DaveG38

Sometimes I wonder if I took my degree in Chemistry. Hypo is Sodium Thiosulphate, not Hypochlorite. Duuhhh!!

MT = Mint Toned, usually with Sodium Hypochlorite..

My dad was a postie back then, and often worked on Christmas Day, usually up to midday. He and my mum were grateful for the overtime and exceptional payments, but for me it meant I had to wait to open my presents.😟

Used to, in the 1950s.

Just to whet your appetite, I have found that he was buried on 15 March 1832 at Rodborough near Stroud, so died not long before. Got several images of data concerning him. In one case, though, there is only a transcript, not an original document. Will have a bit more investigative fun in the morning. I'll forward data/docs as a PM to avoid cluttering this thread up with stuff.

I'll see what I can find, but will be tomorrow now, whilst my other half is watching the footie!

I do have some access, but my family is/was all UK Based, so I had no use for records from overseas. If you want to PM me, I'll see what I can find.

Even more simply, given that the opening post refers to an auction 'the previous Thursday', which auction house was operating on 23rd Nov?

I think we have the basis for a BNJ article developing on this subject.

Clearly, the A is for the original die sinker Algernon, but he died, so Archibald took over. He thought he was better and didn't fancy his work being associated with that scoundrel Algernon, so he put the die letter to the other side of the lighthouse. Then along came Augustine who put his A anywhere he felt like, and didn't care what size it was. Sounds logical to me. Simples!!

Ah, sorry, I didn't see the title of the thread.

Run of the mill!! The first lots I found were the 1826 and 1831 proof sets - estimated at £60-120k and £35-70k. If they are run of the mill, then my collection must be regarded as meagre and scarcely worth the trouble of collecting. However, I do take your point regarding the rest.

My copy of 'Collectors Coins 1998' shows that it was sold by private treaty in 1991 for £28,500. No mention of a sale in 1997 though.

I'm not surprised. I have tried to get them to include the 1695 DEI GRATIA halfpenny, for which their laughable reply was that they couldn't possibly include every minor variety. So, a major legend change is a 'minor varient', but the tiny differences in the early Victorian pennies are 'major' and worthy of inclusion. Spink are a joke and not worth the effort.

Go to the end of the section, and you will find a list of notes, each identfied by number. The numbers shown here correlate with the number against the year date for the coin, and the note applies to that year and date of coin. For the 1870 Penny, the note identified by the number refers to the raised dot after 'PENNY.'

I'm still looking!!!

It seems to me that sloppiness in minting really doesn't matter at the RM, when they are knocking out coins for general circulation. Whether something has an error, a cud or whatever is irrelevant once it starts being spent. It may be of interest to us collectors, but as far as the mint goes I guess they see it in terms of numbers struck and whether they are of the recognised denomination. I'm not saying that they don't try to get things right, but it usually doesn't matter if they get it wrong on occasions. Errors also add to the collecting interest. Things are different with the packaged sets and proof coins, which are clearly intended for collectors, and where quality does matter. Based on the Flying Scotsman saga, it seems to be that they have allowed some sloppiness to ease into the collecting sector of their business, when it shouldn't have. Having said this, it depends on what the sloppiness brings. The 1982 or is it 1983 New Pence/Two Pence coin is a case in point. Technically it was an error to allow the wrong dies to be used. In practice anybody with the 'wrong' coin can make a nice little profit, and collectors are happy to have picked up an error, so everyone is satisfied.

Oh, bugger! Another change to the 20th Century bronze varieties book.

Too many edge nibbles and plenty of bag marks. Too many for that price.

If you go on Youtube and search out Christopher from Britannia Coins (a callow youth!), you will find loads of videos, where he goes through coin hunts of 50p and £2 coins, picking out the various designs. The videos have a certain charm to them, and he does sometimes come across interesting examples of unexpected coins. Anyway, at the start of one of these (there are a a lot), he opens up a package from, I think Cambridgeshire Coins, and this contained a rather nice album for collecting £2 coins. The coins are a press fit into a cut out in the board with the date and description, so nicer than just a coin album and flips. This might be just what you want. It might be worth a look or approach Cambridgeshire Coins (might be Cambridge Coins) to see if my memory still works!!

I don't buy this argument that he only meant language and not actions. He certainly made no such distinction in his tweet. There was nothing else going on in the 1930s that would come close to being recognisable as similar to the government's migration bill, so it is crystal clear that he was equating the Nazi approach to that of the government in order to stir up this kind of 'publicity.' Furthermore, he didn't dispel any misconceptions about what he was talking about, fully intending to leave the impression in people's minds that the government is in some way equivalent to the Nazis of the 1930s. Had he not intended to give this impression, and knowing the interest it would stir up, he would have made this clear.

I entirely accept that GL's tweet cannot in any way be held to be representative of the BBC's views. The problem, as I see it, is that the implication in his tweet that the government is acting in the same way as Nazi Germany did was clearly going to stir up a controversy. As soon as it did, the BBC had two choices. Either censure him, on the grounds that this post was offensive and reflected badly on them, a reasonable position given that the alternative approach would have been the second choice, which was to ignore it, and then watch the headlines screaming that the BBC supports the idea that the Tories are like the Nazis. The BBC were damned whichever way they went. In my view, on balance they went for the right approach because allowing such a sentiment would be harmful to the corporation. In defence of their position, pretty much any employer expects their employees to not act in a way which is detrimental to the company/business even outside of company time. When employees flout this rule, there are usually consequences. For most people, the impact of their actions are low level and of limited impact. However, when the highest paid and high profile presenter at the BBC is involved, then it becomes a different matter. FWIW, I expect GL to return, probably carry on tweeting on political matters as is his right, but to tone the rhetoric down.

I don't understand people who do this on eBay. I've recently been selling a number of coins, and it takes quite a bit of time to photo them, process the pictures, set up the auction page and load the photos onto it. To do all this, and then try and charge idiotic prices, which virtually guarantees failure to sell, seems incredibly stupid to me. Yes, I know just one sale could make it worthwhile, but is such a sale realistic? I have my doubts.

I'm completely green when it comes to old tickets, so any help appreciated. I've just bought a W&M 1693 Irish halfpenny and it has come with an old circular ticket, plus a paper holder. As far as I can judge the writing on these is from two different people, and I wondered if anybody can identify either or both of them. Any ideas? There was no clue from the vendors.

I've always liked JRM as a person, ever since that famous put-down of David Dimbleby on QT. Priceless, the lesson of which is underestimate JRM at your peril.