1795 Half Eagle - The five
dollar gold piece dated 1795 with the heraldic eagle (large
eagle) reverse is a curious and enigmatic issue. The new reverse
design was not introduced in mid 1797, so these coins were already
backdated two full years before they were struck. The reason
for their existence is a story of economical reasons, yellow
fever and carelessness from Mint employees. Three different
varieties are known of this issue, with the following rarity
ratings as listed by Bass-Dannreuther in their reference on
early American gold coinage:
The exact mintage of this 1795 half eagle variety is unknown.
Some sources say that the total mintage was as low as 500
pieces, but based on the quantity of pieces known a number
closer to 1,500 might be more correct. Even with the latter
number correct this remains an extremely low mintage, and
it is not surprising that this is a rare issue which is not
offered at the public market with any regularity. Despite
the numbers listed above some sources quote the number of
pieces known as low as 35, or as high as 50. This will also
remain to be a point of discussion which will continue when
more pieces are discovered and brought to light in the numismatic
community.
Used for coinage of this 1795 half eagle issue were three
different obverses and two different reverses. All of the
obverses had previously been used to strike small eagle varieties,
which had been first struck in 1795. All uses of these dies
for striking heraldic eagle reverse coins appear to have occurred
after all small eagle coins had been struck. However, it would
not come as a complete surprise when a heraldic eagle coin
is found with the obverse in an earlier die state then on
the small eagle variety with the same obverse. All obverses
show obvious die rust in the fields, indicating that they
had been in storage for sometime, and not carefully stored
as would be necessary to keep the dies in good condition.
This could be because the dies were no longer meant for coinage,
but with the high costs of coinage dies this seems unlikely.
The true cause appears to be the yellow fever epidemic of
1797.
The annual outbreak of yellow lever in Philadelphia in 1797
was bad, but not as severe as it had been in 1793. Yet, it
was more than enough to close down operations at the Mint,
halting coinage operations. Yellow fever was a large problem
in 18th century life, and outbreaks were common in cities
like Philadelphia. It is a viral infection which is borne
by mosquitos. It causes jaundice, which is clearly visible
as the person infected will turn yellow because of liver injury
(hence the name). While it can still not be cured by medication,
some people survive. Yet, in the late 1700s this number was
extremely small, and with the vaccine not discovered until
1937 the disease was extremely dangerous. In an 1855 book
about the history of the disease up to that point in Philadelphia
the following has been written about the outbreak of that
year:
“1797.—Very different was the extent of the prevalence
of yellow fever in the year succeeding to that last mentioned.
On this occasion, it once more assumed the character of an
epidemic, less extensive and fatal, doubtless, than that of
1793 and some that followed, but of sufficient severity to
merit a somewhat detailed notice.”
After the yellow fever epidemic there was a need for production
of gold coinage at the Mint. The dies that were put in storage
following the outbreak of the fever re-entered storage, and
it appears that during this time in late 1797 or early 1798
this rarity was created. Because of the haste in production
quality control was not as strict as usually, neither was
the striking quality. As such, many pieces show weakly struck
centers, even when in uncirculated condition. These Mint State
pieces are more available than similar issues of the same
era, even in MS-63 and MS-64 condition. Yet, it remains a
rare coin in any grade, and even in circulated condition this
is a true trophy coin to hold. One with a special story to
tell, that’s for sure.
We at U.S. Rare Coin
Investments highly recommend these coins for investments portfolios.
Whether a single coin or the long term acquisition of them
with the goal of building a set in terms of historical importances
as well as longterm profit potential, cannot be overstated
in our opinion.
