Joseph Wharton - Influence on nickel in coinage

StrikeOutXXX

I was reading Richard Snow’s “A Guide Book of Flying Eagle and Indian Head Cents”, and read an interesting part probably known to many, but not to me until now regarding the then newly proposed 88 parts copper, 12 parts nickel cent and nickel coins in general. Snow writes:

“On July 11, 1856, Mint Director James Ross Snowden recommended the new format. Chief Engraver James B. Longacre was instructed to prepare patterns. Nickel came form a private mine at Lancaster Gap, Pennsylvania, the owners of which obligingly furnished free samples of the copper-nickel allow to the Mint, from which patterns were struck. In 1863 Joseph Wharton became the owner of the mine. Afterward he used his political influence to create new denominations in nickel alloy: the three-cent and five-cent pieces of 1865 and 1866.”

In another section of the book, Snow also writes:

“Meanwhile on April 15, 1864, Joseph Wharton, who in 1863 had purchased the nickel mine at Lancaster Gap, Pennsylvania, and who reportedly had $200,000 invested in it, published a pamphlet, Project for Reorganizing the Small Coinage of the United States of America, which recommended that the use of nickel be increased, and denominations of 1¢, 2¢, 3¢, 5¢, and 10¢ be made with an alloy of 25% nickel and 75% copper. Wharton exercised strong influence on certain members of Congress, and at his doorstep can be directly laid the widespread use of nickel in coinage during this era including the new nickel three-cent piece in 1865 and the nickel five-cent piece in 1866 – all made in accordance with his 25% nickel, 75% copper suggestion.”

Reading this got me interested, so naturally, I did a forum search, finding a post by Michael where he quotes a September 2004 Coins Magazine article titled Nickel three-cent piece often overlooked by Mark Benvenuto:

“When a bill was introduced into Congress to have three-cent coins made specifically to replace three-cent notes, it is reported that it passed without debate. What does not get reported as frequently is that Joseph Wharton, owner and chief stockholder of several mines in Pennsylvania, including the Gap Nickel Mine in Lancaster (and the father of the zinc and nickel industries in the growing United States) had several key friends and supporters in Congress who helped make sure that bill passed as written. This meant there would not only be three-cent coins made to replace the worn and unwanted notes, but also that there would be a ready supply of metal to coin them, provided by one of the nation’s wealthier men who would get still wealthier in the process.”

Google brought me to Wikipedia, where there is a ton of info on the man, but I was more interested in his ties to getting nickel material included in US coinage. Wikipedia link if interested

I thought it was interesting enough to type all this up for the others like me who didn’t know. For the scholarly members who always impress me with further knowledge on many subjects, please feel free to add any other tidbits I/others might find interesting.

Few specific questions if anyone knows. The pamphlet Wharton wrote – is it available anywhere? Google didn’t find it for me. Thought it might be interesting to read.

This "Influence" mentioned with Congress... can anyone elaborate on this - is this just the "Good friends from the neighborhood" influence, the greasing the palms type, the Tony Soprano variety, etc.

It sounds very much like Wharton had quite an influence in getting nickel put in and kept in coins. Is it probable that without his efforts, there would be another composition in use today, or would it have led to nickel eventually without him and his friends/influence in Congress at the time?

ModernCrapNut

Graft and payoffs are nothing new for politicians.

EagleEye

The pamphlet Wharton wrote – is it available anywhere?

Yes, it was reprinted about 15 years ago.

What is more amazing is that Lewis Feuchtwanger promoted a copper-nickel alloy in 1837 and it was rejected by James Booth, who was a scientist at the Frankin Institute. In 1856, Booth, now melter and refiner at the Mint, was the prime motivator in promoting copper-nickel in coinage.

I think had Wharton not promoted nickel we would have had a bronze cent, two cent and three cent piece. Beyond that, the half dime would have survived longer, possibly to this day. Nickel would, of course, have eventually taken over in 1965. Wharton fought hard to make nickel the ultimate coinage metal.

StrikeOutXXX

Thanks Rick, I'll have to keep my eyes open for a copy - be interesting to see how big of a sales-pitch type of pamphlet it was.

What is more amazing is that Lewis Feuchtwanger promoted a copper-nickel alloy in 1837 and it was rejected by James Booth, who was a scientist at the Frankin Institute. In 1856, Booth, now melter and refiner at the Mint, was the prime motivator in promoting copper-nickel in coinage.

Almost forgot about that; you mentioned Feuchtwanger spent a lot of time and effort trying to interest Congress, but his proposal was ultimately rejected. Apparently he needed to write his own pamphlet, and have a lot of friends in Congress.

I think had Wharton not promoted nickel we would have had a bronze cent, two cent and three cent piece. Beyond that, the half dime would have survived longer, possibly to this day. Nickel would, of course, have eventually taken over in 1965. Wharton fought hard to make nickel the ultimate coinage metal.

It is mind boggling how one person's push for nickel could have changed so much in coinage history - the composition, denominations, perhaps the presidents today or images in the past could have been completely different given a different set of events put into motion.

StrikeOutXXX

It seems the Director of the Mint was not a big fan of using nickel in the 88/12 cents. Found this today and figured I'd add it to the thread.

From the Annual Report of the Director of the Mint for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 1863:

"Our cent was, by decreasing the size, reduced in weight from 168 to 72 grains; the former simply copper; the latter an alloy of 88 per cent. copper, with 12 per cent. Nickel; making a coin of convenient size and neat appearance; and containing a half cent's worth of metal, more or less according to market fluctuations. The change was well intended, but the experience of other countries, and indeed of our own, has taught us, that it was an unnecessary liberality; and that all the Nickel we have thus used, has been so much money wasted.

We have, therefore, used a great deal of nickel to little purpose; and much of it from foreign countries, for which we had to pay in gold or its equivalent. We have given it away, under the mistaken notion that value was essential to secure the circulation of our inferior coinage, and to prevent its being counterfeited. The law regulating the cent coinage required it -- experience proves that an alloy more valuable than the principal metal, may be safely omitted.

Nickel derives its name from a certain unpleasant allusion, indicating its character, and which, in a metallurgic sense, it honestly deserves. It is very obstinate in the melting pot, requiring the fiercest fire even when in alloy with copper. It commonly makes a hard mixture, very destructive to dies, and all the contiguous parts of the coining machinery. Perhaps as great an objection as any to the further use of this alloy is its limited use in the arts. With the addition of zinc it would make good German silver, and could be worked up into plated ware. Beyond this, and a few other applications, copper with 12 per cent. of nickel is of no more value to the artizan than copper alone; it is even a deterioration, as it is more difficult to melt. "

Good thing Wharton had friends in Congress

RWB

Interesting post.

Another other annoying problem with nickel metal was that there was a substantial duty on its importation during the 1860s. Each time a shipment arrived in port for the mint, the director had to prepare paperwork requesting an exemption from duty. The customs agents refused to issue a blanket exemption for the mint. (Remember, this was before the mint was merged into the Treasury Department. The archives have nearly a complete file box filled with these requests and letters of complaint to various officials. )

StrikeOutXXX

Sounds like the different departments got along as well then as they do today.

The timeline is quite interesting I think.

1856 - 88/12 cent patterns made with nickel donated from Lancaster Gap mine
1857-1863 Copper-nickel cents produced (Apparently with some imported nickel)
1863 - Mint director complains about using nickel in coinage
1863 - Wharton buys Lancaster Gap mine
1864 - Wharton publishes pamphlet touting 25% nickel 75% copper coins
**Congress passes <wink-wink> bill creating 3 and 5 cent nickel coins
1865 - 3-cent nickel released
1866 - 5-cent nickel released


So, despite the mint director's complaints, and paying for nickel to be imported, we went ahead with nickel 3/5 cent pieces anyhow.

We were paying for imported nickel "in gold or its equivalent" according to the 1863 report. Did we ever become self-supporting with domestic nickel? Was Wharton the sole-source for domestic nickel? Sounds awfully fishy to me.

Writersblock

I do believe that at the time Whartons mine was the only source of domestic nickel, and at least at first it was unable to supply all of the nickel needed by the mint. So Wharton had a locked in customer for his entire production, while the mint still had to import the balance, paying in gold, and still fighting with customs.

Zoins

Great thread StrikeOutXXX! Thanks for putting it together

Longacre

Very interesting post, StrikeOut!

StrikeOutXXX

On my ride into work today, Joseph Wharton was listed under the famous birthdays today (March 3rd, 1826).

He was mentioned as the founder of Wharton College of course, nothing to do with coins, but still...

I remembered I posted this many years ago, and figured I'd bump it - so Happy Birthday Joseph


Wharton's Wikipedia Page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Wharton

CaptHenway

Jeff, you would love a book called "The U.S. Mint and Coinage" by Don Taxay. Lot of shenanigans in there.

leothelyon

Read this before and still a good read. Today is my grandson's and my day as well. Also, did some math earlier and figured 1198 tons of nickel was saved when they made close to 1 billion silver war nickels 1942 to 1945.

Can a nickel be called a nickel when it has no nickel in it?


Leo

EagleEye

The pamphlet that Wharton wrote was printed in the Longacre's Ledger a few issues back. I'll include a copy with the new book, which also has more information about Wharton and the introduction of nickel as a coinage metal.

OldEastside

<< <i>Read this before and still a good read. Today is my grandson's and my day as well. Also, did some math earlier and figured 1198 tons of nickel was saved when they made close to 1 billion silver war nickels 1942 to 1945.

Can a nickel be called a nickel when it has no nickel in it? >>



I always wondered why they chose Silver to alloy the Nickel during WW2,
Was it some kind of tongue in cheek slap at Hitler and Germany by Roosevelt
that German Silver is Nickel, BUT in the USA Nickels are Silver ???

Steve

CaptHenway

@OldEastside Don't think there was anything political to it. The U.S. needed all sorts of metals for the war effort, but silver was of no military use, except one.

The Manhattan project needed several large electrical generators. Normally such generators are wound with copper wire, but since they needed the copper for the war effort they would the generators with pure silver wire. They borrowed the silver from the Treasury Dept. which continued to carry it on their books as an asset. After the war the generators continued to work until they needed normal replacement after about 50 years or so. As each generator was decommissioned the silver wire was cut out and handed back to the Treasury which melted it back into bar form and kept track of the weight received. When it was all back the net loss was very negligebile, about what would be expected from fabrication and scrapping.

OldEastside

Thanx Captain, I know that Nickel was a vital war component and I've read about the Silver generators at Oak Ridge,
But wondered if it was a little off the cuff poke touting our economy, BTW I read that the Silver Generators were much
more efficient than there Copper counterparts.

Steve

CaptHenway

Here are the figures on conductivity and resistance for silver vs. copper, but, as everybody knows, resistance is futile!



linky

denga

An original receipted bill for nickel sold to the Mint by Joseph Wharton ...

epcjimi1

<< <i>An original receipted bill for nickel sold to the Mint by Joseph Wharton ...

>>



How strange, just try to figure out what it is and the way business was done.

CaptHenway

It is funny to think of coinage material being traded in mere pounds instead of tons.

StrikeOutXXX

Neat - that receipt dated May 20th 1865 was likely directly converted into 3-Cent Nickel pieces.

From Wikipedia:

On the last day of the congressional session, March 3, 1865, a bill for a three-cent piece in copper-nickel alloy was introduced in Congress, passed both houses without debate, and was signed by President Abraham Lincoln.

LoveMyLiberty

This is a receipt from the Philadelphia U.S. Mint given to
Joseph Wharton for 587 lbs of nickel he sold them at
the rate of $2 / lb, which came to $1,174.

It was signed by James Curtis Booth, who was the
Melter & Refiner at the time. He was a graduate of
Penn University with a degree in Chemistry & also
taught at the school. He lived from 1810-1888 and
served at the Mint from 1849 until shortly before he died.

Many thanks to strikeout for starting this thread. It
recognizes Joseph Wharton for his industrialization of
our country & epitomized how people like him helped
make this country so great. His achievements were many
and his gifts to the public were great, as were those of
Mr. Booth.

StrikeOutXXX

Anybody own one of these?




or




or HK323