Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Conder101, post: 2428298, member: 66&quot;]They weren&#039;t intended to be, because the profit from the cents were supposed to pay the expenses of the free coinage of gold and silver.&nbsp; But it did approach the face value in 1795 which was why the weight was reduced that year, and it also reached as sometimes exceed the face value in the mid 1850&#039;s hence the size reduction.&nbsp; The copper nickel cent while subsidiary did have some intrinsic value.&nbsp; The nickel was more expensive than the copper so the metal value was maybe half to three quarters of a cent.&nbsp; The civil war tokens showed the government that the nickel and the relatively high metal content were not need to keep the coins in circulation and they went to the bronze cents that were about .1 cents each in metal value.&nbsp; The metal value may have approached the face value agian in 1974 and then again in the early 80&#039;s.&nbsp; Currently the metal value is around .5 cents</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>Yes because that was when they thought that all coins should have close to their face value in metal.&nbsp; The problem was a cent of copper with the full value would have weighed 264 grains (17.6 grams, a clad half dollar is 11.34 grams, a clad Ike is 22.7) and would have been close to the size of a silver dollar.&nbsp; The silver plug with 3/4 cent of silver would have reduced the size down to closer to that of today&#039;s quarter.&nbsp; The silver center cent idea was scrapped as too unworkable, and the weight of the cent was reduced from 264 grains to 208 grains and then in 1795 to 168 grains.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;ll second that, excellent book, have read it twice and several sections several more times.[/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