Barber’s Liberty Patterned After French Coin

By R.W. Julian, Numismatic News December 06, 2011

This article was originally printed in Coins Magazine.
>> Subscribe today!

IT is sometimes thought that a new coinage design adopted in the 19th century was merely a matter of the engraver trying out a few drawings on a Mint official. This was no doubt sometimes the case prior to the Civil War but after that time there was an increasing number of hoops that had to be jumped through before the design was actually changed.

The well-known Seated Liberty motif had been adopted in the 1830s and was first seen on the quarter dollar in 1838. Familiarity, however, often breeds contempt and by the 1870s Mint officials were becoming increasingly interested in seeing a change of designs on the minor silver coins.

Collecting & Investing Strategies for Barber Dimes This 19th and early 20th century “work-horse” series represents a pinnacle of classical American coinage. Get your copy today!

In 1876 Mint Director Henry R. Linderman, known for his seemingly inexhaustible energy, persuaded a talented young British engraver to come to America. George Morgan arrived in the fall of 1876 and soon began to prepare suitable designs for the silver coins. (His mandate was later enlarged to include the gold as well.)

The designs found ready acceptance by Linderman and there is little doubt that one of more of the Morgan designs would have been used on the minor silver had not one of odder economic events occurred in late 1877. During the Civil War much of our silver coinage had been exported to Canada and Latin America and now, unexpectedly, came back in massive quantities.

So much silver returned in 1877-1878 that the Treasury ordered the mints to stop striking silver coins, except for the limited amounts needed as presents. There was a tradition of presenting new coins at Christmas in some areas of the country and the annual coinage of a few thousand pieces of each denomination met this special need.

With virtually no minor silver being struck there was little or no point in changing the designs. Linderman’s grand plan had come crashing to earth in the face of economic reality. For quarters and half dollars there would be little coinage until 1891 at Philadelphia although a significant number of quarters was struck at San Francisco in 1888.

By an odd quirk, however, this early work by George Morgan was not wasted. When it became clear in the latter part of 1877 that the coinage of silver dollars would soon resume, and the Trade dollar ended, Morgan used one of his patterns to advantage when he won the early 1878 contest to design the new dollar.

Although only dimes were then being struck in any quantity for minor silver, in April 1887 Mint Director James P. Kimball thought the time was right for a change of design. He instituted a national contest, which invited American artists to submit designs for the U.S. subsidiary silver coinage. It would appear that Kimball had not consulted the officers of the Philadelphia Mint prior to issuing his circular because the Mint engraving staff, to a man, refused to enter the contest.

It was not an auspicious start and soon got worse. In addition to not consulting the engraving staff, he had not even bothered to read the law with the necessary care. These blunders soon killed the Kimball proposals.

In his annual report for the fiscal year 1887 Kimball addressed a lengthy report to Treasury Secretary Charles S. Fairchild concerning the devices and designs on the current coinage. This time Kimball did his homework properly.

According to Kimball, the Mint director, with the approval of the Treasury secretary, did have the authority to make alterations in coinage designs. Congress could, of course, override this power. (The same general method of selection is in effect today except that, by a law passed in 1890, the designs cannot be changed oftener than 25 years unless directed by the Congress.)

In his report to the Treasury, Kimball went on to state that “my official attention has been called by numerous citizens to the inartistic quality of the designs upon several of our current coins.” He requested that steps be taken to correct the situation. Despite Kimball’s arguments, Fairchild turned a deaf ear. Kimball went out of office in 1889, having accomplished nothing toward the redesign of the minor silver coins.

The next step came from within the Mint itself. In September 1890 chief engraver Charles Barber wrote Mint Director Edward O. Leech suggesting that new designs be sought for U.S. silver coins and perhaps the gold as well. Barber believed that the decades-old artwork should give way to new ideas.

Leech replied that nothing could be done until the spring of 1891. This delay, Leech explained, was due to certain reports that needed to be compiled, including one on the mining industry. The director kept his word by issuing a circular on April 4, 1891, asking interested artists to submit designs for the minor silver coins. The Mint staff, however, as under Kimball, refused to participate because Leech had stipulated a deadline of June 1.

Despite the close deadline several artists did send in drawings. These were judged by a committee headed by Augustus Saint-Gaudens but which included chief engraver Charles Barber and noted medalist Henry Mitchell. The committee met on June 3 and rejected all entries.

The committee suggested that “the services of one or more artists distinguished for work in designing for relief be engaged at a suitable compensation to prepare for the consideration of the Department new designs for the coins of the United States.” Leech took this suggestion as a mandate but his response was not quite what the committee had intended.

Only a few days after the abortive contest had ended, Leech notified Philadelphia Mint Superintendent Oliver C. Bosbyshell that the engraving staff (Charles Barber, George Morgan, and William H. Key) was to prepare suitable designs for the minor silver coinage.

Leech not only gave instructions for preliminary sketches to be prepared by the engravers, but also spelled out precisely what he wanted in the way of designs. In particular, he ordered a head of Liberty to be based on the current French version that appeared on several bronze and silver coins of the Third Republic.

The director ordered that the reverse of the quarter and half dollar bear the Great Seal of the United States, an eagle with the olive branch and arrows in its talons. He felt that the reverse of the then current dime was admirable and ought to be retained.

Bosbyshell did not quite agree with the rules laid down by Leech and answered by suggesting a personal conference among all concerned. In particular Bosbyshell thought that selected outside artists, such as Augustus Saint-Gaudens, should be invited to participate alongside the Mint engravers.

In late June 1891 Leech visited the Mint but insisted on his original plans, which did not include outside artists. The work was to be done in-house and the choice of artist would depend on the sketches submitted to him. In late July the director again visited the Mint and chose Charles Barber to carry out the work.

Leech chose to go public with his choice of artist and news of the ongoing work was published in the first week of August. Although Barber was supposed to use the French head of Liberty, he chose instead to strike off in a different direction. His first obverse had a standing figure while the reverse was based on the famous Una and the Lion gold pattern from the London mint in 1839.

For a time little or nothing seems to have been done but by the middle of August Barber was again at work on the new designs. This time it is certain that the engraver had followed orders more closely and the new head of Liberty had been prepared, following the French model with reasonable care.

About this time Barber had also completed the reverse design to appear on the quarter and half dollar. When Leech first saw the proposed reverse he had some rather stringent criticism, noting that the figure of the eagle did not correspond with the current United States Great Seal die. He also did not approve of the scroll, which contained the motto E PLURIBUS UNUM, passing over the neck of the eagle. There were other complaints, mostly concerned with the olive branch and berries.

At this point Barber made a clear mistake by responding to Leech in the following words: “I am quite ready and willing to make any change in design, provided the suggestion in my mind is a good one, but I must ask that criticism come to an end before I am too far advanced with the die.…” The engraver then defended his version of the Great Seal by stating that he had used the original version of 1782, not the one then employed by the State Department.

In a rare lapse of judgment Bosbyshell unwisely seconded Barber’s answer. The prompt response from director to the two letters was direct and to the point:

“I beg to say that the only limit which will be placed on such criticism will be the final adoption of the design. My purpose in the suggestions and criticisms which I have offered is to get as perfect a work as possible, and if any number of dies have been prepared or are in process of preparation, any change, however slight, that would in my judgment improve the design, I should have it made.

“I do not like this spirit which resents criticism and suggestions in regard to the work of the mints. All criticism and suggestions which are actuated by a kindly spirit and which may have the tendency to beautify our coins, instead of being resented, or any time limit placed upon them, should be most cheerfully received and due consideration given to their merits.”

Barber did reply to the letter but only to justify some minor points about the design. In particular he noted that the heraldic eagle found on the reverse of the early silver dollars had the scroll crossing the eagle’s neck and he was therefore merely following precedent. He made no more suggestions about the criticism coming to an end, however.

Leech insisted on his ideas about the placement of the ribbon (to go behind the eagle’s neck) and in due course Barber executed a new eagle device in which the ribbon appeared as wished by Leech. The director was so pleased with this new appearance that the ribbon stayed behind the neck.

Several pattern coins, all half dollars, were prepared by Barber in the latter part of October 1891 and sent to the director’s office. The obverse head of Liberty was quickly approved by Leech and the Treasury but the reverse design was another matter entirely.

Leech and Treasury Secretary Charles Foster could not make up their minds about the various forms of the reverse that Barber had submitted so they did something rather novel. They asked President Benjamin Harrison and his cabinet to examine the patterns and make the final decision on the reverse design to appear on the quarter and half dollar. On Nov. 5 that august body did in fact make the final choice.

Although the president and cabinet had spoken there were also a few suggestions made by the cabinet. In particular Barber was asked to strengthen the lettering, especially the words LIBERTY and E PLURIBUS UNUM so that they could be read more easily and wear off less quickly.

Once the minor changes had been made, the engraving department began preparing the necessary dies for Philadelphia and the branch mints except for Carson City, which had not struck minor silver coins for some years and was due to be closed in 1893.

On Dec. 11, Bosbyshell requested Leech to delay the introduction of the Barber design until the dies had been thoroughly tested at Philadelphia. According to the superintendent this was necessary because only a practical test would tell if the dies had been properly prepared and that all was in order. On Dec. 14 this request was refused by Leech, who ordered the dies prepared forthwith.

The Barber coinage began at Philadelphia promptly at 9 a.m. on Jan. 2, 1892. Ac­cording to the superintendent the dies for all three denominations were in use that entire day and there had been no disruptions. Bosbyshell went on to say that it was normal to have problems on the first day of any new coinage but these had not appeared.

The sense of well being did not last all that long. Complaints were received in the first weeks after coinage commenced. It seemed that the new quarter dollars would not stack evenly because the head extended above the protecting border rim.

Charles Barber carefully examined the quarter dollar dies and decided—for once—that the criticism was valid and ought to be corrected as soon as possible. A change in the hub for the obverse was undertaken.

Barber increased the width of the border, which protects the surface of a coin, and slightly decreased the radius circle which contained the words IN GOD WE TRUST. The stars were also moved closer to the center of the coin. It took several weeks for these changes to be accomplished. In due course the revised dies were furnished to the branch mints as well.

The reverse quarter dollar hub also was altered at the same time, although this change is only lightly discussed in the surviving mint records. These new reverse dies may be easily distinguished by noting that, on the first type, the eagle’s wing covers only about half of the letter E in UNITED while on the second variety most of the E is covered.)

Even though new quarter dollar hubs had been prepared in 1892, still there were continuing problems that plagued this denomination. In 1900 a third set of hubs was prepared in an effort to end the difficulties once and for all. Oddly enough the San Francisco coiner at first refused to use the dies of 1900, claiming that the old ones were better. He was ordered to do as he was told.

As with other coins in the Barber series, there are a fair number of rarities for the quarter dollar. The 1896-S is the first of these, followed by the 1901-S and 1913-S. The 1901-S is the most difficult to obtain and even in the lowest of identifiable grades, brings several thousand dollars at public auction.

As was true in the 1870s and 1880s, the overly familiar Barber designs led the government to seek out new artwork. For the quarter dollar this meant the new Standing Liberty coins that were first struck in late 1916. Once that happened only the collector was left to appreciate the beauty of the Barber coins.

Half Dime Enjoyed a Long History

By Tom LaMarre, Coins Magazine May 10, 2011

This article was originally printed in Coins Magazine.
>> Subscribe today!

The five-cent “nickel” has been around more than 140 years, but it’s just a youngster compared to the silver half dime. The half dime originated during George Washington’s presidency and lasted until 1873, seven years after the nickel’s arrival made the it redundant.

The Act of April 2, 1792, authorized the half dime four months before construction of the Mint began.

Rare Coin Investing Learn how great coin collections were built with low-cost coins! Get your copy today!

Initially, it was called the “half disme,” but its pronunciation and background are mostly a matter of speculation. Hard facts about the first half dismes are as scarce as the coins themselves.

At the heart of the tangle is President George Washington’s alleged connection. Silver was scarce when the first half dismes were struck. According to the A Guide Book of United States Coins, Washington provided about $100 worth of his own silver for the first half dismes. However, documentation of the legend is mainly hearsay repetition of a story that has been passed down for generations.

“Possibly,” “might have been” or “may have been” are recurring words in the case of the first half dismes. Possibly, Martha Washington served as the model for the Liberty portrait after her husband rejected presidential portraits on coins as a monarchial practice.

Surrounding the Liberty portrait is the legend “LIB. PAR. OF SCIENCE & INDUSTRY.” A flying eagle highlights the reverse, with the inscriptions “HALF DISME” and “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.”

Robert Birch and Adam Eckfeldt may have engraved the designs, but no one knows for sure. The exact status of the first half dismes—whether they were patterns or regular issues—has also been debated.

A unique copper 1792 half disme exists, unquestionably a pattern. In July 1792, about 1,500 silver half dismes were struck. Some collectors classify them as the first coins minted by the government. Because the Philadelphia Mint was still under construction, the half dismes may have been struck in the cellar of John Harper’s saw-maker shop.

Most surviving 1792 half dismes are worn, lending credibility to their classification as regular issues. Their distribution and background were the subjects of a note discovered in the flyleaf of a book in the 1940s. Dated April 9, 1844, and attributed to Mint melter and refiner Jonas McClintock, it said:

“In conversation with Mr. Adam Eckfeldt today at the Mint, he informed me that the half dismes above described were struck at the request of Gen. Washington to the extent of one hundred dollars, which sum he deposited in bullion or specie for that purpose.

“Mr. Eckfeldt thinks that Gen. Washington distributed them as presents. Some were sent to Europe, but the greater number of them, he believes, were given to acquaintances in Virginia. No more of them were coined except those for Gen. Washington.

“They were never designed as currency—the Mint was not at the time fully ready for going into operation. The coining machinery was in the cellar of Mr. Harper’s saw-maker at the corner of Cherry and Sixth Streets, at which place these pieces were struck.”

However, researchers have questioned the accuracy of the note or “memorandum,” if not its authenticity. Was some of Eckfeldt’s information based on hearsay? Was his recollection of events reliable more than half a century later?

George Washington’s account was more basic and irrefutable. In his November 1792 annual address, he wrote, “There has been a small beginning in the coinage of half dismes, the want of small coins in circulation calling the first attention to them.”

The Mint opened in 1793 but produced only cents and half cents that year. In 1794, engraver Robert Scot worked on a new design in anticipation of the start of half dime production at the Philadelphia Mint.

A unique 1794 copper pattern has the same portrait of Liberty with flowing hair as the regular issue that followed, but it lacks the obverse stars. The reverse depicts an eagle within a wreath, similar to the design accepted for full-scale production, but with “HALF DISME” below the eagle.

On other 1794 pattern half dismes, the denomination is omitted, and stars frame the Liberty portrait.

The combined mintage of 1794 and 1795 Flowing Hair half dimes was fewer than 90,000. I use the “half dime” spelling because of its predominance in numismatic reference books, even though the revised spelling does not seem to have been officially recognized until the early 1800s.

In 1796, the Flowing Hair dime gave way to Scot’s Draped Bust design. The new half dime retained the small eagle reverse.

It was a banner year for varieties, including 1796/5 and 1796 “LIKERTY” half dimes. The “LIKERTY” variety is not an “error” coin as sometimes described. It was struck from a damaged die missing a portion of the “B.”

At first the intention was for the half dime to have a star for each state. The concept was eventually abandoned as impractical. Sometimes, human error resulted in variations in the number of stars. In 1797, for example, half dimes were struck with 13, 15 or 16 stars.

In 1800, the half dime received a heraldic eagle reverse inspired by the Great Seal of the United States. Years later, even the dime was exempted from the requirement of having an eagle on the reverse because it was too small. However, the early half dimes demonstrate there was really no basis for the exemption.

During the Draped Bust half dime’s production run, damaged or worn tools and equipment and makeshift techniques continued to result in varieties. The 1800 “LIKERTY” half dime resulted from a broken “R” punch. The 1803 “large 8” half dime was a crude improvisation—a worker joined two rough circles to make an “8.”

The most famous Draped Bust half dime, however, is the 1802, which had a mintage of only 3,060. Unbelievably, Ernest Gambs of St. Louis found one in pocket change more than 75 years after it was struck.

“Another 1802 Half Dime Discovered,” said the headline in the September 1879 issue of Mason’s Coin Collectors’ Journal. The story did not mention Gambs’ name but said the coin had been found in St. Louis.

Gambs was a prominent stamp and coin dealer. His biography in the February 1888 issue of The Badger State Philatelist, published in Delavan, Wis., included information about his 1802 half dime.

“One of the finest and most valuable American pieces,” it said, “which Mr. Gambs was the fortunate possessor of, was a very fine 1802 half dime, which he secured by chance in an old grocery store on Elm Street, in change. It was sold for $50 to William P. Brown, the pioneer coin and stamp dealer of New York.

“Mr. Brown refused $200 for it, but later sold it at auction, only bringing $147.50, being much less than he had anticipated.

“The third time, however, it was advertised at auction and pronounced the finest of 1802 half dimes ever discovered in this or any other country. It brought $176, and was knocked down to a Philadelphia numismatic speculator, who sold it afterward for $225, nearly 5,000 times its face value.”

In a poem published in The Numismatist in the 1890s, A.G. Heaton referred to the 1802 half dime as one of the “silver barons,” meaning it ranked among the nobility of numismatic rarities.

At the sale of the James B. Wilson Collection in 1908, an About Uncirculated 1802 half dime realized $715. Ninety years later, the same coin brought $84,000.

No half dimes were struck in 1804. Only 15,600 were minted in 1805. From 1806-1828, there was another lapse in production, which must have led people to wonder if the half dime would ever return.

In 1829, it did make a comeback in grand style. The new half dime had a Capped Bust obverse design by engraver William Kneass. An eagle and shield appeared on the reverse, and below it the inscription “5 C.” for “five cents.” It was the first time the denomination was indicated on the half dime.

Even more significant than the new design was the increased production of half dimes. In 1829, more than 1.2 million were struck. Production jumped to nearly 3 million in 1836, including “small 5 C.,” “large 5 C.” and “3 over inverted 3” varieties.

In 1837, the final year of the Capped Bust half dime, “small 5 C.” and “large 5C.” varieties were again struck.

The half dime changed to the seated Liberty design during 1837. Engraved by Christian Gobrecht, the seated Liberty obverse was designed by Thomas Sully, a painter of portraits and historical scenes. The seated Liberty figure was inspired by the rendition of Britannia on some British coins.

The lack of stars on the obverse of early Seated Liberty half dimes gives them the appearance of medalets instead of coins, in my opinion. Of all the early Seated Liberty coins, only the early dimes share the half dime’s uncluttered look.

On the reverse, the eagle and shield gave way to a wreath around the inscription “HALF DIME.” The legend “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” formed a border.

The Philadelphia Mint struck more than 1.5 million Seated Liberty half dimes in 1837. Collectors later distinguished “small date” and “large date” varieties.

Seated Liberty half dimes struck from 1837 to 1840 did not have drapery from Liberty’s elbow. It was added during 1840 and reflected an artistic obsession with the placement, number of folds and their arrangement in works derived from classical forms.

It was considered such a vital matter that an outside artist was commissioned to modify the seated Liberty figure. Sculptor Robert Ball Hughes, known to his friends simply as “Ball,” was paid $75 for his efforts, although it took some time for the payment to be approved.

The changes to the half dime were so slight that a casual observer wouldn’t have noticed them. Thirteen stars were added to the half dime’s obverse during 1838. The same year, the New Orleans Mint struck the first branch-mint half dimes, distinguished by an “O” below the wreath. The 1838-O half dime had a mintage of 70,000.

Long ago, collectors believed in the existence of 1837-O half dimes. “We have two worn specimens of 1837,” Heaton wrote in 1893, “without stars and sufficient traces of a small ‘o’ in the proper place to convince us that some half dimes were coined experimentally in New Orleans that year with a die similar to the one used in Philadelphia, although the New Orleans Mint was not regularly organized until 1838. As the coinage of half dimes at New Orleans in the latter year was not recorded, though well known, we are the more assured of the authenticity of our ’37 ‘O’ Mint pieces which were found in New Orleans, and we consider them excessively rare.”

There were not many numismatists in the United States in the 1830s, and collecting coins by mintmark did not catch on in a big way until the early 1900s.

In the case of the general public, there was a modest degree of interest in the work of the branch mints. Four years after it began, New Orleans’ half dime production was in the news. The April 6, 1842, issue of the Wellsboro, Pa., Tioga Eagle reported, “The United States branch Mint at New Orleans coined half dimes during the month of February.” Total production of 1842-O half dimes amounted to 350,000.

The rarest New Orleans half dimes of the 1840s are the 1840 “medium O,” 1841 “large O,” 1844 “large O” and 1848 “small O” varieties.

At the Philadelphia Mint, only 27,000 half dimes were struck in 1846, the lowest mintage of the 1840s.

To indicate a weight reduction specified by the Act of Feb. 21, 1853, arrows were added at the sides of the date on half dimes struck from 1853-1855. Many 1853 Philadelphia and 1853-O half dimes were melted after the new standard went into effect.

In 1858, there was a run on an Indiana bank. When someone presented $1,000 of its paper money for redemption, the notes were paid with half dimes—20,000 to be exact. Even so, they hardly would have made a dent in the Philadelphia Mint’s output of 3.5 million 1858 half dimes.

At that time the silver three-cent piece had been in production for seven years. Known as the “trime,” it robbed the half dime of the distinction of being the smallest silver coin in size and denomination. The three-cent piece was also useful for many of the transactions for which a half dime would have been convenient.

In 1859, the Philadelphia Mint used a new die to strike half dimes with hollow-center stars and a Liberty figure with thinner arms.

The legend “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” was transferred from the reverse to the obverse in 1860. Fantasy half dimes dated 1859 and 1860 were struck without “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” on either side.

The half dime received a thicker wreath beginning in 1860, sometimes referred to as a “wreath of cereals.”

A curious aspect of the half dime involved the placement of the mintmark. It appeared below the bow tying the wreath branches from 1860 through 1869; above the bow in 1870 and 1871; above or below the bow in 1872; and below the bow in 1873. The location seems to have been a matter of personal preference and was not considered of major importance.

Like all silver and gold coins, half dimes disappeared from circulation during the Civil War. According to an 1862 newspaper item, half dimes were as rare in New York City as they were in Richmond, Va.

The San Francisco Mint began striking half dimes in 1863, turning out 100,000.

Construction of the second San Francisco Mint, known as “The Granite Lady,” started in 1870. No 1870-S half dimes were struck for circulation, but a single example may have been struck for placement in the cornerstone of the new Mint.

In 1978, an 1870-S half dime surfaced in a box of old coins taken to an Illinois dealer. It might be a duplicate of the purported cornerstone coin, or possibly it was intended for the cornerstone but never made it.

At a Superior Galleries auction in 1986, the 1870-S half dime brought $253,000.

Half dimes were popular in California. In 1879, however, the San Francisco Call said, “The scarcity of silver five-cent pieces has been marked for some time.”

It was an interesting report because the Coinage Act of 1873 had eliminated the half dime. The main reason for its demise was the introduction of the five-cent “nickel” in 1866. It was easier to handle than the tiny half dime and was not subject to hoarding.

However, nickels were struck only at the Philadelphia Mint before 1912, and they did not circulate in the West. As Heaton put it, the half dime was “peculiarly the coin of the people, for in the extreme South and West no smaller denomination has ever been in use.”

In the 1880s, Californians petitioned the government to revive the silver half dime, but it was to no avail.

Elsewhere, it took around 20 years for half dimes to fade away.

“Since the half dime was abolished in 1873,” Heaton wrote, “the inconvenience of the small piece has resulted in the annual remittance to the Treasury and the Mints of hundreds of dollars worth which streetcar companies, etc., are glad to have destroyed. Consequently, very few half dimes now exist in circulation. Their general scarcity and rarity is augmenting, and the small space a collection occupies will assure them ever-increasing favor.”

Many obsolete half dimes were holed for use on bracelets and other jewelry. Others were mounted on stickpins or made into clothing buttons. As a result, some surviving half dimes have a damaged reverse.

Damaged half dimes were so common they were a nuisance. The Aug. 10, 1881, issue of the Decatur Daily Review reported, “The number of defaced coins—silver half dimes worn smooth and having holes bored in them—which are in circulation in New Orleans, causes the Democrat of that city to make an investigation.”

By the turn of the century, holed U.S. half dimes were circulating in Cuba with a value of 2.5 cents, according to an item in The Numismatist.

Many half dimes that were still intact were melted to provide silver for the 1892-93 Columbian Exposition commemorative half dollars. An 1892 law authorized the coinage of millions of “souvenir” half dollars “to be manufactured from uncurrent subsidiary silver coins now in the Treasury.”

For years the half dime’s size and denomination had set it apart from other U.S. coins. But its small size was also a negative factor, and the release of the five-cent “nickel” diminished the half dime’s function.

Yet the story didn’t end there. Once considered an important part of the monetary system—the first coin struck by the government—the half dime found new roles as an adornment for jewelry and treasure for coin collectors.

Branch Mint Half Dimes Start With ‘O’

By Paul M. Green, Numismatic News October 29, 2010

This article was originally printed in Numismatic News.
>> Subscribe today!

When the 1838-O half dime was produced it was the first half dime to be issued at a mint other than the main facility in Philadelphia. It would be the start of an interesting group of frequently lesser known coins as the branch mint Seated Liberty half dimes are not heavily collected but they are a fascinating group to study and with limited collector demand they are also a collection of early silver coins that are usually at very affordable prices.

2011 North American Coins and Prices This one-of-a-kind coin guide gives you three countries worth of coin information for one price! Get your copy today!

There was a very good reason why the no stars 1838-O half dime was the first half dime produced outside Philadelphia. Prior to 1838 there were no other facilities where they could have been made. It was an accident of timing that just as the design of the half dime was being changed the United States was also opening its first branch mints. The one where the new half dime could be made was New Orleans as the new facilities at Dahlonega, Ga., and Charlotte, N.C., would only produce gold coins, leaving only New Orleans as a possibility for the production of half dimes.

Realistically the 1838 production came at a time when the half dime was really getting established as a regular, annually produced denomination for what might be seen as the first time in its history. Historically, although officials had always complained that the half dime was needed in commerce, its production had never reflected the complaints. The half dime as the lowest silver denomination had simply never been produced in the numbers or with the regularity one might expect. In fact, the first regular production of half dimes had only begun in 1829. Prior to that year the most recent production of half dimes had been all the way back in 1805, so the half dime could hardly be called a regularly produced denomination.

The first Seated Liberty half dime was produced in 1837 in Philadelphia, but in 1838 New Orleans would produce the same type. In fact, the 1838-O along with the 1837 from Philadelphia would rank as the only two dates of the type that did not have stars around the rim on the obverse.

Ironically, the 1838 from Philadelphia would have stars, but it would take until 1839 for stars to appear on the coins from New Orleans. That situation was probably a result of the fact that the whole idea of branch mints at the time was new. The dies for the coins would be made in Philadelphia and then shipped to New Orleans for use. There was naturally a delay and that was probably compounded by the fact that the facility at New Orleans was new. It probably took added time for the workers there to receive the die and make it ready for use. As a result, there was something of an in-built delay when it came to changing designs.

The first New Orleans half dime, the 1838-O, had a modest mintage of just 70,000 pieces. That small mintage would normally suggest a high price, but at $110 in G-4 you have to feel that the historic 1838-O, which is low mintage as well as the first half dime produced outside Philadelphia, is a good deal. In Mint State the 1838-O lists for $2,500 in MS-60 and $29,500 in MS-65. If we check the Professional Coin Grading Service to see if those prices are also good values we find that PCGS has so far graded just 13 examples of the 1838-O as Mint State and of that total only one was called MS-65 or better. Under those circumstances the 1838-O in any grade looks to be a good value on a very historic and interesting coin.

In 1839 the dies would be ready for New Orleans to produce a half dime with stars around the rim. The mintage of the 1839-O was 1,034,039 pieces, which makes it a reasonably available date with a price of $26.50 in G-4. In MS-60 the 1839-O is $730 while an MS-65 is at $6,850. Those Mint State prices cannot be called available date prices simply because the amount of saving around New Orleans at the time and realistically throughout the history of the facility was very limited. Moreover, the collectors of the period did not as a rule collect by date and mint and that leaves us with a situation where the Mint State coins from the branch mints are usually much tougher than those from Philadelphia. In this case we find that PCGS reports only 16 examples of the 1839-O in Mint State and just two of them reached MS-65. That would seem to make any Mint State example but especially an MS-65 a great value at today’s prices.

The evolution of the Seated Liberty design is seen in the 1840-O, which had a mintage of 935,000. Most were of the old design, which had no drapery at Liberty’s left elbow, while the latter ones had the drapery. The latter ones with the drapery are tougher in circulated grades listing for $51 in G-4 while the no drapery type is $28.50. In the case of Mint State coins the type without the drapery is $1,250 in MS-60 while the with drapery type is $6,500 in MS-60. Both types are tough, with PCGS reporting 11 Mint State examples of the no drapery type and just one example of a Mint State 1840-O with the drapery.

The 1841-O would have a mintage of 815,000, which makes it a relatively available New Orleans date at $20 in G-4, $650 in MS-60 and $6,750 in MS-65. While relatively available in circulated grades, the 1841-O is still a tough date in Mint State even if the prices do not reflect that fact as PCGS reports only 10 examples with just a single MS-67 reaching the MS-65 or better designation.

The 1842-O with a mintage of just 350,000 is not as available with a G-4 price of $38. Realistically when you consider that mintage, a $38 price has to be seen as a good value and so is the $2,250 MS-60 price as PCGS reports only about a dozen examples and only one of them was called MS-65 or better.

There was no New Orleans half dime mintage in 1843 and that was followed by a very modest 1844 total of 220,000. Just compare that total to the 264,000 of the 1916-D Mercury dime, which is now $1,000 in G-4 and you see what a good value the 1844-O is at just $80 in G-4. Of course that price also shows how limited the demand is for Seated Liberty half dimes, but that could always change. In Mint State the 1844-O is $5,400 in MS-60 and $27,500 in MS-65 and the prices seem fair with only seven examples called Mint State and just one of those MS-65.

The next New Orleans Seated Liberty half dime would be the 1848-O, which is a relatively available date at $20 in G-4 with an MS-60 at $450 and an MS-65 at $2,450. The 1849-O, however, is another matter as it has a longstanding reputation as a tough date probably in part because its mintage of just 140,000 was the lowest stretching back to the 1838-O. The 1849-O has a price of $29 in G-4, which is really modest considering that mintage and $2,350 in MS-60. PCGS has yet to report an example in MS-65.

The situation regarding silver coins became complicated in the early 1850s because the discovery of gold in California upset the traditional gold to silver ratio in favor of silver. That meant that the cost of producing silver coins was passing their face value and that saw widespread hoarding resulting in a national coin shortage. In some cases we see lower mintages during the period, but the 1850-O and 1851-O had what might be called average New Orleans mintages with totals of at least 690,000 in the case of the 1851-O, which make the two dates relatively available at least in circulated grades.

The first indication of a possibly lower mintage was the 1852-O, which had a mintage of just 260,000, which produces a $25 G-4 price. In MS-60 the 1852-O is $885 but in MS-65 it is $11,500 as PCGS has seen only one example in that grade.

The 1853-O was even lower mintage at 160,000 and the expectation is that it and the 1852-O of the same type were possibly melted. The low mintage puts the 1853-O at $285 in G-4 and that price suggests that melting was very likely involved. The 1853-O is $6,450 in MS-60 and $27,500 in MS-65 where PCGS reports just one example.

The Congress took action in early 1853 to slightly reduce the weight of silver coins and that meant that the half dimes with the slightly lower silver composition were marked with arrows at the date. That would continue for the 1853-O mintage of 2,200,000 as well as the 1854 and 1855 totals. All are available, although the 1855-O did have a mintage of just 600,000, but that results only in a small premium in G-4 while in MS-60 and MS-65 the three dates are in basically the same price range, although the 1855-O is better in MS-60 where it lists for $545as opposed to $315 and $240 for the other two. In MS-65, however, the three are in a range from $3,950 to $4,950 and the most expensive is the 1855-O.

In 1856 the arrows at the date were removed and the type would last through 1859. Of the dates involved, the lowest mintage was the 1859-O, which had a mintage of just 560,000, which again produces a small premium in G-4 and circulated grades but not significantly higher prices in Mint State as in Mint State the toughest of the dates involved is the 1856-O which lists for $470 in MS-60 and $2,350 in MS-65. The slightly higher prices of the 1856-O seem to be supported by the fact that it has been graded just 21 times by PCGS. In reality the totals of examples seen in Mint State from New Orleans during this period show a slight increase over the numbers seen in the case of dates from the 1840s. It might have been a case of a small amount of additional collecting activity at the time in the New Orleans area as realistically these 1850s consistently show numbers of 40 and up in Mint State at PCGS where even in the early 1850s the number of Mint State pieces seen were roughly one-half that total.

The final New Orleans half dime was the 1860-O, which had a mintage of 1,060,000. The 1860-O is an available date even in MS-65 where it lists for $1,375. The PCGS total for the 1860-O in MS-65 and up is 21, which includes a couple in both MS-66 and MS-67. It may be that a couple especially nice examples were saved by someone at the time sensing that with the looming Civil War the facility would be quickly closed and that was the case as by the time the New Orleans facility would resume coin production the half dime was no longer being produced.

While New Orleans was ending coin production because of the war out in San Francisco coin production that had begun back in 1854 was cranking up. The half dime, however, appears to have not been a priority for the San Francisco facility. There was some reason as the facility was small and probably not capable of the production desired, but even with that consideration it was odd that the first San Francisco Seated Liberty half dime did not come until 1863, virtually a decade after the facility had first opened. The 1863-S would have a mintage of 100,000 which results in a $35 price in G-4. As was typical of branch mints the issues of San Francisco would have little saving of Mint State examples as they were released and that results in a price of $1,250 for an MS-60 1863-S while an MS-65 is $3,450. The PCGS totals for the 1863-S do show nearly 40 Mint State examples with 13 of them being MS-65 or better so even with limited saving the trend of higher numbers available in Mint State continued.

The 1864-S had a slightly lower mintage of 90,000 pieces, but despite just a 10 percent mintage difference between the 1864-S and 1863-S the prices are significantly higher for the 1864-S with a G-4 at nearly twice the price of an 1863-S at $60. In Mint State the 1864-S lists for $785 while an MS-65 is at $3,750. The prices are justified as PCGS shows lower totals of just 28 examples called Mint State with a dozen being MS-65 or better.

The following three years saw three half dimes from San Francisco with identical mintages as the 1865-S, 1866-S and 1867-S all had mintages of 120,000 pieces. It should be no surprise that all are at basically the same levels in circulated grades. In MS-65, however, all three are very difficult with PCGS reporting just one example of the 1865-S, five of the 1866-S and four of the 1867-S in MS-65 or better.

The final years of San Francisco half dime production with a couple exceptions would follow the basic pattern of dates with mintages in the hundreds of thousands, which makes them available in circulated grades and tougher in Mint State, with some being especially difficult if you want an MS-65 or better. There were 1872-S coins, which in some cases had the mintmark in the wreath and in others it was below the wreath. It is an interesting variety, but with limited collector demand the two are at basically the same prices in all grades today.

The one major exception to the pattern came in 1870. It was the year when the cornerstone was being dedicated for a new San Francisco facility and it was decided to put an 1870-S of all denominations into it. As things worked out there was no plan to produce half dimes, quarters, Seated Liberty dollars or $3 gold pieces at San Francisco that year, so a special example of each was produced for the cornerstone.

Actually a few extra examples were made of the 1870-S dollar, but the assumption was that only one example of the half dime, quarter and $3 were produced and that those three coins were forever buried in the cornerstone.

Then an example of the $3 appeared much to the surprise of everyone. Neither the quarter nor half dime followed until the 1970s when RARCOA announced the discovery of an 1870-S half dime. The news stunned everyone and produced immediate questions about what a unique 1870-S half dime would be worth. According to Q. David Bowers in his book American Coin Treasures and Hoards, a deal was reached where the 1870-S half dime would be sold for $25,000 more than the price of the 1804 dollar being sold as part of the Garrett Collection.

As it turned out that 1804 brought a stunning price of $400,000, which made the 1870-S half dime’s price of $425,000 really too high at the time and a weakening coin market did not help. In a 1985 auction the 1870-S fell back to a price of $176,000. Since then the 1870-S has been rising, although as there is only one example it is rarely offered making it virtually impossible to determine just what a recent price would be.

In 2009 it sold for $1.4 million.

In 1873 the half dime was discontinued. It left an interesting legacy as over 35 years the Seated Liberty half dime had been produced at two branch mints and in those coins we have a number of interesting and tougher dates as well as one great rarity. For the collector today the values are obvious as the prices are low when you consider the mintages. It makes the Seated Liberty half dimes from New Orleans and San Francisco an interesting group to study and a group of great values to collect.

Junk Silver Coins Soar in Value

With silver prices rallying to levels that have not been seen in 30 years, interest in United States coins that circulated in 1964 and before has skyrocketed. Many of them include silver, and those that do are worth far more than their face values.

Bags and rolls of these “junk silver coins” have become hot items, and harder to find.

Junk silver coins, a term often used to describe older coins that have no real worth to collectors but contain 90% silver, have intrinsic values that have soared right along with silver prices.

Simply stated, “intrinsic value” is the market value of the metals contained within the coin. For example, in more modern terms, a bullion American Silver Eagle contains one troy ounce of silver, making its intrinsic value equal to the current market price of an ounce of silver. As each Silver Eagle only has a legal face value of one US dollar, it becomes clear how the intrinsic value of a coin can be worth much more than the denomination struck on each piece. Some also refer to this as a coin’s melt value.

Keeping that in mind, silver has shown remarkable strength of late, as the price of an ounce on October 6 was fixed in London to $22.92. This is an increase of $5.93, or 34.9%, from where it stood on December 31, 2009.

To show how sharp junk silver coin prices have climbed just this year, the chart below (based on this site’s US Silver Coin Values page) compares the intrinsic values of old United States coinage.

Melt Values for Junk Silver Coins

Silver Coin Types	Silver Coin Face Values	Coin Melt Values (December 31, 2009)	Coin Melt Values (October 6, 2010)	2010 Increase
1942-1945 Jefferson Nickel	$0.05	$0.96	$1.29	$0.33
1916-1945 Mercury Dime	$0.10	$1.23	$1.66	$0.43
1946-1964 Roosevelt Dime	$0.10	$1.23	$1.66	$0.43
1932-1964 Washington Quarter	$0.25	$3.07	$4.14	$1.07
1916-1947 Walking Liberty Half Dollar	$0.50	$6.15	$8.29	$2.14
1948-1963 Franklin Half Dollar	$0.50	$6.15	$8.29	$2.14
1964 Kennedy Half Dollar	$0.50	$6.15	$8.29	$2.14
1965-1970 Kennedy Half Dollar	$0.50	$2.51	$3.39	$0.88
1878-1921 Morgan Dollar	$1.00	$13.14	$17.73	$4.59
1921-1935 Peace Dollar	$1.00	$13.14	$17.73	$4.59
1971-1976 Eisenhower Dollar (40% Silver)	$1.00	$5.37	$7.25	$1.88
American Silver Eagle (1 oz)	$1.00	$16.99	$22.92	$5.93

 

Coin melt values based on daily silver spot prices may be calculated using this site’s Silver Coin Melt Calculator.

There are a few important things to keep in mind when looking at the intrinsic or melt value of a coin. First of all, the numbers shown above are based on the amount of silver in the coin when it was originally struck by the United States Mint. It does not take into account any wear and tear that a coin may have received during its life, which could result in a slightly lower silver content.

Second, many older coins actually have a higher numismatic value than their intrinsic value. Numismatic values are what a coin is worth on the market to other collectors based on its condition and rarity. A rare coin in excellent condition could be worth many times its face value or its intrinsic value.

Still, for collectors of coins containing silver, it is a good idea to keep the intrinsic value of those coins in mind when contemplating the sale or purchase of them.

Barber Bargains

By Mark Benvenuto, Coins Magazine September 21, 2010

This article was originally printed in Numismatic News.
>> Subscribe today!

You have probably heard plenty of times that gold is at or near record highs, and that silver is higher than it has been for years. This constant barrage of price-related news is almost enough to make a seasoned collector get rid of precious metal coins and focus exclusively on copper—almost.

The seasoned, hardened, savvy collector uses a time like this to go hunting. The hunt is for bargains, and the coins we’ll go after all share a common design. I’m talking the Barber coinage of 1892-1916. That means dimes, quarters, and half dollars.

Dimes

Starting small, Barber dimes are a series worth a long hard look simply because they are true collector coins. Yes, they have silver in them, but only 2.5 grams, which is a tad less than a tenth of an ounce. But that small amount means their value is relatively disconnected from the precious metals market.

2011 U.S. Coin Digest Up-to-date market prices in 11 grades of condition! Get your copy today!

In addition, there are more than 20 different dates and mintmarks within the series that have mintages higher than 10 million. Those numbers make for some pretty common coins. With such totals from which to choose, even a $10 bill will land you some good specimens.

Here’s a few examples: The 1907 and the 1902 lead the pack when it comes to the most common of all the Barber dimes. There are more than 20 million of each, which means you can probably find one in any well-stocked dealer’s inventory. The price for a Very Fine-20 specimen is currently around $8. Certainly, that doesn’t land you a perfect coin, but there’s still plenty of eye appeal when a piece is at VF-20. Jump up a step to an Extremely Fine-40 specimen and the price climbs to about $25, which still isn’t all that bad for a coin that is more than a century old.

With those two dates as a baseline for what is common among the Barber dimes, how low can we go before the prices start to jump? The 1916, for example, which is the last year of these dimes, had 18.4 million as its total and the same prices for the VF and EF grades. That’s to be expected. The 1916-S has a considerably lower mintage of 5.8 million, but again, the same prices. The 1909-O might be considered the next step down, with a mintage of 2.2 million. It commands prices of $25 in VF-20 and $50 in EF-40. It appears that we have found a price line. If we go to lower mintages we do find that rather consistently the prices rise.

Just for the fun of it, let’s see what the price tags are for the rarest of these these coins, ignoring the stunning rarity that is the 1894-S. Well, the 1895-O might claim primacy of place here with a total of 440,000 coins. Prices in VF-20 and EF-40 are $1,200 and $2,500, respectively. That’s a lot of 10-cent pieces you’ll have to pay for that particular one.

Now, curiously, the 1913-S isn’t much more common, with 510,000 struck. Its prices in the two grades I’ve just mentioned? How about $190 and $240? It seems we’ve found something of a sleeper in the less common Barber dimes.

So, among the smallest version of the Barber design we find that there is a tier of very common dates and mintmarks that can still be had in the $10 to $20 range despite high prices for silver metal. We’ve also seen a possibility at the low end of things. That’s worthwhile to know. Now, let’s try to do it again, with quarters.

Quarters

All Barber coins have the same date range (1892-1916), so we have the same span from which to choose both here and among the dimes. The differences, perhaps obviously, will be in what the main mint in Philadelphia, as well as the branch mints in New Orleans, San Francisco, and Denver, chose to produce on an annual basis.

As with the dimes, we need to find out what is common for this series. The two dates that ring in with the highest numbers are the 1899 and the 1902, each with over 12 million to their tallies. Checking out prices, we quickly find that $35 will do the trick for a VF-20 coin and $70 will do for an EF-40 piece.

OK. Those prices can be either the bad news or the good news, depending on how you look at things. They are definitely higher than those of the common Barber dimes. But there’s not too much of a difference and for your extra money you do get some extra silver.

So, armed with a new set of prices for common-date Barber quarters, how low in mintages can we go here and still not have to pay a premium for a good looking coin? In looking at other dates with slightly lower mintages a person can see that the majority of dates and mintmarks were made in the millions. There are only a handful or so that dip below the seven-figure mark. Using the 1914-D as an example, with just over 3 million minted, we find VF and EF prices of $28 and $55, respectively.

How can we have a set of prices for a less common coin that is lower than the prices for the most common dates in the series? The answer to that is that price is about more than just mintage figures. Perhaps the Denver quarters of 1914 struck up better than the Philadelphia quarters of 1899 and 1902. Perhaps more were saved, or never released after making it to bank vaults (a quarter did have a lot of purchasing power then, and dimes were spent more). Perhaps more of the 1899 and 1902 pieces ended up in the melting pots back in the 1980s when the price of silver ran to ridiculously high levels.

Whatever the reason, or reasons, this example gives us another instance in which we can find good cause to get serious with Barber coinage.

With all that being said, the point at which the prices of Barber quarters rise above the price of common-date pieces has to be somewhere in the low millions. To pick a few dates to prove the point, the 1916 has prices that mirror those of the 1914-D I just mentioned. It rings in with 1.7 million.

The 1909-S, though, basically goes for double in the same grades. Some might consider this a comparison of apples and oranges since S-mintmarked coins usually carry a premium. But consider the 1909-O, sister of the 1909-S, and the more scarce coin, with 712,000 to its total. The 1909-O runs $200 in VF-20 and $375 in EF-40, significantly higher than any of the others we have looked at. It seems then that the 1 million mark is a decent point for us to claim that the cost will rise within this series of quarters.

One million of anything still strikes most of us as a lot, but the good news about this is that so many of the Barber quarters have mintages far in excess of it. That in turn means we have a lot from which to choose, despite high silver prices.

Half Dollars

So far we have seen that Barber dimes and quarters still offer quite a bit for the collector who wants to get into this design in depth. Let’s use our formula for common dates and prices one more time and see if it holds for the biggest Barber, the half dollar.

When it comes to highs and lows the half dollars don’t hold a candle to the dimes, but that’s to be expected. After all, with a low of 24 for the dimes (1894-S) and a high in the tens of millions, that’s a big spread to beat. No, the biggest run of Barber halves were the 1899 and 1908-Os, with 5.5 million and 5.3 million, respectively. On the low end of things, the 1913, 1914, and 1915 never made it even made it up to 200,000 pieces (making these three into key coins within the series).

The 1899 and the 1908-O each command about $90 in VF-20 and $180 in EF-40. Those prices can be sore blows if you are the frugal type of collector who draws the line at spending even $20 for a single coin. But they are not actually that bad when you consider that you are landing a pretty good sized hunk of silver for your money. What’s more interesting is just how many other Barbers ring in at $90 in VF-20.

According to a recent issue of Coin Prices, there are 73 different dates and mintmarks from which to choose when assembling a full set of Barber halves (not including varieties). Of those 73, there are 21 that come in at or very near $90 in VF-20. That’s almost one-third of the entire series that can be considered common, or common enough that there are no price fluctuations in that grade.

On the low end of things there is even more good news—the 1915 and the 1913 can be considered sleepers. The 1915 lists for $380 in VF-20 and $575 in EF-40. The 1913 doesn’t go for much more. If you do the comparison you’ll find that the 1915 is roughly 25 times less common than the 1899 and 1908-O. But in the grades I’ve just examined it’s never really more than five times more expensive. As with any sleeper the fact that it is undervalued doesn’t mean it will automatically shoot up in price. But it is neat to know that there are still some bargains to be had, even in a series of half dollars.

Well it appears that you can still go to the Barber and not get completely fleeced. As little as $10 can get you buy in for some good-looking Barber dimes. It takes $35 to do the same for the quarters and $90 for the half dollars, but overall the Barber design remains affordable.

None of the coins we have examined are the crème-de-la-crème of the three denominations, but that means none of them command the huge auction house prices we read about all too often. They all do qualify though as good-looking coins with just a bit of wear on them. If you have passed these Barber coins by in the past, now might be the perfect time to take your hobby and collection in a new direction. Good luck!

J&T Coins LLC is now carrying PCGS and NGC graded Mercury Dimes and Full Band (FB) Mercury Dimes.

Click here to view their current inventory.