Q. David Bowers
Quality of Striking
Now we check other considerations. What about the strike? Consult references on Morgan dollars, including the present text, and determine the availability of the piece well-struck and with sharp design details. For example, if you are contemplating buying an 1881-S, then you wiIl note that very sharp pieces are common. In this case, instantly reject a coin that is even the slightest bit weak.
On the other hand) if you are buying a 1921-D Morgan dollar, you will know that even the finest specimens are apt to be poorly defined, so this is something you must live with. Accept this, but try to find one that is attractive in other ways. Purchases involving sharpness of strike must be handled on an issue-by-issue basis.
As you review the sections on individual varieties of Morgan dollars, you will note information concerning the striking quality of each; In a very general sense- and there are numerous exceptions-coins of the Carson City Mint are the best struck, and coins were produced with excellent detailon Miss Liberty's hair and on the eagle's breast feathers.
San Francisco Mint coins are usually seen well struck. How fortunate it is that the most common of high-grade Morgan dollars, the 1881-S, nearly always is seen well struck. Thus, anyone wanting a sample Morgan dollar for a type set or for a curiosity can buy a beautiful 1881-S inexpensively.
Philadelphia Mint coins vary in their sharpnessof strike. These have to be considered on an issue by issue basis.
Of the four mints that made coins during the early (1878-1904) period of Morgan dollars, coins from the New Orleans Mint were the most poorly struck. There is no hard and fast rule on this, and within the same date, one coin can be well struck, and another can be weak. In addition, more New Orleans dollar varieties are known with rotated reverses than are those from the other three mints combined. Such misalignments were caused by one die coming loose, evidence of lack of attention by the pressman. Pride of workmanship was a low or even non-existent quality at the New Orleans Mint!
All 1921 Morgan dollars from each of the three mints that struck them that year-Philadelphia, Denver, and San Francisco-are nearly always seen weakly defined. This is not as much a factor of striking technique as it is of poor die manufacture. The dies lacked the detail of earlier issues. As the preceding text indicates, even the finest struck 1921 is apt to look poor alongside an average 1881-SI wheel used to polish new dies at the mints. The CC dies Were the most convex, bringing the centers closer together, but leaving the rims farther apart. This is a prime reason why the Carson City Mint dollars have strong centers but weak rims. The New Orleans Mint dies were often too flat, causing strong rims but weak centers. The Philadelphia and San Francisco Mint dies were the most correctly basined, and produced the coins most consistently struck in a "normal" way.
Life of Morgan Dollar Dies
Over the life of the Morgan dollar series from 1878 through 1904 (not including 1921) 1,198 pairs of dies were produced for Philadelphia Mint coinage, 222 pairs for Carson City Mint production, 1,231 for New Orleans, and 898 for San Francisco. Dividing these numbers into the total coinage of Morgan dollars from those mints yields a figure of 217,679 coins per die pair from the Philadelphia Mint, 62,441 from Carson City, 151,208 from New Orleans, and 121,930 for San Francisco.
This correlates in a general way with the quality of striking discussed earlier. With relatively few exceptions, Carson City coins are well struck and show excellent detail. San Francisco coins are next best struck, and Philadelphia and New Orleans coins vary.
The preceding calculations presuppose that all dies shipped were actually used, whereas in practice, probably many weren't (or else there would be many more known VAM varieties). The Carson City Mint may have disposed of many unused dies, which would significantly raise the coinage per die pair. Of course, this would be difficult to prove.
Although the striking of details has more to do with the spacing of and basining of dies than the number of impressions from the dies, in general, the closer the dies were spaced together, the sharper the details were, and the faster the dies wore. Thus, Carson City dies were spaced closer together, produced better strikes as the metal tended to fill the dies completely, but the dies wore more quickly. An efficiency expert might have disliked the Carson City Mint's way of doing things, but to the numismatist its procedures were ideal!
In addition to incorrect die spacing and shallow basining, weakness could be caused by sinking of the dies at their centers. The more dies were used, the more the metal "compacted." Thus, dies that were correctly spaced in the press could, after having struck many thousands of coins without subsequent adjustment, produced weakly defined pieces from slightly sunken dies.
Sometimes, when dies were used beyond their normal life, they were resurfaced by grinding or polishing (sometimes called relapping), Some coins struck from such dies show grinding marks as raised parallel lines, particularly in the fields. If dies were not resurfaced, they sometimes acquired minutely grainy or pebbly surfaces, especially in the field toward the rims. Such coins sometimes appear "greasy" or lightly polished.
Lustre
Lustre is another consideration, and the present text can be of help in that regard. Some pieces with "muddy" lustre are not attractive, and when such occur, either try to find one that is frosty (if such exists), or if the circumstances of availability dictate that you must buy one that is somewhat gray or unattractive, then lower your sights and buy an MS-60 coin, not an MS-63. Why pay a high price for a technically high grade if the coin is not attractive aesthetically? In this area alone-one of lustre-you may have to compromise your aesthetic principles. However, don't do it before doing some searching and consulting references. (Wayne Miller's The Morgan and Peace Dollar Textbook gives much valuable information on the quality of surfaces of various issues.)
Inadequate or unsatisfactory lustre can be caused by the dies being spaced too far apart, improper basining, overuse of dies, sinking of dies at their center, or poor planchet quality, among other factors. However, the prime reason for unsatisfactory lustre was probably the poor quality of the die surface. A die with freshly basined surfaces was apt to produce attractive, lustrous coins. A die with grainy surfaces, or with foreign matter adhering, or with overused surfaces was apt to produce coins with poor lustre.