Q.David Bowers
Augustus Heaton promoted his book vigorously for many years. Collecting by mintmark varieties became extremely popular, and by the middle of the 20th century great premiums were attached to coins which differed from each other only by the presence of an identifying mint letter. For example, an 1894-S dime, struck in San Francisco in 1894, was valued at hundreds of times the premium assigned to the same design dime from the Philadelphia Mint.
Heaton became president of the American Numismatic Association. At the 1894 convention of the group held in Detroit, Heaton delivered a paper entitled "Auction Sales of Coins," which was later reprinted as a feature article in The Numismatist. Behind-the-scenes activity at certain auction sales was discussed, with both good and bad points being brought out. On the dark side it was alleged that certain buyers sometimes had their private pick of collection gems before the sale was catalogued. This was hardly news, for any astute reader of The American Journal of Numismatics or other numismatic periodicals of preceding decades would have known that this was often a favorite practice of dealers and collectors. Lorin G. Parmelee, for example, was well-known for buying a collection just to secure several desired pieces from it, and then auctioning the remainder. Heaton went on to say that a dealer, representing his client at the sale (and charging a client a commission accordingly), could:
... take advantage of a bidder by sending him an inferior coin of the same character from his own stock if he covets the one bought ... many other means of deceit will suggest themselves.
It was further noted that some commoner coins were sold so low that, after auction commissions were deducted, a higher price would have been realized by the owner by spending the pieces for face value.
This broadside at the auctioneering business brought a quick reaction in the form of a printed protest signed by Lyman H. Low (who at that time was associated with Scott Stamp & Coin Co.), the Chapman brothers, and David Proskey. Their answer to the Heaton diatribe noted that the original article was:
... a remarkable production and calls for notice, not so much by reason of the ignorance displayed by the writer of the subject of which he treats, as the undercurrent of malicious representation which pervades it ... It is a matter of curious speculation from what source Mr. Heaton obtained a knowledge of all these and "many other means of deceit" practiced at sales, as his presence is about unknown; we have no distinct recollection of his having ever attended the sales ...
The auctioneers went on to call Heaton "willful slanderer" and a "moral coward." The exchange continued as ANA President Heaton replied to the dealers:
... I am surprised at its stupidity and the curious excitement of its perpetrators ... Despite the protest's evasive insinuation, I have attended several auction sales where the dealers signing it were present ... My article on "Auction Sales of Coins" is considered by Mr. Low and his newly beloved bedfellows in the protest as insulting to the dignity of dealers and full of evil insinuations without proof. He has lately most kindly provided me with far more entertaining matter than I ever have been fortunate enough to witness and with a far more incriminating opinion of one prominent dealer, at least than I should have ever ventured to write. At a recent auction sale in New York, he, the conscientious Mr. Low, in his least beautiful phraseology as seen in the protest, ventured to call the prominent dealer and expert "a liar." Numismatic criticism is rarely so frank and so public and the accused gentleman proceeded forthwith to make a vigorous personal attack. The two numismatic sages were soon mixed up on a dusty floor in a manner that would have made football adversaries envious of their combat qualities, until, in a badly circulated condition, they were dragged apart by dismayed spectators ... I will spare further shattering of our numismatic idols by avoiding any further reference to their doings at auction sales hereafter ...
The Numismatist, after printing the charges and counter-charges, declared that the columns were hereby closed to the matter, and further charges would be referred to the American Numismatic Association Board of Governors and not printed for all to read.
Controversy provided much spice during the late 19th century. Dealers were very liberal with their opinions, especially concerning competitors, and did not hesitate to spread them in print. A sour grapes attitude often prevailed, with the result that one dealer's major accomplishment in the way of an auction catalogue, discovery of a new coin variety, or other feat, would often be derided.
The dimes, quarters, and half dollars designed by Charles Barber and introduced in 1892 were not popular with collectors. It was contended that these pieces were mere tokens, devoid of artisic merit. Earlier, in 1878, even more complaints had been voiced by collectors concerning the new Morgan silver dollar design. III 1895 The Numismatist noted that the National Sculpture Society, acting in unison with the American Numismatic Society, was going to have an exhibition at the Fine Arts Building on 57th St., New York City, "at which designs for a new goddess of Liberty will be shown and for which two prizes of $300 and $200 will be given." The article went on to say that:
All the sculptors and artists in the United States have severely criticized the existing coinage. The designs of European coins, they declare, are infinitely superior. The French coins are probably the most artistic of any, although the St. George and Dragon of the British sovereign is undoubtedly a very handsome and artistic design. The first impression which the head of Liberty on the silver dollar gives, so say the sculptors, is that of weakness and indecision. This is not befitting a powerful, progressive nation like the United States. Sculptors also criticize the pose of the eagle ... "
A number of beautiful designs were submitted, but nothing ever came of the competition or the complaints so far as effecting a change in coinage designs. On several occasions during the 20th century artistic designs dated 1895 and ostensibly representing patterns for United States coins surfaced in numismatic periodicals and were the subject of much mystery and speculation, the 1895 competition by that time having been long forgotten.
By 1897 the American Numismatic Association had over 300 members, about one third of whom were delinquent in dues. The initial enthusiasm and momentum was lost about this time, perhaps due to the fact that two recent annual conventions were "flops" (in the words of The Numismatist) and to the ill feelings caused against the ANA, particularly on the part of dealers, by the loose pen of President Augustus G. Heaton. The Numismatist, still owned by Dr. George F. Heath, divorced itself from the ANA and no longer was its official publication. Without dealer support, and with collector interest slackening, it seemed as though the ANA might not survive. Finally, in 1899, following two years of estrangement, the ANA and The Numismatist rejoined company. Interest increased, the organization prospered, and before long the shaky period was forgotten.
A survey in 1900 showed that there were 21 full-time and part-time rare coin dealers in the United States. There were several thousand serious collectors, many of whom ordered Proof coins from the Mint each year. 1904 saw the American Numismatic Association membership stand at several hundred, of which only 40 were west of the Mississippi River. Twelve states had no members at all. The organization's periodical, The Numismatist, was becoming established as the main publication for current numismatic notes and events. In the meantime the American Numismatic Society was prospering, but in a more elite way. The same year, 1904, saw J. P. Morgan and Cornelius Vanderbilt join the Society. The American Journal of Numismatics, which during the 19th century had been the main numismatic publication, was becoming more specialized in its thrust, with erudite monographs filling much space. Items of current popular interest and controversy were printed infrequently. By a quarter century later, the American Numismatic Society in New York was the realm of the serious student and advanced collector, while the American Numismatic Association, with many more members, captured the public interest, held regular annual conventions, and served as a forum for the mainstream of numismatic activity.