Featured Early Commemoratives Proposed But Not Issued

In addition to what Roger wrote, I believe the failure of huge numbers of bills submitted also played a big part to their demise.

“Abuses of commemorative coins came to the forefront under Grant’s tenure, and President Coolidge vowed not to approve any more in 1925. President Hoover approved some commemoratives, then became disenchanted with the ‘racket,’ and threatened to veto any commemorative coin legislation sent to him by Congress.[1] This eventually resulted in replacement of the Standing Liberty quarter with the Washington design in 1932.

Although President Roosevelt initially approved of additional commemoratives, the entire matter got out of hand quickly. Secretary Morgenthau began to crack down on excessive commemorative coin legislation in mid-1936….(add quotes). Demand for normal coinage in 1936-1937 continued strong even through the severe recession. Superintendents of the Philadelphia and San Francisco Mints complained of insufficient equipment to balance output from the various departments. Although new facilities were provided in San Francisco, and both Denver and Philadelphia Mints were expanded, they continued to have difficulty in meeting production targets.

By 1937 Treasury Secretary Morgenthau advised that new issues be stopped:

The commemorative coin abuse, which of last has grown to such proportions that President Roosevelt told the last Congress that 'it jeopardizes the integrity of our coins,' would be curbed under a bill introduced by Senator Francis T. Mahoney of Connecticut.

'Many abuses seem to have crept into the commemorative coins field,' said the New England senator, one of the most consistent opponents of the indiscriminate issuance of these coins, after asking that the President appoint a commission of five to pass on such requests with power to deny improper ones.

…Last Congress there were 50 bills introduced with requests for special issues and 25 became law. Already in the few weeks of the present session a dozen requests for special issues have been presented by members of Congress.

'I think the practice of striking special coins in commemoration of historical events and permitting the sponsoring organization to sell them at a profit is a misuse of our coinage systems, which is assuming increasingly dangerous proportions,” President Roosevelt warned the last Congress….

All sorts of events and persons are sought to be honored by a special commemorative coins. For instance, last Congress, among the 25 authorized, were issues to commemorate the ‘50th anniversary of Cincinnati as a center of music and its contributions to the art of music for the past 50 years,’ the ‘300th anniversary of the landing of the Swedes in Delaware,’ the ‘100th anniversary of the incorporation of Bridgeport, Conn.,’ and a number honoring the sundry anniversaries of states, counties and cities.

The requests introduced this Congress include…’the changing the name of Sawpit to Village of Port Chester, N.Y.,’ the ‘Construction of Fort Peck dam,’ the 'heroes of the Alamo,' and the '100th anniversary of the birth of Grover Cleveland.”[2]

But members of congress, addicted to easy money and local recognition, continued the onslaught of increasingly trivial commemorations. One particularly parochial proposal was for half dollar coins to celebrate the two hundredth anniversary of Bethesda Orphans’ Home in Savannah, Georgia. The President had enough, and like his predecessor vowed to veto every commemorative coin proposal to cross his desk.

President Roosevelt vetoed today a bill for the coinage of 100,000 silver 50-cent pieces in commemoration of the 400th anniversary of the exploration of Francisco Vasquez de Coronado in what is now the Southwestern United States. According to a memorandum given out at the White House, however, he has offered to have commemorative medals struck off by the mint in place of the coins.

Mr. Roosevelt said that new issues of commemorative coins have in recent years increased three-fold, often for local celebrations, and have jeopardized the integrity of regular coins as well as caused confusion.[3]

In the words of Senator Alva B. Adams (D, Colorado), its time ‘…to take the racket out of these coins.’[4] Secretary Morgenthau had decided that additional work required of the mints and growing signs of financial abuse were not worth the extra revenue, and actively opposed all commemorative coin proposals.”1


[1] Over the decades since Grant’s term, most of the responsibility for problems with commemoratives have been placed on the sponsoring organizations. However, director Grant appears to have contributed to the confusion. In a notable exchange of letters between Grant and Representative Ole Juulson Kvale concerning the Norse-American medals of 1925, Grant displays surprising ignorance of the minting process, alloys and production schedules.

[2] “Check Proposed On U.S. Issue of Memorial Coins,” Christian Science Monitor, February 24, 1937. p.13.

[3] “Vetoes Special Coin Bill,” The New York Times, July 3, 1938. p.6.

[4] “Taking Speculation from Special Coins,” Christian Science Monitor, June 16, 1939. p.2.

1Courtesy of Roger Burdette

Much more to follow.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

This is the kind of information I love to read about. Thank you for posting it here.

 

I am sorry, but I am royally confused. Ulysses S. Grant (His real first name was Hiram.) served as president from 1869 to 1877. Calvin Coolidge served from 1923 to 1929. I don’t know how Grant got involved in this history. From what I've read, Herbert Hoover was totally opposed the commemorative coin programs. He did not approve of any of them during his time in office from 1929 to 1933. They resumed when FDR took office in 1933.

Some people say that the 1848 CAL. Quarter Eagle was the first commemorative coin. Even if you buy into that, the next one didn't come along until 1892 with the Columbian Half Dollar. That was approved by Benjamin Harrison. After the issue of comitatives was fairly sporadic until the 1920s.

 

Likely referring to Robert J. Grant, Director of the Mint, 1923-1933

 

In the first footnote he does mention Director Grant so it probably is the mint director he is referring to.

 

I believe that's what Roger meant. Sorry for the confusion.

 

This is a very, very long chapter. These are the failures that I have found. I know there are more. Please share here if you know of any failures that I don't mention. I will carry this all the the way to the 1950s.

I'll get started now on the failures:

1912



“It was thought to be especially fitting in 1912 to suggest that the United States Government-one hundred years after the War of 1812-issue a commemorative silver coin of the denomination of one dollar, the design of which will emphasize the wonderful growth of the country that range of time.

For this commemorative dollar the above design is submitted, from which Walter E. Blyth, a young New York artist, has taken this suggestion for the above drawings: The obverse bear in the center of the field a reproduction of Liberty, with cap and pole, as borne by the first representation of Liberty on the celebrated ‘Libertas Americana’ medal of Dupre, the French artist, issued in 1776, which was adopted as a medal by our mint engravers in 1793 to place upon the first cents struck at the United States Mint. It is suggested, however, that Liberty on the new dollar face to the right, instead of to the left, as on the original medal. Around the central device to be placed a complete circle of stars-forty-eight in number-representing the number of states now in the Union. Around the border to be the legend ‘United States of America.’ At the bottom, the date, ‘1912,’ dividing the denomination ‘One’ and Dol.’ as, ONE 1912 DOL.

The reverse design to show in the center of the field the coat of arms of a state; beneath in small letters the name of the state.

I live in Virginia, Coat of Arms for Virginia (1876), below:


Virginia State Coat of Arms (1876). Courtesy of Wikipedia.

Around this coat of arms to be a partial circle of nineteen stars, to represent the states of which the Union was composed in 1812—namely, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, New York, New jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio, Louisiana and Missouri. Around the border to be inscribed, ‘1812 NINETEEN STATES, 1912 FORTY-EIGHT STATES.’In the edge of the coin, in incused, or sunken, letters, to be ‘HUNDRED CENTS, ONE DOLLAR, OR UNIT’ as borne by the first coin of the denomination issued at the United States Mint in 1794.

That all of these commemorative dollars be struck from a common United States obverse, as above described, to be combined with the same reverse design, but bearing in the center the coat of arms of the various states of the Union at the present time, after the style of the illustrations, which show New York and California.

The issue of a commemorative dollar coin is thought to be worthy of consideration for a number of reasons. One of these is that since 1894 this Government has ceased to coin a metallic representation of its currency unit, as the silver dollar was abandoned in that year, while in 1889 the coinage of the gold dollar was stopped.

It is felt that the issue of this coin along the suggested lines will have an educational value, as it will show the exact number of states now in the Union, a matter upon which a great many of our citizens are not correctly informed, and also will show the coat of arms of each state, which surely will be a matter of interest for nearly all generations of our citizens.

It is thought that the issue of this dollar will not entail any considerable expense, and indeed there may be even a margin of profit. Undoubtedly there will be orders for a vast number of these coins, and the seigniorage alone will probably warrant the issue.

It is recommended that the size, weight, and general coinage features of the silver dollar of 1894 be applied to the striking of this commemorative dollar, and that all the provisions of law relative to the coinage, legal tender quality, and redemption of the silver coins of the United States be made applicable to the commemorative piece.

It is also suggested that in order to permit these commemorative dollars to reach every part of the United States, that, when ordered in sums of $500 or more, the charge for transportation be borne by the Government.

Also that at least 1,000,000 of these pieces be struck, and that a sufficient number of silver dollars be withdrawn from the United States Treasury and recoined for the purpose. And also that the issue be increased if found advisable.

That the United States Mint authorities be authorized to strike a number of pieces from the dies bearing each state’s coat of arms in proof to meet the demands of collectors for cabinet specimens, and that the cost of these specimens be regulated by the rules at present governing the striking and sale by the Government of similar pieces, and that the commemorative dollar be struck at the parent and all the branch United States Mints. ”2

2 The Numismatist, 1912 Commemorative Dollar, by Edgar H. Adams, Vol. XXV, No. 1, January 1912, p. 1-2.

 

1914

“Senator S. Thomas, of Colorado, an advocate of free silver, on July 28, offered a bill for the unlimited coinage of twenty-five cent pieces during the year 1915 to commemorate the opening of the Panama Pacific Exposition and the centenary of peace between English speaking peoples. The bill authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prepare designs for such coins.

A similar bill was introduced recently by Senator Root, except that Mr. Root’s bill did not provide for unlimited coinage at the ratio of 20 to 1. – N.Y. Herald.”4

4The Numismatist, To Coin Commemorative 25-Cent Pieces, September, 1914, p. 451.

1922

“Editorial Comment – Numismatic News

The daily press of the country carried a dispatch from Washington about September 10 to the effect that the Senate had passed a bill introduced by Senator Frank B. Willis, of Ohio, authorizing the coinage of 100,000 half dollars commemorating the 100th anniversary of the birth of Ex-President Rutherford B. Hayes at Delaware, Ohio, October 4, 1922.

The Numismatist, No Hayes Commemorative Half Dollars to be issued, October 1922, pg. 508-509.

1925

“It appears that bills for other proposed issues of commemorative coins failed of passage. Press reports state that proposed issues for the following celebrations were not successful:

One hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill

One hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the Battle of Yorktown

Two hundredth anniversary of the founding of the town of Stoughton, Mass.”

The Numismatist, New United States Commemorative Coins. April, 1925, p. 145.


1926

“Miss O’REILLY (US Mint). Those that are pending are the Bunker Hill, the Yorktown, the Stoughton, California, the Vancouver, the Bennington, which is before us. The Bunker Hill is before the Library Committee, I think; tied up to that is the authorization for a celebration of some kind, the coinage is merely tacked on.”

The Numismatist, Commemorative half dollars pending, June 1926, p. 385.

1929

"Announcement is made that collectors will probably be able to add this year another half dollar to the extensive list of commemoratives now in their cabinets. The coin will be known as the Gadsden Purchase half dollar and will commemorate the seventy-fifth anniversary of that event.

The information comes to us from L.W. Hoffecker, of El Paso, Texas, a member of the ANA, and Chairman of the Gadsden Purchase Commission, who designed the coin and will have charge of its sale."


The Gadsden Purchase (shown in yellow with present-day state boundaries and cities) Northeastern boundary was the disputed U.S.-Mexico boundary; line shown is the unratified Bartlett-Conde compromise proposal which was preempted by the Gadsden Purchase.


The Numismatist, Gadsden Purchase Half Dollar, Editorial by Frank Duffield. April 1929, pg. 236-237.

 

“Oklahoma doesn’t propose to wait until it celebrates its one hundredth anniversary of admission to the United States, like a number of its sister States have done, to have a commemorative coin, but wants one this year, because it is twenty years old. The idea of such a coin has been suggested to Secretary Mellon by N.R. Graham, a Tulsa banker, according to the Tulsa Tribune.

Mr. Graham is president of the Oklahomans, Inc., a division of the State Chamber of Commerce through a national campaign. The memorial coin was suggested by him as a mark of progress which has been made by the forty-eighth State before “being old enough to vote.’

‘We are going to tell the world what a land of opportunity and progress Oklahoma is, and a peculiar thing about this campaign of advertising is that it will be conducted just as the Sooner State becomes 20 years old,” Graham pointed out. He explained that he was going to get in touch with the officials of the State Historical Society here for the purpose of forwarding the memorial half dollar movement.

‘A beautiful design embodying the historical high points of the State and its present position in the wealth of the nation can be prepared by an Oklahoma artist for both sides of the coin,’ he said.”12

12The Numismatist, Oklahoma wants commemorative coin. January 1927, p. 34.

“An effort is being made to have a half dollar struck to commemorate the opening of the Moffatt Tunnel, in Colorado. This tunnel is the longest in the United States, being over six miles long. The imitative has been taken by Ernest Cerney, of Denver, a member of the ANA, who is endeavoring to interest the local Chamber of Commerce and other influential bodies of that city in the matter. In a recent communication to the Denver Post, Mr. Cerney wrote as follows:

‘In a few months the gigantic task-completion of Moffatt Tunnel will be a reality. The man, David H. Moffatt, who unsparingly gave of his health and wealth, and who did not live long enough to see his dream realized, should be fittingly remembered.

‘For the neighboring State of Oregon last year, a half dollar was struck to commemorate the blazing of the Oregon Trail. Why not have struck a coin called the ‘Moffatt Tunnel Half Dollar,’ and forever herald this epochal event to the world through this medium? Few people are aware that since 1892, in which year the first commemorative coins was struck, not less than twenty-six different coins in silver and gold have been issued to commemorate various national and State events. Commemorative coins always sell at a premium-half dollar for not less than one dollar-and are eagerly sought by collectors, to say nothing about people in Denver and Colorado who would readily buy and keep this as a valuable souvenir.

‘Let some influential local bodies, like the Chamber of Commerce, Rotarians, local newspapers, etc., petition our Senators and Congressmen and urge them to work for this, as time is getting short and Congress must pass a law before any coin can be struck.’”13

13The Numismatist, Another Commemorative Half Dollar Proposed. May, 1927, p. 280.

“Editorial Comment – Numismatic news

A bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Mr. Holaday providing for the coining of 50-cent pieces in commemoration of the memory of the late Joseph G. Cannon, former Speaker of the House of Representatives. The bill is in committee and it is believed has little chance of passing the House, owing to opposition by Secretary of the Treasury Mellon, who does not look with favor on issues of commemorative coins for individuals.

That in commemoration of a life-time devoted to noble public service there shall be coined at the mints of the United States silver 50-cent pieces, not to exceed two million in number, in perpetuation of the memory of Joseph Gurney Cannon. Shall be issued only upon the request of the executive committee of the Uncle Joe Cannon Memorial Association, a corporation of Danville, Illinois.”14

14The Numismatist, Commemorative Coin Proposed For Joseph G. Cannon. April, 1928, pg 230-231.

“Authority will be asked at the next session of Congress for a commemorative half dollar to aid the work of the Brooklyn Bridge Plaza Association, it is announced. The proposed plaza would commemorate George Washington and his troops and would be erected at one end of the Brooklyn Bridge.”15

15The Numismatist, Another commemorative half dollar proposed. September, 1928, p. 519.

 

“Representative Cable, of Ohio, has introduced a bill in congress to issue a commemorative $3 gold piece in honor of George Washington’s two hundredth birthday anniversary. The bill proposes that 300,000 $3 gold pieces be minted.

I am in favor of issuing a commemorative $3 gold piece to celebrate the two hundredth birthday anniversary of George Washington, but why mint so many coins? Wouldn’t 12,000 do the work just the same as 300,000 gold pieces? Remember, everybody can’t buy a $3 gold piece, and there aren’t enough collectors in the United States to buy this immense number of coins. Go over the past issues of commemorative coins and see what has happened. The best examples I know of are the Columbian and the Pilgrim half dollars. The Columbian half dollar sells for only 75 cents, and as for the Pilgrim half dollar, it sell for $1.50 or less. These prices are for coins in uncirculated condition. As for this $3 gold piece, I am in favor of issuing just enough coins to give the Government a profit in minting them, and not make them as common as the Columbian half dollar. I would like to see this commemorative $3 gold piece become a rare American coin. As for the number that should be issued, I think that 10,000 or 12,000 would be enough. Wouldn’t the government have to melt all unsold gold coins? Then why make so many that the job of melting the coins would eat up the profit on the $3 gold pieces that were sold? What good would be accomplished by this act?

Joseph Everett Ward


Omaha, Neb., March 5, 1930.”16

16 The Numismatist, More Commemorative Issues? April 1930, p. 229.

“On March 18, 1930, the House of Representatives passed, without debate, two bills affecting United States coinage.

A bill authorizing a half dollar for the seventy-fifth anniversary of the acquisition of the territory known as the Gadsden Purchase. The number of pieces is 10,000 and the coins are to be issued only to the Gadsden Purchase Coin Committee. The bill was introduced April 25, 1929. (A description of the proposed designs for this coin was published in our issue for April, 1929.

A bill authorizing a half dollar to commemorate the three-hundredth anniversary of the founding of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. The number of coins authorized is 500,000, and they are to be issued only to an authorized agent of the Massachusetts Bay Tercentenary, Inc. The bill was introduced December 7, 1929.”17

17 The Numismatist, Important Coin Legislation, Vol. XLIII, April 1930, No. 4.

“A press dispatch from Washington says that the coinage of an issue of 50-cent pieces in commemoration of Rear-Admiral Richard E. Byrd and his Antarctic expedition will be proposed shortly in a bill by Representative Cable, of Ohio, a member of the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures.

The original plan for the bill contemplated the sale of the coins to pay off any possible deficit the expedition might face. A radiogram has been received from the admiral expressing the deep appreciation of himself and his companions for the proposed honor, but explaining there would be no deficit.”18

18 The Numismatist, Half Dollar for Rear-Admiral Byrd Proposed, May 1930, p. 297.

“From the El Paso (Texas) Herald, the home of the Gadsden Purchase Coin Committee and of L. W. Hoffecker, its chairman, a member of the ANA, through whose personal efforts, largely, the bill passed both houses of Congress:

‘It is unfortunate that in exercising his first veto President Hoover administered a figurative slap to Arizona, New Mexico and El Paso by rejecting the Gadsden Purchase coinage bill.

‘He should not have vetoed that bill; there was no sense in doing so. His action was inconsistent. Unfortunately, also, the House failed to pass the measure over his veto.

‘Here was a coinage bill designed to aid in the commemoration of an event of great importance to the nation and especially to the Southwest-the Gadsden Purchase. Yet the President vetoed it.

‘It was the first coinage bill in years that purposely was so restricted as to the number of coins to be minted that it was perfectly modest and reasonable. It provided for only 10,000 coins; half-dollars. Yet the President vetoed it.

‘It was the first coinage bill on which the Government was safeguarded against any possible loss, because L.W. Hoffecker, of El Paso, the father of the measure, stood ready to advance the entire $5,000. Yet the President vetoed it.

‘His veto was based on the view that the issuance of special coins commemorating historical events should be stopped to prevent ‘confusion to our monetary system.’ Just how much confusion to our monetary system could be caused by 10,000 half-dollars, most of which straightaway would go into the cabinets of coin collectors throughout the country?

‘If President Hoover held the view he has expressed, why did he not sanction this very small minting of Gadsden Purchase coins, and then have some member of his party in Congress initiate a bill to prohibit special coinages in the future?

‘The fact is that in the past a good thing has been seriously overdone; no question about that. Special coinages have been asked, from time to time, in commemoration of this historical event or that, and in many instances, perhaps in practically all, the bills authorizing them have specified mintings far in excess of any reasonable requirements; 500,000 half-dollars has been typical. The consequence has been that the Government has been left holding large quantities of special coins for which there was no demand. These have had to be melted up and the bullion recast into conventional coins, all entailing a loss of time and labor of mint officials and workmen as well as constituting a very considerable nuisance to the Treasury Department. There was no such possibility with respect to the Gadsden Purchase coins, the buying of all of which was guaranteed.
‘The complaint against President Hoover is not that his idea is not fundamentally sound. It is. But that he took the wrong occasion and the wrong means to exercise it by picking out, for his veto, the one small and reasonable and absolutely safe special coinage bill that has gone through Congress in many a year.

‘El Paso, for one, is disappointed, and has a right to be. Nevertheless, El Paso, Las Cruces, Old Mesilla, southern New Mexico in general and Arizona south of the Gila river will have a Gadsden Purchase celebration commemorating the seventy-fifth anniversary of that historic episode. It will be a fine event from every standpoint. And we can do without the special coins, since we have to.”19

19 The Numismatist, The House Upholds President Hoover’s Veto, Vol. XLIII, June 1930, No. 6.

“President Hoover’s veto of the bill authorizing the coinage of 10,000 half-dollar pieces to commemorate the Gadsden Purchase has been so stoutly upheld by the House of Representatives that the sound common sense which the President put into his first veto message may be expected to operate against five similar bills now before Congress. These bills provide, respectively, for the coinage of $1.50 gold pieces to commemorate the use of anesthetics by Dr. Crawford L. Long of Georgia; 50-cent pieces to commemorate the 300th anniversary of the founding of Massachusetts Bay Colony; $3 gold pieces to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the birth of George Washington; 50-cent pieces to commemorate the sesquicentennial of Cornwallis’ surrender at Yorktown and 50-cent pieces to commemorate the 125th anniversary of the Lewis and Clark expedition.

‘These bills offer sufficient illustration of the difficulty of drawing the line between one anniversary and another; they offer as well a hint of the multiplicity of bills of this nature to be expected if Congress should continue to tolerate such historical irrelevancies. Maine and Missouri got centennial half dollars from Congress; California could not wait for the centenary of her admission to the Union and obtained a special half dollar in 1925, on the seventy-fifth anniversary; what objection could logically be made to request from Oklahoma for a special coin to mark the twenty-fifth anniversary of Statehood or from Arizona for one to mark the twentieth anniversary?’

‘Some of the objections that the President made to bills authorizing special coinage would apply with equal force to bills authorizing the issue of special stamps. Domestic and foreign observers have insisted so often that the United States is a young nation that the progressive growth of interest in anniversaries may be explained as a sign of rebellion against this parrot’s phrase. Fortunately, medals answer the purpose of protest as well as stamps or coins.”20

20 The Numismatist, President Hoover’s Veto, July 1930, p. 346.

“Reading the article regarding the second International Medal Exposition in Paris in the July issue of THE NUMISMATIST brought to mind several things. If enough people want something it can usually be accomplished, provided sufficient effort is put forth. The French mint has in the past produced many artistic medals that are available at reasonable prices. Those of us who collect medals as well as coins should lose no opportunity to place before the proper authorities our recommendations to the effect that the United States Mint develop that part of its business. With proper advertising it is my opinion that such action would meet with response from the general public, providing the designs are by well known artists and that the price is reasonable.

Another point in this connection is that with the present Administration opposed to commemorative coins, the opportunity lies with the members of the A.N.A. and the local societies to urge commissions for historical events to issue medals in place of the commemorative coins which cannot be put through. Rather than pass up the metallic recording of the celebration of a historical event and losing the continuity, a medal can serve the purpose. If the U.S. Mint cannot strike these medals, due to pressure of other business, we have enough capable private concerns that can produce them. Recently the bill for the Gadsden Purchase 50-cent piece was vetoed and, as far as the writer knows, no concerted effort on our part was made to have a medal produced to take its place.

In closing let me again urge that we try to get the cooperation of the U.S. Mint in producing a series of artistic historical medals and also to have medals struck to take the place of commemorative coins until such time as it will again be possible to have them take, with proper restrictions their rightful place in our coinage.

Harvey L. Hansen”21

21 The Numismatist, Medals and Commemorative Coins, November, 1930, p. 757.

 

I love the early commems. Amazing how many worthy topics got tabled, and how many suspicious ones got passed.

The modern ones are even more of a joke unfortunately. 50th Anniversary of a half dollar design? Give me a break.

 

Right you are.

 

“Editorial Comment-Numismatic News

If the opposition of the Administration in Washington to the further issue of commemorative coins, as shown by President Hoover’s veto of the bill authorizing the Gadsden Purchase half dollar, did not exist, collectors would probably be able to add three more such half dollars to their collections during 1931. The celebration of three events of national interest will take place this year, which, if opposition did not exist, would be considered fitting by their sponsors for the issue of such half dollars.

One of these is the celebration of the 200th anniversary of the founding of municipal government and missions in San Antonia, Texas, which is being sponsored by the Committee of One Hundred of the Bi-Centennial of San Antonio. Feeling, perhaps, that application for a commemorative half dollar would fail, a brass medal has been struck to commemorate the event.

Los Angeles is not so old as San Antonio, but the city is planning this year to celebrate the 150th anniversary of its founding. Regardless of the precedent set last year and with a commendable spirit, those sponsoring the celebration have had a bill introduced in the Senate to authorize the striking of 500,000 half dollars to commemorate the event.”23

23 The Numismatist , The Commemorative Half Dollar Redivivus. March, 1931, pg. 192-193.

“A bill to authorize the coinage of 500,000 special 50-cent pieces in commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the founding of Los Angeles, Cal., was introduced in the Senate on January 27 by Senator Shortridge, of California. In view of the attitude of the present Administration it is doubtful if this bill will be passed. It is hoped, however, that if such is the case the committee in charge will see that authorization is obtained for a medal to be struck at the mint at commemorate this interesting event in Pacific Coast history.

Harvey L. Hansen

The reverse design to show in the center of the field the coat of arms of a state; beneath in small letters the name of the state. Around this coat of arms to be a partial circle of nineteen stars, to represent the states of which the Union was composed in 1812 - namely, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio, Louisiana, and Missouri. Around the border to be inscribed, ‘1812 NINETEEN STATES. 1912 FORTY-EIGHT STATES.’ In the edge of the coin, in incused, or sunken, letters, to be ‘HUNDRED CENTS, ONE DOLLAR, OR UNIT’ as borne by the first coin of the denomination issued at the United States Mint in 1794.

That all of these commemorative dollars be struck from common United States obverse, as above described, to be combined with the same reverse design, but bearing in the center the coat of arms of the various states of the Union at the present time, after the style of the illustrations, which show those of New York and California.

The issue of a commemorative dollar coin is thought to be worthy of consideration for a number of reasons. One of these is that since 1894 this Government has ceased to coin a metallic representation of its currency unit, as the silver dollar was abandoned in the year, while in 1889 the coinage of the gold dollar was stopped.

It is felt that the issue of this coin along the suggested lines will have an educational value, as it will show the exact number of states now in the Union, a matter upon which a great many of our citizens are not correctly informed, and also will show the coat of arms of each state, which surely will be a matter of interest for nearly all generations of our citizens.

It is thought that the issue of this dollar will not entail any considerable expense, and indeed there may be even a margin of profit. Undoubtedly there will be orders for a vast umber of these coins, and the seigniorage alone will probably warrant the issue.

It is recommended that the size, weight, and general coinage features of the silver dollar of 1894 be applied to the striking of this commemorative dollar, and that all provisions of law relative to the coinage, legal tender quality, and redemption of the silver coins of the United States be made applicable to the commemorative piece.

It is also suggested that in order to permit these commemorative dollars to reach every part of the United States, that, when ordered in sums of $500 or more, the charge for transportation be borne by the Government.

Also that a least 1,000,000 of these pieces be struck, and that a sufficient number of silver dollars be withdrawn from the United States Treasury and recoined for this purpose. And also that the issue be increased if found advisable.

That the United States Mint authorities be authorized to strike a number of pieces from the dies bearing each state’s coat of arms in proof to meet the demands of collectors for cabinet specimens, and that the cost of these specimens be regulated by the rules at present governing the striking and sale by the Government of similar pieces, and that the commemorative dollar be struck at the parent and all branch United States Mints.”24

24 The Numismatist, Los Angeles Tries For Special Half Dollar. March 1931, p. 198.

“Senator Caraway has introduced an amendment to the bill authorizing a change in the design of the Texas half dollar which would permit coins with five different reverses. Mrs. Caraway’s amendment would permit the striking of coins for the Arkansas Centennial with three different reverses.

A bill is also under consideration in the Senate to coin 50-cent pieces in commemoration of the outstanding public services of William Henry Harrison. The bill provides for an issue of 500,000 coins, to be issued upon the recommendation of the William Henry Harrison memorial Association of Indiana.”26

26 The Numismatist, Texas Half Dollar; Amendment to Bill. April, 1936, p. 267.

“Bills have been introduced to authorize the following silver half dollars:

Wilkinsburg, Pennsylvania: To commemorate the 50th anniversary of the founding of Wilkinsburg, Pennsylvania. 25,000 pieces.

Washington: To commemorate the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Waillatpu Mission, Walla Walla Valley, Washington. 25,000 pieces

But that's only half of the story. A look through issues of The Numismatist for 1936 gives a frightening view of what might have happened in the future if all of the laws submitted for commemorative coins had been approved. Those that didn't make it included:

A bill for a half dollar honoring the 50th anniversary of the founding of borough of Wilkinsburg, Pennsylvania.

A bill for a half dollar for the 150th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of United States.

A bill for a half dollar to commemorate the 400th anniversary of the journey and explorations of Francisco Vasquez de Coronado.

A bill for a half dollar for the founding of the International Peace Garden at the international boundary line between the United States and Canada, in the Turtle Mountains of North Dakota and Manitoba.

A bill for a half dollar for the 160th anniversary of the arrival of General George Washington and the Continental Army at Morristown, New Jersey, after their inspiring victories at Trenton and Princeton, and the establishment of cantonments in Morristown for the duration of the war.

A bill for a half dollar for the World's Fair to be held in New York City in 1939 in commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the inauguration of the first President of the United States of America and of the establishment of the Federal Government in the city of New York.

A bill for a half dollar in commemoration of the memory of the late Dr. Charles P. Steinmetz.

A bill for a half dollar for the 300th anniversary of the founding of Hartford, Connecticut.

A bill for a half dollar for 100th anniversary of admission of Michigan into the Union.

Two other measures—one for a Tri-State (Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas) half dollar and another for a half dollar for 100th anniversary of the arrival of Marcus and Narcissa Whitman in the Walla Walla, Washington area, and founding of the Waiilatpu Mission—were changed to medals instead of coins.”27

27 The Coin Collectors Journal, Commemorative Half Dollars. April, 1936, p. 11.

 

“Following is the status of the various bills for commemorative coins introduced at this session of Congress, prepared for The Numismatist by Edward L. Weikert, Jr., President of the Washington Numismatic Association. . .

The following eleven bills have either passed one house or the other or are pending or have been reported:

H.R. 8107, Tri-State (Tex. La. Ark.) – Feb. 27, reported to House. April 20, passed the House.

S. 4448, Lynchburg, Va. – April 22, reported to Senate. April 24, passed the Senate.

S. 4464 and H.R. 12397, Opening of the Golden Gate Bridge – April 23, reported to House.

H.R. 11533, Battle of Gettysburg – April 16, reported to House. May 4, passed the House.

H.R. 11688, Arkansas (change of design) – April 16, reported to House. April 30, passed the House.

H.R. 8324, Elgin, Ill. – May 7, passed the House.

H.R. 10317, Texas (change of design) – Feb. 17, reported to House. April 20, passed the House. April 17, reported to Senate.

H.R. 7690, Albany, N. Y. – Feb. 17, reported to House. March 25, passed the House.

H.R. 11371, Wilkinsburg, Pa. – April 16, reported to House.

H.R. 11555, Waiilatpu Mission, Walla Walla, Wash. – April 16, reported to House.

H.R. 12168 Battle of Antietam and S. 4394, Battle of Antietam – April 16, reported to House.

New Bills introduced within the last few days are for half dollars for the anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of the United States; for the anniversary of the founding of York County, Maine, and the four-hundredth anniversary of the journey and explorations of Francisco Vasquez de Coronado. (The text of these bills are published elsewhere in this issue.)

The status of some of the bills mentioned many change by the time this issue of the magazine reaches its readers.”28

28 The Numismatist, Status of Bills. June 1936, pg. 445-446.

“THE WHITMAN CENTENNIAL

Civic Building

Walla Walla, Washington

May 5, 1936


Dear Sir:

Regarding your inquiry about the proposed commemorative half dollars as a feature of the Whitman Centennial Celebration please be advised as follows:

At the present time the proposal is merely in the form of a bill which is in the committee on coins, weights and measures, and no action has been taken as yet although this organization is actively seeking passage of the measure.

We are keeping your name on file and immediately upon favorable action, plans for distribution of the coins will be adopted and you will be notified as to the information requested I your letter. Might we suggest that as an individual interested in the coinage of such commemorative items that you correspond with your Congessmen (sic) and Senators urging passage of the bill which is known as H.R. No. 11555.

You, possibly, will be interested in the paper script which has been issued as a feature of the Whitman Centennial Celebration. It is described in the enclosed statement.

Your interest in this activity and your support of our program is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

Alfred McVay, Secretary.

Ed. Note: Despite all good intentions, no positive action was ever taken concerning a half dollar for the Whitman Centennial Celebration held in Walla Walla, Washington, August 13-16, 1936, so today this event is little remembered by collectors.

THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF MEADVILLE

898 Park Avenue

Meadville, Pa.

January 21, 1937

Dear Mr. Nichols:

I have been given the duty of securing information relative to the issuance of a commemorative coin for our Sesquicentennial in 1938 and will be glad to receive any information you may be able to give me on the following points relative to the York County Maine commemorative.

1. Number of coins sold.

2. Prices at which they were sold.

3. The method or methods used for distribution and sales.

Any help that you can give me will be very greatly appreciated.

Very truly yours,

M.W. Williams, Managing Secretary

Ed. Note: The Meadville project turned out to be another skeleton along the boulevard of broken dreams. Despite information solicited from Walter P. Nichols, the commemorative coin for Meadville Sesquicentennial never came to pass.”29

29An Inside View of the Coin Hobby in the 1930s: The Walter P. Nichols File, Edited by Q. David Bowers, Bowers and Merena Galleries, Inc., Copyright 1984 by Bowers and Merena Galleries, Inc., p. 74, 105.

“Editorial Comment – Numismatic News

For A Constitution Half Dollar

I enclose herewith a copy of a bill which I prepared and had introduced in Congress by Hon. Marcellus H. Evans, of New York. It is Bill No. H.R. 12443, entitled a ‘bill to authorized the coinage of 50-cent silver pieces in commemoration of the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of the United States.’

The text of the bill will disclose its contents, and I wish that you would publish it in the earliest possible issue of the Numismatist; and I would ask your co-operation in all ways possible to secure favorable action on the bill. (The bill is printed elsewhere in this issue. – Editor.)

I am sending copies of the same to T. James Clark, President of the A.N.A.

It is my opinion that there is no greater anniversary to justify a special coinage than the coming 150th anniversary of the Constitution, which will be an event that is unquestionably nationwide, and the enactment of this bill certainly will tend to bring the matter of the constitution to the minds of all citizens and people of the country. By an unlimited coinage of a ‘Constitution Half Dollar’ it will be brought into vast circulation. By the suspension of the issue of regular half dollars it will be more noticeable, and by having the anniversary date of the coin itself, the memory of September 17, 1787, will become everlasting.


J. Tyson McGill

A.N.A 5001

36 Hall of Records, Brooklyn, N.Y.”30

30 The Numismatist, For A Constitution Half Dollar. June 1936, pg. 440-441.

 

“The growing number and variety of proposals for memorial coins finally induced an opposition from the House coinage committee. Thus, a bill of February 16, 1925 to authorize the issue of 2½¢ pieces commemorating respectively, Presidents Roosevelt, Harding, and Wilson, and another, of May 27, calling for a Harding 7½¢ coin, died in committee. Bills introduced by both the House and Senate on May 15, 1924 for a half dollar commemorating Fort Vancouver, and on February 17, 1925 to celebrate the Kentucky sesquicentennial, were similarly unsuccessful.”

An Illustrated History of Commemorative Coinage, Don Taxay, ARCO Press, New York City, 1967, p. 89.

“Because of opposition from the Treasury Department, a number of bills introduced during 1925-1926 for the issue of memorial coins died in committee. One of these would have celebrated the birth of Stephen Foster. Another was to commemorate the completion of the Lincoln and Victory Highways, and still another, the ‘services of American women in all wars.’ A coinage bill ‘to aid the preservation of the birthplace of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’ was briefly debated on April 29, 1926 but its sponsors finally settled for a medal. . . A bill was also introduced last winter in the House of Representatives authorizing an issue of 1,000,000 half dollars to commemorate the one hundredth anniversary of the birth of Stephen C. Foster on July 4, 1926. Mr. Foster was the author of a number of old-time songs, such as ‘Old Folks at Home,’ ‘Old Black Joe,’ etc.”

An Illustrated History of Commemorative Coinage, Don Taxay, ARCO Press, New York City, 1967, p. 118; and The Numismatist,A Brief Review of Commemorative Coins. August, 1926, p. 425.

“Although bills for the issue of half dollars commemorating Mount Rushmore and the sesquicentennial of the Continental Congress were introduced during 1927, no memorial coins were authorized that year. In February 1928, additional bills for Joseph Gurney Cannon and Charles Lindbergh half dollars were quietly disposed of by the House coinage committee.”

An Illustrated History of Commemorative Coinage, Don Taxay, ARCO Press, New York City, 1967, p. 123.

“Among the unsuccessful coinage bills for 1929 were three to celebrate, respectively, the 125th anniversary of the Lewis and Clark Exposition,10 the tercentenary of the founding of Massachusetts Bay Colony, and the 250th anniversary of the founding of Trenton. The following year, bills authorizing ‘discovery of anesthesia’ dollar-and-a-half gold pieces, and Washington bicentennial three-dollar pieces also failed. Then, in April 1930, when Congress finally passed a bill to authorize half dollars commemorating the Gadsden Purchase,11 it was immediately vetoed by President Hoover. Acting on the recommendation of Secretary of the Treasury Mellon, Hoover stated the traditional objections to commemorative coins, namely, the threat of counterfeits, expense to the Government, and burden upon the Mint. The bill was debated by the House on April 22, when the veto was sustained 244 to 99.

It was not until June 15, 1933, after the succession of both Hoover and Mellon, that a new commemorative coin was authorized, this being the Texas Centennial half dollar.”

An Illustrated History of Commemorative Coinage, Don Taxay, ARCO Press, New York City, 1967, p. 132-133.

 

From the Chester Beach Papers at the Archives of American Art.

 

“Representative Cable, of Ohio, has introduced a bill in congress to issue a commemorative $3 gold piece in honor of George Washington’s two hundredth birthday anniversary. The bill proposes that 300,000 $3 gold pieces be minted.

I am in favor of issuing a commemorative $3 gold piece to celebrate the two hundredth birthday anniversary of George Washington, but why mint so many coins? Wouldn’t 12,000 do the work just the same as 300,000 gold pieces? Remember, everybody can’t buy a $3 gold piece, and there aren’t enough collectors in the United States to buy this immense number of coins. Go over the past issues of commemorative coins and see what has happened. The best examples I know of are the Columbian and the Pilgrim half dollars. The Columbian half dollar sells for only 75 cents, and as for the Pilgrim half dollar, it sell for $1.50 or less. These prices are for coins in uncirculated condition. As for this $3 gold piece, I am in favor of issuing just enough coins to give the Government a profit in minting them, and not make them as common as the Columbian half dollar. I would like to see this commemorative $3 gold piece become a rare American coin. As for the number that should be issued, I think that 10,000 or 12,000 would be enough. Wouldn’t the government have to melt all unsold gold coins? Then why make so many that the job of melting the coins would eat up the profit on the $3 gold pieces that were sold? What good would be accomplished by this act?

Joseph Everett Ward

Omaha, Neb., March 5, 1930.”20

20 The Numismatist, More Commemorative Issues? April 1930, p. 229.

“On March 18, 1930, the House of Representatives passed, without debate, two bills affecting United States coinage.

A bill authorizing a half dollar for the seventy-fifth anniversary of the acquisition of the territory known as the Gadsden Purchase. The number of pieces is 10,000 and the coins are to be issued only to the Gadsden Purchase Coin Committee. The bill was introduced April 25, 1929. (A description of the proposed designs for this coin was published in our issue for April, 1929.

A bill authorizing a half dollar to commemorate the three-hundredth anniversary of the founding of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. The number of coins authorized is 500,000, and they are to be issued only to an authorized agent of the Massachusetts Bay Tercentenary, Inc. The bill was introduced December 7, 1929.”21

21 The Numismatist, Important Coin Legislation, Vol. XLIII, April 1930, No. 4.

“A press dispatch from Washington says that the coinage of an issue of 50-cent pieces in commemoration of Rear-Admiral Richard E. Byrd and his Antarctic expedition will be proposed shortly in a bill by Representative Cable, of Ohio, a member of the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures.

The original plan for the bill contemplated the sale of the coins to pay off any possible deficit the expedition might face. A radiogram has been received from the admiral expressing the deep appreciation of himself and his companions for the proposed honor, but explaining there would be no deficit.”22

22 The Numismatist, Half Dollar for Rear-Admiral Byrd Proposed, May 1930, p. 297.

“From the El Paso (Texas) Herald, the home of the Gadsden Purchase Coin Committee and of L. W. Hoffecker, its chairman, a member of the ANA, through whose personal efforts, largely, the bill passed both houses of Congress:

‘It is unfortunate that in exercising his first veto President Hoover administered a figurative slap to Arizona, New Mexico and El Paso by rejecting the Gadsden Purchase coinage bill.

‘He should not have vetoed that bill; there was no sense in doing so. His action was inconsistent. Unfortunately, also, the House failed to pass the measure over his veto.

‘Here was a coinage bill designed to aid in the commemoration of an event of great importance to the nation and especially to the Southwest-the Gadsden Purchase. Yet the President vetoed it.

‘It was the first coinage bill in years that purposely was so restricted as to the number of coins to be minted that it was perfectly modest and reasonable. It provided for only 10,000 coins; half-dollars. Yet the President vetoed it.

‘It was the first coinage bill on which the Government was safeguarded against any possible loss, because L.W. Hoffecker, of El Paso, the father of the measure, stood ready to advance the entire $5,000. Yet the President vetoed it.

‘His veto was based on the view that the issuance of special coins commemorating historical events should be stopped to prevent ‘confusion to our monetary system.’ Just how much confusion to our monetary system could be caused by 10,000 half-dollars, most of which straightaway would go into the cabinets of coin collectors throughout the country?

‘If President Hoover held the view he has expressed, why did he not sanction this very small minting of Gadsden Purchase coins, and then have some member of his party in Congress initiate a bill to prohibit special coinages in the future?

‘The fact is that in the past a good thing has been seriously overdone; no question about that. Special coinages have been asked, from time to time, in commemoration of this historical event or that, and in many instances, perhaps in practically all, the bills authorizing them have specified mintings far in excess of any reasonable requirements; 500,000 half-dollars has been typical. The consequence has been that the Government has been left holding large quantities of special coins for which there was no demand. These have had to be melted up and the bullion recast into conventional coins, all entailing a loss of time and labor of mint officials and workmen as well as constituting a very considerable nuisance to the Treasury Department. There was no such possibility with respect to the Gadsden Purchase coins, the buying of all of which was guaranteed.

‘The complaint against President Hoover is not that his idea is not fundamentally sound. It is. But that he took the wrong occasion and the wrong means to exercise it by picking out, for his veto, the one small and reasonable and absolutely safe special coinage bill that has gone through Congress in many a year.

‘El Paso, for one, is disappointed, and has a right to be. Nevertheless, El Paso, Las Cruces, Old Mesilla, southern New Mexico in general and Arizona south of the Gila river will have a Gadsden Purchase celebration commemorating the seventy-fifth anniversary of that historic episode. It will be a fine event from every standpoint. And we can do without the special coins, since we have to.”23

23 The Numismatist, The House Upholds President Hoover’s Veto, Vol. XLIII, June 1930, No. 6.

“President Hoover’s veto of the bill authorizing the coinage of 10,000 half-dollar pieces to commemorate the Gadsden Purchase has been so stoutly upheld by the House of Representatives that the sound common sense which the President put into his first veto message may be expected to operate against five similar bills now before Congress. These bills provide, respectively, for the coinage of $1.50 gold pieces to commemorate the use of anesthetics by Dr. Crawford L. Long of Georgia; 50-cent pieces to commemorate the 300th anniversary of the founding of Massachusetts Bay Colony; $3 gold pieces to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the birth of George Washington; 50-cent pieces to commemorate the sesquicentennial of Cornwallis’ surrender at Yorktown and 50-cent pieces to commemorate the 125th anniversary of the Lewis and Clark expedition.

‘These bills offer sufficient illustration of the difficulty of drawing the line between one anniversary and another; they offer as well a hint of the multiplicity of bills of this nature to be expected if Congress should continue to tolerate such historical irrelevancies. Maine and Missouri got centennial half dollars from Congress; California could not wait for the centenary of her admission to the Union and obtained a special half dollar in 1925, on the seventy-fifth anniversary; what objection could logically be made to request from Oklahoma for a special coin to mark the twenty-fifth anniversary of Statehood or from Arizona for one to mark the twentieth anniversary?’

‘Some of the objections that the President made to bills authorizing special coinage would apply with equal force to bills authorizing the issue of special stamps. Domestic and foreign observers have insisted so often that the United States is a young nation that the progressive growth of interest in anniversaries may be explained as a sign of rebellion against this parrot’s phrase. Fortunately, medals answer the purpose of protest as well as stamps or coins.”24

24 The Numismatist, President Hoover’s Veto, July 1930, p. 346.

“Reading the article regarding the second International Medal Exposition in Paris in the July issue of THE NUMISMATIST brought to mind several things. If enough people want something it can usually be accomplished, provided sufficient effort is put forth. The French mint has in the past produced many artistic medals that are available at reasonable prices. Those of us who collect medals as well as coins should lose no opportunity to place before the proper authorities our recommendations to the effect that the United States Mint develop that part of its business. With proper advertising it is my opinion that such action would meet with response from the general public, providing the designs are by well known artists and that the price is reasonable.

Another point in this connection is that with the present Administration opposed to commemorative coins, the opportunity lies with the members of the A.N.A. and the local societies to urge commissions for historical events to issue medals in place of the commemorative coins which cannot be put through. Rather than pass up the metallic recording of the celebration of a historical event and losing the continuity, a medal can serve the purpose. If the U.S. Mint cannot strike these medals, due to pressure of other business, we have enough capable private concerns that can produce them. Recently the bill for the Gadsden Purchase 50-cent piece was vetoed and, as far as the writer knows, no concerted effort on our part was made to have a medal produced to take its place.

In closing let me again urge that we try to get the cooperation of the U.S. Mint in producing a series of artistic historical medals and also to have medals struck to take the place of commemorative coins until such time as it will again be possible to have them take, with proper restrictions their rightful place in our coinage.


Harvey L. Hansen”25

25 The Numismatist, Medals and Commemorative Coins, November, 1930, p. 757.

“Editorial Comment-Numismatic News

If the opposition of the Administration in Washington to the further issue of commemorative coins, as shown by President Hoover’s veto of the bill authorizing the Gadsden Purchase half dollar, did not exist, collectors would probably be able to add three more such half dollars to their collections during 1931. The celebration of three events of national interest will take place this year, which, if opposition did not exist, would be considered fitting by their sponsors for the issue of such half dollars.

One of these is the celebration of the 200th anniversary of the founding of municipal government and missions in San Antonia, Texas, which is being sponsored by the Committee of One Hundred of the Bi-Centennial of San Antonio. Feeling, perhaps, that application for a commemorative half dollar would fail, a brass medal has been struck to commemorate the event.

Los Angeles is not so old as San Antonio, but the city is planning this year to celebrate the 150th anniversary of its founding. Regardless of the precedent set last year and with a commendable spirit, those sponsoring the celebration have had a bill introduced in the Senate to authorize the striking of 500,000 half dollars to commemorate the event.”26

26 The Numismatist , The Commemorative Half Dollar Recidivist. March, 1931, pg. 192-193.

This chapter goes up to #76.

 

Photobucket has been down all weekend.

“A bill to authorize the coinage of 500,000 special 50-cent pieces in commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the founding of Los Angeles, Cal., was introduced in the Senate on January 27 by Senator Shortridge, of California. In view of the attitude of the present Administration it is doubtful if this bill will be passed. It is hoped, however, that if such is the case the committee in charge will see that authorization is obtained for a medal to be struck at the mint at commemorate this interesting event in Pacific Coast history.

Harvey L. Hansen

The reverse design to show in the center of the field the coat of arms of a state; beneath in small letters the name of the state. Around this coat of arms to be a partial circle of nineteen stars, to represent the states of which the Union was composed in 1812 - namely, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio, Louisiana, and Missouri. Around the border to be inscribed, ‘1812 NINETEEN STATES. 1912 FORTY-EIGHT STATES.’ In the edge of the coin, in incused, or sunken, letters, to be ‘HUNDRED CENTS, ONE DOLLAR, OR UNIT’ as borne by the first coin of the denomination issued at the United States Mint in 1794.

That all of these commemorative dollars be struck from common United States obverse, as above described, to be combined with the same reverse design, but bearing in the center the coat of arms of the various states of the Union at the present time, after the style of the illustrations, which show those of New York and California.

The issue of a commemorative dollar coin is thought to be worthy of consideration for a number of reasons. One of these is that since 1894 this Government has ceased to coin a metallic representation of its currency unit, as the silver dollar was abandoned in the year, while in 1889 the coinage of the gold dollar was stopped.

It is felt that the issue of this coin along the suggested lines will have an educational value, as it will show the exact number of states now in the Union, a matter upon which a great many of our citizens are not correctly informed, and also will show the coat of arms of each state, which surely will be a matter of interest for nearly all generations of our citizens.

It is thought that the issue of this dollar will not entail any considerable expense, and indeed there may be even a margin of profit. Undoubtedly there will be orders for a vast umber of these coins, and the seigniorage alone will probably warrant the issue.

It is recommended that the size, weight, and general coinage features of the silver dollar of 1894 be applied to the striking of this commemorative dollar, and that all provisions of law relative to the coinage, legal tender quality, and redemption of the silver coins of the United States be made applicable to the commemorative piece.

It is also suggested that in order to permit these commemorative dollars to reach every part of the United States, that, when ordered in sums of $500 or more, the charge for transportation be borne by the Government.

Also that a least 1,000,000 of these pieces be struck, and that a sufficient number of silver dollars be withdrawn from the United States Treasury and recoined for this purpose. And also that the issue be increased if found advisable.

That the United States Mint authorities be authorized to strike a number of pieces from the dies bearing each state’s coat of arms in proof to meet the demands of collectors for cabinet specimens, and that the cost of these specimens be regulated by the rules at present governing the striking and sale by the Government of similar pieces, and that the commemorative dollar be struck at the parent and all branch United States Mints.”27

27 The Numismatist, Los Angeles Tries For Special Half Dollar. March 1931, p. 198.

“A Bill to authorize the coinage of 50-cent pieces in connection with the celebration of the one hundredth anniversary of the opening of the Tri-State Territory of east Texas, north Louisiana, and south Arkansas by captain Henry Miller Shreve, to be held in Shreveport, Louisiana, and surrounding territory, in 1935 and 1936.

The bill requested no more than 50,000 pieces and issued only at the request of The Shreveport Centennial, Incorporated, or it’s duly authorized agent. Proceeds of the sale of coins shall be used in furtherance of the projects of the Shreveport Centennial, Incorporated.

A So Called Dollar, HK692, was issued.”28

28 The Numismatist, More Commemorative Half Dollars in Sight. July, 1935.

“Senator Caraway has introduced an amendment to the bill authorizing a change in the design of the Texas half dollar which would permit coins with five different reverses. Mrs. Caraway’s amendment would permit the striking of coins for the Arkansas Centennial with three different reverses.

A bill is also under consideration in the Senate to coin 50-cent pieces in commemoration of the outstanding public services of William Henry Harrison. The bill provides for an issue of 500,000 coins, to be issued upon the recommendation of the William Henry Harrison memorial Association of Indiana.”29

29 The Numismatist, Texas Half Dollar; Amendment to Bill. April, 1936, p. 267.

“Bills have been introduced to authorize the following silver half dollars:

Wilkinsburg, Pennsylvania: To commemorate the 50th anniversary of the founding of Wilkinsburg, Pennsylvania. 25,000 pieces.

Washington: To commemorate the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Waillatpu Mission, Walla Walla Valley, Washington. 25,000 pieces

But that's only half of the story. A look through issues of The Numismatist for 1936 gives a frightening view of what might have happened in the future if all of the laws submitted for commemorative coins had been approved. Those that didn't make it included:

A bill for a half dollar honoring the 50th anniversary of the founding of borough of Wilkinsburg, Pennsylvania.

A bill for a half dollar for the 150th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of United States.

A bill for a half dollar to commemorate the 400th anniversary of the journey and explorations of Francisco Vasquez de Coronado.

A bill for a half dollar for the founding of the International Peace Garden at the international boundary line between the United States and Canada, in the Turtle Mountains of North Dakota and Manitoba.

A bill for a half dollar for the 160th anniversary of the arrival of General George Washington and the Continental Army at Morristown, New Jersey, after their inspiring victories at Trenton and Princeton, and the establishment of cantonments in Morristown for the duration of the war.

A bill for a half dollar for the World's Fair to be held in New York City in 1939 in commemoration of the 150th anniversary of the inauguration of the first President of the United States of America and of the establishment of the Federal Government in the city of New York.

A bill for a half dollar in commemoration of the memory of the late Dr. Charles P. Steinmetz.

A bill for a half dollar for the 300th anniversary of the founding of Hartford, Connecticut.

A bill for a half dollar for 100th anniversary of admission of Michigan into the Union.

Two other measures—one for a Tri-State (Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas) half dollar and another for a half dollar for 100th anniversary of the arrival of Marcus and Narcissa Whitman in the Walla Walla, Washington area, and founding of the Waiilatpu Mission—were changed to medals instead of coins.”30

30 The Coin Collectors Journal, Commemorative Half Dollars. April, 1936, p. 11.

 

I think it's best to move on to my next topic on the early commerative series.

 

Interesting stuff. It would be neat to see some of these designs fleshed out by a talented sculptor. I'm imagining Chester Beach's "Buffalo Bill" coin design being executed by the Frasers.