What's the difference between "Branch Mint" and "Mint?"

RogerB · December 8, 2016 2:53PM

The question in this thread title is often asked but rarely explained. Here goes ----

The answer lies in the Coinage Act of 1873. This took effect April 1, 1873.

Under the old laws, there was only one "United States Mint" (or "Mint of the United States") and it happened to be located in Philadelphia. All other minting facilities and assay offices were simply extensions - "branches" - of the one and only official Mint. The official title was "United States Mint at Philadelphia." This also explains why there was no superintendent of the Philadelphia facility: it had the Director of the Mint housed there as his official location, and he was in charge of all things related to the U.S. Mint and its branches.

When the Coinage Act of 1873 took effect, the Mint Bureau became a distinct part of the Treasury Department. The Director of the Mint was placed in offices in the Treasury building in Washington, DC. This facilitated communication with the Secretary of the Treasury and especially Congress. (This is also one of the reasons for Director Linderman's pattern collection at Mint HQ.) All mint and assay offices became equal facilities reporting to the Director in Washington. The Philadelphia Mint gained a superintendent to manage the facility, just as had been assigned to all the other mint and assay office facilities. Officially, the Philadelphia Mint became a "Mint of the United States at Philadelphia," and the others were given similar titles. For practical operations, Philadelphia was the superior facility of theoretically "equal" factories due to its age, size, engraving department, die shop, medal department, etc. It also had the best facilities and was the cornerstone of all technical and experimental projects. This distinction was maintained for many years with the New York Assay Office eventually being administered by the Philadelphia Superintendent, and both West Point and Fort Knox Bullion Depositories coming under Philadelphia's operational control (although Mint HQ also had it's fingers in the pie).

Ideally, after March 31, 1873, the term "branch mint" should have vanished, but like all things human, the language and common internal usage hung around for many years. Even into the 1950s we see "branch mint" in occasional official documents.

This is very brief, but I hope members find it helpful!

291fifth · December 8, 2016 3:15PM

More interesting info! Thanks!

CaptHenway · December 8, 2016 9:44PM

Thank you for the information!
TD

Zoins · December 9, 2016 1:18AM

That's a good explanation.

From a collecting perspective, I always thought of it as the mint without the mintmark is the "Mint" and the branch mints were distinguished by their mintmark. Now that Philadelphia coins have mintmarks, it is also a "branch mint". Under this thinking, all the mints are the same, but they are all branch mints with no "Mint"