Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Conder101, post: 3469371, member: 66&quot;]The early copper coinage intrinsic value was somewhat close but did not equal the face value.&nbsp; Originally they were supposed to have the intrinsic value equal to the face value but there were two problems.&nbsp; It made the coins too large, and the way the mint was set up with free coinage of gold and silver the seigniorage profit from the copper coinage was to pay the expenses of the mint. The first large cents had a weight of 208 grains.&nbsp; If they had their full intrinsic value they would have weighed 264 grains.</p><p><br /></p><p>By 1795 copper prices had risen requiring the reduction in weight of the cent in December to 168 grains.&nbsp; Copper stabilized and the weight remained the same until 1857, but in the early 1850&#039;s copper had risen again to the point where the cent was once again a break even proposition.&nbsp; Tests were made and eventually we got the small cent of copper and nickel.&nbsp; The addition or nickel was also intended to prop up the intrinsic value of the cent.&nbsp; The copper in the coppernickel cent was worth about .33 cents, and the 12% nickel was also worth .33 cents.&nbsp; so each cent had .66 cents intrinsic value.&nbsp; In 1864 the idea of intrinsic value in the cent was abandoned after the civil war tokens showed that low value coins did not have to have intrinsic value to be accepted and circulate.</p><p><br /></p><p>The two cent came after the concept of intrinsic value for low value coins was abandoned, it&#039;s intrinsic value was about .66 cents.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in