Some Point on Early US Coining
Rittenhouse
Posts: 565 ✭✭✭
I read with interest the thread on the 1794 Dollar. Unfortunately I was busy with “less important” work and family matters and did not have time to contribute. The following are some points gleaned from the Mint Records and other sources:
1. Presses - The three (3) early presses (1792 – 1795) were provided by John Harper. A payment warrant dated August 29, 1792 for the presses is in the Mint Records - see also Stewart, pg. 170. (Harper was involved with both the NJ coppers and the “pre-Mint” issues of 1792 – Getz, dimes, and half disme.)
Jean-Pierre Droz did not supply presses to the Mint. I discovered this in the late 80s by comparing records and published it in various articles. The proof is rather simple:
Droz was offered the job of Mint Director and two screw presses were ordered from him; see the Jefferson letter in Stewart, pg. 31 – 33.
In an Oct. 14, 1792 letter to Jefferson, William Short, US Minister to France, relates that Droz has still not built the screw presses - see Taxay, pp 55 – 56.
In “The Mint Manual of Coins of All Nations”, pg. 99, Snowden quotes Voigt’s first account book showing the “heavy press” being assembled on Sept. 25, 1792.
Given that a time machine did not exist in 1792, how can the heavy press be in the Mint and under assembly a month BEFORE Droz has even started making it?
The answer, of course is simple: Droz never made any presses. They all came from Harper.
2. Feed Mechanisms - It is likely that the Harper presses had a feed mechanism. It was apparently simplistic, requiring a person to place each planchet individually in the feeder rather than having a “feed tube”. The feed tube was apparently a further refinement by Harper during his abortive attempt to obtain a contract for coining of cents. See the report on Harper Feb. 8, 1796 and an April 22, 1799 letter from Boudinot to Boulton in the Letters Sent file of the Mint Records.
3. Later presses – all of the Mint’s original presses were replaced in 1794 – 1795 with much heavier presses built by John Rutter & Samuel Howell. See the Warrant Book in the Mint records or Stewart, pp. 175, 178, 179. The dollar press is the warrant to Howell dated Feb. 2, 1795 for the 1 ton, 11 cwt ( 3232 lbs) press.
4. Die Prep – Only the Engravers were allowed to engrave, sink, and polish dies – see the “Mint Rules and Regulations” in the Letters Sent file of the Mint Records. Likewise only the Coiner and Asst. Coiner were allowed to handle the dies in the coining room.
5. Lapping - Lapping required removal from the press by Coiner or Asst. Coiner and transport upstairs to the engraver. Evidence of the parallel lapping lines on pre-1836 coinage strongly suggests a manual lapping jig – rotary laps leave circular lines. From my experience in the die forming industry, lapping, any re-engraving (if req’d) , cleaning, re-install of the dies, and set-up would have taken at least 2 hours depending upon the engraver’s schedule and polishing/engraving work required.
6. Striking Rates – Prior to 1836, the Mint only recorded striking rates for cents and small coinage (qtrs, dimes, hd, hc). In 1795, Boudinot estimated the rate at 10,000 per day, but a review of the coining acft. Books shows 8000 per day. Half Dollars can be calculated at 5000 per day circa 1798 from these acct books. Earlier rates and dollars would have been a bit lower. An estimate of 4000 for halfs and 3000 for dollars 1794 – 1798 would be reasonable. From 1836 on the rates are as follows:
60/min for the dollar and half dollar, 10 gold
75/min for the cent, quarter, half cent, 5 gold
90/min for the dime and half dime
7. Deliveries versus Production Date – All dates given in the early Mint records are delivery dates NOT production or striking dates. The Oct. 15 1794 date recorded for the dollars IS NOT the production date; it is the date the Director signed the warrant acknowledging delivery of the coins. This COULD be the production date, but not necessarily so. The Oct. 15 1794 is LIKELY the production date but NOT CERTAIN. They could have been struck the day before or a couple days before.
8. "Specimen Strikes”. The Mint Records make NO reference to so-called specimen strikes. The records do refer to “fancy pieces”. These were what we call proofs - polished or burnished planchets, polished dies, struck at least twice, intended for presentation. At this time, “proofs” were trials of finished dies (as in “proving the dies”).
So now for the so-called 1794 “Specimen” Dollar. As others have offered, since the Carter dollar shows adjustment marks it is MOST CERTAINLY NOT a presentation piece. Presentation pieces were struck on specially selected and polished or burnished planchets. A proper weight planchet would have been hand selected. If most were overweight, the planchet would have been carefully ground and polished to weight. See the 1795 O123 Merkin half dollar and the 1795 B7 “Lord St. Oswald” dollar for examples of what a silver presentation piece SHOULD look like. These are characterized by a lack of adjustment marks, polished or burnished planchets and TWO STRIKES.
Furthermore, it is 99 44/100 percent certain that the 1794 Carter dollar IS NOT the first piece struck. Since the screw presses were manual and required a bit of operation to “settle in”, a presentation piece would almost certainly not be the first struck. A few pieces would be struck after set up to ensure the dies were seated properly; then the presentation pieces would be struck.
In sum, the Carter piece is certainly a nice fully struck early state prooflike and as such would be one of the first 30 or so coins from fresh dies. However, be aware that this will not stop the “experts” (read MARKETING experts not research or numismatic experts) from declaring it the first dollar in order to separate a well-heeled collector from a big pot of money. And that, IMHO, is the sole objective.
1. Presses - The three (3) early presses (1792 – 1795) were provided by John Harper. A payment warrant dated August 29, 1792 for the presses is in the Mint Records - see also Stewart, pg. 170. (Harper was involved with both the NJ coppers and the “pre-Mint” issues of 1792 – Getz, dimes, and half disme.)
Jean-Pierre Droz did not supply presses to the Mint. I discovered this in the late 80s by comparing records and published it in various articles. The proof is rather simple:
Droz was offered the job of Mint Director and two screw presses were ordered from him; see the Jefferson letter in Stewart, pg. 31 – 33.
In an Oct. 14, 1792 letter to Jefferson, William Short, US Minister to France, relates that Droz has still not built the screw presses - see Taxay, pp 55 – 56.
In “The Mint Manual of Coins of All Nations”, pg. 99, Snowden quotes Voigt’s first account book showing the “heavy press” being assembled on Sept. 25, 1792.
Given that a time machine did not exist in 1792, how can the heavy press be in the Mint and under assembly a month BEFORE Droz has even started making it?
The answer, of course is simple: Droz never made any presses. They all came from Harper.
2. Feed Mechanisms - It is likely that the Harper presses had a feed mechanism. It was apparently simplistic, requiring a person to place each planchet individually in the feeder rather than having a “feed tube”. The feed tube was apparently a further refinement by Harper during his abortive attempt to obtain a contract for coining of cents. See the report on Harper Feb. 8, 1796 and an April 22, 1799 letter from Boudinot to Boulton in the Letters Sent file of the Mint Records.
3. Later presses – all of the Mint’s original presses were replaced in 1794 – 1795 with much heavier presses built by John Rutter & Samuel Howell. See the Warrant Book in the Mint records or Stewart, pp. 175, 178, 179. The dollar press is the warrant to Howell dated Feb. 2, 1795 for the 1 ton, 11 cwt ( 3232 lbs) press.
4. Die Prep – Only the Engravers were allowed to engrave, sink, and polish dies – see the “Mint Rules and Regulations” in the Letters Sent file of the Mint Records. Likewise only the Coiner and Asst. Coiner were allowed to handle the dies in the coining room.
5. Lapping - Lapping required removal from the press by Coiner or Asst. Coiner and transport upstairs to the engraver. Evidence of the parallel lapping lines on pre-1836 coinage strongly suggests a manual lapping jig – rotary laps leave circular lines. From my experience in the die forming industry, lapping, any re-engraving (if req’d) , cleaning, re-install of the dies, and set-up would have taken at least 2 hours depending upon the engraver’s schedule and polishing/engraving work required.
6. Striking Rates – Prior to 1836, the Mint only recorded striking rates for cents and small coinage (qtrs, dimes, hd, hc). In 1795, Boudinot estimated the rate at 10,000 per day, but a review of the coining acft. Books shows 8000 per day. Half Dollars can be calculated at 5000 per day circa 1798 from these acct books. Earlier rates and dollars would have been a bit lower. An estimate of 4000 for halfs and 3000 for dollars 1794 – 1798 would be reasonable. From 1836 on the rates are as follows:
60/min for the dollar and half dollar, 10 gold
75/min for the cent, quarter, half cent, 5 gold
90/min for the dime and half dime
7. Deliveries versus Production Date – All dates given in the early Mint records are delivery dates NOT production or striking dates. The Oct. 15 1794 date recorded for the dollars IS NOT the production date; it is the date the Director signed the warrant acknowledging delivery of the coins. This COULD be the production date, but not necessarily so. The Oct. 15 1794 is LIKELY the production date but NOT CERTAIN. They could have been struck the day before or a couple days before.
8. "Specimen Strikes”. The Mint Records make NO reference to so-called specimen strikes. The records do refer to “fancy pieces”. These were what we call proofs - polished or burnished planchets, polished dies, struck at least twice, intended for presentation. At this time, “proofs” were trials of finished dies (as in “proving the dies”).
So now for the so-called 1794 “Specimen” Dollar. As others have offered, since the Carter dollar shows adjustment marks it is MOST CERTAINLY NOT a presentation piece. Presentation pieces were struck on specially selected and polished or burnished planchets. A proper weight planchet would have been hand selected. If most were overweight, the planchet would have been carefully ground and polished to weight. See the 1795 O123 Merkin half dollar and the 1795 B7 “Lord St. Oswald” dollar for examples of what a silver presentation piece SHOULD look like. These are characterized by a lack of adjustment marks, polished or burnished planchets and TWO STRIKES.
Furthermore, it is 99 44/100 percent certain that the 1794 Carter dollar IS NOT the first piece struck. Since the screw presses were manual and required a bit of operation to “settle in”, a presentation piece would almost certainly not be the first struck. A few pieces would be struck after set up to ensure the dies were seated properly; then the presentation pieces would be struck.
In sum, the Carter piece is certainly a nice fully struck early state prooflike and as such would be one of the first 30 or so coins from fresh dies. However, be aware that this will not stop the “experts” (read MARKETING experts not research or numismatic experts) from declaring it the first dollar in order to separate a well-heeled collector from a big pot of money. And that, IMHO, is the sole objective.
0
Comments
Nice update,thank you for your input.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
42/92
I felt all along that issue with the 1794 dollar came down to the adjustment marks.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
42/92
Our eBay auctions - TRUE auctions: start at $0.01, no reserve, 30 day unconditional return privilege & free shipping!
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor