1835/4 Third Farthing?

[Rob]

Has anyone got an 1835 1/3 farthing in perfect condition because this is only EF? It looks distinctly like there is an underlying 4 as evidenced by the upturned serif on the topright of the 5, the vertical dropping down from this point and the angle of the 4 joining the end of the 5's tail to the nearest angle. There is a small pointed bit protruding from the loop of the 5 at 3 o'clock although you have to look from the side to see this.

[Rob]

Seeing as nobody has answered, I shall do so myself, albeit 10+ years late.

Looking at the images of two dates below, it would appear that both exhibit traces of the same features, but are from different dies as one has a flaw from the edge to the U (coin 2) and the other a flaw to and through the adjacent S (coin 1). It therefore looks as if the 5 over 4 is on the master and not recut on the individual die, which would almost certainly mean that all are 5/4, and also that an 1834 could potentially exist. The third coin with the crappy image is from a third die which has a flaw from the edge to the I of DEI. That has long gone, so I don't know if it showed the same characteristics and the image quality is too dire to be of use.

If anyone has an example of an 1835 third farthing, could they please check if it is a different obverse die to the three pictured and whether it is also 5/4. A decent image of the third die would also be appreciated. Ta.

Edited June 18, 2017 by Rob

[Colin G.]

I am not convinced Rob, the 5 always seems to have been prone to die cracks across various reigns and denominations. I think what you are seeing is just a diagonal die crack through the 5. The upturned serif was also fairly standard in the George IV reign, so not that unusual to see that feature on a 5 of this period. 

P.S. Apologies for the slight delay in responding 

[alfnail]

Rob, I have a CGS75 example which appears to have the same features on the 3 and 5 as shown in one of your own pictures. It also has a clear area between the top bar and top curve of the 5, whereas your own example seems to be 'filled' in that area, clogged die or grime I guess. I cannot see any flaws on the obverse anywhere on the legend, other than perhaps on the numeral 5 itself (Colin's theory). There also appears to be an additional line (highlighted in red) under the top bar of the 5 which I am thinking may reinforce the 'die crack' theory rather than being consistent with an underlying numeral 4. Hope this helps rather than confuses, I do not claim to know much about Farthings.

P.S. Sorry about 'cloudy' pictures, they never come out well for me on slabbed pieces........uuuggghhh