RWB

A clerk typing this draft likely typed "signature" twice. The duplicate word was crossed out when the draft was edited before that final version was prepared. [To process this kind of letter, a clerk would have taken shorthand dictation from the author, and typed a draft for approval. The author would make any corrections, return the revised draft to the clerk, and the final version typed and presented for signature to the author.]

RE: "I can't remember how I got the idea that the 1907's were made that way." This lie appears to have its origin with Wally Breen. RE: "Film of coinage." There are several in the archives and also a couple of more modern versions made in the past 15+ years. All were for general interest and present nothing new to typical coin collectors. The old ones are fun for the antique equipment.

Barber did the obverse and Morgan the reverse. Both were from earlier dies. Their purpose was not to propose this as a competing DE design but to test edge lettering.

See the article on USPatterns.com concerning Barber's collection of pattern pieces. The so-called conflict between Barber and Saint-Gaudens was real but on a far smaller, and less sanctimonious scale than presented by Breen and assorted copycats and embellishers. [See Striking Change by Michael Moran]. Barber was justifiably proud of what he and Henri Weil were able to get from Saint-Gaudens' large DE models. This kind of reduction work work was not alien to Barber - he made high relief medals from models routinely. But he was not familiar with the Janvier reducing lathe and Weil was. (See Journal of Numismatic Research Issue #1 for details about Janvier's patent.)

First - Allow me to repeat that the small diameter DE were NOT made by stacking two Eagle planchets. The metal was simply rolled to the correct thickness so that when cut with an Eagle blank cutter, the blank had the same gold as a DE. [See Renaissance of American Coinage 1905-1908 for details.] RE: "Why did those guys THINK the law would require that ? What was the harm in leaving them alone and maybe Saint-Gaudens or another Mint employee got to take them home ?" The only "authority" claiming illegality was T. Louis Comparette, the Curator. Maybe he intended to say the small DE would be illegal coins if adopted? We don;t know. But the result was that the DM assumed the experimental pieces were illegal (which was incorrect) and had all but two destroyed.

RE: "That was originally tried as an experiment back in 1907 by the mint...using two ten dollar planchets. The laws at the time prohibited issuing double eagles with those dimensions, so all were melted except two, which are in the Smithsonian." A couple of minor corrections. The small diameter double eagles were the diameter of the Eagle and the thickness of two Eagle planchets before striking. They were made from two Eagle planchets stacked then struck. Net thickness was much greater than two Eagles because the die radius was short and multiple blows raised the edge. The law did not prohibit experimental, pattern or other test pieces. Contrary to Curator Comparette's incorrect assertion. It was that ignorant and not verified comment from Comparette that caused the Mint Director to call in and destroy all small diameter DE except the two piece for the Mint Cabinet of Coins and Medals. I realize they are small points, but accuracy is critical to understanding the situation in 1907 or today.

"458.1" was the total scrap bullion forwarded and it included the defective 1932 coins. I don't know how many copies were printed or distributed. The printing was done by Heritage's catalog printing contractor.

RG104 E-229 Boxes 106 - 124 (Dec 15, 1899 to Oct 6, 1900) are available in NNP. The remaining boxes will be available from me per the opening post.

When (if ?) the DE book and others are updated/revised, all discoverers of new varieties will be credited in the variety description - but their anonymity will also be respected if that is their preference. (See the 1916-S/S new variety posted about 6 weeks ago for an example.) Further, if someone identified the variety at an earlier time, but did not follow-up, I like to mention that so others can use the information. My feeling is that we have to preserve these little bits of knowledge so future collectors can benefit.

As several have noted, there is no evidence the Langboard coins, or coins involved in 1933 were stolen - except that they exist(ed) and were not supposed to exist. US Mint history shows many investigations surrounding weight and count discrepancies valued at a few dollars. Mint records are also reasonably accurate, given accounting procedures of the time, and there is no mention of any defect in count, weight or melting. The Secret Service was never contacted about missing coins during the time the 1933 DE were at Philadelphia. This is compelling evidence that nothing was stolen and no crime committed. Likewise, there is no evidence of when, how, why or by whom the 22 (or more) DE dated 1933 were preserved, with except of the Smithsonian purchase made from the Annual Assay coins in 1934. RE: "All this picking at little tidbits trying to prove that there could have been an opportunity to obtain these coins "legally" (OK, there never was such a window, there was a window of confusion)" This conclusion is false. Gold coin was paid out for deposits for several weeks. This is clearly documented. Speculations and guesses are fun, but please do not present them as facts. Extant USSS reports are NOT conclusions, merely information and speculations by investigators. No further comments from me on this. The Supreme Court declined to hear the appear and the matter is ended.

NARA is expected to reopen soon and I will then complete digitizing documents for 1900 in Entry 229. The digital files will be available at no cost. If you are using data from 1900 for a research project, please send me an email or PM for instructions about receiving the remaining files. Roger Burdette

RE: "...1861 Dahlonega dollar (Type III) that is believed to have been minted entirely by the Confederate Sates of America (CSA) after they took over the mint." This was likely done while the mint was under Georgia State control. [See Carl N. Lester, “An Illustrated History of the Georgia Gold Rush and the United States Branch Mint at Dahlonega, Georgia.” and Roger W. Burdette. From Mine to Mint. 2013.] Kellogg’s final official report through April, 1861 showed deposits of 300 ounces of Georgia gold, almost $17,000 in coins and approximately $10,000 in bullion, mostly silver. This was sent to Confederate Secretary of the Treasury Christopher G. Memminger. On May 14 the Confederate Congress voted to close the Dahlonega and New Orleans Mints. Charlotte was used as a privately run assay office by Lewis W. Quillian, a former laborer. If we accept coinage of 1,597 half eagles under the USA and 1,600 under Georgia, that leaves approximately 1,000 gold dollars - assuming the $17,000 in coin reported to Memminger was reliable. This is consistent with estimates by modern gold specialists.

"But wasn't some Europeans worried about the United States going to adopt the silver standard, even though in reality it highly unlikely (free silver movement), and increased acquisition of gold in response to the perceived threat of a silver standard?" Nope. The only concern related to silver was an attempt to adopt a truly bi-metallic standard at a fixed, if fictional, ratio. France and the Latin Monetary Union had long before shown that such a system was unworkable. Members of the US Congress - Alexander Stephens principal among them - tolerated such nonsense as Wheeler Hubbell's Goloid and various other silver-gold alloys so long as it served their political purposes. Adoption of a bi-metallic standard never received meaningful support. Even if Bryan had been elected President, and proposed such legislation, it would not have been adopted.

Hmmm....looks perfectly normal mint-issued, hand colored 'collector plate' in genuine professional acrylic paint applied by wandering sidewalk painters with two hands tied behind their back....more or less.

Question: Why did US Customs Agents accept gold notes in preference to physical new gold coin or Mint-certified fine bars? Answer: The reason was stability of value. Agents were personally responsible for transferring their receipts to the Treasury. A Gold Note for $5,000 was worth exactly $5,000 in pure gold. The same face value in double eagles might contain slightly more or less pure gold due to abrasion, mint weight and fineness tolerance or other factors. A US Mint bar of 0.999 fine gold might also be slightly off in weight, and was also off by 0.001 in gold purity.. Further, a Treasury auditor could demand weight and assay of bars or coins at any time.

Silver was only used for international settlements when the receiving country was on a silver standard - China, India (well-not entirely), Spain, Vietnam, etc. The fallacy of the "Free Silver" argument was presumption that some sort of natural relationship existed between silver and gold. The real point that should have gotten attention was uniformity/equivalence of all legal tender monetary units. For commercial expansion and international trade to grow, the use of "money of account" versus "specie" had to be simplified. (See The Big Problem of Small Change for insights from an earlier era.) A Franc, Mark, Dollar, Pound and other units had to have exactly the same commercial/commodity value for robust trade. For example, the "dollar" was the United States' name for its monetary unit. But US Customs Agents only accepted gold in payment of duties -- and even then, gold notes were demanded and preferred even over physical new gold coin or Mint-certified fine bars. Currency that said "Legal tender for all debts, public and private" did not really mean "ALL" just "SOME - MAYBE - WE'RE NOT REALLY SURE." How can companies operate efficiently if "a dollar" is not "a dollar" -- and never try to pay a Customs bill in "silver dollars".....? ! This was also a severe domestic problem - a silver dollar was not equal in purchasing power to a gold dollar; and a silver certificate might not result in as much penny candy as a silver dollar, and a gold dollar might get extra candy.

Nice coin from the new design master die.

Does anyone know if Oliver Leonard was related to Allen Leonard who was encouraged by Dir Patterson to apply for the Engraver position at the Mint in 1846?

This is a coin design idea by Oliver B. Leonard, a New Jersey engraver. The letter was in response to a coin design competition from the Mint Bureau that quickly fizzled.

The Coinage Act of 1873 reorganized all U.S. coinage operations and functions to improve efficiency, accountability and commercial transactions. For miners and depositors the change from deposit-demand coinage to Federal account coinage caused much confusion, as did schedules of cost-recovery fees. Major changes in the U.S. coincided with German unification, adoption of its gold exchange standard, and consequent release of large amounts of silver coin into bullion markets. Silver producers world wide were searching for markets. The U.S.' last gasp of deposit-demand coinage was the Trade dollar which, oddly, was part of the 1873 reform. This was the only way silver bullion depositors could get their metal made into coins (Trade dollars) which were then supposed to be exported into Asian markets. This arrangement gave U.S. silver producers an immense financial advantage since their bullion cost was only that of mining, and the new Trade dollars were bid at a premium over Mexican Pesos.

No. Use of gold coins or bars in international trade depended largely on the gold point, and thus the ability of banks, brokers and others to profit from the transaction. This was also separate from simply paying for overseas purchases.

RE: "Sometimes the alteration of color is created by mechanical means...." Can someone please explain this comment?

Looking forward to the Money Talks presentation - if ANA happens this year. Thanks for the kind remarks. I hope the book will encourage others to uncover more double eagle varieties.

Here's an acknowledgement of contract award for various lubricants used at the Philadelphia Mint. The other mints had similar needs. Lard was used to lubricate gold and silver ingots as they passed through the rolls and drawbench. Sperm whale oil was used on fine machine parts such as lathes and cutting tools, and electric motors. Cosmolubric No. 2 was a fire resistant hydraulic fluid used in engines and small hydraulic precipitate presses. This latter oil would become very important once the new large hydraulic medal press was put in operation in late 1893.

RE: "Wait a second.....after gold was raised to $35/oz., the smuggling would have ended, right ? So that wouldn't have been a factor." Treasury was clear that US coins were not to be melted - including after the Act of January 31, 1934. Coins and bars made from coin gold (or suspected to be) were paid for at their old legal tender value. The assumption by Treasury was that if US coins were melted in Mexico and imported to the US, that they had been originally exported as speculation/hording and not for legitimate commercial purposes. This position helped preserve many US gold coins overseas where they could be traded at bullion value. USSS (RG 87) files include a number of investigations related to this.