Procedures for Foreign Coin Production 0

[mlovmo]

After some review of Mint documents that I have, I believe that the U.S. Mint’s approval process for the production of foreign coins, as it existed in the past, is as follows.  I'm not sure that all of this is correct, but I have found examples in the documents I have on Korea's 1950s contract with the U.S. Mint where each of these points was discussed.

 1)     If needing coin designs, the foreign government can request the U.S. Mint to sketch designs based on the government’s provided parameters, themes or images.  Payment must be made before artwork can be started.  Countries can pay for the sketches alone or may pay for any or all of the following steps including engravings, reductions, and the hubbing of master and coining dies.  Any final sketches that the U.S. Mint produces must have approval of the foreign government before continuing with the subsequent steps.  

2)     The U.S. Mint will request approval from the foreign government upon completion of the sculptures and again upon completion of the master dies.  The foreign government can review sample lead strikes made from the dies to approve them.

3)     If a foreign government wishes the U.S. Mint to produce coins in any of the steps involving melting, rolling, blanking, upsetting and stamping coins, the foreign government must formally appeal through diplomatic channels directly to the U.S. State Department for approval.  Receipt of State Department approval will allow the Mint to place the foreign coin order on the U.S. Mint’s production schedule as long as it does not interfere with coinage production required for the United States.

4)   To be placed on the U.S. Mint’s production schedule, the foreign government must first pay the Mint for the total cost of the coinage project, including actual overhead costs (labor, materials, use of machinery), any costs incurred in the purchase of the coining metals, plus profit for the Mint.

If anyone here thinks that there are mistakes with my understanding of the  process, please let me know!

[RWB]

That's a good summary, just in reverse order. Everything starts with diplomatic contact, then to Treasury, etc.

One pervasive question was usually the source of metal. This was especially important during WW-II when much foreign coinage was struck using Lend-Lease metal contracts.

[mlovmo]

On 9/4/2023 at 2:41 PM, RWB said:

That's a good summary, just in reverse order. Everything starts with diplomatic contact, then to Treasury, etc.

One pervasive question was usually the source of metal. This was especially important during WW-II when much foreign coinage was struck using Lend-Lease metal contracts.

Thanks, RWB!  

You got me to go back and look again... I noticed that the State Department's formal approval letter was NOT received at the beginning the process in the case of the Korean contract. 

It was received right after the the Mint completed sketches and showed them to the Bank of Korea representative on June 24, 1959 for two of the three Korean coins.  Later, the Bank of Korea representative approved finished plasters for the remaining 100-Hwan coin before the State Department even sent its formal "approval letter" for that coin(!).  These things all happened within days of each other, but there was not exactly State Dept approval first, then work commencing next.  It seems that PRIOR State Dept approval before ANY work is done was more of a suggestion than a rule... as long as it was a forgone conclusion that the approval was coming, I guess.

Or is it the case that the Mint could do ARTWORK, up to and including reductions, without State Dept. approval?  They aren't making COINS yet, just artwork.

Edited September 4, 2023 by mlovmo

[RWB]

A lot depended on the context of the work and prior discussions -- things that might have taken place a year or more before, or were part of a treaty, etc. But, yep, things were sometimes very fluid-- at least until money was required.

The Saudi gold discs was an example of State going around Treasury's objections - a little unusual. (Look in my book "Saudi Gold.")

[zadok]

On 9/4/2023 at 1:52 PM, mlovmo said:

After some review of Mint documents that I have, I believe that the U.S. Mint’s approval process for the production of foreign coins, as it existed in the past, is as follows.  I'm not sure that all of this is correct, but I have found examples in the documents I have on Korea's 1950s contract with the U.S. Mint where each of these points was discussed.

 1)     If needing coin designs, the foreign government can request the U.S. Mint to sketch designs based on the government’s provided parameters, themes or images.  Payment must be made before artwork can be started.  Countries can pay for the sketches alone or may pay for any or all of the following steps including engravings, reductions, and the hubbing of master and coining dies.  Any final sketches that the U.S. Mint produces must have approval of the foreign government before continuing with the subsequent steps.  

2)     The U.S. Mint will request approval from the foreign government upon completion of the sculptures and again upon completion of the master dies.  The foreign government can review sample lead strikes made from the dies to approve them.

3)     If a foreign government wishes the U.S. Mint to produce coins in any of the steps involving melting, rolling, blanking, upsetting and stamping coins, the foreign government must formally appeal through diplomatic channels directly to the U.S. State Department for approval.  Receipt of State Department approval will allow the Mint to place the foreign coin order on the U.S. Mint’s production schedule as long as it does not interfere with coinage production required for the United States.

4)   To be placed on the U.S. Mint’s production schedule, the foreign government must first pay the Mint for the total cost of the coinage project, including actual overhead costs (labor, materials, use of machinery), any costs incurred in the purchase of the coining metals, plus profit for the Mint.

If anyone here thinks that there are mistakes with my understanding of the  process, please let me know!

...not suggesting there r mistakes or errors in ur bullet points, just that im not sure the procedures r so cut n dried...im suggesting that procedures most likely varied from the pre ww-1 production n post ww-2 production of coins for foreign gov'ts...u mite also want to consider that in some instances the dies used were the property of the foreign country n subsequently used by that country's mint e.g. mexico 1905-7 issues...one other consideration, although minor, US struck coins at our various mints r indistinguishable unless designated by our mint marks, some r some r not...i am impressed with the degree of ur research in ur subject area....

[mlovmo]

On 9/4/2023 at 8:30 PM, RWB said:

A lot depended on the context of the work and prior discussions -- things that might have taken place a year or more before, or were part of a treaty, etc. But, yep, things were sometimes very fluid-- at least until money was required.

The Saudi gold discs was an example of State going around Treasury's objections - a little unusual. (Look in my book "Saudi Gold.")

Yes.  Hints of "things being in place beforehand" appear in the records, from what I can gather.  The first Koreans to visit the Mint were on an International Cooperation Administration (precursor organization to USAID) sponsored trip, and Korea had been the recipient of over $1.3 billion in U.S. aid in the late 1950s.

[mlovmo]

On 9/5/2023 at 8:59 AM, zadok said:

...not suggesting there r mistakes or errors in ur bullet points, just that im not sure the procedures r so cut n dried...im suggesting that procedures most likely varied from the pre ww-1 production n post ww-2 production of coins for foreign gov'ts...u mite also want to consider that in some instances the dies used were the property of the foreign country n subsequently used by that country's mint e.g. mexico 1905-7 issues...one other consideration, although minor, US struck coins at our various mints r indistinguishable unless designated by our mint marks, some r some r not...i am impressed with the degree of ur research in ur subject area....

These Philadelphia-made Korean dies were only used by the US Mint and the coins only struck in Philly.  The dies were boxed and sealed by Bank of Korea employees who visited Philly from their office on Wall St in NYC.  They were indeed the property of the Bank of Korea, as you mentioned. The masters were all sent to Korea after the end of the coining contract and were never used again to make coins.  I was stoked when I found photos of some of these masters in a Bank of Korea pamphlet printed for the Bank's 20th anniversary in 1970.  I found that in the ANA Library.   I know I'm "nerding out" about it, but it is very hard to find photographic or other kinds of image evidence related to ANYTHING from South Korea's coin production from that far back in time.  Photos and other evidence DOES exist, but the Bank of Korea has placed an absolute embargo on releasing it to anyone.

Oh, and thanks for your kind words!  You can see what I've been up to here:

https://dokdo-research.com/SouthKoreanCoinBook.html

https://dokdo-research.com/Price Guide.html

Edited September 9, 2023 by mlovmo

[RWB]

Not at all "nerding out" -- What you are doing is making use of available resources to piece together past events, actions and decisions. Your research locates and documents the data and analysis connects pieces of data. If you continue with both approaches, and also label the detailed origin of every item, you will eventually have information to convey to others (including collectors in Korea) and that aggregation will have a greater value in its sum than of its original parts.