Q.David Bowers
On June 22, 1886, Newlin wrote again, this time using a piece of stationery from Stan V. Henkels & Co., the Philadelphia auctioneers at 1117 Chestnut Street, who sold the Maris Collection:
I send you today per express the coins purchased for you at the sale as per your telegram. A few of the pieces I did not buy because they went at exorbitant prices. The balance I consider were fair according to the rarity of the pieces.
The collection of Jerseys brought slightly more than your bid, but I consider them cheap and Dr. Maris fully expected them to produce $1,000. [Lots 350 to 500 inclusive in the sale, the collection of New Jersey cents, was purchased by Newlin for Garrett at $551.)
The silver Franklin I believe was the gem of the sale. It is worth $500 [the Franklin issue, Lot 338, sold for $201). I hope you will be pleased with the coins. The bidding was spirited, the New York dealers being present in force. Dr. Massamore was here and asked if I did not have your bids but I gave him no satisfaction. I bought all the pieces in my name that were for you. The pieces bought for myself I bought under another name. I enclose the bill. A letter of bids for Scott of New York on the pattern pieces came just after the sale. He showed them to me and in nearly every instance offered me an advance on the prices I had paid for you.
On June 24, 1886, Newlin wrote a lengthy letter to Garrett:
In reply to your favor, I would say that it was widely circulated in New York that H. P. Smith had bought the Maris Collection, and to correct this, Smith made a public announcement just before the sale that every piece in the sale except two, Lots 488 and 501, belonged to Dr. Maris. Maris was present and vouched for this statement, and if you prefer I can get you his written statement to that effect. So that anyone who has informed you otherwise has done it either to dissatisfy you with me or because I bought so much under my name. Since the sale, many of the dealers have hinted that I was interested in buying in the pieces for Dr. Maris [reference to bidding on the coins on behalf of the consignor]. I bought for you under my name to divert suspicion, and no one knew I was bidding for you. I represented several other bidders at the sale and had all of Sampson's orders, as he wrote me he was unable to come on. I do not consider the prices are excessive at all. And although your telegram instructed me to buy (without any qualifications), yet I allowed the 1838 to go to Frossard at $117.50 and the 1802 dime to Steigerwalt at $34, because I consider they Were bringing more than they were worth. I called at the United States Mint yesterday, and the curator, speaking of the prices, said inter alia that he thought the Centennial dollar worth fully all it brought, that the engraver Mr. Barber had been interviewed relative to it and that he, Mr. Barber, did not have one or know of another. I wrote you that after the sale Scott & Co. showed me a large line of bids on all the important patterns in the sale and thinking I had bought them either for Dr. Maris or myself offered me advances on a great number of them over the prices I had paid. $0, if you should be dissatisfied with any of the pieces or prices on any of the patterns, if you will send them to me I feel confident I can dispose of them to Scott & Co. without any loss to you.
In regard to the unique Franklin at $201 I did not let it go because I thought it worth $500. Maris always valued it at that sum. He bought it of Randall 10 or 12 years ago for $100. I was run on it by H. P. Smith who had bid $200 on it. I heard Chapman say they had $150 on it. Maris fully believed his New Jerseys would produce from $1,000 to $1,200, and he refused a cash offer of $500 before the sale. On the gal aid $20 piece I had another bid for a dealer of $100 and can use it at that price now.
I think the Chapmans are trying to impune the sale in every way by [illegible word] throwing out insinuations such as you have heard. They do this, I think, from their animosities to H. P. Smith because they did nat get the cataloguing of the sale. It is possible that a gentleman in Baltimore has some motive in trying to dissatisfy you with me. [The reference here is to Dr. George Massamore, who on other occasions had himself offered to represent T. Harrison Garrett.] After the sale he tried to find out if I was buying for you, and I refused to tell him. I should feel extremely sorry that you should feel disappointed with any purchases I make fat you. I feel very sure that many of the pieces you purchased cannot be duplicated at any price and I very much hope you will not hesitate to return the pieces that I have mentioned if they do not meet with your entire approval.
More than this I cannot in all fairness do. P.S. Should you prefer to keep the pieces and yet feel that they brought high prices I shall greatly prefer that you will not add my commission.
A second letter was sent also dated June 24th, this from Newlin's home:
I beg to acknowledge the receipt of the package containing three pieces. Your telegram of bids was not handed to me until ten minutes before the sale commenced and in all the confusion incident to entering them I bought the three pieces in the name of "Newlin" instead of "Scholl" for whom I really bought them.In stating in my letter today that you might return any of the pattern pieces that you thought too high, I do not mean to convey the impression that I should return them to Maris, but that I would offer them at private sale to Scott & Co. who had bids on them that arrived too late for the sale.
Maris, or, rather, H. P. Smith, the dealer who managed the sale, would not take back any pieces unless they should prove counterfeits. I am just willing to render any service, however, in the disposal of any pieces that may not suit you. As fully stated in my letter this morning I believe fully that you have made very important acquisitions to your cabinet in the purchase of many pieces that cannot be duplicated for the prices paid or in fact at any price.
P .S. I desire to contradict the statement that Maris, and another party, and myself were financially involved in the sale.
You did not mention that you were dissatisfied with your pieces and the pricing, but from the .tenor of your note I gathered it. Lot 146 was from the Parmelee Collection and was replaced by one slightly finer for which he paid Haseltine $110.
On June 30, 1886, Newlin wrote: I am in receipt of your checks with thanks. I enclose receipted corrected bill. Relative to the numbers upon which you made note, I would say Lot 146 "very high for its state." This is the only specimen I have ever seen offered. It was until recently in Parmelee's Collection. He replaced it for one a little finer for which he paid $110. This piece is worth all I paid for it. Concerning Lot 147, "is this genuine?"
Yes, without doubt, as it came from the Mint Cabinet. It is the finest disme known and I think worth $100. Lot 314. Relative to this I would say that as but two are known, it is worth any amount it may bring. Your telegram ordered me to buy, and if the piece had brought $150 I should have been forced to let it go. I enclose Scott's letter relative to the United States patterns which you may destroy when you have read it. Scott had large bids on the important patterns, excluding lots 146 and 147 mentioned above.