Why was there a Type II Standing Liberty Quarter?

If you are familiar with the Standing Liberty Quarter, you've probably heard the story about how a prudish and outraged citizenry caused the Mint to cover up Liberty's bare breast. Here is "The Bare-Breasted Liberty Quarter " telling the tale:

McNeil was obliged to modify his design. Miss Liberty would need to be properly covered, according to the citizens of our enlightened nation. It is easy to imagine that McNeil might have been a little resentful about the modification chore he had to undertake. Rather than simply rearrange the drapery on Liberty's shoulder to cover the offending breast, he crafted a suit of armor instead, and chastely clothed Miss Liberty nearly to the neck in chain mail!

I have no doubt that there were outraged citizens - there always are. In my own home state of Massachusetts, we had the Watch and Ward Society object to the bare breasted figure on the 1896 $5 Silver Certificate, so of course they didn't like this either.

However, the public outcry may not have been the impetus and McNeil wasn't necessarily resentful because of the change. If anything, he may have been resentful of the Type I design because it was a modification of what he had submitted! David Lange makes the case for that in the "Mystery of the 1917 Quarters" link below, asserting

.. the Type 1 quarters of 1916-17 were the Mint's alteration of MacNeil's design and that the Type 2 issue was a restoration of MacNeil's original concept

Or it may have had to do with World War I. The Wikipedia article on this coin mentions that Ray Young suggested in a 1979 Coins Magazine article that the redesign "came from the symbolism. If Liberty was going to stand up to her foes, she should do so fully-protected—not 'naked to her enemies.'"

Whatever the reasons, the Standing Liberty Quarter is a beautiful design.

References:
Watch and Ward Society
1896 $5 Silver Certificate
Silver Certificates
THE MYSTERY OF THE 1917 QUARTERS
Wikipedia Standing Liberty Quarter

Note: All my coins are in a safe deposit box. I keep nothing in my home.

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

The Price of Proof Sets

When I started buying proof sets from the Mint in the mid 1950's, the price for 91 cents of face value coins was $2.10.   That was an increase from the pre-1950 price of $1.89 and it stayed at $2.10 until 1965, when no proofs were issued but a "Special Mint Set" could be ordered for $4.00.

When proofs resumed in 1968, the price was raised to $5.00.  The coins were now enclosed in a more solid holder, so I suppose the price increase had some justification, but that and the ugly clad coins turned me off and I stopped buying proof sets.

I did buy a 2013 America the Beautiful Quarters Silver set last year. That also is in a better holder, and cost  me $36.90.  The coins are silver, so there may be some argument for that price, but even the 14 coin 2014 proof set (no silver) is $27.95.

Certainly it's good that coin collectors can help defray some of our taxes by giving the Mint these astonishing profit margins, but is it really necessary to charge so much? As a young boy with a $2 weekly allowance, I could afford the $2.10 yearly expense, but I wonder if $27.95 is so easy for today's 7-10 year olds. Perhaps it is: Average Allowances in America, by Age says that $16 per week is about average.

It still seems too expensive to this old fogey.

References:

United States Proof Set Prices

United States Uncirculated Mint Set Prices

Clue for the second 2014 Silver Eagle Giveaway: The Lovett Cent

Note:  All my coins are in a safe deposit box.  I keep nothing in my home. 

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

Complaining about the mint

The delays in shipping the Baseball Hall of Fame coins have caused many complaints. I have to say that I'm not happy that the gold proofs I ordered were delayed so long and I do have complaints about packaging (see "Here's your crap: Baseball Hall of Fame Clad Proofs", but some of this carping is, I think, unfair.

One of the more frequent charges is that the Mint should have better computer systems as that has been where the blame has been placed.  People say that Google and Amazon have no trouble handling large volumes of customers, so why should the Mint be so hampered?

That's just ridiculous. Amazon and Google have billions of dollars at their disposal, but even they don't design for loads that they consider impossible to imagine. That would be a waste of money.  The demand for BHOF's far exceeded expectations - it would be like Amazon suddenly finding itself with billions of new Chinese customers tomorrow morning.

If the Mint (or really, Congress) had spent the money to handle that demand, the Tea Party folks would be screaming that it was a waste of their tax dollars and in this one case, I think they'd be right. The demand was unexpected. Nobody - NOBODY - builds servers to meet demand they cannot imagine happening.

There is plenty I do not like about how Congress handles the Mint. I don't like the Commemorative Coin programs, I don't like the sloppy way proofs are handled - everyone one of my BHOF gold proofs has very noticeable scratches and yes,I'd rather pay more for better coins and better packaging. I also don't like the large order limits that let dealers snatch up the majority of coins before ordinary collectors (see 2014 Kennedy Commemorative for more on that). 

By the way, my gold BHOF's were ordered 03/27/2014 at 01:18 PM (first day, order 42927xxx) and were finally shipped on June 3rd.

Clue for the second 2014 Silver Eagle Giveaway: Are there really 1001 ways to beat the draft?

Note:  All my coins are in a safe deposit box.  I keep nothing in my home. 

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

The Secret History of the First U.S. Mint: How Frank H. Stewart Destroyed, And Then Saved A National Treasure

This is a large, 8-1/2 x 11 book. That makes it wonderful for the hundreds of full color illustrations and photos, but the large size and the nearly 2.5 pound weight do make it somewhat uncomfortable to read.

I do recommend this book to those interested in numismatic history. An Amazon reviewer asserts that it is not devoted to numismatics, and it is true if you emphasize "devoted", but there are plenty of numismatic tidbits to be found and many pictures of the coins that are part of the story. Stewart's own collection is shown and discussed at length also.  There is a great deal of numismatic interest in this book.

That said, the authors do take their title seriously. This is the history of the first Mint; the land upon which it was built and the ownership of each parcel before and the Mint's operation, the details of each building, including which came first and the confusion that various other chroniclers have contributed, the people involved (primarily Frank Huling Stewart) and what happened to the buildings after the Mint itself moved on to larger quarters.

There are times when all the minutia gets both confusing and boring, but the depth of research and documentation is impressive and admirable.  As the authors explain, this work was originally intended to be a short article in the Numismatist but their research kept leading them deeper and deeper.

Any U.S. coins you may own dated before 1833 (excluding restrikes) were produced at this first Mint. For a good part of its history, men and horses provided all the energy needed; a 10 horsepower steam engine did not come until 1816, but even that was only used for drawing, rolling and some planchet cutting. Human muscle power still struck the coins until the second Mint in 1833.

This is a book worth owning if you enjoy coins and history.

Buy this book at Amazon and help me support this site!

Clue for the second 2014 Silver Eagle Giveaway:  Definitely a striking fellow

Note:  All my coins are in a safe deposit box.  I keep nothing in my home. 

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

The Eckfeldt family and the U.S. Mint

The Eckfield family was involved with the U.S. Mint from its very beginning until 1929. Their contributions to numismatics are incredible, ranging from engraving the first dies to illegally striking 1804 dollars and other coins.

Adam Eckfeldt designed and provided equipment for the nascent mint and is thought to have designed the 1792 half dime. He cut the obverse die for the 1792 Birch cent and designed the Wreath Cent reverse as well as the first half cents.

In 1796, he was appointed Assistant Coiner and became Chief Coiner in 1814. He began setting aside carefully struck coins for a Mint Coin collection. Less legally, he caused missing dates to be restruck. That collection eventually became the Smithsonian National Numismatic Collection.

Officially, Eckfeldt  retired in 1839, but unofficially continued to work at the Mint long after. He died in 1852. His son, Jacob Reese Eckfeldr, worked as Chief Assayer for the Mint from 1832 to 1872 and Jacob's son (Jacob Bausch Eckfeldt) worked for the Mint from 1865 to 1929.

Jacob Reese Eckfeldt became world famous for challenging the London Royal Mint over substandard sovereigns. He was found correct in spite of their insistence otherwise.

The grandson of Adam's stepbrother was George J. Eckfeldt. He and his son Theodore worked at the Mint and are said to be responsible for proof restrikes of 1851-1853 Silver Dollars. Theodore is also likely the one responsible for the Class 2 restrikes of the 1804 dollars in the late 1850's.

Further reading:

"Was George J. Eckfeldt related to Adam Eckfeldt?"

"Liberty Seated Dollars, Guide to Collecting and Investing"

"The Secret History of the First U.S. Mint"

"THE U.S. MINT'S "FIRST FAMILY" - THE ECKFELDTS"

Wikipedia Adam Eckfeldt

Wikipedia Jacob Eckfeldt

"1804 silver dollar"

Note: All my coins are in a safe deposit box. I keep nothing in my home.

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

The gold Baseball Hall of Fames came yesterday

My order for gold BHOF's came yesterday. Two of them look good, but one may have a scratch.

I can't be sure. I think it is on the coin, but it could be on the capsule. The only way I could be sure would be to pop it out of the capsule. As I'm not the most adroit person, I'm afraid that I might screw that up and damage the coin.
Under the microscope, I can see something in that area. That makes me think it is more likely to be on the coin.

I decided to just send them all to PCGS. I chose Modern, Secure Plus, and added TrueView. I like the Secure Plus slab, especially for gold and the TrueView will make it easier to see why PCGS blinked if the coins are not PF70.

It is unfortunate that the Mint is so sloppy with expensive proofs. Scratches shouldn't happen. The other two coins don't appear to have scratches, but there are small scraps of black fibers sealed in with the coins. That really shouldn't happen either.  Although I think we already pay enough of a premium to expect better, I'd rather pay more if that's what it would take for better quality control.

Note: All my coins are in a safe deposit box. I keep nothing in my home.

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

Neonumia (for lack of a better word)

I initially called certain coins "shark jumpers", implying that these are silly, desperate productions that are trying to raise waning interest in mint products. This Baseball Hall of Fame issue is a mild example.

Here is something much more extreme. It's sculpture with a coin as its base - definitely not something you'd carry in your pocket!

I don't know what's going to happen with these types of coins. Will collectors in general accept map shaped coins, folding coins, coins with embedded electronics? I don't know. My instinct is that most of these, maybe even all, are ridiculous and that they truly are "shark jumpers" destined for ignominy. Some day this whole period of strange designs might be looked at much as we look at the Dutch Tulip craze now - a brief aberration of sanity.

On the other hand, I could be wrong. Even if most coin collectors ignore them, enough may find them interesting that they won't be disdained and consigned to the dust heap of numismatic history. Collectors may very well include some in their type sets - I could see that happening with the Baseball Hall of Fame coins very easily.

Other collectors may even specialize in these. In fact, that's quite likely and that's why I coined the word "Neonumia" (New Money).  This is in the tradition of exonumia (outside of money), but as these are generally NCLT (non circulating legal tender), they obviously aren't that.  Neonumia works for me, at least until someone comes up with a better term.

No matter what, I don't think this phase has legs. I really don't expect it last very long. I expect that the market for new issues will dry up. Some of the originals may retain value, but I really think that soon enough a mint is going to announce yet another absurd "coin" and get not enough orders to pay the cost or even get no orders at all.  I can absolutely state that if the U.S. Mint came out with a football shaped coin next month, I would not order any and I suspect I'm not unusual.

So, do you have any neonumia in your collection?  Would you collect neonumia specifically? Would you buy that football coin?

Note:  All my coins are in a safe deposit box.  I keep nothing in my home. 

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

Google Books for Coinage History

I stumbled across Congressional Records related to the Mint while searching Google books for something entirely unrelated and immediately realized that there is a wealth of information there that was not previously so easily available to the average collector.

For example, here is the Annual Report of the Director of the Mint, for the "Fiscal Year Ending  June 30th, 1869".  Among other things,  Director James Pollock comments on resuming specie payments, on the dismal progress of building a new San Francisco Mint and also on the not yet operational Carson City Mint.  As you can see here, he didn't expect any coins to be minted there.

However, coins obviously were minted, starting in 1870 with Seated Liberty dollars.  In spite of Pollock's opinions, specie payment (redeeming paper money for gold or silver) was not resumed until 1879.

There is much more to be found.  This report can be downloaded here: http://books.google.com/books?id=P7fzAAAAMAAJ

Note:  All my coins are in a safe deposit box.  I keep nothing in my home. 

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

1995 Double Die Lincoln Cent

Although not as spectacular as the famous 1955 Double Die Lincoln, the 1995 DDO can be seen with the naked eye by most people and a small amount of magnification will make it extremely obvious to anyone.

Very obvious doubling like this was caused during die production - the die hubs had to be impressed at least twice to bring up the necessary detail and heated between pressing.  Sometimes the operators wouldn't get things perfectly lined up on the second (or third) pass and doubling like this results. As the operators are usually quite accurate, most such doubling is quite small and difficult to discern without magnification, but now and then something like this slipped by.

I said "slipped" rather than "slips" because shortly after this the Mint went to "single squeeze" hubbing and this particular type of doubling is now not possible.  With single squeeze, it's still possible to get doubling, but it will be minor and confined to the center of the coin.  See "Doubled Dies" for an explanation of what happens.

Note:  All my coins are in a safe deposit box.  I keep nothing in my home. 

Contests and giveaways: http://coins.aplawrence.com/2014/05/contests-and-giveaways.html

Will the U.S. Mint jump the shark? Or maybe they have already?

I've decided that the 2014 Baseball Hall of Fame coins are going to be an important issue for U.S. collectors.   I say that with utter confidence: these will either be a coin that everyone wants for their collection or a coin that is remembered as the beginning of the end for any interest in the U.S. Mint Commemorative coins.

(From U.S. Mint image gallery) 

I actually like the BHOF's. The shape is unusual, but it's not like some of the silly other things that have been done (see my "Shark Jumpers" post).  I don't think it is ridiculous, but I have certainly heard that opinion expressed by others.

There is certainly good reason to say that the Mint had reached the "ridiculous" stage before this coin.   Giant silver quarters and gold buffalo nickels?  Then there are the inane subjects of other commemoratives like First Spouses and the appalling ugliness of the 2014 Civil Rights Act of 1964 Silver Dollar.

(From U.S. Mint image gallery)

The problem I see is that there may be worse to come.  The Baseball Hall of Fame coins have been a great success, selling out of both gold and silver very quickly. If the Mint (and Congress) attribute that to its quirky shape, they may decide to do a football shaped coin, a basketball, a soccer ball, a tennis racket and who knows what else?   With no apparent sense to restrain them, they could absolutely destroy all collector interest in any of it!

I hope that doesn't happen.

Dump the penny (and the nickel and maybe the dime and quarter)

Canada has stopped producing pennies and there is some talk of doing the same here. The major objection against doing so seems to be that we've always had a one cent coin, so dropping it destroys a hallowed tradition.

I think that's silly.  The cent has become so worthless that it truly is nonsense to keep it.  I think the nickel and even the dime have reached that point also.

Let's look at some history here.  In 1800, we had cents and half cents - nothing smaller.    At that time, a skilled workman like a carpenter or a bricklayer earned a dollar to a dollar and a half per day.   By that measure, 200 or so of the lowest value coin available (the half cent) would have paid their wages.

Would you like 200 cents as your daily income now?  How about 200 nickels or even 200 dimes? Even 200 quarters is less than minimum wage!

Given that nothing else circulates to any real extent today, we could actually get rid of all coins and suffer no more than our ancestors.

Well, that's probably too much breakage of tradition and as a coin collector, I wouldn't really like that. But I wouldn't mind having resized half dollars, dollars and even five dollar coins to replace them.

Yes, the vending machine industry would howl.  If we'd had vending machines in the mid 1800's, they would have screamed when we dumped the half cents and shrunk the cent.  They might have even had a point then, as purely mechanical devices are hard to refit for new coins.   I don't know that modern vending machines take full advantage advantage of computer technology now, but they certainly could and as the useless value coins would be phases out slowly (just stop making them and let them drain away), I don't think they'd suffer much either.

This organization wants to keep cents circulating: http://www.pennies.org/.  They say

Consumers benefit with a low denomination coin, with the penny helping keep high prices in check for millions of America's hardworking families.

But eliminating low value coins only affects cash transactions - credit cards and checks could still be used for exact amounts.

Here's some links of interest:

Wages, 1800 to 1809
Value of one cent in 1800
Multidrop Bus in Vending Machines

The Baseball Hall of Fame Coins are driving me bonkers

Unless I'm already senile, today is April 9th, 2014.   On 03/27/2014 at 01:18 PM, I placed an order with the mint for some of the new Baseball Hall of Fame coins.

U.S. Mint's BOFH Web page

No, I'm not a baseball fan. I think these coins are neat and I also think there's a chance of making some money from them (though there is a good chance of losing some, too).  Anyway, since two weeks ago, the mint has shown me this when I look up my order:

Note: "Expected to ship on 04/03".   Today is the 9th.

So I called them.  I had a pleasant fifteen minutes on hold and then spoke to a very nice woman who explained that nothing is wrong, they are just overloaded with orders.  All will be on its way "soon".  

That's all she could tell me, but she was very pleasant about it.

So, someday, someday "soon", I will get these coins and that will be the end of my fretting, right?

No, dammit.  My troubles just begin when I get the coins.  

What to do with them?  Prices have been steadily rising for the few that are already available (mostly bought directly at the Mint offices or at the recent Baltimore coin show), but I expect the price to dip when people like me start receiving our orders.   Should I sell, should I hang tight for later profit, or should I just hang on and pass them on to my kids someday?

Nor is that the only decision to make.  Should I have these certified by PCGS?  Certified coins usually sell for more and are easier to store than those in OGP (Original Government Packaging), but that neglects the crossover appeal: baseball aficionados may prefer the OGP.

I mentioned that the price could drop.  The mintage of the gold and silver is limited and they are both sold out, but if a lot of people bought to sell, it is possible for these to descend below original cost from the mint.  That's especially true for the gold versions as gold prices have been trending downward recently.

If that happens, these are definitely heading for the safe deposit box and my children.