Options
The Charlotte Mint and it’s Gold *question*
asheland
Posts: 22,695 ✭✭✭✭✭
I’ve read somewhere, possibly here about Dahlonega and the fact that some of it’s gold used was from California after 1848.
So my question is the same about Charlotte. Was their gold strictly from local mines? Or after 1848 was there other gold being used?
And the 10% alloy, supposed to be copper, I’ve read sometimes silver is also found?
I’d love to read some discussion about this subject...
My only example is 1858, kinda late in the run...
Possibly California gold? NC gold?
Any pictures with the discussion would be interesting and appreciated. 👍
6
Comments
1858 probably NC gold.
Charlotte Branch Mint
CA gold deposits
51 $15,111 Cal gold
52 $28,362
53 $15,465
54 $6,328
55 $5,817.66
56 $16,237.35
57 zero
Same source shows zero CA gold for Dahlonega Mint 1849 this is not true
Annual Report Director of the Mint
Very interesting! Thank you!
My YouTube Channel
If you're interested in what gold was being deposited where, take a look at the snapshots below from the Director of the Mint, Franklin Pierce in his 1856 annual report. They provide detailed amounts of gold deposits to each of the U.S. mint facilities up through that year. As you can see from 1851 thru 1854, the majority of gold deposits submitted to the Dahlonega mint were from California's gold fields, whereas most of Charlotte's gold deposits were still coming out of the local area. By the 1856, the San Francisco mint was in full swing and handling pretty much all of the CA gold, therefore gold deposits from the West Coast to the Eastern branch mints dwindled to just a trickle by 1857.
cheers,
'dude
Interesting... I never cared where the gold originated... just that it became a coin and own it...
A quick search revealed this information.... Cheers, RickO
Early U.S. gold coins (1795-1834) consisted of a composition of .9167 gold and .0833 silver and copper. From 1834-1837 the composition was .8992 gold and .1008 silver and copper. In 1837 gold coin composition was changed to .900 gold and .100 copper and that formula continued until the cessation of gold coinage in 1933.
I recall reading the extent that was made to seal up the gold mines in Charlotte. Peace Roy
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall
Greenish gold coloration generally attributes to southern gold with the higher concentration of silver in it while orangish gold is associated with California. Of course this isn't perfect but the higher overall quality of southern gold meant less refining and less copper needed to be added to the alloy and more silver remained from the original gold deposit.
Latin American Collection
Interesting information, thank you all for sharing !!!
You need nitric acid to get the silver out of the raw gold deposits. Sometimes the southern mints had shortages of that which resulted in more silver in the gold coins. Sometimes the southern mints got sloppy. The quality if their products varied from years to year and coin to coin.
The Charlotte Mint personnel never did learn how to make the Types II and III gold dollars, and probably did care that much. All of those coins from the “C Mint” were terrible. Both Charlotte and Dahlonega were more interested in making $5 gold pieces. They made the smaller coins when they had to make them.
In 1853 79% of the gold the Dahlonega Mint porcessed came from California. Miners, who had left Georgia for the more golden pastures of the gold state, came back home with some of their diggings. Most of the gold in this 1853-D half eagle probably came from California.
Looking at the statistics, far fewer miners either went or came back from California. Therefore this 1852-C half ealge is probably made of mosly southern gold.
I am passing along some comments from a noted numismatist, a true Renaissance man:
Regarding Post: “The Charlotte Mint and its gold ‘question’” – some brief comments.
U.S. Mints used up to 5% silver in gold coin alloys from 1795 to about 1844 when it was phased out in favor of the French standard of 10% copper and no silver. The reason for using silver and copper as gold coin alloy was a practical one. Our mints had very limited refining capabilities, with most gold refined by cupellation (aka: “fire assay”). Native gold from southern U.S. mines could be purified for coinage use by melting the placer dust and adding a cheap flux such as borax. The caused most impurities to oxidize and float to the surface where it was skimmed off. Remaining liquid gold contained silver and some copper, but was generally free of iron, lead and antimony which made gold to brittle for coinage.
Foreign gold coins, a large source of U.S. coinage gold, was similar in composition to eastern mined gold. The practical result was that most gold cold be used either as-is (melted foreign coins) or with the addition of a little pure gold or some copper to balance the alloy. If a batch of native gold was under 5% in silver, only copper was added. Thus it was possible for coins of the 1830s to have only 1 or 2% silver rather than the maximum 5%.
The switch to 10% copper alloy paralleled its use in Europe and allowed our mints to melt and recoin most newer foreign coins. Although not completely free of silver the percentage was low enough to permit addition of copper alone.
A similar process was used for purifying silver from lead and other pre-processed ores.
When quantities of California gold began returning east, either to Georgia and the Carolinas with miners, or shipped by aggregators to New York and Boston, problems arose that required more robust refining and bullion processing. The nitric acid process was adopted at U.S. Mints and greatly expanded after 1848. Much California placer gold had a higher silver content than eastern gold, and it also contained platinum, iridium and osmium. These last three mimicked gold weight, but were worth much less. This reduced the true pure gold content and caused extensive complaint in London and elsewhere about being “short” of true gold content. California gold depositors also felt they were being treated unfairly because they were paid only for gold and the Mints kept the silver. This is when a much more robust and chemically active approach to gold and silver refining was firmly adopted.
With multiple gold sources appearing regularly in deposits, U.S. Mints changed to active refining of all gold deposits except certified .900 coin gold and 0.999 fine gold. This simplified making coins, but greatly complicated making assays and refining. Eventually, use of nitric acid was abandoned in favor of various sulfuric acid processes and finally electrolysis.
If collectors want to know if their Charlotte and Dahlonega coins were made from California gold, they can have a high-quality non-destructive assay performed. The present of platinum, iridium or osmium indicates the metal probably originated in western North America including California.
Great information! Thanks for sharing this.
@BillJones excellent examples!
My YouTube Channel
(See above) The information contained in the Director of the Mint Reports for
the SFBM circa 1854-1855 etc. are not completely accurate regarding gold bullion sources for coinage.
The actual Mint registers show gold also coming in from Oregon that contained iridium. There were even a few deposits from Australia.
Obviously the vast majority of the gold was from Cal.