conscoins Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 (edited) PLEASE HELP!! I'm a huge nerd for colonial-era coinage. I've been collecting for years and selling for a couple. KGIII stuff is my niche but I'm having a hard time finding information about this 1811 bank token. For several years during KGIIIs reign, especially during his later years following the American and French revolutions, there was a significant silver shortage. As a result, in the early 1800s, before Great Britain's Recoinage Act of 1816, several bank tokens were minted in an attempt to fill this void. Among these are incredibly uncommon proof patterns. Could this be one of those patterns? I'd like to determine its authenticity and value. Any help in further identifying and offering information is greatly appreciated. Edited April 30 by conscoins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobymordet Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 Hiya, this isn't much and you already may have found it... DOLLARS OR BANK TOKENS. https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1811/mar/21/dollars-or-bank-tokens HL Deb 21 March 1811 vol 19 cc445-7 445 § Lord Grenville said he should beg leave, before their lordships proceeded to the order of the day, to call their attention to a circumstance which appeared to him of the utmost importance. What he was about to advert to, every man was acquainted with, namely, the Directors of the Bank of England having taken upon themselves to exercise the highest prerogative of the sovereign, not less than to raise the denomination of the current coin of the realm, and by the advice of a Committee of the King's privy council. He confessed that all the ideas he had formed of the monarchy under which we lived, and even all his ideas of the parliamentary constitution of the country, were erroneous, if the measure to which he alluded were justifiable. It was further to be considered, that these steps were taken without even referring to or consulting parliament; and this too at a moment when the House of Commons was actually engaged in the consideration of the subject. He proposed to move for a copy of the Resolution of the Directors, in order to bring the facts of the case regularly under the purview of the House, and to enable their lordships to form their opinions, not only upon the particular measure, but upon the great subject con- 446 nected with it. It must be plain that the monied circulation of the country was unconstitutionally interfered with, when such steps were taken to increase its denomination. He was aware of the wretched quibble attempted to be interposed; he meant that the Dollars in universal circulation as coin, would, by noble lords opposite, be regarded, on this occasion, not as the current coin of the realm, but merely as Bank tokens; but this was a subterfuge which he trusted would not be attended to in the consideration of this most important business. His lordship concluded by moving for the production of a copy of the Resolution of the Governor and Directors of the Bank of England, for raising the denomination of Bank Tokens, or Dollars, now in circulation, &c.—On the question being put, § Earl Bathurst expressed his satisfaction at the subject being brought forward, as no persons could be more anxious for its investigation than the members of his Majesty's government, who readily took ail the responsibility on themselves. With respect to one pointed remark of his noble friend, he must observe, that any man must plainly see the difference between the regular current coin of the realm, issued by his Majesty, and the Tokens of the Bank, which were only to be regarded in the same light as Bank-notes. He must take that opportunity to protest against any conclusion drawn from this measure, as to the depreciation of Bank paper; all that could be inferred from the transaction, was a rise in the price of silver. This might be attributed to various causes, especially, perhaps, to an increased demand for that precious metal, but it could, by no means, be attributed to any depreciation of the notes issued by the Bank. The Earl of Lauderdale entertained a different opinion upon the subject, and referred to some instances in history, where, in cases nearly similar, such transactions were held to involve a depreciation of the paper currency. He coincided with his noble friend, with respect to the identity of the dollars so circulated with the current coin of the realm. Such a miserable attempt at distinction, was, he observed, amply refuted by Locke, and other intelligent writers upon the subject. § Lord Grenville , in reply, observed, that the time would come when the Bank Directors would have to answer for their conduct with respect to other matters, as well as that in question; but in the pre- 447 sent instance, the King's government, by their conduct in the transaction, were to be considered as parties, as they lent their advice and authority to the Bank Directors; and the coin alluded to, it appeared, was also circulated under the authority of his Majesty's government. Earl Buthurst , in explanation, denied the inference, that his Majesty's government had declared them a legal tender. § Lord Ellenborough took occasion to observe, that such a step was not regularly in the power of ministers. By the law and the constitution, that power was vested elsewhere. The Earl of Ross made some observations with respect to the state of the paper currency, particularly in Ireland, where it was in far more favourable a state than some noble lords seemed to think. The issues of the Bank of Ireland had narrowed considerably since the investigation took place; the state of the exchange with Ireland was improved; and the difference between a guinea and Bank paper was, in that country lately, only four-pence. The Earl of Lauderdale adverted to the causes of the improved state of the Bank of Ireland currency, as alluded to by the noble earl; it was principally to be attributed to the great reduction of the issue of Bank of Ireland notes, which took place soon after the inquiry. § Earl Stanhope entertained similar sentiments with noble lords on his side of the House, respecting the recent conduct of the bank directors. He reprobated it as a transaction of which the foulest advantages might be made, in case of the directors having given private notice to their friends of their intention to raise the price of dollars upon such a day. There had been cases as bad. It was known that some individuals had by some means extricated certain secrets from Mr. Pitt, when at the head of affairs, and by means of such secrets, they had acquired large properties. The motion was then agreed to, as was also a motion for an Address to the Prince Regent, praying, That copies of the correspondence between his Majesty's government and the Bank of England, on the occasion in question, be laid before the House. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenntucky Mike Posted April 30 Share Posted April 30 Does not have the look of a proof to me, seems like a fantasy piece or knockoff. Is a similar piece listed in ESC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conscoins Posted April 30 Author Share Posted April 30 On 4/30/2024 at 5:53 AM, Fenntucky Mike said: Does not have the look of a proof to me, seems like a fantasy piece or knockoff. Is a similar piece listed in ESC? Actually yes. The ESC looks to be 1983. It isn't listed as a pattern coin in the ESC--as claimed by the KM#--it's listed under Bank of England dollars (those created by Matthew Boulton). It's given the rarity R3 which, from what I understand, is very scarce at 201-500 known. Maybe this is just something I need to send to NGC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cobymordet Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 NGC seems to aware of the coins' existence: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenntucky Mike Posted May 1 Share Posted May 1 (edited) On 4/30/2024 at 2:13 PM, conscoins said: Actually yes. The ESC looks to be 1983. It isn't listed as a pattern coin in the ESC--as claimed by the KM#--it's listed under Bank of England dollars (those created by Matthew Boulton). It's given the rarity R3 which, from what I understand, is very scarce at 201-500 known. Maybe this is just something I need to send to NGC. That lines up more with how the coin in the OP looks, it not being a proof pattern. The piece still looks off to me and not well struck. It looks like there are parallel lines running through the fields and details on the obv., are those stains/toning or are they features. EDIT TO ADD: I see that @coinsandmedals replied to your other post, he would be more familiar with a piece like this than anyone else here and I'd take his word on whether the piece is authentic or not. Edited May 1 by Fenntucky Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
