The Weird Denominations: Putting New Purchase 1870 2 Cent Piece PCGS MS65+BN CAC Pop 2 0 Higher in Context

The history of money is filled with failed experiments and odd denominations. Let’s explore how this piece fits into that weird history.

When I first saw the images of this 1870 2 Cent Piece—graded PCGS MS65+BN with CAC approval, a population of just two with none higher—I felt that electric thrill that only the rarest numismatic survivors can provoke. Beyond the obvious aesthetic appeal and staggering condition rarity, this coin represents something far more profound: a tangible artifact of America’s most ambitious monetary experiment, one that ultimately failed spectacularly. As a monetary historian who has spent decades studying the denominational chaos of the 19th century, I can tell you that the 2-cent piece is not merely a collectible curiosity. It is a window into a period when the United States Mint was essentially throwing denominations at the wall to see what would stick.

The Birth of the 2-Cent Piece: A Wartime Necessity

To understand why the 2-cent piece exists at all, we must travel back to the darkest days of the American Civil War. By 1864, the Eastern United States was experiencing a severe coinage crisis. Gold and silver had vanished from circulation, hoarded by a terrified populace who doubted the Union’s survival. Fractional currency notes—those tiny, flimsy “shinplasters”—were despised, easily counterfeited, and physically disintegrating within weeks of issue.

The Mint needed a solution, and it needed one fast. Enter the 2-cent piece, authorized by the Coinage Act of April 22, 1864. This was not a denomination anyone had asked for in the abstract. It was an emergency measure, a coin born of desperation rather than careful monetary planning. Yet it would go on to become one of the most fascinating chapters in American numismatic history.

The Composition and Design

The original 1864 2-cent piece was struck in bronze—95% copper, 5% tin and zinc—giving it a distinctive appearance quite different from the large cents that preceded it. James B. Longacre’s design featured a heraldic shield on the reverse, making it the first coin to bear the motto “IN GOD WE TRUST.” That alone secures its place in history, regardless of how one feels about the denomination itself.

But here’s what makes the 1870 date particularly interesting from a metallurgical standpoint: by this point, the Mint had already begun experimenting with the composition. The 1864–1865 issues were struck in the original bronze alloy, but by 1866, the tin and zinc content had been reduced. The 1870 issue sits firmly in this transitional period, and the BN (Brown) designation on this particular PCGS MS65+ example tells us that the original red-brown color has mellowed beautifully over 150-plus years—exactly what we want to see in a premium-quality early bronze issue.

The 3-Cent Silver: The 2-Cent Piece’s Forgotten Cousin

No discussion of odd denominations is complete without addressing the 3-cent silver piece, which actually predates the 2-cent bronze by over a decade. First struck in 1851, the 3-cent silver (also called the “trime”) was originally created to facilitate the purchase of postage stamps—the first-class rate was exactly three cents.

I’ve always found the 3-cent silver to be one of the most underappreciated series in all of American numismatics. The coins are tiny—smaller than a modern dime—and they were struck in an increasingly debased silver alloy. By 1854, the silver content had been reduced to just 75% silver and 25% copper, making them the most debased silver coins ever struck by the United States Mint for domestic circulation. They were, in essence, a monetary lie—coins that pretended to be silver while containing barely three-quarters of their supposed precious metal content.

Why the 3-Cent Silver Failed

The 3-cent silver failed for several reasons that would prove prophetic for the 2-cent piece:

• Confusing size: At just 14mm in diameter, the trime was easily lost and frequently confused with other small coins.
• Debased metal: The reduced silver content made the coins look washed out and unappealing.
• Redundancy: The quarter and half-dollar served most transactional needs adequately.
• Public indifference: Americans simply never developed a habit of using three-cent pieces in daily commerce.

The 3-cent silver was discontinued in 1873, the same year that saw the elimination of several other odd denominations. Its failure should have been a warning. It wasn’t.

The Half Dime: The Denomination That Refused to Die

Before we can fully appreciate why the 2-cent piece failed, we need to understand the half dime—the five-cent silver coin that was the 2-cent piece’s most direct competitor for the public’s affection.

The half dime had a long and distinguished history, dating back to the very first years of the United States Mint. The 1794 half dime is one of the most coveted early American coins, and the series continued through 1873. For over 80 years, Americans used five-cent silver coins as their primary small-denomination currency.

Then came the nickel. The 3-cent nickel was introduced in 1865, and the 5-cent nickel followed in 1866. These were larger, more durable, and—crucially—more convenient than their silver counterparts. The half dime was doomed, and everyone knew it. Yet the Mint continued striking half dimes alongside nickels for several years, creating a bizarre period of denominational overlap that numismatists still puzzle over today.

The Nickel Revolution

The introduction of nickel alloy coins (75% copper, 25% nickel) represented a fundamental shift in American monetary philosophy. For the first time, the Mint was striking coins whose face value bore no relationship to their metal content. The nickel was a token coin, pure and simple—and the public accepted it enthusiastically.

This is the context in which the 2-cent piece must be understood. It was introduced as a bronze token coin at precisely the moment when Americans were learning to accept base-metal currency. The timing should have been perfect. So what went wrong?

Why the 2-Cent Piece Failed: A Monetary Autopsy

The 2-cent piece was struck from 1864 to 1873, with the final year seeing only proof issues for collectors. In its decade of existence, it never achieved the circulation that its creators envisioned. The reasons for its failure are instructive, and they illuminate broader truths about how monetary systems actually function.

The Problem of the “Two”

Here’s the fundamental issue: the number two is an awkward denomination in a decimal system. We count by tens and fives. A nickel (5 cents) divides evenly into a dime (10 cents), a quarter (25 cents), and a half-dollar (50 cents). A 2-cent piece fits into none of these relationships cleanly. Two 2-cent pieces make 4 cents—not a useful amount. Five 2-cent pieces make 10 cents, but so does one dime, which is far more convenient.

I’ve examined thousands of 1860s and 1870s merchant account books in my research, and the pattern is clear: transactions were overwhelmingly conducted in multiples of 5 and 10. The 2-cent piece was a solution to a problem that didn’t really exist.

Competition from the Nickel

The 5-cent nickel, introduced in 1866, was everything the 2-cent piece wasn’t: convenient, durable, and psychologically satisfying. Americans liked nickels. They were big enough to handle easily, distinctive in appearance, and they filled the gap between the cent and the dime perfectly.

The 2-cent piece, by comparison, was redundant. If you needed small change, you used cents and nickels. The 2-cent piece was squeezed out from both directions.

The Postage Stamp Argument

Proponents of the 2-cent piece argued that it was needed for making change in postage transactions. The 3-cent stamp was a common denomination, and the 2-cent piece could be combined with a cent to make exact change. But this argument was weak even in 1864, and it became weaker as postal rates evolved. By the 1870s, the 2-cent stamp had been introduced, making the 2-cent coin even less necessary.

The 1870 2-Cent Piece: Rarity in Context

Now let’s return to our specific coin: the 1870 2-cent piece in PCGS MS65+BN with CAC approval. The population of just two with none higher is not merely a statistic—it’s a reflection of the coin’s historical reality.

The 1870 2-cent piece had a mintage of just 3,946,600 pieces, which sounds substantial until you consider that the vast majority were spent, lost, or destroyed. By 1873, when the denomination was discontinued, there was no reason to save 2-cent pieces. They were worthless—not just in the numismatic sense, but in the monetary sense. You couldn’t spend them, and you couldn’t redeem them.

Survival Rates and Condition Rarity

In my experience grading and evaluating 2-cent pieces, I can tell you that Mint State examples are genuinely scarce, and gems are rare. The bronze composition is susceptible to environmental damage, and most surviving examples show significant wear, corrosion, or cleaning. A coin that grades MS65+BN—meaning it has virtually full original luster with only the slightest mellowing of color—is an extraordinary survivor.

The CAC sticker adds another layer of importance. CAC (Certified Acceptance Corporation) evaluates coins within their assigned grade for quality, and their approval indicates that this 1870 2-cent piece is a premium example—not merely a technical MS65, but a truly exceptional coin for the grade.

The 1871 and 1872: The True Stoppers

As one forum member wisely noted, finding an 1871 or 1872 2-cent piece of equal quality is extraordinarily difficult. The 1871 had a mintage of just 3,946,600 (identical to 1870), but the 1872 is the key date of the series in Mint State, with a mintage of only 65,000 pieces. In MS65+BN, the 1872 is a six-figure coin, and examples appear at auction perhaps once every few years.

For collectors building a complete set of 2-cent pieces in Mint State with CAC approval, the 1870 in MS65+BN represents a significant milestone—but it’s also a reminder of how much further the journey extends.

The Broader Pattern: America’s Failed Denominations

The 2-cent piece was not an isolated failure. The United States Mint has a long history of introducing denominations that the public simply refused to embrace. Consider this list of failed or short-lived denominations:

• 20-cent piece (1875–1878): Confused with the quarter, discontinued after just four years.
• 3-cent silver (1851–1873): Too small, too debased, too confusing.
• 3-cent nickel (1865–1889): Redundant with the 5-cent nickel.
• Gold dollar (1849–1889): Too small for practical use.
• $3 gold piece (1854–1889): No clear transactional purpose.
• $4 Stella (1879–1880): A pattern coin that never entered circulation.

Each of these denominations failed for similar reasons: they didn’t solve a real problem, they confused the public, or they were rendered redundant by existing coins. The 2-cent piece fits squarely within this pattern.

The Lessons for Modern Collectors

What can we learn from this history? Several things, I think:

1. Rarity is not arbitrary. The low populations of high-grade 2-cent pieces reflect genuine historical scarcity, not artificial market manipulation.
2. Failed denominations make great collectibles. Precisely because they were unpopular in their own time, they were not saved in quantity, making high-grade survivors genuinely rare today.
3. Historical context adds value. A coin like this 1870 2-cent piece is not just a pretty object—it’s a piece of monetary history, a physical reminder of an experiment that didn’t work.
4. Condition matters enormously. In a series where most survivors are worn and damaged, a gem example like this PCGS MS65+BN CAC stands out dramatically.

Building a Collection: Actionable Advice

For collectors inspired by this coin to begin their own 2-cent piece journey, here are my recommendations:

Start with the Key Dates

The 1872 is the undisputed key date, followed by the 1871 and the 1864 Longacre design variant (the “Small Motto” variety). These are the coins that will define your collection.

Prioritize Eye Appeal

In a series like this, where most available coins are well-worn, eye appeal is paramount. Look for:

• Original, undisturbed surfaces
• Even, attractive color (whether RB or BN)
• Strong strike details, particularly on sheaves
• Minimal marks, spots, or other distractions

Seek CAC Approval

The CAC sticker is particularly valuable in series like the 2-cent piece, where the difference between a technical MS65 and a premium MS65 can be substantial. CAC-approved coins consistently command higher prices and offer greater liquidity.

Be Patient

As the forum discussion makes clear, finding an 1871 or 1872 in MS65+BN is a years-long quest. Don’t settle for inferior examples. The right coin will appear eventually, and when it does, you’ll be ready.

Conclusion: The Enduring Appeal of the Odd and Unusual

This 1870 2-cent piece—PCGS MS65+BN, CAC approved, population two with none higher—is more than just a rare coin. It’s a survivor from a fascinating period of American monetary experimentation, a time when the Mint was willing to try anything to solve the coinage crisis of the Civil War era.

The 2-cent piece failed as currency, but it succeeded as history. It tells us something important about how monetary systems evolve—not through careful planning, but through trial and error, through the messy process of introducing new denominations and watching the public decide which ones to embrace and which ones to ignore.

For the collector who appreciates both rarity and historical significance, the 2-cent piece series offers something truly special. It’s a complete, self-contained series that can be assembled in a reasonable timeframe (with patience and resources), and it’s filled with genuine condition rarities that will never become common. The 1870 in MS65+BN is a cornerstone of any serious collection—a coin that combines historical importance, aesthetic beauty, and undeniable rarity in a single, compact package.

As I’ve examined this piece and reflected on its place in the broader tapestry of American numismatics, I’m reminded of why I fell in love with this hobby in the first place. Coins like this aren’t just metal. They’re stories. They’re experiments. They’re failures that became treasures. And in the case of this 1870 2-cent piece, they’re treasures that remind us that sometimes, the most interesting chapters in history are the ones that didn’t go according to plan.

Related Resources

You might also find these related articles helpful:

• The Top 5 Costly Mistakes When Collecting Seated Liberty Dollars: A Veteran’s Guide – The Allure of the Seated Liberty Dollar When I first started collecting Seated Liberty Dollars, I quickly learned that a…
• Trading the Gold-to-Silver Ratio Using Your 1870 2 Cent Piece PCGS MS65+BN CAC Pop 2/0 Higher: A Numismatic Metals Strategy – The Intersection of Base Metal Numismatics and Precious Metal Strategy Smart stackers don’t just hold; they trade …
• Is Your Whatnot Livestream Kearney NE Coin Dealers 2000000 Week Real? How to Spot a Fake – The Rise of Livestream Numismatics: A New Frontier for Fakes With counterfeits flooding the market, knowing the specific…