NOTES:
All think and thin planchet varieties are included together in the same population figures
HK1 C: American Numismatic Society New York. There is a picture of it within their online database. This is the only one of these I have ever seen or found.
HK2: Joe Levine from his 58th PCAC sale lot#186 states: "This is a great rarity as well as being one of the most important historical pieces in the So-Called Dollar series. Insofar as we know, the identity of the "C.R." engraver is unknown and we can come up with no likely candidate. This is the only known medallic artifact of our semi-centennial celebration in 1826. It is considerably rarer than the Silver Erie Canal medal which consistently brings in the $1,500-$2,000 range, and, in our opinion, is more historically signifigant."
HK5: Joe Levine from his 59th PCAC sale lot#194 states: "The 1858 New York Crystal Palace Exhibition was the first World's Fair held in this country. White metal examples show up with some frequency, but the copper specimens are quite rare."
HK7: Joe Levine from his 40th(Part 1) PCAC sale lot#160 states: "Such pieces were probably given to members of the exposition police as momentos of their service. An exceptionally rare relic of the first international exposition held in the United States.", Also, there is a variety of this piece without "Crystal Palace Police" but with the inscription "New York Crystal Palace For The Exhibition Of The Industry Of All Nations". This latter unlisted piece, although still rare, is more common than the "Crystal Palace Police" piece as listed in HK.
HK11a: Joe Levine from his 70th PCAC sale lot#456 states: "This token, with it's reverse of an eagle within a circle of stars, is considerably scarcer than it's HK 11 brother. Both the obverse and the reverse of this piece were used on a George McClellen political by George Lovett(See GMcC 18654-8 and 1864-8(D). The present piece is cataloged by DeWitt/Sullivan as GMcC 1864-8(F)"
HK12 S: The six sales of HK12 in silver that I recorded in my tally were as follows: 1)PCAC sale 31 lot 1163 described as AU (no photo). 2)PCAC sale 48 lot 198 described as "choice Unc with attractive iridescent toning", and "this must be amongst the nicest"(with photo). 3)PCA sale 68 lot 103 (with photo) described as "choice proof with iridescent toning from Stack's Coin Galleries sale of July 1993 #141 where it brought $1810.00". This piece could also be the same as the piece that sold in PCAC sale 48, lot 198, but comparing the photos, they are probably different. 4)PCAC sale 69 lot 120 described as "XF/AU with some scattered field marks"(with photo). 5)Rich Hartzog 12/1/80 lot 889 described as "nicely toned steel color with some minor hairlines"(photo of reverse only). 6)Johnson and Jensen sale 15/16 lot 366 described as "toned EF"(with photo). This piece was probably better than EF due to the fact that Johnson and Jensen grading was often very conservative. Other sales that I found but did not tally are as follows: 7)Tony Swicer's sale in 1992, simply described as "Unc"(no photo). 8)PCAC 70 lot 459, this is the same piece that sold in PCAC sale 68 lot 103 - "choice proof with iridescent toning"(with photo). 9) A piece I bought off ebay a few years ago that I would possibly describe the same way as the piece that was sold in PCAC sale 69 lot 120 was described - "XF/AU with sacattered field marks". However, my piece is definitely different. So, all in all I found nine sales, two of which are the same. Some of the other eight sales could be the same piece, but it appears that most, if not all, are different pieces. There were evidently 124 of these silver pieces minted, but I doubt that many exist today.
HK12 gilt: There were two of these that I found in gilt. The first was PCAC sale 68 lot 105. It was described as AU on a thick 5.2 mm planchet with obverse edge dent at 4:00 and a reverse edge nick at 11:00, with other small digs and nicks on the reverse. This same piece also sold in PCAC sale 70 lot 461. The second piece sold in Stacks 5/6/92 sale lot 239. It was described as Choice AU, lightly hairlined, with a small spot of verdigris on "D" in "Presidency"; and the edge was scratched. It was also struck on a 5.2 mm planchet. Copper pieces are struck on 3.9 mm planchets.
HK19: Joe Levine from his 54th PCAC sale lot#170 states: "Accompanying this piece is a folded, foxed and somewhat ragged period copy of an attestation signed by A. Loudon Snowden, Coiner of the Mint. "I certify that the Nevada Exposition Medals, prepared in this department, and this day delivered to Mr. G.G. Stevenson, Chairman of the Nevada States Board, are made of pure silver crushed from Nevada ores, at the Nevada Quartz Mill located in the Centennial Exhibition Grounds, and subsequently refined at the United States Mint"
HK20: There are evidently two different die varieties of this medal. Joe Levine from his 64th PCAC sale lots#1384/1385 states: "Struck from the relatively scarce obverse die #1 which has over 40 thin rays emanating from the glory of stars at the top and also has the 1 in1876 partially over the T in THESE".........Lot #1385: "Struck from the much more common obverse die #2 which has 27 relatively thick rays and with the 1 in the date to the right of the T in THESE"
HK20 WM: Three of the four recorded sales were exactly the same piece that was sold 3 different times by Presidential Coin and Antique. With regard to this piece, Joe Levine from his 40th(Part 1) PCAC sale lot#166 states: "is pedigreed to the personal collection of Charles Barber from whose family we purchased it. One of only three known examples in white metal. Undoubtedly a trial striking"
HK25: Includes both die varieties
HK27 and HK29: Varieties exsist with and without star between "Therof" and "Proclaim". Only varieties WITH star are included in population numbers. The variety without star appears to be considerably rarer.
HK34: Joe Levine from his 58th PCAC sale lot#192 states: "HK's use of "extremely rare", while much overdone, is entirely accurate in this instance. This is the only example of this piece we have ever handled."
HK43: Some auction catalogs state that Hibler/Kappen's book is incorrect in it's description of HK42-HK45. In fact, at least as far as HK43 goes(Copper/Bronze), Hibler/Kappen's description is correct. Joe Levine of PCAC actually sold an HK43 in his sale #25 lot #1314 exactly as described in Hibler/Kappen(It appears that he forgot he sold it). Paul Van Sant also sold an HK43 in his August 1997 fixed price list. A third was probably(the description was not elaborated on to be absolutely sure) sold by Charles Kirtley #160 lot#MO55. The confusion comes at least partly from the fact that Rulau/Fuld's book "Medallic Portraits of Washington" is incorrect in it's description of Baker 394 as being Hibler and Kappen's #42-45. Baker 394 is actually a muling of the reverse of HK42 with the reverse of HK48. Also note that all three of these HK43s were looped(possibly clamped on loops). Also, possibly two out of three, or even all three could in fact be the exact same piece.
HK69: There are two die varieties. The more common one is where the T of TO is directly below P of Park. On the more scarce one the T is between the P and A of Park. Both varieties are listed here together.
HK74 to HK79: I think I almost popped my brain cork trying to reconcile the confusion in the literature(sales catalogs, HK, Baker ) with regard to HK74 through HK79(Baker 388 through Baker390D). To keep things simple, I decided to combine the population numbers of HK78 and HK79 with the population numbers of HK75 - HK77. The confusion lies partly in the fact that there are evidently three different die varieties showing the rectangular painting of Congress by Trumbull. There is one variety that has "Demarest. SC." below in tiny lettering. This is the variety that is NOT pictured in either HK or Baker. It is however listed in Baker without a picture as Baker 388(look at Presidential Coin & Antique Auction #74 lot#223 for a picture) The other two varieties have the "Demarest. SC." omitted. One of these is pictured as the obverse of HK74. The other is pictured in Baker as the reverse of Baker 389. There are many minor differences, but perhaps one of the more obvious is a man standing in the distance just to the right of the right window of HK74. This man is missing in the picture of Baker 389. Click Here for NEW IMAGES of all three varieties. To complicate things a bit more here(why not) I also combined HK77 with HK76 being that the difference between white metal and pewter are probably negligible.
HK85 and HK86: Joe Levine from his 74th PCAC sale lot#228 states: "HK catalogs this piece(and HK 85, its black gutta percha brother) as just a composition variation of HK 83 & 84. It is not! HK 83-4 is 41mm while HK 85-6 is only 38mm. In addition, 85-6 is struck from both different obverse and reverse dies. The inscriptions are the same as 83-4, but the letter positioning is different."
HK114: Joe Levine from his 39th PCAC sale lot#618 states: "HK erroneously attributes this to the 1876 Centennial period. It is a good bit earlier"
HK120: Joe Levine from his 58th PCAC sale lot#196 states: "In addition to the strikings in Bronze and White Metal as cataloged in HK, this piece was also struck in Silver, Brass, Gilt and Gold. 7 pieces were struck in gold for presentation to the First Lady, Mrs. Hayes, and others, and the dies were destroyed. A note in 13AJN 23 states that the dies were cut by Mr. Morgan".
HK125: Joe Levine from his 58th PCAC sale lot#197 states: "Accompanying this piece is an extract entitled, A Centennial Souvenir from the New London Telegram describing this medal and stating that the strikings were made in White Metal, Bronze and Silver from a design approved by the Groton Heights Centennial Committee"
HK136: Of the eight sales recorded here, it appears as if only two of the sales were exactly the same piece. All others are probably different. The seven different pieces were as follows: 1)Johnson & Jensen 9/16/79 lot 591. Part of a boxed set of three medals including one in silver. Described as obverse having slight nicks and reverse perfect. Was not graded specifically, but all three pieces were graded overall VF-AU. No photo 2)PCAC 6/25/88 lot 76. Described as choice about uncirculated with uneven blue & rose toning. No photo 3)PCAC 12/2/89 lot 280. Described as choice uncirculated with attractive pale gold and turquoise toning, and the choicest of the two specimens owned by Paul Magriel. No photo. This piece sold once again at the 12/8/90 PCAC sale lot 251, with photo. 4)PCAC 6/25/94 lot 146. Described as Choice uncirculated with attractively toned and proof surfaces. It was originally bought from Tony Swicer who noted that it was Ex-Dreyfuss, #5449. With photo. 5)Dick Grinolds 6/9/98 lot 1086. Described as xf+++-au with a small rim bump at 9:00 obverse. With photo. 6)PCAC 11/13/99 lot 339. Described as Choice deeply toned about uncirculated. With photo. This same piece also sold in PCAC 12/1/01 lot 471. This latter sale was after year 2000 so was not added into population numbers. 7)Bob Slawsky 12/1/99 lot 927. Described as Proof with light orange toning. With photo that appears to show some hairlines on the obverse field.
HK163: HK163 has always appeared to me to be the same as HK161. I have never found any piece in any auction/sales catalog that was described or listed as HK163, so in fact maybe they are the same.
HK170: Exists with "Height" spelled correctly and with "Height" misspelled "Heigth". Population numbers for both varieties are combined.
HK176 HK178, HK180, HK182, HK184, HK186, HK188, HK190, HK192BR, HK194, HK196, HK198, HK201, HK203 BR/gtBR: All of these "brass" pieces could in fact be gilt.
HK213: Comes in two varieties; one with copyright wording and one without.
HK222: This is a somewhat unique so called dollar in that it is an older white metal piece that is quite often found in nice condition. It is possible that many of these were hoarded away for many decades following the fair, never seeing the light of day until more recently (how recently I do not know). There is also a less common variety in low relief. Both pieces are quite attractive.
HK241: Two different die varieties both included in same population figures.
HK283: Six of the total here were described as gilt. In fact, all brass pieces could be gilt.
HK289: Like HK281, most if not all may in fact be gilt.
HK305 and HK306: Statements in HK seem to coincide pretty well with numbers that I found. HK states that less than 25,000 of the round ones were sold to the public, but that a full 25,000 of the octagonal ones were later sold to dealers. Obviously the number of round ones sold was considerably less than 25,000 if in fact there were a full 25,000 of the octagonal ones sold. Also, the octagonal ones are usually found in nicer condition. This also makes sense if in fact the round ones were sold to the public, while the octagonal ones were sold to dealers sometime later. Of the 116 octagonal pieces that I located, only 13 were graded below AU. Of the 40 round ones that I found, 25 were graded below AU.
HK328: It may be that many of the pieces in these population numbers are in fact silver plate.
HK334: The Washington State reverse is found muled with two different obverse die varieties. One variety has "Lewis and Clark". The other variety has "Lewis & Clark". The population numbers are a combined total of both varieties.
HK335 to HK338: US Mint figures state that there were a total of 250 silver proof pieces minted, and the same number of gold plated pieces minted; but there is no question that today the gold plated pieces are considerably rarer. The mintage of the silver proof pieces was probably higher than the stated Mint figures, but not anywhere near as high as the oxidized silver(HK336 - 4200 mintage) and bronze(HK338 - 6250 mintage) pieces.
HK344: It may be that some pieces thought to be silver may in fact be silver plated.
HK349: Different die varieties exist. Population numbers include all varieties.
HK351: Exists with and without dots before and after "To Pacific Coast". Population numbers include both varieties. A note about the no dot variety is included in the description of HK352a in HK.
HK353: There is some question as to whether these are silver or silver plate. Personally I believe they(or at least most) are solid silver. The worn ones that I have seen did not show any base metal through the plating. There were a few pieces in catalogs that I went through that were described as being silver plated. Their population numbers are combined with HK353.
HK357: All pieces that I have come across have either been fobbed or with fob removed.
HK359 S: NGC evidently recently encapsulated a silver one of these with the reverse of an HK359, not the reverse of HK358.
HK360: Different die varieties evidently exist. All are combined into the same population numbers.
HK361: Joe Levine from his 56th PCAC sale lot#151 states: "We note in the HK description and in the photo of HK 361, that on the lower right edge of the reverse there appears the numerals "900". This marking usually denotes the purity of the precious metal content of the item. Query: Did HK mistakenly identify the metal of their piece as Bronze, or did even bronze examples have this "900" on the die that struck them? We suspect, without really knowing that all pieces are in Silver. The only other known example of HK 361 we have ever seen, (Middendorf Sale, #253) was also in silver (not gilded). That piece brought an impressive $577.50, attesting to its true rarity."
HK369: Comes with and without "Med. Art Co" on the edge. Both varieties are included in the same population numbers. I have always felt that the stated mintage numbers of this piece as stated in both HK and Delorey were low. HK states "less than 75", Delorey states "between 50 and 100". Although certainly not common, the numbers that I found suggest a higher mintage. The fact that some come with and some come without "Med. Art Co" on the edge suggest different strikings. I have never been able to inspect a number of these pieces together to determine any differences.
HK369 BZ: Delorey lists this piece as being unique, but Joe Levine from his June 25, 1988 PCAC sale, lot 199 states "we have handled only one other". PCAC also sold one in their sale #70 lot#482. Tony Swicer sold one in his 1992 sale (I did not tally this piece into my study). There was evidently a fourth sale that I located and tallied, but I did not record where I saw it. Tony Swicer's piece was listed as Unc while Joe Levine's two sales were described as being AU. Thus, although it is possible that some of these pieces were the same piece, it is unlikely that all four pieces were the same. Both of the PCAC sales were without the Medallic Art Company edgemark. Tony Swicer's sale makes no mention of an edgemark either way.
HK370: HK states that fewer than 200 of these were struck, but Delorey states: " a total of 205 pieces appeared in seven lots in Elder's 12-13-29 sale". Delorey also mentions that Thomas Elder seemed to never throw anything away, which might explain the existence of these dies years later. Obviously there are more than 200 in existence.
HK379: Joe Levine from Part 1 of his 38th PCAC sale lot#132 writes: "HK comments that "research fails to establish origin of these issues." That mystery is now solved, for this silver medal is suspended from a blue, white and orange ribbon which is attached to a silver top bar inscribed COMMISSION. The medal is housed in a leather box lettered, THE HUDSON-FULTON CELEBRATION COMMISSION. Struck by the Medallic Art Company..."
HK390 WM: May not exist - read Delorey#78
HK398: These pieces evidently have a mintage of 50,000, virtually all of which are serially numbered; but finding any that are numbered above 25,000 or so is extremely difficult if not impossible. Although this piece is somewhat common, the total that I located do not suggest an availability number as high as 50,000. HK states that "Disposition of issue, following passage through canal, is not known.....". I have never heard or read anything about where the rest of the mintage could be if in fact they exist at all. This piece occasionally comes without any serial number. Also of interest were two pieces that I located that were marked "Specimen" where the serial number is usually located (Stephen Alpert sale 57 lot 1670, and Charles Kirtley sale 21 lot 1227). Occasionally these pieces can be found with a box. PCAC sale 50 had three such pieces (lots 898, 900, and 901). One box was described as "original uninscribed cardboard box of issue". The other two boxes were no doubt the same. Lastly, these pieces go for a premium when found with a low serial number.
HK423: The single HK423 listed in gold is from a Kurt Krueger sale, July 8 1985 lot #4025. It was described as follows: "1915 California Souvenir State Dollar. Like HK-423, except 14K gold. Unlisted rarity. AU-50. Ex H.O. Granberg! (PLATE)". The PLATE photo is small but there is no question that it is an octagonal slug. Both of the silver plated pieces that I found are from 2 Presidential sales: PCAC #59 lot#1206 was described as "HK 423 But Silver Plated. PPIE Octagonal Dollar. XF". The other was PCAC #46 lot#821 described as "HK-423 but silver plated. Type II Octagonal Dollar. XF, very weakly struck on the obverse as usual. Within this same description Joe Levine also poses the following question, "(Querry: Do any genuine silver pieces exist or are they all silver plated?)". I also recorded one piece that was described as solid silver, but I did not record where I found it.
HK449/HK450: The numbers of these that I found seem to match known mintage figures reasonably well. Many of these were thrown into the ocean and recovered later. The copper ones are especially hard to locate without salt water damage. Of the 55 copper ones that I located, only eight were described as being strictly AU or better, with more than half being described as VF or worse due to salt water damage. Of the 47 silver pieces that I located, 26 were described as AU or better; 13 described as being VF or worse. Five of these were minted in gold (HK1031), and only very rarely come on the market. This piece can also be found in gilt. There were two of these gilt pieces sold on ebay a number of years ago, and I bought one of them. The piece that I own has surfaces that have a bit of a matte look to them. There is a bagmark on the forehead, and under a glass it looks as if the matte-like gilt surface extends down into the bagmark; so obviously the piece was plated after it was struck. It has no saltwater damage. At this time I do not know what the underlying metal is. I have no idea as to the origins of these gilt pieces. Obviously they may have been gilded in order to imitate the gold pieces, but I doubt that they were ever made to deceive anyone, as they are not very convincing.
HK460 gt: No Medallic Art Co on Edge.
HK469: There are smaller pieces(both 31.9mm in diameter) that can sometimes be confused with HK469 and HK474(both 32.7mm in diameter). Click here for images Also, HK states that the reverse of HK469 is "SIMILAR to the reverse of No. 474". To eliminate any doubt here, the reverse of HK469 is EXACTLY the same as the reverse of HK474.
HK474: There are smaller pieces(both 31.9mm in diameter) that can sometimes be confused with HK469 and HK474(both 32.7mm in diameter). Click here for images Also, to eliminate any doubt, the reverse of HK474 is EXACTLY the same as the reverse of HK469.
HK487 to HK490: I wasn't going to get much into varieties, but being that I went back and took a second look at Charbneau dollars, here is what I found. I found 4 examples of 1939 pieces in silver("sterling" around bottom) with a "40" stamped into the upper left field of the tower side. I am guessing the "40" was stamped on some of the 1939 pieces to "transform" them into 1940 pieces. Being that these four pieces are varieties not listed in HK, none of them are included in my population numbers. However, I also found one silver ("sterling" around bottom) piece graded AU that was actually dated 1940(there was also a picture of it). Another thing that I found was that a lot more "sterling" silver pieces came up for sale than gold ones, and yet I read a number of times where the gold ones were suppose to be more common, so at this point I am not sure what to believe. Another thing that I found was that among the gold pieces there were some that were described as 10K gold. The gold pieces as described in HK have a "1" and a "D" in the field split to the left and right. The 10K pieces evidently have a "1" in the same location, but in place of the "D" have a small five pointed star. These 10K pieces(there were two of them that I found, one dated 1939, the other dated 1940) are also not included in the population numbers. As far as the copper pieces go, I did not run across any that were strictly copper. There were two pieces that were gold plated(one dealer thought his might be solid gold but he wasn't sure). These pieces had no markings that are normally found on the silver or gold pieces("sterling" for the silver; "1D" for the gold etc.). I personally own a silver plated piece, also with none of these markings. I can see the copper or bronze showing through on the high points. Low and behold there was another of these silver plated pieces with none of the usual makings sold recently by Presidential(Auction #75 lot#149).
HK509: My population number of 177 is high for a mintage of 5,000 (as stated in HK). The population number includes two full unc rolls(100 pieces) sold in two PCAC sales(PCA #69 lot 1187 and PCA #60 lot 981). Subtracting these pieces would bring the number down to 77, which, relatively speaking is probably a more reasonable figure for a mintage of 5,000. There must have been quite a few of these pieces recently released, as just under four unc rolls(198 pieces total) were sold on ebay about 3 or 4 years ago all at the same time.
HK528 to HK537: The stated mintage figures of these pieces coincide strikingly well with the numbers that I located. My feeling is that the mintage figures are quite accurate. It makes me wonder about the validity of stated mintage figures for many so called dollars where mintage numbers do not coincide with numbers found:
HK575 and HK576: I found 12 of these in silver which I guess is about right (maybe a bit low) for a mintage of 300. I have also seen these silver pieces on ebay occasionally. HK states that two thirds of the bronze pieces were made with loops, but of the 44 that I found, only 7 were described as having loops or loops removed. I have no explanation for this discrepancy.
HK577: HK states a mintage of 65,000, all of which were evidently sold. The eleven of these that I found would suggest a mintage of considerably less. HK suggests that these pieces were scarce at the time that HK was published, probably due to them being sold and then stored away by boy scouts soon before the publication of HK. The truth is, right from the beginning there may have been a lot less than 65,000. It has been nearly fifty years since these pieces were released, so they should be more available. They show up on ebay occasionally though, so maybe my number of eleven is a bit low, for whatever reason.
HK579 to HK581: The numbers of HK579, HK580, and HK581 that I found going through old catalogs do not jive with the mintage figures as stated in HK. I have definitely seen more of these show up on ebay, but still not at anywhere near the frequency that the stated mintage in HK of 125,000 for HK581 would suggest. At the present time I have no explanations for these discrepancies. The numbers that I found for both HK579 and HK580 also seem low for their stated mintages.
HK588 and HK589: The mintage figures of 3,000 for HK588, and 15,000 for HK589 have never matched the numbers that I have found. In fact I have found the opposite to be true - that HK589 is rarer than HK588. It may be a statistical anomaly or whatever. At this point I am not sure. It is a discrepancy that I noted when I first began keeping track of population numbers, and in later studies I found things to be similar. Being that HK 588 is more valuable than HK589, one would think that maybe sellers would shun HK589 in favor of HK588, but I do not think that this was the case. In the year 2,000 when this study ended, HK589 would sell for maybe 6 or 7 dollars, while HK588 would sell for maybe around 12 to 15 dollars - hardly a big difference; and look at the sales of HK583, a much more common and even less valuable piece. Sellers sold quite a few of these. Anyway, at this point I have no good explanation.
HK589a and HK589b: Many older white metal so called dollars are hard to find in nice condition, some probably not to be found that way at all. It was the white metal pieces that often were the ones distributed at an event, many given holes for ribbons and/or hanging pinbars. They were often not distributed with the idea that they would be kept as nicer collectibles. It was often the bronze and/or silver pieces that were made in more limited quantities to be sold to collectors. HK589a/HK589b is a classic example of this, with the white metal pieces being more common, sometimes with holes, and usually not found in nice condition. This is in contrast to the silver and bronze pieces being less common and found nicer.
HK590: Joe Levine writes in Part II of his 40th PCAC sale lot#1125: "HK dated this medal to 1876 because of the appearance of that date on the obv. If this is true, then this is one of the earliest known commercial aluminum medals. However, it is possible the 1876 date refers to the date of the founding of Bridgeport Board of Trade rather than the year that the medal was issued. In any event, the piece is extremely rare - the first we have seen."
HK595 S: Joe Levine from his 70th PCAC sale lot#507 states: "HK lists the Georgia Settlement medal only in White metal. Copper specimens, however, are also known. Silver examples are extremely rare - this is the only one we have seen and have no records of any other."
HK608 SplBZ: Included above with HK608
HK649: Two die varieties. Listed together in population numbers.
HK658 and HK659: HK states that the silver piece was limited to 60 pieces, the bronze to 1,000. I found three silver pieces - a bit low for a mintage of 60, but possible. I only found four bronze pieces, virtually the same number as the silver piece. Obviously the bronze piece is much more difficult to locate than mintages would indicate. I still do not own either silver or bronze. Of the seven that I found in all medals, only one was described as uncirculated, with most described as EF.
HK680 to HK687: Pieces are numbered from #1 to #14 following "L.A.R.S. Co."
HK712: With a stated mintage of 2,000 you would think this piece would not be terribly difficult to find. But my tally of only 2 says otherwise. I bought one of these on ebay 5 years ago for a mere $6.00. Offhand I cannot remember seeing another.
HK725: There are two varieties, one with a signature, and one without. Both varieties are combined into the same population numbers.
HK735 and HK736: This piece in both medals is listed as extremely rare in HK. In fact, this piece is not rare at all in either metal. Why HK described it as such I have no idea. One idea might be that most were released after HK was published; but it was available even in the Christian and Stone catalogs that I looked through from the 1960s. Also, it is found in all conditions, not typical of a late release where the vast majority would be found in Unc or near Unc condition. Unlike the brass and bronze pieces, this piece is quite rare in silver. The gilt pieces that I found may very well have been brass.
HK779: HK states that "Restrikes made from these dies can be distinguished in same manner as can those made from dies of No. 777." This statement sometimes leads to confusion. It is true that the restrikes of both HK777 and HK779 have matte surfaces, where as the originals have smooth surfaces; but only the restrikes of HK777 can be distinguished from the originals by the length of "Tiffany & Co." on the edge. HK779 has no incuse lettering of any kind stamped on the edge.
HK782: Joe Levine from his 62nd PCAC sale lot#100 states: "The additional legend on the reverse of this piece makes more explicit the results of free coinage on silver on the size of the standard government dollar. HK 782 is the rarest of the Gorham cartwheel dollars with the exception of the extremely rare George H. Ford & Co. piece. It is generally believed to be the most attractive of the group."(the Gorham cartwheel dollars are HK780, HK781, HK782 and HK1012)
HK783: Joe Levine from his 75th PCAC sale lot#155 states: "This piece makes the same point as the larger Gorham pieces, but does so in a different way. With the larger pieces, the point is made physically that the size of our coinage would become so large as to be impractical for everyday use. Here, the message is that if the size of the government dollar was to be increased by more than 100% to accommodate the 16-1 ratio, then a piece of this size would have a market value of about 48 cents."
HK820: HK states that "most authorities agree that substantially fewer than 100 specimens extant today". This is obviously not true, as I was able to find 62 of these, a fairly large number. When I first began to collect so called dollars in the mid 1990s I remember talking a dealer down in price on one of these because I knew it was not terribly rare, and so did he. I must say though that today the piece appears to be less easily had. I do not see it on ebay or elsewhere all that often. It may be that in the early 1960s when HK was published, this piece was indeed quite rare. I have always had a feeling that possibly a considerable number of these may have been released later. Ten of these were sold as one lot in the PCAC sale 11/19/94 lot 153.
HK821: With regard to HK821, HK states that "number extant is believed to be fewer than 12", but my tally of 16 sales for this piece probably suggests otherwise. My tally of 16 may be a bit harsh though as I could find no records of this piece being sold in many catalogs including any Charles Kirtley catalogs, any of the Johnson and Jensen catalogs that I looked through, and others; and at the present time I cannot specifically account for four of the sixteen sales (they are probably there somewhere, but I did not record where I found them and at the present time I have no desire to go back through EVERYTHING to try and locate them). When I went back and looked at the Presidential Coin and Antique Co. catalogs separately, I found 9 sales. Eight of those sales are as follows: PCAC 32 lot 257 AU; PCAC 40 Part 1 lot 205 AU; PCAC 56 lot 173 XF/AU; PCAC 57 lot 154 XF/AU with minor field marks; PCAC 59 lot 237 EF; PCAC 60 lot 138 and lot 139 choice AU, and EF with numerous edge nicks and scattered small dings in the field; PCAC 70 lot 551 lightly toned AU. None of the descriptions in the catalogs stated that any of the pieces had been sold in previous PCAC sales, and most of the descriptions appear to be different. Outside of the PCAC sales there are three Paul Koppenhaver sales of this piece that I know of specifically: 2/19/77 lot 37 described as toned AU; 6/3/78 lot 104 described as Unc; 9/30/98 lot 92 described as XF. Most so called dollars with a mintage of 12 or so would show up in my study maybe an average of once or twice, maybe three or four times. Contrast this piece to HK 823 where I was not able to locate a single piece, and where HK states "only 15 issued..."
HK822: The numbers that I found may point to a somewhat higher mintage than what is quoted in HK, but at least in this case my figures and HK's figures appear to have some semblence of verifying each other. There is no question in my mind that this piece is more common than HK821, but distinctly rarer than HK824.
HK823: HK states that 15 were issued. I was not able to locate a single one. You would have thought I would have come across at least one or two. Were most melted or lost?
HK824: There are two varieties, all combined into the same population numbers. The scarcer variety has the left upright of "D" between the "EY" of "Pedley". The more common variety has the left upright of "D" immediately below the upright of the second "E" in "Pedley". HK states that 85 of these were all that were struck. The numbers that I have found obviously do not justify this low mintage figure. Joe Levine from his 50th PCAC sale lot#919 states: "HK states that fewer than 85 pieces were produced, although we feel this figure is a bit on the low side." In this same sale was an HK824 with a "1929 " counterstamp (lot 921).
HK825: HK states that 500 of these were issued, making this the most common Pedley-Ryan piece; but like HK824, the numbers that I found point to an even higher mintage. A roll of 20 of these sold in PCAC sale #70 lot 553. These pieces were not included in my tally of 153 as they sold after the year 2000.
HK826: The only two sales that I was able to locate were Charles Kirtley sale 9 lot 802 AU, and PCAC sale 40 Part 1 lot 208. It was also graded AU.
HK827: I found eleven of these, but only recorded where I found 4 of them, all PCAC sales: PCAC 22 lot 724 XF; PCAC 40 Part 1 lot 209 XF; PCAC 48 lot 219 EF; PCAC 50 lot 129 VF with "light obverse scratch and a small reverse edge nick ". Three of the four had the same description, but no mention was made as to whether or not any of them had been sold in previous sales. For a mintage of 300, my tallies are on the low side, so there is a good possibility that less than 300 are still in existence. Many of these come with doubled lettering, which makes sense if in fact they were struck by some fellow seated in a store display window with a hammer, a punch-type die, and a nice smile.
HK828: For a supposed mintage of 50, my number of only three found is too low, so obviously it is rarer than the mintage figure would suggest. Joe Levine in his PCAC sale 40 Part 1 lot 210 states " 50 Pieces Struck. They rarely appear on the numismatic market. The only recent auction record we can find is from our Sale #24 (1978) when an uncirculated example brought $280.00 ".
HK852 S(MR): On silver 1961 restrikes there is a small "S" on the reverse between the circles of Delaware and Pennsylvania.
HK867 to HK870: The numbers that I found for these four related pieces confirm stated mintages reasonably well, although my tallies indicate similar numbers for HK867 and HK868 even though the stated mintage of 300 for HK867 is less than half the mintage of 700 for HK868. Interestingly, NGC's census shows a similar situation with these two pieces. HK870 is by far the most common of the four, and always comes with obvious die polish marks on it's surfaces. I have never heard or seen of any of these without these die polish marks, not even in those graded MS67 by NGC.
HK871: Extremely rare varieties were struck in gold and platinum in various thicknesses and on round and square planchets.
HK873: Joe Levine from his 69th PCAC sale lot#130 states: "This piece is part of a set in different metals representing a proposal for an international coinage. It was the joint conception of well-known numismatists Abe Kosoff and Hans Schulman. HK notes that 313 specimens were struck in 23.95 karat gold. However, the edge of this piece is impressed "Coin Gold"
HK892: Found dated either 1917 or 1918. HK describes piece as being dated 1917, but shows picture of piece dated 1918. Population numbers probably(?) include only 1917 pieces. 1918 pieces appear to be more rare.
HK908: Population figures Include different varieties (those with "E.W.J.S." and those without)
HK911: All are probably silver plated.
HK1003: Joe Levine from Part 1 of his 34th PCAC sale lot#150 writes: "Struck in white metal. Lightly tarnished Unc. This piece in silver is listed as HK1003(in the rarity section reserved for pieces with 1-3 known). It is unlisted in any other metal although a bronze example appeared in a 1960 vintage Kagin auction and a brass specimen was recently sold by Bowers & Ruddy(VF/XF-$275.00). This piece is of major importance as it is directly related to the U.S. Mint and is similar to the 1906 Denver so called dollar ($20 Gold size) struck for the opening of the mint. Also of major importance to pattern, so-called dollar and California collectors. It's pedigree to Charles Barber greatly enhances it's attractiveness."
HK1010: In HK "No. 779" appears to be a misprint. It should read "No. 777"
HK1023: The two recorded sales here are in fact the exact same piece. Both were graded Unc with the some of the same small imperfections in both photos. One sale was Charles Kirtley #54 lot 2868. The other sale was PCAC #70 lot 573. Joe Levine in Presidential sale #70 points out there was also another different piece sold in a different Charles Kirtley sale that was described as AU, but the description appears to be in error.