The collecting bug strikes again!

Discussion in 'World Coins' started by Coinsandmedals, Jan 19, 2021.

  1. Coinsandmedals

    Coinsandmedals Well-Known Member

    1742 page 1 - Copy.jpg

    I have found over the years that coin collectors often collect other things. Some pursue items unrelated to their numismatic interests, while others pursue tangentially related items. In my case, my side collections fall more in line with the latter rather than the former. Often this takes shape in the form of numismatic references published in the mid to late 18th century, with the occasional spattering dating back to the 17th century. These books often make for nice shelf decoration with their weathered leather spines in addition to being full of contemporary knowledge and interesting engravings. Lately, this area of collecting has expanded to include other ephemera such as contemporary newspapers, which brings me to the current journal topic.

    Before I became entirely enamored with the Soho Mint, I spent a good deal of time building a collection of earlier English copper that I used to tell the story of the small change shortage that plagued England for centuries. This custom set entitled "Social elitism: As told by the history of English copper 1694-1807" won the NGC most creative custom set award in 2019. I only mention this because that set tells the larger scope of the story that I plan to introduce here. Before showing off my new find, let me first set the context.

    England had witnessed a shortage of small change since the 1300s. Across several centuries "attempts" were made to fix the issue, but it was never fully resolved. In part, this was due to the reliance on silver, which necessitated increasingly smaller coins for the lower denominations as the price of raw material continued to rise. Although the idea to use copper in place of silver for the lower denomination coins had been considered as early as Elizabeth I's reign, it wouldn't be until 1672 under Charles II that we would see the first regal copper coin for England. Eventually, counterfeiters realized that a healthy profit could be made by melting down regal coppers and producing their own lightweight "coinage" from the raw material. This became an expansive issue in England that was only made worse with the introduction of tin coinage. Counterfeiting would continue almost unchecked throughout the reigns of William and Mary, William III, and George I. Lackluster distribution of regal copper by George II’s predecessors left the outskirts of England with an almost non-existent supply of copper, while large cities such as London were under siege by lightweight counterfeits made from the melted regal coppers that never circulated out the city.

    In short, the state of small change in England was a mess, and the initial response was to produce new regal copper to drive out the counterfeits. Production was authorized on July 21st, 1729, and signed into law by Queen Caroline in the King's absence. In theory, this approach might have worked, but as before, the output of regal copper was insufficient to meet the public's needs. Instead of fixing the problem, the new regal coinage made it worse. As in prior years, the process was simple. Counterfeiters would melt down regal coppers and use the raw material to cast lightweight forgeries. The difference in the weight would yield a handsome profit to the counterfeiter. Eventually, the scheme escalated, and regal copper was melted down, the metal diluted to a less pure state, and the forgeries were created from the less pure metal. This allowed a twofold profit for the counterfeiter because the less pure copper mixture allowed them to produce more underweight forgeries. This newfound profit instigated an explosion in counterfeiting activity.

    1742 page 687 (page 1) - Copy.jpg

    In response to the growing issue, George II issued "An Act for the more effectual preventing the counterfeiting of the current Coin of This Kingdom, and the uttering or paying of false or counterfeit Coin" on September 29th, 1742. The majority of the act concerns silver and gold coinage, but my primary interest is the new provisions related to the copper coinage. I have done my best to include scans of the original document when convenient. At times the area of interest is split between pages, and it would be troublesome to properly format the pictures in a pleasing way for the reader. The excerpt below is an excellent example of this type of occurrence, and as such, I have resorted to merely quoting the text here.

    One of the more interesting parts, as it relates to copper and silver coinage, is the following passage:

    "shall file, or any ways alter, wash, or color any of the brass monies called Halfpennies or Farthings, or add to or alter the impression, or any part of the impression of either side of an Halfpenny or Farthing, with intent to make an Halfpenny resemble or look like, or pass for a lawful Shilling, or with the Intent to make a Farthing resemble or look like, or pass for a lawful Sixpence"

    From this excerpt, it appears that a clear threat against the silver coinage existed in that copper coinage was altered to pass as either a Shilling or a Sixpence. This presents a new facet of the counterfeiting operation as it pertains to the copper coinage that I was unaware of and further highlights the prevalence of the issue. This point is further highlighted in the section discussing the uttering of false or counterfeit money.

    1742 page 688 (page 2) - Copy.jpg

    "And whereas the uttering of false money, knowing it to be false, is a Crime frequently committed all over the Kingdom, and the offenders therein are not deterred by reason that is only a misdemeanor, and the punishment often but small, although there be great reason to believe, the common utters of such false money are either themselves the coiners, or in confederacy with the coiners thereof"

    It is very interesting to note the writers openly suggest that those who commonly utter counterfeit money are also likely at best in cahoots with the counterfeiters. This further suggests that the crime had developed into a multifaceted operation, a notable maturation from prior counterfeiting operations. The document discusses the appropriate punishments for both offenses (i.e., counterfeiting/altering, or uttering counterfeit money). Given the focus is on silver and not copper coinage, I have not detailed it here.

    Before moving on, it is also noteworthy that the first provided excerpt of the document refers to the halfpennies and farthings as "brass" instead of copper. This error is later corrected in the document. It is not until the 6th paragraph that copper coinage provisions are revisited, and it is short-lived. Here is the whole excerpt:

    1742 page 689 (page 3) - Copy.jpg

    "And whereas the coining or counterfeiting any of the copper money of this kingdom is only a misdemeanor, and the punishment often very small; be it hereby further enacted by the authority aforesaid, that if any person whatsoever, shall, after the said twenty ninth day of September, make, coin, or counterfeit any brass or copper money, commonly called a Halfpeny, or a Farthing, such person offending therein, and his, her, and their aiders, abettors, and procurers being thereof convicted, shall suffer two years imprisonment, and find sureties for his or her good behavior for two years more, to be computed from the end of the said first two years."

    From this, it is clear that the counterfeiting of copper coinage remains a misdemeanor, but unlike before, the punishments are much more severe. The new law provisioned a two-year prison sentence to those found guilty of counterfeiting copper coinage and further escalated the punishment by requiring the convicted to secure sureties for their crime-free behavior for two years after release. This last part is notable because the convicted were required to find someone willing to financially vouch for their good behavior. If the convicted were to violate the surety terms, the backer would lose whatever surety was required. In other words, it would be very quick to burn bridges with allies if found guilty, released, and subsequently convicted again. Of course, this provision is minimal in comparison to the next.

    The remaining portion of the document details a marked increase in the reward provided to those who apprehend offenders of any of the offenses mentioned above. For offenses related to silver or gold coinage, the reward was £40 per conviction, whereas they were only entitled to £10 for convictions related to copper coinage. To my knowledge, this is the most aggressive approach to counter the falsification of copper coinage taken by any monarch at the time. To make matters more interesting, the act further provisioned pardons under certain circumstances.

    "And be it hereby further enacted, by the authority aforesaid, that whoever being out of prison, shall, after the said twenty ninth day of September, commit any of the offenses aforesaid and shall afterwards discover two or more persons, who shall, after the time aforesaid, have committed any of the said offenses, so as such two or more persons shall be thereof convicted, such discoverer shall have, and is hereby intitled to His Majesty's most gracious pardon for such his or her offenses."

    In other words, if a previously convicted individual were to provide information that directly resulted in the conviction of at least two others, their charges would be dropped, and a royal pardon would be issued. This pardon would allow the convicted turned informant to avoid the surety provision and wipe their slate clean, which would be vital to avoiding harsher punishments for subsequent convictions. As you can imagine, the language used opened many legal loopholes that were fully taken advantage of.

    Although the new law made the punishments more severe, it seems as though the impact was not as significant as intended. Peck (1964) notes that the law was not written concerning pieces that had noticeable differences to the regal issues. For instance, if the forgery had numerous spelling errors or slight alterations of the bust and did not have a nearly exact similarity to the regal issue, the prosecution was made much harder and often resulted in a minimal punishment. This is why so many non-regal pieces have slightly different legends and design details compared to the regal issues. This idea took off, and by 1751, counterfeiters were advancing to the use of hand presses to produce their forgeries. This allowed them to produce more pieces at a faster rate yielding even more profit. This quickly became a more sophisticated operation with one location melting the regal issues, one location diluting the copper, another producing the blanks, and yet another striking the forgeries. A final agent would be involved in distributing the counterfeits to the market. This fragmented process made apprehending the criminals very difficult. This is also when we see an expansion in invasion type coinage, specifically to the colonies, as the same counterfeiting laws did not protect them.

    This new document is tangible proof of the widespread issue and only adds to my enjoyment of the history surrounding England's copper coinage. Although it predates my main focus, the Soho Mint, it helps set the historical context that resulted in its success. Without the crown's dramatic failure to issue sufficient copper coinage, the failure of parliament to protect it against counterfeiting, and the court's failure to fully prosecute the guilty parties, the history of the Soho Mint might have been very different.

    So what are some of the other things that you collect? Are they related to your numismatic pursuits? What got you interested in your “side collection”?
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. Chris B

    Chris B Supporter! Supporter

    Like you, I collect literature related to my coin collection. So books related to pre-1871 Germanic coinage and most anything about British coinage dominate my book shelves.

    I have recently started trying to purge titles that don't "fit" the collection.

    Seattlite86 and Coinsandmedals like this.
  4. Coinsandmedals

    Coinsandmedals Well-Known Member

    It's nice to see I'm the only one who tracks down antique references! There is just something special about consuming period knowledge. If you ever do part with your copy of Conder’s work, please let me know.
  5. Chris B

    Chris B Supporter! Supporter

    I'll keep that in mind but it is unlikely to happen any time soon. I have a large paper copy of Pye as well which, in my opinion, is a much more enjoyable reference. I don't "use" either one but they are still a pleasure to have.

    Pye01#119.jpg Pye02#119.jpg
  6. Coinsandmedals

    Coinsandmedals Well-Known Member

    Very cool and it's in good shape to make it even better!
    Chris B likes this.
  7. robp

    robp Well-Known Member

    I think you'll find a lot of libraries out there. I too like old books. The earliest numismatic volume I have is a copy of the Pembroke plates (1746).


    With 100 copies printed, these 300 or so plates formed the referenced illustrations for the Pembroke collection sale at Sotheby's in 1848. Although most coins were illustrated as perfect circles, an attempt was made in the case of weakness, fragments or badly chipped coins to replicate the irregularity as seen.

    The Earl of Pembroke died in 1733, but the collection remained at Wilton House for over 100 years after his death. It was sold over a 12 day period starting on 31st July 1848 and comprised 1500 lots. The total raised from the sale was £5905 and 14 shillings.

    For completion's sake, here is a coin from the sale - lot 128 which was a 1601 silver pattern halfpenny, believed at the time to be a farthing pattern.

    and this is the catalogue listing.
  8. mrbadexample

    mrbadexample Well-Known Member

    The SOHO mint got me started on Isle of Man coinage. I wanted a really nice cartwheel penny but the prices were more than I could stomach at the time. This was cheaper and just as nice to me.
    Isle of Man 1d 1798 (5).jpg
  9. Coinsandmedals

    Coinsandmedals Well-Known Member

    @robp that is nothing short of amazing, but I have come to expect that when you share something. You truly have an amazing collection. Thank you for sharing. On a side note, what did you think about the P-1111 that sold Baldwin's October sale? I enjoyed the write-up, but it seems they failed to mention the Vice article.
  10. Coinsandmedals

    Coinsandmedals Well-Known Member

    I can relate to this on so many levels. The Soho Mint directly influenced several areas of collecting for me as well. Some of which that I never imagined I would find myself pursuing. By the way, I love the look of your coin. The obverse is especially appealing. ​
  11. robp

    robp Well-Known Member

    I didn't buy it! There wasn't anything of interest in the sale for me.

    I think a lot of people are unaware of the Vice article because the Format catalogue was not as widely distributed as Spink's Numismatic Circular or Seaby's Bulletin, though the shop was well known. Also, St. James's or other auction catalogues are more geared towards hyping up a coin rather than providing research info.
    Coinsandmedals likes this.
  12. Coinsandmedals

    Coinsandmedals Well-Known Member

    It immediately made me think of you and our conversations. It was a pretty piece, but given the history, it seemed a bit overhyped to me. The Vice article was a real eye-opener. I had always more or less taken Peck’s notes on the restrikes at face value. After all, the man was in a league of his own.
  13. mrbadexample

    mrbadexample Well-Known Member

    What changed? i.e what information came to light to show it's a halfpenny?

    Just curious. :)
  14. robp

    robp Well-Known Member

    The arguments are laid out on pages 10 &11 in Peck. It's based on Snelling's conjecture that they were for a token or pledge in copper. The weight of a copper pledge penny is 28 gr., so using half the weight as a guide for something in this metal, bearing in mind they were contemplating using copper for the English coinage at this time. The difference in specific gravities between copper and silver would therefore produce a weight of around 16.0 grains, which is the average of the six silver specimens known. This one is 17.2 grains, though another is only 14, so quite a broad range.

    It's also worth bearing in mind they were using copper in 1601 for the Irish coinage and the weights of penny and halfpenny were 30.33 and 15.11 grains respectively.
    Coinsandmedals likes this.
  15. mrbadexample

    mrbadexample Well-Known Member

  16. offa the saxon

    offa the saxon Active Member

    This got me started in 1963 now 59 years and 14,000 coins later I’m still hooked

    Seattlite86 and Coinsandmedals like this.
  17. Robidoux Pass

    Robidoux Pass Well-Known Member

    Very interesting thread. I too collect books. Yes, some are related to my numismatic pursuits. But my passion in book subjects lies in books about Egypt and Egyptology, especially those concerning the visits of the European travelers (especially British) during the 18th and 19th century awakening of Egypt to the West. I also collect books about early technology.
    Coinsandmedals likes this.
  18. Coinsandmedals

    Coinsandmedals Well-Known Member

    Of all things to get started with, I think an Irish coin is perfectly suiting!
    offa the saxon likes this.
  19. Coinsandmedals

    Coinsandmedals Well-Known Member

    These are two very intriguing topics. If you don't mind me asking, what got you interested in them?
  20. Robidoux Pass

    Robidoux Pass Well-Known Member

    As a child of about seven, I read a book on the ancient pharaonic Egyptians, which fostered an enduring fascination. In adult life, I got a chance to work in Egypt. In my four year residency, I did a lot of exploring, especially in the Eastern Desert. At that time it was essentially off-limits to most people. Most of the information available on the old Ptolemaic and Roman sites in the desert was from 19th-century travelers. Thus I avidly pursued their books. The best sources turned out to be their journals and letters and maps and drawings. Thus I've also spent much time in the various manuscript rooms in London, Oxford, and Cambridge.

    As for early technology, I'm an engineer, and certainly, the ancient Egyptians, the Greeks, and the Romans were instrumental in its development, especially concerning construction.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page