best explanation WINS

It is silver plated and stamped with hong kong because it is a fake. Many fakes are made in China/Hong Kong.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Coin-Collecting-2297/2012/1/old-coin-47.htm

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

1966 silver dollar? That one come from China too?

 

Lol. You are simply trying to bribe someone to agree with you. You posted a pic in another thread showing all of the "treasures" found with this item, and some of those were obvious forgeries as well. The pic of the edge of this coin truly is laughable. Only someone who knows absolutely nothing about coins, or some who refuses to believe the truth, who cannot see that HUGE casting seam.

That coin is the POSTER CHILD of how to spot a cast forgery. Its so utterly obvious on every single category that its not funny. That is why I am suspecting not one person who has been collecting coins past two weeks will agree with you, regardeless fo what bribes you throw their way.

Again, what did your "expert" say about it? I have asked 3 times, why aren't you answering? Your first thread ended with you declaring you are taking it to a "real" expert. What did he say?

 

just like i had expected ....not one reasonable answer

ok then how about anther question

how many cast bubbles do you see

 

If I say it is real, do I win? :devil:

I probably won't though because of virtue.

 

Quite a few actually. I be more if I had this item in hand with a microscope.

Question for you. How do you believe that coin was struck? What kind of collar leaves that kind of a ring around the coin? Another question, you say there was a shortage of silver in the US, why then would we be striking a coin to circulate in a swamp in China? Third question, why do you still say this is silver plated when you offer no proof? Its silver colored, but you have no proof its real silver. Fourth question, why would Chinese people be willing, (if they were short of silver and HAD to accept silver as you erroneously say), to accept a copper coin that was plated? Fifth question, for the FOURTH TIME why do you ignore me when I ask what you "real expert" said about your obvious, laughable fake?

I hate to sound like a jerk, and I know I am sounding like it, but you consistently throw crud out here, and refuse to actually dialogue here. We ask you questions based upon what you have said, you ignore us and still post your own misguided thought. If you are going to treat us disrespectfully, expect the same in return. We have tried to help you, and you simply ignore us.

Btw ma'am, I know askign these questions I am not going to win your prize. That's ok, I would not want it anyway. Here are a couple of pics of a portion of my numismatic library.



How large is yours?

 

Game, set, match.........

 

I would answer this question but am dealing with a case of "Linsanity.". . TC

 

You too TC?

 

ok can you back that up with a little proof ...show me just one of the many fakes of any coin stamped HONG KONG like mine and if nothing better is suggested by 6 pm then I will send you the 2012 coin book

 

another answer without an answer .

obviously you dont have an answer worth presenting


you would think with your big ole library full of books you might be able to come up with something.... all you people do is say it is fake ....it is cast
and then cover up yur lack of knowledge with silly little errors i made like ENGLISH VS BRITISH ...

well what have you got to say about this then

On March 13,1776 a joint committee of the New Hampshire legislature stated William Moulton should be authorized to make copper coins

It is generally thought Moulton prepared some cast patterns but the coin never went into production.

 

are you saying it is not possible that the coin I had was made before 1912

i dont care if it is cast or struck minted or laid in a nest all i want to know is

when and why

until someone find another example of any other coin with hong kong on it like mine then there is a very good chance it is what I think it is and there is documented history to back up what I am saying .....


what I am hearing is just an excuse to try and cover up the fact that you are all in agreeance .....and not one of you has an answer that makes sense

mine makes sense if it were a fake made after 1912 ...how would my great great uncle have had it he went down on the titanic and he gave it to my great uncle before the ship left the dock ...

 

It's a good thing I was at work today, because this is just discombobulating.

 

I quickly read Common Sense (Common Sense is a pamphlet written by Thomas Paine) and I didn't get the answer there.

 

The answer is "To make a profit." Not unlike Willie Sutton's answer to "Willie, why do you rob banks?" "Because that is where the money is."

 

To make coin jewelry. Or because they had nothing better to do than sit around and deface the coin.(experimenting)

 

Continental Currency pieces were originally struck in pewter, brass and silver.

There is no mention of a 1776 copper coin plated with silver, but if I had to guess, due to the low value of copper, I would say that the copper coin was plated with silver to be acceptable in trade. This coin could have been made for the British & America as Hong Kong was under British rule at one time.
The "Hong Kong" chop marks was used to verify the authenticity of the coin.

 

On March 13,1776 a joint committee of the New Hampshire legislature appointed to confer on the expediency of making copper coins entered their report. They stated William Moulton should be authorized to make copper coins at the current British standard weight, which was just over 153 grains. The report stated:

The Committee humbly report that they find it expedient to make Copper Coin, for the Benefit of small Change, and as the Continental and other Bills are so large that William Moulton be impowered to make so many as may amount to 100lb w.t subject when made to the Inspection and Direction of the General Assembly, before Circulation. Also we recommend that 108 of said coppers be equal to one Spanish milld [milled] Dollar: That the said Coin be of pure Copper and equal in Wt to English halfpence, and bear such Device thereon as the Genl Assembly may approve. (Crosby, p. 175)

On June 28 the New Hampshire legislature passed an act stating a copper coin would be made in the colony having a pine tree and the motto AMERICAN LIBERTY on one side and a harp design with the date 1776 on the other. The copper was to weigh five pennyweight and ten grains, that is 130 grains. It would be distributed by the Treasury in quantities not exceeding £1000 in exchange for local paper currency at the rate of three coppers for two pence lawful money, which equaled the standard Massachusetts rate of 18 coppers per shilling. (the act, which was not clearly written, is found in Crosby, p. 176) Lawful money refers to the colony's paper currency, which was issued at the proclamation rate (6s to the Spanish American dollar). It has been suggested the harp design was probably based on the then current $7 continental currency bill which carried a Latin motto that can be translated as "The larger (harp strings) are harmonious with the small," -- a clear allusion to the union of the smaller and larger colonies.

At lease five variations of the New Hampshire coin are known, two of which carry the date 1776 on the obverse and the initials W. M. on the reverse. Some of these pieces may be unique while others are found in only a few examples. Examples of the varieties are plated in Breen, the Garrett Collection Sale and the Norweb Collection sale as cited in the bibliography below. It should be noted several modern reproductions of these coins exist. The pieces with the W.M. initials are now thought to be of doubtful origin and have been removed from the current edition (51st 1998) of R.S. Yeoman, A Guide Book of United States Coins,p. 38. In 1996 Dan Freidus explained one variety had been fabricated by C. Wyllys Betts in the early 1860's. That variety has an obverse containing a tree with the legend AMERICAN LIBERTY and a reverse with a harp. Freidus has illustrated an example of the coin as well as the dies from which it was made. The authenticity of the other pieces have also been questioned; currently there is no consensus on which, if any, may be authentic. It is generally thought Moulton prepared some cast patterns but the coin never went into production

Breen, pp. 59-61; Maurice M. Gould, "New Hampshire Cent?" Numismatic Scrapbook Magazine vol. 22, no. 11 (November 1956, whole no. 249) 1945-1946; The Garrett Collection, auction by Bowers and Ruddy, part 1, November 28-29, 1979, with the MA Janus head copper as lot 574, p. 132 and part 3, October 1-2, 1980, with two varieties of NH coppers as lots 1323-1324, p. 52; and The Norweb Collection: Part 1 Early American and U.S. Coins, a public auction sale of October 12 and 13, 1987 in New York City by Bowers and Merena Inc., Wolfboro, N.H.: Bowers and Merena, 1987, pp. 402-403 on the NH coppers with an introduction and three varieties as lots 1384-1386; Dan Freidus, "Identifying a Betts Copper," The C4 Newsletter, A quarterly publication of the Colonial Coin Collectors Club, vol. 4, no. 1 (Spring, 1996) 11-16 and front cover illustration

http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinIntros/StatePatterns.intro.html

 

Irish... What Jinx is saying is that these copper coins you are referring to are NOT continental dollars... but New Hampshire cents that may or may not even exist.