Featured The 1792 half Disme – The First U.S. Coin

I just received my first capped bust H10 , a 33 also but not that nice .

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Thanks for the history of H10 coins , very interesting read .

 

This is true, but the problem is that at the time the 1792 half disme were strucj the key personnel had NOT posted their bonds yet so production of precious metal coins at the time was not legal. The Mint could not legally issue silver coins. At best I would consider these to be personal "tokens" made for Jefferson not true US coinage.

 

I thought that it was legal because the cabinet level official who was responsible for the mint was supervising the operation.

 

For those who enjoyed this article, I would highly recommend this book. 1792: Birth of a Nation's Coinage, by Pete Smith, Joel J. Orosz and Leonard Augsburger.
The Authors cover all the information that you read here and a lot more here. It was several years in the making because they asked me to provide photos of my coin early on their research process.

 

John
Thanks again for sharing this knowlege in this thread.
This should be on the home page for all to see.
@Peter T Davis

 

I’ll throw my 1829 into the mix, it’s a PCGS40

 

Thanks for the link. After about 15 minutes of study, I'm convinced the reverse is P. I think the Obverse is 2 which makes it an LM-5.

Why I don't think it's obverse 1:

• My coin's S8 is closer to the cap, not the rim
• My coin's 8 and 3 are not widely spaced

Why I don't think it's obverse 3:

• My coin's 8 and 3 are not close
• the 1 on my coin does not point in the correct direction

I can't believe it's an LM-5 because of it's rarity. The one thing that leads me to believe it's a Obverse 2 is the placement of S8 and the distance between the 8 and 3 in the date.

What do you think?

 

I think you need to work at this a tad bit longer..... @Nathan401
I believe we got another one on the line.....lol

 

I see what you're saying about the reverse. My "S" is filled, saw it on the P reverse and didn't check the ribbon and "T" alignment. The filled S on my coin definitely doesn't have the same ribbon as the "P" reverse.

After further review, it appears to be a T reverse, which makes it an LM-3. What would account for the filled "S" on my coin?

There was no way I thought I had "lucked" into the LM-5.

 

How about a 3 obv /rev. P LM 10

 

The reason I ruled on 3 obv.

• The 1 definitely does not point in the same direction
• The distance between the top and bottom of the 8 and 3 are equal in my coin. The top of the 8 and 3 in obv. 3 are much closer

The reason I ruled out P (after your first post)

• the end of the ribbon is definitely not centered under the "T". It's flush with the start of the "E" in United

Now all that being said (typed), I would lean towards your attribution than mine. I'll have to put it under my dino lite this weekend and take a closer look.

 

Having the coin in hand makes doing this a heck of a lot easier.
I have done them from an image but I have been wrong as well.
There is 1 of the remarriage that it depends on the olive stems being present or not.....I tell you this from a photo almost impossible to make the call...
As they can be present but barely seen which makes the attribution either correct or not.

 

John my apologies as it truly not my intent to hijack your wonderful thread.....just anything to do with half dimes is a personal passion.....extremly hard for me not to go into details as like your post they do offer so much to the collector and history of this country.

 

The law says the bonds have to be posted before they could handle precious metal, there is nothing in the law that says unless there is a cabinet level official there to oversee. And besides Jefferson, who would have been the cabinet level official didn't stick around to oversee their production. He dropped off the silver and then picked the coins two days later. So there wasn't a cabinet level official there.

 

@johnmilton , Thank you for the interesting and clear article! I will read it again with pleasure. Great story behind these coins.

 

Lean times.

 

another awesome post john, but I wanted to give some feedback as I also believe that the accurate information is out there, but not largely consolidated.

The 1792 Half Disme was supposed to be the first circulation coin, but they were struck before the US Mint opened for business in earnest, thus the argument about their pattern status.

Also, these were struck in 1792, and the Mint's Chief Coiner, Henry Voight, and his assistant had not yet posted their bond. It took an act of Congress to lower their bond, and then a loan from President Washington to post it before silver and gold coin deposits and production could begin in 1794. This is the reason that the only coins struck by the US Mint in 1793 are Cents and Half Cents. They were the only coins that Voight was legally allowed to strike.

Great article!

 

Thanks to all but especially Johnmilton and Paddy54 for this interesting discussion and the opportunity to view some beautiful coins.

 

Paddy will bow to John on this one!
He certainly has put together a set of early half dimes that are superb.
I believe no matter what you collect these little gems will spark your interest.
They can be down right addictive ..... and here's some bait one could put together a date set 1829-1837 in vf 20. Around a $1000.!
Now 1837 -1873 set will take you a tad bite longer!

Hat's off to John for a job well done!