I didn't buy this, but I saw it on Ebay and something about it just looks "off" to me. I'm curious to hear opinions from others more familiar with these than I am.
Just looking at the condition would cause me to pass on it. However, I'm going to take a chance and say Bradley has it right. Looks off to me but I am no expert.
I’d need to see a better photo/scan. There are plenty of these low grade 1899 $5 notes on eBay. This series was printed for over 20 years and was a real workhorse in its day.
Looks like its been through the washer a couple hundred times ! but that's when you have to be careful, notes that have been artificially aged or in a beat up condition are hard to spot versus uncirculated ones, but very little value there or at best a filler until you get something better, which shouldn't be hard to do.
It definitely looks tattered, and @mpcusa is right that a lot of times modern counterfeits are tried to be created to look like originals. The note appears to be (or was made to look like) a Fr. 271 due to Treasurer Roberts signature. But the way the note is folded/faded in spots but that signature is very clear leads me to suspect it could be a fake note. Of course until there are better pics, it is all a guessing game at this point.
Agreed, scans would be nice. Unfortunately those were the only pics. I was comparing it with this one (also not mine) that's in similar condition. Notice how the text on the bill in my original post looks much thicker, and it has a more "fuzzy" appearance. I actually never intended to buy this note, but I saw it because I was bidding on something else from the same seller and became curious about its authenticity. If it is fake, then somebody's out $125 + shipping!
