▲ Photo: ANA Money Museum/Robert B. Kelley
Did We Really Know What We Thought We Knew?
How did we get to a point where so many accepted the continental Dollar as a genuine exemplar of American Revolutionary currency ? One obvious part of the trouble is its invention. Couple “ 1776 ” with the Franklinesque “ Sundial ” and “ Linked Rings, ” and you are sure to trigger numismatic lust. The bare ocular invoke of the Continental Dollar has been fooling about everyone, from schoolkids to the most dedicated numismatic researchers, for decades.2
▲ Photos: The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation/Gift of the Lasser Family (2003-94)
Ninety-nine years after the ostensible date on these metallic pieces, numismatist and generator Sylvester Sage Crosby3 ( pictured right ) plated the Continental Dollar and described the physical traits of a few specimens struck in different metals. He then concluded with a recording of Bishop Richard Watson ’ s 18th-century report, by and large acknowledged as the first English-language description of the mint to appear in mark. Included therein was an erroneous enactment about the pieces being issued by Congress, a detail refuted by academician Josiah Meigs in 1788.4 Accepting the emergence for what it appeared to be, Crosby took the opportunity to mention that they were “ not of extreme curio, neither are they identical common. ” During the earned run average of the Centennial, when outstanding american numismatists were bequeath to accept a few 1776-dated oddities as genuine, it seems the Continental Dollar wasn ’ deoxythymidine monophosphate raising any eyebrows.5
▲ Photos: ANA Archives (Crosby) & The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation/Gift of the Lasser Family (1994-210, 40, 45, 49 & 54)
about 75 years late, the issues remained mainstays of the colonial-coin domain, though doubts were starting to bubble up. One collector who questioned the wholesale authenticity of the Continental Dollar was Damon G. Douglas, who wrote this in the April 1948 emergence of The Numismatist 6 :
Completely ignored by Congress, it was produced, according to Du Simitière’s 1784 notebook, in London credibly as a sarcasm on the newspaper currency that was becoming a synonym for worthlessness .
While Douglas was correct about du Simitière ’ s words, the moment about the issue being “ satirical ” is strictly bad on his part. Since Pierre Eugene du Simitière ( 1737-84 ) had intended to illustrate the Continental Dollar in his celebratory history of the United States, we can be indisputable he didn ’ metric ton see it as sardonic.7
Douglas ’ words were taken badly by 38-year-old Eric P. Newman ( pictured ), causing the capital numismatist to return an About Uncirculated administration Continental Dollar to James Kelly, the dealer who had offered it on approval for $ 145. In rejecting the man, Newman wrote on July 25, 1949 :
I am regretful that I am returning the continental dollar in administration. I am hush interest in it, but because of recent research of others the evidence points to the fact that these may be satirical pieces made in England, after the Revolutionary War and are not contemporary pieces .
Something changed Newman ’ s take care over the naturally of the adjacent three years. His landmark monograph, “ The 1776 Continental Currency Coinage, ” was published in the July-August 1952 issue of The Coin Collector ’ s Journal ( No.144 ) .
Always advancing the ball down the field, Newman continued his research, which led to his article “ The continental dollar of 1776 Meets Its Maker, ” published in the August 1959 offspring of The Numismatist. Above the title of this study is posed the frank question, “Does circumstantial evidence solve this problem?” The fact that we are having this discussion about 60 years late shows the circumstantial lawsuit Newman made in 1959 has compounded the problem, not resolved it .
Newman began his argument by correctly noting that the Continental Currency $ 1 bill, included in all four emissions authorized between May 1775 and May 1776, had been omitted from every subsequent spill through the September 1778 exit. It reappeared as the lowest appellation of the January 1779 publish, and the Congressionally guaranteed bills issued in the names of eight individual states during the jump and summer of 1780. Newman then suggested that this paper-dollar evacuate was intentionally created to make room for a circulating metallic version—one wholly absent from the tortuous records of the Continental Congress .
▲ Photos: ANA Archives (Newman) & The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation/Gift of the Lasser Family (1994-210, 58)
On the surface, Newman ’ s theory of a whitemetal, dollar-shaped coin, struck on the down moo in Revolutionary America to serve as a substitute for the paper version, seems plausible. Bringing his hypothesis forth, we can logically gauge the act of pewter dollars thereby required by looking at the size of the opening in $ 1 bill production. And this is where the entire impression runs off the rails .
In studying the actual print of lower-denomination Continental bills8, we see that the quantities of each were the same.9 During the time the $ 1 placard was produced ( between May 1775 and May 1776 ), the claim lapp numbers of $ 1, $ 2, $ 3 and $ 4 notes were generated. When the newspaper $ 1 reappeared in 1779, it again was printed in quantities identical to the early denominations.10 Therefore, we can use the quantities of early humble denominations issued between mid-1776 and mid-1778 to estimate the size of the col in the newspaper $ 1 supply—a whopping 1,033,857 bills ! 11
Is anyone cook to believe that a million or more pewter dollars ( or flush tens of thousands ) were clandestinely produced around 1776-78 to take the plaza of the Continental Currency $ 1 bill ? 12 There is no doubt that the pause in $ 1 bill output was intentional, but it had nothing to do with a pewter substitute. Congress, with its fingers constantly on the pulsate of the money issue, just printed what it thought necessary for the fiscal health and convenience of the United States on an as-needed basis.13 Remember, excessively, that Congress printed 600,000 of each of the four fractional denominations of February 17, 1776, which were intentionally designed to be easily combined to make an even dollar.14
Who “E.G.” Is Not
Among the most shrewish questions pertaining to the Continental Dollar is the identity of the person whose initials appear on one obverse die. Baffling to 19th-century numismatists, the signature “ EG FECIT ” below the sundial on this variety15 was anonymously hypothesized in 1909 as being that of Ephraim Getz16 ; in 1952 Eric Newman suggested it might be Elbridge Gerry.17 ( While this particular Getz doesn ’ triiodothyronine seem to exist, Gerry was, at least, a member of the Continental Congress. )
concisely thereafter, Newman identified another “ EG ” campaigner : New York City engraver Elisha Gallaudet, who was born erstwhile between 1728 and 1730. Newman, in his 1959 article18, did a superb job of bringing the pre-Revolutionary War works of Gallaudet to light. documentary sources prove that he created components of the plates used to print the February 16, 1771, issue of New York ’ sulfur paper money, vitamin a well as the tool needed for the production of the 1774-76 issues of New York City ’ s “ Water Works ” notes. early engravings that bear Gallaudet ’ sulfur touch include a number of competently executed bookplates and a not-so-great portrait of George Whitefield19, one of the celebrated british clerics of the day. Head and shoulders above all these are the beautiful, individually engraved silver prize medals he produced for the Literary Society of King ’ s College in 1767.20
▲ Known as “Water Works” notes, New York City issues of 1774-76 were printed from composite plates featuring cuts likewise created by Gallaudet. Photos: The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation/Gift of the Lasser Family (1994-210, 565 [New York] & 1994-218, 567)
little else has been revealed about Gallaudet. He and his large family disappeared from New York City sometime after the mid-1770s and reappeared in Freehold, New Jersey, where he died in 1779.21 It has been reasonably posited that Gallaudet fled the british, who took New York City in mid-September of 1776, suggesting he was sympathetic to the Patriot lawsuit. Could he be the “ EG ” -initialed shopkeeper with whom Congress sought a contract ?
Nope. You guessed it…Elisha Gallaudet ’ second name doesn ’ t appear anywhere in the 14,000+ pages of the Continental Congress ’ records. In contrast, this same archive records payments to those responsible for every expression of the universe of the newspaper bills. Included are those who fashioned the especial paper-making moulds, those who made the composition, the party who supplied the original edge “ cuts, ” and the celebrated couple of Hall & Sellers, who did the actual printing.22 Congress even recorded payments to those who transported boastfully quantities of fresh currency around the state for distribution .
early than having initials that match those on the metallic write out and the skill set necessity for cutting mint dies, what connects Gallaudet to the Continental Dollar and the Continental Congress ? The answer is “ nothing. ” 23 then again, nowadays that we know the hard evidence points to the pieces being produced across the ocean some four years after Gallaudet ’ s death, why should this misconstrue man be associated with them anyhow ?
At the termination of “ The Continental Dollar of 1776 Meets Its Maker, ” Newman listed a twelve points he believed carried his argument over the goal telephone line. From nowadays ’ south perspective, some of them hush ring true, but every factual instruction he makes is tangential to the question at hand. early points are strictly conjectural, inquisitive or anecdotal and immediately can be disproved .
frankincense, the question posited in Newman ’ mho 1959 article has been addressed. The problem of identifying the maker of the Continental Dollars has not been solved, largely because “ EG ” had been sought in the wrong ten and on the wrong continent .
▲ This silver medal, rendered by Gallaudet in 1776 for the Literary Society at King’s College in New York (pictured above) was awarded to Gouverneur Morris the following year. Photos: Stack’s Bowers Galleries (medal) & The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation (museum purchase, 1968-440)
Poems, Pewter Dollars & Poppycock
More recently, other bits of potentially relevant information have appeared in patronize of the Continental Dollar as a circulate Revolutionary coin of 1776. These include two tales of an american mint and its purport products. The first, appearing in the June 26, 1776, issue of The New York Journal, is nothing more than a rumor that made it to the newspaper ’ randomness offices, as declared by the article ’ s opening phrase :
We hear it proposed, that after three months, the currency of all copper mint made of regretful alloy, or wanting in weight, is to pass at the rate of 15 for an one-eighth separate of a dollar. And if it shall appear that there is not a sufficiency for common use, that it will wholly be called in, and a new impression struck of a Continental Copper Coin, of a larger size ; twelve of which is to pass for a dollar, after which no other coppers are to pass current .
As this fib of a nominate policy change went no far, the story was cursorily deemed baseless by the publisher. The moment character, short more than a snip of transatlantic chew the fat, appeared in the December 26, 1776, issue of The London Chronicle. Writing home from New York City, an anonymous british officer told his nameless correspondent that
the Congress have established a Mint at Philadelphia, where they coin copper and silver pieces about the size of a half a crown : In silver go for twelve shillings, in copper for fourteen penny .
As with The New York Journal piece, this report was never revisited or continued, showing that it besides was ultimately judged to be out of true. From a numismatic point of scene, neither account describes a patch even remotely alike to a mobilize pewter Continental Dollar.24 While interesting, these rumors add nothing to our avocation .
▲ This excerpt from the Boston Evening Post on July 16, 1753, relates the story of Samuel Blancher, who was jailed for casting and spending counterfeit pewter dollars. Below is a fake Spanish “Pillar dollar” which was found in Crown Point, New York, at the site of an 18th-century military post. Photos: Don Troiani Collection (Counterfeit) & Erik Goldstein Collection
The most late man of fresh testify offered in confirm of the Continental Dollar appeared in “ eighteenth Century Writings on the continental Currency Dollar Coin, ” which Eric Newman co-author with Maureen Levine in the July 2014 issue of The Numismatist. This extensive article led off with an investigation of Jonathan Odell ’ s satirical poem “ The Congratulation. ” Odell, a New York Loyalist, penned its verses in 1779 to denigrate the Continental Congress and its currentness, while provoking those negatively affected by it. Without rehashing Newman and Levine ’ south words about Odell, or presenting another transcription of the stallion poem, we ’ ll cut to the chase here. The final stanza, lines 13-16, learn :
Whoever these authoritative points
Congress will nobly pay him for his
Of pewter dollars, what both hands
can hold ,
A thimble-full of plate, a touch
In the following few sentences, Newman and Levine speculated on the think of of the blatantly generic phrase “ pewter dollars ” and concluded, without offering any supporting evidence, that it must be a reference to a circulate continental dollar .
pewter dollars were indeed common in 18th-century America and appear in both objective and archaeological records.26 But they aren ’ metric ton Continental Dollars. They are locally produced counterfeits of the coarse spanish colonial dollar, a fact not offered for consideration by the article ’ s authors. A research through early newspapers yields numerous accounts27 of these faithless coins, including this numb warn in the April 16, 1759, version of The Boston Evening-Post :
The Public are cautioned to beware of counterfeit Dollars, for such there are passing among us ; they are made of Pewter, and may be easily distinguished from the truthful ones .
Odell ’ s acerb words aren ’ t a fume gun at all. Rather than supporting the notion of the Continental Dollar as a circulating coin of the War of Independence, the poem merely alludes to a now-fascinating set of crimes that plagued commerce in Early America .
Speculation Spawns “Attribution Creep”
A review of what has been written about the Continental Dollar since Newman published his hypothesis in 1959 shows a make noise acceptance of its tenets. What was presented as a circumstantial case for the identification of Gallaudet as the creator of an undocumented metallic substitute for the Continental Currency $ 1 bill had petrified into incontrovertible fact. This phenomenon, in accession to helping overthrow objectivity and the hunt for extra facts, has spawned another meaning misattribution.
Consider the fractional specimens of the February 17, 1776, exit of Continental Currency, which bear designs borrowed by the manufacturer of the Continental Dollars about seven years late. The credit of these pewter pieces to Gallaudet has caused more than a few authors to follow a delusive path of logic and to conclude that he must besides have been creditworthy for the cuts needed to print the fractional bills. once again, the proceedings of the Continental Congress slam the door exclude on a modern hypothesis. In the records, no names are associated with this erstwhile exit. Newman knew this in 195928 and captioned the $ 1⁄6 bill pictured in his article as “ made by an nameless artist. ” The “ facts ” had morphed hanker before the Newman/Levine article was published in the 2014 book of The Numismatist. Without offering supporting tell, the authors stated that Gallaudet
had engraved the 1771 New York State currentness, the 1774-76 “ New-York Water Works ” notes and the February 17, 1776, Continental Currency one-sixth dollar paper currency. The engravings for the dies for the 1776 dollar coin intelligibly are based on the blueprint on the one-sixth dollar bill.29
I wonder which came first—the circumstantial chicken or the notional testis ? We know the “ EG ” who made Continental Dollars around 1783 was not Gallaudet, who had died years before. therefore, this attribution can ’ triiodothyronine be forced on the 1776 fractional bills. Until more facts are uncovered, all we know is that they were printed from plates incorporating cuts created by an nameless craftsman.
▲ The Continental Congress, represented here (from left) by John Adams, Gouverneur Morris, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson, conducted most of its business in Philadelphia, contracting production of its paper money to local tradesmen. Illustration: Library of Congress/Augustus Tholey
The Way Forward
It is always healthy to question the conventional wisdom regarding past events, places and things, particularly now that researchers have some pretty mighty tools at hand. The digital era has made it possible to discover many needles hidden in institutional haystacks around the world, frequently from the convenience of one ’ s front-runner comfortable chair. We owe it to ourselves, and those who come after us, to perpetually ferret out new truths about the numismatic treasures we love. Yes, the process of discovery is electrifying, but it besides can be afflictive, as beloved old beliefs stubbornly lurch into the region of mythology. however, it ’ sulfur always better to keep it real, international relations and security network ’ thymine it ?
▲ This pewter Felicitas Britannia et America medal (Betts-614) was struck in England in late 1783. Its reverse design is the same as most Continental Dollars, and the piece features a milled edge. Photos: The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation /Gift of the Lasser Family (2008-46, 172 [Medal]) & Trustees of the British Museum/Dr. Catherine Eagleton
Having set out to replace erroneous and presumptive statements about the Continental Dollar with demonstrable truths, I have taken this study angstrom far as possible for now. many questions can not be answered at this point. In the absence of hard evidence, any further hypotheses could lead to a bracing layer of theoretical baloney. I want to avoid this at all cost, so I offer no guess here .
alternatively, I ’ d like to encourage the pursuit of extra facts by posing a few queries. Some of these associate to flawed suppositions of the past and might seem rhetorical or, at best, the perplex of dead horses. Regardless, exploring them could prove to be a useful and enjoyable exercise in critical thinking… and therefore worthwhile. As possible answers and clues arise regarding the succeed, they surely will bring fresh questions :
- Who was “ EG, ” the person who created at least one Continental Dollar obverse fail ? now that we know the search has long focused on the ill-timed slope of the Atlantic, we can begin to look for him in 1780s England or Europe .
- As off-metal strikes of a coarse pewter decoration, did the brass and silver examples play a historic or numismatic function ?
- other than the explanatory flier saved by Sarah Sophia Banks ( an artifact that now resides in the british Museum ), do other examples exist and are they identical to hers ?
- How do these Continental dollar medals relate to the pewter “ Felicitas Britannia et America ” medals ( Betts-614 ) struck in England after September 1783 ? not only do the two share a common reverse design and miss a copper “ magpie, ” but both besides have milled edges, making them strikingly similar .
- Can the dies used to impress the edges of the Betts-614 medals be linked to those used on any varieties of the Continental Dollar ?
- Does testify exist to support the use of an edge mill in America before 1777 ?
- Why do no Revolutionary War-era newspapers mention a circulate, Congressionally authorized pewter dollar ? This absence stands in stark contrast to the countless times that diverse aspects of Continental paper money were discussed. Money was as fascinating to newspaper readers then as it is now
- Why have none of these pewter pieces been excavated from campsites occupied by the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War ? jointly, these sites have yielded thousands of pewter buttons and countless bull and modest silver coins. Since one of the independent purposes of the Continental Currency was to pay troops, huge quantities of the money went directly to the military. One would think if a Congressionally sanctioned pewter dollar circulated after mid-1776, then a estimable place to look for a misplace or discard model should be the locate of a continental Army camping, home to thousands of soldiers for months or years on end .
- The Continental Congress conducted a majority of its materials-based clientele in the Philadelphia area, and its paper money, from A to Z, was produced by local tradesmen. Though David Rittenhouse supplied the first 36 “ cutts ” 30 for the Continental Currency plates in 1775, we don ’ metric ton know who supplied those employed for the February 1776 fractional bills. however, other commodious options existed. Philadelphia had many of the best engravers and metalworkers in 18th-century America, like James Smithers, who made cuts for some currency issues. other highly skilled mechanics, like silversmith Joseph Richardson, produced the dollar-size 1756 “ Kittanning Destroyed ” and the 1757 “ Treaty of Easton ” medals, the first such items struck in British America. even the dies Richardson used were Philadelphia-made, from the hand of clocksmith Edward Duffield. One might wonder why the Continental Congress would turn to Gallaudet in New York City, a hundred miles and a few days ’ travel away, when it had a overplus of more talented craftsmen with a greater array of skills right in its backyard .
- The suggestion that the Continental Congress was producing coins in privacy to avoid perturb with the british makes no sense. other far more “ faithless ” activities were extensively documented in its records, like the active support of rebellious troops ( the Continental Army ) and the issue of “ Letters of Marque, ” which authorized patriotic American ocean captains to prey on british ship anywhere in the earth. While Congressionally licensed pirates were a clear and salute danger to Great Britain, the hit of base-metal coins during wartime posed no threat to the Crown Forces or the empire ’ s economy. And would the production of such coins be deemed more faithless than the print of Continental Currency or, for that matter, the dispatch of the Declaration of Independence to King George III ?
For their aid and inhalation, I wish to thank Jason Copes, John Dannreuther, Dr. Catherine Eagleton, Jimmy Hayes, Ronald L. Hurst, John J. Kraljevich Jr., Angelika Kuettner, the late Joseph R. Lasser, David McCarthy, Chris McDowell, the deep Eric P. Newman, Dr. Joel Orosz, Ray Williams and Vicken Yegparian. ■
1 now and hereinafter, the “ Continental Dollar ” is not to be confused with the Continental Congress newspaper $ 1 bills issued between 1775 and 1780. The use of the condition in this article is for public toilet only and is not intended to suggest that the author accepts these numismatic items as coins .
2 The writer unabashedly offers his mea culpa on this point .
3 Crosby, Sylvester S. The early Coins of America, 1875 ( Quarterman reissue, 1983 ), pp. 305-06 .
4 See the January 2018 issue of The Numismatist ( p. 54 ) for a complete transcription of Bishop Watson ’ second description of the Continental Dollar, and Meigs ’ disproof in the December 12, 1788, issue of The New-Haven Gazette and the Connecticut Magazine .
5 The authenticity of the “ 1776 ” coppers, mainstays of the “ Red Book ” for generations ( 2018 edition, pp. 59-60 ), has come under unplayful doubt in the past few years. Though Crosby, believing them to be authentic, besides discusses them ( pp. 175-76, 30305 ), an examination of these enigmas is a affray for another day .
6 “ British-American Colonial Coins, ” p. 250 .
7 du Simitière, Pierre Eugene. Common Place Book, 1775-1784, Library of Congress, Manuscript Division. See the aforesaid article in the January 2018 issue of The Numismatist ( p. 51 ) for an analysis of du Simitière ’ sulfur writings .
8 fractional denominations of February 17, 1776, excluded .
9 Newman, Eric P. Early Paper Money of America, 5th version ( 2008 ). The quantities were determined by the composition of the printing plates, with eight different denominations of bills on each sheet. See p. 459 for a discussion of this expression of newspaper money fabrication .
10 A combined sum of 267,991 Continental $ 1 bills were generated by the January 1779 and the April-July 1780 undertake issues. See Newman ( 2008 ), op. cit., pp. 73, 177, 215, 245, 263, 291, 358, 400 and 452 .
11 This act is the total measure of bills issued for each appellation ( $ 2, $ 3, $ 4 and $ 5 ) during the time the $ 1 beak was not produced. See Newman ( 2008 ), op. cit., pp. 66-69 .
12 Since no hard, primary-source evidence suggests the universe of a covertly operated mint, why should we assume one was established entirely for the sake of legitimizing the continental Dollar as a circulating coin ?
13 It besides must be noted that not every appellation was represented in every exit of Continental Currency, with the exception of the $ 5 bill. The $ 2 and $ 3 bills were omitted from both issues of 1778 ; no $ 4 bill was included in the September 1778 issue ; and the $ 6 permanently disappeared after the April 1778 issue. The $ 20 bill, initially worthy of marble-edged newspaper, disappeared after May 1775, only to be reinstated in a more economic format in April 1778. Based on the obviously consider manner in which the Continental Congress chose which denominations were to be issued during the class of the war, there ’ s no reason to think anything fishy was going on .
14 The $ 1/6, $ 1/3, $ 1/2 and $ 2/3 bills can be combined in at least seven different ways to equal $ 1 .
15 Newman, Eric P. “ The 1776 Continental Currency Coinage, ” The Coin Collector ’ s Journal, July-August 1952 ( No. 44 ), p. 8, Obverse 3 .
16 The numismatist, June 1909, pp. 177-78. This article, published without a named author, credibly was penned by Farran Zerbe, the magazine ’ s managing editor and publisher. The Getz bite is hearsay as reported to Zerbe by Edgar H. Adams .
17 Newman ( 1952 ), op. cit., pp. 3-4 .
18 Newman, Eric P. “ The Continental Dollar of 1776 Meets Its Maker, ” The Numismatist, August 1959, pp. 914-26 .
19 For a replica of Gallaudet ’ s engraving of Whitefield, see Newman ( 1959 ), op. cit., p. 922 .
20 As detailed in Vicken Yegparian ’ s “ The Literary Premium Medals Awarded by the Literary Society of King ’ s College in New York, 1767-1771. ” This unpublished paper was delivered as a lecture at the October 2004 Coinage of the America ’ second Conference ( COAC ), hosted by the American Numismatic Society in New York City. It should be noted that these medals apparently were nameless to Newman in 1959 and were not mentioned in his work about Gallaudet .
21 The last will and testament of Elisha “ Gillaudet ” ( sic ) was dated March 29, 1779, and his estate of the realm inventory taken on June 11 of the same class was valued at about £122. See New Jersey Abstract of Wills, Vol. thirty-four, 1771-1780, p. 204 .
22 Payments to these tradesmen are recorded in the Library of Congress ’ Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789, Government Printing Office, 1909. Hall & Sellers printed the currency from plates incorporating cuts supplied by David Rittenhouse. The special newspaper used for the bills was made by Frederick Bicking using “ moulds ” fashioned by Nathan Sellers .
23 Two Gallaudets served in New Jersey regiments during the war. reverse to rumor, neither has a documented connection to the Continental Congress, George Washington or pewter numismatic objects .
24 At this time, a british half crown measured about 33mm in diameter, far smaller than the modal 40mm diameter of a continental dollar .
25 Odell, in citing quantities of these three metals, was referring to a minuscule come of money .
26 See W.L. Calver and R.P. Bolton ’ south History Written with Pick and Shovel, New York Historical Society, 1950, pp. 74-75, for an trope of a forge pewter spanish Colonial milled 8 reales ( portrait type ), excavated from a Revolutionary War camp near the northerly tip of Manhattan Island .
27 For other primary-source accounts of circulating forge dollars made of pewter, see the July 16, 1753, issue of The Boston Evening Post, p. 2 ( illustrated here ), for an particularly detail report of Samuel Blancher ’ s woebegone situation. Kenneth Scott ’ s Counterfeiting in Colonial Pennsylvania, p. 100, and Counterfeiting in Colonial Connecticut, p. 189, include transcriptions of newspaper accounts dating to the 1760s and 1770s. Others can be found on the Internet database America ’ s Historical Newspapers ( available by subscription only ) .
28 Newman ( 1959 ), op. cit., p. 916 .
29 Over the years, Newman speculatively identified Gallaudet as the engraver creditworthy for the February 1776 fractional bills. digression from the abovementioned 2014 article, see Newman ( 2008 ), op. cit., pp. 21, 64 and 284, for early appearances of this misguided attribution .
30 Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789, Vol. III, p. 286 .
About the American Numismatic Association
The American Numismatic Association is a nonprofit organization organization dedicated to educating and encouraging people to study and collect coins and refer items. The Association serves the academician residential district, collectors and the general public with an matter to in numismatics.
The ANA helps all people discover and explore the world of money through its huge array of educational programs including its museum, library, publications, conventions and numismatic seminars .