Williamsburg Público Deposited

Conteúdo do artigo
  • From mkringo@aol.com Sat Feb 25 18:35:15 2006
    Return-Path: <MKRingo@aol.com>
    X-Sender: MKRingo@aol.com
    X-Apparently-To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
    Received: (qmail 50527 invoked from network); 26 Feb 2006 02:35:13 -0000
    Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)
    by m32.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 Feb 2006 02:35:13 -0000
    Received: from unknown (HELO imo-d21.mx.aol.com) (205.188.144.207)
    by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Feb 2006 02:35:12 -0000
    Received: from MKRingo@aol.com
    by imo-d21.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r7.3.) id r.d9.37a85080 (15877)
    for <colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com>; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:35:02 -0500 (EST)
    Received: from FWM-M32 (fwm-m32.webmail.aol.com [64.12.193.234]) by air-id07.mx.aol.com (vx) with ESMTP id MAILINID74-3e05440113d463; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:35:00 -0500
    Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:35:00 -0500
    Message-Id: <8C808945FF761EC-84-EFFB@FWM-M32.sysops.aol.com>
    Received: from 66.79.78.65 by FWM-M32.sysops.aol.com (64.12.193.234) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:35:00 -0500
    X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
    X-MB-Message-Type: User
    In-Reply-To: <BAYC1-PASMTP04EB33BF11BED0B1A8164B9DF10@CEZ.ICE>
    X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 15106
    Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
    boundary="--------MailBlocks_8C808945FF29D38_84_ECD0_FWM-M32.sysops.aol.com"
    MIME-Version: 1.0
    To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
    X-AOL-IP: 64.12.193.234
    X-Spam-Flag: NO
    X-Originating-IP: 205.188.144.207
    From: mkringo@aol.com
    Subject: Williamsburg
    X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=36492546; y=oP50tNMtRThRE6Eahe-vzn9p_iQq--2c6MJtXY1o6ctAQg
    X-Yahoo-Profile: mkringo

    ----------MailBlocks_8C808945FF29D38_84_ECD0_FWM-M32.sysops.aol.com
    Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
    boundary="--------MailBlocks_8C808945FF29D38_84_ECD1_FWM-M32.sysops.aol.com"

    ----------MailBlocks_8C808945FF29D38_84_ECD1_FWM-M32.sysops.aol.com
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

    Hi all,

    I just got back from my first trip to Colonial Williamsburg (which was long overdue), and I had a very rewarding visit with Erik in the inner sanctum. We started with a visit to the Geddy Foundry, where sand cast molds of a Pillar dollar (from a cft) had been made a day or two earlier. This was my first participation in an actual counterfeiting operation (at least in this life <g>), and I felt like I was there 200+ years ago. Very cool. The coin attached is a GB 1/2d cast in brass (though not made yesterday), and is strikingly similar to a few pieces in my collection. I will post more photos tonight and tomorrow of the operation and the cft 8Rs made by the "gang of three".

    Mike

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Oliver D. Hoover <oliver.hoover@sympatico.ca>
    To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
    Sent: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:59:37 -0500
    Subject: RE: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: St. Patrick Inquiry ... John Lupia revisited


    Thanks Mike. That?s what I thought.

    Oliver




    From: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com [mailto:colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mkringo@aol.com
    Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 5:05 PM
    To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: St. Patrick Inquiry ... John Lupia revisited

    Oliver and JNL,

    I've been collecting contemporary cast counteferfeits for about 25 years now, and have probably over 100 examples of early issues, state coins, post-confederation, etc., and I don't recall ever seeing what I would consider any kind of contemporary cast of a St. Pats. Or struck for that matter.

    Just my 2 bits worth...

    Mike

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Oliver D. Hoover <oliver.hoover@sympatico.ca>
    To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
    Sent: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 16:46:55 -0500
    Subject: RE: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: St. Patrick Inquiry ... John Lupia revisited

    JNL,

    On the question of counterfeit St. Pats, while I agree that there may be
    counterfeits involved here, how can we possibly know to what extent or
    seriously begin to formulate theories as to which should be properly classed
    as counterfeit until the die study is published or at least made generally
    available?

    If there are counterfeits involved one would have to assume that it was a
    fairly sophisticated gang of forgers, no? You can pick just about the worst
    example of a St. Pat (I have no idea which ones you suspect as counterfeit),
    and the quality of engraving will be superior to that of say contemporary or
    somewhat later counterfeits of tokens and patent and royal coppers.

    I think you are mistaken in claiming that all coppers are equally easy to
    counterfeit. While I agree that it isn't particularly difficult to splash on
    some brass, it does require more effort than simply pressing out a plain
    copper piece. Likewise, milling the edges requires much more work than
    coins without such edging. If you accept Danforth's reconstruction of the
    edging process for St. Pats, it could be quite tricky. Even if you don't
    subscribe to Danforth's interpretation of the necessary technology and
    prefer a less advanced approach to the milling you are still looking at a
    more laborious process than producing coins without milled edges.

    As for contemporary cast counterfeits of St. Pats, how many of these are
    actually out there? Can you cite me an example? I haven't knowingly seen
    one.

    Oliver

    P.S. I apologize for my failure to employ gratuitous alphabetization above.
    Still, in the interest of continuity... QRSTUVWXYZ.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com [mailto:colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com]
    On Behalf Of John Lupia
    Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 11:44 AM
    To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: Re: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: St. Patrick Inquiry ... John Lupia
    revisited



    --- Will Nipper <wnippe@acxiom.com> wrote:

    > John,
    >
    > >> > Help me understand what it is that you think
    > I'm
    > > > pusuing, after I wrote that I wasn't pursuing
    > anything.
    > > No. 1 -- Good.
    > Oh. Now I understand. Thanks for the explanation.

    I had construed your ermine connection with Leake.
    Apparently Stan interpreted it to mean the robe and
    the line inquiry died out as it should since there is
    no other possible connection. It was you who did
    suggest ermine, no? So if you did not mean what Leake
    suggested did you really mean to refer to the robe? If
    you meant what Leake suggested then Stan offered
    another and now what you originally meant is ambiguos
    and you can now claim what you wish. So the whole line
    of inquiry is better off left ended.



    >
    > > > On your other point, I don't think counterfeits
    > can
    > > > be ruled out as the source of SOME St. Pat
    > farthing varieties.
    > No. 2 -- Good.
    > SOME is the operative word. I believe counterfeiting
    > may have been a
    > factor, but probably not the dominant factor in
    > there being so many
    > varieties.

    SOME is a Particular Affirmative or I-Propsition in
    logic. The I being one of four classes consisting of
    A, E, I, O where A=all are, E=none are, I=some are,
    O=some are not. When I-Propsitions are true
    A-Propositions and O-Propositions are undetermined,
    and E-Propositions are false. Consequentaly, by the
    rules of formal logic if the I-Proposition is true we
    cannot know to what extent , or, the magnitude since
    ALL may be a possibility as well as SOME ARE NOT. You
    appear to imply the the extent was very small by the
    manner in which you express yourself and I realize I
    may be misreading you.

    > > > Still, it doesn't quite make sense that anyone
    > would choose to
    > > > counterfeit the toughest-to-make base metal
    > issue when lesser
    > ones could be replicated more easily.
    > > No. 3 -- Why do you think that?
    > Among many other reasons, it would simply cost more,
    > be harder to do
    > and provide no incremental benefit to the
    > counterfeitor except as I
    > say in 4 & 5 below.

    Then you appear to be convinced that to cft a SP was
    excessively difficult to do. This I am not convinced
    about and disagree. I think SPs like any other coin
    was of equal ease or difficulty to replicate by
    cfters.

    >
    > > >Of course one could say that doing so might be
    > convincing since
    > the lesser pieces could be made by anyone.
    > > No. 4 -- Explain?
    > Credibility. One would likely assume that a coin
    > with complex
    > devices and legends and anti-counterfeiting devices
    > would more
    > likely be the product of a legitimate mint than say
    > a flattened lump
    > with a primitive stamp, even if the first is a
    > counterfeit and the
    > second is genuine.

    First of all you are straying from what is in fact to
    abstract possibilities that are not. We do know the
    SPs and there is nothing about them so complex or
    embedded with anti-cfting devices that would make
    replication difficult, costly or anything else that
    would prevent them from being cfted. Look at them. I
    have heard people on this list repeat time and time
    over how these coins were of such high quality, etc.
    This is simply not so. They are very crude, ineptly
    die sunk usually, with improperly placed dripped
    splashers from haste and other aspects that show the
    quality was very low. It seems reasonable that any
    counterfeiter out there could cast them or from a coin
    make a mould and replicate a die to screw press their
    own. So cast copies and pressed copies do not seem to
    be too difficult and convenient for a forger who
    usually made a small fortune cheating the public and
    the treasury from mass produced small change.


    > > And, the posiibility of 'retaking' would make St.
    > Pats
    > > > better targets than the 'unlycensed tradesmans'
    > tokens.
    > > No. 5 -- Merchant Tokens were redeemed by the
    > merchant. Whom do
    > you think redeemed the St. Pats?
    > The big problem with the merchant tokens was that
    > merchants wouldn't
    > redeem the tokens of others and could, at their
    > whim, refuse to
    > redeem even their own. They did so at great cost to
    > the poor.
    > Armstrong's lack of a provision to 'retake' his own
    > farthings was a
    > reason for their failure.

    The situation was far more complex than that about the
    crisis of farthings, Will. I began this journey
    writing a history of small change. I first began to
    compile data on US half cents since it did not matter
    where I began but the master-plan is to produce a
    comprehensive study from the 17th century to the 19th
    century. So now I find myself skipping back to the
    17th century here with the SPs. The whole story of
    modern small change is very complicated and
    fascinating. Since I began the study of SPs I finally
    took a look at Maris after all these years and now
    interested in the NJ coppers I think I would like to
    create a modern revised version of Maris in 2 volumes
    with one on SPs and a second on NJ Coppers. Then I
    will return to the half cents and other colonials that
    made up small change in the US completing my study.

    Ford, at least in his 1664
    > proposal,
    > offered a plan to retake his tokens through agents.


    This was always a requirement for any licenced minter
    coining for the government and was not unique to Ford.

    > If you were
    > counterfeiting, would you make a piece that quickly
    > might become
    > devalued or one that carried the promise of
    > redemption and, hence, a
    > reason for acceptance?

    There is no point in spitting in the wind. You are
    once again not addressing something real but unreal.


    > > >Still, it all seems as if it is a lot of effort,
    > materials and
    > technology when a little would do, in a country
    > starved for coinage.
    > > No. 6 -- This is the same as Nos. 3 & 4 above.
    > No, its a summary thought. IF we're talking A-K-Q,
    > counterfeiting
    > might be Q, J or 10. IMHO.

    Obfuscation does not help. My original inquiry was
    aimed at finding out why you thought counterfeiting
    SPs was so very hard, technologically difficult,
    costly, etc., but you offer nothing but rhetoric. Now
    you offer obfuscation with an artificial alphabet soup
    that spells nothing.



    > > >
    > > > I also believe that Ford's contemporaries
    > thought
    > > > his tokens, St. Pats or not, to be invulnerable
    > BECAUSE they
    > were so varied. We know that to be wrong-headed, as
    > proven by Robert
    > > > Scot and John Reich.
    > > No. 7 -- Explain?
    > First part: Read Pepys, Wood, etc.


    How does this blank suggestion help? Where in Mr.
    Peeps is anything that sheds light on what you are
    talking about? Which Wood do you mean? the coiner of
    the Irish money that is written up in the Drapier
    letters? Or do you mean another Wood? And what does
    this Wood have to say that sheds light on what you are
    talking about? I could not help but notice you used
    two names but failed to mention Scot in your original
    statement. You seem to throw things out at people as a
    shield of obfuscation, Will. This is not helpful in
    any discussion.

    > Second part: U.S. bust half dollars had many
    > variatins and, thus,
    > were extensively counterfeited before John Reich
    > enhanced the
    > hubbing process to produce uniform coins. By
    > Gobrecht's time, a
    > piece that was only slightly variant stood out. Now
    > we notice an
    > extra leaf on a Wisconsin quarter.

    You have good evidence here to support the position
    that Ford did not have a better idea and would have
    been rejected if his only premise was to make a
    complete varied coinage that nobody could tell one
    from another opening wide Pandora/s box to all
    counterfeiters so that even the coiner himself would
    not know which were his from those that were not. The
    17th century English did not buy into Fords reasoning
    as you claim. Where is the proof of the fact that they
    did? I mean besides none?


    >
    > > >But these 17th century guys don't seem to have
    > figured it out.
    > > No. 8 -- Or, it was not true to begin with.
    > See #7.
    > If they didn't believe it, why did they mention it?

    You need to take another look at who they are. This
    sort of making proposals and petitions with a myriad
    of claims false and otherwise went on all the time.
    Each new petitioner had the best idea that could not
    be counterfeited, etc.,, there were dozens of these
    petitioners all the time. Being a relative of Lady
    Jane Gray with political pull may have aided in
    getting a minor commission to a dying man who probably
    would not survive the trip to the mint.


    > >
    > >
    > > After all, the final triumph of English milling
    > over the
    > > > hammer had come only in 1662.
    > > No. 9 -- Really! And you know this to be a
    > supportable
    > > and defensible fact based on what evidence?
    > Plato said that we can know nothing, but only have
    > opinions.

    Please cite the text.


    Having
    > said that, I believe you will find that post-1662
    > English hammered
    > coinage and unicorn poop exist in ROUGHLY similar
    > quantities.

    I was not asking about hammered coins, but I see how
    you could have taken one of the two subjects in your
    bifurcated proposition. I mean milled. And what I
    meant is how do you knoow milled coins began in 1662?

    Best regards,
    John

    John N. Lupia, III
    Beachwood, New Jersey 08722 USA; Beirut, Lebanon
    Fax: (732) 349-3910
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Roman-Catholic-News/
    God Bless America

    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
    http://mail.yahoo.com



    Yahoo! Groups Links









    Yahoo! Groups Links









    SPONSORED LINKS Coin currency of us Rare coin and currency American coin



    YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

    Visit your group "colonial-coins" on the web.

    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    colonial-coins-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

    ----------MailBlocks_8C808945FF29D38_84_ECD1_FWM-M32.sysops.aol.com
    Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

    <HTML><BODY><DIV style='font-family: "Verdana"; font-size: 10pt;'><DIV>
    <DIV>Hi all,</DIV>
    <DIV> </DIV>
    <DIV>I just got back from my first trip to Colonial Williamsburg (which was long overdue), and I had a very rewarding visit with Erik in the inner sanctum. We started with a visit to the Geddy Foundry, where sand cast molds of a Pillar dollar (from a cft) had been made a day or two earlier. This was my first participation in an actual counterfeiting operation (at least in this life <g>), and I felt like I was there 200+ years ago. Very cool. The coin attached is a GB 1/2d cast in brass (though not made yesterday), and is strikingly similar to a few pieces in my collection. I will post more photos tonight and tomorrow of the operation and the cft 8Rs made by the "gang of three".</DIV>
    <DIV> </DIV>
    <DIV>Mike</DIV> <BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: Oliver D. Hoover <oliver.hoover@sympatico.ca><BR>To: colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com<BR>Sent: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:59:37 -0500<BR>Subject: RE: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: St. Patrick Inquiry ... John Lupia revisited<BR><BR>
    <STYLE>
    .AOLPlainTextBody {
    margin: 0px;
    font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, Sans-Serif;
    font-size: 12px;
    color: #000;
    background-color: #fff;
    }

    .AOLPlainTextBody pre {
    font-size: 9pt;
    }

    .AOLInlineAttachment {
    margin: 10px;
    }

    .AOLAttachmentHeader {
    border-bottom: 2px solid #E9EAEB;
    background: #F9F9F9;
    }

    .AOLAttachmentHeader .Title {
    font: 11px Tahoma;
    font-weight: bold;
    color: #666666;
    background: #E9EAEB;
    padding: 3px 0px 1px 10px;
    }

    .AOLAttachmentHeader .FieldLabel {
    font: 11px Tahoma;
    font-weight: bold;
    color: #666666;
    padding: 1px 10px 1px 9px;
    }

    .AOLAttachmentHeader .FieldValue {
    font: 11px Tahoma;
    color: #333333;
    }

    </STYLE>

    <DIV id=AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319><?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:SmartTagType name="PostalCode" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" =""><o:SmartTagType name="country-region" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" =""><o:SmartTagType name="City" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" ="" downloadurl="http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"><o:SmartTagType name="State" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" =""><o:SmartTagType name="place" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" ="" downloadurl="http://www.5iantlavalamp.com/"><o:SmartTagType name="PersonName" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" ="">
    <STYLE>
    /* Font Definitions */ @#AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 font-face {font-family:Wingdings; panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;} @#AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 font-face {font-family:Tahoma; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} @#AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 font-face {font-family:Verdana; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {color:blue; text-decoration:underline;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:blue; text-decoration:underline;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 pre {margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Courier New";} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 tt {font-family:"Courier New";} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.aolplaintextbody, li.aolplaintextbody, div.aolplaintextbody {margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; background:white; font-size:9.0pt; font-family:Tahoma; color:black;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.aolinlineattachment, li.aolinlineattachment, div.aolinlineattachment {margin:7.5pt; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.aolattachmentheader, li.aolattachmentheader, div.aolattachmentheader {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; background:#F9F9F9; border:none; padding:0in; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.title, li.title, div.title {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.title1, li.title1, div.title1 {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; background:#E9EAEB; font-size:8.5pt; font-family:Tahoma; color:#666666; font-weight:bold;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.fieldlabel, li.fieldlabel, div.fieldlabel {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.title2, li.title2, div.title2 {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; background:#E9EAEB; font-size:8.5pt; font-family:Tahoma; color:#666666; font-weight:bold;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.fieldlabel1, li.fieldlabel1, div.fieldlabel1 {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; font-size:8.5pt; font-family:Tahoma; color:#666666; font-weight:bold;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.fieldvalue, li.fieldvalue, div.fieldvalue {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.title3, li.title3, div.title3 {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; background:#E9EAEB; font-size:8.5pt; font-family:Tahoma; color:#666666; font-weight:bold;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.fieldlabel2, li.fieldlabel2, div.fieldlabel2 {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; font-size:8.5pt; font-family:Tahoma; color:#666666; font-weight:bold;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 p.fieldvalue1, li.fieldvalue1, div.fieldvalue1 {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; font-size:8.5pt; font-family:Tahoma; color:#333333;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 span.EmailStyle31 {mso-style-type:personal-reply; font-family:Arial; color:navy;} @#AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 div.Section1 {page:Section1;} /* List Definitions */ @#AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 list l0 {mso-list-id:1093818013; mso-list-template-ids:857099274;} @#AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 list l0:level1 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:\F0B7; mso-level-tab-stop:.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Symbol;} @#AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 list l0:level1 lfo2 {mso-level-start-at:0; mso-level-numbering:continue; mso-level-text:\F0A7; mso-level-tab-stop:.5in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Wingdings;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 ol {margin-bottom:0in;} #AOLMsgPart_2_2434d766-0fb5-4ce7-97a6-ce611a5fd319 ul {margin-bottom:0in;}
    </STYLE>

    <DIV class=Section1>
    <DIV class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Thanks Mike.  That?s what I thought.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
    <DIV class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
    <DIV class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Oliver<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
    <DIV class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
    <DIV>
    <DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
    <HR tabIndex=-1 align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
    </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
    <DIV class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">From:</SPAN></FONT></B><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma"> <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:PersonName w:st="on">colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com</st1:PersonName> [mailto:<st1:PersonName w:st="on">colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com</st1:PersonName>] <B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">On Behalf Of </SPAN></B>mkringo@aol.com<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Saturday, February 25, 2006 5:05 PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> <st1:PersonName w:st="on">colonial-coins@yahoogroups.com</st1:PersonName><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [Colonial Numismatics] Re: St. Patrick Inquiry ... John Lupia revisited</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></DIV></DIV>
    <DIV class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
    <DIV>
    <DIV>
    <DIV>
    <DIV class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Oliver and JNL,<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></DIV></DIV>
    <DIV>
    <DIV class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></DIV></DIV>
    <DIV>
    <DIV class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">I've been collecting contemporary cast counteferfeits for about 25 years now, and have probably over 100 examples of early issues, state coins, post-confederation, etc., and I don't recall ever seeing what I would consider any kind of contemporary cast of a S
URL da fonte Data de publicação
  • 2006-02-25
Volume
  • 1

Relacionamentos

Autor do PNN