1882 London Mint penny ?

[Beebman 2]

Wide or narrow date? Is this the Bamford one illustrated in Michael Gouby's book>

David

No idea, but here's a link to the DNW auction archive page showing the Bamford one:

http://www.dnw.co.uk/coins/auctionarchive/searchcataloguearchive/itemdetail.lasso?itemid=74545

Meanwhile I've done a little more searching in the Times database to see if I can find out if anything caused problems for the Mint's production in 1876 and according to the following paragraph from an article dated Thursday, July 5th, 1877, it would appear that something did:

"The total value of the coinage effected at the Royal Mint during the past year has been of a comparatively small amount, owing to an accident which occurred there in July of last year, by which the first motion wheel was completely shattered; and it became necessary, in consequence, to suspend the coinage for a period of nearly five months. Had such a serious breakdown occurred at a time of urgent need of a rapid increase of the coinage, great public inconvenience might have resulted; and this accident affords clear necessity of the Government giving the Mint what has been so long urged upon it by Mr. Fremantle, the Deputy-Master – namely modern and improved machinery and appliances, to enable him to meet the heavy demand for coinage which may at any period be thrown upon the Mint authorities."

[Red Riley 2]

Meanwhile I've done a little more searching in the Times database to see if I can find out if anything caused problems for the Mint's production in 1876 and according to the following paragraph from an article dated Thursday, July 5th, 1877, it would appear that something did:

"The total value of the coinage effected at the Royal Mint during the past year has been of a comparatively small amount, owing to an accident which occurred there in July of last year, by which the first motion wheel was completely shattered; and it became necessary, in consequence, to suspend the coinage for a period of nearly five months. Had such a serious breakdown occurred at a time of urgent need of a rapid increase of the coinage, great public inconvenience might have resulted; and this accident affords clear necessity of the Government giving the Mint what has been so long urged upon it by Mr. Fremantle, the Deputy-Master – namely modern and improved machinery and appliances, to enable him to meet the heavy demand for coinage which may at any period be thrown upon the Mint authorities."

That's certainly fascinating information but it seems just as likely that the contract had been placed with Heatons beforehand as they had produced coins in 1874 and 1875. As the production was split between Heatons and the Royal Mint in both of those years, the controversy over missing H's can't possibly arise but interesting to see that government funded organisations have been grumbling about under-funding as far back as that. No doubt, when the new machinery was finally installed, the Daily Mail or its then equivalent had a good old bleat about wasting the taxpayers money...

[Bernie 203]

I've found in The Times archive (to which I've online access at work) is an article dated Wednesday January 10th 1883 in which a summary of the work undertaken at the Mint is given. The new machinery consisted of 3 vertical engines of maximum 250 hp power and 14 new 'Uhlhorn' lever presses turning out 90-100 coins per minute "and very few brockages". The cost was £30,000. There was also much building work to enlarge the premises.

However the most relevant piece of information to this thread is:

"These building operations were begun on February 1st, 1882, from which date the coinage was entirely suspended till the alterations were finished."

No mention is made of any arrangements of minting coins anywhere else while the work took place.

Here is a copy of the article from the Sept 1967 Spink Numismatic circular, Author Jim Noble, Formally of Spink & Son, London, now Noble Numismatics Sidney Australia.

[Peckris2 0]

I've found in The Times archive (to which I've online access at work) is an article dated Wednesday January 10th 1883 in which a summary of the work undertaken at the Mint is given. The new machinery consisted of 3 vertical engines of maximum 250 hp power and 14 new 'Uhlhorn' lever presses turning out 90-100 coins per minute "and very few brockages". The cost was £30,000. There was also much building work to enlarge the premises.

However the most relevant piece of information to this thread is:

"These building operations were begun on February 1st, 1882, from which date the coinage was entirely suspended till the alterations were finished."

No mention is made of any arrangements of minting coins anywhere else while the work took place.

Here is a copy of the article from the Sept 1967 Spink Numismatic circular, Author Jim Noble, Formally of Spink & Son, London, now Noble Numismatics Sidney Australia.

That seems to bear out my "speculation" (above), and Charles Wilson Peck agrees with me. I knew I'd chosen my username well

[1949threepence 3,367]

I've found in The Times archive (to which I've online access at work) is an article dated Wednesday January 10th 1883 in which a summary of the work undertaken at the Mint is given. The new machinery consisted of 3 vertical engines of maximum 250 hp power and 14 new 'Uhlhorn' lever presses turning out 90-100 coins per minute "and very few brockages". The cost was £30,000. There was also much building work to enlarge the premises.

However the most relevant piece of information to this thread is:

"These building operations were begun on February 1st, 1882, from which date the coinage was entirely suspended till the alterations were finished."

No mention is made of any arrangements of minting coins anywhere else while the work took place.

Here is a copy of the article from the Sept 1967 Spink Numismatic circular, Author Jim Noble, Formally of Spink & Son, London, now Noble Numismatics Sidney Australia.

That seems to bear out my "speculation" (above), and Charles Wilson Peck agrees with me. I knew I'd chosen my username well

Indeed, the 1967 article is an excellent one, and casts more light on the 1882 riddle. Thanks to Bernie for that.

I'm leaning more and more towards some sort of trial run at the London Mint made ~ as the article suggests ~ towards the very end of 1882, in anticipation of re-opening.

Edited November 2, 2010 by 1949threepence

[niyuco 0]

Here is a copy of the article from the Sept 1967 Spink Numismatic circular, Author Jim Noble, Formally of Spink & Son, London, now Noble Numismatics Sidney Australia.

It's certainly a well thought out theory, although the discovery since of circulated examples must cast some doubt on it.

But if true raises other questions: What happened to the dies? I find it hard to believe they would simply throw them away after producing only a few dozen coins.

Perhaps we should all be looking for 1883/2 overdates...

[scott 144]

i don think there are any overstrikes in the 1880's?

this upgrading of the mint will explain the low figures for 1882 silvers as well.

[Red Riley 2]

i don think there are any overstrikes in the 1880's?

1882/1H - but you need very good eyesight to spot it!

[RLC35 288]

I was thinking about bidding on the 1882/1 that is in the 2nd Workman Auction, but I couldn't see the overdate very well in the pic at Colin Cooke. I requested a close up view, but Cooke sent me the same pic they have on the auction site, and you can't tell anything from that...so I guess I won't bid after all. It must not be very clear.

[Beebman 2]

I've just noticed that London Coins have in their forthcoming December auction a slabbed (CGS EF60) 1882 'no-H' Penny. ("this piece was purchased for £450 in the eighties from Spinks.") Guide price is £2500-5000. Link to the sale is below (the 1882 Penny is Lot 2055):

http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/index.php?page=Catalogue

[Peckris2 0]

I've just noticed that London Coins have in their forthcoming December auction a slabbed (CGS EF60) 1882 'no-H' Penny. ("this piece was purchased for £450 in the eighties from Spinks.") Guide price is £2500-5000. Link to the sale is below (the 1882 Penny is Lot 2055):

http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/index.php?page=Catalogue

Thanks for giving the lot number Beebman (Note to other members : when giving a link to a Spink auction or similar, PLEASE give the lot number or similar unique identifier, it helps so much when you're staring blankly at a home screen!!)

[davidrj 194]

I've just noticed that London Coins have in their forthcoming December auction a slabbed (CGS EF60) 1882 'no-H' Penny. ("this piece was purchased for £450 in the eighties from Spinks.") Guide price is £2500-5000. Link to the sale is below (the 1882 Penny is Lot 2055):

http://www.londoncoi...?page=Catalogue

How odd! They only illustrate the obverse!

David

[Coppers 58]

I've just noticed that London Coins have in their forthcoming December auction a slabbed (CGS EF60) 1882 'no-H' Penny. ("this piece was purchased for £450 in the eighties from Spinks.") Guide price is £2500-5000. Link to the sale is below (the 1882 Penny is Lot 2055):

http://www.londoncoi...?page=Catalogue

How odd! They only illustrate the obverse!

David

It looks like they haven't finished putting up all of the images for the certified coin section, so it may be coming.

[Peckris2 0]

I've just noticed that London Coins have in their forthcoming December auction a slabbed (CGS EF60) 1882 'no-H' Penny. ("this piece was purchased for £450 in the eighties from Spinks.") Guide price is £2500-5000. Link to the sale is below (the 1882 Penny is Lot 2055):

http://www.londoncoi...?page=Catalogue

How odd! They only illustrate the obverse!

David

Yes! I noticed that too. Bit of a deficiency when you think what they're auctioning. Also, when you look at the small photo, did you get the impression that Victoria is bearded?

[VickySilver 836]

This is a true rarity and no pretender like all those slim dates/odd varieties, die states, etc.

Sadly I am not in play on this one, but will see how it goes from the sidelines...

[Beebman 2]

This is a true rarity and no pretender like all those slim dates/odd varieties, die states, etc.

Sadly I am not in play on this one, but will see how it goes from the sidelines...

I've just checked the LCA website for Monday's auction and the 1882 no-H went for £9500!

[1949threepence 3,367]

So after all the debate we had about the 1882 no H penny 5 years ago, is this latest offering at the LCA for March 2016, the real deal?

1882 no H

I still go back and forth on whether there is such a thing as a genuine 1882 no H, actually available for collectors. Whllst I accept that there was an UNC 1882 found with an 1883 die combination (see previous page of thread from Bernie), it could be a bit like the 1954 penny debate. Just the one - or potentially more? If so, were any released into circulation?

Or are the ones we see, all tooled?

I note the coin shown went for £2,200 last time out. Seems a bit of a risk if there is uncertainty as to genuineness.

Edited December 14, 2015 by 1949threepence

[PWA 1967 2,142]

I think its pay your money on a couple i have seen and take your chance.

I am happy to have a gap and would sooner have something else i am sure about for that money.

[Nordle11 564]

Do they not use an extremely powerful microscope to check the area, just to make sure it is what they say it is? I can't remember the specific name of the technique though, but you can get a local university to do it for you.

[VickySilver 836]

SEM - scanning electron microscopy. Linus Pauling many years ago used to use this showing white cells ingesting viruses & the like, but can be used on larger objects at lesser mag. The University near me wanted to charge 350 quid for the service. There should be other imaging technology though.

[Nordle11 564]

Thanks VS, that's extremely dear though!

[SWANNY 25]

However I try I can't float my boat with anything after....well it has to be predecimal when you got 480 halfpennies for £1.

In my youth I used a lot of these in 2p arcade machines.

I've still got rolls of halfpennies.

Maybe I have copper tinted glasses but really pre 1936 gets me going everytime.

Decimal currency does nothing for me what so ever, hence the fact most of us tend to collect OLD coins lol. Does anyone here actually collect decimal? Apart from the 2 pound boys

I do , but my collection is close to complete so I am moving down to Victoria

Edited December 14, 2015 by SWANNY

[Nordle11 564]

Straight from Elizabeth? Big jump, expect varieties galore in comparison!

[Bernie 203]

It's genuine OK, Obverse 11 with reverse N. There were no H currency pennies were struck with this die pairing.

[PWA 1967 2,142]

That gives more confidence as you will know Bernie .

Thanks.