Commodity Online

By Hubert Moolman
The worst part of the world’s current financial crisis is still on its way. The enormous debt levels present in our financial system is central to this crisis. This huge debt levels could cause the world’s monetary system to collapse, starting with the weaker currencies and quickly making its way to the major ones. Day by day the premier signal (gold price) of this collapse is getting clearer and should encourage more people to run for cover.

The world economy cannot recover and make progress until the gigantic debt burden is lifted. This can still take more than 10 years. If we have a deep and extreme collapse (in debt) much like the stock market crash in 1929, then it could be 10 years, and off course longer should the crash be less extreme but more distributed. I think 10 years is more likely, since major crashes tend to end in an extreme collapse. A peak in the gold price could be a good signal that we are at or close to a bottom of this debt crisis, and we are still far from a peak in gold.

There are various signs that indicate that we have reached the end of the prosperity part of the debt bubble. Some of these signs I have mentioned before, like the top in the Dow/gold ratio. The gold’s price is also another, it has increased 4.72 fold since beginning of this decade. You can also just look at headlines around the world of countries like Greece having a debt crisis. You can also go and find the following charts (which could be considered a good proxy for debt levels) and you will notice how these levels have consistently increased at least the last 50 years:

Cumulative rate of growth of M3 and Monetary Base
Household Debt as a percentage of GDP
You could probably look at your own finances as well as your neighbour’s for evidence of extreme debt levels compared to just a few decades ago.

Debts levels have become a huge burden and it will strangle the world economy for at least the next 10 years. The debt will have to be settled eventually, voluntarily (unlikely) or by force (death of all fiat denominated debt). All future production will be severely reduced by the debt obligation and the effects will be a world economy in chaos and possibly with life threatening phenomena like starvation being the order of the day.

That is just how it works when you have huge debt – you will have less of your future income/production available due to the debt obligation that has to be met every month.

This crisis cannot be stopped, but you do not have to be caught up in its worst effects. You have to educate yourself by seeking the right knowledge that will help you prepare for its worst effects.

Will Gold Shoot to New Records?

gold bar By David L. Ganz, Numismatic News
April 20, 2010

Gold charged forward, hitting $1,161 a troy ounce on April 12, suggesting perhaps the beginning of an assault on the $1,200 an ounce mark achieved last December.

The Dow Jones Industrial average was 10,452 on Dec. 1 when gold hit $1,214.80 on Kitco’s close; today the Dow is above 11,000. What about gold?

Each time that gold ticks upward, the numismatic consequences are enormous. That’s because double eagles are such a significant component of the rare coin market, and each contains almost a full ounce of gold. The U.S. $20 gold piece, which was produced in circulating quantities from 1850-1932, contains .9675 troy ounces of gold.

At $1,150 an ounce, the current base camp before assault on the golden peak, an uncirculated double eagle has a starting point, before numismatic value, of about $1,112 in gold. Some market analysis say that this makes MS-60 and MS-61 double eagles a great purchase opportunity.

Gold’s movement over the past 12 months has also seen its effect on gold bullion coins. The Engelhard gold quote at $1,161 was $898 a year ago. The Krugerrand and Canadian Maple Leaf have gone from $940 to $1,209. Coming up next is the American Eagle, moving in the same year period from $949 to $1,214. The U.S. Eagle gain is 27.9 percent. Slightly higher at 28.6 percent are the Krugerrand and Maple Leaf.

Meanwhile, silver is at $18.47 (up from $12.74 a year ago); platinum was $1,243 and is now $1,728. The silver gain is over 44 percent, platinum a bit less.

By Geena Paul
LONDON (Commodity Online):
Even as the world is watching Iran with suspicion over its nuclear ambitions, Tehran is harbouring plans to tackle the US pressure through gold.

Otherwise, how will you explain the gold hunt Iran has launched after the Gulf war.

To stop an effort by the West to seize Iranian assets in Europe, the Iranian leadership decided to begin a massive, secret repatriation of its international currency reserves.

Therefore, the Central Bank of Iran started buying gold so that it can stall any economic threat by countries like US and England.

And, nobody knows how much gold Iran has already amassed. That too at a time when the world is still reeling under recession impacts and several central banks are hunting for gold to convert their foreign reserves into yellow metal.

So, Iran purchased gold secretly like China does it now and shipped it to their vaults. That was Iran’s intelligent move to shift its currency reserves to gold.

Earlier, Iran’s leadership wanted to purchase 700 tonnes of gold. However, their secret effort to convert Iran’s foreign currency holdings into gold appears to have stopped when word leaked.

The gold is now being held in the vaults of the Bank Markazi in Tehran. The asset repatriation plan was set into motion just weeks after Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took over as president of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The decision was made during a strategic planning session of top regime leaders in Tehran, who were examining Iran’s options in the nuclear face-off with the West.

In addition to giving the orders to convert foreign currency holdings to gold and to repatriate them from Switzerland, the leaders also gave orders to Iran’s central bankers to move cash accounts from Europe into Arab and Russian banks, which they felt would be more immune to Western pressure.

Ahmadinejad this week visited Zimbabwe and Uganda, with whom he will discuss Iran’s nuclear programme.

Ahmadinejad’s visit to Uganda gains significance as world powers have stepped up pressure for a new round of UN sanctions against Iran for pursuing its nuclear programme.

The Gulf War wreaked devastation of unimaginable proportions on Iran’s infrastructure so much that even economic experts had predicted that it would be impossible to revive the economy in the foreseeable future.

But, Iran’s resilience to win back its lost glory has seen results in the recent past with countries like India even supporting the Iranian cause.

The economy of Iran is the sixteenth largest economy in the world by purchasing power parity (PPP). It is a transition economy with a large public sector and an estimated 40% of the economy centrally planned.

Exports are dominated by oil and gas which constituted 50% of government revenue in 2006. A unique feature of Iran’s economy is the large size of the religious foundations whose combined budgets make up half that of the central government.

High oil prices in recent years have enabled Iran to amass $97 billion in foreign exchange reserves. Yet this increased revenue has not eased economic hardships, which include double-digit unemployment and inflation.

According to the Central Bank of Iran, annual inflation declined to 11.5% as of February 2010. The economy has seen only moderate growth.

At this juncture, Iran’s policy of buying gold may make the country more self-reliant.

 
  LONDON (Commodity Online): Will gold price zoom past the record of $1227 per ounce that the precious metal achieved in December 2009? It looks gold price is surging once again prompted by a number of reasons that include the Greek financial crisis, volatility in dollar and Euro and several central banks’ decision to raise interest rates.On Monday, gold price started climbing in global markets across several continents from Asia to Europe. Gold prices hit a fresh four-months high in Asian trading on euros rebound as EU offered a bailout package to Greece. Gold for immediate delivery was seen trading at $1165.35 an ounce at 11.30 a.m while U.S. gold futures for June delivery was at $1,166.40 per ounce.Bullion analysts said that gold price is once again on a boom. Gold’s steady ascent to a record of $1227 per ounce began in October 2009 in the aftermath of India buying 200 tonnes of gold from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). IMF decision to sell gold to India at a high price led to a frenzy in bullion markets around the world, resulting in the precious metal’s historic rally to $1227 per ounce on December 4, 2009.

Precious metals analyst Mark Robinson says gold price is once again on a surge. “Gold has turned out to be the best investment asset for common people, banks, brokerages and investors around the world. Everyone is betting on gold on increasing political and currency worries in several nations from Greece to Brazil,” he pointed out.

“April is going to be the month for gold, it looks. The current gold rally has the potential to cross the $1227 per ounce. I am looking at a gold price of $1250 or above per ounce in short terms. Gold is surely going to achieve another historic record. Gold is on a bullish run on global investment demand,” Robinson told Commodity Online.

Analysts like Robinson say that the bull run in gold will continue for some months now as investors are scouting for pouring money into gold funds, gold bars, gold coins and several other bullion-based assets. “In countries like India, one of the largest gold consuming countries in the world, people are buying into Gold ETFs and gold funds based on mutual funds. This is all leading to another bullish run on the yellow metal,” he added..Several bullion analysts are now banking on the bull run theory on gold. David Levenstein, another precious metals analysts posted this report on gold on Monday:

“In dollar terms the gold price is now about 5 percent below its all time high, but the weakness of the pound and the euro against the American currency means that the price of the yellow metal in sterling and euros has just made new record highs. The price of an ounce of gold has thus reached record levels of £754 and €865 in recent trading, and the dollar price has reached a three-month high of $1,157. In August last year the gold price in sterling terms, for example, was £562, so British gold investors have made a profit of 34%, compared with a rise in the dollar price of 23% over the same period.

During the past week, the Euro was very volatile especially as the financial drama in Greece continued. As expected, the ECB left the main refinancing rate at 1% in April, and both growth prospects and inflation were largely unchanged from previous meetings. ECB President Trichet addressed questions about Greece’s deficit problem and said that ‘default is not an issue for Greece’. Although the Euro edged up higher on Friday, the trend for the week has been down.

There were a number of Central Bank events last week. Australia raised rates by 25bps to 4.25% as widely expected, and the Bank of Japan and Bank of England left rates and the quantitative easing program unchanged. The U.S. Federal Open Market Committee minutes for March’s meeting unveiled the Fed’s dovish monetary outlook. While forecasts of real economic activities remained largely unchanged from previous meeting, policymakers were surprised by deceleration of inflation. At the same time, the Fed noted unemployment would be undermining recovery.

Nicholas Brooks of ETF Securities, which runs exchange-traded funds, said: “The strong performance of gold, despite the strength of the US dollar, indicates that investors are increasingly viewing it as an alternative store of value, not just to the US dollar but to fiat [paper] currencies more broadly, as sovereign risks continues to rise.

“Traditionally, investors concerned about the structural outlook for the US dollar would buy euros, British pounds or yen. However, with policy and debt risks rising in all of these countries, investors – as well as central banks and sovereign wealth funds – are increasingly looking to gold as an alternative ‘hard asset’ store of value.”

On April 8, of this month The world’s largest gold-backed exchange-traded fund, SPDR Gold Trust said its holdings hit an all-time high at 1,140.433 tons surpassing an earlier record of 1,134.03 tons touched on June 1, 2009. The rise in the ETF holdings to a new record level reflects strong investor demand.

In my previous report I mentioned that the IMF had turned down a bid from Eric Sprott to buy the remaining 191 tons of gold on offer. Evidently, the IMF claimed that Sprott’s desire to purchase the gold from the IMF did not comply with ‘protocol”, and that the IMF only sells gold to central banks. When Sprott explained what happened, he also mentioned that “I’m a 100% believer that central banks have suppressed the price of gold. I find it hilarious today that they have these programs to sell gold – it’s of no use. It’s one of the dumbest decisions in the last decade.”

Loss of Mint Luster Key Grade Point

  By F. Michael Fazzari, Numismatic News
April 01, 2010

I believe that once you learn how to recognize friction wear, rubbing, cabinet friction, etc., whatever the current term for loss of mint luster on the highest point of a coin’s design is; you can grade anything.

Let me suggest some universal aspects of grading that come into play even while examining unusual numismatic items. These ideas should be obvious to anyone who has given much thought to grading.

Think about these points:

Smaller coins are harder to grade than larger coins because they are harder to see. While it’s true that some sort of magnification aids your examination, the actual parts of the coin you are looking at are small to begin with.

The contact marks on smaller coins are generally less severe than the marks on larger coins. That’s because smaller coins are lighter. Light coins do less damage when they come into contact with each other while circulating.

With all coins, the contact marks become more detrimental the easier they are to see. Marks in a prime focal area are the most important to consider.

The amount of wear on a coin is relative to its size. Take for example an Indian Peace medal with a diameter of 75mm (slightly bigger than three Washington quarters placed end-to-end). A tiny amount of cabinet friction – enough to change the color of the medal’s highest point – would hardly lower the commercial grade of the medal into the AU range; yet that same amount of friction might lower the grade of a small coin one point.

As you grade a coin, no mater what its configuration, you are looking for a changes of color (independent of toning) indicating the loss of originality at that point. Coins these days come in all shapes and sizes. Have you seen the coins from the Somali Democratic Republic in the shape of motorcycles and guitars? Even unusual coins such as this have certain points that will show the first signs of wear.

It is very helpful to know what design details are present on a fully struck example of a coin you are grading but an experienced numismatist who knows the difference between a weak strike and actual friction wear can get around this requirement.

Keeping these points in mind, all the usual criteria used to arrive at a grade remain the same no matter what the coin looks like. These include strike and the number, severity, and location of marks. Eye appeal is always most important. Now let’s take a look at some unusual coins you may encounter and discuss how they might be graded.

I believe any unusual coin can be graded the same as a normal specimen. Fig. 1 shows one part of a double struck silver medal at 10 power magnification. In the micrograph, the fields are dark and the raised portions of the design are white. In the center, you can make out parts of the letters on the first strike that have been flattened by the second strike. Since the fields of this medal are mirror-like and free from marks or blemishes, this error coin has very high eye appeal. It would grade PR-68 or higher as an error or as a normal piece.

An allowance is made for off-center error coins that show an unstruck portion of the planchet remaining. While the originality of the unstruck portion should be judged, original planchet surface marks on this part of the piece should not be factored into the grade unless they are severe.

Figure 2 shows a waffled state quarter at 15 power magnification. Its golden color is due to the lighting conditions in the location where it was photographed. Let’s grade it assuming that the rest of the coin looks the same as the micrograph.

The piece has full, blazing, mint luster with no rub. That gets us into the uncirculated range. There are virtually no perceptible marks on the piece and it has high eye appeal. That gets us into the gem grade. There are some stress cracks from the cancel die used to disfigure the coin but one could argue that the cracks are part of the cancelling process rather than defects. Wouldn’t you agree that this is a beautiful example of a waffled coin?

Good Time to Mentor a Young Collector

young numismatists By Bill Brandimore, Bank Note Reporter
March 15, 2010

I’ve been thinking about the low number of young people involved with this hobby. It’s not really that surprising an observation, but there are very few collectors in the 12 to 30 age group. I’m sure most of you have noticed this.

By contrast, most of us older collectors began collecting while we were in that age group. It was usually the result of a job such as peddling papers or clerking in a mom and pop store when we discovered this neat hobby where we could collect things for free. We could put an item away for its face value, and many times the item would be worth a dollar or two.

I found a 1916-D Mercury dime on my paper route. At the time it was worth $5.

Later, especially if we were history buffs, we would hook up with paper money. My early stamp collecting experience let me fall quickly in love with intaglio printing on a large enough scale that you didn’t need a magnifying glass to enjoy it.

Those kinds of free collecting incentives no longer exist. If we want to see a healthy population of collectors that will buy our collections when the time comes, we need to do some personal mentoring.

Mentor was the good friend of Odysseus, who agreed to teach his son Telemachus how to be a man while Odysseus was away fighting in the Trojan War. Mentor did, and Odysseus found a good man in Telemachus when he returned 20 years later to reclaim his kingdom. The secret was getting them young.

My Dad gave me the Christmas envelopes to play with when I was 8 or 9. I enjoyed putting things in an album.

I went to the post office and bought 12-cent plate blocks. I learned so much. To this day I remember that Ohio came into the Union in 1803, because a 1953 stamp was issued to celebrate the 150th anniversary of Ohio’s statehood.

On my paper route I got a few Barber coins and Liberty Head nickels. I enjoyed filling the holes in my albums. Later I discovered paper money, in particular, Fractional Currency of the Civil War era. I was definitely hooked.

How do we hook our children and grandchildren today? How do we capture the neighbor kids for numismatics?

The American Numismatic Association puts a lot of emphasis on Young Numismatists programs. A local club I belong to, the Wisconsin Valley Coin Club, draws a crowd at its annual show by putting out a bucket of cents and folders for youth who accompany their parents to our show. It’s a big hit, as the kids enjoy it and the parents are free for a while to explore the dealer inventories.

A personal touch, however, with follow-up, seems to be even better. We need to invite these kids to our meetings, sign them up, and make sure they have a ride to meetings.

Perhaps interest them in a Lincoln Cent collection featuring the Memorial reverse. After all, these coins go back 50 years now, and you can get them free out of change. It really is like a treasure hunt.

As the youthful practitioners get into the swing of things, we can introduce them to $1 Federal Reserve Notes, district sets, fancy numbers, and on and on.

So, take a personal interest in the youth that might be in your coin club. Give away a few Lincoln cents, an Indian Head cent or a Buffalo nickel. It might have the same magical affect on them as it did for us.

What really got me excited back in 1952 was finding a very well worn 1909 Barber quarter. It was older than my Dad, and it was free for face value.

I really believe there is something genetic about collecting. None of my kids are interested beyond assuring me that they think my currency is really cool. They might even spend five or 10 minutes looking at my treasures before their eyelids droop.

At the same time, there are young people out there who are latent collectors if we can only press their genetic collector button. Give it a try, it worked for Mentor.

Show business this month of April includes the Military Payment Certificate Collectors Fest at Sandusky, Ohio. George Cuhaj and I are making it a point to attend.

From all reports, this is one of the most enjoyable collector encounters you are likely to attend. Everyone I talk to who has been there returns. These specialists are enthusiastic collectors.

For information, drop a line to Fred Schwan at the BNR Press, 132 E. Second St., Port Clinton, Ohio 43452-1115-04 or call 419-732-6683.

Other April attractions include the Wisconsin Valley Coin Club Show, April 25. It works if you’re in the north central Wisconsin area.

Central States Numismatic Society holds its annual convention in Milwaukee, April 29-May 1. This show has lots of dealers, exhibits, educational sessions and great camaraderie. This show always seemed to have a good deal of paper money, and this was true even when paper money wasn’t nearly as hot as it is now.

Whatever you do this spring, get out to a coin show. You never know what you’ll find.

One nice feature of small shows is that frequently the dealers at these shows are not up on all the paper money fields. If they haven’t bought the book, you might make a great find.

Looking a little further ahead, we’re all eagerly awaiting the International Paper Money Show in Memphis, Tenn., this June. This will be Lyn Knight’s first Memphis event as the show’s owner. I know we can count on a great auction and splendid exhibits.

It is also pretty hard to beat all the restaurants on the Mississippi. I generally take a nice evening ride on a trolly car. It is quite refreshing after a hard day on the floor, and a great meal. So mark your calendars for June 17-20.

On the market side, it looks as if prices truly are beginning to respond a bit—especially better Nationals and large-size type. If you’re looking for a bargain, pick up on Fractional Currency, Colonial currency and the notes of the Continental Congress. Small-size is offering some bargains, as well, but nice small-size is still bringing nice prices.

As always, e-mail me at billb3883@verizon.net. I enjoy your questions and comments. If you’re at a show I’m attending, come on up and say hello.

Gold Volatility Whips Market

  By Patrick A. Heller
February 23, 2010

Other News & Articles

The gold market suffered but overcame two major onslaughts last week.

After U.S. markets closed last Wednesday, the International Monetary Fund announced that it would offer the remaining 191.3 metric tons of gold from its planned gold sales onto “the market” rather than central banks. By making it appear that more than six million ounces of gold might be dumped onto retail channels over time, some investors panicked into selling, which pushed down the gold price.

Gold eventually fell more than two percent but then recovered all lost ground within 24 hours of the announcement.

The nature of the IMF announcement indicated that it was done to drive down the price of gold. Revealing such plans is a tactic that guarantees that the IMF sells the gold for the lowest possible price. If the IMF was really trying to raise the maximum funds for its own operations, it would not sell its gold by this process.

The quick recovery in gold prices meant that another tactic was needed. Late on Thursday afternoon, the Federal Reserve announced that it had increased the interest rate banks would have to pay the Fed for overnight borrowings. This was meant to be a signal that interest rates might rise in the near future, which again knocked down precious metals prices.

Still, gold came right back the next day. Over the weekend, Asian markets climbed as high at $1,130. When the U.S. markets opened Monday, the price was immediately taken down to the $1,110-$1,115 range.

There is a huge incentive to hold down gold prices this week. Gold options expire Tuesday, with more than 5,000 call contracts (over 500,000 ounces) that could be exercised at a price of $1,100. Should the COMEX close Tuesday above $1,100, these contracts for immediate delivery would be called. That would put a supply squeeze on the dwindling COMEX gold dealer inventories, which are down 25 percent in the past three months to only 1.65 million ounces.

Also this week, Fed chair Ben Bernanke will be testifying before the House Financial Services Committee and Senate Banking Committee. There is an effort under way to encourage a member of one of these committees to ask Bernanke the very same questions about admitted Federal Reserve gold swap arrangements that the Fed has refused to disclose in response to the Gold Anti Trust Action Committee’s Freedom of Information Act Request. If ever there was a week that Bernanke needed to appear competent, this is the week.

The U.S. government, the member nation with the largest voting power in the IMF, leaned on the IMF to make it appear that some of its gold might be sold to the public (which, if it occurs, I think will at most be only a token percentage of the total), then risked crashing stock and bond markets by raising one of the key interest rates. To me, these actions were obviously taken solely to try to suppress the price of gold.

Such extreme measures worry me that there are some horrendous financial developments about to break. There are so many potential crises waiting to collapse that I cannot discern just which ones they might be.

In the short term, I expect extremely volatile gold and silver markets. I expect to see more extreme efforts made to hold down prices at the same time that demand for physical metals soars. Daily swings of 5-10% are possible. I expect that the result of all this volatility will be significantly higher prices than we see today.

The safest way to participate in the continuing long-term bull markets for gold and silver is to buy physical metals, not paper contracts, and avoid trading on margin. As prices are whipsawed, those with margin accounts could actually lose money despite prices eventually reaching new highs.

In the 1979-1980 bullion boom, I worked as a certified public accountant. One client was a commodity broker who personally bought several thousands of ounces of silver on margin. The day before the price of silver rose almost consecutively until it reached the January 1980 peak, it dipped about five percent. This client was unable to cover the margin call and saw his silver position closed out. If you don’t buy on margin, you won’t have this risk. At that time, I owned significant positions in gold and silver coins, almost all of which I sold in early 1980 for sizable profits.

The idea of purchasing precious metals on margin is to multiply the hoped-for profits. However, in volatile markets, the strategy could backfire. Buy physical gold and silver with your own funds, then relax and sit back to watch the coming fireworks.

Patrick A. Heller owns Liberty Coin Service in Lansing, Mich., and writes “Liberty’s Outlook,” the company’s monthly newsletter on rare coins and precious metals subjects. Past newsletter issues can be viewed at http://www.libertycoinservice.com. Other commentaries are available at Coin Update (www.coinupdate.com) and Financial Sense University (www.financialsense.com). His periodic radio interviews can be heard on the Korelin Economic Report at http://www.kereport.com.

Auction prices show pause in ’09 results December 31, 2009
by  Mike Thorne

Summary

“Gold Hits All-Time High,” “Unemployment Tops 10 Percent,” “10 Percent of Homes Are in Foreclosure,” “Dollar Rises, Gold Falls,” screamed the headlines in 2009. But how has the uneasy economic situation affected you personally?

“Gold Hits All-Time High,” “Unemployment Tops 10 Percent,” “10 Percent of Homes Are in Foreclosure,” “Dollar Rises, Gold Falls,” screamed the headlines in 2009. But how has the uneasy economic situation affected you personally?

And how has it affected the coin industry?
It would certainly make sense for coin collectors to cut back on hobby purchases because of the troubled economy.

But has this really happened? One way we might be able to tell is to take a look at numismatic auctions in 2009.

The year certainly started well enough for Heritage Auctions, one of the industry giants, as the Heritage FUN auctions in early January brought in $65 million in sales of rare U.S. coins, U.S. paper currency, and ancient and world coins. Highlighted in their U.S. coin sales were pattern pieces from the Queller Family Collection. (David Queller’s 1804 dollar realized $3,737,500 in a Heritage sale in 2008.)

One of the Queller collection’s better patterns was an Numismatic Guaranty Corp.-graded PR-62 1880 $4 gold Stella, Coiled Hair type. With just 18 pieces known, this popular rarity realized $575,000. The auction record for the type is $977,500, achieved by a PR-66 Cameo example in 2005.

— — —

One metric I’ve used in recent years as a gauge to the health of auction activity is the number of $1 million coins crossing the auction block. In 2008, for example, I noted four such coins. In 2007, I counted five million-dollar sellers, and in 2006, the figure was again four.

For 2009, I counted only three million-dollar coins, although a fourth coin came really close. With one exception, the million-dollar coins are not ones you would have predicted to receive such exalted amounts.

The one you could have predicted, however, is sometimes called “The King of Coins.” It’s an 1804 dollar sold by Heritage Auction Galleries at its April 29 to May 2 sale in Cincinnati, Ohio, at the Central States Numismatic Society Convention. The coin was part of the Joseph C. Thomas Collection.

Once owned by Amon G. Carter, Sr., who paid $3,250 for it in 1950, this is a Class III 1804 dollar, of which just six are known. Class I, or original, 1804 dollars were minted in the 1834-1835 period, and eight are known. Restrikes were made in 1859 and have a slightly different reverse than the originals; Class II, of which there is only one piece, has a plain edge.

Graded PR-58 by Professional Coin Grading Service, this coin is the best of the three Class III dollars available for private ownership. It sold for $2.3 million, “a new world record for its class,” according to Greg Rohan, president of Heritage. “Thursday [April 30] night’s price made this particular 1804 dollar the seventh most valuable coin ever sold at auction.” (Note that all figures given in this article include the buyers’ fee, which is typically 15 percent of the winning bid.)

Although $2.3 million sounds good for a Class III 1804 dollar, the same coin sold by private treaty in a deal brokered by Heritage for $2,475,000 in 2006. Thus, it’s possible that the current buyer, NGC founder John Albanese, got a bargain in a depressed market.

The second million-dollar coin sold on May 29 at a Heritage auction conducted at the Long Beach Expo, in Long Beach, Calif. The winner was the finest known 1856-O $20 gold piece.

Graded Specimen-63 by PCGS (and also by NGC earlier), the $20 gold piece realized $1,437,500, more than double the $542,800 it brought in 2005. (“Specimen” refers to coins that are neither business strikes nor proofs but are obviously specially made, with some characteristics that distinguish them from business strikes.)

Is this coin actually worth the amount it brought? Bob Green, a specialist in Liberty Head double eagles, “was very surprised that this coin sold for $1,437,500. I would not have bid more than $1 million.”

Similarly, Greg Reynolds, a numismatic researcher and expert, said, “In my view, the price realized was a little high, given current market conditions. A circulated 1856-O could probably be purchased, at some point over the next 18 months, for less than $475,000.” His prediction proved prophetic, as an NGC-graded AU-58 1856-O sold for $460,000 at a Heritage auction in Los Angeles in mid-summer.

Amazingly, the third coin that sold for more than a million dollars was a large cent. Specifically, it was a 1795 large cent with reeded edge, which is typically listed along with normal varieties, so it’s considered enough of a regular issue to be included in a complete collection of large cents.

This particular 1795 reeded edge cent was PCGS-graded VG-10 and was part of the Dan Holmes large cent collection. The collection was sold in an Ira and Larry Goldberg (with Chris McCawley and Bob Grellman) auction held Sept. 6-8 at the Beverly Hills Crowne Plaza. When the bidding stopped, the coin, which is the best of the five or six pieces known of this variety, had realized a whopping $1,265,000. The pre-sale estimate was just $250,000.

Another coin in the Goldberg sale almost achieved the million-dollar mark, a 1799 large cent graded MS-62 by NGC. This coin realized $977,500, again with a pre-sale estimate of $250,000.

In an article about the Holmes collection sale, Greg Reynolds noted that the 1799 cent now resides in a PCGS holder with a grade of MS-61. Reynolds himself grades the piece AU-58, and McCawley and Grellman consider it AU-55. I view  this as a good illustration of the grade inflation that often occurs at the certification services when a scarce or key date is involved.

Two other coins worth mentioning are a pair of 1793 Strawberry Leaf cents. One (NC-2 variety) graded Fair-2 by PCGS sold for $264,500, and the other (NC-3 variety), optimistically graded G-4 by PCGS, went for $218,500. Surely the Fr-2 coin is one of the lowest-grade coins ever to sell for more than a quarter million dollars.

— — —

2009 must have been the year for large cents, as another example of the 1793 Strawberry Leaf (NC-3) variety became the most valuable large cent (until later in the year) when it sold for $862,500 on Jan. 5 at a Stack’s auction in Orlando. After the sale, the coin received a grade of VG-10 from PCGS. It’s the finest of just four known examples of this variety.

Another auction with record-breaking large cent sales occurred early in the year, at Ira and Larry Goldberg’s Pre-Long Beach auction held Feb. 1-3. Featured was part of the Ted Naftzger Collection of large cents consisting of middle date cents (1816-1839). Highlights included an 1823 cent graded MS-66 Brown by PCGS. Against an estimated value of at least $35,000, it realized an astounding $299,000.

Another key in the Naftzger collection was an 1839/6 PCGS-graded MS-65 Brown. This cent was described in the auction catalog as an “indispensable piece for anyone trying to assemble a Mint State ‘Red Book’ collection of Middle Date … large cents.” With a PCGS population of one, with none finer, the coin was estimated at $50,000 and up. The final price was up, way up, in fact, as the coin realized $264,500.

— — —

Of course, 2009 was the 200th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth and the 100th anniversary of the Lincoln cent. Thus, it seems appropriate to consider how Lincoln cents fared at auction.

In the sale held March 27-31 in Baltimore by Heritage, for example, one of the top ranked lots was a 1969-S doubled-die obverse cent. Graded MS-63 Red by PCGS, this coin, with an estimated population in all grades of between 17 and 32 pieces, brought $86,250. Heritage sold two more 1969-S doubled die Lincolns at an auction in October. Graded MS-63 Red by NGC and AU-55 by PCGS, the two sold for $57,500 and $54,625, respectively.

At the March Heritage sale in Baltimore, a 1955 doubled-die Lincoln cent, graded MS-63 Red by PCGS, realized $5,750. This amount is nearly 100 percent over the wholesale value given in the Coin Dealer Newsletter (CDN or Greysheet).

A 1917-S cent, graded MS-65 Red by PCGS, went for $12,650 in the Heritage Long Beach Signature Auction held in February. This is more than 140 percent over the CDN wholesale bid. Also, this price illustrates the meaning of “condition rarity,” a common coin in lower grades but rare in higher grades.

An even better illustration of condition rarity can be seen in a Lincoln cent result at the Heritage September sale in conjunction with the Long Beach Expo. There, a 1925-D cent, graded MS-66 Red by PCGS, realized an astonishing $74,750. This is a coin with a PCGS population of just two pieces.

— — —

Condition rarities in other denominations also garnered major amounts in 2009. For example, in the Heritage FUN auction, held in Orlando from Jan. 7-11, an 1892-S Morgan dollar graded MS-67 by PCGS sold for $460,000. In low grades, the 1892-S is worth little more than a common date.

In late March, at the Bowers and Merena auction at the Baltimore Coin and Collectibles Expo, the second highest seller was another 1892-S Morgan. This coin, graded MS-66 by PCGS, realized $201,250. As you can see, a single grading point made more a quarter-million dollar difference. Although I haven’t seen the two coins, I wonder if the MS-67 piece looks $250,000 better than the one graded merely MS-66.

In the Buffalo nickel series, one example of a condition rarity is the 1926-S, a low-mintage date that’s relatively common in grades such as Good and VG, but decidedly uncommon in VF and above. Two uncirculated 1926-S nickels sold in the Bowers and Merena auction at the American Numismatic Association National Money Show in March in Portland, Ore. One, graded MS-63 by PCGS with a CAC sticker, sold for $25,300. The other, PCGS-graded MS-64, without a CAC sticker, realized only $14,950.

CAC stands for Certified Acceptance Corporation, and for a fee, CAC will examine a certified coin and determine whether or not it’s accurately graded. If it is, CAC attaches an oval-shaped green sticker as a stamp of approval. As you can see from the above example, the CAC sticker appears to have made a huge difference in how the two coins were evaluated.

Another Buffalo nickel condition rarity crossed the auction block at the Bowers and Merena auction at the ANA World’s Fair of Money in August in Los Angeles. The coin was a 1925-S nickel NCG-graded MS-66, which realized $87,400. This is a date that doesn’t cross the $100 mark until the grade of XF.

Earlier I mentioned a 1925-D Lincoln cent graded MS-66 Red by PCGS that sold for $74,750. At the same sale, a common (in low grades) 1920-D Buffalo nickel, graded MS-66 by PCGS, with a CAC sticker, brought the same $74,750 as the 1925-D Lincoln.

In the Walking Liberty half dollar series, the 1919-D is a slightly better early date in circulated grades that becomes a condition rarity in mint state. As one illustration of this, Heritage auctioned a 1919-D PCGS-graded MS-66 at the Central States convention in late April, early May for the astounding figure of $253,000. Of course, this coin is considered the single finest certified 1919-D.

The final condition rarity I’ll mention is an 1886-O Morgan dollar. This coin is valued as a common date in most circulated grades but becomes much less common in mint state. At the Heritage Summer Fun Signature sale, held in early July, an 1886-O, graded MS-65 by PCGS, with a CAC sticker, sold for $149,500.

— — —

Key date coins, coins that are the keys to completing a particular series, also brought in large amounts at auction in 2009. At their Central States auction, Heritage sold a 1918/7-D Buffalo nickel for $253,000. It undoubtedly helped that the coin graded MS-66 by PCGS and was tied for the finest certified example.

At the Scotsman Auction Company’s Midwest Summer Sale held in St. Charles, Mo., the second highest price in the sale went for the big key Mercury dime, the 1916-D. Graded MS-65 FB (Full Split Bands) by PCGS, the coin realized $38,525. This amount is $25 over the current CDN bid price, which means that the coin sold for wholesale.

A high-grade example of the key date 1918/7-S Standing Liberty quarter appeared in the Heritage Long Beach sale in February. Graded MS-65 by PCGS, the coin brought $66,125, which is slightly below the current CDN bid price.

In Morgan dollars, I noted two sales of high-grade Mint State examples of the key date 1889-CC. In NGC-graded MS-64 PL (prooflike), one sold at the Heritage February Long Beach sale for $51,750. A much better example sold at the Heritage January FUN sale for an unimaginable figure of $531,875. The coin was graded MS-68 by PCGS.

For collectors who consider the proof-only 1895 Morgan part of the series, an NGC-graded PR-66 Cameo example realized $57,500 at the Heritage Dallas Signature Sale held in October. This would have to be considered an incredible bargain, as the current CDN bid price for this coin is $75,000. This may be just another example of the sale of a great coin in a down market.

— — —

Unusual items found ready buyers in 2009. Some of the most unusual items were found in Stack’s Americana Sale held in late September in Philadelphia. For example, a 1906 Indian Head cent struck in gold realized $276,000. The coin was probably struck on a planchet intended for a gold quarter eagle. Graded AU-58 by NGC, the coin may be unique.

Another unusual item was a large-size Thomas Jefferson Indian Peace medal struck as thin silver shells. The medal realized $345,000, which was well beyond the pre-sale estimate and set a new record for U.S. silver medals sold at auction.

A 1942 aluminum pattern Lincoln cent realized $126,500 in the Heritage Signature sale in May in which an 1856-O double eagle grossed more $1 million. The Lincoln pattern was graded PR-66 by PCGS, and is considered to be R8 (Rarity 8, 2-3 known).

Last, but not least, another new record was set at an auction sale held in conjunction with January’s FUN event. Held by the Original Hobo Nickel Society, the sale’s 145 lots garnered $47,728.95, eclipsing 2008’s record by more than $11,000.

— — —

Proving once again that Registry Sets (sets of coins certified by either PCGS or NGC and ranked according to average grade and completeness) can bring in big bucks, a complete set of nickel three-cent pieces went for $304,750 at a pre-FUN sale held by Bowers and Merena Auctions in Orlando. The nickel three-cent pieces comprised the top-ranked PCGS Registry Set in their category (Business Strike Three-Cent Nickels). At the same sale, a PCGS-graded MS-63 example of the always-in-demand 1921 Saint-Gaudens double eagle sold for $287,500.

— — —

One way to get an idea of the state of the auction market in 2009 is to look at coins that sold more than once during the year. For example, Heritage offered the same 1933 $10 gold piece twice, first in January and then again in August. Graded MS-65 by PCGS, the coin sold for $488,750 early in 2009 but brought only $460,000 in midyear. Did the market decline more than 6 percent in a little over six months?
As another illustration of a particular coin selling for less later than it did earlier, the 1880 Coiled Hair Stella that I mentioned as part of a Heritage sale in January was auctioned a second time in August. The realization was “just” $546,250, or slightly more than 5 percent below the $575,000 it earned in January.

Instead of asking whether the sale of these two coins represents a decline in the market from January to August, perhaps a better question would be, “Why were the two coins placed in auction again so soon after being purchased?” I’m reminded of the TV commercial in which a man purchases a painting at auction and then immediately tells the auctioneer that he wants to sell it. Obviously, this is not a good way to handle items that are bought for investment.

— — —

That’s my survey of the auction scene for 2009. What does it show? As always, desirable coins brought big money, although perhaps not as big as in some recent years.

Still, given the state of the economy things undoubtedly could have been a lot worse in 2009 than they were. If the recession is really over, as we’re told, then numismatic auctions in 2010 should make banner news. I, for one, will be a keen observer.

World Coin News Names Coin of the Year Winners

 

By NumisMaster Staff
December 22, 2009

Ten outstanding 2008-dated coins have been honored with Coin of the Year Awards by World Coin News magazine.

An international panel of judges selected the winners from hundreds of nominated coins during a final round of balloting that concluded in late December. The awards will be presented Jan. 30, 2010, in a special ceremony at the World Money Fair in Berlin, Germany, by World Coin News executive editor David C. Harper.

“Krause Publications and World Coin News have sponsored the Coin of the Year Awards for nearly 30 years, and each year the entries get better and better,” said Lisa Bellavin, Coin of the Year coordinator for KP. “This round of voting was no exception. The creativity, innovation and craftsmanship shown by mints around the world is nothing short of breathtaking, and we are pleased to honor those who continue to push coin design and manufacturing to new heights.”

The winners include:

Most Historically Significant: Kazakhstan, 100 Tenge, silver, Genghis Khan
Best Contemporary Event: Israel, 10 New Shequalim, silver, Israel’s 60th anniversary
Best Gold: Latvia, 20 Lati, gold, Coin of Latvia
Best Silver: Germany, 10 Euro, silver, Franz Kafka
Best Crown: Austria, 10 Euro, silver, The Abbey of Klosterneuberg
Most Popular: United States, 1 Dollar, silver, American Eagle
Best Trade: Cyprus, 2 Euro, bi-metallic, Ancient statue cross
Most Innovative: Austria, 25 Euro, silver, Fascination Light
Most Artistic: Poland, 200 Zlotych, gold, Warsaw ghetto uprising
Most Inspirational: Canada, 2,500 Dollars, gold, Towards Confederation

Voting for the overall Coin of the Year, as well as the People’s Choice award, will conclude soon, with winners also unveiled online and at the World Money Fair.

For press inquiries, email lisa.bellavin@fwmedia.com. For more information about Coin of the Year, visit www.worldcoinnews.net.

About the Author

Tom’s career began with Coin World in the early 1970′s where he became editor of the “Collector’s Clearinghouse” before joining the staff of the American Numismatic Association, holding the position of senior authenticator for its certification service from 1981-1984. A prolific writer, Mr. DeLorey is the co-author and technical editor of several books and contributing editor to many numismatic periodicals. His efforts have earned him the ANA’s Heath Literary Award on three occasions, the Wayte and Olga Raymond Memorial Award twice, and two Numismatic Literary Guild awards. He is a contributor to both the Guide Book and Handbook of United States Coins, as well as other standard references. He also remains a consultant to the ANA Authentication Bureau.

Coins With Shady Pasts

1 Comment

By Tom DeLorey on Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Filed Under: Featured, History, US Coins

The U.S. Treasury’s high-handed seizure of a 1933 St. Gaudens Double Eagle from a British dealer lured to America under false pretenses by a Secret Service Agent posing as a buyer for the coin is outrageous to me, and should be highly disturbing to you, the collector. The arrest of this dealer, Stephen Fenton, and of his American agent, Jay Parrino, on charges of allegedly possessing stolen U.S. government property is frightening to all of us.

Popular legend has long held that no 1933 Double Eagles were ever “officially” released by the U.S. Treasury, and that somehow this made them illegal to possess (other than the two specimens “officially” given by the Treasury to the National Numismatic Collection at the Smithsonian Institution). This is despite the fact that several 1933 $20s were publicly advertised and sold in the numismatic market between 1933 and 1944, at which point the Treasury suddenly and arbitrarily decided that they could not be sold after all, and began seizing them and destroying them!

Although most common gold coins were required to be surrendered to the U.S. Treasury at face value by the Gold Surrender Act of 1933 and the Gold Reserve Act of 1934, the laws specifically exempted “gold coins having a recognized special value to collectors of rare and unusual coins” from the requirement, and the 1933 Double Eagle certainly qualified as a rare and unusual coin. These laws were ultimately nullified by Public Law 93-373, which made all forms of gold legal for Americans to own again and was signed into law by President Gerald Ford on August 14, 1974, and again by Executive Order 11825, promulgated by Ford on December 31, 1974.

This would appear to make the 1933 $20s legal to own now, a point arguably subject to debate and interpretation when the Treasury began seizing them in 1944. However, the Treasury now claims, without substantiation, that the 1933 $20s are actually stolen government property, a charge significantly not raised by the Treasury when two earlier victims of government seizure in the late 1940s and early 1950s sued the government for the return of their property.

Those lawsuits were conducted at a time when the Gold Surrender Act was in effect to support the Treasury’s otherwise weak position. In both cases the litigants abandoned their efforts in the face of the endless legal fees incurred in challenging Uncle Sam’s deep pockets. However, neither litigant was ever faced with the threat of criminal prosecution.
 
The government bases its current charges, unsupported by any police report involving the theft of property that I am aware of, on the premise that the Treasury has no record of the coins ever having been issued. However, the allegation that there is no official record of them having been issued does not constitute evidence that the coins were “stolen” in some manner, as there are literally thousands of U.S. coins in existence today that the U.S. Mint has no record of ever even striking, much less issuing.

The largest class of these are the Proof gold and silver coins dated before 1858, and the Proof copper, bronze and copper-nickel coins before 1878. These coins were basically treated as medals for the Mint’s accounting purposes, which were mainly concerned with keeping track of the metals used in them, and they were not included in the Mint Reports for the coins issued in a given year. Look at the Mint Report for Half Cents dated 1840 to 1848, and 1852. According to the U.S. Mint Report these coins were never struck and never issued. Should they be seized? Nonsense!

The same Mint Report also claims that no regular issue Half Dollars were struck at the Philadelphia Mint in 1815, and likewise that no $2.50 gold pieces were struck at the New Orleans Mint in 1845, yet both coins certainly exist! Should the U.S. Treasury therefore seize the coins, or should it calmly accept the assumption which the hobby makes that these coins were struck in early 1816 and early 1846 respectively from leftover dies, and that the U.S. Treasury’s records are understandably either wrong or incomplete? (We will ignore the coins which the Mint Report says were issued but were in fact never actually struck, such as the 1797 Quarter Dollars and the 1805 Silver Dollars which the hobby now knows to have been earlier-dated coins either struck or issued in those years. The Treasury would certainly have no interest in seizing coins which do not exist. We hope.)

Thus there is significant historical precedent to establish that the U.S. Treasury’s records are sometimes wrong and sometimes incomplete, and no reason to believe that they might not be wrong or incomplete in the case of the 1933 Double Eagle. The Mint might have released a few coins without telling the Treasury, or the Treasury might have released a few without telling the Mint. Also, there seems to be no record of how many of the 29 1933 Double Eagles reserved for the 1934 Assay Commission were actually assayed by that commission, and what happened to any unmelted coins.

There may also have been some uncertainty on the Mint’s part as to whether the embargo on gold was permanent or temporary. Though Roosevelt had issued the Gold Surrender Act, officially Executive Order #6260, on March 6, 1933, prohibiting the further release of gold coins struck by the country’s mints, the Philadelphia Mint continued to strike 1933 Double Eagles until April 5th of that year, and by some accounts struck them as late as May. There was no reason to strike the coins if the Mint did not believe that it might perhaps someday be allowed to issue them.

Thus there were, for a period of several weeks, genuine 1933 Double Eagles in the Philadelphia Mint where, under the Mint’s normal business practice (for the day) of courteously accommodating the public in general and coin collectors in particular, they theoretically could have been legally exchanged for another $20 gold piece or any $20 face value in gold.

As an example of this progressive attitude, Q. David Bowers tells in “Silver Dollars & Trade Dollars of the United States” how the Secretary of the Treasury in 1928 had the Philadelphia Mint make a 1928-P Peace Dollar, which had not yet been officially released, available to a powerful New York political organization which wished to include one in a cornerstone being laid in that year. I personally have seen a cover letter on San Francisco Mint letterhead from 1928 or 1929 telling a collector that the five different S-Mint dollars (all the way back to the 1921-S Morgan!) that he had requested and paid for were enclosed, and offering to supply other coins from their inventory.

The same could have happened to the 1933 Double Eagle, just as it did to other coins. When I was Senior Authenticator at the American Numismatic Association in Colorado Springs, I once had the pleasure of meeting with a family who was visiting our museum who had a coin which they wanted looked at. The coin was a 1921 Double Eagle, which is a very rare date despite a mintage of 528,500 pieces, as virtually all of the mintage was held by the Treasury as backing for Gold Certificates and later melted in 1933.

The grandmother in the family explained that her uncle, who was the Superintendent of the Philadelphia Mint at the time she was born in 1921, had given her the coin as a present upon her birth, and that it had been in her family ever since. (Alas, the family had cleaned it several times over the years!) She mentioned a name which I later verified in the “Coin World Almanac” as one of the two men who served as Superintendent in 1921, but I do not recall now which one it was.

Breen estimated that only 15 to 18 1921 Double Eagles exist today, and it is quite possible that all of these were courtesy releases just like that innocent grey-haired lady’s. Nevertheless, the date is considered to have been officially issued, and that makes them legal in the eyes of the Treasury.

If somebody of influence, or at least of means, had gone to the Philadelphia Mint during that window of opportunity in 1933 and requested a 1933 Double Eagle, there was no reason at that time why that request would not have been honored. There might also not have been a record of such an insignificant transaction, just as today you would not make a diary entry of the fact that you had given a friend two $10 bills for a $20.

Finally, we must remember that the Secretary of the Treasury from March 5 to December 31, 1933, was none other than the noted numismatist William Hartford Woodin, one-time owner of the two unique 1877 “Half Union” $50 pattern coins in gold. Woodin had been pressured into returning them to the Treasury in 1910, and was given the Mint’s fabulous 118-year accumulation of odds and ends, mostly patterns, in return for them. This hoard became the basis for the book “United States Pattern, Trial, and Experimental Pieces,” co-authored with Edgar H. Adams in 1913.

Woodin was a friend and financial supporter of FDR from his New York political days, and an enthusiastic proponent of his New Deal. As Secretary of the Treasury he helped shaped the wording of the various gold surrender acts, and may have been instrumental in providing for the exemption of numismatic coins from them. Whether or not he also helped preserve a few of the 1933 Double Eagles for posterity we will never know.

Woodin grew ill in the Fall of 1933 with respiratory problems, and offered his resignation on Oct. 31. FDR refused the resignation, but after a prolonged leave of absence in the Southwest failed to improve his condition, Woodin resigned again on Dec. 13, effective Dec. 31. He died on May 3, 1934, and his collection was disposed of privately.

There are many other items that the U.S. Treasury and/or the U.S. Mint consider or have considered to be unlawful for the average American citizen to own. The most mysterious is probably the 1964-D Peace Dollar, of which some 316,000 pieces were struck at the Denver Mint in 1965 but never “officially” released.

The U.S. Treasury’s decades-old supply of Morgan and Peace silver dollars, long held as backing for silver certificates, had been exhausted by a run on the Treasury during the years 1962-64, ignited by the surprising release of several original bags of 1903-O Dollars in October of 1962, which prior to that moment had been worth some $1,500 each in Uncirculated condition.

The supply of Dollars ran out in 1964, just as recently-inaugurated President Lyndon B. Johnson was beginning to exert his power as our first Western President. Silver Dollars had long been popular in the West, and when several of LBJ’s political cronies from the silver-mining states suggested that it would be a good idea for the U.S. Treasury to mint some more silver dollars, LBJ thought it was a good idea too.

LBJ ordered the Mint to get ready to make silver dollars, and to the Mint getting ready means making dies and testing them. Even though no change was contemplated from the Peace dollar design last used in 1935, the dies and hubs used for that coinage had long since been destroyed, and new ones needed to be created and tested for their striking characteristics.

The coins were authorized on August 3, 1964, but for some reason, probably the so-called coin shortage of 1964, production was delayed until May of 1965 when LBJ finally ordered the Mint to strike the coins. An initial test run of 316,076 pieces was struck as a final testing of the dies, but then the Coinage Act of 1965, effective July 23 of that year, forbade the issuance of any new silver dollars.

Bowers cites the noted Denver dealer Dan Brown as saying that the Superintendent of the Denver Mint, Fern Miller, had told him that employees at the Mint had been allowed to buy some of the test coins at face value just after they were struck, but that later the employees had been requested to return them.

I was able to confirm this story while talking with a retired Denver Mint employee who was visiting at ANA headquarters down in Colorado Springs, who verified that the employees had been given the opportunity to buy some of the coins. He told me that a friend of his at the Mint had bought two of the coins on his way out of the door on the first day that they were struck, and that the friend had spent them at a bar in Denver that night, perhaps figuring that he could always get more the next day.

However, that next day all of the people who had bought the coins were threatened with being fired if they did not return them. Several did, but the friend insisted that the coins were gone, and did not lose his job.

Another mysterious issue is the 1974-dated Aluminum Cent, and its cousin the 1974-dated Bronze-Clad Steel Cent. Some 1.5 million of the Aluminum Cents were struck in 1973 as a test of a proposed new alloy for the cent, after which a reported 16 of them were distributed to certain congressional committee members and their staffs. Apparently it was anticipated that all of the 1974 Cents would be done in aluminum, which would have made the trial pieces essentially meaningless.

However, the vending machine and copper-mining lobbies successfully defeated the Aluminum proposal, which presumably led to the Bronze-Clad Steel variation being struck. Ultimately no change was made, and the Treasury later began a quiet campaign to retrieve the Aluminum pieces. Seven were recovered, one was donated to the Smithsonian by its recipient, and eight remain unaccounted for. In the face of much unfavorable national publicity, the Treasury later declared the aluminum pieces to be illegal to possess, but wisely did not threaten members of Congress with criminal prosecution.

Five of the Bronze-Clad Steel striking are reported to exist. When they first became known to the hobby in 1994, the Treasury initially offered an informal opinion that they were legal to possess. However, after they were publicized the Treasury reversed its position and declared them to be illegal to possess and subject to seizure.

Lesser known is the 1977/6 Lincoln cent, which the U.S. Mint’s own Laboratory initially declared to be a genuine error. After it was widely publicized, however, the Mint then changed its mind and declared the piece to be an alteration, seizing the coin despite prior guarantees that it would not do so and refusing to allow it to be examined by outside experts.

(If you think there is a correlation between the publicity a piece receives and the likelihood of it being made subject to seizure, you may be right.)

On the positive side, the Mint, which has had a wide range of policies regarding error coins over the years, has showed signs of growth. At one time it declared virtually all error coins, such as off-metal, off-center and capped die strikes, unlawful to possess on the grounds that they did not contain the authorized compositions and/or inscriptions.

However, in the past quarter century it has become enlightened enough to admit that it is only human, and that honest mistakes do occur which can be lawfully released via mint-sewn bags. It continues to rightfully investigate and seize, where appropriate, deliberate errors smuggled out of the Mint for sale at a profit.

Many classic U.S. rarities have uncertain origins. Perhaps the most famous of these is the 1913 Liberty Head Five Cents piece, first offered for sale in 1920 by a former employee of the Mint. There are no records of these coins having been struck, and no explanation of how this Mint employee happened to come by them, though they were undoubtedly struck from U.S. Mint dies on U.S. Mint planchets. One of the five pieces is currently unaccounted for, having disappeared following the death of its owner in a car accident.

The 1894-S Dime is a significant rarity, but at least the low official mintage of 24 pieces is listed in the Mint Report. Extensive research by James Johnson and William Burd has established that the Superintendent of the San Francisco Mint had the 24 pieces struck for distribution in eight equal groups to seven of his friends and to his daughter, who sold two of her three pieces to a dealer in 1954, having spent the other one on ice cream in 1894! As the Superintendent passed all of these coins through the official records their legality is beyond question.

Our most famous coin is probably the 1804 Silver Dollar, whose story you should read in the book “The Fantastic 1804 Dollar” by Eric P. Newman and Ken Bressett. First struck in 1834 for inclusion in diplomatic presentation sets, in the mistaken belief that other 1804 Dollars had already been struck in 1804, the coin was later recognized as a numismatic rarity when it was realized that the 1804 strikings had actually been dated 1803 or even earlier.

Already engaged in restriking earlier rarities for sale at a profit, the Mint was preparing in 1858 to make more 1804 Dollars as well when the night watchman, a son of the Chief Coiner, beat them to the punch and made a few of his own. These amateurish, plain-edged productions were sold to various coin dealers, repurchased by the Mint after the scandal of this striking broke, and resold in the 1870s after the edges of the coins had been lettered to resemble the 1834 strikings.

Nobody questions their legality today, and the Smithsonian Institution proudly displays its recently acquired Lindermann Specimen, which was donated to them by Willis DuPont. (I know the coin well, having recovered it in 1981 when it showed up at ANACS after being stolen from DuPont in 1967, and even when it lay in the U.S. Attorney’s vault in Denver as evidence the issue of the coins legality to own was never raised.)

The Proof Trade Dollars of 1884 and 1885 have always existed under a cloud, with many people rashly assuming that these were a private production within the Mint. However, Carl Carlson revealed in Stack’s June, 1988 catalogue of the Sprinkle Collection that the dies and bullion used to make the 1884 pieces were indeed accounted for in the Mint’s records, even if the coins themselves are not listed in the Mint Report. Perhaps someday records will surface regarding the 1885 Trade Dollars as well.

An even greater rarity is the 1873-CC No Arrows Dime, currently believed to be unique, and its near-great sisters the 1873-CC No Arrows Quarters, of which only four are known. All of these began as regular issues in early 1873, but the bulk of the mintages were melted down after Congress authorized a slight increase in the weight standards to make them even multiples of grams rather than grains in the interest of promoting the metric system.

It is believed today that these five coins were rescued from oblivion out of the coins submitted to the 1874 Assay Commission, just as some of the 1933 Double Eagles might have survived the 1934 Assay Commission. As long as the government was reimbursed for the metal, there was no reason why any of them should not have been saved.

Finally, we have the 1870-S Half Dime, Silver Dollar and $3 gold piece. None of these are listed in the Mint Report, yet nine or ten of the Dollars have been known for years. The unique Half Dime was not discovered until 1978, when it was purchased over the counter at a small coin shop here in Cook County as a regular type coin!

The currently-believed unique 1870-S $3 made its first appearance (outside of its supposed resting place in the cornerstone of the San Francisco Mint, which was laid in 1870) in an advertisement in the April, 1907 “The Numismatist” by H. T. VanCamp of New York. It next appeared in the May, 1909 “The Numismatist,” as a reference in a notice entitled “A Monograph of the Five-Dollar Piece and its Varieties in Preparation.”

The notice told about a work being prepared by the $3’s owner, who owned the only known complete collection of $3 gold pieces, namely “the well-known collector of United States gold coins,” Mr. William H. Woodin! Did Woodin also own a complete set of St. Gaudens $20? We may never know.

Originally published in COINage magazine in May, 1996. Reprinted with permission of Harlan J Berk Ltd. Copyright 1997 by Thomas K. DeLorey.

http://www.harlanjberk.com. E-mail: info@harlanjberk.com

« Older PostsNewer Posts »