| Contenu de l'article |
- 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 source |
|
|---|
| Date publiée |
|
|---|
| Volume |
|
|---|
