a 2 ounce round canceled with a large X, we wouldn't be having this conversation. >>
Yes, but the Nevada museum pieces bear markings of a legal-tender dollar, but aren't.
All the ones I released were struck on legal-tender dollars.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm just asking if you're ok with 1 would you be ok with 1,000? hypothetically speaking. >>
1,000 of these... why would anyone be concerned with a 2 ounce silver blob with a large X on both sides? If DCarr struck his fantasy 1964-D Peace dollars on a 2 ounce round canceled with a large X, we wouldn't be having this conversation. >>
Yes, but the Nevada museum pieces bear markings of a legal-tender dollar, but aren't.
All the ones I released were struck on legal-tender dollars. >>
You might be able to find a more similar example than this to fight your battle... IMO, these aren't even remotely the same. One (yours) looks like a 1964-D Peace dollar while the other (this one) looks like an oversized blob of silver that someone used canceled dies to create a true fantasy piece. NO ONE would think the blob is real, would attempt to sell it for a real Morgan dollar, would attempt to pass it as currency, etc., whereas the same can't be said for your 1964-D Peace dollar. Trying to compare yours with this one may backfire.
Same die, but uniface and not of silver. Canceled copper slug?
<< <i>Would this one be considered a fantasy piece too?
Same die, but uniface and not of silver. Canceled copper slug?
Copper slug, cancelled die.
<< <i>Would this one be considered a fantasy piece too?
Same die, but uniface and not of silver. Canceled copper slug?
I expect the legal argument would be; "What would a reasonable person think?" I doubt a reasonable person would consider this a real coin, or the 2 ounce blob. I expect a reasonable person would consider the 1964-D Peace dollar to be a real coin.
<< <i>Might as well add some gold.....
Are you talking about the toning? The metal appears to be silver!
<< <i>it's a museum product made with real mint tools. >>
a mint die of all the tools should not be used for a museum product.
sell me otherwise.
OK, I got the fact there is a huge X and the strike is a really low pressure one.
Can anyone get me past why it is ok to use a cancelled die other than the unmissable X ??
If I had a cancelled die, could I press whatever I wanted?
<< <i>
<< <i>it's a museum product made with real mint tools. >>
a mint die of all the tools should not be used for a museum product.
sell me otherwise.
OK, I got the fact there is a huge X and the strike is a really low pressure one.
Can anyone get me past why it is ok to use a cancelled die other than the unmissable X ??
If I had a cancelled die, could I press whatever I wanted? >>
Why not? It's canceled so it can't be passed as a real coin. What's the difference between adding 'COPY' to a die or placing a big X on the die? Either would satisfy the intent of the HPA. To inform the general uneducated public that it isn't legal tender currency.
<< <i>
<< <i>it's a museum product made with real mint tools. >>
a mint die of all the tools should not be used for a museum product.
sell me otherwise.
OK, I got the fact there is a huge X and the strike is a really low pressure one.
Can anyone get me past why it is ok to use a cancelled die other than the unmissable X ??
If I had a cancelled die, could I press whatever I wanted? >>
If you had a canceled die that you came by legally, then the answer is yes, you could do that. In fact the US Mint did
sell 1984 Olympic $5 gold dies with the chiseled X on them as souvenirs. You can still find them occasionally on Ebay.
I think they sold for about $35 as I recall. IF you owned one of those little beauties and had Mr. Carr's press I do believe
that it would be very legal to produce your own slugs, or whatever you want to call them
bob
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>it's a museum product made with real mint tools. >>
a mint die of all the tools should not be used for a museum product.
sell me otherwise.
OK, I got the fact there is a huge X and the strike is a really low pressure one.
Can anyone get me past why it is ok to use a cancelled die other than the unmissable X ??
If I had a cancelled die, could I press whatever I wanted? >>
If you had a canceled die that you came by legally, then the answer is yes, you could do that. In fact the US Mint did
sell 1984 Olympic $5 gold dies with the chiseled X on them as souvenirs. You can still find them occasionally on Ebay.
I think they sold for about $35 as I recall. IF you owned one of those little beauties and had Mr. Carr's press I do believe
that it would be very legal to produce your own slugs, or whatever you want to call them
bob >>
I have a friend with the Olympic commem silver dollar cancelled dies. He has been thinking f striking something with them.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>it's a museum product made with real mint tools. >>
a mint die of all the tools should not be used for a museum product.
sell me otherwise.
OK, I got the fact there is a huge X and the strike is a really low pressure one.
Can anyone get me past why it is ok to use a cancelled die other than the unmissable X ??
If I had a cancelled die, could I press whatever I wanted? >>
If you had a canceled die that you came by legally, then the answer is yes, you could do that. In fact the US Mint did
sell 1984 Olympic $5 gold dies with the chiseled X on them as souvenirs. You can still find them occasionally on Ebay.
I think they sold for about $35 as I recall. IF you owned one of those little beauties and had Mr. Carr's press I do believe
that it would be very legal to produce your own slugs, or whatever you want to call them
bob >>
I have a friend with the Olympic commem silver dollar cancelled dies. He has been thinking f striking something with them. >>
Hopefully not another human or a pet!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>it's a museum product made with real mint tools. >>
a mint die of all the tools should not be used for a museum product.
sell me otherwise.
OK, I got the fact there is a huge X and the strike is a really low pressure one.
Can anyone get me past why it is ok to use a cancelled die other than the unmissable X ??
If I had a cancelled die, could I press whatever I wanted? >>
If you had a canceled die that you came by legally, then the answer is yes, you could do that. In fact the US Mint did
sell 1984 Olympic $5 gold dies with the chiseled X on them as souvenirs. You can still find them occasionally on Ebay.
I think they sold for about $35 as I recall. IF you owned one of those little beauties and had Mr. Carr's press I do believe
that it would be very legal to produce your own slugs, or whatever you want to call them
I have a friend with the Olympic commem silver dollar cancelled dies. He has been thinking of striking something with them. >>
This thread just got a lot, lot more interesting.
I'd be willing to bet if DCarr had struck some coins with them, people on here would be flipping out.
Of course that's speculation.
But it looks like his 64D detractors are giving the green light.
I'd still say to stay away from that idea.
<< <i>... 1964-D Peace dollar. Trying to compare yours with this one may backfire. >>
Just one of many possible comparisons (none are exact).
<< <i>
<< <i>If I had a cancelled die, could I press whatever I wanted? >>
Why not? It's canceled so it can't be passed as a real coin. What's the difference between adding 'COPY' to a die or placing a big X on the die? Either would satisfy the intent of the HPA. To inform the general uneducated public that it isn't legal tender currency. >>
It has not been definitively established that my "1964-D" over-strikes are not legal-tender currency. They were legal-tender prior to the over-striking. I do not advocate their use as legal tender, of course.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If I had a cancelled die, could I press whatever I wanted? >>
Why not? It's canceled so it can't be passed as a real coin. What's the difference between adding 'COPY' to a die or placing a big X on the die? Either would satisfy the intent of the HPA. To inform the general uneducated public that it isn't legal tender currency. >>
It has not been definitively established that my "1964-D" over-strikes are not legal-tender currency. They were legal-tender prior to the over-striking. I do not advocate their use as legal tender, of course. >>
What is the point of this topic if you are already confident that what you did is legal?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If I had a cancelled die, could I press whatever I wanted? >>
Why not? It's canceled so it can't be passed as a real coin. What's the difference between adding 'COPY' to a die or placing a big X on the die? Either would satisfy the intent of the HPA. To inform the general uneducated public that it isn't legal tender currency. >>
It has not been definitively established that my "1964-D" over-strikes are not legal-tender currency. They were legal-tender prior to the over-striking. I do not advocate their use as legal tender, of course. >>
I would wager if someone challenged your 1964-D Peace dollar in court using the HPA, which uses effect, not intent, as their basis, and used the reasonable person criteria to display effect, that they would be considered legal-tender currency.
<< <i>
<< <i>It has not been definitively established that my "1964-D" over-strikes are not legal-tender currency. They were legal-tender prior to the over-striking. I do not advocate their use as legal tender, of course. >>
They surely are legal tender!
They are "United States one-dollar pieces", manufactured, with full authority, by the US Mint.
That they have been altered to appear as of a different year of issuance, does not remove their legal tender status.
A person spending one should have no troubles, (any more than a person spending a non-altered 1922 'Peace Dollar'.)
If the appearance of a current US FRN $1.00 'bill' is altered to appear as being of a different issue date, (or altered to look like GW has a moustache, or to include graphic commemoration of any event, etc, etc,) it too is still legal tender, and can be spent.
When a coin/note is altered in such a way to apparently alter the *denomination*, THEN we have a violation of the anti-counterfeiting laws of the USA. (F.Ex: If you alter a $1.00 note to look like a $10.00 note, you're thereby counterfeiting a $10.00 note.)
You can pound a genuine Buffalo Nickel with a hammer, and as long as it can still reasonably be seen to be a 'nickel' *AND* you can still read "five cents", a bank can (& usually will,) pay you 5 cents for it. (Though you *might* have trouble spending it, it would still be legal to try!)
I took a roll of dateless 'Buffs' to the bank once, and they sorted them into two groups, those with "five cents" readable, and those without. They paid me for those 'with', and rejected those 'without'. (When I asked if they would return them for their "refund", she said, "No way, I'm keeping them!")
That begs the question... since they're legal tender, did DCarr create something that is illegal to own: a 1964-D Peace dollar?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>If I had a cancelled die, could I press whatever I wanted? >>
Why not? It's canceled so it can't be passed as a real coin. What's the difference between adding 'COPY' to a die or placing a big X on the die? Either would satisfy the intent of the HPA. To inform the general uneducated public that it isn't legal tender currency. >>
It has not been definitively established that my "1964-D" over-strikes are not legal-tender currency. They were legal-tender prior to the over-striking. I do not advocate their use as legal tender, of course. >>
Established by whom? >>
NOT established by anyone definatively. That is what I said (I think).
<< <i>I would wager if someone challenged your 1964-D Peace dollar in court using the HPA, which uses effect, not intent, as their basis, and used the reasonable person criteria to display effect, that they would be considered legal-tender currency. >>
Ok, suppose the HPA (FTC) determines that they are legal-tender currency. I guess that would be fitting since they were struck on legal-tender Peace Dollars after all.
"Reasonable Person Criteria" is hypothetical, and would show only hypothetical "effect", not actual effects that have occured.
Actually it's not a hypothetical, it's a legal rule. It's what a reasonable person would assume to be true.
<< <i>Reasonable Person
Actually it's not a hypothetical, it's a legal rule. It's what a reasonable person would assume to be true. >>
It is still hypothetical, but as you say, can be applied in court cases.
I could also argue that a "reasonable person" would not spend a lot of money for "1964" dollar unless they knew exactly what they were getting.
<< <i>
<< <i>Reasonable Person
Actually it's not a hypothetical, it's a legal rule. It's what a reasonable person would assume to be true. >>
It is still hypothetical, but as you say, can be applied in court cases.
I could also argue that a "reasonable person" would not spend a lot of money for "1964" dollar unless they knew exactly what they were getting. >>
Again, the HPA uses effect, not intent. Your intent as the manufacturer, the original buyers intent and the secondary market sellers intent is ineffective. What does matter is effect. What effect has resulted in the manufacturing of these 1964-D Peace dollars? You're safe until someone decides to challenge these...
<< <i>
<< <i>Again, the HPA uses effect, not intent. Your intent as the manufacturer, the original buyers intent and the secondary market sellers intent is ineffective. What does matter is effect. What effect has resulted in the manufacturing of these 1964-D Peace dollars? You're safe until someone decides to challenge these...
The HPA is statutory and specific.
It would take an official act by, and for, the federal govt to establish a lack of compliance status.
It's not as when a person files a civil suit, for example. (Any civil suit for fraud has to be brought by the one defrauded, against the one who 'did the defrauding'.)
I truly doubt the fed would act on complaints, after reviewing the pieces.
It was probably quite wise though, to have used actual US Peace dollars, since then the 1964 date makes no difference.
If he'd used simple 90% silver blanks, the issue would be *very much* less clear(!!!)
(BTW, If he had struck 1922-P coins, putting a date of 1934-S on them, THEN he'd have *clearly* violated the HPA.) >>
I didn't mean someone as in a unilateral someone, I meant someone as in an agent with political intent.
The cancelled CC coins were taken by the treasury after some have been sold and/or raffled off. So if the 64-D's and the cancelled CC's were similar does that mean the 64-d's should also go the way of the treasury?