The History Of The Buffalo Nickel - Part II

Continued from Part Iadditional changes that also would have to be
A buffalo (bison) named Black Diamond, who wasmade.
a resident of the New York Zoological ParkFraser complained to MacVeagh about the
served as the model. Fraser utilized a little artisticcircus-like atmosphere. MacVeagh tended to
freedom to depict the bison as though he was onagree, and asked Mint Director Roberts to settle
the Great Plains. A few years after the release ofthe matter quietly by not asking the artist to do
the nickel, Black Diamond was sold to a meatanything more. Roberts saw the matter
packing plant who then sold him as Black Diamonddifferently and ordered Fraser to work on the
steaks despite numerous attempts to save him.latest list of Hobbs' demands. It was now nearly
The stuffed head of Black Diamond was displayedthe middle of February 1913, and there was no
at a major coin convention during the 1980's.end in sight. The artist complained once again to
The American Indian fascinated Fraser, so muchthe Treasury.
so that it was no surprise he chose an IndianFinally, on February 15th, MacVeagh set up a final
design for the 5-cent coin design. Fraser, whoconference that was held with all interested
grew up in the Dakota Territory in the 1880'sparties with the end result being MacVeagh
was a witness to the slaughter of the Americanordering an end to the matter and that the most
buffalo and the destruction of the way of life ofrecent designs be used. Production began on
Native Americans of the Great Plains. By creatingFebruary 21, 1913 with a single coining press at
the Buffalo Nickel, Fraser was able to honor andthe Philadelphia Mint started turning out the nickels
preserve an important part of American history.at the rate of 120 a minute.
The preliminary sketches were very impressiveWhen the coins reached circulation, public reaction
and Mint Director George E. Roberts, who alsowas mixed. Although MacVeagh promised the
had held that post when President Rooseveltnickel would be "immensely interesting and
revamped the coinage, was highly enthusiastic.beautiful." the New York Times condemned them
Although the designs were, on general principle,as a "travesty on artistic effect." Other critics said
quickly approved by Secretary MacVeagh, quitethat the coin's "rough" surfaces would encourage
some time passed while various officials arguedcounterfeiters (I guess a nickel went a long way
among themselves how the details should appearback then). Unfortunately, the biggest complaint,
on the coin. By June 26, 1912, Roberts hadand one that would plague the nickel forever was
tentatively approved plaster models of the newthe complaint about the nickels inability to
five-cent coin-although he did request that Fraserwithstand heavy use. One coin collectors'
lower the relief somewhat.magazine predicted that the slightest wear would
During the summer of 1912, all was going well andobliterate the date and the inscription Five Cents
a finished product was close at hand, or so it"beyond understanding." Sure enough, although
seemed. The Hobbs Company of New York, anow in circulation for only a month it was noticed
manufacturer of coin-operated vending machines,that the lettering for the words 'FIVE CENTS' on
got wind of the planned design change on thethe Buffalo Nickels was wearing away. The words
five-cent piece and wanted to review the designswere positioned within the outline of the raised
for they feared the new design would not workmound on which the buffalo was standing. The
in their vending machines.early coins showed the bison standing on a grassy
Several months of bickering, changes, etc wouldmound. For the new version, engraver Charles
ensue between Hobbs, Fraser, MacVeagh, etc. InBarber cut away the base of the mound to make
December of 1912, MacVeagh grew tired of thea straight line. He also lowered the words Five
mess and ordered that Fraser be allowed toCents so the rim would protect them from wear.
complete his work. In late 1912/early 1913, modelsCollectors noticed right away that the inscription
went to Chief Engraver Charles Barber, whowas clearer. But the changes did not help the date
oversaw the preparation of dies and the strikingon the other side of the coin. Excessive wear of
of pattern coins early in January 1913. It is knownthe numerals continued to plague Buffalo nickels.
that Barber was cooperative in the effort, whichBarber again made minor modifications in 1916 by
was uncharacteristic of him considering that thelowering the relief of the head and strengthening
coin being replaced was one he designed and heseveral details, including the nose. In addition, the
had no or little input into the new design.lettering of the word LIBERTY was made heavier.
All seemed well until, somehow, a pattern coin fellAlthough the date problem was now well known,
into the hands of one of the Hobbs folks and thewith all the modifications Barber made, he never
design war began once again. Changes wereaddressed the problem of the date wearing down
asked and the Mint Bureau agreed. The changestoo rapidly. That was unfortunate as now we see
were accommodated without sacrificing artisticall the games being played with acid, etc., in order
creativity and once again all seemed well as itto restore dates. More on acid date recovery
seemed the Hobbs folks were content. Again, solater. By the end of 1937 planning for the Buffalo
it seemed. Although the on-site engineer indicatednickel's successor was well under way, as the
that all seemed fine, once the engineer returneddesign's required 25 years would end the following
to company headquarters in New York, Hobbs'year. It was to be replaced by the third coin to
officials did an abrupt about-face. The companybear a likeness of one of our presidents, Thomas
now wrote the Mint that the latest pattern wasJefferson.
totally unacceptable-and produced a long list of