Direct evidence of 1856 cents sent to Members of Congress
RogerB
Posts: 8,852 ✭✭✭✭✭
The following is a "brief" of a letter sent to Louisiana Sen. John Slidell evidently asking for his support for the coinage bill of 1857 and enclosing 6 sample cents - presumably 1856 date. [A 'brief" is a short summary of a letter. Mint letters were usually folded into 3-sections, and the brief went on the outward facing one-third page. This made it easier for clerks to find specific documents than flat filing.]
"[Brief of letter sent to Sen. John Slidell of Louisiana. Letter has not been located.]
To:
Hon. John Slidell
U.S. Senate
Washington City
January 6, 1857
Respecting points presented in Mr. Garret’s letter to him; also send 6 specimens of new ceont coin and askes assistance to pass bill."
0
Comments
Any way to know if these were BS or Proof specimens?
"BS" ?
They were certainly 1856 pattern cents, but it's impossible to tell from this letter if they were proofs or something else.
Awesome!
Wonder how many got pocketed by light-fingered legislators?
Wow !!!
Two answers: "Most - given the quantity available in the marketplace today" or "None - they weren't asked here to return them".
Six is a strange number. Why six? So they could make change for a half dime? Two trimes worth?
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
I was under the impression that there were business or regular strikes and proofs and that the regular strikes were more valuable. Never owned either.
Documents such as this always promote the question 'What happened to the coins?'.....and most of the time, we never do find any explanation.... Cheers, RickO
Examples of what they would have been? The FE cent or a "pattern" that was not issued?
How does this fit into US history? What was going on in 1857 where the context would be significant? Was influence being sought through these "gifts"?
1856 FE - typical design, is most likely. This was in the midst of attempts by Treasury to get a coinage bill that would authorize a new, small one cent coin, and allow removal of foreign coins from U.S. circulation. At the time of the letter, it had been more than 2 years since the first proposed legislation was introduced.
Treasury/Mint definitely wanted Senators and Congressmen to see and approve the small cent. No one was asked to return the sample coins - too many were distributed. (Collector requests for the new coins seem to have begin in December 1856.)
My opinion on why this is such an important date is that is is the "transitional" pattern cent that is the result of a 20 year campaign starting with Feuchtwanger (and others I'm sure) to reduce the size of dirty old large cents with something more practical. There were many different small patterns made of differing designs and metals beginning in 1850 - and 1856 was the one that tipped the scales in the transition. It may have seemed at the time to be a big deal since people were still concerned with the metal value. So it may have been as significant as going from analog to digital.
Feuchtwanger might have gotten it done earlier if he wasn't such a carnival type promoter and new how to hire the right lobbyist. Not to mention he was very stuck on the use of his "German Silver" composition, even naming it after himself, "Feuchtwanger's Composition." This composition though had already been invented and is attributable to others in Europe from whom he imported it, lol.
Or....
The History channel will send in the Metal Detector specialist and confirm the potential possibility the treasure was turned over the Masons of Washington DC where there is clear evidence of their presence at the time and then sent to a small island in the North Atlantic or hidden in a known Masonic treasure storage area in the area just outside of Memphis, TN for some local yahoo to meet with the Lagina Brothers to have them fund the treasure hunt.........
Which would be more fun?
To add a little --- The Mint did not like ternary alloys, including any of the "German silver" versions. This policy remains the standard, especially after the miserable performance of WW-II five cent pieces. (The was a certain acceptance that a significant portion of coins would end up being used for commercial purposes - flatware, machine fittings, knobs, etc.)
From about 1834 forward, the public seemed to increasingly dislike the large cent and half cent with each passing year. Documents show minimal concern about full value since the cent had never really been of full "one-cent" copper value during the lifetime of most people. The nickel-copper alloy eventually adopted was a "lip service" attempt to keep the intrinsic value higher than a pure copper or bronze coin might have. The pending legislation also increased the market price of nickel from about 80-cents per lb (August 1856) to over $2.00 per lb. (March 1857).
Nice! Thanks Roger. Did not know that. See the nickel guys had the right lobbyist!!!
RE" "Masonic treasure storage area in the area just outside of Memphis, TN...."
This is really Murfreesboro, TN. Turn left at the 4th hog farm on the right...then follow the scent to the cents.
Several businesses proposed selling the 88/12 alloy (no. 4, below) to the Mint. Here's a sample:
It was a final payment for the hit on Meriwether Clark fifty years earlier!
RogerB we could do a History Channel show! Now if we could just come an alien coverup or Atlantis connection and we'd have a hit!
To return this to a coin topic - love these small cents and thanks to the first ones being passed out to our forefathers!
LOL. I don't live far from where the "hit" happened.
Nice info.
IMO all 1856 cents were specimens. Most are 88/12 approximately copper /nickel . There are
about 15 different minor differences . Whether one considers a coin mint state or proof depends on how the coin looks and to what grade the coin represents. Also what PCGS
Calls the coin on the insert. Then there are pattern 1856 Cents.
Stewart,
How do you define the differences between the groupings you mentioned above?
6 pieces is an interesting number. There were right around 300 members of Congress at that time.
In reply to a collector’s request for the mintage of 1854, 55 and 56 pattern cents, director Snowden wrote:
“January 11, 1859
In reply to so much of your letter as relates to certain trial pieces of coins, I may remark in general terms that I am unable to state the exact number that have from time to time been struck at the Mint.”
In a draft of the reply Snowden indicated that 50 of the 1854, 1855 pieces had been made. 1856 was not specifically addressed.
There were 303 members of the 34th Congress (to March 4, 1857). If each was given 6 1856 pattern pieces, then 1,818 were distributed, plus several hundred more for members of the Executive branch. A total of about 2,200....?
If prior practice was followed, the "true" pattern pieces would have been proofs made on a medal press. Additional pieces could have been made from the same die sets on a toggle press. I'm sure someone with access to hoards of 1856 cents has carefully examined them all and separated by level of detail, etc. If each member of Congress was given 1 pattern proof and 5 toggle press pieces that would mean a minimum production of 303 proofs and the rest as lesser quality pieces.