![]() |
|||||
| Home | About Us | Specials | Coin Collecting | Mailing List | Shopping Cart |
| INVESTING |
Joel's Crystal Ball Picks 06/09/2006 |
VALUE |
Rare Coins and Politics

Politics and rare coins might not seem to go together, but they are linked
throughout the history of the United States. From the first coins of the 1650s
to the change you carry in your pocket today, political influence has been a
significant part of United States coinage.
The first coins struck in what is now the United States were minted in 1652,
more than a century before the "United States" existed. The Massachusetts Bay
Colony struck silver coins from 1652 through about 1682, yet all but one of the
denominations always carried the date 1652 regardless of the actual year of
issue. Why? Politics. Since the coins were minted openly, there was real intent
to fool the British Crown into believing that all of coinage in circulation was
actually minted in 1652, when there was no monarchy. Instead, it was probably a
courtesy. The colonists were saying: "We're going to continue to mint our own
coins while not appearing to flagrantly ignore your edicts."
In 1665, after receiving a book of laws from the colonists, the King's
Commissioners requested that a number of laws be changed or repealed. Among them
was the following: ". . .title money, the law about a mint house, etc., be
repealed, for coining is a royal prerogative, for the usurping of which yet act
of indemnity is only a salvo."
Salvo? More like a salvation, as the coins were desperately needed in the
colonies. It was time when wampum, musket bullets, and counterfeit foreign coins
were used as money alongside the few legitimate coins that were available. The
colonists ignored the request of the Crown, evidently without penalty.
The Civil War of 1861-65 presented tremendous problems for circulating coinage.
The silver half dime was one of the many denominations that wasn't circulating,
and the five-cent fractional currency was considered to be a poor substitute. A
solution to the problem was a coin of a new metal, and coins struck in nickel
were introduced.
Nickel is impractical for coin production, as its hardness is conducive to
laminations, die breaks, poor strikes, and many other problems. When James
Pollock, director of the Mint in 1865, proposed a new nickel alloy for coinage,
he was under the influence of political pressure. His personal preference was
for coins made of French bronze, but nickel magnate Joseph Wharton had many
friends in Congress, and the new nickel alloy won out. Nickel had been used in
the copper-nickel cents of 1856-64, but the demand or nickel became
unprecedented with the introduction of the three cent nickel (1865) and the five
cent nickel (1866).
Nickel coins are still struck today, of course, and many of the problems are
just as prevalent. Try putting together a set of problem-free Jefferson nickels,
let alone such series as Buffalo nickels or Shield nickels.
The political clout of the followers of the late Anthony Comstock led to a
significant change in our coinage in 1917. Hermon MacNeil's magnificent Standing
Liberty quarter design, first introduced in 1916, was beautiful and popular. It
was also scandalous, at least to the highly vocal Society for the Suppression of
Vice. Treasury Secretary William McAdoo was bombarded with complaints about Miss
Liberty's partial nudity, and in mid-1917 the design was modified to cover the
lady. It is often argued that there were other reasons for the change, such as
1) the type one coins wouldn't stack, or 2) the chain mail placed on Miss
Liberty was a symbol of war, or 3) it was done so the coin would strike up
better. Argument #3 is totally invalid, as the type one Standing Liberty quarter
is consistently far superior in strike to the type two. The other two arguments
have a degree of credibility based on surviving documents, but the most
important reason for the change was almost assuredly a case of "comstockery" as
the prudery was labeled by prominent writers of the era.
While the incidents of coins mixing with politics mentioned above are famous
ones, perhaps no other case can quite compare to the Morgan dollar. The Mint Act
of 1873 abolished this denomination, along with the other issues such as the
three-cent silver and the half dime. By 1878 the silver dollar was back as the
result of extreme political pressure from the silver interests, such as the
owners of the gigantic Comstock Lode, a monumental silver mine in Nevada.
Overriding a presidential veto, the Bland-Allison Act of February 28, 1878
provided that the government would purchase $2 million to $4 million in domestic
silver for coinage into silver dollars. It took less than two weeks for the new
design to be approved, the dies made, and the first proofs struck.
The Sherman Silver Purchase Act set the amount of silver to be purchased monthly
at an exact figure-187 tons per month. When the act was repealed in 1893, the
mine owners were rich and the Treasury vaults were overflowing with unneeded
silver dollars. It wasn't until 1898 that legislation provided for the disposal
of the remaining silver through continued silver dollar mintage. In 1904, the
silver finally ran out in 1893, the mine owners were rich and the Treasury
vaults were overflowing with unneeded silver dollars. It wasn't until 1898 that
legislation provided for the disposal of the remaining silver through continued
silver dollar mintage. In 1904, the silver finally ran out, and Morgan dollar
production ended for 17 years.
The story of the Morgan dollar was nearly finished-but not quite. In 1918 the
Pittman Act was instituted, which required the melting of up to 350,000,000
silver dollars. A little over a quarter of a billion-that's right, billion-were
actually melted, but political pressure caused another weird scenario. The
silver lobby persuaded Congress to include a clause that domestic silver be
purchased to replace the silver dollars lost in the melting. What was this
silver used for? Starting in 1921, it was used to mint silver dollars!
Coins and politics. Politics and coins. After nearly 350 years, they are still
inextricably entwined, an integral part of our past and an inevitable part of
our future.

The three-cent nickel: the alloy won out over silver
|
|
|
Joel
D Rettew Rare Coins
23685 Moulton Pkwy B1
Laguna Hills, CA 92653