THE PUZZLE OF 1815 COINAGE

The root of the difference, or dispute if you want to call it that, is that Julian and I studied mutually contradictory Mint records. I studied an internal document that describes the flow of metal within the Mint, and he studied a letter from the Director. If Julian believes Patterson’s letter provides “absolute certainty” that the Mint abandoned standard practice at the end of 1815, so be it. As a retired practicing scientist, I am loath to use the term “absolute certainty” in any context, especially in a numismatic/social science context.

Here is a copy of the relevant page from the Treasurer’s receipts for copper coins, which I published in the Penny-Wise article last year. You will note the top entry from October 28, 1814 followed by the next entry on the same autographic page from February 3, 1816. There are no entries from the fifteen months in between, which includes all of calendar 1815. The article was published in Penny-Wise, vol.49, pp. 120-121. Readers who may be interested in following my logic in more detail may download a copy here: http://tinyurl.com/jjlrpyr.

I see no point in continuing this discussion. All research findings are subject to interpretation, and his and mine differ. I am happy to let E-Sylum readers draw their own conclusions.

To read the earlier E-Sylum articles, see:
ONLY QUARTERS AND HALF EAGLES COINED IN 1815 (www.coinbooks.org/esylum_v19n36a16.html)
NOTES FROM E-SYLUM READERS: SEPTEMBER 11, 2016 : R.W. Julian: Cent Coinage Resumed in 1815 (www.coinbooks.org/esylum_v19n37a12.html)

	NBS (coinbooks.org) Web