1889 1/4 anna variation

[brokencompass]

I am having a difficult time attributing the mint of 1889 1/4 anna. On Krause, it says that for 1/4 anna's after the 1870's Calcutta mint coins has a type II Reverse and Bombay has a Type I reverse.
Reverse I - Leaf below first and last digit of date
Reverse II - Leaf below center of date

From the pictures below, I am not able to see the difference. The first picture is an NGC attributed (C) which is supposed to have a leaf below center of date, it does have it. The second picture is an NGC attributed (B) which also has the leaf below center of date.

[brokencompass]

Here's the second picture that I missed which is a (B)

[brokencompass]

Any thoughts?

[Figleaf]

The second coin is mis-attributed. Both are Calcutta. I hope the explanations below help. I like to look at how the stem connecting the leaves flows.

Peter

[brokencompass]

Thanks Peter!! Which book is the illustration from? Pridmore?

[Figleaf]

British Commonwealth Coins 1649-1871, third edition by Jerome Remick, Somer James, Anthony Dowle and Patrick Finn. It's old, but I find myself still using it a lot. It's available here.

Peter

[brokencompass]

For the 1862 1/4 annas, the Bust types and mint attribution in Krause are opposite to the attribution in this book. Krause states Bust A as Single flower on right on bottom panel but this book shows two flowers for Bust A. They could have been calling the same thing with who different names but again Krause says Single Flower Obverse/ Leaves on first and last digit of date is Calcutta but this book says the same thing as Bombay. It's confusing!!!

[Figleaf]

Either find more catalogue listings or bet on the author you trust most. Maybe someone has Pridmore. I would trust Pridmore any time.

Peter