Expert: Dmitry Livshits - 3/29/2010

Question
QUESTION: My great aunt used to live in Hawaii around the 1930s-50s and she collected coins. I ended up finding an 1881 five-cent "Kalakaua, King of Sandwich Islands" coin that she once owned.  

The only problem is that someone separated the coin. Both halves match up but it is as if someone struck it with a blade and it sliced in half (actually 2/3rds and 1/3rd). It says "Sandwich Islands" on it--not Hawaii. Is that the coin that I saw in the coin books under "Hawaiian coins and tokens"? I was also wondering why someone would cut this in half and is it without value because of it?
 
Thank you for any information that you can provide.

ANSWER: Hi Pam,
This is a very interesting question, and the value part of it is something I wonder about myself.
As for the history: There were only an estimated 200 pieces of the 1881 5 cent piece struck in Paris, France specifically for the Hawaiian king. However, there have also been many re-strikes made, both old and modern.
The re-strikes have little value, especially if they are damaged. An original strike in good shape is worth from $5,000 to $7,500 or more. Mint condition examples are very rare and sell for astonishing amounts.
Now, if yours is indeed an original it will still be worth anywhere from a couple of hundred dollars up to a couple of thousand. It really depends on the amount of wear. Even when it's cut there is a huge difference in value for one that is well worn and one that has sharp details.
The quickest reliable way to tell if you have an original or later strike is to look at the crown. If there is a tiny cross on top of the crown, you have an original. If there is no cross, you have a later version. Please note that you may need a magnifying glass to really see the cross.
I have no idea why someone would purposely cut a coin in half. Perhaps someone needed to test some new machinery and had no idea about coins, though I would then wonder how they would come into possession of it in the first place.
One interesting theory I have is that (if it's an original strike) it may have been a sub-par example. All mints do quality control and destroy coins that come out below their standards. If this was the case and could be proven, it would dramatically increase the value.
Definitely some food for thought.
Thanks for the question! =)


---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Thank you for your very detailed thorough answer. You have inspired me to ask another couple of questions and provide more information about the coin. When I look at the crown, there appears to be something on top and it looks like an old-style cross on the very tip top of the crown, overlapping the etched border. The words around the "5" are "Au Mau Ke Ea O Ka Aina Ka Pono." On the front it says, "Kalakaua Kin [the "g" of "king" is missing where the coin was cut]of Sandwich Islands 1881." It doesn't say "Hawaii" and I was wondering if this was how the coin was originally cast or if that was a later cast using "Sandwich Islands." The coin is light in weight and your theory about it being tested and tossed may be correct. The cut is a slightly curved one that looks like maybe a tool was struck by a hammer to slice right through it. The cut is just above the king's eye and cuts along his hairline, separating his hair from his face and neck. The details are very clear on the coin, as if this was just tested or split and set aside, with some scraping around the date. If this is an unusual coin, where do you go to get it valued and how do you find a home for it (with a museum or collection)? I am not a collector so I don't know where you go to identify and value this. Thank you so much for your well-researched answers. This has become a fun journey for my family.

ANSWER: Hi again,
This is how the coin was originally made, with the "Sandwich Islands" legends. It indeed sounds like you have a rare original strike. They were made on thin Nickel metal planchets and are usually very thin.
Another thing to check for, the edge should have the word "MAILLECHORT" stamped on the edge, to signify it is an original Paris issue.
You mentioned that the cut is slightly curved. There are mint errors known as a straight or curved clip. What happens with the curved clip is that a previous coin does not completely exit the die and part is cut of when the next coin is struck.
This would make it an even more rare example than if it were tested and tossed by the mint. Most mint errors are discarded, but some of the more rare ones are those that had been (illegally) taken home by the quality control employees. This would explain how the two pieces remained together.
I would highly suggest sending the coin to NGC to be professionally graded and certified. You can go to the NGC web site and find a local representative who will send the coins in for you. The cost will be anywhere from $25 to $50, depending on the exact attribution services rendered. This is absolutely worth it.
A coin in two pieces with no certification versus one that is a certified error or mint-destroyed piece equals the difference between something worth $1,000 or $10,000 or even more.
I would be curious to see a picture of the coin, if you would like to post another follow-up and attach one that would be great.
Thanks again for the question! =)

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Hello again: I scanned the coin into an image file and enlarged it so that I could see it better and send it to this site. I would like to show both sides of the coin but I don't know if I can send two photos in. I will try. What may have looked like a cross above the "5" may be the top of the crown; I am not sure as my eyesight isn't perfect. There's something other than the border there, but I am not sure if it was what you had mentioned. I couldn't find the word "Maillechort" around the edge of the coin either, but it is hard for me to see really tiny details. If a mint was testing the coin (it is rather lightweight), would it still have the imprint around the rim, if it was tossed? I do not know what NGC stands for but I would like to have someone look at it. I don't know how they could know why it was cut after 100 years, but I guess that is why people are "experts." Thank you so much for this very detailed information.

Answer
Hi again Pam,
The way that the metal is cut actually sheds much light on this coin. The area where the metal split is very rough, which would not be the case with nickel. This coin is made of aluminum, which is consistent with counterfeits made in Canada in the early part of the 1900's. This makes sense as to why someone destroyed the coin. The value on the vintage copies is limited, since it is difficult to legally auction them off. For one in this condition I honestly could not give you an estimate that was any good.
I am sorry that it did not turn out to be the real thing. If it were, that would really be finding a needle in a huge haystack.
Thanks again for the questions! =)