Home› U.S. & World Currency Forum

1770 Maryland 1/6 Dollar note

jmm2562jmm2562 Posts: 102 ✭✭
in U.S. & World Currency Forum

I'd like to verify that a colonial note is genuine. From the obverse, it is a Maryland note dated March 1st 1770. The denomination is 1/6 Dollar. The reverse is blank. The paper stock is a bit thicker than regular currency paper. I see examples online where the reverse has a design and others where it is blank. Does anyone know if there was a release with a blank reverse? Is there any way to certify such a note?...


Thanks!

Comments

  • element159element159 Posts: 557 ✭✭✭

    My copy of 'The Early Paper Money of America', E.P. Newman, 5th edition, only seems to note this issue with a back design with leaf/nature print, and not blank. At least if I am reading it correctly. However, based on looks, the face looks genuine to me. So I don't know!

  • jmm2562jmm2562 Posts: 102 ✭✭

    Here are some examples of the same note with ... and without a reverse design...

    https://www.ebay.com/itm/276664987870
    https://www.ebay.com/itm/157003742007
    https://www.ebay.com/itm/157122745256

    I also see some reverse designs that appear to be post mintage.

    Thanks for any guidance,
    Jim

  • element159element159 Posts: 557 ✭✭✭

    The signatures look good, and match the images that I can find. Fwiw, the photo in Newman has the same signatures as yours, but they are flipped left/right, so there is apparently some variation in this. I don't know what to think about the blank back. I do have a Pennsylvania note from this period that is thick, more like card than paper. Perhaps these can split apart? I am not familiar with these so I can't add any more expertise, but the face does look good as far as I can tell.

  • element159element159 Posts: 557 ✭✭✭

    And fwiw, the commas in M,DCC,LXX were intentionally added as an anti-counterfeiting device, assuming that counterfeiters would skip this punctuation which was normally not used. Your note checks out on this as well :)

  • jmm2562jmm2562 Posts: 102 ✭✭

    Wow, thanks for your keen observations on the obverse (obversations?). :)

    I have also seen other denominations with a blank reverse. Some notes actually have crazy random imprints which might have been due to ink transfer from other stacked documents/notes. Yes, this note is on slightly thicker stock which appears to be layers. One remote possibility is the reverse top-most layer was somehow separated from the note. Seems unlikely but nevertheless a possibility over it's 250+ years in existence.

    Based on your guidance and all accounts in evidence, I'm going to place my bets and declare the note very likely genuine. If it's ultimately declared a fake, I'm willing to make good on the bet of course.

    Thanks again for your guidance and sharing your expertise!

Sign In or Register to comment.