Contenido del artículo |
- From palmers4@erols.com Tue Dec 24 14:40:30 2002
Return-Path: <palmers4@erols.com> X-Sender: palmers4@erols.com X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_2_3_0); 24 Dec 2002 22:40:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 3496 invoked from network); 24 Dec 2002 22:40:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m11.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 24 Dec 2002 22:40:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n18.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.73) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 24 Dec 2002 22:40:30 -0000 Received: from [66.218.67.250] by n18.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 24 Dec 2002 22:40:19 -0000 Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 22:40:17 -0000 To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: George Selgin Message-ID: <auanoh+bl22@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: <au9q72+ojve@eGroups.com> User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Length: 2955 X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster From: "dp1787 <palmers4@erols.com>" <palmers4@erols.com> X-Originating-IP: 24.186.173.179 X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=35383343 X-Yahoo-Profile: dp1787
George, Happy Holidays to you as well! Wouldn't ANY button manufactory have the ability to strike coins? As we don't know the exact date of manufacture of many of these ctfts., they could have been struck by any of them, as well as at Boulton's factory, whether by design of the owner, or clandestinely by workers, during or after hours. Would seem to me that there would be more than 10 places that had the ABILITY to strike these things, not that all who had it, did it. If Selgin is correct that the Tower mint made regals and would not pay shipping to where they were needed ( seems very reasonable to me), then they could be made anywhere they might be needed, or in London, and then shipped by mail coach to wherever, based on the profit margins afforded the counterfeiter, and the need to satisfy the customer. The relative ease of circulation of these coppers, also helped anyone thinking about making them, decide to do so. "Hey, he was doing it too!" Why not? David
--- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "George Fuld <fuldy2000@y...>" <fuldy2000@y...> wrote: > > > Jeff: > > I agree with your logic re casting. But why were almost all George > III struck. How many places would have the equipment to strike them? > There couldn't be to many--certainly under ten. Lets find out how > many places in GB had the ability to strike coins. This would show > the limited number of places that they could be struck. Selgin could > be a starting place. Happy holidays to all!! > > George F. > > In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, Rosaamltd@a... wrote: > > Ray, cast counterfeits were almost certainly cheaper to produce - - > the cost > > was almost nothing! You needed the sand or wax to make the casting > mold, and > > some cheap metal that could be melted down. Once you made the mold, > you > > could spend the real coins that you used to impress the design. It > was > > certainly more time intensive, and the number of casts you could get > from a > > given mold would be small -- but if you could do it without getting > caught, > > it was almost pure profit. On the other hand, struck copies would > require a > > lot of capital investment -- a press capable of producing > significant > > striking pressure, steel for dies, engraving tools, planchet cutting > and > > rolling equipment, smelting equipment, not to mention some amount of > talent > > to engrave the dies. Needless to say, there wouldn't be a whole lot > of > > people who had an actual counterfeiting mint set up in their > basement (well, > > other than in certain areas of New Jersey perhaps). I would guess > that many > > of the struck counterfeits of the period were struck at other mints, > token > > manufactures, button manufacturers (which would have almost similar > > equipment), and perhaps even "off the record" at some of the regular > mints by > > moonlighting personnel.
|
URL de origen |
|
Fecha de publicación |
|
Volumen |
|