| Article content |
- From clement.schettino@axcelis.com Fri Jan 20 13:27:08 2006
Return-Path: <clement.schettino@axcelis.com>
X-Sender: clement.schettino@axcelis.com
X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Received: (qmail 1900 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2006 21:27:05 -0000
Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
by m2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 20 Jan 2006 21:27:05 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO n7a.bullet.scd.yahoo.com) (66.94.237.41)
by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 20 Jan 2006 21:27:05 -0000
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
Received: from [66.218.66.58] by n7.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 20 Jan 2006 21:26:41 -0000
Received: from [66.218.66.71] by t7.bullet.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 20 Jan 2006 21:26:41 -0000
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 21:26:39 -0000
To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID: <dqrkif+6jno@eGroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <dqpf4c+6val@eGroups.com>
User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-compose
X-Originating-IP: 66.94.237.41
X-eGroups-Msg-Info: 1:12:0:0
X-Yahoo-Post-IP: 12.146.8.100
From: "Clement V. Schettino (Clem)" <clement.schettino@axcelis.com>
Subject: Re: How long did 1775 counterfeit halfpence circulate in London???
X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=60887536; y=W8qt8BUmkF6VSpRCXcZ7IIhPLueRQhA7Wym4xAvdwaHbDuMw5g
X-Yahoo-Profile: copperclem
Hey John,
I've been very busy here at work today and am just now getting around=20
to catching up on my egroups.
I'm going to add something that someone else my have already said but=20
I'm at work and need to read from the site, very cumbersome.
So, do the two counterfeit 1775 British 1/2d I have overstruck on two=20
different 1797 Condor tokens help shed light on the fact that they=20
certainly not only circulated well into the late eighteenth century=20
but were STILL obviously being struck at that time.
Clem
--- In colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com, "John Lorenzo" <johnmenc@o...>=20
wrote:
>
> Some students familiar with English copper regal coinage and the=20
> associated contemporary counterfeits have read something of this=20
> type of passage on Matthew Boulton:
>=20
> His first coins, for Sumatra, which had been made in 1787 on old=20
> hand-operated coin presses he had got from a customer, were=20
probably=20
> not much better than the Royal Mint's erstwhile output. But by 1791=20
> he had solved the problem of achieving consistent size and weight.=20
> By 1794 he had introduced reeded and lettered edges, only recently=20
> copied by the Royal Mint with its =A31 and =A32 coins. Such edges made=20
> shaving instantly detectable and thus brought a halt to the=20
practice=20
> by preventing shaved coins from being returned into circulation.=20
> Another innovation in the same year was to inset the lettering=20
> around the edge of a coin into a raised border, which made the=20
> forger's life somewhat more difficult by improving the wearing=20
> properties of coins, since the raised border took the bulk of the=20
> wear. He also conceived of the idea of a gauge for detecting=20
whether=20
> the coin was made of the right metal. This gauge was made to the=20
> precise diameter and thickness of the coin, which was first passed=20
> through it and then weighed. If a coin which contained, say, too=20
> little gold, passed through the gauge its weight would be short;,=20
> whilst if its weight were correct it would be too big to pass=20
> through the gauge. By 1799 he had devised a method of producing=20
> coins with diagonal reeding on the edge, which is extremely=20
> difficult to counterfeit. Two centuries later, the Royal Mint has=20
> yet to catch up. He also introduced the practice, still followed=20
> with regard to the British coinage, of making the weight of copper=20
> coins proportional to their value, 2d pieces weighing 2ozs, 1d=20
> pieces 1oz, and so on. This enables the value of a bagful of change=20
> to be determined simply by weighing it. The standards Boulton set=20
> for coin size and weight remained in force until decimalisation=20
over=20
> 170 years later.
> Just posting an interesting piece in my previous post illustrating=20
a=20
> 1775 English halfpence contemporary counterfeit counterstamped with=20
> the Samuel Davis of London counterstamp. Brunk believes this=20
> merchant operated in London between 1808-1822 and he gives this=20
> piece his attribution number of #51265 due to the first of two=20
types=20
> of spelling of the word HOUNDSDITCH in the counterstamp.
> My point - it seems contemporary counterfeits were circulating=20
> somewhat WELL PAST the so-called end of the counterfeit era due to=20
> Boulton coinage of the late 1790's. This piece CERTAINLY confirms=20
> this fact. Can not recall too many other pieces showing similar=20
> proof. Mr. Albany, Dave P. or Clem ... anything ...???
>
|
|---|
| Source URL |
|
|---|
| Date published |
|
|---|
| Volume |
|
|---|
