1st 1892/1893 Chicago Half Dollar Proof - Can we see it in Chicago?

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by iPen, Jan 9, 2020.

  1. iPen

    iPen Well-Known Member

    I read in this Coin World article that Chicago's Field Museum currently owns the very first Chicago half dollar struck at the Chicago World's Fair in 1893. This is the same specimen that was purchased by the makers of Remington typewriters for $10,000 in 1893 dollars. I also read on Wiki that the Chicago Historical Society owns the very first proof that was struck in 1893. Are these the same coins somehow? Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding...

    Anyway, I haven't been to the Field Museum since I was a child, and this wouldn't of even been on my radar back then. If the Field Museum does own it, I wouldn't be surprised if they are locked away somewhere in the back, or kept at a bank vault off premise. I did find that the Field Museum has a Chicago World's Fair exhibit with 2,000 items, but no mention of any coin. Has anyone seen this very first Chicago commemorative half dollar in person?

    Thanks in advance!
     
    ddddd likes this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. iPen

    iPen Well-Known Member

    Or read of it somewhere? Or is there at least a pic of it?

    Also, I do understand that proof strikes require a certain set of steps and procedures when struck, and it's generally recognized that the 1892 and 1893 Columbian half dollars were not actually struck as proofs. They'd at most be proof-like. Even from documented reports by eyewitness journalists, the very *first "proof" Columbian was struck very much not like a proof.

    *The first one struck had a flaw and was destroyed, the second one struck was the one bought by the Remington typewriter company. From the Coin World link in the OP:

    They gathered around an improved automatic, toggle-jointed coining press, a noiseless, powerful, highly polished and wonderfully accurate machine. No power was applied to the machine for the first test. Instead, Foreman Albert Downing placed one of the planchets in the receiver and grasped the lever which raises the lower die while Edwin Cliff, his assistant, stood at the balance wheel. Then came the critical moment. Unfortunately the first attempt was a failure. To an ordinary observer it might have appeared perfect, but the coiner and designer examined it under a glass. One glance was enough. A fatal flaw was revealed, and the verdict which consigned the prospective ten-thousand dollar beauty to the scrap box was pronounced. A hammer was at hand, and what might have been the most famous coin in history was battered into comparatively worthless metal. The next attempt was made more carefully for the reputation of the coiners was at stake, and they had resolved that the first souvenir of the exposition should be a marvel of perfection and beauty. The planchet before being accepted was examined under the microscope and found without blemish. For the second time the two workmen turned the press by hand, while the spectators waited in suspense.
     
  4. iPen

    iPen Well-Known Member

    I just learned that the first 1892 proof is owned by the Field Museum. The first 1893 proof is owned by the Chicago Historical Society:

    [​IMG]
     
    yakpoo and ddddd like this.
  5. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    The coin held by the Field Museum is the first (actually second) 1892 proof, the coin held by the Chicago Historical Society is the first 1893 proof, so they are different coins. I don't now if the Museum has it on display, but they did have both coins on display a few years ago at one of the ANA conventions in Chicago. I saw both of them at that time.
     
    iPen likes this.
  6. physics-fan3.14

    physics-fan3.14 You got any more of them.... prooflikes?

    @leeg posts here, right? If anyone can answer your questions, he can.
     
    green18 likes this.
  7. iPen

    iPen Well-Known Member

    The coin in the #2 envelope is the very first commemorative coin ever struck in US history. It was rejected by mint workers due to a planchet flaw.

    What's very odd to me are the possible inconsistencies or rather lack of information given. The reporters (who are also the eyewitnesses of the actual striking; see post #2's testimony from one of the multiple reporters there that day) say that one of the mint workers destroyed the coin... yet the coin that Ellsworth refers to is not explicitly described to be damaged/destroyed - is this supposed to be implied?

    upload_2020-1-9_20-58-4.png

    So...
    • The coin in the #2 envelope is undamaged by the Mint worker, and thus it is not the first struck coin, or
    • The coin in the #2 envelope is damaged but it wasn't specified in the article, even though the author thought it would be clearly identifiable as coin #2 by its reverse planchet flaw but not the obvious damage for some reason, or
    • The reporters witnessing the destruction of coin #2 were collectively mistaken, or
    • Some other explanation is necessary
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2020
  8. GeorgeM

    GeorgeM Well-Known Member

    green18 likes this.
  9. iPen

    iPen Well-Known Member

    The scrapped coin refers to the coin in the #2 envelope that Ellsworth refers to.
     
  10. green18

    green18 Unknown member Sweet on Commemorative Coins Supporter

    GeorgeM and iPen like this.
  11. GeorgeM

    GeorgeM Well-Known Member

    Considering their scarcity, it's quite reasonable that they're often overlooked.
     
    green18 likes this.
  12. iPen

    iPen Well-Known Member

    I found a pic of the first 1892 proof! Granted, it's a photo taken presumably sometime in the 1960's (1968?), and the resolution isn't that great relative to today's standards. The first proof Columbian struck in 1892 in Chicago is at the Field Museum, along with an image of the original 4-page article from The Centinel, the official publication of CSNS that this story is pulled from (dated April 1968; these are the folks that host the annual coin show near Chicagoland - it's not as big as FUN but it's pretty darn big and Heritage hosts an auction there, too). The first pic below is of the box with the certified letter from the Board overseeing the Columbian Exposition. The coin is inserted at top on the right side - notice its deep, ultra cameo! It's hard to tell the surface quality, but the contrasting "black" is consistent with the effect you'd see with a very mirrored surface (IME at least).

    The 4-page article details exactly where both the first struck proof 1892 and 1893 Columbian half dollars are located - at least at the time of the article, both were in Chicago - at the Field Museum and the Chicago Historical Society, respectively.

    Also, it has a PMD! Someone made a miniscule graffiti in the triangle area, where coincidentally one of the two proof die markers can be found (check out the right-hand side of the third page of the article).

    [​IMG]

    upload_2020-1-12_13-13-49.png
    upload_2020-1-12_13-13-59.png
    upload_2020-1-12_13-18-34.png upload_2020-1-12_13-18-24.png
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2020
  13. leeg

    leeg I Enjoy Toned Coins

    First coin struck from a single blow of the press. It had a planchet flaw causing it to be held back from sale to Wyckoff, Seamans and Benedict, on behalf of the Remington Typewriter Company. Courtesy The Field Museum in Chicago, Illinois.

    First 1892 Columbian, Planchet Flaw, Chicago Field Museum.png
     
    iPen likes this.
  14. iPen

    iPen Well-Known Member

    Nice! Thanks for the pic!!

    So this is technically the second coin struck and put into envelope #1, which is in the display case/box held at/by the Field Museum. Look at the "1892" date - it looks very obviously different, skinnier, and sharper than the 1892 seen on business strikes. It would be interesting to see the "graffiti" damage done where the obverse proof die marker is.

    Now for the other mystery... what does the first ever struck commemorative coin with a planchet flaw, and thus rejected by Mint workers, look like? It was destroyed as reported by the Chicago Tribune and the New York Times; yet, it's stated in the article that you can identify it by its sharper die state and planchet flaw, but oddly enough, it left out the very obvious way to identify it - what the damage done by the Mint worker looks like! Granted, not any one identifying mark is sufficient, and all three identifying marks would help to confirm this coin. That also makes me wonder how the TPGs would classify it... "Damaged - Mint Worker"?
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2020
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page