Broken Bank Notes Message Board

Forum for Obsolete Currency Discussions
It is currently Mon Nov 19, 2018 7:07 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 123 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 8:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 1:58 pm
Posts: 527
I just realized that you will not find any SENC notes in the NY section.
Do you want me to add the SENCE information?

Bernie


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 8:16 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:11 pm
Posts: 1094
Not necessary. I already have that covered.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 8:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 1:58 pm
Posts: 527
I presume you have merged my latest version (posted 5/14) of the NY proofs with “Christie information only” with yours.

If you have added the SENC information to the NY section, could you please post a copy? This will help me in trying to find exceptions to unique-Christie proofs listed as SENC.

By the way I can't seem to connect to the Smythe site anymore. The merger with Spink seems to have knocked off the Smythe site? There seems to be a new site http://static.smytheonline.com which might be an archived Smythe site. However, it also does not seem to respond. The Spink site is of no help in finding the Smythe archive. Hopefully these are not lost.

Bernie


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 8:59 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:11 pm
Posts: 1094
I did integrate your data with the sheet, but I also ran through the NY listings myself. The latest version has both. The totals are based on my listings.

At some point we should reconcile the two versions and see what discrepancies turn up.

- Greg


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 9:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 1:58 pm
Posts: 527
So here is the danger of including Haxby UNL proofs that are unique-Christie proofs.

The attached note is listed in the spreadsheet as:

“The Farmers Bank of Seneca County from Romulus NY-2455-UNL. Durand,18--; cert of deposit; 2nd sheet has a note at bottom w/o denominations; pencil notation and a few small tears in margins, slight aging; printed on card”

Heritage lists it as: http://currency.ha.com/common/view_item ... 362&src=pr

“Romulis, NY- Farmers Bank of Seneca County $5 Date? 1839. This is a bill of exchange and thus not listed in Haxby. All of the regular notes on this bank are listed as SENC, "Surviving Example Not Confirmed." This is the first time that we have encountered any note, bill of exchange, etc. on this bank. Very Good”

Haxby mentions that there are certificates of deposit between $1 and $1000. He also says that he does not cover “certificates of deposit” or “bills of exchange”. Thus there is NO way of knowing how many of these exist.

Note that Christie and Haxby mention “certificates of deposit” whereas Heritage and the image indicate “bill of exchange”. So this note might not even correspond to the Christie proof. The next row in the spreadsheet mentions “bills of exchange” but no $5 value. Also the imprint in Christie’s for the “bills of exchange” is DU,UBS&H whereas the imprint on this note is Durand.

Maybe we should only include demand and post proofs in this Haxby-UNL category since Haxby does list these?

Bernie

P.S. Thanks for the new version. Sorry you had to go through the NY section yourself.


Attachments:
NY-2455_05_UNL.jpg
NY-2455_05_UNL.jpg [ 212.89 KiB | Viewed 4499 times ]
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 9:53 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:11 pm
Posts: 1094
Yes, I've considered the situation further and decided there are several problems with trying to count the Unlisted uniques. The first and main problem... how do you distinguish between them? Several listings for a bank may include unlisted notes, and offer little or no description. There is no way (apart from what information is provided) to determine whether there are multiples of one unlisted type, or several distinct unlisted types.

Unless you have the notes in hand, it just adds to the confusion.

- Greg


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 8:08 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:11 pm
Posts: 1094
If anyone is interested, I'm still working through the data. So far I have eliminated over a dozen of the notes that were previously on the list, so we're down below 960 now... and I'm less than 25% through the data.

- Greg


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 8:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 1:58 pm
Posts: 527
What are the characteristics of the eliminated notes. It would be interesting to group these so that we (and others) know what to look for.

Are you looking at counter examples or are you only looking through Christie's catalog and Haxby and eliminating the obvious?

I have not been able to spent too much time looking for unique-Christie-SENC proofs that are counter examples since my LAN is giving me internet connection problems.

Bernie


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 10:15 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:11 pm
Posts: 1094
The eliminations thus far have been the result of inconsistencies between Christie's and Haxby, and transcription errors on my part. I was planning on doing the secondary step of elmination (based on post-Haxby observations in online auction results sites) after I've narrowed the data down to the correct subset.

- Greg


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 10:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 1:58 pm
Posts: 527
So here is an UNL Christie-unique non-SENC demand note listed by Heritage as:

Wheeling, VA- The Merchants & Mechanics Bank $5 Proof Haxby UNL Jones UNL. An extremely rare Proof of note payable in Baltimore. No examples of this design are listed in either the Haxby or the Jones and Littlefield references. Uncirculated, with a repaired section on the front, 6 POC.

Since it is a DEMAND note and Haxby would have listed it if he knew about it, should this add to your 970 notes even if it is not listed as SENC?

Bernie


Attachments:
VA-240_05_Baltimore_UNLp.jpg
VA-240_05_Baltimore_UNLp.jpg [ 144.74 KiB | Viewed 4476 times ]
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 10:54 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:11 pm
Posts: 1094
No, I'm keeping a separate list for the UNL entries that have only one known example. I probably won't be able to do much with that separate list.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 1:58 pm
Posts: 527
But certainly this demand note is as SENC as it gets? I agree that it should be kept separate from the actual SENC Haxby notes. It, or another one like it, deserves a paragraph and picture in the paper to illustrate that there are notes like this out there that are potentially unique impressions. That is, these are just as unique as those in the main category.

Counter examples to the main category should be able to add and to subtract from this sub-census.

Bernie


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 1:24 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:11 pm
Posts: 1094
You may be right, and I can envision cases in which it is possible to demonstrate that a particular unlisted note is in fact unique. I'm primarily concerned about not having a well defined reference point against which to judge possible examples.

This is opening up a different can of worms... call it the Haxby 2.0 can of worms. If we decide that we need to make a catalog of unlisted notes and banks, that's a large project. We've got a base set of data to start with (any note found in Christies that was declared UNL in Haxby). Problem is we don't have images for that base set, and images are the a key way to differentiate between multiples in this space.

To illustrate, I'll make up a bogus example... let's say there's a listing in Christies for NY-3995 that has three unlisted types ($1-$1-$2-$5). We would show that as NY-3995-Unl,Unl,Unl. Let's say we show the imprint as DW and the date is 18--, and that's pretty much the extent of what we know about the note. No information about vignettes, design elements, or anything else that would be useful to distinguish it.

Maybe the next entry has another grouping of DW notes with a date of 18-- that has $5-$5-$10-$20, which we list as NY-3995-Unl,Unl,Unl. Again we have no information about vignettes or other distinguishing factors. Do we know whether the $5 note on the first sheet is the same or different from the two $5 notes on the second sheet?

Now let's say we see a note in an old auction listing from this bank... it too is an unlisted $5 note with a DW imprint and a date of 18--, but now we have a picture. Is it the same or different from either or both of the other sheets? We have no real way of knowing unless we have an image database of the unlisted types... and when it comes to the Christies listings we don't have that image database.

So I'm not ruling out the possibility that we can track some unique unlisted types... I'm just concerned that they are even more difficult to defend as unique than the listed types (which at least have a reference point).

- Greg


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 4:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 1:58 pm
Posts: 527
Certainly for the example that you illustrate, there are potentially 2 identical $5 notes (from the different sheets) for the same NY-3995 bank with the same imprints listed in Christie. Thus since there is “no positive proof” (e. g. two different images of $5 UNL notes), this note should NOT be listed as potentially unique. Remember the notes in your main category are only “potentially unique.”

By the way you never responded to my suggestion of changing the name of the article to “Unique Impressions?” instead of “Unique Impressions.” Note the subtle question mark.

For my example, there also were 4 other (but different from this one) $5 unlisted proofs. Only one of them had the same imprint of UBS&H DU. However, the “place payable” was blank, whereas my example image had the place “payable at The Merchants Bank of Baltimore”. This would make this note as unambiguously “unique” as those in the main SENC category. By the way, this “potentially unique” note sold for $299 in 2003. So there was some competition for this note.

I took another close look at the Heritage image and noted that it looked to be a demand note whereas the one in Christie’s was stated to be a post note. So I reread the introduction to Haxby (quite worthwhile by the way), and he defines a post note as “differing from demand notes in being payable only after a certain time has passed. This time is stated on the note …” So although my example note uses the word “demand”, what makes it a post note are the words “After date …” Somewhat subtle. This project sure is fun since it is paying off in many other areas. Thanks for starting it and your message board. I just wish more people would participate!

If Haxby were to come out with Haxby2, he would presumably remove the SENC notations for the now known Christie proofs. What would this do to the main category of unique-Christie SENC? This would depend on what other ABNC information he has/had. My problem with the Haxby listed proofs is that we really don’t know whether these actually came onto the market or not. Did he see these in ABNC archives and listed them as proofs even when they were never available to the collector? If so, many of these might have been destroyed and will never be available to collectors? If he only listed proofs that had been released to the market, “who, when, how” were they released. He lists almost as many proofs as were released in the Christie sale. Yet, I think that proofs became much more common after 1990 than they were before 1988.

I also reread the top of his introduction page XIV of Volume 1 regarding “proofs”. He uses the words “when a note is known to us only as a proof …”. However, he does not explain what “known to us means”. Can we assume he means “in collector hands”?? His words almost imply this? Can you read that section and give me your impression of what he means?


Bernie


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Unique Impressions
PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 5:36 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:11 pm
Posts: 1094
The question mark in the title is appropriate. I might use it.

Bernie wrote:
I also reread the top of his introduction page XIV of Volume 1 regarding “proofs”. He uses the words “when a note is known to us only as a proof …”. However, he does not explain what “known to us means”. Can we assume he means “in collector hands”?? His words almost imply this? Can you read that section and give me your impression of what he means?


I'm taking his words literally. When he says "known to us", I don't assume that means "in collectors hands". It may be that he only had access to notes in collectors hands, so the point may be moot.

There is one finer point to be noted about that section... I would say that listing something as "Proof" is tantamount to listing it as SENC, for all intents and purposes. He apparently only used that designation when "a note was known only as a proof". However, that begs the question... if it was known as a proof and he was not aware of the contents of the archives, then is there any way to ascertain whether the listed proof was unique? Moreover, if a single example was found in the Christie's sale, would that constitute a second note or a second sighting of the same note? My guess would be that any note he listed as "proof" was seen outside the context of the archives, hence more than one would have to exist.

- Greg


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 123 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group