Why were New Orleans coins so poorly struck?

toreador74 · June 20, 2007 7:09AM

Why were the coins minted in New Orleans typically so poorly struck? This phenomenon seems to be across denominations. QDB's "Experts Guide" and Morgan 2nd $ Edition mention this but offer no real explanation why...

Possibilities:

1) Humidity or other water-related environmental factors
2) The workers just wanted to mint as many as fast as they could
3) The dies or equipment were sub-par compared to other mints

Any ideas/thoughts/answers?

relicsncoins · June 20, 2007 7:14AM

The south was economically devastated after the Civil War and got the most out of everything including dies?

JJ

ziggy29 · June 20, 2007 7:15AM

Another possibility -- (4) Skinflints at the New Orleans Mint decided that reducing striking pressure could increase die life, thus cutting costs.

GoldenEyeNumismatics · June 20, 2007 7:16AM

They struck the coins very hastily because of weather issues

Artist · June 20, 2007 7:17AM

In those days all dies came from Philly, therefore the branch mints has to make what was onhand work - a way to extend die life was to use less striking pressure, and I suspect that this in part might account for the poor strike quality.

Doogy · June 20, 2007 7:19AM

this exact question was posted to N.O. mint workers in the early 20th century. here is a list of their reasons for the weak strikes:

"the sun was in my eyes!"

"it wasn't me, honest!"

"darn, flalutin' high-tech gizmo things didn't work right!"

"coins?! we were makin' coins?!"

"our boss, Mr. Bowers told us this: "strike 'em light boys, so someday they'll wonder!" "

" our jobs were outsourced to Halliburton, what kinda' work do you expect from crooked no-bid contractors!? "

toreador74 · June 20, 2007 7:20AM

didn't think about the striking pressure.... but that makes sense.

This is more than a Civil War issue, however, because 1853 quarters and halves have this problem as well, I believe.

ziggy29 · June 20, 2007 7:30AM

<< <i>In those days all dies came from Philly, therefore the branch mints has to make what was onhand work - a way to extend die life was to use less striking pressure, and I suspect that this in part might account for the poor strike quality. >>

Wouldn't this have affected San Francisco even more than New Orleans because of the cost, time and distance to ship the dies? Or maybe they received enough dies to hammer the strikes? There aren't too many poorly struck '81-S Morgans...

Artist · June 20, 2007 7:38AM

<< <i>Wouldn't this have affected San Francisco even more than New Orleans because of the cost, time and distance to ship the dies? Or maybe they received enough dies to hammer the strikes? There aren't too many poorly struck '81-S Morgans... >>

Yeah you'd think...

I am only speculating here, but my guess is that because San Francisco made many more coins than New Orleans (or Charlotte or Dahlonega or Carson City for that matter) that they were furnished with more dies. I would presume that the rural mints had fewer dies to work with (I know Dahlonega was only given 1 die set to make $3.00 with in '54) and perhaps less capable press equipment as well. You certainly see not only softer strikes, but also by and large die problems such as clashing and cracking much more frequently on smaller branch issues than on Philly or SF coinage.

DaveG · June 20, 2007 9:02AM

Here's a thread with a bit more substance than the answers you've received so far.

toreador74 · June 20, 2007 9:07AM

excellent thread at the other side of that link... we were heading there eventually, I think, but better to "cut to the chase".

CoinHusker · June 20, 2007 9:09AM

New Orleans was the "Big Easy" even back then.

RWB · June 20, 2007 10:07AM

There are probably several reasons for the substandard quality of the New Orleans Mint output. Some are speculative, other are supported by documentation.

Speculative
A ‘laid back” attitude; small pool of high quality workers to hire from; distance from Washington encouraged dumping inferior coin into circulation before the director could condemn them; local political favoritism was stronger than in other cities. Too many "cordials" and a large liquor ration.

Documentation
The New Orleans Mint was known within the Mint Bureau for shoddy work almost from the beginning. NO had the highest rate of rework of any of the mints at any time. (Yes, worse than Dahlonega or Charlotte) In some months 60% of the struck silver and gold was condemned and melted. It also had a nearly constant correspondence with the mint director about poor quality coin. Superintendents seemed less hands-on than those at other mints and so workers had more opportunity to cut corners. Every time someone came to investigate, quality improved – then deteriorated when the inspection was over.

After the Civil War, NO had old equipment and less skilled staff than SF and Phil. Old equipment could not meet the production demands of huge silver dollar coinage further degrading quality. Annealing furnaces were unable to keep up with volume and many planchets were too hard, thus causing excess die wear and breakage, and the collapsed looking coins common from NO. Letters from the director about defective coin being released (based on the special assay samples) continue into 1909 – when the director closed the place a month before the end of the fiscal year.

There are also a number of letters asking for secret service investigations of NO officers for cotton and grain speculation.

tahoe98 · June 21, 2007 6:28AM

<< <i>Why were the coins minted in New Orleans typically so poorly struck? This phenomenon seems to be across denominations. QDB's "Experts Guide" and Morgan 2nd $ Edition mention this but offer no real explanation why...

Possibilities:

1) Humidity or other water-related environmental factors
2) The workers just wanted to mint as many as fast as they could
3) The dies or equipment were sub-par compared to other mints

Any ideas/thoughts/answers? >>

i think it was mardi gras

kwmorgan · June 21, 2007 6:42AM

The Denver mint was an excellent replacement for New Orleans. They care about quality much more than New Orleans ever did, or even Philadelphia now.

The Denver Mint started operations in 1906 and at that point I'm sure the New Orleans staff saw the "handwriting on the wall".

As far a New Orleans Morgans, there are some really decent ones out there. You just have to sort through a lot of inferior coins to find them.

Elcontador · June 21, 2007 7:08AM

Boudreau and Thibodeau worked probably worked at the N.O. mint. No other explanation is necessary. It's a Nawlins thing.

Why were New Orleans coins so poorly struck?

Comments

Leave a Comment