What are your thoughts on contemporary mint correspondence, and should letters be saved for posterit

Longacre

I was reading the Renaissance of American Coinage 1909-1915, by Roger Burdette. In it he refers to the lack of historical files containing correspondence from common citizens to the mint. Specifically, he states,

“Through most of 1908 the mint attempted to respond to the increased flow of letters. Each letter had to be checked carefully because some contained orders for the new gold coins, and no one wanted Roosevelt to read a complaint about having a coin request ignored. The small headquarters staff was overwhelmed with cards and letters … . By late 1908, director Leach and Margaret V. Kelly, who was in charge of administrative workers … decided to change how the mint answered mail. Individual replies were largely eliminated except for known correspondents, business leaders, and officials. As each new letter was opened, a secretary read it and wrote a response directly on the original, placed it in fresh envelope, addressed it and sent it back to the writer. … From this point until 1915, few letters from the mint were saved … . … The result is an historical archive lacking in depth and connection with the common citizen.”

*****************

(1) What are your thoughts on the mint’s decision not to respond to every single letter from citizens? Should the mint have an obligation to respond to inquiries?

(2) What about the comment about keeping an historical archive of letters for future generations? Should the mint be obligated to do this? Other than for future research value, should these letters be saved from every Tom, Dick, and Harry who decides to write to the mint? I fully agree with the need and interest in historical archives, but the mint is essentially a business, and should a business need to keep all of these letters from the commoners?

(3) Today, we communicate differently. Most correspondence is done through email. Is anyone concerned that the mint is not keeping a good contemporaneous file of correspondence for future generations? I assume the mint does not keep email correspondence (or letters). When Roger Burdette’s child spends months in the National Archives researching and writing the Renaissance of American Coinage 1983-1988, will the book be any less groundbreaking because no contemporary correspondence is available?

(4) How important is contemporary correspondence in getting flavor of the issues of the day? What other documents can be used in place of it to get that same flavor?

Steve27

Based on my own experience writing to the Mint, they should only save the correspondence if someone needs a good laugh. I wrote a letter asking about the mintage of the American Art Series gold coins. I received a response saying it was being investigated, and they included some literature on the NEW State Quarter program. That was the last I heard from them.

mgoodm3

I think they should save all the EMails that say: "You First spouse coin is on backorder."

ModernCrapNut

It would probably be more useful to permanently archive this forum.

Pentimento

I would keep a statistical representation of letters received. Set up a plan for the archives and stick to it-- maybe .0001% of all letters are saved this year, but the 2007 sample ultimately moved to the archives should contain the same geographical spread, email to paper letter ratio, and general topics as the total set of 2007 correspondence.

RWB

The Mint Bureau and individual mints did try to respond to each letter they received. The major change was in not preparing a separate reply, but instead, writing the response on the original letter and sending it back. Sometimes they included a circular if there was anything to announce. No press copies were made of outgoing letters of this type. Because of this we no longer have extensive information on what ordinary citizens were writing about. Similar things happened in previous years, with the original simply tossed out after a reply was mailed.

As one of the posters suggested, most of the correspondence from citizens is not significant and keeping all of it is probably much more than could be expected. (Likewise, would anyone actually go through the stuff? Most of what I searched from 1890 to 1925 had not been touched in decades if at all.)

In later years, letters on a specific subject were kept – so we know what people submitted for the Washington Quarter competition, or what some wrote about the SLQ or suggestions for new designs or denominations. Occasionally, like with the Giles Anderson correspondence, there is something interesting that gives us a new and better view of the times. Same for the letters from Farran Zerbe or John Beck.

What is important to keep are the internal operating records and internal messages about work that is done. This is where the researcher can find out what really happened vs what the mint made public. If you look at the public record for the Lincoln cent, or Buffalo nickel, or the Peace dollar (or any other coin), you’ll find the mint and treasury dept. hiding any trace of disagreement or problem. Only if pushed hard, did (and do) mint officials say what happened, and even then it is likely to be distorted or incorrect.

Increasing use of the telephone in the early twentieth century resulted in a loss of much detail that previously had been include in letters and memoranda. Email is having the same impact. Trying to piece together the full story of the design and production of the Sacagawea dollar will be virtually impossible unless the Mint saved all the correspondence of all types, and turns it over the NARA in a timely manner.

Gemineye

Due to budgetary cuts in the U.S.Mint...our computers will no longer be updated.Once our hard drives are at capacity level we will be deleting the first correspondece accordingly.
We thank you for you E-mails...keep 'em comin.....the Mint......!!

firstmint

Regrettably, the United States Mint has a simply horrible record of accountability regarding original documentation of Mint activities. This will probably never change.

With that being said, yes, the U S Mint should keep pertinent documents from all government agencies that have to do with the designs and production of American coinage. Personal correspondence is very interesting, but not that important when compared to official - lawful following procedures that the U S Mint must adhere to. Nowhere is this more focused than the March/April 1933 Mint policies, when the FDR imposed "banking holiday" was put into effect. That act itself was done at midnight, being a non-congressionally mandated ruse.

The problem then lies in the NARA to maintain the accessibility for all of this newer material. They hardly have the room or the staff to accomodate this numismatic area now. Much of the original materials in the Archives are slowly deteriorating from natural elements. An example of this can be found in Bullion Journal A, which recorded the first delivery of 1794 silver dollars on October 15th. That important first page is completely loose from the crumbling leather binding. Hopefully, it is still there.

Since there are no funds for putting the NARA materials online, or conservators to restore and maintain the documents and books, the materials held at the NARA offices throughout the country will eventually become pieces of worthless paper, unless something is done soon.

EagleEye

Didn't Stella Hackel throw out decades worth old correspondence from the 1920's and 1930's? It was a cost saving measure, as I recall.

It seems that much of the important documents get saved only where there is a litigation of some kind, and then there is a treasure trove of info, like with the 1933 $20.

cmerlo1

I have quite a collection of postcards and ads I've gotten in the mail from the mint, including a huge brochure about the Sac dollars when they came out...not sure if this is really 'correspondence' or just 'junk mail', but I'm keeping it.

--Christian

RWB

Your collection of mint promotional items may be one of the few that exist.

denga

EagleEye Tuesday September 25, 2007
Didn't Stella Hackel throw out decades worth old correspondence from the 1920's and 1930's? It was a cost saving measure, as I recall. It seems that much of the important documents get saved only where there is a litigation of some kind, and then there is a treasure trove of info, like with the 1933 $20.

Rick Snow

What happened was that Stella Hackel in 1978 decided to destroy a large quantity of mint records dating as early as 1901.
This was done in secret at the Mint Bureau and only a close aide, who signed off on the the plan, knew of it. Hackel then
went to a division of the Archives having nothing to do with Mint records and got its accord. Mint Historian Eleonora
Hayden and the Archives people dealing with such records did not learn of the destruction until 1984 when I told them.
(I had gotten permission, through Miss Hayden and Mint Director Donna Pope, in 1984 to examine the Philadelphia material
held by GSA but when I arrived to examine the documents I was shown a thick sheaf of destruct orders. Hackel even ordered
destroyed a quantity of Mint Reports dating back to the 1850s.) A certain quantity of records was hidden by Philadelphia Mint
employees and later openly preserved when Director Pope learned of her predecessor's actions and reversed the policy.

Some years ago Mike Craven, then doing a video documentary on the coinage, directly asked Hackel why she had destroyed
these records. The answer? She could not even remember the matter!

Denga

IGWT

-- Stella Hackel --

I get angry every time I hear this story. She was aptly named, because she was a political Hackel who was appointed as Director of the Mint by Jimmy Carter despite her utter lack of qualifications for the job. From the American Presidency Project:

"[Hackel] was elected city grand juror (city prosecutor) of Rutland in 1956, and was reelected annually until 1963. From 1963 to 1973, she was commissioner of the Vermont Department of Employment Security and chairman of the Employment Security Board. Hackel practiced law in Rutland from 1973 to 1975. From 1975 to 1977, she was treasurer of the State of Vermont."

RWB

The “Hackel Debacle.”