"What are the True Relative Scarcities of Dates in the Liberty Seated Quarter Series?"; Robert A.
Izydore, The Gobrecht Journal, published by the Liberty Seated Collectors Club, Volume 13 Issue
#39, 17-19, July, 1987.

  The results of the 1986 Liberty Seated quarter survey which were published by Roy Ash in Issue
#38 of the Journal were informative and useful. My first impression upon reading the tabulated
results was that they imply that many of the relatively common dates in the series are almost as
scarce as the dates that are considered scarce or rare. Comparing two seven-year periods, for
example, the high mintage Philadelphia business strikes of 1856-1862 were reported only 2.63
times as often as the low mintage Philadelphia business strikes of 1884-1890. This ratio, as well
as others involving the common vs scarce dates that can be calculated from the tabulation, seems
too low to me.

  A search of Collective Volumes Number One and Number Two as well as Issues #34-37 of the
Journal revealed that a number of articles on the relative scarcity of the dates in the Liberty Seated
quarter series have been published. Included among these articles are those by:

  Mel Hatfield, Collective Volume Number One, page 191 (July, 1976)
  John W. McCloskey, Collective Volume Number Two, page 146 (March 1981)
  Larry W. Briggs, Collective Volume Number Two, page 153 (November, 1984)
  Roy D. Ash, Collective Volume Number Two, page 154 (March, 1985)
  Brian Keefe, Collective Volume Number Two, page 155 (March, 1985)
  Brian Keefe, Collective Volume Number Two, page 157 (March, 1984)

  The article by John McCloskey is especially significant in that it too ranks the dates of the Liberty
Seated series on the basis of collected data, but this data is of a different type in that it was
gathered from advertisements that appeared in Coin World over a period of 24 consecutive weeks.
A comparison of the number of Philadelphia mint business strikes offered for sale in Coin World
from the two seven-year periods given above shows a ratio of 5.68 in favor of the higher mintage
dates. This is a significant increase over that obtained from the member survey. The two sets of
tabulated results also show differences in the relative scarcity for a number of the scarcer dates in
the series. The order of scarcity of the 1871-S vs 1872-S, 1873-CC vs 1872-CC, 1840-0 No
Drapery vs 1840-0 With Drapery, and 1873 No Arrows vs 1873 With Arrows dates is reversed in
the two sets of data. The member survey data ranks the 1891-0 date second and the 1849-0 date
seventh in scarcity in the New Orleans mint issues, whereas the advertisement data ranks these
two dates twentieth and first, respectively. There are also significant differences in the relative
scarcities of other dates including those of 1875-CC, 1851-0, 1852-0, 1854-0, 1858-0, 1859-0,
1860-0, 1864-S, 1866-S, 1867-S, 1873-S, 1888-S, and 1888. With the exception of the 1855-S,
1872-S, and 1891-0 dates, the member survey gives a higher number of reports for the mint
marked issues than does the advertisement survey, even though a fewer total number of coins was
involved in the member survey. There is no doubt that the relative scarcity of the 1849-0 date is
more accurately predicted by the member survey because this date was reported 43 times by the
respondents, while prior to the survey it was generally believed that only 30-40 examples of this
date existed. Similarly the scarcity of the 1875-CC date is undoubtedly more accurately given by
the member survey with 37 reports than by the Coin World advertisements with zero reports.
Matters become more confusing when the rarity groups assigned by Brian Keefe in Collective
Volume Number Two for the New Orleans mint quarters are considered. The assignment of the
rarity groups, which was based on availability, is markedly different from what either of the two
tabulations discussed thus far predict. However, it was not stated in Brian's article how the data for
the group assignments was obtained.

  Perhaps it is not surprising that the two sets of data give different relative scarcity ranks. The
survey of members tends to show what the specialists in the series collect, and their collections
are likely to be skewed in favor of what they believe to be the scarcer dates. Moreover, they may
typically own only one or two examples of the more common dates, and this would cause the
common dates to appear scarcer than they really are in the tabulated results. The tabulation
obtained from the Coin World advertisements shows what is available to the general body of coin
collectors/investors. Dealer stocks contain a larger percentage of the common dates while many of
the scarcer dates are in the possession of the specialists. When available, the scarcer dates are
more commonly offered at auction.1 An argument can therefore be made that the advertised lists
show a proportionately greater representation of the more common dates.

  What then are the true relative scarcities of dates in the Liberty Seated quarter series? The
answer to this question is presently not known with accuracy. It may never be known! However,
the publication of more comprehensive studies is needed if the correct answer is to be approached
more closely than it has been thus far. Future studies of availability should include the frequency of
appearance of the various dates at auction over an extended period.

  The two tabulations that have been discussed herein are probably deficient in that the data used
to formulate them represented too small of a sample size in each case. Andrew Pollock III
described in 1985 his experiences in determining the relative rarity of uncirculated Liberty Seated
coins by studying rare coin auction catalogs. A number of coins that he had earlier classified as
being quite scarce after examining 190 catalogs were subsequently found to be fairly plentiful
when the number of catalogs examined was increased to 357.2 John Kroon reviewed Coin World
price lists and mail bid sale lists for Liberty Seated silver dollars which appeared over a period of
one year and felt that one year was sufficient to establish the relative availability of the scarcer
dates.3 However, this is not necessarily true. The longer the time period that is studied, the more
accurate the results should become. Perhaps complete tabulations of the dates advertised in the
major numismatic publications such as Coin World and Numismatic News since the times of their
inception could be obtained from the records of the publishers.

  Of course, the determination of the frequency of appearance of the various dates at auction and
in numismatic publications is of value only if the number of appearances is directly proportional to
the actual number of coins of each date in existence. This proportionality is generally assumed to
be present, but whether or not it actually exists for each date is really speculative. The actual
number of coins in existence must be known in order to prove the proportionality. A knowledge of
the actual population figures would lead to the true relative scarcities, but how can they be
determined? To conduct a complete census of all the Liberty Seated quarters in existence in the
world is a virtual impossibility. These numbers can possibly be approximated by a complete survey
of the coins that are held in collections and in dealer stocks at a given time. A joint effort involving
the participation of the Liberty Seated Collectors Club and the American Numismatic Association
might be useful in this regard. In the meantime small scale surveys similar to the one compiled by
Roy Ash are of value for determining estimates of the number of coins of the scarcer dates that are
still in existence. Such surveys should continue to be made and updated.

Closing Thoughts
  It would be interesting to be able some day to compare the results of a thorough survey, covering
a time period of 30 years or longer, on the availability of the various dates based on
advertisements, auction appearances, and mail bid sales with the results of a thorough census of
the dates held by collectors, investors, and dealers in order to see how well they match up. If they
do not match up well, then which set of results would be more useful to the collector? Perhaps it
would be the availability data because this data would better inform the collector of the
probabilities of finding the various dates over his collecting lifetime, irrespective of their true
scarcities. This is a philosophical question that would be best left up to each collector to decide.

1 Weimar W. White, The Gobrecht Journal, Issue #35, page 18 (1986).
2 Andrew W. Pollock III, The Gobrecht Journal, Collective Volume Number  Two, page 12 (March,
1985).
3 John Kroon, The Gobrecht Journal, Collective Volume Number Two, page 327 (March, 1984).