Previous Lot Next Lot

Auction: 23004 - Ancient and British Coins - Featuring the 'White Rose' Collection
Lot: 628

(x) Elizabeth II (1952-1965), An 'Unauthorised Striking' 22ct 'Electrum-Alloy' Gold Halfpenny, 1965, from official Royal Mint dies (Alloy: 91.7% Au; 4.7% Cu; 3.6% Ar), laureate first young head right, by Mary Gillick, M.G. incuse on truncation, rev. Golden Hind sailing left in calm seas, 12.44g, 25.5mm., 12h (Lobel EL2HD-130; cf. Freeman 492, dies 3+H; cf. Spink 4158), areas of striking softness to mast, planking and below HALF, with scarcely perceptible sporadic bagmarks in otherwise lustrous, original fields, choice FDC, a truly enigmatic 'mint sport' heirloom from Queen Elizabeth II's unprecedented reign, this in effect 'her rarest coin' alongside the 1954 Penny as being entirely UNIQUE

Provenance

Spink 207, 28-29 March 2012, lot 1051

The Property of a Monmouthshire Collector (May 1925 - † September 2000), and by descent to an executor

W G Pritchard, Glendining, 8 October 1991, lot 1039*

~ Royal Mint letter to D Fearon, confirming earlier findings, dated 29 July 1991 ~

Mr Michael Forman, 'a representative of the Royal Mint came to Birmingham to hand the coin back', 9 December 1969
Royal Mint Museum Collection, 28 February - 8 December 1969

Frank H Fellows & Sons (Edgbaston) Sale 15, 20 November 1968 - sale postponed following investigation by the Director of Public Prosecutions into the origins of the coin, prompting its seizure by Birmingham CID under the Coinage Offences Act (1936) ~

~ Prior to the auction, 'Mr A E Fellows, partner, stated: 'I was absolutely astounded. It was brought to us about two weeks ago. The coin did not look as if it had been touched since it was struck.', (Birmingham Daily Post, 14 November 1968) ~

The Collection of a Birmingham Gentleman, who sold the coin by private treaty back to Forman
Michael Forman, (Format Coins & Medal Co., Birmingham) 'to a local collector', by private treaty, 1967 - £700.0.0
'Purchased in London, from a reputable dealer' by Mr Michael Forman, 1966 - 'There are people capable of making coins like this, but I believe it was made at the Royal Mint in 1965.'



In 1991, the coin was resubmitted for examination at the Royal Mint when the following statement was given: "It does not correspond to any coin that was struck by the Royal Mint in the 1960s. There seems little doubt, however, that whatever the origin of the blank it had been struck by official halfpenny dies. It is true, as my colleagues noted in 1968, that in places the design has not been fully struck up, but elsewhere the fine striations on the surface are consistent with what might be expected of halfpenny dies of the period. The areas of weakness reflect a less than full blow, or perhaps a blank with an uneven surface, and it may be significant that the edge has evidently required special treatment. It was not possible in 1968 to throw any light on the circumstances in which the coin was struck, and my colleagues contented themselves with the statement that the coin had not been struck either legally or accidently in the Royal Mint. This form of words did not exclude the possibility that a Mint employee had brought in a gold blank and illegally and deliberately, placed it in a coining press at work on 1965 halfpennies. It is a possibility which surviving papers show was raised at the time, and it remains, perhaps the most likely explanation.



~ "Still no sale for the gold halfpenny": The gold halfpenny that came back to Birmingham yesterday after two legal wrangles cannot be sold yet - it is still regarded as counterfeit. But last month, the High Court upheld an appeal by the coin dealers against the lower court decision. And yesterday, a representative of the Royal Mint came to Birmingham to hand the coin back. Mr Michael Forman, managing director of the Format Coin and Medal Co. said last night: "We have got the coin back, but it will be put away in safe keeping for the present. Within the law it is still counterfeit. We shall now take what legal steps we can to clarify the position, because numismatically speaking, we don't regard it as a counterfeit." Mr Forman said he believed the gold coin was made illegally at the Royal Mint. (10 December 1969, Birmingham Daily Post) ~




~ Solicitor Maurice Putsman petitions for the return of the coin to Format Coins, as it is accessioned by Mr. Baird into the Mint Collection. ~


~ Birmingham Stipendiary, Mr John F. Milward orders that the 22ct gold coin 'made in 1966' should be handed over to the Royal Mint, (28 February 1969, Birmingham Daily Post) ~


~ "The mystery halfpenny", 'Mr Ernest George Newman, a chemist and assayer of the Royal Mint said he had examined the coin and found it was made of an alloy of gold, silver and copper of a type which was not used in the Royal Mint. Questioned by Mr. Putsman, Mr. Newman said that in his opinion the coin was counterfeit because it had not been made legally or accidentally in the Royal Mint. He agreed that the coin could have been made illegally in the Mint. Mr. William T. Baird, Superintendent of the Royal Mint, said he had examined the coin and was also of the opinion that it had not been struck legally or accidentally in the Royal Mint. Questioned by Mr. Putsman he agreed that it could have been produced in a Mint die - but had it been an ordinary halfpenny it would have been rejected as sub-standard. He could not rule out the possibility that it had been struck improperly in a Mint die. Mr. Baird said that the most noticeable differences between the coin and a genuine halfpenny were its colour and its weight. It was possible that someone could be deceived into thinking that it was a half-penny. Mr. Putsman: 'Can you imagine and possible object in making someone thinking that it was a halfpenny? - None whatsoever. Mr. Putsman said there was no clear definition of a counterfeit coin. He submitted that coin was not a counterfeit. It was not intended to pass for one of a higher denomination - it was merely a piece of gold alloy struck in the form of a halfpenny. There could be no possible intention to deceive, as it did not represent a coin of a higher denomination. Mr A R Arnell (appearing for the Police) said that the coin was not a halfpenny, and it was not a genuine gold coin. it could be described as a "genuine gold imitation half-penny". That meant it was false and counterfeit. Making an order for the coin to be handed over to the Royal Mint, Stipendiary (Mr. J. F. Milward) said: 'I am quite satisfied now, odd though the result is, that it is a counterfeit coin. It is false, and it resembles a current coin of the realm. It is true that there are differences in colour and weight, but it is not all that different in appearance from a new halfpenny, which is bright when it leaves the Mint." After the case, Mr. Baird said the coin would be held for seven days, and then it would be put in the museum at the Mint. The museum at the Mint was unique and contained many very valuable coins. (21 February 1969, Birmingham Mail) ~


~ "Gold coin was not made at the Royal Mint", An investigation into a gold halfpenny which had been advertised for sale in Birmingham, had shown that it had not been produced at the Royal Mint, either legally or accidentally, the Birmingham Stipendiary J F Milward was told yesterday. Mr D. Emrys Morgan, for the police, said that the coin had been seized by police on a warrant under the Coinage Offences Act, 1936. The Stipendiary, who was shown the coin, ordered that it should remain in the possession of the police during the adjournment. Asking for an adjournment until February 6, Mr. Morgan said that the police had information that the coin was being advertised for sale as a 1965 gold halfpenny. Mr Morgan added: 'There are people who are interested in this particular coin and I ask for adjournment so that they can be heard, and it is desirable that they should be heard. Mr. Morgan said that police took possession of the coin after a warrant had been issued the Coinage Offences Act of 1936, and this was the first convenient time for the matter to be brought before the court. (22 January 1969, Birmingham Daily Post) ~




~ A spokesman for the Royal Mint stated: 'It would have to be struck from a die if it is an exact replica. It could have been struck with steel dies in a power press. We have never heard of such a thing as a gold half-penny before. It might well be unique.', 13 November 1968 ~





From the legal wrangling, it is evident that this coin remains officially condemned as a forgery 'made neither legally or accidentally by the Royal Mint', with provisional metallurgical analysis conducted in December 1968 suggesting that the blend of gold, silver and copper was not consistent with any authentic mint product at that time. However an exhaustive study of the dies confirms their match to Freeman's attributed matrix pairing '3+H', the same as that identified for the currency strikings of 1965. Since 1969, the public appearance of a multitude of 'mint sport' strikings from 1965, and the years immediately surrounding adds significant credibility to Michael Forman's original contention that this was an illicit production inside the Royal Mint. For example:
i) Halfpenny, 1965, 5.73g, 12h, struck in cupro-nickel; LCA 175, 4 December 2021, lot 2132, graded LCGS 80, 'Variety 02' (£240); LCA 139, December 2012, lot 532 (£130)
ii) Commemorative 'Churchill' Crown, 1965, struck with two obverse dies; Stack's, 14 August 2019, lot 22903 - PCGS MS63 [$2,200]
iii) Penny, 1966, struck on a Commonwealth (Jamaica ?) brass coin blank; SRA 7, 21 September 2022, lot 255 - LCGS 70 [£650]; Steve Copthorne, collection dispersed by Cooke; Dr Findlow 'Hall of Fame'; C Adams, Spink, 23 July 2003, lot 371
iv) Two-Shillings, 1966, 7.30g, 12h, struck on a foreign lightweight planchet; Spink Numismatic e-Circular - '50 Years of Decimalisation', 6 January 2022, lot 9110 - NGC UNC Details [£75]
v) Penny, 1964, 12h, a double reverse mule; Spink Numismatic e-Circular - '50 Years of Decimalisation', 6 January 2022, lot 9111 - NGC AU58 BN [£750]




The Royal Mint Annual reports add the following contextual details:


In 1965, Superintendent Baird recorded:

Die Production:

The Die Department has been reorganised to cope with the demand of dies and tooling both for internal use and for external supplies. The heat treatment shop has been equipped with additional salt baths, the method of packing dies in charcoal and heating them for stress-relieving and hardening in muffle type furnaces has been thereby superseded.


The hydraulic die-sinking press installed last year has been successful and has supplanted the friction press for the hobbing of all coinage dies. A further press of the same specification is on order and will be used for the hobbing of matrices, punches and standard medal dies.


Developments:

In collaboration with Birmingham University, a project has been put in hand to explore the possibilities of high-rate forming techniques for die manufacture. Further developments which are still under consideration include:


i) Automatic examination of coin blanks
ii) Automatic weight grading of coins or blanks in precious metals.
iii) A universal automatic feed for coining presses
iv) Elevator feed for rotary blank annealers
v) Continuous or semi-continuous casting techniques



Plants:

Ten 180 ton Hordern, Mason & Edwards coining presses were installed. Two of these were fitted with a variable speed friction drive unit in place of the D.C. motor normally supplied. An improved method of bottom die location was tried and proved on one press and is now being applied to all machines.



Security:

The increases in production of coins, medals and specimen coins put a considerable burden on the security organisation; this was covered by increasing the supervising staff in some sections and improving the security layout in areas concerned.


During the year 3.5 million ounces of gold were processed and successfully accounted for. Process losses are normally so tightly controlled that there is little scope for improvement; losses were slightly lower than in the past notably in the melting area where a 5 per cent improvement was achieved.



Staff Employed in the Operative Department at the End of 1965
Professional - 11

Clerical - 51

Technical - 44

Drawing Office - 5

Die and Seal Department - 62

Melting - 55

Rolling, Cutting, Annealing, Marking- 236

Coining - 176

Weighing and Telling - 68

Mechanics - 152

Medal Department - 53

Stamp and Revenue Department - 38




The numbers of good pieces passed for issue in 1964 and 1965 are shown in the following table:

United Kingdom Coinage - 441,152,068 (1964) - 500,922,606 (1965)
Commonwealth Coinage - 353759,700 (1964) - 424,784,700 (1965)
Foreign Coinage - 249,716,500 (1964) - 332,360,000 (1965)


The 500,922,606 pieces of the United Kingdom coinage passed for issue were made up as follows:

Sovereigns - Gold - 5,400,000 - £5,400,000

Maundy Sets - Silver - 4,806 - £50.0.0

Crowns - CuNi - 12,080,000 - £3,020,000.0.0

Halfcrowns - CuNi - 8,124,800 - £1,015,000.0.0

Florins - CuNi - 48,723,000 - £4,872,300.0.0

Shillings (English) - CuNi - 9,218,900 - £460,945.0.0

Shillings (Scottish) - CuNi - 2,017,100 - £100,855.0.0

Sixpences - CuNi - 149,948,000 - £3,748,700.0.0

Threepences - Nickel-Brass - 23,907,200 - £298,840.0.0

Pence - Bronze - 135,534,000 - £564,725.0.0

Halfpence - Bronze - 105,964,800 - £220,760.0.0




*These include the following coins dated 1964:


£1 - 3,000,000

2s. 6d. - 1,474,400

2s. - 1,135,000

1s. (E) - 2,900

1s. (S) - 1,100

6d. - 22,076,000

3d. - 2,787,200

1d. - 14,334,000

1/2d. - 8,764,800





Life of Coinage Dies:

Number of dies used 1964: Obverse 16,270 / Reverse 14,358 / Total 30,628 - Coins: 1,050,851,646 = Average 68,620 per die

Number of dies used 1965: Obverse 19,765 / Reverse 17,996 / Total 37,761 - Coins: 1,261,602,287 = Average 66,820 per die




The following table is an analysis, according to alloys, of pieces passed for issue in the years 1964 and 1965.

Gold:

United Kingdom 916.67 - 5,090*

Struck before 1964, but not included in any previous totals:

£1 - 3,622 dated 1963, and £1 - 1,468 dated 1962



The Melting Branch reported a total of 3,587,493.824 ounces (109.8211 tons) of gold coin and scissel melted to produce 3,379,950.160 (103.4677 tons) of gold bars, with a fineness between 92.890 and 94.570. The following is recorded:

.999 Fine - 11,307.298 oz - 0.3461 tons = 10,693.870 oz - 0.3274 tons - 94.570%

.980 Fine - 22,206.895 oz - 0.6798 = 20,628.810 oz - 0.6315 tons - 92.800%

.916.6 Au/Ag - 8,753.581 oz - 0.2680 tons = 8,225.730 oz - 0.2518 tons - 93.979%

.916.6 Au/Cu - 3,545,226.050 oz - 108.5272 tons = 3,340,401.750 - 102.2570 tons - 94.222%



The percentage of gold bars cast in the years 1964 and 1965, which after assay were passed for rolling are shown below:

Gold:

United Kingdom - 916.67 - (-) [1964] - 98.19 [1965]

Commonwealth and Foreign - 999 - (-) [1964] - 100.00 [1965]

Commonwealth and Foreign - 980 - (-) [1964] - 100.00 [1965]

Commonwealth and Foreign - 916.67 Au/Ag - (-) [1964] - 100.00 [1965]





X-Ray Fluorescence Analysis:

Coin production has risen 63 per cent over the last two years and seems likely to rise continuously, if a little less sharply, for many years to come. With this increase has come the problem of storage space for raw materials, the materials in process and the finished coin.


By making materials available shortly after arrival and by releasing coins for issue within hours of striking, the X-ray fluorescence spectrometer has made a valuable contribution to the production increase. It has also made it possible to reduce certain stockpiles and release more working space.


The 73 per cent increase in the number of assays performed in 1965 over those of 1964 is partly due to the practice of determing all the major constituents and some minor ones in each individual sample; in practice, using the spectrometer, this takes very little extra time and minimizes errors.


Previously, for instance, zinc was determined 'by difference' and nickel determined only on one sample in five - unless there was a reason to suspect incorrect composition.


The national and international standing of the Royal Mint makes it essential for the Assay Office to keep a consistently high standard of compositional control. For many years such standards have been maintained by classical methods of chemical analysis. The recent rapid growth of coin production had made it necessary to expand the department to cope with the increased analysis. The expansion has been made in the direction of instrumental methods of analysis and only one addition has been made to the staff. The advent of the X-Ray Spectrometer two years ago marked the beginning of the programme to modernise the Assay Office. The office has five floor levels including a basement. Before the spectrometer took the bulk of the routine assays, two rooms on the first floor were used for weighing out samples. The smaller of these two rooms is now quite adequate for weighing gold and silver. The rest of this first floor consists of administrative offices of the department and a laboratory for gold and silver analysis. Of the remaining space on the ground floor, one room is devoted to X-ray fluorescence analysis and the other contains furnaces for gold assaying; this latter room is to be modified to include the R.F. induction furnace (mentioned in the 1954 Mint Report).


Sovereign Production:

A new mill manufactured by Messrs. Albert Mann Ltd., having 6 in. diameter by 7 in. diameter rolls driven by a 10 h.p. a.c. single speed motor with a three speed gear shift unit was introduced. Initial troubles due to slight roll-to-bearing eccentricity were overcome, following which the mill has been in continuous use.


During the course of the year the standard accuracy has improved until it has surpassed the level of previous runs. The sovereign has a weight of 123.274 grains with a tolerance by weight of +/- 0.2 grains. The finished gauge at the required diameter is 0.0485 in. with a tolerance of +/- 0.0000787in.


Previous runs on sovereign production produced cut blanks from the finished strip which were acceptable for coining in the following percentages:

1958/9 - 68.5 per cent

1963 - 72 per cent

1965 - 82 per cent

1965 December - 90 per cent


In the last quarter there was an almost total elimination of light blanks; the small percentage of heavy blanks were reduced by anodic dissolution to within the upper weight limit.




Subject to 5% tax on Hammer Price in addition to 20% VAT on Buyer’s Premium.