I bought this coin at a Stacks auction back in 1989. It was fairly bright when I got it, but the cataloguer did not mention any cleaning in the description. I have put it out on a tray to tone naturally on-and-off over that least 30 years or so. The peripheries have acquired some toning, the centres remain mostly untoned. I am certainly not an expert, but I don't see any signs of a harsh cleaning. Only the marks and scuffs one may expect from a circulated coin. What is your opinion? (Actually, for whatever it's worth, the coin was briefly mentioned in a Coin World description of the Stacks sale). The pictures fairly adequately show the way it looks. Thanks!
My gut reaction is that the coin has the remaining detail of a 55. BUT, I see no evidence of luster anywhere but you will have to confirm or correct since photos can lie on that. AND, I think it looks cleaned at one point. PLUS, there's a good bit of chatter and slight rim ding on the reverse. So, for a straight-grade, I'd give it either a 45 or 50.
In the first set of images it looks to me like someone dragged a pencil eraser or other soft abrasive instrument across the surface above the eagle to clean the coin. The same appearance may show up elsewhere on the coin, and not be so obvious in the images . . . or maybe, just maybe I'm imagining things.
Thank you. The surfaces have very little if any lustre left at all. There are no signs of an aggressive cleaning, that I can tell. Does the fact the surfaces were bright when I bought it mean that it was at least dipped? (I guess this is obvious, hmm?) I am also suprised that it has not retoned, even after prolonged exposure to sunlight.
Looks nice but I think it was cleaned some time ago. Not harshly but with something like an eraser. With as much detail as that coin shows you should see done luster. It may have been dipped. If it was dipped it was dipped too long.
If it has very little luster, it’s not an AU. Back in the ‘80s and before, flat luster coins like this were frequently offered at “Unc.-ish” prices. The market frequently caught up with them, but not at Mint State prices. The up side is that a lot of these “heavy” pre 1853 dates were melted because the California gold strike increased the relative value of silver which resulted in many of the silver coins from this era going to the melting pot.
1850 is one of my favorite dates. Very hard to find but treated as almost a common date. The AU grade, for me, stresses just how much original luster remains. I demand 50% for true AU. As you mentioned, the coin is dull. My highest grade would be XF-45. I would expect it to straight grade but that does not mean it has not been cleaned. I just think it was so long ago it would be grandfathered in as a straight grade coin. One of the obvious "tells" for me on Seated Coins is the crook of Liberty's elbow on the Obverse. That area, plus inset areas around much of the other devices tell me this coin was probably terminal black at one time. Pick your poison as far as how some previous owner decided to lighten the coin up. I like the general appearance all the same and would be happy to own this coin. Lots of detail even if lacking flash. James
Very interesting comments - thank you very much. Not my best purchase decision, it seems. Still, a scarce date (thank you @samclemens3991 for the information) in an acceptable condition.
