Q.David Bowers
In regard to the prices which I set upon my pieces I have this to say, that I have never asked more than I think the piece is really worth in point of rarity or condition, and I have paid in many instances large prices for the coins. For instance, for the 1797 half eagle and the 1828 half eagle only Fine I paid $100, and for my 1797 quarter eagle $65. You will therefore see I have been willing to give good prices for fine pieces, And I have never yet regretted it. I hope some of the coins please you.
Newlin's letter written October 31st, discussed the negotiations:
Your favor received, enclosing a check for $240, for which receive my thanks. You say I did not set any price upon the 1797 quarter eagle. 1 did not care to sell it unless you took the 1796 but now that my set is broken I would just as soon sell as trade. I obtained the piece from Mr. Woodward about two years ago. He sent it on to me at $75 stating it had formerly belonged to Mickley and was the finest specimen known of that date. I wrote him that I did not care to pay so much for the piece, and he put it then at $65, and we agreed upon that basis. I have several times refused an offer of $55 from Mr. Jenks of Philadelphia, an old gold collector. If the piece is better than yours you may have it for $65 net. In regards to my 1815 half eagle, I value it at $500 as it is the only perfect specimen known, and I know that Mr. Woodward, at least so he said, refused an offer of $400 cash for it, and I was offered $400 cash by a collector, in Philadelphia whose name I can give you should you desire it. I have not yet seen your piece but this 1 may tell you that Mr. Robert Davis of Philadelphia, our oldest collector, told me the other day that he had seen both pieces in Mr. Woodward's collection and that he considered the best one worth fully 100% more than the other, and that as a collector he would give that difference. Mr. Davis did not and does not know that 1 had bought the best 1815 half eagle from Mr. Woodward. Nor does he know that you and 1 were the purchasers of the two pieces that he saw. If you wish, I can get Mr. Davis' written opinion as to the difference in value. I write this at length because I want you to be perfectly satisfied, and also 1 do not wish to ask you one cent more than the difference is really worth, and I should be glad if you would write me your views of the matter of what you value your piece at. My only reason for parting with my gold is that I cannot afford to keep it. I have not bought one of the pieces with a view to speculation. Did the 1861 and 1854 dollar not suit you? I will wait to hear from you before writing again.
A second letter was sent the same day, and was intended to settle the sale:
I am in receipt of your package containing my coins except ... 1797 quarter eagle and 1854 and 1861 which you have reserved. I also have your 1815 half eagle. It is certainly not so fine as mine, and under a glass shows slight marks of circulation, besides lacking brightness and lustre that an Uncirculated piece has. I had thought that $150 was a fair difference between them as I think mine being the finest known will command $500. However, to close the matter 1 will give you my 1815 half eagle, 1797 quarter eagle, 1854 and 1861 dollars, for $200 each, and I will keep your 1815. This 1 think is a fair trade to you and no more than the pieces are really worth at any time. I make this proposition in order to save you the trouble of writing. Hope that this will meet your approbation.
The next letter was strictly an academic question:
large eagle; and 1797, obverse 16 stars, reverse small eagle. A collector writes to me that he has 1797, obverse 15 stars, reverse small eagle. This would seem to make three distinct varieties. I am writing a little article on gold and am desirous of gathering all the information I can about the very rare pieces. Have you this third variety? In any event it must be exceedingly rare and I want to get at the number known.
In his next letter dated November 26, 1884 Newlin offers
... one of the rarest quarter eagles in brilliant Proof condition. In regard to its rarity, you will find in Snowden's Mint Manual of Coins pg. 115 that he says the act reducing the standard [weight] was passed June 28, 1834, and there were coined 4,000 quarter eagles of the old type. "These were in the hands of the chief coiner at the time the act was passed and were returned by him to the treasurer two days after, on the 30th. This fact makes it extremely doubtful whether there was any issue of any quarter eagles of the old standard, as it is probable that the last return would be immediately recoined at the reduced standard, as they would yield a considerable profit."
I believe but few of these coins got into circulation. I bought the piece that McCoy had, (Mickley never had one) which was described as Fine but is only Very Good. There was also one sold in the Jenks Collection sold in Haseltine's 69th sale in January. It was only Good and brought $22. I think the piece rarer than the 1797 quarter eagle or 1796, and I believe that a really fine specimen has never been offered.
I value the piece at $50 and think it worth that amount in rarity and point of condition. Should you desire the piece for your cabinet it is at your service and should you think the price I ask is too high, you can send me a check for any amount you may deem the piece worth. I doubt if you will ever again have an opportunity of getting a piece in such condition.
Newlin wrote again to T. Harrison Garrett on November 28, 1884: I send you for your inspection a set of three patterns for $5 and$2.50 gold pieces. They were made with the idea of increasing the size of the coin and making them thinner. Mr. Morgan, whodesigned them, told me they were extremely rare. I do not believe more than two or three sets were struck. They are not in the Mint Cabinet.
They differ very materially from the set in the Massamore sale, both in size and design. These have never been offered for sale either privately or in public, and I send them to you first. If you do not care for them then I shall forward them to Mr. Parmelee. I hardly know what valuation to put on them, but I think $50 for the set would be reasonable. If, however, you think it too much you may send me any amount you think them to be worth. I am perfectly willing to accept your judgment in the matter. I shall, if you desire, give you the first opportunity of seeing anything of unusual rarity that I may secure.
The next letter, is dated December 1, 1884; suggests a trade as an alternative:
Should you not care to purchase the coins I sent to you, it occurs to me that you ought to be willing to trade your 1796 and 1797 quarter eagles-the ones you had in your collection prior to the time you bought the finer specimens from me. I intend to send you for your inspection a Proof 1796 quarter eagle with stars.
Send on the two pieces and we may come to a trade. I have a brilliant Proof 1858 gold dollar also an 1800 brilliant Proof half eagle and a beautiful 1810 half eagle with large date.
The next letter from Garrett brought his 1834 half eagle for consideration in trade; however, Newlin was not interested in this particular date, as:
I have one which came from the McCoy sale and therefore do not care to trade. If you will send your 1796 with stars, 1796 no stars, 1797, and 1798, I may trade with you provided mine are finer. I sent you a 1796 quarter eagle with stars in Proof. It is not scratched, but the planchet was slightly filed before striking as is often the case with early pieces. Also a 1798 quarter eagle Proof and an 1874 twentycent piece. This is so rare that I have never seen or heard of but two specimens [this is in reference to the 1874 twentycent piece which is a pattern]. If you will kindly send me your pieces I will examine and suggest what I consider a fair difference.