[Colonial Numismatics] George Selgin Public Deposited
Re
- From jackhowes@yahoo.com Sun Dec 22 12:57:31 2002
Return-Path: <jackhowes@yahoo.com>
X-Sender: jackhowes@yahoo.com
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 22 Dec 2002 20:57:29 -0000
Received: (qmail 84638 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2002 20:57:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217)
by m9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 22 Dec 2002 20:57:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n9.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.93)
by mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Dec 2002 20:57:30 -0000
Received: from [66.218.67.176] by n9.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Dec 2002 20:57:30 -0000
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 20:57:26 -0000
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] George Selgin
Message-ID: <au58vm+dfbt@eGroups.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Length: 1774
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
From: "Jack Howes <jackhowes@yahoo.com>" <jackhowes@yahoo.com>
X-Originating-IP: 68.42.255.132
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=68201567
X-Yahoo-Profile: jackhowes
>From: rg5turc@a...
>Date: Sun Dec 22, 2002 10:05 am
>Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] George Selgin
>Hi Jack,
>Thanks for posting this site as the reading is very interesting. One
>question is why do you feel the cost of producing cast counterfeits
>not to be less expensive then struck counterfeits? I would be
>interested in your comments!
>Ray T.
Ray,
My opinion is based on limited data and that it seems to square with
what we see 200 years later.
Anton says (page 31, Forgotten Coins of the North American Colonies)
that casting, "was entirely unsuitable from the standpoints of mass
manufacture and quality of execution." He futher says that his
sampling of populations indicate a ratio of about 60 to 1 struck to
cast.
The only hoard that I have seen documented (and I have not looked hard
for this kind of thing yet) is in Smith, (George III Counterfeit
Halfpenny Series, COAC95, page 51) a find of 325 defaced halfpence,
one of which was cast.
Also I see very few cast counterfeits for sale (although this is
qualitative since I have not been counting).
This is why I was surprised that Selgin indicates that casting was
easy and cheap. He also indicates that cast counterfeits were common
throughout the 18th century and has a period reference that I do not
have access to immediately -- Colquhoun, 1800, pg 178.
If cast counterfeits were common in the 18th century I would expect
them to be common in hoards and in collections.
It seems to me that casting might be easy and cheaper than striking to
make a few but does not seem to me to be a process that scales up well
otherwise mints would look more like foundaries. (But I have been
known to be wrong about all kinds of things and would not rule that
out this case either.)
Jack - 2002-12-22
- 1
