Can you please give me your views on these two? (I collect mainly British coins so I am uncomfortable giving firm opinions on US coinage.) My local antique dealer in the UK has had them brought in. Each weighs 26.8g on my scales (to the nearest 0.1g), and is non-magnetic. Strike is Coin aligned (flip through horizontal access to keep them the right way up). Are they: 1. Genuine dated coins (if cleaned...)? 2. Modern restrikes in Silver? 3. 100% Fakes? 4. Some other combination? He has bought them, paying less than silver melt for them - what can he honestly sell them for? (They came in with a bunch of other modern silver commemorative coins from UK and World which look right to me.) Thanks!
Common date Morgans are not exactly sought after in Europe. While the 1886 is scratched on the obverse, the surfaces of the 1890 look a bit odd. Either it was slightly cleaned or it’s haze/tarnish. None of them would grade high, so it doesn’t surprise me that they sold cheap.
Eh you can but it pains me when people melt down old coins that have so much history behind them. They lose all their historical/numismatic value (although these don’t have much).
I agree with the other posters, they look genuine. The 1890 has tarnish and doesn't appear to have much luster left. Clean from contact marks, but it looks dull. I suspect a dipping that was a little over done. I wouldn't pay much over melt. 1886, well the scratch would bother me too much.
I was only being provocative to get a few more responses! They would have to be a hell of a lot worse for me to melt them. Although they are not massively collected over here, there are a few keen amateurs around the coin fairs who will be happy to have them in their collections. I suspect the previous owner dipped them which accounts for the brightness and loss of sheen and patina. I will convey the good news to the antique shop owner.
