1831 Penny

[El Cobrador]

I've developed an interest in British coinage if for no other reason than here in the U.S. (or at the very least in my region of the country) U.K.issues are very much something of a collecting backwater, and thus I find some really great material relegated to dealers' "bargain" bins.

Case in point - this 1831 ".W.W" variety William IV penny turned up at a local (that being in my largely rural area a relative term, as it was still a sixty mile drive, one way) coin club sponsored show in a tray of "junk" coppers, and therefore cost me virtually nothing.

[zookeeperz]

Welcome to the forum. A very nice coin . I think I shall move to the states  Spinks have that W.W incuse on truncation @ £450 in VF. Nice find

[Paddy]

Welcome Stephen! I am glad we got you through the registration at last.

 

[oldcopper]

Yes, the .W.W is much rarer than the 1837. I have hardly ever seen a really superb one - this is definitely one of the better ones.

[copper123]

Reverse looks close to EF never seen one anywhere near that good

[El Cobrador]

7 hours ago, oldcopper said:

Yes, the .W.W is much rarer than the 1837....

The overall mintage of the 1831 penny supposedly totals 806,400. Does anybody have a notion to how that breaks down with regard to the various types?

Also some die peculiarities to point out on this specimen. On the obverse, the two middle I's in "IIII" are each missing the upper serif. On the reverse, the colon following "DEF" is a mess, possibly ineptly repunched?

 

1 hour ago, copper123 said:

Reverse looks close to EF never seen one anywhere near that good

Note that these photos were taken immediately after I acquired it, when it still had a lot of greasy grunge mucking up the surfaces. A subsequent soak in distilled water made it actually much more presentable than it appears here.

[copper123]

try acetone

[copper123]

these william pennies are notoriously hard to find in nice grade.

most have to make do with a near vf or worse coin

 

[Peckris]

2 hours ago, El Cobrador said:

The overall mintage of the 1831 penny supposedly totals 806,400. Does anybody have a notion to how that breaks down with regard to the various types?

No - you'd have to go on their current ratios. Whatever the original mintage, the Mint began withdrawing them quite soon after bronze was introduced. As their were virtually no students or collectors of contemporary base metal coins, the numbers of each type put aside would be largely a matter of chance.

To put it in context, if bronze was replaced in 1911, the number of 1902 coins surviving a melt would depend on how many had been  put aside. As the Low Tides were the first issue, you might have ended up with a situation where more LTs survived than ordinary.

Edited May 16, 2018 by Peckris

[oldcopper]

The strange oval lump above the final colon is a die crack with a thin raised line running from either end of it. Here is an example from London Coins:

http://www.londoncoins.co.uk/img.php?a=149&l=2399&f=r&s=l

Most .W.W pennies don't have this lump so whether it is from a different die or just the later stage of the main die, I don't know. Detailed comparison would be needed.

As to the scarcity of WW versus 1837, Bramah states that out of every 100 Wm IV pennies, 59 are 1831 and 11 are 1837. Then he gives the ratio of 1831's as approx. 4:1 non-WW : WW, (ie giving about 12 WW's out of 59 1831's). This indicates that the WW and 1837 are about the same rarity.

I would think that the much great availability of good condition 37's over WW's is probably due to the 37's being kept as mementos as the King died in June 1837.

[oldcopper]

Sorry, the link doesn't work, but I can copy the picture: it's Lot 2871, auction 7/12/2014. If you can't see this, check out the LC archive.

[oldcopper]

In case you're wondering how I know it's got a thin line emanating from either end, I have an example with this die flaw which I can look at under strong magnification!

[1949threepence]

On 5/16/2018 at 8:18 PM, Peckris said:

No - you'd have to go on their current ratios. Whatever the original mintage, the Mint began withdrawing them quite soon after bronze was introduced. As their were virtually no students or collectors of contemporary base metal coins, the numbers of each type put aside would be largely a matter of chance.

To put it in context, if bronze was replaced in 1911, the number of 1902 coins surviving a melt would depend on how many had been  put aside. As the Low Tides were the first issue, you might have ended up with a situation where more LTs survived than ordinary.

According to Gouby:-

Quote

"The copper coins issued prior to the new bronze coinage had continued in circulation but were eventually demonetised after 31 December 1869. Up to that date a premium of 2% above their face value was paid, to encourage their return to the Royal Mint"

It makes logical sense that there would have been very few high grade copper coins extant after demonetisation, for the early years, such as George IV's reign - the readily available high grade copper specimens gradually increasing for subsequent years up to 1859, which would have had only 10 years circulation at the end of 1869.This is based on an assumption, as you rightly point out, that they weren't too high up on the average coin collector's priorities at that time, and hence not too many early high grade examples hanging around in collections.

The ones that did turn up being down to random chance findings of coins equally randomly deposited in various places. 

   

Edited May 17, 2018 by 1949threepence

[Peckris]

20 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

It makes logical sense that there would have been very few high grade copper coins extant after demonetisation, for the early years, such as George IV's reign - the readily available high grade copper specimens gradually increasing for subsequent years up to 1859, which would have had only 10 years circulation at the end of 1869.This is based on an assumption that they weren't too high up on the average coin collector's priorities at that time, and hence not too many early high grade examples hanging around in collections. I could be wrong, but more probable than not, I would have thought.    

Not coin collectors certainly - but wouldn't it have been like the pre-1920 silver, i.e. put aside in the view it was more intrinsically valuable? The premium paid by the Mint for them, would encourage that view (the Mint certainly wouldn't have paid more than they were worth, and probably less.) Shrewd 'investors' might have sensed a future profit. 

[1949threepence]

14 minutes ago, Peckris said:

Not coin collectors certainly - but wouldn't it have been like the pre-1920 silver, i.e. put aside in the view it was more intrinsically valuable? The premium paid by the Mint for them, would encourage that view (the Mint certainly wouldn't have paid more than they were worth, and probably less.) Shrewd 'investors' might have sensed a future profit. 

Possibly, although maybe there was a rush at the end, to get the premium ahead of demonetisation.

Perhaps that is a factor in the scarcity of the early years.