Considered counterfeit?

I was going to post this in Christopher290's thread titled "List: Favorite Coin", but decided not to hijack it and started this one instead.

Specifically regarding the 1861-O Half dollar. If the US first minted, then the State of Louisiana minted, then the Confederate Army minted, wouldn't the last two be considered counterfeits? Using stolen Federal dies.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

not exactly sure

 

I think there is a difference between being declared counterfeit and being demonetized.

Chris

 

I don't think they would be considered counterfeit because counterfeits are meant to deceive. They were still using the same silver and dies and a legit mint building. They weren't trying to be deceitful with those coins.

 

Not counterfeits, coins of one government coined using the dies of another government. (The coins were legally produced by an authorized government entity) The US mint has struck coins using the dies of many other governments, are those coins counterfeits? That is an interesting question. Are there other examples of one government using the dies/design of another for their own domestic use?

 

But, these dies, and silver, were owned by the Federal gov., coinage meant to be used by the Federal gov., but were actually used against the Federal gov. I suppose you could say they the Confederate gov. stole the silver and/or coin, but was recovered at a letter date?

 

I would say the dies were owned by the FORMER Federal government, but that government dissolved when the South seceded. The inheritor of this property was the new authority, first the state of LA and later the confederacy.

Therefor, I would not consider it a counterfeit at all. They were struck by those who had the legal right to strike coinage.

 

I thought that the Federal gov and the Confederate gov were in existence at the same time, hence the Civil War.

 

YOU could say that if YOU really wanted to. I wouldn't, but if it means that much to you....

 

I agree with Books. If it means that much to you, then why should we discuss this further?

Chris

 

Many different countries' coins circulated in America up until about that time. Additionally, I doubt anyone looked at die marriages or could tell the issues apart in 1861. It filled a need at the time just like Spanish Reales and other coins filled a need in our early history.

 

I agree with Jim on this one, as the dies, blanks and press used to make these did in fact belong to the U.S. Federal Government . When captured they were used to coin or make coins that in fact weren't for the U.S. Federal Government but to be used for the C.S. war efforts .
Jim is also correct stating that the US mint does and has minted coins for other governments ' countries' under approval and contract by said government .

A perfect example would be country xyz contracts the US mint to mint 50,000 coins. Any mintage's over that amount would be considered counterfeits . Even though they are minted on the dies,using the same blanks , and materials .

 

While it's true that the coins were not minted for the federal government the counter argument would be that the Union never formally recognized the legitimacy of the succession. Without formal recognition they were technically US minted coins

 

Not a prayer. The coiner, assayer, etc. were not legal employees of the US Mint.

 

Originally owned by the US Gov. Now they were "spoils of war" captured by another government. Captured enemy property is just that captured and for all practical purposes becomes the property of the government doing the capturing. (unless they lose in which case they may have to pay reparations for what they captured)

But were they used for trade purposes or for domestic circulation. There are several examples of one country being made by another for trade purposes. For example the 1898 Mexican pesos we made for use in China. But is there a another case of oe county making another countries coins for their own domestic circulation use?

Actually I believe they were. When Louisiana took over the mint , and later when the Confederacy did, most if not all of the employees stayed on and continued working. It's weird but I believe for at least a little while they continued to send reports to Philadelpha even after the takeover.

I consider the coins legitimate, struck by other governments using captured enemy supplies.

 

They were at war, isn't that enough

 

Louisiana seceded on Jan 26, 1861, the war officially broke out on the attack of Fort Sumter April 12, 1861, so technically both the State and Confederate minted coins before the war which continued for only a few weeks more until the bullion ran out.

The employees did stay on after Louisiana seceded, but as State employees.

 

GDJMSP, after the Russian Revolution the USSR took over the Goznak facility in Sankt Peterburg, later Petrograd, then Leningrad and continued minting Tsar Nikolai II 10 rubles in gold dated 1911 well into the very late 1920s and possibly into the 30s as they were using them as payments for international goods. Official mintage reports from 1911 report 50K coins being minted, but there are far more out there even after all the melts etc. For domestic consumption only, well in theory, the Soviets had Chervonetz coins minted 1923-25 -but they were more for show than for actual circulation. Basically they were minted to give the appearance of a gold backed ruble after some 5-6 years of inflation and redenominations of the currency. Silver coinage did circulate but only until 1932 then Stalin made the ruble the first "fiat" currency - in theory it was backed by gold ie the gold ruble, but in practice it was backed by the full faith and pledge of the Soviet workers.