I was reading this and now I'm a bit confused with the second paragraph. Does that look to be correct. http://www.usmint.gov/about_the_mint/fun_facts/index.cfm?action=fun_facts10
if this is what you are asking about: "The one-cent and five-cent pieces are considered "minor" coins of the United States and have never contained precious metals." Nope, once again the mint gets it wrong. The five cent coin was originally (also called the half dime) in silver.
On the contrary, the Mint got it right. You got it wrong. You can't compare apples and oranges. The five-cent piece is NOT a half dime. While true, a half dime would be valued at 5 cents, they are two different coin series. The (nickel) five-cent coins were started in 1866 and (the silver) half dimes were discontinued in 1873. The blurb from the Mint website is also talking about modern coinage but you are correct that half dimes were struck in silver.
Andrew, Please correct me if I am wrong, but weren't the "war nickels" of 42-44 partially made of silver? Jon
Yes, you are correct. SD, to clarify. My point was that half dimes and 5 cent piece are seperate series. Half dimes were silver but 5-cent pieces were made of nickel from the start in 1866. Half dimes do have a value of 5 cents but are not 5 cent pieces. Thanks for your question though. Cheers
Andrew: We will continue to agree to disagree, since half of a dime is 5 cents. and Jon: Yup, you got it.
My thesis is based on the belief that a half dime is a seperate series from the 5-cent piece. The half dime was a silver coin that started in 1793 and was discontinued in 1873. The 5-cent piece was introduced in 1866 to compete with the half dime and made the half dime redundant so the half dime series was discontinued in 1873. While the half dime has a VALUE of 5 cents, it's NOT a 5 cent piece. Half dimes were made of silver but 5-cent pieces were not (until the war years as thoughfully reminded by the fine collector from San Deigo) there were always a nickel-copper mix. You can call the mint out on overlooking the war years but to call the Mint out saying that a half dime is a 5 cent piece, is not correct (i.e. wrong) in my opinion. Half dimes are not 5-cent pieces per se. They just happed to have a value of 5 cents which is merely unfortunate. Thus, this statement "The five cent coin was originally (also called the half dime) in silver." I find incorrect and hence my argument.
So, Andrew, would you say, in the strickest sense of the word, that the 2nd paragraph mentioned in the original citation, was incorrect? Also, on a more general note, what is considered the dividing year(s) between modern US coinage and pre-modern as stated by you earlier? Thanks. Jon
i would say it was incorrect because of the war nickels not because of the half dimes. still incorrect. Richard
Taking into consideration the war years, yes, ofcourse the statement is not correct if you are being technical about it. Thank you for reminding me of the war year issues but that is beside the point. My original point, which, I think, is still valid is that the statement is not incorrect due the existance of silver half dimes. Silver half dimes have a value of 5-cents but are not considered to be 5-cent pieces. The 5-cent piece was never originally silver. I could really care less about the correctness of the sentence but I wanted to make sure that the reason for the incorrectness is clear. Overlooking the war years, I don't think is a big deal at all. PS ..I love cointalk ...lol ...where else can you engage in a healthy debate about 5 cents ...lol. It's been enjoyable. Indeed.
Steven, I'm sure you didn't intend to start an argument over semantics. I'm guessing you were making a reference to the "war nickels" which indeed were partialy silver. Yes, the mint messed up.
When did the term "nickel" come into being? I guess some could call a half dime a 5-cent piece but you could never call it a "nickel"! LOL!
A Half Dollar contains 10 nickels and a 50 cent piece contains 10 Five-Cent pieces, unless the 50 cent piece is silver then it will have 10 Half Dimes. Duh...
The half dime and the nickel have the same value, but are not one in the same. Proof is in the fact that they were both minted for quite a few years simultaniously. But, as an answer to the original question, I'd have to say the mint is incorrect in that statement. Guy~
No argument intended but I like the constructive discussion. I was considering the war nickels when I read the US Mint statement. Thanks for all the response.
semantics...thanks for the insightful thread...let's keep this scholarly piece of work at the top of the page.
