QUEBEC Maysenholder & Bohle Goldsmiths Breton 566, 25.64mm, 6.53 grams, ⇈ die axis, plain edge, Very Fine
From the September 1912 edition of the American Numismatic Association's, The Numismatist (p309)
One of the most noteworthy of these fakes is the Maysenholder & Bohle card Breton 566 which first came to the knowledge of collectors about the year 1885 although from its inscription it appears to date back to about the year 1850 The story told in connection with its discovery is that on Mayson holder's death about the year 1870 his tools and working plant were sold out in lots at auction and that in a drawer forming part of one of these lots among other things eleven whole and two uniface specimens of this coin were discovered That was fifteen years after the sale was further claimed that none of these coins was issued at the time the dies were engraved because the firm dissolved soon afterwards These eleven coins were quickly sold to collectors eager to possess a representative of the new discovery at prices ranging from five to twenty five dollars and as the demand continued sufficient examples were secretly forthcoming to supply all who were ready to pay the advanced price until over thirty specimens were counted by those who kept tale on the issue But each among the unsophisticated purchasers thought he was getting one of the original eleven From this multiplication the story of the discovery began to be doubted and Canadian numismatists after a thorough examination set down the Maysenholder as a fake for the following reasons
1st It is unlikely that a number of coins could have remained so long undiscovered in a tool drawer to which numbers of workmen had access through many changes in proprietorship
2nd In comparing several coins it was found that their faces had been treated with diluted acid to give them an old appearance while the rim had escaped in spots where it appeared as bright and fresh as on a new coin There was evidence of overflow of the acid preparation on other parts of the rim
3rd The pertinent question also come up Was the Albert guard with the bar fastener as shown on the coin adopted as early as 1852
4th There is an error in the date of the founding of the firm which by the coin is set down as 1849 whereas according to the Montreal Directory it was three years later Bohle started business alone in 1843 and Maysenholder in 1848 and their names appear separately until 1852 when they are entered as Maysenholder D and Bohle F The firm continued for four years only for the 1856 Directory represents them again as working separately In 1860 Maysenholder formed a new partnership and during the ten following years his firm was changed no less than five times. He died in 1870 for in the Directory of 1871 his name does not appear but is replaced by that of Mrs D Maysenholder.