A Survey of the Quarter Dollar Type Coins, Part 2, 1892 - Present

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by johnmilton, Nov 16, 2020.

  1. johnmilton

    johnmilton Well-Known Member

    1913 Quarter All.jpg

    Barber Quarter, 1892 – 1916

    There was interest in replacing the Liberty Seated designs as early as the 1870s, but no major push was made in that direction until 1887. Mint Director, James P. Kimball, devised a plan to have either John LaFarge (1835 – 1910, a noted painter and stained glass artist) or Augustus St.-Gaudens to prepare “a critique on the artistic execution of individual coins.” None of this came to fruition because the attorney general ruled that only Congress could authorize a change in the coin designs. The project was deferred until 1890.

    In September 1890, Congress had approved changes to the coinage designs, and mint engraver, Charles Barber, laid out his suggestions for guidelines that would be given the perspective artists:
    1. The designs must be models, not drawings.

    2. The models had to be four to eight inches in diameter.

    3. The models had to be in low relief. The relief did not have to be in coin low relief, but it was understood that they had to be suitable for the low relief of the finished coin.

    4. Barber strongly suggested that the designs had to include all of the statutory requirements including the coin’s denomination, date and all of the mottos and legends that were required by law.
    A group of ten artists, including Augustus St.-Gaudens were invited to submit designs. St.-Gaudens made it clear that he would not submit to a competition among artists, but he did volunteer to be involved in the design selection process.

    St.-Gaudens and several other artists signed a letter that stated there was insufficient time to complete the designs. Furthermore, if they were going to take the time to develop appropriate work, they should be compensated. The artists asked for three months to execute the work and a pay schedule that called for the following amounts: $100 for each sketch, $500 for each design accepted and $1,000 for each design that was actually used.

    Given these demands, the secretary of the treasury abruptly canceled the invitations to the artists and opened up the design competition to the general public. Seal engraver, Henry Mitchell (Who was from Boston.), St-Gaudens and Charles Barber were appointed to review the designs. The three judge panel rejected all of the designs submitted by the public. It has been reported that Barber and St.-Gaudens clashed repeatedly during the proceedings and generally did not listen to each other. This marked the beginning of the contentious relationship that would continue between the two until the time when Theodore Roosevelt asked St.-Gaudens to submit new designs for U.S. coinage in 1907.

    Ultimately Charles Barber got the assignment to develop the new designs. Numismatic researcher, Roger Burdette has described the Barber designs as “typically mediocre imitations of the current French-style – hardly better than the arcane Seated Liberty type they replaced.” Modern collectors are split on this opinion with some taking a more favorable view of the Barber coins while others consider them to be dull and uninspiring.

    The Barber Quarter features a bust of Ms. Liberty from the neck up, facing right, with a liberty cap on her head above a laurel wreath that was held by a bow. There were 13 stars surrounding the edge with “In God we trust” at the top and the date below. The reverse features the Heraldic Eagle design with 13 stars arranged about the eagle’s head and “United States of America” at the top and “Quarter Dollar” below.

    I would characterize Barber’s designs as institutionally serviceable. The coins are reasonably attractive, at least in high grade, and the U.S. Mint System was able to strike them fairly well, with some minor exceptions. Conversely the Barber designs have a lack of energy and imagination.

    Type collectors will have little trouble finding a suitable Barber Quarter for their sets. The coins are frequently available in all grades from less than Good to Gem Uncirculated and Proof. The complete date and mint set offers a much stiffer challenge with the 1901-S, 1913-S and 1896-S leading the way as the key

    Standing Liberty Quarter, 1916 – 1930

    By 1916 the Barber coinage had been in place for 25 years, and according to a law that was passed in 1890, the Treasury Department had the authority to change the design without the approval of Congress. By then the “Renaissance of American Coinage,” started by Augustus St. Gaudens and Theodore Roosevelt, was in full bloom. Government officials were ready to replace the tired Barber designs.

    The Treasury Department sponsored a contest among private artists for the new designs. Adolph Weinman won two of the competitions with his Mercury Dime and Walking Liberty Half Dollar. Herman MacNeil won the third with his Standing Liberty Quarter. The design featured a full figure of Ms. Liberty standing in a portal. She held a shield to the right and an olive branch in her hand on the left. “In God we trust” was inscribed on the portal with “Liberty” above and the date below. The reverse featured an eagle in full fight with the statutorily required “United States of America,” “E Pluribus Unum” and “Quarter Dollar” at the top, middle and bottom. There are 13 stars around the eagle.

    This design was “very busy” given the small space provided, but if MacNeil had stayed with his initial motif, many of the production problems that would plague the Standing Liberty Quarter might have been avoided. As it was MacNeil tinkered with his work, which doomed this potentially attractive design to a shorter than expected run.

    1917 Type I Quarter.jpg

    Type I, 1916 – 1917

    The mint introduced the Standing Liberty Quarter in December 1916 after issuing the Barber Quarter for first eleven months of the year. The new quarters caught coin dealers by surprise. Dealers usually set aside rolls of new coins that they sold over a period of years as their customers demanded them. The 1916 Standing Liberty Quarter, which had a mintage of only 52,000 pieces, slipped under the dealers’ attention, and they saved very few rolls. The coin became a low mintage, low survival issue making it a classic key date in the 20th century.

    In a scenario that would be repeated a couple more times, MacNeil found that 1916 quarter had some production issues. The design details did not strike up as well as he had hoped. After he made some adjustments, the 1917 Type 1 Quarters were the best struck issue for the design, at least for the Philadelphia Mint pieces. Unfortunately, that positive situation would not continue.

    There are enough differences in the design details to distinguish between the 1916 and 1917 Type 1 Quarters to differentiate the two when the date is no longer visible. Ms. Liberty’s head is closer to the rim and the shape of her gown and the bottom folds of her garment are further off the floor on the 1916 quarter than the 1917 dated piece. The differences are worth noting because even in the lowest grades a certified, dateless 1916 Standing Liberty Quarter is worth more than $1,000.

    A 1916 Standing Liberty Quarter, Photos courtesy of Heritage Auctions

    1916 Standing Lib.png


    1920 Quarter Full Head.png

    Type II, 1917 – 1924

    Much has been written about how the Type I Standing Liberty Quarter was an “obscene design” because Ms. Liberty’s bare bosom. For years numismatic writers have claimed the Herman MacNeil changed his design because of editorial complaints about the coin. A little over a decade ago, numismatic researcher, Roger Burdette, set the record straight.

    There was no flood of protests in the press over MacNeil’s initial design. Herman MacNeil modified his design in a desire to symbolize the upcoming entry of the U.S. into World War I. He covered Ms. Liberty in chainmail armor in preparation for the fight that was ahead. On the reverse, he moved the eagle up in the field and moved three stars to a position under the bird.

    These modifications were a disaster for the design. The vast majority of the pieces were poorly struck, not only on Ms. Liberty’s head, which is the focal point for coin collectors, but also on the rivets in her shield, parts of her gown and even the date. In addition, the date wore off the coin fairly quickly, and on a few occasions, date was barely readable from the day the coin was struck. Modifications were in order, but it would be eight years before the mint would make them.

    1929 Quarter.jpg

    Type III, 1925 – 1930

    In 1925, the mint made some much needed adjustments to the date area of the coin. The date was placed in a recessed area that made it less prone to wear. The change also eliminated the strike issues in the date area that had previously plagued the Standing Liberty design. Sill the design was far from perfect, and too many pieces continued to be struck with missing details. The Standing Liberty design would end after less than 15 years of production.

    1932 Quarter All.jpg

    Washington Quarter 1932 to Present

    The mint system introduced the Washington Quarter in 1932 in commemoration of the first president’s 200th birthday. For a brief period, mint officials considered issuing the Washington Quarter as circulating commemorative coin, but they soon decided to make the design change permanent.

    The selection of the design was controversial. As had become the standard practice, private artists were invited to submit designs. The only requirement was that the portrait of Washington had to be based upon Jean-Antoine Houdon’s famous bust of the general and first president. Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin sent Houdon to America to execute the bust in 1785. The artist executed the Washington bust from life while he was visiting Washington at Mt. Vernon. Houdon’s Washington bust is viewed as the definitive three dimensional image of the first president.

    Bust of Washington.jpg

    Bust of Washington by Jean-Antoine Houdon

    The apparent winner of the contest was Mrs. Laura Fraser, the wife of James Fraser who had designed the Buffalo Nickel. Mrs. Fraser was no stranger to producing designs for U.S. coins. Previously she had designed the Alabama and Grant commemorative coins, and she had combined her talents with her husband to produce the Oregon Trail Commemorative Half Dollar. Many critics rate the Oregon Trail as the best of all of the early U.S. commemorative coin designs.

    Mrs. Frazer’s design won the approval of the Fine Arts Commission, which had an important role in selecting the artwork that appears on U.S. coinage. Unfortunately for Mrs. Fraser, treasury secretary, Andrew Mellon, preferred the work of John Flannigan. The issue went back and forth, but ultimately Mellon got his way, and the Flannigan design appeared on the new quarters.

    Washington $5 Gold.jpg

    Mrs. Laura Frazer's design for the Washington Quarter finally made an appearance in 1999. It was used for the Washington commemorative $5 gold coin which noted the 200th anniversary of Washington's death.

    Since that outcome, many collectors have cried, “foul!” In the view of many observers, Laura Fraser’s portrait of Washington was far more forceful and impressive, and her clean and uncluttered eagle on the reverse won hands down over Flannigan’s crowded, muddled design. Finally in 1999, Mrs. Fraser received posthumous recognition for her work when it appeared on the Washington Commemorative Five Dollar Gold Piece. This coin memorized the 200th anniversary of Washington’s death.

    In the interim, from its introduction in 1932, mint die makers have made many minor adjustments to the Washington Quarter design to improve its appearance. The one that is easiest to note for most collectors was the strengthening of the lettering for the motto, “In God we trust,” on the obverse in 1934. Specialists, who are truly devoted to the series, have noted many more adjustments.

    Years ago, I met a collector who was also an engineer. After going through many rolls of clad quarters he found one piece that was a very rare interim adjustment to the Washington design that was represented by a very few coins according to him. He had reserved a special place in his safe deposit box for his find, which the vast majority of collectors would never notice. That’s what you call dedication!


    The Clad Quarter with an Eagle on the Reverse, 1965 – 1974, 1977 - 1998

    By the early 1960s, the nation’s stock pile of silver was beginning to be depleted, and the price of silver was rising. Despite disclaimers from government officials, some people were hoarding silver coins in anticipation that their melt value would eventually exceed their face value. The introduction of the Kennedy Half Dollar in 1964 accelerated the drain on the nation’s silver reserves with a record mintage of 429.5 million pieces. The nation was faced with a shortage of coins in circulation, and Congress had to act.

    The Coinage Act of 1965 removed all of the silver from the dime and quarter and replaced it with the clad coinage. The outer layers of the new quarter were made of 75% copper and 25% nickel bonded to a core of pure copper. The design of the Washington Quarter remained the same. The goal was to produce a coin that the vending machine industry could use without retooling. The last made for circulation silver coin was the half dollar. Its outer layers were made of 80% silver and 20% copper that was bonded to a core of 79.1% copper and 20.9% silver.

    Bicentenial Quarter.jpg

    The Bicentennial Quarter, 1975 and ‘76

    The Washington Quarter design remained the same until 1975 when it was modified in celebration of our nation’s Bicentennial. The reverse was replaced with a design by Jack Ahr, a private citizen and professional artist, who won the contest for the Bicentennial era coinage. It featured a Revolutionary War drummer boy with a torch to the left, surrounded by the statutorily required “United States of America,” “Quarter Dollar” and “E Pluribus Unum.” The only modification to the obverse was a double date, “1776 upload_2020-11-16_17-47-48.png 1976.” The coins were issued with the same double date during 1975 and 1976.

    The Bicentennial Quarter was issued with the copper-nickel clad alloy for general circulation. There were also 40% silver clad collector coins that were issued in the Proof and Uncirculated coin formats. All of these coins are inexpensive and readily available to collectors.

    In 1977 the Washington Quarter retuned to its original design. The mint continued to tinker with the original motif. At one point there was a significate increase in the amount of hair detail in Washington’s wig. Some collectors derisively called termed this “improvement” as “spaghetti hair.”
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. johnmilton

    johnmilton Well-Known Member

    1999 Del Quarter.jpg


    The 1999 Delaware State Quarter was the first of the State Quarter series. Five coin were issued per year for ten years.

    The State Quarter and America the Beautiful Programs, 1999 to Present

    In 1999 the mint introduced the State Quarter Program. The State Quarters were issued, five per year, over a ten year period in the order that each state had joined the Union. Delaware, the first state, began the program. Hawaii, the 50th state ended it. Collectors, rookie and veteran, anticipated each new coin, and the program encouraged a great many people to get involved in coin collecting.

    In 2009, the program was extended to include the District of Columbia and the five U.S. territories. The territories were Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Northern Mariana Islands. These new designs failed to generate as much collector interest as there had been for the State Quarter Program.

    Two thousand ten marked the beginning of the America the Beautiful Quarter Program, which is scheduled to run until 2021. The purpose of this program is to honor sites which have “natural or historic significance.” Like the territories, the American the Beautiful Program has been greeted with much less enthusiasm than the State Quarter Program.



    As the public’s buying habits change and inflation eats away its value, collectors might wonder about what the future holds for coins in general and the quarter in particular. Coins have been a part of the economy since ancient times, but one has to wonder if someday our money might be no more than an electronic marker in the financial system instead of a physical presence in our wallets, purses and pockets.
     
  4. green18

    green18 Unknown member Sweet on Commemorative Coins Supporter

    Very tight and intregret article,John..most informative for young and old (collectors) alike. I enjoyed the read...
     
    johnmilton likes this.
  5. happy_collector

    happy_collector Well-Known Member

    Another enjoyable read. Thanks!
     
    johnmilton likes this.
  6. JeffC

    JeffC Go explore something and think a happy thought!

    @johnmilton Thanks for this. I enjoyed reading it and have some questions (no rush - reply when you have time).

    1. Today, is the Treasury Secretary still the one who ultimately approves a design?

    2. Referring to:
    But what then was the initial motif? (Unless I'm mistaken and you were referring to Type I as the original, in comparison with Type II?)

    3. I checked throuh my Red Book but might have missed it. Would it be correct to say that the reverse design of Charles Barber is the only one that encroaches upon, and partially obscures, the Country name (i.e. the "E" in UNITED and the "E" in AMERICA)? I can't find another U.S. coin that did this.

    4. Is Roger Burdette's research regarding the real reason for the SLQ design change from Type I to Type II generally accepted now?
     
  7. johnmilton

    johnmilton Well-Known Member

    1. Back in Andrew Mellon's time, he the power to override everyone. Today it's more of a committee with the Fine Arts people having a lot of say. Back in the 1940s, Nellie Tayloe Ross overrulled everyone and allowed Mint Engraver John Sinnock to design the Roosevelt Dime and Franklin Half Dollar.

    2. The first proposal was this:

    1916 Dolphin Pattern O.jpg 1916 Pattern Quarter R.jpg

    The 1917 Type 1 quarter was a modified version of the 1916 quarter. The 1916 quarter design did not strike up that well. MacNeil modified it, and the design was well struck, at least at the Philadelphia Mint. I can't recall seeing a poorly struck 1917 Type 1 Philadelphia Mint quarter.

    Then MacNeil modified the design during the "Let's get into World War I" frenzy. The result was a design that did not work well at all. Some coins barely had a date because the strike issue.

    3. I can't answer that question without a lot more research.

    4. Yes, according to Roger Burdette, he was unable to find any articles or editorials which called the Type I "obscene." The change was due to the nation going on a wartime footing.
     
  8. halfcent1793

    halfcent1793 Well-Known Member

    Well put.
     
    johnmilton likes this.
  9. BJBII

    BJBII Metrologist, CSSBB

    These two posts (Parts I & 2) combine for a very informative and interesting tutorial.
    Many thanks, JohnMilton
     
  10. Mr.Q

    Mr.Q Well-Known Member

    I should have waited on my reply. In any event it was worth the wait. Both posts are excellent educational tools for all CT'ers. Thanks bunches.
     
  11. JeffC

    JeffC Go explore something and think a happy thought!

    Thanks again for all this.
     
  12. ksparrow

    ksparrow Coin Hoarder Supporter

    great thread with a lot of information. thanks, J.M.
     
  13. Mountain Man

    Mountain Man Supporter! Supporter

    More likely he just didn't want a female to design the coin. Just saying, it was the times.
    Thanks, as always John.
     
  14. johnmilton

    johnmilton Well-Known Member

    She got to design some of the commemorative coins, like the Alabama, Grant and Fort Vancouver.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page