Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="Jwt708, post: 1930907, member: 32619"]Ok, these two deserve a repost. Unless I'm being overly strict with Cunningham, neither one of these are listed. While similar to WA340a & WA340b, both of these tokens are identified as reading FORT LEWIS N.C.O. OPEN MESS / NOT / GOOD FOR / CASH on the obverse. Both of these tokens read FT. LEWIS N.C.O. OPEN MESS / NOT / GOOD FOR / CASH. The difference being FORT vs. FT. Was this a mistake? Why on this token would he spell out FORT when it's abbreviated? On the over 100 tokens I've been cataloging this weekend, this would be the first time where he differed from the token. Second issue with these two - the font type used on the obverse. On the $0.05 the letters are without serifs and there is a diamond ornament at the 6 o'clock position. The $0.25 letters have serifs and are larger. These tokens are very close in size (don't have my calipers with me...what was I thinking!) and they have the same reverse font and size. So do we have two unlisted tokens, a variety of an unlisted token, or two unlited varieties of a listed token? What do you think tokenists? Hopefully Bruce and longnine009 chime in here. If you have Cunninham Volume I, please see page 316 and 317. Edit: Dang, I was hoping the pictures would show up.[/QUOTE]