The Canada-New Zealand Mule.

 

Just what are these things? They made quite a splash when first discovered in the late 1980s but now seem to be overlooked, even by Canadians. For Canada, they were listed only in the One-Dollar variety section of the 60th edition of the Charlton catalogue and in Krause's World Coins catalogue they are listed as "NZ KM #95" and "Canada KM#120.2". Obviously Krause considered them to also be a New Zealand error as well as Canadian . In the writer's opinion, they are a Canadian , rather than a New Zealand error coin. Only.

 

This particular mule combines the obverse of a New Zealand 50-Cents reading ELIZABETH II NEW ZEALAND and the year 1985 below with the reverse of a 1985 Canadian nickel dollar. The upper illustration shown below is not quite as sharp as we would hope but it is guaranteed to be of an actual mule and not just two photos cobbled together.

 

 

Top: The mule as pictured in Jeffrey Hoare's Torex Sale, No. 52, 1996, Lot 1269.

Bottom: Mule as pictured in Charlton's "Canadian Coins" catalogue, 60th ed., p.545

 

 

The NZ 50-Cent issues of 1984 and 1985 can be differentiated between Llantrisant (1984) and Canberra (1985) from the Canadian struck in the same years by the Canadian obverses having wiry hair and bushy eyebrows in those two years, the result no doubt of a master die having been cut slightly too deep.

 

The known mules (Krause lists the number as six) all have one common obverse characteristic: a slight doubling of the lettering. This is to be expected; the diameter of the nickel dollar (32.13mm) is somewhat larger than that of the New Zealand 50-cent and the finished diameter of the mule is in the order of 32.05mm. The smaller mis-matched obverse would result in more metal spread. For what it's worth, the mule listed in the Hoare auction was also lighter than the nickel dollar, weighing 15.31 grams against the dollar's 15.62 grams. But it was also "raw-graded" as being an EF with a polished obverse.

 

The New Zealand 50-cents has been using essentially the same reverse, shown left, since 1967 for their regular circulation coins. For a number of those years (1978-87) some of these mintages were struck in Canada . In any case, there was no mintmark to indicate whether Canada , Britain 's Royal Mint in Llantrisant, or the Royal Australian Mint in Canberra , all of whom struck these coins, sometimes simultaneously, was the mint of origin.

 

A Canadian or New Zealand error coin? Let's follow logic. We know that both the New Zealand 50-cent and nickel dollar were struck at the same mint (probably Winnipeg since this is where Canadian circulating coin is usually produced). While the reverses of the two coins are wildly different and very highly unlikely to be confused, the obverses are much the same, using the same portrait of the Queen. The fact that a working die was involved, sunk mirror-image in negative relief, makes the danger of mixup even greater.

 

Therefore we have a believable scenario: during the mint run of the Canadian 1985 nickel dollar, some press operator, probably in a hurry and not paying close enough attention, could lock in an obverse working die of the New Zealand 50-Cent, only discovering his mistake after the press was in operation. Presumably he would have immediately shut it down and done his best to retrieve the "coin mistakes" from the bin, missing a few of them despite his efforts. These made their way into circulation. They would, therefore, be a Canadian error coin.

 

More proof? This mule is practically unknown in New Zealand and even on the internet, search entry for " New Zealand coin mule" will bring up little more than the undated (1967?) mule of the Bahamas 5-Cent obverse / New Zealand 2-Cent reverse. Top collectors are "not aware of any example ever making its way to NZ" and "it appears the coins were released in Canada but never in NZ". Sales of these coins appear to be largely limited to Canada , to date ICCS having graded three: 1 AU-50 (which may be the one sold by Michael Walsh at the 2002 CNA auction) and 2 MS-60. The Jeffrey Hoare "EF polished obverse" would make a fourth. The Krause catalogue says "6 known".

 

Even though Krause lists them only in one condition (MS-63), the best of them seem to be MS-60 - normal, clattery, baggy UNCs - indicating they are legitimate errors and not some unexplained backdoor concoctions. For this reason, the writer would urge they be included in the front "Dollar" section of Canadian catalogues where they have as good - or better - claim as the various flipped reverses, diving geese and the like. (By the way, the Charlton catalogue gives the market value of these as being $3,000 - 5,000).

 

(Special thanks to MICC member George Manz for his unstinting help in rounding up information I was unable to find. Also note that any unwarranted conclusion-jumping is mine alone. - wlj)

 

Wayne Jacobs is a numismatic expert. Currently secretary and editor of the "Mid-Island Coin Club Numismatic Journal"of Nanaimo, Vancouver Island , British Columbia, he is the award winning author of numerous articles. The MICC journal are hosted here: MICC webpages Copyright 2006 Wayne Jacobs. This article may be reprinted freely for non commercial purpose only if the resource box is left intact, linking back to us.