Jeton R.W. Owen Montreal Ropery 1824 (LC-18 / Breton #564)

[safarijim]

I have to agree that it is the most likely option and the fact that the LC -55 is probably a concoction makes it all the more likely that he might have made the Owen's as well. When I have time, I will send a picture off to Chris Faulkner who I have had occasional discussions with and see if he has any thoughts on the matter. I will have a look at Haxby's book and if he has a good photo of an LC-55 I can contact him and ask about it as well. I think it is fascinating to think that the two are connected. Makes me what to go looking for more counterfeits and see what is out there.

On that topic, I am wrestling with another conundrum around the PE-2. There have been at times examples show up that are cleaner and finer than the usually crude examples we all know and love. Lettering is finer and the periods are all on the same level. One such example was sold during the Ford sale in 2013 and was attributed to a later manufacturing around 1900. It still went for some 2700 US dollars so not sure what to make of that. I know this is not the best place for the discussion, but I would be interested to know if you have seen examples of that and what your thoughts were on these rare pieces.

[ainsivalavie]

I will have a look at Haxby's book and if he has a good photo of an LC-55 I can contact him and ask about it as well. I think it is fascinating to think that the two are connected. Makes me what to go looking for more counterfeits and see what is out there.

I forgot to mention it, but I checked the Haxby catalog published by Whitman, which token is not illustrated. And in the Haxby & Willey catalog published by Uni-Safe, the photo is of terrible quality, as you can see below:

Mr. Haxby in his Whitman catalog mentions the origin of the obverse as coming from a "Ships Colonies & Commerce" token. In my opinion, he probably never had the chance to really compare the token LC-55. He specifies that he knows of only one example.

But indeed, if there is a connection, which seems to be the case, but without the opportunity to examine the two tokens in person it's hard to be categorical. That said, it would certainly give your token a nice history, and would definitely put an end to the fate of the LC-55 token concerning the fact that it is indeed a concoction.

Incidentally, I'm still wondering whether one or more copies of this LC-18 counterfeit exist. The other possibility I haven't mentioned, and which could also be the case, is that the May 1998 example from the Montreal Stamps and Coins auction could also be the source of the present token. I'm almost certain that Mr. Robins participated in this auction, as some of the tokens offered ended up in his collection.

It would also be interesting to see if the LC-55 was ever in the Morris collection. Because if your token really did come from the September 1912 sale, it could also give an approximate origin and time period if this is also the case for the LC-55.

You mentioned in a previous post a possible electrotype copy. I'm curious, is there any separation on the edge?

As for the PE-2 token, I've accumulated nearly 30 examples in photos over the years, and by comparison, it's obvious that there are some special cases. However, I'm not yet in a position to draw any conclusions.



Traduction Française:
J'avais oublié de le préciser, mais j'avais vérifié dans le catalogue Haxby publié chez Whitman, lequel jeton n'est pas illustré. Et dans le catalogue Haxby & Willey publié chez Uni-Safe, la photo est de terrible qualité comme vous pourrez voir ci-dessous:

Monsieur Haxby dans son catalogue chez Whitman mentionne l'origine de l'avers comme provenant d'un jeton «Ships Colonies & Commerce». À mon avis il n'a probablement jamais eu la chance de comparer véritablement ce jeton. Il précise qu'il ne connait qu'un seul exemplaire.

Mais en effet, si connexion il y a, ce qui semble être le cas, mais sans possibilité d'examiner les 2 pièces en personne difficile d'être catégorique. Cela dit, ça donnerait assurément une belle histoire à votre jeton, et ça viendrait définitivement clore le sort du jeton LC-55 concernant le fait qu'il s'agit bel et bien d'une contrefaçon.

D'ailleurs, je me questionne encore s'il existe un ou plusieurs exemplaires de cette contrefaçon du LC-18. Car l'autre possibilité que je n'ai pas évoquée, et qui pourrait aussi être le cas, c'est que l'exemple de mai 1998 de l'encan de Montreal Stamps and Coins pourrait aussi être la source du présent exemplaire. Car je suis quasi certain que monsieur Robins avait participé à cette vente, puisque certaines des pièces offertes avaient terminé dans sa collection.

Il serait également intéressant de savoir si le LC-55 a déjà fait partie de la collection Morris. En effet, car si votre jeton provient effectivement de la vente de septembre 1912, ça permettrait peut-être de donner une origine et une période approximatives si c'est également le cas pour le LC-55.

Vous avez parlé dans un message précédent d'une possible copie électrotype. Je suis curieux, est-ce qu'il y a une quelconque séparation au niveau de la tranche?

Concernant le jeton PE-2, j'ai accumulé près de 30 exemplaires en photos au fil des ans, et par comparaison, il est évident qu'il y a des cas particuliers. Par contre, de là à pouvoir en tirer une conclusion, personnellement ce n'est pas encore mon cas.

[safarijim]

Sounds like we need to get together at some meeting and let you have a closer look at the Owen c/f. There is no way it is a electrotype of a true Owen as the images are just not correct. That said it could still be a spliced token from two haves, so I will have to send you a shot of the edge when I can. You might want to look at the picture of the LC-55 in the Saskatoon coin club data base. I believe this is not a true example but a very worn example of another token. I think if we both concur they might wish to rethink it as an example as I think it is a disservice having it up there.

Since sending you the question about the PE-2 I have come to realize that the finer lettering with the periods in line is a known entity. One was sold for over $3000.00 Canadian in the Ford sale and it was described as a later copy. In Charlton it also mentions this example "1. Copies exist with a more refined type and the period after the E is on the baseline." This may be in reference to the one sold in the Ford sale as it was some years before. From what I can tell no one has a clear idea of when this was made or why or by whom. cheers JIM

[safarijim]

By the way, if we knew the owner of the LC-55 we might be able to persuade him or her to let us compare them directly as this would be a good basis for a research article. Safarijim

[ainsivalavie]

Sounds like we need to get together at some meeting and let you have a closer look at the Owen c/f. There is no way it is a electrotype of a true Owen as the images are just not correct. That said it could still be a spliced token from two haves, so I will have to send you a shot of the edge when I can. You might want to look at the picture of the LC-55 in the Saskatoon coin club data base. I believe this is not a true example but a very worn example of another token. I think if we both concur they might wish to rethink it as an example as I think it is a disservice having it up there.

Hi Safarijim,

As far as I know, the last time the "historic" LC-55 token was offered for sale publicly was in February 1995. However, I don't know where it is today.

One possibility is that it is now in the collection of the Museum of the Bank of Canada, even though the token is not catalogued on their website. In theory, I'm due to contact the museum in the next few weeks about another project, and in the meantime I'll ask them about it, and get back to you on the subject.

And just for info, I replied last week to your private message.