Research Feed

The Australian 1937 and 1938 Crowns - From Treasured Coronation Mementoes to Casey's Cartwheels

andrew — Wed, 14 Nov 2018 04:12:30 +0800

The 1937 crown is Australia's third pre-decimal commemorative coin, struck and issued to mark the coronation of King George VI in 1937, an event celebrated right through the British Commonwealth.

It is far more than just another commemorative coin however- the story behind it is uniquely Australian.

The Commonwealth Government had originally planned to commemorate the coronation of King Edward VIII on (January 20th 1936) with the release of a five shilling coin, however as this denomination had not been issued in Australia before, the Coinage Act of 1909 had to be amended before it could be struck, let alone enter circulation.

No sooner had Federal Parliament passed the necessary legislation and regulations (on December 7th 1936), King Edward VIII abdicated three days later (December 10th 1936) so he could remain true to his love for Mrs Simpson.

A Hugely Popular Memento of the New Monarch

Despite the controversy and scandal that surrounded Edward VIII’s abdication, the coronation of his successor was no less a happy occasion, and Australia's third commemorative coin was struck to mark the coronation of King George VI instead.

King George VI and his wife, Princess Elizabeth had already travelled to Australia decade leading up to 1937, so this monarch was already well known and universally admired by the Australian people by the time he reached the throne.

It is hardly surprising then that this commemorative coin - a denomination never before been seen in Australia, one celebrating a popular monarch and one with a face value two and a half times greater than the most valuable coin in circulation at that time, was hoarded by the general public for sentimental reasons. Contemporary newspaper reports across the country describe members of the public paying a premium over face value to obtain examples for their collections or family memento box.

This demand was quite understandable - it was an officially-issued, historical and scarce item that was not expected to be seen again – what better heirloom could there be?

Since 1927 it had been standard practice in Great Britain to strike a crown each year, albeit in rather limited numbers and solely for collectors upon request.

Apart from the 1935 crown they were not issued into circulation, and if they were ever seen by the general public, they were regarded simply as treasured collector's items, not commemorative coins relating to an event of national importance.

“Casey's Cartwheels” - A Term of Disdain

The Australian public was somewhat set abackwhen a crown was again issued in Australia in 1938 - that this large coin was now to be an ongoing part of the mix of coins in daily use seemed to fly against their initial appeal, and it didn't take long for the tide of public opinion to turn. They were increasingly seen as a cause of inconvenience in daily trade - some businesses and customers began to either refuse to take or complained strongly when doing so.

This collective agitation soon saw the crowns derisively tagged as “Casey's Cartwheels”. This moniker was a combination of the surname of Australia's Commonwealth Treasurer at that time (Richard Casey), and the “Cartwheel” pennies of Matthew Boulton's Soho Mint in the late 18th century.

Casey had proposed that the crown be struck and had pushed hard for its introduction, and although he had served his country with distinction during World War I at Gallipoli and then in France, he certainly bore the brunt of the general public's disdain for this coin's unsuitability to daily use.

This was an incredible fall from grace with the Australian public - by the time Casey returned home from World War I, he had been he had been promoted to the rank of Major, and had been awarded the Military Cross as well as a Distinguished Service Order - both among the highest awards available to an Australian soldier at that time. Following the end of WWI, Casey became director on numerous company boards and also developed a personal friendship with Stanley Bruce, who went on to become the Prime Minister.

However disgruntled the Australian public may have temporarily been about this inconvenient coin, it didn’t seem to affect the arc of Casey’s career - he resigned from Parliament in 1940, as he went onto a very role in the British Civil Service during WWII, and then assumed the role as Governor of Bengal (India).

Possibly Melted Down During WWII and in the 1960’s

It appears that even though the coins were unpopular with the Australian general public of the late 1930's, they were much more prized by smugglers during the 1960's when the price of silver reached new heights. Many saw their way to the melting pots in Asia because of their high silver content, however some speculate that a large number of crowns were melted down legally by the Commonwealth Government at the outset of WWII.

The (as yet unverified) story is that 400,000 Australian crowns were shipped to China so they could be re-struck as Sun Yat-Sen dollars. This proposition doesn’t align with the production dates for this coin - although Krause states that "In 1949, three U.S. mints restruck a total of 30 million [Chinese] Junk Dollars dated Year 23”, the source of the silver for at least some of those coins is not noted.

The 1937 crown was warmly received by an Australian public keen for mementoes of the Commonwealth’s new monarch, while the 1938 crown is known by collectors today as easily the scarcest of the two dates.

Australia’s Next Generation Banknote $50 Is Now In Circulation - A True Black Swan Event

andrew — Tue, 30 Oct 2018 05:11:25 +0800

One of the biggest business books of the past decade was surely "The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable”, written by Nassim Taleb and published in 2007.

Taleb's book focuses on the impact that rare and unpredictable events have, as well as the human tendency to retrospectively find simplistic explanations for these events. (Named by Taleb as "Black Swan Theory”).

As the release of Australia’s NGB $50 note into circulation on October 10th 2018 had been meticulously planned and even publicised it definitely would not be classified by Taleb as a "Black Swan event", however as there are several black swans featured in the designs either side, we may be able to classify the launch as a black swan event on that technicality....

The table below lists the main characteristics of each of Australia's NGB notes, you can see that there are two black swans listed as visible on the $50:

Security Features	$5.00	$10.00	$50.00
Top Right Rolling Colour	Flying Eastern Spinebill & Prickly Moses Wattle	Sulphur-crested Cockatoo & Bramble Wattle	Black Swan
Bottom Left Security Feature In Clear Window	Federation Star	Pen Nib	Open Book
Top-To-Bottom Window Feature	3D Federation Star	3D Pen Nib	3d Book
Top-To-Bottom Window Feature	Flying Eastern Spinebill & Prickly Moses Wattle	Flying Cockatoo	Colourful Black Swan
Top-To-Bottom Window Feature	Colourful Eastern Spinebill	Colourful Sulphur-Crested Cockatoo	Flying Black Swan
Top-To-Bottom Window Feature	Reversing 5 in Federation Pavillion	Reversing 10 in Homestead	Raukkan Church
Flowers Either Side of Clear Window	Prickly Moses Wattle	Bramble Wattle	Acacia Humifusa
Tactile Feature	1 Raised Dot	2 Raised Dots	4 Raised Dots

Release Date	September 1st 2016	September 20th 2017	October 10th 2018

There is an additional black swan in the designs however, one that only becomes visible when the note is placed under ultra-violet light, as you can see in the images below.

I believe the muted public reception of the NGB $50 note is due to the design and colour continuity between the 1st Generation $50 note and the NGB $50 - compare the two together and you’ll see they are very, very similar.I believe the improvement in printing technology has allowed the lines in the intaglio print to be applied much more finely than on previous designs - that is plainly evident when comparing the two portraits of Edith Cowan to each other.

As the $50 note is the denomination seen in circulation more often than any other denomination, this in turn means that the 1st prefixes will be much rarer relative to all of the other prefixes printed for this denomination across 2018.

Due to the sheer number of notes required to replace those in circulation, my understanding is that up to 3 different sheets will be used - 2 more than was used for either the NGB $5 or the NGB $10.

A Distinct Western Australian Theme

Us Sangropers here in Western Australia can often complain that we're overlooked in the general scheme of things when it comes to such things as the distribution of the GST and credit where credit is due - whether such complaints are valid or not are of course quite another thing.

The NGB $50 note has a distinct West Aussie theme to it however:

Edith Cowan was Western Australian born and bred;
The black swan is featured on the Western Australia's State coat of arms;
King Edward Memorial Hospital is featured on the top left of the front of the note;
The wattle used within the designs of this note (Acacia Humifusa) is native to the Kimberley region of the Far North of WA; and
An outline of the seating plan for the Legislative Assembly of Western Australia can be seen on the right hand side of the front of the note when under ultra violet light.

The 1887 Sydney Gold Two Pound Proof Coin - Royalty, Mystery and Scandal

andrew — Thu, 25 Oct 2018 02:40:46 +0800

The 1887 Sydney Two Pound Proof is one of Australia’s rarest gold coins. It is in fact so rare that senior staff at the Royal Mint in London were still not aware that it existed until 1922 - more than 3 decades after it was struck.

It has been a highlight of a number of Australia’s finest collections of gold coins - Dangar; Farouk; Dixson and Quartermaster to name but a few, yet despite those provenances, the history of this coin has been presumed and not definitively known. This uncertainty is no doubt grounded in a near-complete absence of official Mint records accounting for its production.

The accepted explanation for the existence of the 1887 Sydney Two Pound is that it was a commemorative struck in 1887 to celebrate Queen Victoria’s Golden Jubilee, and further that it was specifically intended for distribution to VIP’s. Research conducted in the preparation of this article has proven that is not the case.

As several examples of this coin exhibit a proof-like or orange-peel appearance, it has been presumed that two batches of dies were used to strike the 1887 Sydney £2 proof coins, and further that the proof-like coins were re-struck after 1887. Numerous comments have been published that these coins either were or could have been struck in 1893, “in or around 1900”, in 1902 and in 1926. Research conducted in the preparation of this article has proven that none of those dates are correct.

The process of authenticating and attributing these coins is further complicated by the activity of the counterfeiter David Gee. The transcript of the court case against Gee shows that he attempted to strike and pass off several of these coins in the 1970’s. It is of course vital to understand just what technical characteristics these counterfeits have.

This article explains the background to the production of the 1887 Sydney Two Pound Proof coin, explores the technical characteristics of known examples and touches on the characteristics of several of Gee’s counterfeits.

With this new information, collectors can have a clear understanding of where this incredibly rare gold coin sits in the scheme of Australia’s gold coinage, and can have confidence in the characteristics that a genuine example exhibits.

Queen Victoria’s 1887 Golden Jubilee in Sydney - An Outpouring of Royalist and Republican Sentiment

The 50^th anniversary of Victoria’s reign was widely celebrated across Great Britain and the Commonwealth. Such was the interest in Britain on this special occasion, the crowd that gathered to view the Royal procession was described by the American writer Mark Twain as “stretched to the limit of sight in both directions.¹”

In Britain, the public had such a strong interest in the Jubilee celebrations that “…the gold five-pound pieces were so much in demand that a premium was being paid on some of them.²”

In Australia, despite or perhaps because of the strong public expressions of affection for the monarch, Republican sentiment in New South Wales was at a high point across 1887 and 1888.

A series of boisterous public meetings were held in Sydney in June 1887 to determine how to best congratulate Queen Victoria on her Golden Jubilee.

Clashes on the role of the monarchy in Australia between royalists and republicans continued for several weeks, a newspaper report described one of the meetings as “an absolute chaos of uproar, confusion, faction-fighting and ruffianism of a most disgraceful and unprecedented character in the history of the colony.³”

The “Queen's Jubilee Fund for Distressed Women in New South Wales”, chaired by the Governor’s wife, Lady Cecilia Carrington, was adjudged as being a fitting tribute⁴ to make to Queen Victoria.

The launch of this fund was planned for the evening of June 15^th 1887, in the Sydney Exhibition Building. Either by accident or design, decisions regarding other commemorative events that would celebrate Queen Victoria’s testimonial were held over to the same event.

Contemporary newspaper accounts state that 20,000 people attended, and that “In order to secure 'liberty of speech', the police and army and navy reserve, supported by the members of the Loyal Orange Institution, the Primrose League, several football clubs, and the undergraduates of the University, divided the audience of ten thousand inside the building into small, manageable squares. The ten thousand outside were marshalled by a group of mounted police.

The platform, defended by a group of undergraduates and footballers, was rushed by the crowd and in the 'hand-to-hand combat' which ensued, a large cedar table and a number of chairs were 'completely smashed, and the fragments scattered far and wide'. The bearers of the banner were forced to beat a hasty retreat. After the uproar had continued for about 20 minutes 'a sudden change came over the scene.⁵”

Dignity was restored when the Governor and Lady Carrington entered the stage for the motion to found the women’s fund. After they left the building, the crowd resumed their confrontation. The meeting was declared closed at 830pm, and a line of police were used to clear the hall.

No less than 6 days after playing a pivotal role in calming “a demonstration without parallel in the history of Australia⁶”, Lady Cecilia Carrington helped strike the first Jubilee gold coins at the Sydney Mint.

Although the above events appear to have only a passing relationship to the gold 1887 patterns of the Sydney Mint, they do give us a clear idea of the fundamental role that the Royal Family played in Australian life during this era, and the regard that symbols of the Royal family were held in, at least by the majority of the general public.

An Exclusive Commemorative to Mark Queen Victoria’s Golden Jubilee

The accepted explanation for the existence of the 1887 Sydney Two Pound and Five Pound Proofs is that they were commemoratives struck in 1887 to celebrate Queen Victoria’s Golden Jubilee, and further that they were specifically intended for distribution to VIP’s.

On that basis, one would expect that they were struck prior to June 20^th and 21^st in 1887 - the exact dates of Victoria’s Jubilee. Mint records do not confirm that. The dies used to strike these coins are not listed among the first Jubilee dies sent to Sydney on April 14^th 1887, nor were the coins mentioned in newspaper articles covering the production of the first Jubilee coins at Sydney.

The Australian Town and Country Journal of Saturday 25 June 1887 announced that “Among the incidents of the present Royal Jubilee is the issue of new sovereigns and half sovereigns from the Royal Mint, and its Australian branches. The new coinage was begun in the Sydney Mint on Monday, June 20, in the presence of Lord and Lady Carrington, and the coins were put in circulation Wednesday last, the first proof specimens being preserved in the Australian Museum, the Technological Museum and the Art Gallery.⁷” The final comment is an interesting anecdote regarding the distribution of the archival coins that were chosen to commemorate the event.

Designing the Jubilee Portrait - A Very Drawn Out Process

The process by which designs for the Jubilee coinage evolved from concept to reality was a very drawn out process, and began in February 1879 when Sir Henry Ponsonby, the Queen's private secretary, informed the Deputy Master of the Royal Mint, Sir Charles Fremantle, “that Boehm had been ordered to execute a new effigy of the queen to serve as the model for future dies.⁸”

With respect to Boehm’s work on the Jubilee portrait of Queen Victoria, his obituary included the comment that: “Boehm had been greatly hampered by his instructions.⁹”

Queen Victoria preferred Boehm’s effigy, however unfortunately Royal Mint staff experienced numerous challenges when attempting to translate Boehm’s sculpture into a design that could be effectively used on coinage. These challenges succinctly are expressed in a comment made by Sir William Chandler Roberts-Austen, who was Chemist and Assayer to the Royal Mint between 1882 and 1902: “a coin must be struck at a single blow, & Boehm's design, in plaster, was too high for this to be possible”.¹⁰

The direct consequence of the drawn out design refinement process is that the time available for the actual production of the Jubilee coinage was quite tight - the Queen did not formally approve Boehm’s portrait until April 1^st 1887,¹¹ less than 2 months before the date of her Jubilee.

Sovereign and half sovereign dies were shipped to the Sydney and Melbourne Mints on April 14^th 1887,¹² and did not arrive in Sydney until May 31^st 1887 - less than 3 weeks before the date of Victoria’s Jubilee.¹³

Correspondence retrieved from the “Registers of Correspondence” held by the Royal Mint demonstrate that the dies for the 1887 £2 and £5 coins were not dispatched to Sydney until September 30^th 1887,¹⁴ more than four months after the date of Victoria’s Jubilee celebrations, and were received by Sydney on December 8^th 1887. Correspondence retrieved from the Register of Correspondence in the Sydney Mint archives confirms this.

Recent research by the British numismatist David Iverson has shown that Royal Mint staff were under so much pressure in the period leading into Victoria’s Jubilee that it was necessary to hand-finish the obverse dies for the 1887 Sydney Jubilee sovereigns.¹⁵ In this context, it is understandable if dies for circulating coinage were a higher priority than those that were not intended for circulation.

The First Batch of Dies - Sunk In A Shipwreck?

One further explanation for the late arrival of the dies is found in a perhaps unlikely source - a book that covered the David Gee legal case in the 1970’s - “Heads I Win”.

A passage in this book advises that “The dies from which the coins were to be struck were made in the Tower Mint, London, and then shipped to Australia. The vessel carrying them ran into bad weather in that maritime graveyard of last century, the Great Australian Bight, and sank off the South Australian coast. However, the box containing the dies was brought safely ashore and sent on to the waiting Sydney Mint by horseback, wagon and coach. It was a long and harrowing journey across a still wild country, and it was all in vain. When the dies arrived in Sydney they were found to be too badly corroded by their brief immersion in seawater to be used. So a second set of dies was ordered from England.¹⁶”

A review of the correspondence registers of the Royal Mint and the Sydney Mint indicates that the author may have used some poetic licence with the available facts.

Although there were perhaps half a dozen shipwrecks recorded off the South Australian coast across 1887, none of them had London as their port of departure.¹⁷ Two sections of the Sydney Mint correspondence files retained at the NSW State Archives indicate that something did indeed happen to the dies while they were en route to Sydney - the first correspondence was in December 1887, the second in the mid-1920’s.

Correspondence in 1887 Regarding the Dies

On December 8^th 1887, the Deputy Master of the Sydney Mint, Robert Hunt, wrote to the Superintendent of the Royal Mint in London (Charles Fremantle) regarding a parcel of dies that the Sydney Mint had just received. In his letter, Hunt stated that “…regret to have to report that on opening the case the dies were found to be loose and more or less rusty. Nearly all the dies bore marks of friction and one £5 die in particular was much marked.¹⁸” No shipwreck or other maritime mishap is mentioned, nor is there any evidence that these £2 and £5 dies dated 1887 were destroyed or repaired after they were received.

Final confirmation that no 1887 £2 proofs were struck by the Sydney Mint in 1887 can be taken from a comment in another letter from Deputy Master Hunt to Sir Charles Fremantle on the same date, where Hunt advises that “We have not as yet struck any £5 or £2 pieces and then await your instructions.¹⁹”

Correspondence in the 1920’s Sheds More Light

The second batch of correspondence relevant to the production of the 1887 £2 and £5 dies occurred in the 1920’s. That correspondence was between two British coin collectors; the Deputy Master of the Sydney Mint and the Superintendent of the Royal Mint in London.

Early in 1922, William Hocking, Superintendent of the Royal Mint, received a letter from a stamp and coin dealer based in London, George Hamilton-Smith. Hamilton-Smith was a partner in and Managing Director of Glendining & Co Auctioneers from 1922, and is known to have been a keen collector of coins and medals.²⁰

Hocking is noted as the author of “Catalogue Of The Coins, Tokens, Medals, Dies And Seals In The Museum Of The Royal Mint", published by the Royal Mint in 1906. Although Hocking’s book notes that pattern gold coins were struck at the Sydney Mint in 1893²¹ (in itself a remarkable, and wholly unsupported comment), he apparently did not feel that he was in a position to answer Hamilton-Smith’s letter accurately, and he instead directed the question to the Deputy Master of the Sydney Mint, John Campbell.

Hocking advised Campbell that Hamilton-Smith had stated he owned “sets of Jubilee specimens … bearing your mintmark “S”, and that as the Royal Mint had no records of any such coins being struck, he found that “somewhat disconcerting.²²” Hocking pointedly asked Campbell “Have you, in your records, anything which shows that sets were issued by your branch?”²³

Campbell wrote responses to both Hamilton-Smith and Hocking several months later. The text of Campbell’s letter to Hocking is as follows:

“With reference to your letter of the 2^nd January last I have to state that according to the records of this Branch of the Royal Mint two Five-Pound pieces and twenty-five Two-pound pieces of the “Jubilee” coinage, dated 1887, and having the Mint mark “S”, were issued between the 10^th October, 1888 and the 7^th December 1892. The name of J.G. Murdoch does not appear in the records and the piece in your possession may possibly have been purchased by him from another collector.”²⁴

Campbell provided Hocking with a copy of his response to Hamilton-Smith, and was somewhat more expansive with details regarding the two coins concerned: “I would supplement this official information for your benefit by letting you know that one Five-pound piece was issued to H.C. Dangar and one to Dr. Evans, both well known collectors, on the 7^th December, 1892. Evan’s collection was sold, but I do not know what became of Dangar’s. The Two-pound pieces were issued to sundry persons, one of whom I remember was a hawker travelling the back country, who used to dispose of them on his rounds at a considerable profit, The premium charged was 25 per cent. The dies are still here, as are the dies for the 1893 Five-pound and Two-pound issue.

Now here’s a point. It is just possible (You know how things were in 1893) that one or two additional pieces may have been issued in exchange for sovereigns without appearing on the records. There has always been a hazy idea that something of the sort happened, but I have no proof whatever, nor do I know to whom such pieces would be given. You are of course at liberty to supplement the official information given to Hamilton Smith as you may think best.²⁵”

This correspondence gives us a definitive mintage for the 1887 Sydney Two Pound Proof, and also defines the date range over which they were originally struck.

Correspondence ex London Discusses A Second Batch of Dies

No evidence has been found in the correspondence registers of either the Royal Mint or the Sydney Mint of a second parcel of 1887-dated £2 and £5 dies being dispatched to replace those that were “rusty and damaged”. Research into the correspondence registers at the Royal Mint and the Sydney Mint indicates that the second batch of £5 and £2 dies sent to Sydney after September 1887 is that detailed below:

15th November 1887

2 Obv. £5 dies;

2 Rev. £5 “ 1888;

2 Obv. £2 “;

2 Rev. £2 “ 1888

32 Obv. Sov “ ;

32 Rev. Sov “ 1888²⁶;

Anyone familiar with Australian gold coins will be aware that this apparently dry and uninteresting manifest is nothing short of remarkable, as it reveals the Sydney Mint had dies for 1888-dated £2 and £5 coins, and that these have never been seen. Just why the 1887-dated dies were apparently used to strike coins once the 1888-dated dies were available is not known.

A Review of Existing Literature Covering the 1887 Sydney Two Pound Proof

The existing written references that cover the production of these coins advise variously that they either were or could have been struck in 1893, “in or around 1900”, in 1902 or 1926. Each of these propositions are reviewed below.

Struck at the Sydney Branch of the Royal Mint in 1887

The earliest discussion of the production of this coin in the public domain can be found in the 1953 auction catalogue by Glendining & Co for the Dangar collection: “Jubilee Two Pound Piece 1887, of similar type to the last, and extremely rare, believed to be only 11 struck. Extremely fine and Probably struck as a proof.²⁷” No official information was cited to support that estimate.

Henry Cary Dangar was a prominent Sydney barrister, politician and sportsman that was active in numismatics from the late 1800’s through to the early 1900’s. His collection has been described as being one of the most important collections of Australian coins formed prior to Federation, and contained numerous Australian and British numismatic rarities. This mintage figure has been repeated several times in various auction lot descriptions by several very experienced numismatists over the years,²⁸ the primary documents that support it are yet to be located.

Later in 1953, James Hunt Deacon wrote in Volume 4 of the South Australian Numismatic Journal: “Some specimens of the £5 and £2 were struck at the Sydney Branch of the Royal Mint in 1887, bearing the Jubilee Head (Type Vl) and St. George and the Dragon (Type C) (d.w.). There are no records in the Mint Report of that year as to the number of specimens struck and consequently these must be regarded as Bullion. These pieces carry the reference numbers 129 and 130 respectively.²⁹” Hunt Deacon does not cite a primary reference for this conclusion, information in the Correspondence Registers indicates that he was mistaken.

Struck at the Sydney Mint in 1893

An intriguing comment is be found in the “Catalogue of the Coins, Tokens, Medals, Dies and Seals in the Museum of the Royal Mint”, prepared by William Hosking for the Royal Mint in 1906. A note on page 325 of the catalogue states that “Specimen five pound and two pound pieces were struck at the Sydney branch mint in 1893.³⁰” Unfortunately, does not provide a mintage figure, nor is any explanation given on the circumstances under which the coins were struck, nor were the dates on the reverse dies mentioned.

Possibly Struck at the Sydney Mint “Around 1900”

An auction lot description for one Sydney Two Pound proof coin offered for sale in November 1986 contained the following comment “Struck as a semi frosted proof circa 1900. All told, about 10 examples were struck.³¹" No supporting documentation was referred to in that comment, nor has any been discovered since then.

Struck at the Sydney Mint in 1926?

The former numismatic curator at Museum Victoria, John Sharples, has conducted extensive research into the numismatic collection of Museum Victoria, as well as the collection formed by the former Deputy Master of the Melbourne Mint between 1921 and 1926, Albert Malet Le Souef.

Research into the archival records of the Melbourne Mint by Sharples has shown that Le Souef was instrumental in re-striking the 1887 and 1902 £2 and £5 Sydney proof coins.

Sharples’ comments on the manufacture of these coins were not intended to be comprehensive, and are presented in the context of articles that are much larger in scope. Although his comments focus more on the 1902 Sydney proof £2 and £5 gold coins, the primary documents that Sharples was working from demonstrate that they apply equally to the same denominations dated 1887.

In his catalogue of the A.M. Le Souef collection, John Sharples stated that the 1902 Sydney Proof £2 coin was “One of three struck at the closure of the Sydney Mint in 1926. The other two were for Sir William Dixon and the Melbourne Branch of the Royal Mint.³²” Sharples stated elsewhere in the same article that just 3 of the 1887 Jubilee Head £2 coins were re-struck in 1926.³³

The mintage figures reported by Sharples are confirmed by referring to Melbourne Mint correspondence files between Le Souef and William & Robert Dixson, however the date and location at which those coins were struck may be clarified.

Struck at the Melbourne Mint in 1927

Correspondence between Le Souef and William & Robert Dixson, now housed in the collections of the Museum Victoria and the Dixson Library (in the State Library of NSW) indicates that the coins Sharples refers to were in fact struck at the Melbourne Mint in February 1927, rather than at the Sydney Mint in June 1926.

In a letter dated January 11^th 1927, Le Souef wrote to Robert Dixson in Sydney, advising that “Dies were also prepared with a distinctive Mint Mark S. For £5 and £2 pieces of Victoria 1887 and Edward VII 1902. I can strike you one of each of these pieces and hand you the dies lightly defaced by a cut which does not impair the design more than is necessary to prevent the dies being used again.³⁴” Later in the same letter, Le Souef states that 13 pairs of unused sovereign dies were also available for Dixson to purchase, “…and these are very lightly defaced with a fine cut, so that the original polish is left on the surface.³⁵” Le Souef advised that “…the total cost of the above would be £115.³⁶”

In his work covering the history of the Melbourne Mint, former staff member Bill Mullett has written regarding Le Souef’s proposal that “…the proposition was referred to the London authorities and their concurrence gave some propriety to the matter.³⁷” The correspondence upon which Mullett’s statement is based is yet to be located.

Melbourne Mint correspondence records show that on January 12^th, Le Souef wrote to “Mr Green” at the Melbourne Mint, and advised him that “Mr Clucas has a list of the other coins and medals in preparation for Mr Dixson and for the Melbourne Mint collection. If these can be ready on my return on the 24^th I will pay for them then and we can send them off with the dies to Sydney. I should however, have to destroy some of the dies before their despatch.³⁸”

Primary documents in Museum Victoria archives shows that these coins were struck at the Melbourne Mint on February 25^th 1927, and were then shipped to Robert Dixson in Sydney on February 28^th, 1927.³⁹

Noticeably absent from Le Souef’s letter to Green were any instructions to repair the dies concerned before they were to be used, which indicates that the re-struck coins should all have the same basic technical characteristics as those struck between 1888 and 1892.

Cross-Referencing Bullion Allocated Against Medals Struck

Melbourne Mint staff recorded the number of each of the 1887 and 1902 £2 and £5 they struck on that date. The reason it appears that the coins Sharples’ has stated were struck in Sydney in 1926 were in fact struck in Melbourne in 1927 is that a minor arithmetical oversight is common to both sets of figures.

The table prepared by Melbourne Mint staff shows a total of 34 “medals” were struck on that date.⁴⁰ If that production list is cross-referenced against the bullion allocated to the production of those medals,⁴¹ we can see that the number of medals struck is short by 1, and that the total number of medals struck from the allocated bullion was in fact 35, rather than 34.

The mintage of the Sydney £2 Proof coins (dated 1887 and 1902) was in fact 6 coins across both dates, rather than 5 as the production list states. One example of each coin dated 1887 and 1902 was struck for Dixson; the Melbourne Mint and Le Souef himself.

This arithmetical discrepancy is also seen in the mintage figures quoted by Sharples, and while it is of course conceivable that Sydney Mint records may yet show that the same number of 1887 and 1902 gold proof coins were also struck at the Sydney Mint in June 1926, such records have not yet been located.

The 1887 Sydney Two Pound proof coin struck for the Melbourne Mint is now housed in the Museum Victoria numismatic collection, while after a somewhat journeyed history, the coin struck for Sir William Dixson remains in the Dixson Library collection within the SLNSW. John Sharples has stated that the example struck for Le Souef was “missing in 1976 stocktake.⁴²” The present location of this coin is not known.

A Further Complication - David Gee and the Dixson Library

An additional factor that must be taken into account when classifying known examples of the 1887 Sydney Two Pound Proof are the activities of David Gee.

For those not familiar with him, David Gee was a Sydney-based coin and stamp collector active in the 1960’s and 1970’s, who was convicted of stealing coins and dies from the State Library of New South Wales, as well as of counterfeiting coins from those stolen dies.⁴³

Over the space of several years, Gee made regular visits to the SLNSW to view coins held by the Dixson collection, and also to take photographs of them. It is understood that the photographs were taken using “…a Box Brownie mounted in a large camera box…”⁴⁴ SLNSW records indicated that Gee also asked to examine dies from the Dixson collection during this time, the case against Gee was that the coins and dies were smuggled out via the camera box.

The Dies Were Scored Immediately After They Were Used for the Last Time

Le Souef’s correspondence with Dixson indicated that the dies were scored shortly after they were used to strike the coins for Dixson, the Melbourne Mint and for Le Souef,⁴⁵ and before they were dispatched to Sydney on February 28^th 1927. Le Souef’s instructions to Green dated January 12^th 1927 make no reference to the dies needing any repair or restoration before being put into use.⁴⁶

This indicates that any of the coins struck at the Melbourne Mint in 1927 should have the same overall technical characteristics as those struck between 1888 and 1892.

On that basis, we can conclude that any coins that show additional die markers to those known to be genuine should be carefully reviewed to determine whether they have been struck by David Gee from the stolen and repaired dies.

Analysis of the technical characteristics of the coins held by the Museum of Victoria and the Dixson collection has determined that they do not show any superfluous die markers. The following points can be noted regarding these coins:

Surfaces: Satin / matte, no frosting is evident in the relief

Strike: Strong - fine details are sharp right across both sides

Obverse die characteristics: 14 pearls in necklace

Reverse die characteristics: No spur in tail; tail points towards lance; BP evident; mintmark above the centre line of the date.

Die Markers for Coins Struck by Gee Using Restored Dies Stolen from the SLNSW

Publicly available images of the 1887 Sydney Five Pound Proof coin dies, published in “Heads I Win”, clearly depict a pair of dies used to strike the 1887 Sydney Gold Five Pounds with a deep score mark across the faces of both dies.

The tradesmen at The Exclusive Diesinking and Engraving Company in Peakhurst that had unwittingly repaired the dies for Gee advised him that “they could not repair his die so that unblemished "fantasy pieces" could be struck from it, but they could make him a new die which would not have the disfiguring score-mark.

After some experimentation that proved unsuccessful, the partners suggested that a process known in the diesinking trade as "hobbing" might do a better job of repairing and reproducing the die.⁴⁷”

They did not have the appropriate machinery to perform this task, so referred him to another business in Sydney that was able to make a “hob” from the scored die. The raised score line across that “hob” was then removed, and the surface of the hob was repaired to restore the lost design elements. A new die was then created from the repaired hob.

Numismatists acknowledge that the process by which counterfeit coins are manufactured from transfer dies results in a slight loss of fine detail, when the counterfeit coins are compared to coins struck from the original dies.

Die markers that are evident on either the original dies, the counterfeit hob or the counterfeit dies are also seen on the coins that are struck from them.

Several of the 1887 Sydney gold £2 coins counterfeited by David Gee, as well as a counterfeit die and a counterfeit hub that Gee struck are all held in the National Coin Collection (housed at the Royal Australian Mint in Canberra). A physical assessment of them is useful in determining how to identify possible counterfeits.

The National Collection holds three 1887 Sydney gold £2 coins counterfeited by David Gee - the first has been struck from dies created from a genuine London £2 proof that has has a mintmark added to it. The shape of the mintmark on this coin clearly does not confirm with that seen on examples known to be authentic.

The other two counterfeits show very obvious signs of having been struck from the scored dies that Gee stole from the Dixson Library. These coins have uneven surfaces in those sections where the score mark would have been repaired, there are weaknesses in the fine details, and sections of the design have been re-engraved. These characteristics mean these particular Gee counterfeits are very easily identified.

Numismatic Characteristics of Known Examples

The British numismatists David Iverson and Steve Hill have conducted a great deal of research into the Jubilee Head gold sovereigns in recent years⁴⁸ - the criteria used to demonstrate the evolution in the dies used to strike the 1887 Jubilee sovereigns are useful for the purpose of classifying known examples of the 1887 Sydney Two Pound Proof.

Technical Characteristics of the 1887 Sydney Two Pound ProofSummary of Research Into Correspondence Registers

The research conducted into the correspondence registers of the Royal and Sydney Mints yields the following information:

• No 1887 Sydney Proof gold £2 and £5 coins were struck at the time of Victoria’s Golden Jubilee in June 1887;

• 25 1887 Sydney £2 proofs were struck prior to 1922 ;

• 3 1887 Sydney £2 proofs were struck at the Melbourne Mint in February 1927;

• The dies were damaged before they were first used; and

• £2 dies were prepared for the Sydney Mint dated 1888 and 1893, but were not used.

The 1887 Sydney Gold £2 Proof is unequivocally one of Australia’s rarest and most keenly-sought gold coins.

Although the Sydney Mint struck £5 and £2 gold coins dated 1887 and 1902, as only 2 examples are known in private hands of the 1902 £5; 1902 £2 and 1887 £5, the 1887 Sydney £2 is realistically the only Australian high denomination gold coin that most collectors will have the opportunity to own.

It has a history rich in royalty, mystery and scandal, and has been included in each of the finest collections of Australian gold coins ever formed. It is so rare and exclusive that the Royal Mint in London was not confident it existed more than three decades after it was first struck.

Acknowledgements

My thanks are due to the following people and organisations for their assistance in providing the information found in this article:

David Iverson
Tony Byrne
Dr T. Vince Verheyen
Jim Noble
Matt Curtis and the staff at the Royal Mint Museum (London)
David Berry and the staff at the Dixson Library (SLNSW)
Staff at NSW Archives

Any omissions or errors found in this article are entirely the responsibility of the author.

¹Twain, Mark, “A Tramp Abroad, Following the Equator, Other Travels”, The Library of America, 2010, p 1050.

²Lant; J.J., "The Jubilee Coinage Of 1887" in the British Numismatic Society Journal, 53, 1973, p 137.

³Daily Telegraph, Sydney, June 11th 1887, p6.

⁴Sear, Margaret, “Femininity that calmed the crowds: Lady Carrington at the queen's jubilee celebrations Sydney 1887”; Journal of Australian Studies Volume 21, Issue 52, 1997, p11.

⁵Sear, Margaret, “Femininity that calmed the crowds: Lady Carrington at the queen's jubilee celebrations Sydney 1887”; Journal of Australian Studies Volume 21, Issue 52, 1997, p12.

⁶Daily Telegraph, Sydney, June 16th 1887, p5.

⁷Australian Town and Country Journal (Sydney), Saturday 25 June 1887, page 30

⁸Op. Cit., Boehm, p275

⁹The Times Newspaper, London, 13 December 1890, p. 9.

¹⁰Op. Cit., Boehm, p281

¹¹Op. Cit., Boehm, p280

¹²Op. Cit., Iverson I, p6

¹³Iverson, David & Hill, Stephen [Ed.], “The Jubilee Head Gold Sovereign 1887-1893”, Baldwin’s, London, 2015, p6.

¹⁴NSW Archives; NRS 13137

¹⁵Ibid, p6

¹⁶Watson, Thomas & Bennett; , "Heads I Win", Angus & Robertson, Sydney, 1986, p 14.

¹⁷https://data.sa.gov.au/data/dataset/shipwrecks

¹⁸NSW Archives, Copies of letters sent [Royal Mint, Sydney Branch], NRS 13138.

¹⁹Royal Mint: Registers of Correspondence; MINT 21

²⁰https://archive.li/oGJ5Y

²¹Hocking; WJ, “Catalogue of the coins, tokens, medals, dies and seals in the museum of the Royal Mint", Royal Mint, London, 1906, p 325.

²²NSW Archives, Copies of letters sent [Royal Mint, Sydney Branch], NRS 13138.

²³NSW Archives, Copies of letters sent [Royal Mint, Sydney Branch], NRS 13138.

²⁴NSW Archives, Copies of letters sent [Royal Mint, Sydney Branch], NRS 13138.

²⁵NSW Archives, Copies of letters sent [Royal Mint, Sydney Branch], NRS 13138.

²⁶Royal Mint: Registers of Correspondence; MINT 21

²⁷“Catalogue of the important collection of Greek, Roman, English, Australian and foreign gold and silver coins, formed by the late H.C. Dangar”, Glendining, 15 April 1953, p21

²⁸Fenton; Stephen, "Auction Number 3", St James Auctions, Knightsbridge (London), October 3rd 2005, p Lot 105.

²⁹Hunt Deacon; James, “Australian Minted Imperial Gold“ in the South Australian Numismatic Journal, Volume 4, 1953, p 30.

³⁰Hocking; WJ, “Catalogue of the coins, tokens, medals, dies and seals in the museum of the Royal Mint", Royal Mint, London, 1906, p 325.

³¹Lot #716, Noble Numismatics Auction 20 (November 1986).

³²Sharples; John, "Catalogue Of Coins, Medals & Checks In The A. M. Le Souef Collection" in the NAA Journal, Volume 2, 1986, p26 (Footnote 4).

³³Sharples; John, "Catalogue Of Coins, Medals & Checks In The A. M. Le Souef Collection" in the NAA Journal, Volume 2, 1986, p26 (Footnote 2).

³⁴Dixson, William, Sir, 1870-1952. "Sir William Dixson Correspondence and Notes, 1898- 1952."

³⁵Dixson, William, Sir, 1870-1952. "Sir William Dixson Correspondence and Notes, 1898- 1952."

³⁶Dixson, William, Sir, 1870-1952. "Sir William Dixson Correspondence and Notes, 1898- 1952."

³⁷Mullett; WJ, "Melbourne Mint - Branch of the Royal Mint, The Establishment", Self-published, Chifley (ACT), 1992, p 34.

³⁸Melbourne Mint correspondence

³⁹Melbourne Mint correspondence

⁴⁰Melbourne Mint correspondence

⁴¹Melbourne Mint correspondence

⁴²Sharples; John, "Catalogue Of Coins, Medals & Checks In The A. M. Le Souef Collection" in the NAA Journal, Volume 2, 1986, p26 (Footnote 2).

⁴³“Crime that branded our rare coins”, Sydney Morning Herald, March 3, 1979, Page 6.

⁴⁴Watson, Thomas & Bennett; , "Heads I Win", Angus & Robertson, Sydney, 1986, p 66.

⁴⁵Melbourne Mint correspondence

⁴⁶Melbourne Mint correspondence

⁴⁷Watson, Thomas & Bennett; , "Heads I Win", Angus & Robertson, Sydney, 1986, p 46-48.

⁴⁸Iverson, David & Hill, Stephen [Ed.], “The Jubilee Head Gold Sovereign 1887-1893”, Baldwin’s, London, 2015.

Hidden Messages and Micro Code - Teltscher's Is Still Skill Studied 8 Decades Later

andrew — Sat, 13 Oct 2018 04:22:19 +0800

The story of the men that created the notes used in the Hay Internment Camp was recounted in popular culture most explicitly in the 1980's TV series produced by the BBC titled "The Dunera Boys". The full story of the notes is far less well known - particularly the fact that the designs either side contain a range of "hidden" messages within them.

The "Dunera Boys" included musicians, artists, philosophers, scientists and writers - their living facilities at Camp Hay were basic, many said that was boredom that was the greatest enemy.

Internees organised educational and artistic projects, including lectures, concerts and camp newspapers. One such project was the creation of these currency notes that were intended to be used within the confines of the internment camp. The designer of the notes, George Teltscher, clearly revelled in the intellectual and artistic challenge that the design process offered, as he deployed several design devices that have proven to have an enduring appeal to historians and collectors.

Numerous Hidden Messages Can Be Found In the Designs on Both Sides

Aficionados of these notes have long known that three relatively obvious hidden messages can be found in the simultan designs across the front of the note:

The designer’s name “Eppennstein” can be seen within the fleece of the merino;
The phrase “We Are Here Because We Are Here” can be seen in the barbed wire perimeter of the note; and
The phrase “HMT Dunera Liverpool to Hay” can be seen in the barbed wire running across the face of the note, on the ground at the base of the fence poles.

Research in recent years has determined that the back of the notes are also thought to contain hidden text. Although this research is not yet complete, the names of each of the internees that were assigned to Hut 26 at Camp 7 in Hay are believed to be hidden within the fleeces of the 25 merino rams.

Further research by several enthusiastic amateur historians researching the case of "...one of Australia's most baffling cold case mysteries - The Somerton Man" has asserted that the designs of these notes may contain many more messages than has been previously determined. Those messages are thought to have been written in micro code within or under minor aspects of the ink either side. Click this link to read more about the theories they have proposed).

Just whether those theories have any merit or not is still a matter of some debate, however it is clear that Teltscher's work was sophisticated enough that it occupies fertile minds some 8 decades later.

The considered opinion to date is that these hidden messages were not intended to be seditious or subversive in any way, but simply a way for the internees to express their intelligence and creativity.

It will be interesting to see whether research exploring any of the new theories confirm that conclusion.

Several videos have been posted on Youtube exploring these ideas - this is a link to the first one; this is a link to the second one.

Australia's Pre-Federation Banknotes - A Rich and Complex Series

andrew — Fri, 20 Jul 2018 01:00:51 +0800

Australia's pre-Federation banknotes are a rich and complex series that captures the history of Australia’s growing economy throughout the 19th century.

As these privately-issued notes are so starkly different to the single series of currency notes we use across the country today, it is an area that can be foreboding for the novice collector.

A large number of banks issued notes across many cities; states and decades - each one of those banks issued several different series of notes, often with markedly different designs and often in different denominations.

As the cost of a pre-Federation note can run into the hundreds; thousands and even tens of thousands of dollars, rather than risk making a decision that might cost them a significant sum, many collectors choose to steer clear of this series completely.

This is a real shame, as Australia’s banking system during the 1800’s has been described by one prominent economist as "one of the most interesting historical experiences of free banking. Australian banking was relatively free for almost a century…"1

The banknotes issued by Australia’s private banks during this period are tangible mementos of "how well the theory of free banking has worked in practice.” 2

This is a series that is unique in world numismatics, they are a physical record we can all be proud of.

The first step in understanding one of these notes is to learn how each it is classified into one of four forms - proof, specimen, issued and superscribed. Each of these different classes has their own appeal to collectors.

Printer's Proof Note:

Printer’s proof notes were generally used by printing and bank staff in the early stages of the printing process when signing off on design elements and designs.

Proofs are usually (but not always) printed in black ink, and are often (but not always) printed on firm card. Printer’s proof notes can be printed either just on one side or on both sides.

Minor elements of the design of a printer’s proof note may differ from those seen on the issued version of the note.

Printer’s proof notes often have notations in either pencil or ink by bank or printer staff in the margins.

Although some printer’s proof notes have the term “Specimen” stamped or punched into them, this alone does not designate them as specimen notes.

Some pre-Federation notes are only known in the form of printer’s proofs.

Printer’s proofs are reasonably distinct from the issued notes they were intended to represent, so although many of them are extremely rare, they are the most affordable type of pre-Federation notes available to collectors.

Specimen Note:

Specimen notes were intended to stand as evidence of the final version of a note to printing and bank staff before it entered circulation.

A specimen note has passed through each phase of the printing process (intaglio and simultan), and generally (but not always) has had serial numbers added to it.

Specimen notes are printed on paper (not card), and often (but not always) have the term “Specimen" either stamped onto or punched into them.

A note with the term “Specimen” stamped onto or punched into it is not necessarily a specimen note - it must have the above characteristics if it is to be correctly classed as a specimen note.

A specimen note will not have been signed by authorized bank staff.

As nearly all pre-Federation notes are rare and often expensive in issued form, specimen notes are often used to represent a particular bank, denomination or series in a collection.

A specimen note may also be used to represent a note as it would have been seen in circulation when all of the issued notes available are heavily circulated - faded; dirty; torn or perhaps even missing sections.

Some pre-Federation notes are only known in specimen form.

Specimen notes are the most attractive of all pre-Federation notes.

Issued Note:

An issued pre-Federation note that has been fully printed, has had serial numbers added to it, and has been signed into circulation by the bank’s authorized representatives.

Very few issued notes were printed in black ink only; very few issued notes were printed on one side only.

An issued note will not have the term “specimen” stamped onto or punched into it.

As notes issued into circulation during the pre-Federation period had a significant purchasing power, most circulated for an extended period of time.

Very few were either saved for posterity or lost - nearly all were spent or redeemed at the bank that issued them, and so most are found in heavily circulated condition.

Issued notes in superior quality are the most highly-prized of all pre-Federation notes. They are valued for their rarity; history and purchasing power.

Superscribed Note:

A superscribed note is an un-issued pre-Federation note that was printed for a private Australian bank, and has been officially overprinted either by the Queensland Colonial Government or the Australian Commonwealth Government.

As there is only one superscribed note from the Queensland Colonial Government in private hands, the term “superscribed note” is invariably used to describe those notes over-printed by the Australian Commonwealth Government.

The Australian Commonwealth superscribed notes feature the term "AUSTRALIAN NOTE” above authorizing text across the front, with serial numbers above and below, all in black ink.

These superscribed notes were intended only as a temporary measure until the Commonwealth’s own series of notes was designed, printed and issued into circulation.

Once their purpose had been served, superscribed notes were actively recalled and destroyed by the Commonwealth Treasury, so very few remain available to collectors today.

As the first notes printed for the Australian Commonwealth Government, superscribed notes are highly prized for their history, rarity and purchasing power.

Superscribed notes are not known in printer’s proof or specimen form in private hands.

Summary

Determining whether a particular note is a printer’s proof; a specimen; an issued or a superscribed note is the first step in determining how it fits into the schema of Australia’s pre-Federation note series.

Subsequent identification tasks such as determining the series that a note is part of is made much easier once the note has been correctly classified into it’s form.

1. Dowd; Kevin, "Free Banking In Australia", Taylor & Francis, London, 1992.

2. Dowd; Kevin, "Free Banking In Australia", Taylor & Francis, London, 1992.

The Small Head Obverse of King George V on Australia's Soveriegns

andrew — Sun, 10 Jun 2018 09:12:53 +0800

To the Australian sovereign collector, the adoption of the Small Head portrait of King George V doesn’t appear to have been urgently required - it does not correspond with any major anniversary of George V’s reign.

I have not been able to locate any significant discussion of this obverse type anywhere to date, and have compiled the following information from the resources available to me. Be advised that it is a work in progress, and will be amended and added to as more information comes to hand.

Although many sovereigns with the Large Head portrait of King George V do not have fine details of the reverse design fully struck up, that is more to do with dies wearing through mass production than any significant inherent design fault.

This is another indication that the change of portrait resulted from broader considerations.

No Evidence of Production Challenges in the Royal Mint Annual Reports

If production staff at the Australian branches of the Royal Mint were experiencing significant challenges when striking sovereigns, we would expect to see those problems mentioned in the Annual Reports between 1911 and 1928.

A review of those Annual Reports does not yield any such commentary however. The only significant challenge in the production of sovereigns during this period is mentioned in the Annual Report of the Sydney branch in 1925, where Deputy Master John Campbell stated that “Every trouble incidental to an obsolete and worn-out plant seemed to be encountered.”

In 1925, the Sydney Mint received 10 times the amount of gold that it had in 1924, which meant that production of sovereigns needed to increase similarly to keep pace with the increased supply of raw metal. Campbell’s primary complaint at that time was that “the sudden demand for sovereigns came at a time when the establishment was much below its normal strength, and it was necessary to recruit from outside sources. The machinery (especially the rolling mills) also caused trouble, and it was some time before the coining staff got fully into their stride. In the course of training the new staff (mostly boys), the machinery suffered.”

No responsibility for those problems was attributed to MacKellan’s obverse design however: “The percentage of sovereign from bars broken down was a mere 58%, a poor result attributed to the fact that the staff manning rollers and cutters were new.”

The Annual Reports for the Australian branch mints do periodically mention the average number of coins that a pair of sovereign dies would strike before being retired - unusually low numbers indicate issues with production, while higher numbers reflect efficient production.

The following table lists the average number of coins that a pair of sovereign dies struck each year, where such figures were mentioned in the Annual Reports by the Deputy Master:

Average Number of Sovereigns Struck Per Pair of Dies:

Year	Mint	Av Per Die Pair
1876	Melbourne	36,000
1880	Sydney	17,500
1921	Melbourne	80,000
1923	Melbourne	51,000
1925	Melbourne	179,000
1927	Melbourne	103,000
1928	Melbourne	46,000

1930	Melbourne	28,000

As can be seen from this relatively random sample of data, the average die life for sovereigns struck with the Large Head portrait of King George V appear to be statistically no lower than those struck with the Young Head of Queen Victoria, nor are they lower than those struck with the Small Head of King George V that replaced it.

If anything, on the basis of this admittedly small and random sample, they appear higher.

In the absence of an alternative explanation then, the available evidence seems to indicate that that the Small Head portrait was introduced to Australia’s sovereigns only for the sake of uniformity, and only after the “Modified Effigy” had been comprehensively applied to the token coinage of Great Britain.

MacKennal’s Portrait Resulted in Ghosting - Particularly on British Pennies

The Royal Mint in London had been experiencing many significant problems in effectively striking copper and silver coins with Bertram MacKennal’s portrait of King George V from the date it was introduced in 1911.

Numismatic texts show those problems were not fully resolved until 16 years after the King’s accession had passed. Although it was widely regarded as handsome, MacKennal’s portrait of the King was quite deep relative to the reverse designs it was paired with.

This was particularly evident on those denominations that had large areas of open fields, or did not have a high rim that shielded the design from wear.

As the penny had both open fields and a low reverse rim, problems such as a weak reverse strike and “ghosted” reverses were most evident on them. “Ghosting” is the numismatic term used to describe a recessed section of a coin that matches the outline of the design on the opposing side. The “ghosted” design appears beneath the struck design - the outline is only weakly evident, hence the term “ghosting”.

The Royal Mint’s approach to resolving the issues with weak reverse strikes was staggered in four stages across each of the range of copper and silver denominations.

The following table recounts those stages, as delineated by Spink’s “Coins of England”:

Stage	Start Date	End Date
1st Portrait	1911	1919
2nd Portrait	1920	1926
3rd Portrait	1926	1927
4th Portrait (Modified Effigy)	1926	1936

Although the Royal Mint was concentrating significant resources on upgrading the designs for the copper and silver coinage, MacKennal’s original portrait of King George V remained untouched until 1928.

We can find some logic behind that prioritisation in the greatly reduced role that gold coins played in daily commerce during the First World War. Once war had been declared, one of the British government’s first priorities was to withdraw circulating gold from the economy so that it could be used to fund the national war effort.

To ensure that people still had cash in their tills and pockets, the government introduced ten shilling and one pound Treasury notes, colloquially known as “Bradbury’s”.[1]

Paper currency continued to circulate without issue after WWI ended, the Bank of England resumed issuing ten shilling and one pound notes from 1928.

The 4th Portrait / Modified Effigy / Small Head Obverse

The portrait known by Australian sovereign collectors as the Small Head of King George V has several different titles in Great Britain - it is described by Spink as the 4th Portrait, and is regularly described elsewhere as the “Modified Effigy” (ME).

It was not until this modified effigy of King George V had been introduced in 1927 that the Royal Mint was satisfied the issues of weakly-struck reverse designs and ghosting had been comprehensively addressed.

Points of Difference Between the Large Head and Small Head

When we compare the obverse of a 1928 sovereign with the obverse of a 1929 sovereign, we can observe the following minor but significant differences:

• The beads around the obverse rim are square;

• The square rim beads are larger than the denticles used previously - they leave less room for the legend and the portrait. The legend and the portrait are tighter around the centre of the coin on the Small Head;

• The portrait is smaller; has been completely re-engraved; and has a lower relief;

• The King’s ear, face and truncation are all markedly different;

• The designer’s initials have had the stops removed, and have been relocated closer to the centre of the truncation;

• Less fine detail is evident in the hairline.

A lower relief on the obverse of the Small Head sovereign allowed for a lower relief on the reverse also. The reverse of the Small Head sovereigns struck for circulation are clearly more rounded and less sharp than those struck between 1911 and 1928.

More research is required to determine if those changes resulted in increased efficiency in production.

The 1929 Melbourne Proof Sovereign

The striking of the 1929 Melbourne proof sovereign would have been a major occasion for the staff at the Melbourne Mint - a gold coin had not been struck by the Melbourne Mint to an archival standard since 1911, some 18 years earlier.

The Small Head or Modified Effigy of King George V was also the first design change to any Australian coin since the 1927 Parliament House florin was struck two years earlier.

Melbourne Mint staff had developed some modest experience in striking silver coins to proof quality, now was their chance to strike gold to the same stunning standard.

For those collectors interested in knowing exactly how rare certain coins are, unfortunately no records were kept recording the dates on which proof or specimen sovereigns were struck by the Melbourne Mint, much less how many were struck of each date.

In the absence of written Mint records to this effect, the incredibly low number of 1929-M proofs seen at auction over the past 5 decades is clear evidence that very few proofs were struck with that date. Auction records indicate that 2 and certainly no more than 3, of these historic coins are in private hands.

In his history of the Melbourne Mint, former employee and devoted numismatist Bill Mullett stated that “Specimen coins were produced by the Mint during the era of gold coinage. The dies used were those for the coinage for circulation. The numbers of specimens and proofs was extremely small.[2]”

Regarding the number of proof sovereigns thought to have been struck each year, Mullett states that “…the number of “proof” coins of a year was possibly no more than four and often less. It was stated on the sale of one such coin “having personally obtained it from the Melbourne Mint (believed only 3 or 4 were struck off for special collectors).[3]”

Indications are that the Melbourne Mint proofs dated between 1888 and 1893 are slightly more readily available than those struck before or after that era. Mullett states that “It was recorded that in 1893 the Mint struck specimen half sovereigns for the years 1888 to 1893. There would appear to have been as many as 10 of each year, of which 3 or 4 could have been for special collectors, and the rest for official collections. The official figures give no production of half sovereigns in the years 1888 to 1892. It would be fair to say that these particular coins … were not sold but exchanged for coins from circulation. Under this arrangement the Mint’s stock of gold was unaltered, so no issue would be recorded.[4]”

Indications are that of the very few gold specimens and proofs struck by the Melbourne Mint, one or more from each year were swapped or traded with collectors or other institutions for coins that were added to the Mint’s own archival collection.

Mullett goes on to state: “The Melbourne Mint had eventually built up a most important coin collection which included quite a number of rare coins. Its sources were from specimens it had received from other Mints, from specimens of its own production and from purchases from coin dealers. Its funds seemed to have been derived from the sale of old newspapers and old casks. In some cases where there were a number of specimens, it was also possible to use the spares for the purchase of other coins. The enthusiastic period of collecting began about the 1890’s.[5]”

No official Melbourne Mint records yet have been identified that specifically refer to the 1929-M proof sovereign. One comment by the Deputy Master in his Annual Report for 1929 states that “This year saw the introduction of a new obverse design for the sovereign ‘which produces a drastic artistic effect’. The opportunity was taken to make the beading on the obverse of the same pattern as the square beading of the Pistrucci design on the reverse.[6]”

In an introduction to a retrospective of MacKennal’s work in 2007, a curator at the Art Gallery of New South Wales stated that “MacKennal’s status as an Australian cultural hero is undeniable.[7]”

Incredible rarity, history and “drastic artistic effect” by an Australian cultural hero - the appeal that the 1929 Melbourne sovereign has is undeniable.

https://www.rbsremembers.com/remembers/banking-in-wartime/supporting-the... ↩

Mullett; Bill, “Melbourne Mint - The Establishment”, Self-Published, Canberra, 1996, p 19. ↩

Mullett; Bill, “Melbourne Mint - The Establishment”, Self-Published, Canberra, 1996, p 21. ↩

Mullett; Bill, “Melbourne Mint - The Establishment”, Self-Published, Canberra, 1996, p 21. ↩

Mullett; Bill, “Melbourne Mint - The Establishment”, Self-Published, Canberra, 1996, p 32. ↩

Royal Mint Annual Report; London; 1929 ↩

http://archive.artgallery.nsw.gov.au/__data/page/10540/mackennal_edkit.pdf ↩

The Federal Bank of Australia - “The Most Famous And Most Notorious Of All Boom Institutions”

andrew — Wed, 30 May 2018 12:52:37 +0800

The 2018 Banking Royal Commission has caused a great deal of debate within Australia's political parties and the general public over just how Australia's banking system should be designed to ensure the safety of the average bank depositor.

Those discussing the issues at hand will be interested to learn of the history of the Federal Bank of Australia in the late 1800's, and the failed attempt by the "Associated Banks of Victoria" to enforce effective separation in the Australian banking system.

The narrative of the Federal Bank of Australia mirrors the incredible wealth that was generated during the land boom seen in Melbourne in the late 1800’s. Unfortunately for the bank’s directors; investors and depositors, their demise also exemplified the crushing cost of the banking crisis of 1893 that followed. The Federal Bank of Australia has been described by one historian as being “The most famous and most notorious of all boom institutions.”¹

Marvelous Melbourne’s Land Boom of the 1880’s - Unparalleled Wealth

Melbourne witnessed an extraordinary boom in real estate prices throughout the 1880’s that was as strong and as intoxicating as the boom in cryptocurrencies seen across 2017. By 1889, the value of land in central Melbourne was as high as it was in London.² The most successful entrepreneurs in the land boom era controlled a network of land banks, mortgage companies and building societies, all discreetly linked behind the scenes.

The Federal Bank of Australia - “The Most Famous And Most Notorious Of All Boom Institutions”

The Federal Bank of Australia was established by a Scottish businessman and politician, James Munro. Munro was a printer by trade, and happened upon the idea for a career in banking when printing the regulations for a building society. Munro had seen first-hand the commercial success that building societies in his native Scotland had enjoyed, and was convinced that a public building society set up on a slightly different model would work well in Victoria. Shortly afterwards in 1865, Munro established the Victorian Permanent Building Society.³

Outside his commercial pursuits, Munro was deeply involved in the temperance movement in Victoria. That involvement led to him being elected in 1874 to the Victorian Legislative Assembly as the member for North Melbourne. In 1876, Munro built a grand family home named “Armadale House” at 117 Kooyong Road in the suburb now known as Armadale.

Throughout the 1880’s, Munro channeled his entrepreneurial drive towards his moral agenda by establishing several “coffee palaces” in central Melbourne. These grand establishments, with their incredible size and ornate architecture, might best be described today as hotels that did not serve alcohol. Most coffee palaces did not survive the depression that followed the boom, however the Grand Coffee Palace on Spring Street survives today as the Windsor Hotel.

The Federal Coffee Palace, was another of Munro’s establishments, with 370 guest rooms it ranked as one of the largest hotels in Australia. Designed in the French Renaissance style, the façade was embellished with statues, griffins and the goddess Venus in a chariot drawn by four sea-horses. The interior featured chess, billiard, reading, smoking, writing and sitting rooms, six “accident proof” lifts, gas lighting, electric service bells and an ice-making plant.

In 1881, Munro parlayed his profile as a temperance leader and politician together with his commercial success with the Victorian Permanent Building Society and his coffee palaces into two much larger enterprises - The Federal Bank of Australia and the Federal Building Society.

The Federal Bank of Australia and the Federal Building Society

Munro assumed the role of Managing Director of the Bank, and appointed his son Alexander as the Secretary of the Building Society. Thousands of small depositors opened accounts on the strength of Munro’s standing in the community and their shared hopes for a prosperous future. Munro and his colleagues showed incredible foresight with their initial property purchases - they acquired undeveloped land in exactly those areas Melbourne’s new railway network was extended into. Land values rose strongly in the years that shortly followed - Munro’s nett worth was estimated to be £250,000 prior to the end of the boom. In the intervening years, the Federal Bank of Australia regularly paid strong dividends to investors. The boom in land values and shares in the companies developing it lasted as long as there was confidence in the future.

Once credit growth slowed and confidence stalled however, the boom quickly collapsed into an economic depression that economists state was far worse and lasted far longer⁴ than the Great Depression. In 1887, Munro established yet another financial entity named “The Real Estate Bank” to ostensibly better manage his personal real estate affairs.

A Network of Financial Institutions

The Associated Banks of Victoria foresaw the potential for conflicts of interest when significant investors in the real estate boom controlled or were associated with multiple financial institutions, and so in 1889 passed a regulation excluding banks that had any ownership of a Building Society. Shortly after that regulation was passed, the Federal Bank of Australia sold the 130,000 shares it held in the Federal Building Society.

Munro had met the requirements on paper, however many remained concerned that was not matched in reality. Property prices in Victoria collapsed in 1889, this led to a spate of building society failures in 1890. Once it became clearer that the fall in property prices was not just temporary, the financial collapse spread to the land banks. As the number of failures and frauds grew over time, public confidence in all financial institutions faltered, which spread the crisis to the institutions at the core of the financial system - the banks that issued their own notes.⁵

Munro became Premier of Victoria just as this financial maelstrom was unfolding, on November 5^th, 1890. One regulatory bill passed during his tenure was the Voluntary Liquidation Act, assented on December 3^rd 1891. This act was represented by the government as a measure to ensure the financial system remained stable during a period of turmoil.

Critics of the bill however suggested that its true purpose was instead to enable disreputable and badly managed businesses to avoid the full consequences of their actions. That theory was lent some weight when Munro’s Federal Building Society suspended payments to depositors the day after the bill was passed, the Real Estate Bank followed suit on December 15^th.⁶

Although the Federal Bank of Australia was a member of the respected Associated Banks of Victoria⁷, it was regarded as being the “smallest and weakest” bank in that group. Many members of the general public remained so concerned with the links apparent between the Federal Bank and Munro’s other troubled entities that the bank lost a third of its Australian deposits⁸ in the 10 months prior to January 1893.

The Final Phase - Suspension of Payments and Resignation as Premier

The final phase in the history of the Federal Bank of Australia began on January 30^th 1893, when it was also forced to suspend payments to depositors. Munro stood down as Premier of Victoria on February 16^th, the Real Estate Bank entered liquidation just 3 days later. Munro declared bankruptcy in February, his debts amounted to £97,000. That debt would have been far higher if the Federal Bank had not released him from his debt to them of £125,000 just four days before it closed. The extent of Munro’s related party dealings only became truly clear when the accounts of his various entities were audited in the months that followed. Auditors of the Real Estate Bank showed cash losses that totalled £1,027,000.

The solicitor George Godfrey led a number of investigations into the activities of boom companies, and alleged that £180,000 had been paid by the Real Estate Bank to Munro for several worthless properties. We can see that if those two related-party transactions had not been entered into, the true level of Munro’s personal debt would have amounted to £397,000 at the very least, excluding any other related-party transactions that may have taken place.

Allegations of more of the creative accounting practices that the Federal Bank’s directors and staff had entered into in order to keep the bank afloat came to light during the subsequent court case. Evidence was presented that showed Munro had lent himself, his family and friends close to a million pounds in public funds via the Federal Bank.

Munro’s villainous standing in the community after the collapse of his various financial institutions was captured in the events of April 17^th 1893, when he was physically attacked by an aggrieved depositor of the Federal Bank on Collins Street, not altogether far from the bank’s headquarters at 307 Collins Street.

George Davis was described as “a tall and powerfully built builder’s labourer” who had lost his life’s savings with the collapse of the Federal Bank. Although several versions of the incident were recalled by victim, the defendant and the various witnesses that were called before the court, it was agreed that Davis attempted to speak with Munro on Collins Street, and was pushed away. Davis then knocked Munro out with a single punch to the head, and was restrained by several passers-by. The court found Davis guilty of assault, and fined him either £5 or a month in prison.

Davis was surprised to learn that the fine had been anonymously paid on his behalf before he had even left the courtroom - whether this was by a fellow disgruntled customer of the Federal Bank of Australia was the subject of some media discussion in the days that followed. The Land Boom that unfolded in Melbourne throughout the 1880’s and erupted into the Depression of 1893 was an episode of unparalleled wealth in Australian history.

James Munro was arguably the highest profile member of the Melbourne business community during the headiest days of the land boom, the Federal Bank of Australia rode the boom for all it was worth. Although Munro’s wealth didn’t survive the Depression intact, the Windsor Hotel on Spring Street; Armadale House on Kooyong Road and the notes of the Federal Bank of Australia are exclusive and lasting reminders of the heady days of “Marvelous Melbourne”.

¹Cannon; Michael, "The Land Boomers", Melbourne University Publishing, Melbourne, 1967, p .

²https://collections.museumvictoria.com.au/articles/2676

³Cannon; Michael, "The Land Boomers", Melbourne University Publishing, Melbourne, 1967, p .

⁴Fisher and Kent; , "Two Depressions, One Banking Collapse" in the "System Stability Department, RBA", June 1999, p 3.

⁵Bryan Fitz-Gibbon and Marianne Gizycki; , "A History Of Last-Resort Lending And Other Support For Troubled Financial Institutions In Australia" in the System Stability Department Reserve Bank of Australia, 2007-07, October 2001, p 22.

⁶https://collections.museumvictoria.com.au/items/1206559

⁷Bryan Fitz-Gibbon and Marianne Gizycki; , "A History Of Last-Resort Lending And Other Support For Troubled Financial Institutions In Australia" in the System Stability Department Reserve Bank of Australia, 2007-07, October 2001, p 24.

⁸Bryan Fitz-Gibbon and Marianne Gizycki; , "A History Of Last-Resort Lending And Other Support For Troubled Financial Institutions In Australia" in the System Stability Department Reserve Bank of Australia, 2007-07, October 2001, p 24.

The 1942 Melbourne Threepence - Solid Value in Times of Great Sacrifice

andrew — Fri, 18 May 2018 12:20:28 +0800

From the safety and security of the 21st century, it is incredibly difficult for us to appreciate just how challenging daily life was for Australians living in Melbourne in 1942. The Japanese armed forces were slowly making their way throughout South East Asia towards Australia, while living conditions reflected the grim sacrifices being made by Australia’s service personnel in the Middle East and against the Japanese.

Although the Melbourne Mint struck around 31 million coins throughout 1942, the mintage of the 1942 Melbourne threepence is amongst the lowest of any Australian coin struck for circulation in the past 80 years. In mint condition, it is a classic rarity and is the key coin to acquire in Australia's King George VI series.

Sacrifices Made Across the Country for the War Effort

World War II began in September 1939, Australian troops had been in action since January 1941. The Japanese launched their shock offensive against the United States at Pearl Harbour in December 1941, and made rapid progress invading a series of South East Asian countries in the months that followed. The Japanese captured Singapore in February 1942. Singapore was the major British military base in South-East Asia, and was the keystone of British imperial interwar defence planning for South-East Asia as well as the South-West Pacific. Winston Churchill called the loss of Singapore the "worst disaster" in British military history.

15,000 Australian troops were made prisoners of war by the Japanese in that conflict alone, and it is estimated that around 5,000 Allied troops were killed also. Although the conflict areas of Singapore, Borneo, New Guinea and Malaya (among others) were all many thousands of kilometres away from most Australians, the morale of the Australian populace was heavily hit by losses such as this.

The concern for the welfare for Australia’s soldiers captured far from home was further compounded by intermittent Japanese bombing of cities and towns in Northern Australia from February 1942 - Darwin; Katherine; Port Hedland; and Townsville were all hit - 300 people died in the first bombing of Darwin alone. Japanese midget submarines raided Sydney Harbour in May of 1942, further increasing concerns that the Japanese were slowly but relentlessly driving their way towards Australia’s largest cities. Concerns such as these played on the minds of Australians each and every day.

As the war rolled on, prominent buildings in Melbourne were sandbagged or partly bricked up; rolling blackouts were enforced; key museum treasures were relocated for safe keeping; there was heavy censorship; and essentials such as butter, sugar and petrol were rationed. One Melbourne woman interviewed after the war reported that ini 1942 "Melbourne was an empty city. The only men you saw were little boys or very old men...Women drove the trains, women delivered the mail, women did everything….” The Japanese military may have been thousands of miles away, however Australians right across the country were making sacrifices for the war effort.

The Arrival of US Forces - A Welcome Announcement

In the face of Japanese aggression, Australia’s Prime Minister John Curtin stated in December 1941 that "Without any inhibitions of any kind, I make it quite clear that Australia looks to America, free of any pangs as to our traditional links or kinship with the United Kingdom.” It was a welcome announcement then that the US General Douglas MacArthur would command Allied military operations in the Pacific from an Australian base. Melbourne was chosen as the initial site of the Allied headquarters, and it was host to more than 30,000 U.S. soldiers from early 1942. Before WWII was complete, close to 1 million US servicemen had spent time in Australia.

The arrival of these soldiers had an immediate impact on Australian society and the economy. Not only were the US servicemen “over-sexed, overpaid and over here”, they were paid in cash, which meant a substantial amount of work for the staff of Australia’s mints.

Bombay, Denver and San Francisco all Called Into Action

The amount of coins estimated as necessary to pay US troops while based in Australia was ten times that struck in 1939, a level quite obviously well beyond the pre-war capacity of the Melbourne Mint, much less what it was capable of while it was under-manned and under-resourced.

To fill the gap between the capacity of Australia’s mints and the total number of coins required, the Bombay Mint in India was called upon to strike copper pennies and halfpennies, while the Denver and San Francisco mints of the United States were tasked with striking Australian silver coins.

Before the Melbourne Mint’s burden could be lightened by the co-operation of the Indian and American mints, it needed to prepare the hubs; dies and punches those foreign mints would use. Research by the numismatist Dr David Briggs has shown that between 1939 and 1942, the Melbourne Mint produced close to 4,000 coining dies, as well as numerous hubs and punches.

It is understood that, once they had the required equipment, the US mints stated they would be able to deliver £200,000 worth of coins to Australia per week, which equated to 16 million threepences or 8 million sixpences. Interestingly, those figures correspond with the number of Australian threepences struck in the US in 1942 - 16 million by the Denver Mint, and 8 million by the San Francisco Mint.

As the Melbourne Mint had been tasked with striking close to 18 million florins and around 8 million sixpences itself during 1942, the mintage of just 528,000 threepences in 1942 indicates that it may have been required to meet a particular short-term deadline for a particular city or state. The Melbourne Mint struck close to 25 million threepences throughout 1943, so a production run of only slightly more than half a million coins didn't go very far at all at making a dent in the overall need for coins in Australia at that time. Research by Dr David Briggs indicates that the punches were not made for these coins until the second half of 1942, which indicates the coins were not struck until June 1942 at the very least.

Further examination of mint records will no doubt shed more light on just how this particular coin fits into the schema of Australia’s coinage during the second world war. It remains a classic rarity in mint state - the key coin to acquire in Australia's King George VI series, and is a tangible reminder of the sacrifices made by all Australians at a time when rationing, blackouts and bombing raids were an expected part of daily life in Australia.

Australian Convict Love Tokens - Rarer in Private Hands than in Public Collections

andrew — Thu, 10 May 2018 06:01:39 +0800

Convict love tokens are one of the few numismatic items in Australia that appear in mainstream media more than numismatic media. Collectors love nothing more than to sink their teeth into a series - to allocate an item to a category and type, to understand how it fits into the scheme of things.

The research that has been conducted to tradesman’s tokens is a great example of that numismatic interest - tradesman’s tokens have been categorised according to denomination, issuer, date, region of issue, and even die type.

Although tradesman’s tokens are nowhere near as popular as silver or copper predecimal coins, I’d estimate that around a dozen books, booklets and pamphlets have been published on them over the years, the first dating back to the late 1800’s. A well-studied collector of tokens can take a look at an item from that series, and tell you in in instant where, when and by whom it was issued.

I believe it’s fair to say that, despite their incredible history and appeal, convict love tokens have enjoyed no such detailed numismatic investigation. I don’t recall the last time I read an article on a convict love token in a numismatic magazine, even though they are unequivocally numismatic items that have direct links to our national history.

The fact that there has been limited numismatic study into these compelling objects does not mean that no research at all has been conducted into them however - historians in both Australia and Britain have spent countless hours exploring the stories behind individual examples. It is the social history they have explored however, as this is where their appeal lies.

This is how they appear in the mainstream media - a record price is mentioned in a press release for an auction, and the journalist picks up on the story behind the token.

Hand-made Decades Before Our First Tradesman’s Tokens

Most commercial tokens collected by Australians were struck for a specific purpose - to circulate as small change, or to advertise the business that commissioned them. They were commissioned, designed and struck in an orderly process that was repeated and perfected by issuers and manufacturers dozens of times throughout the mid to late 1800’s.

On the other hand, convict love tokens were hand-made many decades before our first tradesman’s tokens, by private individuals and often on the spur of the moment, under circumstances and with equipment that would surely have been challenging to the finest craftsman.

Love tokens were given by convicts to their loved ones and families as mementos. They were all made in Britain, often in the hulks of a ship or in the cells of a gaol, using whatever coins and tools were at hand. They were intended to act as a lasting reminder of a relationship with someone that was to be transported to the other side of the world, perhaps never to be seen again. The design themes and messages included on them are touching and personal, and evoke just how heart-breaking it would have been to be separated from families and loved ones by cell walls, and ultimately oceans and great distances.

In The Chronicles of Newgate, Arthur Griffiths quotes a prison inspector's report from the parliamentary papers of 1836: "The most peaceably disposed found some occupation in Newgate making tokens, leaden hearts, and grinding the impression of penny-pieces, then pricking figures or words on them to give to their friends as memorials. The initials or names of a loving pair were punched upon them, together with a heart or some symbol of affection, sometimes with a motto such as 'True for ever', 'Love for life’.”[1]

The fact that these tokens were hand-made using official coinage often right under the noses of convict officials speaks volumes of the boldness, resilience and resourcefulness that many convicts had under the strain of incredible circumstances.

Far More Are Known in Public Collections Than In Private Hands

The largest collection of convict love tokens was compiled by the British numismatist Timothy Millett. Millet first came across them while working for rare coin dealers Baldwin’s (his family’s business), they became an area of keen interest for several decades. Millet’s collection was used as the basis of a book published by the Numismatic Association of Australia in 1998, as well as an exhibition by the Powerhouse Museum at the Hyde Park Barracks in the same year. Millet’s collection of 307 convict love tokens was subsequently sold to the National Museum of Australian (NMA) in 2008, and is understood to have changed hands for A$671,000.

The NMA already had several tokens in it’s collection, and has added to them since 2008, bringing the total number of tokens it holds to 314. Other public institutions that are known to hold convict tokens in their collections include the Powerhouse Museum and the National Maritime Museum, both in Sydney.

Although such tokens do appear in public numismatic auctions from time to time, it is fair to say they are very rarely seen here in Australia. On that basis alone, the number held by public institutions in Australia would certainly dwarf the number held privately.

As might be concluded by the nature of their origin and distribution, any “fresh” convict love tokens that might be made available to the market invariably appear in the United Kingdom. They are always the subject of detailed research by those with a keen interest in colonial history, and the poignant mementoes left by our convict forebears for their loved ones.

Footnotes:

[1] Griffiths; Arthur, "Chronicles of Newgate", Chapman and Hall, London, 1884.

The Bombay Mint Restrikes of Australia's Proof Copper Coins - 1942 and 1943

andrew — Thu, 10 May 2018 01:39:56 +0800

In 1964, coin collectors in Australia and the United States were informed that Australian proof coins were being sold by the Bombay Mint.

The most alarming aspect of this report was that the Australian proof coins available were dated 1942 and 1943 - under normal conventions, production of them had stopped more than two decades earlier.

There was a credible explanation for this incredible revelation however, and the coins are regarded as prized rarities to this day.

Coins from India for Soldiers from America to Spend in Australia

Due to the scarcity of skilled labour and raw materials at our Mints, as well as the limits on manufacturing capacity the war imposed, coins were in very short supply across Australia after the outset of WWII. Once General Eisenhower decided that the US campaign in the Pacific was to be directed from Australia, close to a million US military personnel were based at various locations throughout Eastern Australia in the years between 1942 and 1945.

This number was at least 10% of the Australian population at the time - the arrival of the American forces here had a significant impact on many aspects of daily life in Australia, not least on the number of coins required to lubricate the wheels of commerce.

US servicemen were paid in cash, so the pre-existing scarcity of coinage was exacerbated in areas where they were based.

The US top brass were keenly aware of the potential impact on the morale of their troops if they didn't get paid.

Production of coinage during this period scaled up very quickly as a result - the number of coins struck for circulation in Australia in 1943 was more than ten times the number struck in 1939.

The Australian branch mints were simply not able to cope with this increase in demand, so production of Australia's coins was outsourced to mints as far afield as Bombay, San Francisco and Denver. The US Mints supplemented Australia’s silver coins, while the Bombay Mint was tasked with striking Australian pennies and halfpennies throughout 1942 and 1943.

The number of US servicemen based in Australia eased significantly as the war progressed, and production of Australian coins was again handled solely by Australian mints from 1945 onwards.

Indian Mints - Re-Striking Coins Since the 1890’s

An interesting adjunct to the story that Indian branch mints struck coins for Australia in times of crisis is that authorities on Indian numismatics readily acknowledge that the Indian mints have re-struck many coins for collectors for many decades. The pioneering authority on British Indian coins, Major Frank Pridmore, stated that “The principal period of these ‘original’ proof specimens was from 1890 to 1905.[1]”

“Restrike” is the term used to describe coins that were struck again after the official mintage run ended. For example, if dies used to strike a coin dated 1892 were used to strike more coins in 1927, then the resulting coins are described as being “restrikes”. Those coins were struck using official dies, by Mint staff on the Mint’s premises, so while they are unequivocally genuine, they are correctly described as “restrikes”.

The average collector might regard the practice of re-striking coins as quite unusual, however that opinion clearly wasn’t shared by the staff of the Bombay Mint throughout the 20th century.

The Characteristics of the Three Different Classes of Indian Proof Coins

Pridmore’s summation of these coins, published in his seminal work, “Coins of the British Commonwealth of Nations: Part 4, India : Volume 2” states that there are three distinct classes of proof coins struck by India's mints in the 20th century:

1. Those struck for government use;

2. Those struck for collectors and private individuals prior to 1947; and

3. Those struck after (Indian) independence in 1947. Of these, Pridmore states that “The earliest of this restrike series appear to have been carried out for Australian collectors, who sought specimens of the Bombay-minted Australian bronze pence and halfpence.” Pridmore further stated that many of the Bombay Mint restrikes featured a “...lacquered finish, particularly the base metal coins.[2]”

Pridmore's taxonomy of these coins has been confirmed in the most comprehensive catalogue of the coins of British India, written by Paul Stevens and Randy Weir. Stevens and Weir state that "proof coins of the series have been produced and reproduced in different circumstances and in different quantities and qualities throughout the period 1835 until about 1870.[3]"

From Pridmore’s comments above, we can see that Indian Mint staff had been periodically re-striking coins since as far back as the late 19th century, so it certainly wasn’t a new, secret or unconventional practice for them. The coins were struck using the original dies, on the Bombay Mint premises, under the full authority of the Bombay Mint staff, so are unequivocally regarded as official coins.

News of the Bombay Mint Restrikes Reaches Australia in 1964

As one might expect for a chapter in Australian numismatics such as this, it is challenging to build an exact chronology of events regarding how news of these coins first reached Australia.

An article by Robert L Clarke, published in the Australian Numismatic Journal in October 1964, stated that the US collector George Falcke advised him that a group of "Sydney collectors"[4] had become aware of the availability of the Bombay restrikes in "early 1964", and that he placed an order for 8 coins in April 1964. Clarke received his coins from the Bombay Mint in September 1964, his article was published shortly after that.

The numismatist Dion Skinner placed an order with the Bombay Mint in around May 1965, and received his coins in March 1966. [5] Shortly after that, he advised the Canberra Times newspaper of the situation, and the story broke on March 28th, 1966. Treasury officials responded publicly via the Canberra Times the next day, and that story was in turn followed by a written response from the Master of the Bombay Mint the day after.

We have to keep in mind that this news broke just 42 days after Australia switched to a decimal currency, so interest in Australian numismatics was at an all-time high. The public was keen to buy memorabilia relating to the nation's new coinage - proof sets of the new coins were not released until October 1967, and there was a strong push for a decimal commemorative coin to be made available.

The idea that in this climate of scarcity, a tiny number of exclusive collectors were able to make use of an archaic back-channel to obtain extremely rare and valuable coins would have horrified Mint and Treasury officials. Political pressure to cut this anomaly off would have been incredibly strong.

Treasury officials "took appropriate action" and, at the request of the Australian Government, the Master of the Bombay Mint, advised that production of the restrikes had ceased. Soon afterwards, the dies were returned to the Royal Australian Mint.

"Proof Coins from Bombay" - The Sequel

A second article by Robert L Clarke published in the Australian Numismatic Journal in March 1967 ("Proof Coins from Bombay - The Sequel") gives us several incredible points of information that really add to the appeal that these coins have.

The first point is that each of the Australian copper coins struck by the Bombay Mint actually feature a tiny identifying mark that has not yet been widely discussed:

"To digress a few moments from the narrative seems appropriate, because a close examination of the 1942-1943 proof restrikes has revealed an interesting feature first noticed by George Falcke. In the obverse field behind the King's head on all four pieces one can observe a very small diamond. At first inspection, this diamond can pass for a flaw and be dismissed as the result of a pitted die. However, the mark is found in the same position on each date and denomination. Furthermore, during 1942 and 1943 the mint-mark of the Bombay Mint on Indian coins was a diamond rather than a dot. From this analysis one concludes that the mark was deliberate, but since the letter "I" serves as the mint-mark, the purpose of the diamond on Australian bronze is unknown.[6]"

We currently have access to 1943 Bombay pennies in both proof and circulation strike formats - although the diamond is indeed visible in the right obverse field of both coins, they are clearly in different places.

The second fundamental point of information that Clarke was able to ascertain regarding these truly exclusive coins was the mintage figure. Over a period of around 6 months throughout 1966, Clarke corresponded with "his Bombay correspondent", who was finally able to advise that "I had once advised you the coins (Australian pennies and halfpennies) struck were 65 pieces. It was not correct. Please note that it was 65 sets, i.e., 65 pennies and 65 halfpennies as these people used to strike sets of full and halfpenny against the foreign orders.[7]"

On first blush, this figure seems particularly high - auction appearances for these coins over the past 30 years or so indicate that the 1942 and 1943 proof Australian copper coins appear as seldom as coins that have been verified to have much lower mintage figures than 65.

Although the Bombay Mint copper proof restrikes came into existence via an arcane bureaucratic approach that was quickly shut down, they can be counted among the Australia's most desirable coins when numismatics was at it's apex in this country - just after the switch to decimal currency in 1966.

Footnotes:

[1] Pridmore; Frank, "The Coins of the British Commonwealth of Nations. Part 4, Volume 2", Spink & Son, London, 1980, p 91.

[2] Pridmore; Frank, "The Coins of the British Commonwealth of Nations. Part 4, Volume 2", Spink & Son, London, 1980, pages 90 - 91.

[3] Paul Stevens & Randy Weir, "The Uniform Coinage of India", Spink, London, 2012, p iv.

[4] Clarke; Robert L, "Proof Coins from Bombay - The Sequel" in the Australian Numismatic Journal, Volume Volume 18 Number 1, March 1967, p 136.

[5] Skinner; Dion, "Australian Coin and Banknote Values", Renniks Publications, Adelaide , 1989, p 66.

[6] Clarke; Robert L, "Proof Coins from Bombay - The Sequel" in the Australian Numismatic Journal, Volume Volume 18 Number 1, March 1967, p 137.

Australia's Paper Decimal Banknotes - from Commonwealth to Polymer in 30 Years

andrew — Sat, 31 Mar 2018 12:06:43 +0800

To the uninitiated, Australia’s paper decimal banknotes remained largely the same between 1966 and 1996. Sure, the serial numbers may have changed over time, but the designs remained the same for pretty much 30 years.

The collectors that have studied this series know that a number of improvements were made to the printing process between 1966 and 1996, and further that a number of other changes were made which resulted in distinct varieties of each denomination.

Here are a list of the major eras in our paper currency notes:

1966 - Coombs and Wilson

H.C. “Nugget” Coombs was the Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia in 1966, while Roland Wilson was the Secretary to the Commonwealth Treasury - theirs were the signatures seen on Australia’s first paper decimal notes. Designed by Gordon Andrews, our new notes were welcomed by the Australian public. Regarded as symbols of Australia's growing maturity and independence, they entered the vernacular straight away.

1967 - the $5 Note

Staff at the RBA had determined that another denomination could be added to the 4 denominations already in circulation to further simplify daily transactions in the Australian economy. The $5 note was introduced in May 1967, and quickly became one of the most highly printed denominations.

1967 and 1968 - Coombs and Randall

The Treasury and the Reserve Bank intended that the transition period during which both forms of Australian currency were accepted in trade was to be kept reasonably brief, which meant that many hundreds of millions of notes were printed in the lead-up to February 14th 1966. Although the new notes had a finite lifespan (as low as 7 months for the $1 notes), and thus had to be continually replaced, the number of notes printed in the years that shortly followed 1966 was a fraction of those printed leading up to 1966. This short window of longevity of the initially printed notes was bracketed by the retirement of the Secretary to the Treasury, and the retirement of the Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia, H.C. “Nugget” Coombs. Roland Wilson completed his tenure at the Commonwealth Treasury in October 1966, while Nugget Coombs entered retirement in July 1968. Richard Randall was Secretary to the Treasury from October 1966, while John Phillips assumed the Governorship of the RBA from July 1968. These changes meant that the short tenure of Coombs and Randall as signatories lasted less than 2 years (21 months). As the quantity of notes required in the economy was relatively low at that time, the actual print runs for each denomination were actually much shorter than the 21 months indicated.

This means that some of the rarest standard paper decimal banknotes in the entire Australian series were printed with these signatures. The entire print run of the Coombs / Randall $20 note was confined to a few short weeks between the middle of September 1968 and October 1968.

1973 - the $50 Note

Further fine-tuning of the composition of Australia’s paper currency notes took place late in 1973, with the addition of a $50 note to the 5 denominations already in circulation.

The large note found a productive role in the Australian economy straight away.

1974 - The Switch from Commonwealth of Australia to Australia

Ask any member of the Australian public over the age of 40 whether "the old Commonwealth notes” are worth anything, and it’s odds on they’ll quickly agree that they’re worth good money. Although that isn’t quite the case, it still shows that the change was a major one if it lives on in the minds of non-collectors some 4 decades later. The directive to change this title was made at the behest of the Prime Minister of the day, Mr Gough Whitlam. As a result of several telephone enquiries I’d made with Mr Whitlam’s personal assistant at some stage in the early 2000’s, I actually received a phone call from the great man himself, who advised that “...it was necessary to bring it in line with that seen on our coinage.” Just whether there was more to the story of that change I’ll never know, what we do know is that the change stuck in the minds of most Australians for decades after it had passed.

July 1976 - Movement of the Security Thread

One of the more subtle but important changes made to Australia’s decimal currency was the relocation of the metallic security thread in all paper printed by the Note Printing Branch’s suppliers from July 1976.

Note Printing staff had determined if the security thread was moved closer to the edge from the initial location of around 70mm from the left hand edge , the circulating lifespan of Australia’s notes could be extended.

This change was made during the tenure of Knight and Wheeler, which resulted in several different varieties of each denomination with these signatures.

July 1976 - Introduction of the OCR-B Font to Serial Numbers

The font used to print the serial numbers on Australia’s decimal notes was also changed from July 1976.

The “Gothic” font was replaced with a new font that was known as the OCR-B font.

OCR-B stood for Optical Character Recognition, Class B.

This switch in font meant that ther are as many as 3 differen varieties of each of the paper decimal notes with the Knight Wheeler signature combination.

1976 and 1988 - Field Trials - the DBP Paper Test and the Polymer Bicentennial Note

On several occasions Note Printing Australia issued notes with the express intention of measuring their longevity in circulation.

A short print run of 500,000 $1 notes printed on “double fold” paper were issued in 1976, while in 1988 the world’s first polymer banknote, issued to celebrate the Bicentennial, was also used as a field test to fine tune printing techniques leading into the $5 note being replaced in 1992.

Both of these field test have resulted in a number of interesting varieties of each note.

1985 - Old Machinery Dusted Off in the 1980’s Caused Minor Changes to the Paper $5; $20 and $50 Notes

Production of the polymer $10 note was so challenging for Note Printing Australia that leading into 1988, NPA staff were forced to dust off and use a few of the older serial numbering machines that had been retired in 1976 in order to keep the supply of Australia’s paper currency notes topped up. Relatively small print runs of the $5, $20 and $50 notes during this period feature the “Gothic” style of serial numbers, they’re highly prized by collectors for their scarcity.

1984 to 1988 Coins Replaced the Smaller Denominations

One of the problems faced by NPA and the Commonwealth Treasury was the relatively short lifespan of the $1 and $2 notes - they lasted in circulation for as little as 7 months, which meant production of them ran pretty much non-stop to ensure economic demand was met. The $1 note was replaced in 1984 by the Mob of Roos $1 note, while the $2 note was replaced by an equivalent coin in 1988. These were the first major changes made to Australia’s circulating currency in over a decade, when the $50 note was introduced in 1973.

The New Polymer Notes - Out with the Old and In With the New

The composition of Australia’s circulating currency was overhauled between 1992 and 1996, when each of the denominations in circulation at that time were replaced by equivalent notes printed in polymer. Although the new polymer notes were largely well-received, the Australian public acknowledged the changes were nostalgic, and marked an end of the era that began when decimal currency notes was first introduced in February 1966. Many, many members of the Australian public set a few notes aside “for the kids”, which eventually led to a boom in demand for all types of Australian banknotes that ran for several decades.

The introduction of the Next Generation series of polymer banknotes is bringing a whole new generation of collectors to the market, collectors that will eventually move back in time to our paper currency notes and beyond. Although the last Australian paper banknotes were withdrawn in 1996, they remain popular with collectors more than a decade later.

HC Nugget Coombs - The First Governor of the RBA and Far More Than A Civil Servant

andrew — Wed, 28 Mar 2018 02:06:24 +0800

Herbert Cole “Nugget” Coombs is best known to numismatists as the first Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia, and by extension as a signatory on Australia’s banknotes for several decades. In the broader community however, Coombs is highly regarded for a much wider range of significant civic contributions across several diverse areas.

Many numismatists will be surprised to learn that Coombs’ working life both before and after he was a signatory on our banknotes spanned no less than five different decades. Coombs had been in full-time employment for 22 years before becoming Governor of the Commonwealth Bank, and remained active for 27 years after he retired from the Reserve Bank of Australia.

Coombs held several key government roles during World War II, as well as during the period of economic recovery that followed. Coombs was Australia’s most senior banking official when our nation’s central banking operations were transferred to the Reserve Bank of Australia, as well as during the transition to decimal currency in 1966. Coombs is recognized as also having made significant contributions to education, the arts and indigenous rights during his lifetime - his contributions were so instrumental, he was described by former Prime Minister Bob Hawke as “one of the most important Australians this century.^[1]”

Early Years of Academia

Coombs was born in Kalamunda on the outskirts of Perth in 1906, and was identified early in his schooling as having academic talent. He earned scholarships for both high school and teacher’s college, and began his working life as a teacher in 1927 at Katanning primary school. While teaching, Coombs studied part-time at the University of Western Australia for a Bachelor of Arts degree, which he completed with honours in economics. Coombs followed this with a Master of Arts, also at UWA.

This stage of Coombs’ life coincided with the depths of the Great Depression. He received a further scholarship to write a thesis in economic theory at the prestigious London School of Economics, one of the most highly respected academic institutions for economics in the world. His experience of this trip - both the knowledge gained but also his direct experience of poverty fundamentally shaped his outlook on the role that economics and banking should play in the life of the average person.

Working for Equal Contribution to the War Effort

Coombs returned to Australia in 1934 - he soon entered the public service via the Commonwealth Bank, and transferred to the Commonwealth Treasury as an economist in 1939. Over the next several decades, Coombs developed into a government policy maker who was fundamental to Australia’s post-war stability and prosperity. Prime Minister John Curtin appointed him to the Commonwealth Bank board in October 1941, while in 1942 Treasurer Ben Chifley appointed him as Director of Rationing.

Coombs related to his role in charge of rationing as that of ensuring that there was equity in the sacrifices made by Australians. The incredible costs of both World War I and the Great Depression remained fresh in the minds of many Australians, so the public discussion of just how all classes of the community contribute equally to the war effort was fundamental to national morale in challenging circumstances.

Chifley created a new ministry in 1943 - the Department of Post-War Reconstruction, and appointed Coombs as its Director-General. It was in this capacity that Coombs played a leading role in the preparation of the “White Paper on Full Employment in Australia”. This paper did much to shape Commonwealth government policy for the next three decades, and is described as being “the blueprint of the post-war Long Boom”^[2] that ran from 1945 to 1975.

A Central Figure In An International Community

A good deal of Coombs attention during the post-war years was how Australia’s economic fortunes would be impacted by the actions of our major trading partners - Great Britain and the United States prime among them. International treaties defined the ends to which the world’s economies would be directed, and also the concessions they would make to each other. Coombs was chosen to represent Australia’s interests at a conference staged by the United Nations in May 1943, the purpose of which was to discuss how the world’s economies would interact and compete with each other.

Among the results of this conference was the establishment of the International Trade Organization (ITO) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Between 1943 and 1948, Coombs spent many months away from Australia participating in conferences and diplomatic meetings related to these events - his passport would have shown repeated stamps for London; Washington and Geneva, as well as for Havana and Sweden. During this time, Coombs became “…a central figure in an international community of government officials.^[3]”

Governor of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia from 1949

Once it became clear that the world’s post-war economic relationships had been formalised, Coombs was appointed as the Governor of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. He started in this position on January 1^st 1949, one that was regarded as being “…the most important post in the regulation of the Australian economy.^[4]” Just prior to this appointment, Coombs had been offered the inaugural Vice-Chancellorship of the Australian National University, which was also being established at that time. In declining the Vice-Chancellor role, Coombs advised that “…`the Depression has been the most significant event in my life’… and that he was now engaged in preventing another.^[5]”

Coombs was as pleased with his new role at the Commonwealth Bank for personal as much as for professional reasons - by living in one place for an extended period of time, he would be able to see more of his family.

In personal correspondence at the time, Coombs joked to one Western Australian friend “The family think it's a good idea. I will be home more and we shall have our name on the pound notes. It's hard to say which is the more important to them.^[6]”

The delight the Coombs family felt seeing their name on Australia’s currency notes was a recurring theme in Nugget’s responses to the congratulatory notes he received after being appointed to the CBA role. To another he wrote that “the kids think that [him being at home is] nearly as good as having their name on the pound notes.^[7]”

According to the Reserve Bank of Australia historian, Boris Schedvin, one of Dr Coombs’ finest achievements was building a central bank in Australia “that could compare with the best in the world … in the 1950s the Bank became a prestigious place in which to work. The quality of economic intelligence was greatly improved, and economic debate flourished.^[8]”

Australia’s economy grew strongly in the peace that followed WWII, this growth was reflected in the size and strength of the Commonwealth Bank. By the end of the 1950’s, the Commonwealth Bank had more than 650 branches, more than 6,500 agencies and more than 14,000 staff.^[9]

One consequence of this growth was an unyielding pressure to separate the central bank functions of the Commonwealth Bank from its operations as a trading and savings bank. Although some legislative changes were introduced in 1953, pressure mounted on the government to completely separate the central bank’s operations from those that were in commercial competition with the private-enterprise banks.

Australia’s Most Senior Central Banker

In 1957, Prime Minister Menzies announced legislation that would do just that, and on January 14^th 1960, the Commonwealth Bank was split into the Reserve Bank of Australia and the Commonwealth Banking Corporation.

Nugget Coombs was appointed as the inaugural Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia. One notable moment of guidance by Coombs to the RBA’s operations was his advice that a more flexible approach to interest rates would increase the effectiveness of monetary policy - these changes were implemented from the mid-1960’s onwards.^[10]

Through his varied roles in public service, Coombs developed deep working relationships with no less than four prime ministers and eight treasurers, and became a key economic adviser to Curtin, Chifley, Menzies, Holt, McMahon and Whitlam.

Coombs stated that throughout his life as a public servant, one of his key commitments was to influence politicians in a way that they drafted economic policies that were inclusive of all Australians - this commitment can be seen in his approach to managing rations during WWII, the outcomes he pushed for regarding the ITO, as well as the need for the Reserve Bank to be as effective as possible with monetary policy.

A Second Career After Banking

Coombs retired as a public servant in 1968, however continued to make significant contributions to civic life for a further three decades.

After stepping down from the Reserve Bank, Dr Coombs was appointed by Prime Minister Harold Holt as Chairman of the Council for Aboriginal Affairs, as well as the Chairman of the Council for the Arts. Coombs also assumed the role of Chancellor of the Australian National University between 1968 to 1976.

A biography by the Australian Academy of Science stated that “More than any other individual, he was responsible for the formation of the Australian National University…”^[11], while one arts body describes Coombs as “The most influential arts administrator this country has so far produced“^[12] For his tireless contribution to indigenous self-determination, Coombs was described by the ATSIC Social Justice Commissioner Mick Dodson as an elder that “… draws respect and love from all Indigenous Australians who know his story.^[13]”

Coombs remained very active until he suffered a stroke at the age of 89, and passed away at the age of 91. One obituary stated that “Coombs was probably the most outstanding civil servant Australia has produced, but he will be remembered for being more than a civil servant.^[14]”

Nugget’s Set of Specimen Banknotes

The Nugget Coombs estate was handled by Goodman’s auction house in the Sydney suburb of Double Bay in October 1998. Nine different lots of specimen banknotes that had been presented to Coombs were included, either sets or single notes.

Lot 181 was a set of four specimen notes (ten shilling, one pound, five pounds and ten pounds) dating to 1949 and featuring the signatures of Coombs and Watt, these notes were housed in a “plush presentation album”. Although several specimen notes from the King George V and Elizabeth II periods had been seen at auction as early as 1980, this was the first auction to make specimen notes from the King George VI era available to collectors, there was much excitement in the market as a result.

Several price records were set during the Goodman auction, which set the tone for how Nugget’s notes would be received by collectors at later auctions also.

In spite of easing values in this segment of the numismatic market, the rarity of these has not diminished one iota - just three individual specimen notes from the King George VI period have been seen at auction in the past 5 years.

[1]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/obituary-h-c-coombs-1291452...

[2]Rowse; Tim, "Nugget Coombs - A Reforming Life", Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002, p 108.

[3]Rowse; Tim, "Nugget Coombs - A Reforming Life", Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002, p 140.

[4]Houldsworth; Marion, "Maybe It'll Rain Tomorrow", Central Queensland University Press, Rockhampton, 2007, p 201.

[5]Rowse; Tim, "Nugget Coombs - A Reforming Life", Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002, p 177.

[6]Rowse; Tim, "Nugget Coombs - A Reforming Life", Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002, p 181.

[7]Rowse; Tim, "Nugget Coombs - A Reforming Life", Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002, p 181.

[8]Schedvin; Boris, "In Reserve", Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 1992.

[9]"The Commonwealth Banking Corporation", Commonwealth Banking Corporation, Sydney, 1980, p 54.

[10]Cornish; Selwyn, "History and the Development of Central Banking in Australia 1920-1970 ", Australian National University, Canberra, 2008, p 25.

[11]https://www.science.org.au/fellowship/fellows/biographical-memoirs/herbe...

[12]http://liveperformance.com.au/halloffame/hccoombs1.html

[13]https://www.humanrights.gov.au/news/speeches/assimilation-versus-self-de...

[14]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/obituary-h-c-coombs-1291452...

After 87 Years - New Research Into the 1930 Penny Has Been Published

andrew — Tue, 06 Feb 2018 05:43:14 +0800

The 2017 Annual Year Book for the Australasian Coin & Banknote Magazine contained a great deal of interesting information for Australian numismatists, however the one article that really caught my eye was that written by Fred Lever on the 1930 penny.

It contained a range of fresh research, built on the shoulders of the work done by Bill Mullett several decades earlier.

Bill Mullett was a former employee of the Melbourne and Royal Australian Mints, after he retired he spent some years researching and writing about the history of the Melbourne Mint, as well as a number of the coins it produced. His three publications are titled:

1991 - "Australian Coinage - An Account of Particular Coins"

1992 - "Gold coinage and Refining at the Melbourne Mint"

1992 - "Melbourne Mint, Branch of the Royal Mint : The Establishment"

From what I’ve been able to discern, Bill didn’t circulate a great deal with the numismatic community, and as a result his work isn’t as widely known as it should be. Add in the fact that he self-published his writing, and you can understand why his writing has flown under the radar for the past two decades.

The reality is, although Bill’s writing is not exactly approachable, it is a truly rare source of detailed technical information obtained from primary sources - information like this is very rarely available. Mullett appears to have written about the Melbourne Mint’s operations as he accessed the primary documents he was looking through, as opposed to compiling research in order to write on a specific subject.

This writing style makes Mullett's first publication “Australian Coinage” particularly hard-going. When compiling my article on the 1931 Dropped 1 Indian Obverse penny, I actually needed to prepare a timeline of events in order to make sense of the situation in the Mint at that time. The effort was well worth it, as Mullett’s research unearthed facts simply unavailable elsewhere.

The first major point that Mullett determined regarding Australia’s most famous rare coin - the 1930 penny - is that it was struck on at least 2 different dates. There’s nothing unusual at all about an annual mintage being split into different production runs, however 13th August 1930 is the first confirmed date of manufacture, and what is more interesting is that the second confirmed date of manufacture is 13th August 1931 - exactly 12 months later, in the calendar year after the date on the reverse of the coin.

I’d suggest that there’d be very few Australian coin collectors that would be aware of the fact some, if not most, of the 1930 pennies we come across today were struck in 1931.

Fred’s article goes on to discuss Mullett’s comments regarding the different obverse and reverse dies used to strike this historic coin, and to draw conclusions on what this means for collectors. Fred’s article shows conclusively that there are 4 different varieties of 1930 penny, rather than just the two that have been acknowledged to date:

Table 3 - Present 1930 Varieties

REV	V1	V2	V3	V4
F dot	N	Y	N	N
3/2 date	Y	Y	N	N
OBV
Ind	Y	Y	Y
Eng				Y

Each of the die varieties can be related to the reverse and obverse dies used to strike these historic coins, which is just an incredible step forward in our knowledge of Australia’s most popular rare coin.

If you haven’t seen the article yet, it contains a range of images showing the characteristics of each die variety.

We know from the dies used which coins were struck on which dates, so anyone that owns one of these rare and historic coins will be keen to check just which die pair their coin was struck from.

This research also has implications for authentication - it is not enough just to rely on checking for one die combination when authenticating coins, from now on it will be necessary to check for the 3 different die pairs.

This emerging news shows that even close to 9 decades after these coins were struck, we’re still learning more about them.

Australia’s Next Generation Banknote $10 - the Bramble is Paler Than the Prickly Moses

andrew — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 01:50:58 +0800

Australia's NGB $10 banknote was released into general circulation on 20 September 2017, with nowhere near the same vacuous fury that we saw on social media 12 months earlier when the NGB $5 note was released.

It is interesting to speculate whether the paler appearance of the wattle either side of the clear vertical window on the NGB $10 relative to the NGB $5 was intentionally adjusted after the hue and cry of September 2016, however the official version from the RBA is that "The wattle flowers on the new $10 banknote are paler than those on the new $5 banknote – just like the two wattles in real life."

The test of the accuracy of this statement will be to compare images of any early specimens or press releases against the notes we’re seeing in circulation. I’m not an expert on the relative brightness of the Prickly Moses Wattle relative to the Bramble Wattle, however if these images are any indication, it does appear the Prickly Moses does indeed have brighter flowers.

As with the NGB $5 note, the NGB $10 banknote still features the same portraits seen on the equivalent First Generation polymer $10 - Dame Mary Gilmore and AB ‘Banjo’ Paterson. The style of their depiction has been refreshed, arguably from an earlier time in each person’s life.

Although the notes have been in circulation for close to 3 months now, here is a comparison table that explains the design features seen on each of our NGB notes:

Security Feature	$5.00	$10.00
Top Right Rolling Colour	Flying Eastern Spinebill & Prickly Moses Wattle	Sulphur-crested Cockatoo & Bramble Wattle
Bottom Left Security Feature In Clear Window	Federation Star	Pen Nib
Top-To-Bottom Window Feature 1	3D Federation Star	3D Pen Nib
Top-To-Bottom Window Feature 2	Flying Eastern Spinebill	Flying Cockatoo
Top-To-Bottom Window Feature 3	Colourful Eastern Spinebill	Colourful Sulphur-Crested Cockatoo
Top-To-Bottom Window Feature 4	Reversing 5 in Federation Pavillion	Reversing 10 in Homestead
Flowers Either Side of Clear Window	Prickly Moses Wattle	Bramble Wattle
Tactile Feature	1 Raised Dot	2 Raised Dots

What I’ve found most interesting about the NGB $10 note is not so much the designs seen on the note, nor the security features, but it’s the way the notes are being distributed.

When the NGB $5 was released, it wasn’t unusual at all to be able to obtain bundles of notes with the same prefix - not all of the notes were consecutive mind you, however it was possible to obtain bundles of the first and last prefixes as an example.

I have to say that with the NGB $10, released just 12 months later and printed using the exact same machinery that was used to print the $5 note, I haven’t seen one intact bundle that contains notes all with the same prefix - anywhere.

For some reason, the bundles of NGB $10 notes that are being seen in the banking system feature notes with a range of prefixes - any particular bundle might start with notes that have the AA17 or EA 17 prefix, however that has been no guarantee at all that the remaining notes in those bundles have the same prefix.

For some reason, it looks like the notes are somehow being shuffled before being packaged into bundles. Just why that might be necessary for distribution purposes I’m not yet sure - I don’t recall seeing this for any other Australian banknote at all, polymer, NGB or otherwise!

It will be interesting to get an explanation for the reason for this apparent shuffling from someone that has knowledge of the reasons for it - as soon as I get clear on why this is happening, I’ll be sure to post it online.

The Way Henshall Cut and Struck the 1813 Dump / Fifteen Pence Impacted the Viability of the Holey Dollar

andrew — Fri, 10 Nov 2017 04:23:58 +0800

Whenever Australia’s first coins are discussed, most of the focus is placed on the Holey Dollar rather than the Dump. This is hardly surprising, as the larger coin had four times the purchasing power of the smaller coin.

What is often overlooked in that assessment is the fact that the way the Dump was cut and struck determined whether both coins remained in circulation.

If Macquarie’s counter-stamping plan was to prevent coins from being taken outside NSW, the weight of both the Holey Dollar and the Dump needed to fall within a tightly defined range. If either coin weighed outside their intended range, its silver value could vary widely from its face value, which could be an incentive to take the coin away from NSW and pass it off at its intrinsic value, defeating the purpose of the whole exercise.

All other criteria being equal, the weight of each Dump (and thus the weight of each Holey Dollar it was cut from) was determined by the diameter of the Dump. The larger the diameter of a Dump, the heavier it is; and also the lighter the Holey Dollar it was cut from.

If the weight of each coin was to be within a tolerance that enabled the currency value of both coins to exceed its intrinsic value, Henshall needed to calculate the diameter of the Dump very precisely.

The question then becomes, just what diameter would a Dump need to be before it was at risk of being exported for its intrinsic value? Further, could a Dump be cut so small that the resulting Holey Dollar had an intrinsic value greater than its currency value?

A further interesting question is that although the diameter and weight of each Dump and Holey Dollar still in existence has not been exhaustively recorded (at least, such data has not yet been published), there is some thought that Henshall may have adjusted his calculations regarding the optimum diameter of each Dump over the time he was producing them.

Published results of an exhaustive study of the diameter and weight of these coins could well have consequences for our understanding of which Dumps were struck first.

Diameter = Weight = Striking Sequence?

The numismatist that has studied the Dump in the most detail is undoubtedly Bill Mira, he unequivocally stated that “Neither the diameter nor the weight has any relation to the dies used. Diameters vary from 18-20mm, whilst the weight averages 83 grains.[1]”

Based on his survey of over 200 Dumps, Mira theorised that dies C/4 may have been used first, followed by dies E/3, then A/1 and finally D/2. Based on their crude appearance, Mira supposed that dies C/4 and E/3 could have been “…trials and were used initially on only a few pieces[2]…”

If a systematic study of the weights is published, and if Dumps featuring the the C/4 and E/3 dies are shown to have marginally wider diameters (and/or are marginally heavier) than those struck with the A/1 and D/2 dies, it may reinforce Mira’s hypothesis that the first two pairs of dies were phased out not as a result of their aesthetic characteristics per se, but as a result of the likelihood that they would strike coins with the correct diameter.

Just half a millimetre difference in the diameter of a Dump corresponds with an increase in weight of around 5%, so any changes made may not have been observable at the time of Mira’s research.

The Queensland numismatist George Snelgrove has also given some thought to the relationship between the diameter of a Dump, its weight and the viability of Macquarie’s exercise.

Dump 20% and Holey Dollar 80%

In an article in the 2010 Report of the Australian Numismatic Society, Snelgrove points out that as the total declared face value for the coins was 75 pence / six shillings and threepence (five shillings for the Holey Dollar and one shilling threepence for the dump), the relative proportions of the total silver weight and surface area across both coins would need to reflect the proportion of the total currency value that each coin was intended to have.

“When Governor Macquarie ordered the Dollars to have a plug struck from their centre he would have required it to be 20% of the Dollar's weight, arrived at as follows; Each 8 Reales dollar became a Holey Dollar and Dump, which then had a combined value of six shillings and threepence (i.e. 75 pence). Each Dump of fifteen pence, therefore was 20% of this total value. On this basis, the Dump should have been 20% of the size and weight of the coin from which it was struck.[3]”

“The surface area of a 40 mm 8 Reales is 1,257 mm, so 20% of this is some 251 mm. The surface area of an 18 mm Dump is 254 mm, confirming that the centre punched out was almost exactly the targeted size. It has been pointed out by Bruce Canning, of the Canning Mint, that the diameter of the punch for an 18 mm Dump was, likely to have been eleven sixteenths of an inch (Imperial), which is slightly under 18 mm, but when over struck with the dies for the fifteen pence the planchet would have spread to 18 mm.[4]”

“However, the degree of the expansion would have depended on the thickness of the planchet and the pressure of the overstrike. The 19 mm Dumps that are known may well reflect a slightly thicker planchet and the application of greater pressure in the strike. Turning now to the extremely small number of Dumps known that are 20 mm in diameter; their surface area is 314 mm or 25% of the full 8 Reales coin. Clearly, this was not the result that Macquarie wanted, as it would make the export of such heavy Dumps much more attractive to traders. Probably the very small number of 20 mm Dumps reflects the fact that Macquarie realised that these were too heavy and early on ceased their production in favour of the smaller 18mm.[5]”

Mira states that the heaviest Dump he had sighted had been struck with the D/2 die pair, which in his mind was most likely to have been the final die pair used. If that is the case, any variance in diameter may be a function of chance rather than design. Despite this single coin, the relationship between weight, diameter and the order in which these coins were struck will be interesting to pursue further.

A Combined Currency Premium of 30%

Although the currency ratio between the Holey Dollar and the Dump is indeed 80/20, the two coins had a combined currency value over their intrinsic value of around 30%, which effectively provided Henshall with a reasonably wide margin for cutting and striking the coins before they were at risk of being exported. The table below shows the relationship between the weight, diameter and currency (face value) of a range of Dumps and Holey Dollars.

The Relationship Between Diameter, Weight and Face Value for the 1813 Holey Dollar and Dump

	8 Reales	Holey Dollar (Internal 18mm)	Holey Dollar (Internal 19mm)	Holey Dollar (Internal 20mm)	Holey Dollar (Internal 21.5mm)	Dump (18mm)	Dump (19mm)	Dump (20mm)	Dump (21mm)	Dump (21.5mm)
Diameter		18	19	20	21.5	18	19	20	21	21.5
Face / Currency Value	4/- 4d	5/-	5/-	5/-	5/-	1/- 6d	1/- 6d	1/- 6d	1/- 6d	1/- 6d
Face Value (Pence)	52	60	60	60	60	15	15	15	15	15
Weight (g)	27.07	21.59	20.96	20.30	19.61	5.48	6.11	6.77	7.46	7.82
Silver Value	52	41.45	40.25	38.98	37.65	10.53	11.73	13.00	14.33	15.02
Pence per gram	1.92	2.78	2.86	2.96	0.33	2.74	2.46	2.22	2.01	1.92
Weight (%)	100	79.76%	77.44%	75.01%	72.45%	20.24%	22.56%	24.99%	27.55%	28.88%
Surface Area (mm)	1,257	1,003	973	943	911	254	284	314	346	363
Surface Area (%)	100	79.76%	77.44%	75.01%	72.45%	20.24%	22.56%	24.99%	27.55%	28.88%
Currency / Intrinsic Value Differential (%)	0.00%	30.91%	32.91%	35.03%	37.24%	29.82%	21.81%	13.36%	4.48%	-0.13%
Currency / Intrinsic Value Differential (Pence)		18.55	19.75	21.02	22.35	4.47	3.27	2.00	0.67	-0.02

Mira has stated that a Dump with a diameter of 20mm is at the upper range of the 200 coins he studied, however the intrinsic value of such a coin would still remain 13% below its currency value - well below the level one would expect it would need to be for it to be at risk of being exported.

As can be seen from the data above, if the standard weight and thickness of an 8 reales is accepted as constant, it is only when the diameter of a Dump reaches 21.5mm that its weight exceeds the currency or face value of 15 pence. Mira’s published research after a survey of 200 coins does not include any reference to a coin weighing anywhere near 7.82 grams.

Mira stated that the single heaviest dump he had seen by 1974 weighed 6.61 grams,[6] which at an intrinsic value of 12.69 pence, was still 15% below the currency or face value that the coin had, presumably sufficient disincentive to export the coin. Mira also stated that this Dump had been struck with the D/2 die pair, which does not indicate that Henshall was likely to have adjusted the diameter of the Dump over time.

If we examine the weight and intrinsic value of the Holey Dollars with an internal diameter corresponding with the diameter of most known Dumps, we can see that all had a currency value at least 30% above their intrinsic value, so none were at no risk of being exported on that basis.

Although it is highly unlikely any Dumps weighed enough to warrant them being exported, it will be interesting to further test whether Macquarie and Henshall did indeed slightly reduce the intended diameter of the Dump over time, to minimise the possibility that any Dump might weigh outside the intended range.

Until then, the above consideration of weights, diameter and currency value demonstrates that the calculations by Macquarie and Henshall were adequate for the task of ensuring the NSW 1813 Dumps and Holey Dollars remained in circulation within NSW.

Endnotes:

[1] Mira; Bill, "The New South Wales Dumps", The Metropolitan Coin Club of Sydney, Sydney, 1990, p 4.
[2] Mira; Bill, "The New South Wales Dumps", The Metropolitan Coin Club of Sydney, Sydney, 1990, p 19.
[3] Snelgrove; George, "Holey Dollars and Dumps of NSW - Some Further Comment" in the The Report of the Australian Numismatic Society, 2010, p 10.
[4] Snelgrove; George, "Holey Dollars and Dumps of NSW - Some Further Comment" in the The Report of the Australian Numismatic Society, 2010, p 10.
[5] Snelgrove; George, "Holey Dollars and Dumps of NSW - Some Further Comment" in the The Report of the Australian Numismatic Society, 2010, p 10.
[6] Mira; Bill, "Lachlan Macquarie’s NSW Dump" in The Report of the Australian Numismatic Society, 1974, p 10.

Governor’s Charity Sheet Notes - A New Type of Specimen?

andrew — Sat, 28 Oct 2017 08:03:35 +0800

To the uninitiated, polymer “Charity Sheet" notes appear to be a new type of specimen note - as with the polymer specimen notes issued between 1988 and 1996, each charity sheet note features “000000” after the serial prefix, so the initial confusion is understandable.

Charity Sheet notes are not specimen notes however - they served a different purpose, were distributed in a different manner, and are rated differently by collectors.

Even though Charity Sheet notes are not specimens, they are quite scarce and are very collectable in their own right.

One Sheet Donated by the RBA to Charity Each Year

The Reserve Bank of Australia donates one uncut sheet of banknotes, known as the Governor’s charity sheet, to charity each year. The banknotes on the Governor’s charity sheet bear serial numbers with the suffix ‘000000’. The sheets are auctioned by the ASX Thomson Reuters Australia Charity Foundation in conjunction with the Financial Markets Foundation for Children.

These banknote sheets are quite often purchased and then cut up into single notes, pairs and a block of four, and resold individually.

Unfortunately for those collectors that have bought them, such notes have often been variously described as “specimen” notes, “presentation proofs” or “presentation specimens”.

As such notes are not in the form they were originally released in, they are not highly regarded by a range of experienced banknote collectors.

The First Auction in 1994 Raised $44,000

A full sheet with the serial number AA 93 000000 was first auctioned for charity by Australian Associated Press Group Financial Markets at a dinner in Sydney on February 18, 1994. It raised $44,000. The $10 sheet was signed by Fraser and Cole.

The sheet was later cut into one block of four, one pair and 39 single notes. The single notes were offered for sale at $1,950 each.

The ASX Thomson Reuters Charity Foundation

The ASX Group and Thomson Reuters Australia (formerly Reuters) joined forces in 1999 to form a Charity Foundation with the objective of helping Australian-based children’s, disability and medical research charities by organising fundraising events in conjunction with the Financial Markets.

The following information has been compiled from the publicly-available information I’ve been able to locate so far - do let me know if you notice any errors or if you have any additional information available on the notes released to date.

RBA Governor’s Charity Sheet Note - Technical Information

YEAR OF AUCTION	DENOMINATION	# PER SHEET	Serial Start	Serial Finish	COMMENTS
1993	$5	40	AA00 000000	AA00 000000
1994	$10	45	AA93 000000	AA93 000000
1995	$20	40	AA94 000000	AA94 000000
1996	$50	40	AA95 000000	AA95 000000
1997	$100	32	AA96 000000	AA96 000000
1998	$5	40	AA97 000000	CA97 000000	Recoloured - Serial # range presumed
1999	$10	45	AA99 000000	DF99 000000	Serial # range presumed
2000	$50	40	AA99 000000	DA99 000000
2001	$5	40	AA01 000000	DA01 000000	Federation
2002	$10	45	AA02 000000	DF02 000000	Serial # range presumed
2003	$20	40	AA02 000000	DD02 000000
2004	$50	40	AA03 000000	DA03 000000	Serial # range presumed
2005	$20	40	AA04 000000	DD05 000000
2006	$5	40	AA 05 000000	DA 05 000000	Serial # range presumed
2007	$5	40	AA07 000000	DA07 000000
2008	$20	40	AA07 000000	DD07 000000
2009	$50	40	AA08 000000	DA08 000000	Serial # range presumed
2010	$50	40	AA09 000000	DA09 000000
2011	$20	40	AA10 000000	DD07 000000
2012	$100	32	AA11 000000	CF11 000000	Serial # range presumed
2013	$50	40	AA12 000000	DA 12 000000	Serial # range presumed
2014
2015
2016
2017	$10	45	AA15 000000	DF15 000000	Bicentennial Design, https://goo.gl/NM3rGz
2018

The Western Australian Bank (1841 - 1927) Underwritten by Parochialism

andrew — Wed, 25 Oct 2017 05:12:48 +0800

It is difficult to hold a banknote from the Western Australian Bank and not be taken back to the era it was issued in.

These large notes, with their intricate designs, calligraphed signatures and firm but undoubtedly fragile paper quality are objects of wealth unique to this part of the world, and evoke a long-distant era of formality and discipline. The Western Australian Bank merged with the Bank of New South Wales in 1927, and at it’s peak it was widely regarded as the most important commercial enterprise in Western Australia, one that “…had done more to assist in the development of mining in this state than nearly the whole of the other financial institutions combined.[1]”

The quality of a very small number of notes issued by the Western Australian Bank are regarded as among the finest Australian banknotes issued prior to Federation in any denomination, from any bank, in any part of Australia. They embody the drive to capture the abundant natural wealth in Australia’s western third, and are a reminder of a time when the leading financial institution in this part of our nation was founded, run and patronised by the people that lived and worked here.

Underwritten by Parochialism

The success of the Western Australian Bank was clearly underwritten by the parochialism for which many West Australians are renown, the causes of that parochialism commanded customer loyalty for many decades. Although it is hardly news that many residents of Australia’s most isolated state have long chosen to do business with their own over outsiders, the formative events that led to the dominance of the Western Australian Bank have not yet been widely discussed.

1832 - The Agricultural Society Requests £5,000

The first indication that a financial institution might be beneficial to the Swan River Colony was in 1832, when the Agricultural Society formally submitted a prospectus to Governor James Stirling for “an advance of £5,000 from the Treasury on the security of twenty-five responsible persons.”[2] Stirling denied the request, and stated “that the colonists should raise the money by private subscription.”

This rebuff, a result of policies set by the colonial authority located in distant London is a very early example of a remote governing body not sharing the same level of urgency regarding the availability of capital with those Western Australians who were living with the consequences of it. No doubt at least some of the colonists vowed to never allow themselves to be in this situation regarding their own finances again.

1833 - Colonial Secretary Peter Brown Issues £1 Notes

One author has stated that the result of Stirling’s urge for self-sufficiency was that the “Swan River Society” was formed out of the Agricultural Society in 1833 - each member was allocated 50 £1 promissory notes, and agreed to accept them in lieu of cash.[3]

For a period of time, these promissory £1 notes of the Swan River Society are believed to have performed their role as a medium of exchange well. Surviving examples of these notes have no mention of the “Swan River Society” on them, however several contemporary newspaper reports suggest that the notes were issued personally by the Colonial Secretary, Peter Brown.[4]

Brown was accused by another colonist of misusing the funds received from these notes, so Brown sued for slander, and won. A notice advising that the £1 notes were being recalled was advertised in November 1836.

1835 - John Wood’s Counterfeit Rupees

The popularity of the Swan River Society £1 notes apparently further eased once a number of Indian silver coins began to circulate throughout the colony. Within months however, it became apparent that these popular silver coins were in fact counterfeits, struck by a colonist (not a convict) who had bought up a large portion of the colony’s white metal, and had made them into crude rupees.[5]

The restrictions inherent in the Swan River Society notes, coupled with the threat to economic stability that the counterfeit rupees posed as well as a perceived disinterest on the part of the colonial authorities in London, both set the stage for the foundation of Western Australia’s first bank.

1837 - Bank of Western Australia

The Bank of Western Australia (1837 - 1841) was founded by George Leake, a leading merchant in the Swan River Colony of the time. The establishment of this bank was warmly welcomed in the colony’s newspaper: “It has been our ambition, for some few years, to obtain assistance from abroad, and many efforts were made; but we were not sufficiently advanced to effect it. At length from our own resources, it is accomplished. We heartily congratulate our brother colonists upon this bright feature in the annals of our colonial history.[6]”

The article in the Perth Gazette and Western Australian Journal reflected that since 1835, the Swan River Colony had become self-sufficient in “nearly all the articles of immediate necessity”. It commented that although a surplus of funds had been steadily accumulating in the two years since, “A large portion of these accumulations lie scattered and in a great degree, ineffective, in private hands. The operations of a well digested Banking System will consist in the collecting these scattered sums into one mass, and applying in, with concentrated force, to objects of private and public benefit. It will promote punctuality and confidence in our commercial transactions, domestic as well as foreign; at the same time that, by the circulation of the notes, and the assistance of its credits, it will give a more permanent standard of value to our possessions, in lands, houses, improvements, and every other description of property.[7]”

The civic nature of the new bank was emphasised several times, that the bank was “…founded on the broad basis of the whole community, the support which it claims is as universal as the benefits which it will bestow.[8]”

“…this long-desired object has been attained; and it must be a subject of congratulation to every one to know that it springs, not from foreign capital ingrafted in our native stock, or from artificial and premature schemes, but, naturally, from the gradual advancement of the Colony in prosperity, and the accumulation of capital…”[9]

“Here we have recorded the establishment of one of the most important institutions connected with our future prospects, and we are happy to say it exhibits a striking and faithful picture of our rapid progress, inasmuch as we find our accumulating capital, distributed in different hands, employed to the advancement of the general body.[10]”

Buoyed by these positive expectations, the Bank’s records show that it was able to obtain funds from local colonists, and was able to lend them out successfully. The Swan River Colony and the Bank prospered in the years that followed, however this convivial existence was interrupted when the Bank of Australasia (founded in London) announced it would open a branch. Following this news, Governor James Stirling arranged for a merger between the Bank of Australasia and the Bank of Western Australia.

As the Bank of Western Australia had been founded via a collective contribution of locally earned capital, for the benefit of the local community, the suggestion that foreign capital might be “ingrafted in our native stock” was not universally welcomed. Stirling asserted that the merger was to be “of much importance to the colony… for by its means settlers were calculated to obtain cheaper money.”[11]

Shareholders subsequently voted in agreement with this merger by the reasonably close margin of 57 to 51, this decision that did not sit well with number of the colony’s leading figures.

Western Australia’s first bank had survived as a sovereign entity for just 4 years.

1841 - Western Australian Bank

Shortly after the merger of the Bank of Western Australia and the Bank of Australasia, George Frederick Stone led a number of the 51 former shareholders of the Bank of Western Australia that had voted against the merger chose to establish another bank, named the Western Australian Bank.

Stone and others are said to have been “disgusted” with the decision to merge the Bank of WA with the Bank of Australasia, his prospectus denigrated the Bank of Australasia, and he exhorted local support because the new bank was local, with all the implications this carried.

The prospectus also carried some sting with the statement that it would be backed “by more influential and prosperous settlers…”[12]

The list of the people involved with the establishment of the Western Australian Bank does indeed include at least a good portion of “…the leading business, professional and colonial government section of the community[13]”:

George Frederick Stone; William Tanner; Richard Hinds; Edward Hammersley; Samuel Moore; Thomas Richard Carey Walters and W.J. Lawrence.

Of the directors and staff linked with the Bank of Western Australia, only one is also linked with the Western Australian Bank - Richard Hinds. Richard Hinds (senior) was a naval surgeon that arrived arrived in the Swan River Colony in 1837 on the ‘Shepherd’ with his wife Susannah and children Sarah and Richard.[14] This was the same ship that Edward Hammersley and his family arrived on. Hinds was the largest initial depositor at the Western Australian Bank. A number of the personalities associated with the establishment of the new bank also figure prominently in the government of Western Australia, showing that “the development of the Bank and the colony are connected.[15]”

1845 - Bank of Australasia Closes its Western Australian Branch

As soon as the Western Australian bank was established, it set about winning business from the Bank of Australasia by discounting its rates.

It received such strong support from local depositors that it forced the Bank of Australasia to shut down it’s branch in Western Australia after just 4 years of competition, indicating that the appeal of parochialism was a powerful one. At its worst, parochialism can be self-serving; short-sighted and unnecessarily conservative.

In contrast with Governor Stirling’s emphasis on the cost of money, the decision to establish the Western Australian Bank demonstrates that members of the Swan River Colony business community were more concerned about the local availability of money than they were with the cost at which that money might be borrowed - lending policies and the retention of surplus funds within the colony were more important to them than interest rates alone. The decision to support a local bank was intended to help ensure money remained available locally.

1845 - 1868 The Monopoly Years

The start of transportation of convicts to Western Australia in 1850 caused a fundamental shift in the Colony’s economic development.[16] Estimates of economic activity in the Colony, the size of Western Australia’s economy in 1860 was four times that in 1850.[17] With greater access to capital, the pearling and timber industries began to develop[18], while public expenditure on works, buildings and roads also increased. The assets of the Western Australian Bank slowly but surely grew during this period.

The National Bank of Australasia opened a branch in Perth in 1868 - its profitability and the optimism of it’s staff contrast greatly with that of the Western Australian Bank. "The NBA sent its manager at Robe Town (South Australia) with £10,000 in coin, and instructions to compete fairly with the local bank, Law sailed around the barren coast to a colony that had no telegraph, no railway, and no feature of the industrial age of iron, except the leg-iron.[19]”

“The only surviving convict colony, perhaps half of Western Australia’s 20,000 people were convicts or ex-convicts in a gaol as large as India. Trade was sluggish, exports of wool and sandalwood were meagre, and the colony had only one bank, the local Western Australian Bank, which had opened in 1841 when Perth was a village. For the last twenty years the small bank had enjoyed a monopoly, simply because no bank thought the colony was worth entering.[20]”

Writing on the position of the National Bank of Australasia in 1871, the historian Geoffrey Blainey had to say this about the level of economic activity in Western Australia: “Western Australia was backward, and the new notes printed by the bank made this clear. The Victorian bank notes, in an ornate cameo, showed the face and shoulders of a contemporary damsel, clasping a long-tailed lamb. The South Australian notes depicted a coy girl with grapes in her long hair and a sheaf of wheat on her shoulder. The Western Australian notes showed a buxom girl, her chubby arms resting on the head of an axe, the symbol of a colony whose forests and deserts were imperfectly explored and whose commerce was more a venture in national development than in profitable banking.[21]”

If Blainey’s searing indictment of Western Australia as a place of commerce can be taken as an indication of external attitudes towards business in Western Australia, it is hardly surprising that some Western Australians might choose to do business with a local bank. In stark contrast, archival records of the Western Australian Bank show it was able to pay consistent dividends to its shareholders of 17.5% to 20% throughout its lifetime, regardless of whether economic conditions were favourable or unfavourable. Bonuses of £1 per £10 share were regularly given throughout the 1860’s and 1870’s, the bonus paid to shareholders in 1876 alone was £5 per £10 share[22] - just 5 years after the period that Blainey was commenting on.

1878 - 1890 Increased Competition and the Discovery of Gold

As the economy of colonial Western Australia expanded between the 1860’s and the 1880’s, a number of banks based either in London or the Eastern seaboard established branches in Perth.

The Union Bank of Australia opened a branch in Perth in 1878; the Bank of New South Wales opened a branch in 1883; the Commercial Bank of Australia opened a branch in 1888.

Despite this increased competition, the Western Australian Bank continued to pay strong dividends to shareholders, although arguably at the expense of market share. The loans made during the period 1861 to 1890 were mainly to pastoral concerns, road boards, municipalities, churches and societies[23] - by following that strategy, the Western Australian Bank remained tightly bound to the leading families in the colony. Edward Wittenoom received an overdraft for £3,000 for the leasing of White Peaks, and other such well-known pastoralists as the Padburys, Shentons, Lefroys, all received substantial aid for the development of the North—West properties, and for their businesses.

The discovery of gold in Halls Creek in the Kimberley region in 1886 was fundamental in shaping the economic and social landscape of the colony. News of the discovery travelled internationally and brought an unprecedented rush of immigrants and a level of economic growth previously unknown in the State.

Between 1890 and 1900, Western Australia’s population grew from 48,502 to 179,967.[24] Although the Halls Creek gold rush was short-lived, many prospectors stayed in Western Australia and explored other regions, culminating in the discovery of gold at Mt Charlotte near Kalgoorlie in 1893.

The story of the opening of the Coolgardie branch of the Western Australian Bank, as recounted in “Westralian Banker" in September 1950, places a human face on the Western Australian Bank’s expansion during this period. “Mr Steuart was appointed manager and Mr. Sherwood the teller and accountant, the two set off for the goldfields with two outsized bullion boxes containing £10,000 in assorted notes and mixed coin, without any armed escort, and only carrying between them a six shooter to protect themselves and the money.

They went by rail to Northam, and by construction train to Burracoppin.

From there they travelled to Southern Cross by Cobb and Co. coach, it having taken them three days to travel 120 miles.

They slept in the open with the bullion boxes as a pillow. It took them six days to reach Coolgardie, to find that no bank was made and that there was nowhere to place the bullion.

Their average working hours per week were sixty to seventy hours, and they had to do this for no payment for overtime.

For eighteen months they all slept in the premises provided, with hessian and rough sawn timber camps, each accommodating two members- extra supplies later included camp stretchers, a wash stand, a basin and ewer, plus one gallon of water daily, which had to serve for drinking, washing and cooking.

Showers cost 1/6 each, and all that it consisted of was a water can being upturned over a person, the water being collected in a trough below and used again for the next customer.[25]”

To fully appreciate the level of trust placed in bank staff in this era, as well as the risks and sacrifices that they undertook, we need to remember that a week’s wages for the average worker at this time was slightly more than £2 per week, meaning that the amount of gold these men were responsible for could well equate to the total sum of money they would ever earn in their lifetimes. They needed to account for it down to the last penny, and protect it with just a single pistol between them. Given the sums of money involved, it is remarkable that more violent robberies didn’t take place.

1890 - 1910 The Banking Crisis and the Discovery of Gold

The discovery of gold in Western Australia occurred at around the same time a series of banking, currency and sovereign debt crises were unfolding around the world.

Following decades of strong economic growth, the Argentinean government defaulted on its sovereign debt in 1890, which caused what is now known as the Barings Crisis.

The British investment bank Barings was heavily exposed to Argentinean debt, and was only saved by the intervention of several other major investment banks in London, as well as the Bank of England.

The consequences of this crisis were felt right around the world, not least in Australia.

A strong boom in land values had been underway in Melbourne for some years by the 1890’s, under-pinned by loans made by the Australian banks, who had in turn borrowed cheap funds from British banks.

Following the Barings Crisis, those same British banks withdrew funds from Australia, which exposed many Australian banks to the lack of liquidity in their property loans.

By the time the 1893 banking crisis in Australia drew to a close, 11 banks across NSW, Queensland and Victoria had suspended operations and restructured.

This suspension had significant consequences for the lending policies of those banks in the years that followed. The Western Australian Bank’s business was entirely based in WA, so it was not exposed to losses on property caught up in the Victorian Land Boom. It was one of the very few banks in Australia that did not suspend during the 1893 financial crisis. One historian has stated that “One of the greatest factors in the growth in importance and in the regaining of the position of leading bank in the colony for the Western Australian Bank, was the occurrence of the Eastern banking disaster at a time when the colony of Western Australia was embarking on an era of growth and prosperity through the discovery of gold.[26]”

By 1903, the Western Australian Bank was represented by branches in the following locations:

Albany, Beverley, Black Arrow (Nunngarra), Boulder, Bridgetown, Cuballing, Broad Arrow, Bulong, Bunbury, Burthville, Busselton, Coolgardie, Cue, Day Dawn, Dongarra, Duketown, Esperance, Fremantle, Geraldton, Greenbushes, Guildford, Kalgoorlie, Kanowna, Katanning, Kooynie, Laverton, Lennonville, Leonora, Meekatharra, Mt. Morgan, Nannine, Narrogin, Newcastle, Norseman, Northman, Pingelly, Ravensthorpe, Southern Cross, Wagin, York and Gundamindera (The Granites).

One comment in the local press in this period captures the regard that many in the state had for the Western Australian Bank: “So far, nothing has contributed more to the Western Australian gold boom than the solid notes of the Western Australian Bank, and nothing will better support the gold boom in the future than those notes, which at any time may be paid in coin across the counter ten times over. The Western Australian Bank is indeed a model bank.[27]”

Gold yields had declined by the early 1900s, and agriculture overtook gold as the primary driver of economic growth. Historians have also recorded that during this period, the Western Australian Bank focused on lending money to pastoral and mercantile establishments that had sure security to offer, and made no attempt to assist small farmers become established.

Perhaps not without coincidence, the Forrest Government established the Agricultural Bank in 1895, which made loans to farmers up to £400 each. The Western Australian Bank became largely a trading bank for the large pastoral and mercantile concerns - they did business with the local aristocracy of the colony, the old established families of the state.[28]

1927 - Amalgamation with the Bank of New South Wales

Amalgamation in the Australian banking industry had been taking place since the 1890’s, larger banks were better equipped to deal with the lack of liquidity inherent in long-term loans, and did not have their risk geographically concentrated.

The notion of the Western Australian Bank becoming part of a larger organisation was first raised in 1914, following a severe drought in Western Australia that impacted a number of agricultural loans.

A further decline in the pastoral industry in 1919 saw the idea of amalgamation raised again, however this was not pursued.

The Bank of New South Wales made it’s first “tentative and informal approach” to acquire the bank in 1924, the first formal offer was made in January 1927.

An article in the Argus newspaper in Melbourne announced on January 28th 1927 that the Western Australian Bank had been absorbed by the Bank of New South Wales for a sum of £1,900,000.

At that time, the WA bank had 84 branches and sub-branches in Western Australia. Amalgamation with the Bank of New South Wales was complete by March 29th, 1927, which brought to an end a local institution “that had so long identified with the life and fortunes of this state.[29]”

Historians have stated that even though the public was not notified of the merger until February 1927, “…little public concern was shown at the time of the amalgamation.[30]”

The primary benefit of amalgamating with a bank that had national scope was that “…it should theoretically bring extra available capital to the state.[31]”

In the decades since 1841, Western Australia had become far less isolated from the commercial centres of Australia’s Eastern seaboard than it had been, meaning that simply being parochial was not as pragmatic as it once was. “To new immigrants, the Bank was just a bank and no patriotism could be felt for it. It certainly had done little to aid these new settlers in their attempt to farm the Eastern Wheatbelt areas, and probably they thought the Bank to be concerned only with the large pastoralists and business houses.[32]”

Although several emotive pleas were published in the WA press arguing against the merger, the bank’s management did not make any public comment on the proposal prior to the vote being put to shareholders.

After the decision had been made, an article in the West Australian newspaper stated “There was the feeling that the volume of deposits requisite to enable it to cover the vast field open to it in the matter of sound advances for developmental purposes were insufficient to the local bank. Western Australia is young industrially, and has no considerable capital accumulation, and the rapid expansion of agricultural and pastoral industries and commerce has created opportunities for the profitable utilisation of capital which can not be met unless a considerable portion of that capital is drawn from resources without the state.[33]"

“…a bank which although it figured prominently in Western Australia up to its amalgamation with the Bank of New South Wales in 1927, has completely vanished from the local scene. With it has gone many memories of its valiant efforts to help the growth of the colony with financial aid to such industries as timber, pearling, fruit and gold in their early development.[34]”

A number of buildings built in the early 1900’s that housed branches of the Western Australian Bank remain standing to this day, and have been preserved for their heritage value. Far fewer notes of the Western Australian Bank are available to collector - these large notes, with their intricate designs, calligraphed signatures and firm but undoubtedly fragile paper quality are objects of wealth unique to this part of the world, and evoke a long-distant era of formality and discipline.

The Banknotes of the Western Australian Bank

Type One (24/6/1841 - 24/2/1844)

The first series of notes issued by the Bank of WA were printed in black ink on the front only, by a printer in the Swan River Colony itself. They measure 183 * 102mm, the paper stock was extremely light, even when compared to other notes from the pre-federation period. 4,000 of these notes had been issued by January 1844.

A small batch of several hundred unissued examples of these notes were discovered in the early 1980’s, and were marketed by the coin dealers Downies. These unissued £1 notes were presented in a coloured cardboard album that contained a range of background information on the bank and the note, and was decorated by a number of contemporary watercolours of the Swan River Colony.

Downies’ marketing literature for the notes stated that “From records, it is possible that up to 650 of these notes exist in original and uncancelled condition. However, experts believe the number surviving may well be as little as half of that number.[1]”

Type Two (24/2/1844 - 1/11/1860)

Mick Vort-Ronald writes that “At the WA Bank’s half-yearly meeting of January 10th, 1844, the Bank’s directors announced that “A supply of new Notes, of a more durable character and from an engraved plate, is also daily expected, to supersede the neat but temporary note in type, which has hitherto been in circulation.” These “Type Two” notes were engraved outside WA, and featured an oval containing a swan on the front at top centre, the title of the bank and “Established 1841”. The name of the bank is in the top and bottom borders, “Perth” is in the side borders. The back of these notes were also blank.[2]” No notes of this type have ever been sighted, either in a public collection or in private hands.

Type Three A (1/1/1861 - 1866)

Mick Vort-Ronald’s research on these notes indicates that they have the following specifications: “Large swan at top centre on the front, surrounded by ornamental leaf design. "White line" straight border, with title of bank in top border, and "Perth" in bottom border. Denomination in a medallion either side of the swan. Front printed in black only. Serial numbers A 1 to A 20000.[3]” No notes of this type have ever been sighted, either in a public collection or in private hands.

Type Three B (1866 - 1/7/1878)

These notes measure 190 * 113mm, and have the same basic design as Type 3A. They also feature “WAB” in large coloured letters in the centre of the front of the note, and are known to have been engraved by Charles Skipper & East, London. Just one issued note of this type has been sighted so far in private hands.

Type Three C (1/1/1879 - 1909)

These notes measure 185 * 114mm, the designs are largely the same as Type 3B, they were printed by Bradbury Wilkinson & Co. in London. The large “WAB” in the middle of the front of the note has been replaced by the denomination in large sans-serif letters in blue ink. The designs on the back of the note are in blue - it features the denomination figure in the centre, surrounded by geometric "white line" design. The serial number range for these notes is from B 00001 through to D 725000, they were last issued in 1909.

It is believed that at least 3 or 4 of these notes (this note among them) were originally held in the archives of the Western Australian Bank, and were retained after the Commonwealth Government assumed authority over Australia’s note issue in 1910.

The Western Australian Bank amalgamated with the Bank of New South Wales in 1927, and the archives of the Western Australian Bank were transferred to the archives of the Bank of New South Wales in the years that followed.

Today, the Westpac Museum is located at Playfair Street in the Rocks, it houses a display that “traces the history of banking from as early as Australia's colonisation in 1788, to current day banking and finance trends.[4]”

The Westpac Museum was established at the current site in the mid 1980’s, and it is understood that a number of items were divested from the Bank’s archives in order to fund acquisitions of other items required to present a comprehensive display of banking history.

Not only do these notes from the Western Australian Bank remain in incredible quality relative to nearly all the other Australian banknotes issued prior to 1910, they have an impeccable provenance.

1. Greenhill; C, "The Western Australian Bank, 1841-1927 : an historico-economic research of Western Australia's only private local banking institution" in the University of Western Australia Thesis, 1959, p102 p ↩

2. Greenhill p12 ↩

3. Greenhill p12 ↩

4. http://www.wanowandthen.com/Peter-Brown.html ↩

5. Perth Gazette and Western Australian Journal (WA : 1833 - 1847), Saturday 28 November 1835, page 606 ↩

6. Perth Gazette and Western Australian Journal (WA : 1833 - 1847), Saturday 20 May 1837, page 904 ↩

7. Perth Gazette and Western Australian Journal (WA : 1833 - 1847), Saturday 20 May 1837, page 904 ↩

8. Perth Gazette and Western Australian Journal (WA : 1833 - 1847), Saturday 20 May 1837, page 904 ↩

9. Perth Gazette and Western Australian Journal (WA : 1833 - 1847), Saturday 20 May 1837, page 904 ↩

10. Perth Gazette and Western Australian Journal (WA : 1833 - 1847), Saturday 20 May 1837, page 904 ↩

11. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/History_of_West_Australia/Chapter_13 ↩

12. Greenhill, p24 ↩

13. Greenhill, p51 ↩

14. https://www0.landgate.wa.gov.au/maps-and-imagery/wa-geographic-names/nam... ↩

15. Greenhill, p1 ↩

16. “An Economic History Of Western Australia Since Colonial Settlement”, WA Department of Treasury and Finance, Perth, 2004, p 7. ↩

17. “An Economic History Of Western Australia Since Colonial Settlement”, WA Department of Treasury and Finance, Perth, 2004, p 8. ↩

18. “An Economic History Of Western Australia Since Colonial Settlement”, WA Department of Treasury and Finance, Perth, 2004, p 7 ↩

19. Blainey & Hutton; Geoffrey & Geoffrey, “Gold and Paper (1858 - 1982)”, Macmillan, Melbourne, 1983, p 49. ↩

20. Blainey & Hutton; Geoffrey & Geoffrey, “Gold and Paper (1858 - 1982)”, Macmillan, Melbourne, 1983, p 49. ↩

21. Ibid, p50. ↩

22. Greenhill, p4 ↩

23. Greenhill, p69 ↩

24. ABS, 2004 ↩

25. Westralian Banker, 1950 ↩

26. Greenhill, p94 ↩

27. Financial Post, 9/10/1895 ↩

28. Greenhill, p102 ↩

29. Greenhill, p3 ↩

30. Greenhill, p4 ↩

31. Greenhill, p130 ↩

32. Greenhill, p137 ↩

33. “Western Australian Newspaper”, February 21st 1927, p 6. ↩

34. Greenhill, p3 ↩

[1] Australian Coin Review

[2] Vort-Ronald; Mick, "Banks of Issue in Australia", Self-Published, Adelaide, 1982, p 236.

[3] Vort-Ronald; Mick, "Banks of Issue in Australia", Self-Published, Adelaide, 1982, p 236.

[4] http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/heritageapp/ViewHeritageItemDetails.as...

The Famed Heaton Mint and Australia's Coinage

andrew — Sat, 26 Aug 2017 03:09:21 +0800

The first coins for the Commonwealth of Australia in 1910 were struck at the Royal Mint in London.

Although significant quantities of silver had been discovered in Broken Hill in the 1880’s, and although the colonial governments of New South Wales and Victoria had been agitating for the Australian branch mints to strike an Australian national coinage for some years, it was an established practice that the coinage for all British colonies (outside India) was struck by the Royal Mint in London. Maintaining this practice was not without challenges however.

Colonial coinage accounted for an average of 25% of the Royal Mint’s total output between 1900 and 1910, and ranged between 11% and 93%.[1]

Over the course of that decade, the Royal Mint took several steps to reduce challenges to their production capacity:

it expanded and upgraded equipment;[2]
it delegated production to the Heaton Mint;
it opened a new branch in Ottowa (Canada); and
delegated production of India’s coinage to the Calcutta and Bombay Mints.

A further means of mitigating the challenges limited capacity posed would have been for any or each of the Royal Mint branches at Sydney, Melbourne and Perth to strike Australia’s copper and silver coinage, however that was not immediately possible.

Senior Royal Mint staff believed that the coining presses in the Australian branch mints had to be modified before the production of silver and copper coinage could begin here.

As an example, the presses used at the Perth Mint in the early 1900’s were manufactured by Taylor & Challen, their “Model 640”.[3]

These machines were designed and set up to strike gold sovereigns and half sovereigns – coins of a relatively soft metal and no more than 20.5mm in diameter. At 30.8mm in diameter, pennies are approximately 50% larger larger than sovereigns, and 59% larger than a half sovereign.

Further to that, copper is a much harder metal than gold to work with. By way of comparison, copper has a measure of 369 Mpa on Mohr’s hardness scale, while gold has a measure of just 216 Mpa on the same scale.

In his seminal work on Australian coinage, Dr Arthur Andrews explained in 1921 the circumstances under which Australia’s first coins were struck: “An arrangement was made with the Imperial Government by which, until the coinage could be undertaken in Australia, the necessary supplies should be provided by the Royal Mint in London on account of the Commonwealth Government.”[4]

The Royal Mint struck Australia’s coins throughout 1910 and 1911, however in 1912 it was beset by an unexpected and strong increase in demand for copper pennies in Britain. [5]

The Heaton Mint In Birmingham - Extra Capacity During Periods of High Demand

The city of Birmingham has been one of Britain’s most important trade centres for centuries.

The engineers James Watt, Matthew Boulton and William Murdock, the chemist Joseph Priestley and the printer John Baskerville were all leading figures in the Industrial Revolution, and all lived in Birmingham.

Their innovative ideas and work developed Birmingham’s reputation as a powerhouse of manufacturing and innovation, and earned their city the title of “The City of a Thousand Trades.”[6]

Such was Boulton’s reputation for efficiency, accuracy and productivity, since 1853 the Royal Mint had regularly outsourced production of British and colonial coins to the Heaton Mint, specifically during times of high demand for coinage. This was again the case in 1912, when the Heaton Mint was called upon to strike 16.8 million pennies for Great Britain, as well as copper pennies and halfpennies for Australia. [7]

The 1912 penny and halfpenny are the first Australian coins struck by the Heaton Mint. If the Royal Mint was busy in the 1900’s fulfilling their responsibility to manufacture coinage or Britain and the colonies, additional work aimed at supporting the Allied effort in World War I increased the Royal Mint’s workload further.

Royal Mint records show that during World War I, it assisted in the production of munitions, and also provided special engineering skills needed to produce items like artillery dial sights and gauges. [8]

Demand for British coinage rose yet again in 1914, so the Heaton Mint was tasked with producing a portion of Australia’s florins and halfpennies, as well as a portion of Australia’s florins, shillings, pennies and halfpennies for 1915.

Delegating production to the Heaton Mint solved the problem of manufacturing Australia’s coins, however it did not solve the problems inherent in shipping them to Australia.

After World War I began in 1914, allied ships were under threat from German submarines regardless of what they were carrying, [9]so production of Australia’s coins needed to be relocated yet again.

As a result, the Heaton Mint’s involvement with Australia’s coins ended as quickly as it began.

Challis; C, “A New History of the Royal Mint”, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992, p 547. ↩
Challis; C, “A New History of the Royal Mint”, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992, p 540. ↩
Perth Mint archives, Die Register 2995 ↩
Andrews; Arthur, “Australasian Tokens and Coins”, Government Printer, Sydney, 1921, p 136. ↩
Challis; C, “A New History of the Royal Mint”, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992, p 547. ↩
http://visitbirmingham.com/what-to-do/heritage/the-history-of-birmingham ↩
Challis; C, “A New History of the Royal Mint”, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992, p 546. ↩
Challis; C, “A New History of the Royal Mint”, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992, p 556. ↩
Hindenburg; Paul Von, “Out of My Life”, Cassell, London, 1920, p 253. ↩

Star Replacement Notes in Australia - How to Collect Them

andrew — Fri, 25 Aug 2017 04:01:44 +0800

Printing banknotes is just like any other mass manufacturing process, and even though the end product of the banknote production process is rather more celebrated than the average bolt or screw, just like the average bolt-producing machine, banknote printing presses work perfectly 99.99% of the time, but mistakes can and will happen.

Misprinted banknotes are always destroyed immediately (or at least they are as soon as they are spotted), which leave a standard bundle of 100 notes one or two notes short. Checking the serial numbers at the start and end of each bundle is one quick and initial way of telling how many notes are included, so rather than just take a few notes from the next batch to make up the bundle, up until 1948, not only did staff at the Commonwealth Note Printers need to manually identify each mis-printed note and remove it from the series of notes to be issues, they then needed to manually re-number a replacement note.

When we consider that this needed to be done 13, 000 times per week (the equivalent of 100 hours work), we can readily understand why note printing management were keen to do whatever they could to increase the efficiency of their staff.

Australia Adopted the American Star Replacement System on 10/- and £1 Notes in 1948

In September 1948, Australian note printing authorities decided to adopt the US system of using star replacement notes as substitutes for spoiled notes. A memo to Commonwealth Bank staff at that time advised them that: "Notes used for replacement purposes will have a five-pointed star in the position normally occupied by the last figure of the serial number."

The new star replacement system made it much easier for printing staff and tellers to check and count notes, and brought about a considerable saving in time and labour costs.

Star replacement notes were first introduced into the printing process of Australia's 10/- and £1 notes, but were not used on £5 notes until 1962, and were not used at all on £10 notes. Although we know that all Australian pre-decimal notes are extremely rare, Commonwealth Note Printer records have not yet yielded exact mintage figures for them.

The Scope Of A Complete Set Of Australian Pre-Decimal Star Replacement Notes:

Denomination	Ref #	Date Range for Usage		Signatures	Type
Ten Shillings	R13s	Sep 48	Jan 50	Armitage / McFarlane
Ten Shillings	R14s	Aug 49	Apr 52	Coombs / Watt
Ten Shillings	R15s	Mar 52	Aug 54	Coombs / Wilson	KGVI
Ten Shillings	R16s	Jul 54	Aug 61	Coombs / Wilson	QEII Commonwealth
Ten Shillings	R17s	Aug 61	Apr 66	Coombs / Wilson	QEII Reserve Bank

One Pound	R30s	Sep 48	Aug 49	Armitage / McFarlane
One Pound	R31s	Jul 49	Aug 52	Coombs / Watt
One Pound	R32s	Feb 52	Oct 53	Coombs / Wilson	KGVI
One Pound	R33s	Oct 53	Feb 61	Coombs / Wilson	QEII Commonwealth
One Pound	R34s	Jan 61	Apr 66	Coombs / Wilson	QEII Reserve Bank

Five Pounds	R50s	Oct 60	Apr 66	Coombs / Wilson	QEII Reserve Bank

Australia's Paper Decimal Star Replacement Notes - Much More Is Known

The star replacement system was maintained when Australia switched to decimal currency from February 14th 1966, however only on the $1 notes through to the $10 notes - they were not initially used in the printing process for $20 notes.

The star replacement system was brought to an end late in 1972, less than a year before the $50 note was introduced in October 1973.

This table shows the scope of a complete set of Australian decimal star replacement notes:

Denomination	Ref #	Signatures	Date Range for Usage		Mintage of Standard Notes	Mintage of Star Notes	Ratio of Star to Regular Notes	Value in Uncirculated Quality	Price to Rarity Ratio
Denomination	Ref #	Signatures	Start	End	Mintage of Standard Notes	Mintage of Star Notes	Ratio of Star to Regular Notes	Value in Uncirculated Quality	Price to Rarity Ratio
$1	R71s	Coombs / Wilson	14/2/66	Feb 68	130,210,000	535,000	243	$2,950	181.36
$1	R72s	Coombs / Randall	Feb 68	Nov 69	37,690,000	172,000	219	$6,500	26.46
$1	R73s	Phillips / Randall	Nov 69	May 72	299,100,000	683,000	438	$2,950	231.53

$2	R81s	Coombs / Wilson	14/2/66	Nov 67	192,096,000	718,299	267	$3,950	181.85
$2	R82s	Coombs / Randall	Nov 67	Oct 68	75,904,000	274,000	277	$4,950	55.35
$2	R83s	Phillips / Randall	Oct 68	Oct 72	473,000,000	607,107	779	$3,750	161.90

$5	R202s	Coombs / Randall	29/5/67	Oct 69	57,600,000	204,000	282	$6,500	31.38
$5	R203s	Phillips / Randall	Oct 69	Oct 72	84,400,000	101,619	831	$17,500	5.81

$10	R301s	Coombs / Wilson	14/2/66	Oct 67	77,168,000	336,000	230	$3,950	85.06
$10	R302s	Coombs / Randall	Oct 67	Oct 68	48,132,000	167,000	288	$7,500	22.27
$10	R303s	Phillips / Randall	Oct 68	Nov 72	223,700,000	348,004	643	$4,750	73.26

$20	R403s	Phillips / Randall	Oct 68	Oct 72	65,800,000	62,500	1,053	$19,500	3.21

Why Are Collectors Interested in Star Notes?

Collectors have chased star notes for as long as they've been printed, for the same reasons collectors chase anything - they're different and incredibly rare. Any collector that looks at a lot of notes will agree that their eye is caught by anything that is unusual and stands out, star notes fit that bill easily. It's also pretty neat to be able to own something that many other people have never seen before, or will ever get the chance to own.

What's The Best Way Of Collecting Star Notes?

The easiest way to build a collection of star notes is to get one of each star note issued - decimal and pre-decimal - simple! These notes are so valuable and hard to come by though that most of us need some kind of plan to balance our collecting desires with reality. There are a couple of other ways a collector can add some stars to their collection without breaking the bank.

Just One. No matter what your budget is, no matter what your level of dedication is, any collector can add just one star replacement note to their collection. Just one note can represent the whole series - you don't need a full set to show someone else what they look like, or to explain the role that they played in the banknote printing process. You can make the task as hard or easy as you like, and can choose the rarest or the most readily-available denomination or signature combination, you can get it in heavily circulated condition, or you can get it in crisp original condition. Prices start from just a few hundred dollars for a circulated example, up to many tens of thousands of dollars for the rarest examples in pristine condition. An Uncirculated Phillips Randall $20 will do the job just as easily as a well-used 1961 Coombs Wilson One Pound.

A Type Set. A type set of star replacement notes contains one of each type, and the good thing is you can define the different "types" any way you want. You could have one pre-decimal star note and one decimal star note, to cover off both types. Again, you can choose the rarest or the most readily-available denomination or signature combinations, you can get them in heavily circulated condition, or you can get them in crisp original condition. Pre-decimal star replacement notes tend to be more expensive than the cheaper decimal star notes, however the rarer decimal stars can be much tougher to get than the cheaper pre-decimal stars that were printed a decade or two before. A type set of Australian star replacement notes shows the history of them over an extended period of time. You could couple a Phillips Randall $1 with a Coombs Wilson Five Pound to cover both eras off.

A Denomination Set. A denomination set is one that includes one of each denomination that had stars on them - you don't need to get one of each and every single signature combination, just one of each major design type. You can make your job as easy or as hard as you like - you can choose to only include the first signature combination in each denomination, you can restrict your choices to the rarest signatures of each denomination, or you can get the most readily-available signatures for each denomination. A denomination set will include 3 pre-decimal denominations (10/-, £1 and £5), and 5 decimal denominations ($1, $2, $5, $10 and $20).

A Complete Set. The complete set is one that covers everything off - 11 pre-decimal notes and 12 decimal notes. A set like this isn't for the faint hearted, if only for the fact they turn up irregularly, even if quality isn't a consideration. There really is something about setting a target as comprehensive as this - it can be just as exciting as it is foreboding. Once finished, a complete set of star replacement notes shows the full scope of their deployment across the 24 years they were in use. Each different note can elaborate one aspect of the star replacement story to depict the complete history of these rare and compelling notes.

A First and / or A Last Prefix Set. One way of differentiating your collection from others is to focus on the prefixes in the serial numbers on the notes included in it. You could focus only on getting notes that were among the very first printed, or you could get notes that were amongst the very last printed, or you could look to get both first and last prefixes. Very few sets like this have ever been attempted.

A Set of Consecutive Pairs. Another layer of complexity and rarity that can be added to a set of star replacement notes is to only acquire notes that remain in consecutive pairs - two of the same note, numbered one after the other. Although it really isn't unusual at all to get consecutive notes in your change or directly from a bank, very very few star notes remain as pairs or even as trios. Most printing errors occurred on single sheets, and so stars were only ever inserted into bundles one by one, rather than one after the other.

Where Can I Get More Information?

There are a couple of books you can use to learn more about the star replacement note system in Australia - how they were printed, how often they're seen, and what they cost today. Mick Vort-Ronald's books on Australian pre-decimal and decimal notes are required reading, as would be the latest copy of either / or the Renniks or Greg McDonald price guides. These will tell you everything you need to know about Australia's star replacement notes, and how much they'll set you back.

Whichever way you choose to get into collecting star notes, there is sure to be a set and collecting strategy that will suit your budget and temperament. These rare notes are sure to be in demand with collectors for many years to come, now is a great time to get a toe wet and start.

Click here to see a list of the star replacement notes that we have available at the moment, or click here if you'd like to get in touch with Andrew to discuss your own collecting ideas - we'll be pleased to help you each step of the way.

The 1931 Indian Penny With the Dropped 1 Reverse - Less than 1,000 Were Struck

andrew — Mon, 07 Aug 2017 05:48:49 +0800

“The constant aim of producing a "good" coin was usually brought closer by varying a process in an experimental way. Experimentation was a long tradition of The Royal Mint, London and its branches.^[1]”

The 1931 Dropped 1 Indian penny is widely agreed to be one of Australia’s rarest pennies, however it is a coin that the average collector and the general public know little about - a reasonable level of numismatic knowledge is required to identify and appreciate it.

This compelling coin shares a great deal of history with the glamour rarity that preceded it in 1930 - research unequivocally shows that both coins are the result of practical efforts by Melbourne Mint staff during downtime in the Great Depression aimed at improving productivity.

Each and every Australian penny dated 1931 shares the same basic designs, however experienced collectors are well aware they can be classified as one of four varieties, depending on the position of certain design elements either side.

The 1931 Dropped 1 Indian penny is far and away the rarest of the four 1931 penny varieties, and although research has confirmed that it is directly linked to the 1930 penny, that relationship is not what many collectors have presumed it to be.

The Challenge of Mass Production - Extending Die Life

In his book titled "Australian Coinage - An Account of Particular Coins”, Mullett describes the problems that Melbourne Mint staff encountered in the production of pennies in the late 1920’s: “By this time, problems were increasing in the penny production, and this is shown by a change of master tools in 1928.^[2]”

Bill Mullett retired as a staff member of the Melbourne Mint in 1977. Mullett clearly had a deep interest in making the history of coin production in Australia accessible, as when he retired, he “was able to research at great length the records of the Melbourne Branch of the Royal Mint and those of the Sydney Branch which had been preserved in Melbourne.^[3]”

Regarding penny production in the 1928, Mullett recounted that “In the following year, the problem became more obvious. The die life in 1928 ranged from 30,000 to 166,000, but in 1929 die life frequently was below 10,000, with the average for reverse dies being 46,000 and for obverse dies 34,000. Later in the year the cause of failure of the dies, recorded as cracking, was noted.

With deterioration of the hubs by sinking (and spreading), the effect would be to increase the pressure needed to bring up the impression on the coins so leading to an early failure of the dies by cracking. A letter from H.D. McCay in London dated 20.3.30 confirms this problem in that at some time previously he was asked for advice. His suggestions of the cause and ways in which the problems might be overcome are enlightening. The changes which had not been tried in Melbourne were then made.^[4]”

Mullett’s work is well-known to numismatists that are interested in the technical details behind the production of Australia’s Commonwealth coins, however there are three reasons why it is far less well known outside that circle.

Each of Mullett’s three books on Australia’s coins were self-published in very limited numbers. For that reason alone, Mullett’s work is not well known. Not only that, Mullett did not particularly interact with the Australian numismatic community - once his work was published, it was not disseminated widely. Lastly, Mullett’s writing style is extremely technical - he bases his explanation of the background to certain coins by recounting the manufacture and movement of the dies used to strike them. When the dates for each movement of a die are combined with the reference numbers allocated to them and the assorted technical terms used to label them, it is challenging to arrive at the consequences of what Mullett has recorded. The effort required is certainly worth it however - Mullett’s work really is the only source of verifiable information on a number of Australia’s most important 20^th century coins.

Experimentation - A Fundamental Phase In Effective Manufacturing

Without specific reference to pennies in 1928, Mullett states that “The constant aim of producing a "good" coin was usually brought closer by varying a process in an experimental way. Experimentation was a long tradition of The Royal Mint, London and its branches.^[5]”

Experimentation by Mint staff then should therefore not be seen as frivolous activity indulged in to while away a quiet day, but more as an essential phase of the experiential process that is effective manufacturing. Mullett clearly confirms that successful minting is achieved and maintained by learning on the job, by trial and by error.

It is not correct therefore to say that the Melbourne Mint staff began experimenting with adjustments to their established processes after the Great Depression started. Mullett’s research demonstrates that internal discussion within the Mint about what could be done to improve the life of their penny dies started as early as 1928 - at least a year before the Great Depression began, and earlier still than the formal advice from Treasury that no coins other than halfpennies would be required in 1930.

It is fair to say however that a reduced workload in 1930 enabled Melbourne Mint staff to spend more time on this project than they otherwise would have. The total number of copper and silver coins struck for circulation across each of the three Australian mints in 1930 was just 581,800, as against 4,117,900 struck in 1929 - a drop of 86%.^[6]

The Annual Report for the Melbourne Mint in 1930 included the following comment by the Deputy Master: “Owing to the lack of orders for token coinage...unestablished staff have been working short time during the year.^[7]” Repairs and upgrades to the machinery are also mentioned, however it is the experimentation that numismatists will be most interested in.

“An Excursion Through The Varieties Of Steel Available”

1930 and 1931 appears to have been a time for the Mint staff to run practical tests on penny dies that were produced by a range of suppliers. Different dies were tested on the production floor, the number of coins struck by them was recorded, the aim being to identify a supplier and die steel that optimised production.

The different types of steel that were tested during this period included “No. 2” and “No. 3” steel; Huntsman's^[8] forgings; Armstrong's (forgings);^[9] Dannemora steel^[10]; Skellington steel;^[11] BCS (Bohler Carbon Steel);^[12] and MIC.

It is difficult to determine from Mullett’s research whether the experimentation performed during this period regularly included the variation of factors other than die steel. One process variation is noted by Mullett in 1929: “On 28.2.29 a 15' cone was tried on the steel blanks for pence and halfpence working dies (two pairs of pence) using a No. 3 steel.^[13]” Mullett states that “The reverses were good and the obverse recorded was fair…”^[14]

The first thought we might have regarding “experimentation” and dies with different characteristics might be that different dies were intentionally used to facilitate measurement of the life those coins had in circulation. We know that the designs of certain pennies (those struck during 1919 and 1920 are just two examples) were altered very slightly to enable quality control if required, however that was not the case in this instance.

Melbourne Mint staff were focused on increasing productivity rather than measuring the longevity of the product those trials created, and the results of each test were known as soon as each production run was finished. At least two different obverse and reverse penny hubs were in use at that time, which is the reason there are four different varieties of the 1931 penny.

London, Calcutta and Birmingham

When the production of copper coins first took place on Australian soil, the working dies were supplied by the Royal Mint in London.^[15] In 1920 however, as part of the gradual decentralisation of Australia’s coin production, the Melbourne Mint obtained penny master tools from Calcutta^[16].

To the untrained eye each of these different dies look by and large exactly the same, and for all intents and purposes, they are. They can be differentiated in a number of ways, however perhaps most readily by the number of rim beads that are around the perimeter of the design. The shape of the “R” in “BRITT” also differs between each die. The table below lists the number of beads for each of the obverse and reverse die types used on Australian pennies during the King George V period (1911 ~ 1936):

Die Source	Obverse	Reverse
London	177	174
Birmingham	-	177
Calcutta	178	178

Collectors need not worry about counting the number of rim beads on the coins they assess, as the different die types can be determined by checking how certain design elements line up with the denticles around the rim. The following table identifies how each of the different obverse and reverse die types are identified:

Die Source	Obverse	Reverse
London	The upstroke in the "N" of "OMN" falls between two denticles.	The tips of the letters “AL” in “AUSTRALIA” are each in line with a rim denticle, while the tips of the letters “IA” fall between two denticles
Birmingham	-	The tips of the letters “AL” in “AUSTRALIA” each fall between two denticles, while the tips of the letters “IA” are each in line with a rim denticle.
Calcutta	The upstroke in the "N" of "OMN" lines up with a denticle	The tip of the letter “L” in “AUSTRALIA” is in line with a rim denticle, while the tips of the letters “A” and “IA” fall between two denticles.

The research done by Mullett into the die records of the Melbourne Mint enables us to determine the exact dates on which each of the four 1931 penny varieties were struck.

Production Ranged From August 1931 Through to July 1932

The first 1931 pennies were struck on (or shortly after) August 13^th, 1931. Mullett states that “At the end of the trials of the 1930 reverses, the obverse die A2B10 was used with a 1931 reverse for a production of 46,000.^[17]” Working back from Mulllett’s comments on each die, hub and master die, it is possible to determine that these coins had the Indian obverse, and the standard reverse. On the 3^rd, 10^th and 11^th of September 1931, a number of 1931 pennies with the London obverse and the Dropped 1 reverse were struck. Based on Mullett’s research, the current best estimate of the mintage for these coins is 279,000 coins.

The following comment indicates the date that the 1931 pennies with the Indian obverse and the Dropped 1 reverse were struck on September 11^th 1931: “…the reverse S150 with obverse A2B16 107 was at the presses on 11.9.31 for nil thousand and cracking was the cause of failure.^[18]”

The balance of the production of 1931 pennies were struck between September 15^th 1931 and “about 9 July 1932”^[19], and all appear to have had the London obverse and the standard reverse.

What of the Presumed Relationship Between the 1930 Penny and the 1931 Indian Pennies?

Many collectors have long presumed that as the 1930 penny and 1931 Indian penny with the dropped 1 reverse both share the Indian obverse, that the same dies were used to strike them. In 1960, James Hunt Deacon made the following comment regarding the 1931 dropped 1 penny in a South Australian Numismatic Society Journal article covering “The Story of Australia’s Coinage and Currency”: “Next we have the famous 1930 penny, which except for the overdated threepence, is the rarest coin of the series. Linked with the 1930 penny is a variety of the 1931 issue, which has the last figure of the date rather out of line with the other three. This is probably the result of the 1930 die being re-engraved with the 1931 date. This is quite easy to distinguish while examining the two varieties together.^[20]

According to Mullett’s research that is not quite the case - obverse die A2B10 was indeed one of the three obverse dies used to strike 1930 pennies on August 13^th 1931, and it was also used to strike the 1931 Indian pennies with the standard (Birmingham) reverse later the same day.

However, the obverse die used on the 1931 Indian pennies with the dropped 1 reverse was labelled A2B16-107. That die was struck in “No. 3” steel^[21], which is the same steel as used for obverse die number 108 - one of the other three obverse dies used to strike the 1930 pennies in August 1931.

Physical confirmation of this distinction can be seen when we examine examples of both coins - the 1931 dropped 1 Indian obverse pennies all have the same obverse die flaw near the “S” of “GEORGIVS”, whereas this die characteristic is not seen on 1930 pennies.

From this, we can conclude that the relationship between the 1930 penny and the 1931 dropped 1 Indian penny is:

1. The obverse dies used to strike them were from the same hub source;

2. The obverse dies used to strike them were produced in the same type of steel, and

3. The coins were both struck as part of the Melbourne Mint staff’s “live” trials aimed at increasing productivity during challenging economic times.

Given the very limited number of coins struck from the dies produced in No. 3 steel, it would seem that the Melbourne Mint experiments in August 1931 would have excluded it from being used from that date onwards. Mullett does not mention a formal report being prepared that summarised the result of the experimentation that was undertaken, however No. 3 steel does not seem to have been mentioned from that date onwards.

A known mintage of less than 1,000 coins for this variety ranks the 1931 Indian Dropped 1 penny among Australia’s rarest Commonwealth coins. That it was struck during the series of experiments and trials that also produced the “glamour” coin in the Commonwealth series makes it all the more compelling to own.

[1]Mullett; WJ, "Australian Coinage - An Account of Particular Coins", Self-published, Canberra, 1996, p 28.

[2]Ibid, p 8.

[3]Ibid, preface.

[4]Ibid, p 8.

[5]Ibid, p28

[6]Skinner; Ian, "Australian Coin and Banknote Values", Rennik’s Publications, Adelaide, 1989, p 41-59.

[7]"Annual report of the Deputy Master and Comptroller - Royal Mint, 1930“, Royal Mint, London, 1931

[8]Mullett, op. cit., p9

[9]Ibid, p9

[10]Ibid, p12

[11]Ibid, p10

[12]Ibid, p9

[13]Ibid, p9

[14]Ibid, p9

[15]Ibid, p1

[16]Ibid, p1

[17]Ibid, p17

[18]Ibid, p19

[19]Ibid, p19

[20]James Hunt-Deacon and Kenneth J. Irons; , "The Story of Australia’s Coinage and Currency" in the Australian Numismatic Journal, 11, 1960, p 6.

[21]Mullett, op. cit., p10

Ian Rank-Broadley - Sculptor of the Third (and Perhaps Final) Portrait of the Queen on Australia's Decimal Coins

andrew — Tue, 13 Jun 2017 01:41:22 +0800

Ian Rank-Broadley (IRB) is a renown British sculptor - perhaps his best-known work is the obverse coinage design that he designed of Queen Elizabeth II - it was used on Great Britain's coins between 1998 and 2014, and has been seen on Australia's coins since 1997.

IRB's works are in the permanent collections of the British Museum, London's National Portrait Gallery, the Ashmolean Museum, Fitzwilliam Museum Cambridge, St Paul's Cathedral, the Rijksmuseum, and several others. His work at the British National Armed Forces Memorial saw him receive the Marsh Award for Public Sculpture. As well as public sculptures, IRB has also generated a wide range of portraits, reliefs and medallions.

Few Australian coin collectors would be completely unaware of Ian Rank-Broadley's body of sculpting work aside from his obverse of the Queen, yet when we view his public sculptures, portraits and medallions, even the most focused collector will appreciate the talent that he has for capturing his subject matter in a unique and compelling way.

One of the Most Naturalistic Public Portraits of the Last 500 Years

One review of his portrait of Elizabeth II stated that Rank-Broadley’s obverse design was one of two portraits within the past 500 years to have truly captured their subject naturalistically: “...one, a woodcut of the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I dates from around 1519, and the second, the portrait head of Queen Elizabeth II of Britain , from the recent year of 1998. Portraying their subjects honestly, without any artistic embellishments, these portraits are both vehicles of propaganda, possibly made more impressive and authoritative on account of their blunt realism."

The British general public was perhaps less enthusiastic about the realism evident in IRB’s portrait - there was a degree of shock that the Royal Mint and even the Queen herself had given the portrait approval.

One art reviewer at the time stated that in Rank-Broadley’s portrait of the Queen, “...the realism and almost-harsh detail of her face is surprising when compared with past renditions and modern conceptions of beauty; while most would agree that the Queen was once quite beautifully depicted on the past faces of British coins (see Figure 3), the modern likeness shares nothing of this standard conception. Perhaps it is the lack of standardized classical beauty, which has its origins in the Greco-Roman artistic tradition, that gives these two royal portraits their undeniable influence. Showing the rulers as they were seen in life, these representations of heads of state seem imperturbable and determined, an effect perhaps achieved by their realistic, untouched depictions that seem to give them power, thereby rendering them successful in their aims to create an unquestionable figure of authority."

At the time the portrait was launched in Britain in 1997, IRB himself stated that there was “...no need to disguise the maturity of the Queen’s years. There is no need to flatter her. She is a 70-year-old woman with poise and bearing."

There is no doubt at all that IRB’s portrait of depicts the Queen with poise and bearing, and although a revised portrait of Elizabeth II was introduced to the coins of Britain in 2015, there has been no official statement yet from the Royal Australian Mint that it will be seen on Australia’s coins also.

Is This the Last Portrait of Elizabeth II We’ll See on Australia’s Coins?

The announcement of Prince Phillip’s retirement from public duties in May of 2017 threw British media into a tailspin - it “...raced to the railings at Buckingham Palace as rumors of abdication, an imminent, or actual death swirled."

Media pundits at the time surmised that Prince Philip may have been encouraged to retire for reasons other than his age, that the whole exercise was in fact a "dry run" for a similar announcement on behalf of the Queen at some stage in the future.

Christopher Andersen, author of the best-selling royal biography "Game of Crowns” advised the Daily Beast that “The announcement of Philip’s retirement does foreshadow changes that are inevitable,” he says, “What we are witnessing are the first steps in the final stage of a plan that will culminate in the end of an era, and the beginning of a new and radically different reign. It is a process, carefully drawn up by the mysterious “Men in Grey” (that’s what Diana called them) who actually pull the strings at Buckingham Palace, and a series of events that I have been predicting for years.

Philip steps aside, the Queen begins curtailing her own royal duties, and when her husband dies Elizabeth II announces her own “retirement”, the word chosen to soften what will be her formal abdication."

Whether this means that the IRB portrait is the last we’ll see on Australia’s circulating coins is not yet clear, however the odds certainly are not dead against that happening.

The Melbourne Mint - The Natural Gateway to Australia’s Goldfields

andrew — Mon, 12 Jun 2017 04:16:40 +0800

Although a mint was not established in Victoria until 1872, as early as the 1850s the Victorian Government and business community lobbied the various decision makers in London for the first overseas branch of the Royal Mint to be located in Melbourne. Although historians have recorded rivalry between New South Wales and Victoria before this issue arose, the location of Australia’s first official mint was a further cause for competition between the two colonies for several decades.

In some respects, the Victorians were perhaps justified in believing that Melbourne would have been a far more appropriate location than Sydney – the volume of gold exported from the Victorian goldfields between 1851 and 1865 was close to five times that exported from New South Wales.[i]

Furthermore, Melbourne was regarded by many as “the natural gateway to Australia’s goldfields”.[ii]

While Sydney faces the Pacific Ocean and the United States, Melbourne was located directly in line with the main shipping route from Europe to Australia and was considered by some to be around 1000 miles closer to Europe than Sydney. Its relative proximity to the Victorian goldfields and ease of access to the Murray–Darling river system were further advantages.

One of the key initial reasons that Sydney was chosen rather than Melbourne was that the British Colonial Secretary, Earl Henry Grey, had given tacit approval to the establishment of a mint in Sydney on 20 February 1852.

Although gold had been discovered at Mount Alexander, Bendigo and Ballarat in July, August and October of 1851 respectively, this news had not reached London until around the time of Grey’s approval. Certainly, the richness of the Victorian goldfields were not known in London for some months after that.

The first official petition for a mint at Melbourne was not sent by Governor La Trobe until 27 July 1852, and did not arrive in London until October of that year – nearly 8 months after the initial decision in favour of Sydney had been made.

The position adopted by the British Treasury when they received Victoria’s request was that the undertaking made by Earl Grey to New South Wales was to be honoured, and that the question of a second mint in Melbourne would be addressed only when the success (or otherwise) of the Sydney Mint had been determined.

The First Dies Sank In a Shipwreck Off the Coast of Ceylon

As the question of the purity of Australian gold had been resolved by 1866, along with plans for complete uniformity among all sovereigns struck within the British Empire, the relevant decision makers in London would have been satisfied that the operation of a branch of the Royal Mint on the opposite side of the world did not pose a significant risk to the reputation of the Empire’s coinage, nor would its operation be a drain on Britain’s resources.

A second petition was made in 1865 by Victoria for a mint in Melbourne, and the Victorian Mint Act was passed on 6 September 1867.

Several key staff involved in the establishment of the Sydney Mint were seconded to perform the same duties in Melbourne, with the balance of the staff arriving from London in January 1872.

The opening ceremony took place on 12 June 1872, with the first coins being struck by Governor Sir John Manners-Sutton and his wife.

The early months of the Melbourne Mint were fraught with difficulties, not least of which was the complete loss of an important batch of dies in a shipwreck off the coast of Ceylon in November 1871.

The Royal Engineer in charge of the establishment of the Melbourne Mint, Colonel Ward, had actually requested that dies dated 1870 and 1871 be sent.

His request for dies dated 1870 was declined by the Royal Mint and, as most of his staff would not be in Melbourne until January 1872, the dies dated 1871 would be redundant.

Ward made a further request for 1872-dated dies, and it was these that went down with the Rangoon in the Port of Galle in November 1871. In order to minimise the impact of a similar unforeseen event, the next batch of dies was split into two separate parcels, which arrived in April and May 1872.

The efficiency of the Melbourne Mint’s coin production in the early days left much to be desired – half sovereigns were not being produced at all, and the number of sovereigns that the mint was obtaining per pair of dies was far below what was necessary.

This inefficiency led to a marked shortage of dies towards the end of the year, and there was some concern that at the rate the existing stock of dies were being destroyed, and given the length of time it took for replacements to be obtained from London, the Melbourne Mint might run out of dies altogether.

The Danish Jeweller Julius Hogarth Experimented With the Production of the Melbourne Mint’s First Dies

In an attempt to make the most of the mint’s scarce resources until further dies arrived from London, Colonel Ward engaged the services of a die engraver in Melbourne by the name of Julius Hogarth.

Hogarth was a Danish jeweller who had arrived in Sydney in 1852 with a Norwegian named Conrad Erichsen.

Together, the two men established a jewellery business that gained some repute, producing some of the most expensive and keenly sought-after jewellery and sculpture in Australia at that time.

Their exceptional technical skills and creativity saw them emerge among the first artisans in Australia to incorporate local flora and fauna in decorative artworks. They are also well known among numismatists for the small number of silver threepence tokens they issued between 1858 and 1860, which remain eminently collectable today. Their business skills did not match their technical skills, unfortunately, and in 1860 Hogarth and Erichsen were bankrupt.

Julius Hogarth had travelled to Melbourne in 1866 with the specific aim of gaining employment at the new branch mint, and Ward’s commission required him to experiment with the production of dies.

Such a task requires highly specialised skills, and it is probably hardly surprising that, despite his acknowledged talents, Hogarth regarded his work in producing dies as “a failure altogether”.

He came up with the idea of altering the dates of existing dies so that they could be used if they were required. The result of this work remains evident for collectors today.

Essentially, Hogarth added a number “2” to the date of 60 obverse dies, and although his work significantly increased the number of coins the Melbourne Mint was able to produce during 1872, it cannot be regarded as impeccable since the number “1” can still be seen under the “2” on many 1872 Shield sovereigns available to collectors today.

The additional replacement dies ordered by Ward in July 1872 arrived in Melbourne in October, thus allowing the Melbourne Mint to move forward without further impediment. Julius Hogarth went on to obtain full-time employment as a medal engraver with the medal producers Stokes and Martin, the business that acquired much of the equipment of the failed Kangaroo Office. Many medals and tokens engraved by Hogarth for Stokes remain available to collectors today.

By the time of its closure in 1931, the Melbourne Mint had gone on to produce the highest number of sovereigns issued by any branch of the Royal Mint – a clear reflection of the richness of the goldfields of Bendigo and Ballarat.

It was at these same goldfields that the notorious Eureka Stockade took place back in 1854, an event that was influential in shaping the collective Australian psyche.

The wealth of the Victorian goldfields, often when spent as gold sovereigns from the Melbourne Mint, for ever transformed the architecture, society and culture of Australia.

Much of this transformation may be traced through a collection of sovereigns from the Melbourne Mint.

Collecting the Sovereigns Struck at the Melbourne Mint

A complete set of Melbourne Mint sovereigns spans 59 years, 7 obverse and reverse types, and 72 dates.

Although this set is nowhere as difficult to achieve as a complete set from the Sydney Mint, there are enough truly rare coins in the Melbourne set to present even the most earnest and well-funded collector with a challenge.

Many dates from the Melbourne Mint are seen but once or twice a decade in superior quality, and are coveted by discerning collectors when they do happen to become available.

For collectors seeking just one representative gold sovereign from the Melbourne Mint, the Queen Victoria Young Head obverse may be considered to be the preferred choice.

The full spectrum of rarity and affordability may be found in both the Shield and St George series, leaving the collectors with a wide range from which to select a coin that for them best captures the Eureka spirit of the Victorian goldfields.

[i] Brian Fitzpatrick, The British Empire in Australia, p 109.

[ii] Cook McCalman and Ed Reeves, Gold: Forgotten Histories and Lost Objects of Australia, p 52.

The 1966 Silver Australian Uniface Obverse Pattern Dollar - One Of Australia's Most Important Numismatic Items

andrew — Thu, 22 Dec 2016 03:55:17 +0800

In the middle of 2015, a 1966 silver Australian uniface obverse pattern dollar coin was offered for sale via public auction. This coin had not been seen on the open market since March 1988, so it was an exciting offering. Excitement was building in the collector market as the 50^th anniversary of decimal currency approached, however despite the topicality that the coin has, it was passed in without being sold.

Although coins are passed in at auction all the time, I was a little surprised by the result - the little I knew of the coin told me that it was incredibly important. The only other time that I had seen it offered for sale was in an auction conducted by Spink in Sydney in March 1988, their landmark Bicentennial sale. That auction ran across two days, and had a total pre-sale value of $2.5 million. Taking inflation into account, this is equivalent to $5.5 million in today’s dollars,^⁠1 and was an auction of unprecedented size back then.

The auction contained an incredible array of historic numismatic items - the Mick Vort Ronald collection of Australian banknotes and the Paul Worth collection of Holey Dollars to name just two portions of unparalleled importance. The list of other significant numismatic items in that sale is not short either - it included many pre-decimal pattern and proof coins, numerous proof and pattern gold coins, as well as some of the most important Australian tokens ever struck. Estimated at $15,000, the 1966 uniface obverse pattern dollar was among the most valuable items in the entire sale.

I have since learned that the coin had also been offered in the Spink Auction #20, held in Sydney in November 1986. In that earlier auction, the coin had an estimate that matched the finest known 1855 half sovereign (arguably Australia’s rarest circulating coin), and exceeded that of a 1911 silver 4-coin matte proof set - the only known proof set of Australia’s first Commonwealth coins.

I couldn’t understand how a coin could fall from a position of such prominence to suffering from a complete lack of interest in 2016. This lack of interest told me that collectors simply didn’t know what the coin was, much less how important it was.

This lack of knowledge should not be surprising - other than the description in the auction catalogues that it has been included in and a passing reference to the November 1986 auction, absolutely nothing of substance has been published on this coin.

On face value, this coin is incredibly important to Australian decimal coin collectors, and by extension could also be regarded as being among Australia’s most important coins. Not only would it have been the highest denomination coin in the Australian decimal currency system, it is the only example in private hands. It is dated 18 years before the first Australian one dollar coins were issued into circulation, and is a unique link to the evolution of decimal currency in Australia.

Despite all of that, it was jarring to me that the coin didn’t sell when it was offered at auction. Perhaps it was passed in with good reason? I wanted to clear all my existing assumptions about the coin, which first meant determining whether a one dollar coin was even under consideration leading into 1966.

Australia’s Decimal Currency - Just Which Coins Would We Use?

Once it was agreed that Australia would move to a decimal currency system, the Commonwealth Government formed a special taskforce in February 1959^⁠2 named the Decimal Currency Committee (DCC) to research a number of important issues, with a view to making recommendations to decision makers at the appropriate time.

One of the decisions the DCC was tasked to make was just which coins Australians would use under the decimal currency system - would the pre-decimal coins simply be replaced by decimal equivalents? Would they be the same size and in the same metal? Would completely different denominations be created, and different metals used?

The DCC presented it’s final report to the Treasurer on August 18^th 1960. It recommended “…the provision of the following subsidiary coins under a 10s.- cent decimal system: 20 cents (=2s.), 10 cents (=1s.), 5 cents (=6d.), 1 cent (=1.2d.) It is suggested that consideration be given to the minting of 50-cent (=5s.) and 2-cent (=2.4d.) coins, if and when a new range of decimal coins of smaller size than existing coins is minted.^⁠3”

Based on the information that I have seen, at no stage was the idea of a one dollar coin considered by the DCC. On this basis, there may not seem to be a compelling reason for a pattern one dollar coin to have been struck four years after the DCC’s final report was tabled.

Why Has This Coin Been Classified As A Dollar?

If a dollar coin had not been considered by the DCC, why then has this coin been classified as a dollar coin for several decades now?

Crown and dollar-sized coins have been issued by many countries for close to five hundred years now - the technical characteristics common to all of them are a diameter ranging between 35 and 40mm, and a composition of silver.

The diameter and alloy of the 1966 uniface obverse pattern dollar both correspond neatly with those criteria, easily passing “The Duck Test” - that is, if a thing looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and swims like a duck, there is quite a good chance it is in fact a duck.

The logic behind “The Duck Test” at least indicates that this coin is most likely a silver dollar.

Same Same, But Different

Despite its general similarity to a crown or dollar, the technical characteristics of this coin differ meaningfully from what I expect they would be, if a one dollar coin was under consideration leading into 1966.

It is the rule rather than the exception that governments ensure there is a uniformity to the alloys used across circulating coins, and also that there is a direct relationship between the size and the face value of each denomination. On this basis, I would expect the coin to be 80% silver and 20% copper, and weigh double the 1966 silver 50¢ coin.

If the coin did not meet those criteria, I would at least expect it to match the characteristics of other crown or dollar-sized coins released elsewhere in the British Commonwealth around the same time.

Auction Lot Description and Stated Technical Specifications:

“ELIZABETH II, Royal Mint London pattern silver dollar, 1966, reverse plain, edge plain (24.42g). Peripheral toning, satin frosted finish, choice uncirculated and excessively rare, the only example in private hands. Ex Spink Australia Sale 24 (lot 1163). There is a single specimen in the National Coin Collection at the Mint in Canberra.”

Digital calipers; digital scales and an XRF scan have yielded the following information:

Diameter: 36.20mm

Thickness: 2.8mm

Weight: 26.42g

Purity: 95.4% silver, 4.66% copper

COUNTRY	COIN	WEIGHT	PURITY	ASW	Diameter
Australia	1937 Crown	28.28g	92.50%	0.8410 ozt	38mm
Australia	Pre 1946 Florin	11.31g	92.50%	0.3363 ozt	28.5mm
Australia	Post 1946 Florin	11.31g	50.00%	0.1818 ozt	28.5mm
Australia	1966 Fifty Cent	13.28g	80.00%	0.3416 ozt	31.5mm
United States	50 Cent Pre 1964	12.50g	90.00%	0.3617 ozt	30.6mm
United States	50 Cent 1965-'70	11.50g	40.00%	0.1479 ozt	30.6mm
United States	50 Cent 1971 ~	11.34g	Copper / Nickel		30.6mm
Canada	One Dollar ~ 1966	23.3276g	80.00%	0.6000 ozt	36mm
Canada	One Dollar ~ 1972	23.3276g	50.00%	0.3750 ozt	36mm
New Zealand	One Crown 1949	28.28g	50.00%	0.4546 ozt	38.6mm
South Africa	5 Shillings ~ 1960	28.28g	50.00%	0.4546 ozt	38.8mm
South Africa	50 Cents 1961 ~	28.28g	50.00%	0.4546 ozt	38.8mm
Great Britain	Crown 1935	28.2759g	50.00%	0.4546 ozt	38mm
Great Britain	Crown 1935	28.2759g	92.50%	0.8410 ozt	38mm

The table shows that the weight of the pattern silver dollar is not double that of the 1966 round 50¢ coin, nor is the purity the same. The purity, diameter and weight of the pattern silver dollar is also different to the large dollar and crown sized coins struck for other Commonwealth nations around the same time.

Taxonomy is the term used to describe the practice of classifying things - coins are classified according to their face value, date, mint of manufacture and by the designs seen on them. Standard numismatic taxonomy demands that each and every coin be allocated a denomination, even if one hadn’t been considered at the time it was struck.

Similar Patterns Held By The Royal Collection Trust

Several similar British uniface patterns of the Machin obverse are housed in the Royal Collection Trust (RCT), the entity that houses the art collection of the British Royal Family. The RCT is acknowledged as housing the world’s largest private collection of art. There are several different types among them - they are variously noted by the RCT as having a diameter ranging between 2.66cm (26.6mm) and 3.60cm (36mm), and as having been struck in both silver and copper-nickel.^⁠4 Although the purity of the silver alloy used in the Machin obverse patterns is not mentioned, it is clear that these technical characteristics correspond very closely with the Australian 1966 uniface obverse pattern dollar.

What is most interesting about the patterns held by the RCT is that they are classified as being either a “Uniface pattern for decimal coinage” or a “Uniface Pattern 20 Decimal Pence”. The decimal 20 pence coin was not struck for circulation in England until 1982, so clearly there is a precedent for British Commonwealth coins to be classified as a denomination not in current production.

Just why 20 pence was selected as the denomination to be allocated to the uniface obverse patterns held by the RCT is not yet clear - the weight and diameter of the Machin obverse patterns correspond most closely with the pre-decimal crown (five shilling) struck for Britain, however that denomination converted to 25 pence under decimalisation. 20 “New” pence converted back to 48 “old” pence, or four shillings / double florin. That denomination hadn’t been used since 1890, making it a very odd selection for the classification of these patterns.

A New Obverse of the Queen

The obverse design seen on Australia’s first decimal coins was chosen following a competition conducted by the Royal Mint in London in 1963. The sculptor Arnold Machin won that competition, his selection was announced in June 1964.^⁠5

Machin’s portrait was well received by the selection committee, and is today considered to be “… possibly the most reproduced image in history.^⁠6” It is thought to have been reproduced more than 320 million times across Britain’s coins and stamps since it was first designed. The genius of Machin’s work was acknowledged in 1965 when he received an OBE.^⁠7

On June 10^th 1964, the Australian Commonwealth Treasurer Harold Holt announced that Machin’s portrait of Queen Elizabeth II would also be seen on Australia’s new decimal coins.^⁠8

Holt announced another change at the same time, that the Australian Commonwealth Government had decided that the legend around Machin’s portrait would convey dignity and simplicity.

To achieve this, the lettering around Machin’s portrait was to be in English and significantly shortened. When compared to the relatively long obverse legends on Australia’s pre-decimal coins - written in Latin and referring to the Queen’s divine right to rule, the new obverse legend was indeed dignified and simple.

Patterns - An Important Role Between Concept and Final Design

Numismatic patterns are stated to “…often play an important role in the often-lengthy numismatic route from conception to final design^⁠9.” In private correspondence with a former RAM staff member, he stated that the 1966 silver uniface obverse pattern dollar was an early prototype struck to tangibly demonstrate the Machin obverse that would appear on Australia’s decimal coins. As an aside, he also stated that in the late 1960’s, one of Australia’s most prominent coin collectors had offered to purchase the Machin uniface obverse pattern dollar held by the Royal Australian Mint for $10,000, but that his offer was rejected without hesitation. Taking inflation into account, this offer is equivalent to $126,000 in today’s dollars^⁠10 - a significant sum of money indeed.

Confirmation that patterns of Australia’s first decimal coins were struck between 1964 and 1966 can be found in the Commonwealth Hansard, of all places. During Senate Question Time in July 1998, Senator Bill O’Chee posed a question on notice to the Minister representing the Treasurer regarding Australia’s first two-cent coins:

——

Senator O'Chee asked the Minister representing the Treasurer (Senator Kemp), upon notice, on 2 July 1998:^⁠11

When was the first design for the 2 cent coin approved by the Federal Government?

Who prepared the design for the 2 cent coin?

When was the design brief, or similar document requesting such a design, issued by the Federal Government?

Did the preparation of such a design entail the striking of sample coins; if so, when and where were the first sample 2 cent coins struck?

Senator Kemp (Assistant Treasurer):

“The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question:

The Royal Australian Mint has advised that sample coins were struck and that samples of coins struck in different sizes, alloys and configurations are held at the Royal Australian Mint.

These were struck at the Royal Mint London and the Royal Mint Melbourne but dates of striking are not clear from the records, which simply indicate that they were acquired in 1966.

It is thought that the first strikings were in London and probably late in 1964 or early in 1965. Production of coin commenced about March 1965.^⁠12”

——

An Exclusive Group of Key Decision Makers

The existence of the 1966 uniface obverse pattern dollar tells us that it was necessary or desirable for a tangible and three-dimensional model of Machin’s proposed portrait to be viewed by a very exclusive group people involved in the conception, design and production of Australia’s decimal coins. It was not seen in Australian print media, and was not displayed to the general public.

Harold Holt is the public figure referred to most often in discussions regarding the introduction of decimal currency in Australia, so we can presume that this pattern had been examined and handled by him. It is also conceivable that members of the Decimal Currency Committee and the Decimal Currency Board may also have been given the opportunity to review the pattern. Finally, it is also obvious that the pattern was also used internally within the Canberra and Melbourne mints to guide decision making regarding the final appearance of the Queen’s portrait seen on our circulating coinage.

All of the above information indicates that the 1966 silver obverse pattern dollar was struck as an early prototype of the Machin portrait of Elizabeth II, and was viewed exclusively by key decision makers involved with the introduction of decimal currency to Australia.

High Art Tempered by the Realities of Mass Production

Machin is certainly not the the first numismatic artist to have had his initial design reviewed, adjusted and refined numerous times before it entered mass production on a coin, nor will he be the last. The unique characteristics that a coin offers as an artistic medium ensure they must be taken into consideration well before a design enters mass production.

Coins are of course (in the main) small, round and made of metal, which means that many of the tools an artist will normally use to express a design are not available to them. So they can bear up to the rigours of circulation, circulating coins must also have a relatively low relief, which further restricts the way a designer may express themselves.

The Purest Expression of Machin’s Celebrated Portrait

When we examine the 1966 silver Australian uniface obverse pattern dollar in detail, we can see that it has a very deep relief, even when compared to the 1966 pattern 50¢. The difference between the relief of the pattern dollar and the proof and circulating 50¢ is even more pronounced.

The pattern dollar exhibits far more detail than the circulation strike - there is much more detail in the eye, nose and mouth. The fine detail of the hair, drapery and crown on the pattern dollar is incredibly sharp when compared to the pattern, proof and circulating 50¢.

Both sections of the obverse legend on the pattern dollar start at 6 o’clock, and then extend upward around the portrait either side, whereas the obverse legend on the 1966 pattern, 1966 proof and 1966 circulation coins all start at 6, and run continuously clockwise around the entire rim.

It is evident that the lettering in the font was simplified further after the production of the obverse pattern dollar, and that the pellet was also removed from obverse legend.

The design elements seen on the 1966 proof and circulating 50¢ coins are noticeably much thicker than the fine detail seen on the pattern dollar.

We can see from the above research that the 1966 Australian silver uniface obverse pattern dollar is a dollar coin in name rather than in denomination, and that it’s technical characteristics correspond very closely with the equivalent British uniface obverse patterns held by the Royal Collection Trust. It is clear that it captures the purest expression of Machin’s celebrated portrait, that it is unique in private hands, and is the only obverse pattern of any Australian coin available to collectors.

¹http://www.rba.gov.au/calculator/

²http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;orderBy=d...

³http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;orderBy=d...

⁴https://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/search#/3/collection/44384...

⁵http://www.royalmint.com/discover/royalty/the-royal-portraits

⁶http://www.royalmint.com/discover/royalty/the-royal-portraits

⁷http://blog.royalmint.com/the-portraits-of-the-queen/

⁸http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;adv=yes;o...

⁹https://www.dnw.co.uk/auctions/catalogue/foreword.php?auction_id=68&spec...

¹⁰http://www.rba.gov.au/calculator/

¹¹http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;db=CHAMBE...(Dataset%3Aweblastweek,hansardr,noticer,webthisweek,dailyp,votes,journals,orderofbusiness,hansards,notices,websds)%20ParliamentNumber%3A%2238%22%20Responder_Phrase%3A%22kemp,%20sen%20rod%22;rec=1

¹²http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;db=CHAMBE...(Dataset%3Aweblastweek,hansardr,noticer,webthisweek,dailyp,votes,journals,orderofbusiness,hansards,notices,websds)%20ParliamentNumber%3A%2238%22%20Responder_Phrase%3A%22kemp,%20sen%20rod%22;rec=1

The 1927 Canberra Florin - Australia's First Commemorative Coin

andrew — Thu, 15 Sep 2016 05:07:06 +0800

The 1927 Canberra florin is Australia’s first commemorative coin - enough of them remain available today to confirm that no Australian was to miss out on their own memento from the opening of the building that was Australia’s democratic heart. It remains everyman’s coin, a poignant link to an era when Australians were aware of their nation’s move to political independence.

Old Parliament House – the Political Heart of a New Nation

The building now known as the “Old” Parliament House was opened on May 9^th 1927. In Canberra’s early years, Parliament House was the social, geographic and political heart of the new Australian capital. It served as the home of Federal Parliament until 1988.

The sixty years during which Old Parliament House served as a working parliament were a time of enormous change for Australia. The country grew from an Imperial Dominion to a nation in its own right. Over that time, Old Parliament House was “…the theatre in which the politics of the day were played out and momentous decisions made^[1].”

A Special Issue Worthy of the Occasion, With Plenty to go Around

In January 1927, the Australian print media proudly announced that “A florin of special design is to be issued in Australia to commemorate the opening of the Federal Parliament at Canberra on May 9, by His Royal Highness the Duke of York^[2].”

The Acting Prime Minister, Sir Earle Page stated that “…it was felt that the historical occasion justified a special currency issue...^[3]”, and further that “…the issue of the special coin would provide a ready means by which everybody in the Commonwealth could retain a memento of the occasion^[4].”

The Australian population is recorded as being 6.25 million in 1927, which explains why the mintage was set at two million coins – every Australian that wanted one was to be given the opportunity of getting it. The Governor of the Commonwealth Bank at the time, Ernest Riddle, confirmed this unstated policy of universal availability when he publicly stated in the week before the big day that “…there will be plenty of these florins to go round, and the public need not scramble for them[5].”

Interestingly, the very first news articles discussing the new florin stated that the reverse design “…will include the coats-of-arms of the different States^[6].” This description of course differs completely from the design that was seen in circulation around the nation just a few months later.

Although the official opening of Parliament House was scheduled for Monday 9th May 1927, as that was a public holiday in the ACT, it was decided to release the coin “…at the Commonwealth Bank at Canberra on May 7, so that residents of and visitors to the Federal capital will have facilities to obtain…[7]” them. For the rest of the country, “The florin will be available at the head branches of all banks in each capital city on May 9[8].”

The Rush Was Heavy – Extra Tellers Were Terrifically Busy

The scenes on the morning of May 9^th at just one bank in Sydney demonstrates that the public were keen to get their hands on our nation’s first commemorative coin “At the Commonwealth Bank, in Pitt-street for example, about £5,000 worth of the commemorative florin was paid to a crowd which assembled in long queues, and kept six extra tellers terrifically busy. About 10,000 people demanded florins at this one bank. The rush was heavy at all other banks too[9].”

The Royal Mint Annual Report for 1927 includes several comments by the Deputy Master of the Melbourne Mint regarding the Canberra florin:

“From the paucity of coins at present in circulation, nine months after the date of issue, it is evident that the issue has been well received by the public, by whom, it would appear, a large portion has been absorbed[10].” Deputy Master William Robins went on to state that “Much care was given to making the special issue of Canberra florins worthy of the occasion[11].”

Several newspaper articles of the day questioned just how long the public might be inclined to keep their new florins out of circulation, however there is no evidence to doubt that Kruger-Gray's reverse design and MacKennal's portrait of the King were universally regarded as being suitable.

Although there was clearly strong demand for the Canberra florin as a memento when it was first released, the number seen in heavily circulated condition today clearly show that over time at least, the purchasing power of the Canberra florin exceeded its appeal as a memento.

High at the Steps and Ear

A paper written by William Mullet on the history of the Melbourne Mint discusses the challenges that Mint staff faced in striking the Canberra florin. “The design was high at the steps of Parliament House and relatively high directly opposite. It was hard to get adequate reproduction of the King's ear on the obverse[12].” Discerning collectors will be aware that it is quite difficult to obtain a Canberra florin with “full steps”, where each broad step leading to the entrance of Parliament House has been struck sharply, and is distinct.

Mullet explained that “The Mint was unhappy but could only do its best to meet a tight deadline. The Government wanted these coins to be available at the time of arrival of the Duke of York. This left no chance of revision of the design to give a better result[13].”

When we consider that just 15 weeks passed between date the coin was publicly announced and the date it was released to the public, those challenges are made clear. If we presume that 2 weeks were allowed for to distribute the coins from Melbourne to all points of the compass, and that the reverse die made a four to six week journey from London to Melbourne via ship, that leaves just 7-9 weeks for the Melbourne Mint to strike 2 million coins. That is not an onerous timeframe by any means, however it clearly didn’t leave sufficient time for significant adjustments to be made.

The Proof 1927 Canberra Florin – Sold Without a Case for 2/6

There was a great deal of newspaper coverage on the Canberra florins stuck for circulation, however no news at all was published regarding Australia’s second commercially available proof coin.

Research by John Sharples indicates that the proof Canberra florin had a mintage of 400 coins[14], and that they were sold “…without a case for two shillings and sixpence [15].” Whether that statement implies some were also sold with a case is not yet clear. Subsequent research by Vince Verheyen, to be published in a forthcoming book on Australia's pre-decimal proof coinage, indicates that the actual mintage figure could be as low as 200 coins.

Peter Hutchinson, an experienced dealer in pre-decimal proof coins, has stated a belief that “The number of coins available on the market today would suggest that somewhere between 150 and 300 coins were sold[16].”

Two of the main buyers of the proof coins were the prestigious London auction house of Baldwin’s, as well as the “Keeper of Coins” at the Art Gallery of South Australia, James Hunt Deacon. Baldwin’s are known to have acquired 25 proof Canberra florins, while Hunt-Deacon is known to have purchased 48.

The purchase price of a proof Canberra florin of 2/6 was equivalent to around 2 days wages for the average worker in 1927, which may explain a possible lack of demand for the more exclusive and expensive version of Australia’s first commemorative coin.

If the nation’s media was correct in stating that the Australian public clamoured for the circulating coins when they were first released, and if the Deputy Master of the Melbourne Mint was correct in stating that the vast majority of the two million coins struck had been removed from circulation, surely it is unlikely that 100 - 250 of the exclusive proofs were unsold.

In the absence of any empirical information confirming that a portion of the 400 coins struck were unsold and presumably destroyed, Hutchinson’s observation of a low survival rate of the 1927 proof Canberra florin may be in fact explained by the same financial imperative that caused so many of the circulating coins to be treated as a medium of exchange rather than as keepsakes.

The Great Depression followed just a few years after these coins were struck, which was a period of hardship that would have tested the resolve of all but the most determined numismatists.

Identifying a Proof Strike – Die Markers Abound

It can be quite difficult for the novice to identify the differences between a proof Canberra Florin and one struck for circulation. A detailed article by Vince Verheyen identifies a series of points used by numismatists to authenticate a proof strike, such as surface characteristics and die markers[17].

Even the most heavily circulated example of Australia’s first commemorative coin remains a tangible link to the times when every Australian was aware of the nation’s move towards political independence. A “Gem” condition example with “full steps” is a premium example for collectors of circulating coinage, while a proof striking is a truly exclusive memento of the opening of the building that was Australia’s democratic heart.

[1] http://moadoph.gov.au/collection/

[2]Sydney Morning Herald, Thursday 20 January 1927, page 11

[3] Ibid

[4] ibid

[5]Barrier Miner (Broken Hill, NSW), Tuesday 3 May 1927, page 1

[6] Ibid

[7]Daily Examiner (Grafton, NSW), Thursday 5 May 1927, page 9

[8] ibid

[9]Sydney Morning Herald,Tuesday 10 May 1927, page 13

[10]Great Britain. Royal Mint. 1927, Annual Report of the Deputy Master and Comptroller

[11] Ibid

[12] Mullett; William, "Melbourne Mint, Branch of the Royal Mint, The Establishment", Self-Published, Canberra, 1992, p 26.

[13] Ibid

[14] NAA Journal 5, page 21

[15] Ibid

[16] Hutchinson; Peter, "Australian Proof Coin Policy Development 1916-1953" in the Australian Coin Review, Issue 346, April 1993, p 31.

[17] Verheyen; Vincent, "The 1927 Canberra Proof Florin" in the Australasian Coin and Banknote Magazine, Volume 10; Number 1, February 2007, p 20.

Australia’s Next Generation Banknote $5 - 10 New Security Features

andrew — Sat, 03 Sep 2016 12:08:05 +0800

Australia’s Next Generation Banknote $5

Well, September 1st 2016 has passed, and the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has issued Australia’s Next Generation Banknote (NGB) $5 into circulation.

Although keyboard warriors across the nation frothed at the mouth when the designs were first shown just a few short months ago, I heard hardly a peep in the media last Thursday (mainstream or social). Crickets could be heard chirping in the silence, and tumbleweeds rolled down the street!

So it seems that although us collectors will examine the new note with some interest, once the general public gets used to the new security features the notes have, it’ll be business as usual. I have little doubt though that the introduction of the NGB banknotes will cause a lot of Australians to start collecting banknotes in some way or form. Sure, most folks will simply grab a few of the smaller denominations out of their change and stick them in a drawer at home, but if the past is any guide at all, others among us will really run with it and start building complete sets in mint condition, while others will hunt down first and last prefixes, and so on.

What Are the New Security Features of the NGB $5?

The RBA lists 10 different characteristics, most (but not all) of which were identified by us banknote geeks back in April:

New Security Features of the NGB $5
Top-To-Bottom Window	Microprint
Rolling Colour Effect	Colourful Eastern Spinebill
3D Federation Star	Intaglio Print
Federation Star	Reversing 5
Flying Eastern Spinebill	Fluorescent Ink

We can see from the above list that two design elements have been used several times in different ways - the Federation Star and the Eastern Spinebill.

The element I was looking forward to learning about was the much talked about "tactile element” that had been introduced - the publicity released in April was less than forthcoming about how exactly this was going to be implemented. There was some thought that it could be hidden in the top left corner of the back of the note.

I’m convinced that the launch of the new $5 note will stimulate interest in collecting decimal notes - the hand-wringing hysteria of the Twitterati has faded already, and people are back to relating to their banknotes “just" as money.

The 1861 Sydney Mint Half Sovereign With the Type 2 Reverse

andrew — Wed, 03 Aug 2016 11:39:41 +0800

The 1856 Sydney half sovereign with the Type 2 reverse (HST256R2) was for several years unique within the Australian gold coin series - no other circulating Australian half sovereign was known with this exact reverse design.

That all changed in April 2012 however, when an eagle-eyed numismatist spotted an 1861 Sydney half sovereign that had the same reverse design.

The 1856 Sydney half sovereign with the Type 2 reverse is extremely rare in any condition - research as at July 2016 indicates that possibly around 12 unique examples are known to be available to collectors.

The 1861 Sydney Half Sovereign with the Type 2 reverse is in fact quite a bit rarer - just 4 unique examples have been sighted on the open market to date.

The current body of knowledge on the background of the 1856 Sydney half sovereign with the Type 2 reverse has evolved over time:

November 1981 - The coin was first published in the Spink Noble Sale 39 auction catalogue in November 1981. Thought to have been produced by the same matrix used to strike the 1853 Sydney Mint pattern half sovereign - one of the most important coins in Australia's numismatic history.

2005 - Research conducted in preparation for the auction of gold coins taken from the Reserve Bank's archives showed that the reverse die used to strike the 1856 Sydney half sovereign with the Type 2 reverse was in fact quite different to both the 1853 pattern half sovereign, as well as all other Sydney Mint half sovereigns.

2012 - the first 1861 Sydney Half Sovereign with the Type 2 reverse was identified on eBay by a WA numismatist

That the 1856 half sovereign with the Type 2 reverse was struck with a pattern reverse die is beyond dispute, whether you believe this came about by accident or design depends on your view of the organizational culture and working conditions at the Sydney Mint during these formative years.

One logical explanation put forward regarding the existence of 1856 half sovereigns with the Type 2 reverse is that a further "pattern" half sovereign reverse die (i.e. one different to the die used to strike the 1853 patterns, and also different to those used to strike coins for circulation) was somehow unintentionally mixed with a batch of "working" half sovereign dies sent from London, and that therefore it was used quite by accident.

A more pragmatic thought is that the Sydney Mint may have been short of half sovereign reverse dies at some stage during 1856, and that the pattern die was deployed into the production process out of necessity.

It is likely that Sydney Mint staff found themselves in the same situation in 1861, which led to the existence of this particular example.

These circumstances mean the 1861 Sydney Half Sovereign with the Type 2 reverse is another rare and important reminder of the lengths that Sydney Mint staff were forced to go to ensure that production of Australia's earliest half sovereigns could continue uninterrupted.

In that sense, it ranks alongside the 1856 Sydney half sovereign with the Type 2 reverse, the 1858 Type II Sydney Mint half sovereign with the RR reverse legend "error", as well as the overdates known in the Type 2 Half Sovereign series.

As time passes, I expect further research will be done into the relationship between the die states of the different Type 2 reverse Sydney Mint half sovereign, which will increase clarity regarding the likely reasons behind their existence.

The Alignment of the Holey Dollar Dies - Part II

andrew — Wed, 29 Jun 2016 03:19:55 +0800

Following the publication of our first article on the alignment of the dies used to strike the Holey Dollars, I got a phone call from George Snelgrove - currently a councillor with the Queensland branch of the Australian Numismatic Society (ANS). George mentioned that although he didn't get our email himself, he'd been told about it by John Cook - the Secretary of the Queensland branch of the ANS.

What followed was quite an animated conversation about a number of aspects of the article, and the Holey Dollar and Dump generally. George stated that this was the first information he'd seen on the alignment of the Holey Dollar dies, outside the articles that he'd written for the ANS Journals. This grabbed my attention immediately, because I hadn't come across those articles myself.

Dies on the Vast Majority of Holey Dollars are Aligned, However Not With the Host Coin

George mentioned that his analysis showed that the dies of the Holey Dollars were mainly aligned, although the dies were definitely not always aligned with the host coin.

Our conversation ranged across the working conditions that Henshall worked under, the apparent lack of ongoing study that is done on these historic coins, and the likelihood of the dies being aligned intentionally.

We agreed that I'd get back to him after I'd read his articles - fortunately I keep anything that is printed on any area of Australian numismatics, so was able to locate them in my library fairly quickly.

Although George and I have so far gone down slightly different paths with our research into the Holey Dollar dies, the fact that two people had written about it on completely different sides of the country at least shows that it is a subject that is going to be of interest to other collectors.

Did Henshall Work by Himself?

In his first article, titled "An Observation on the Holey Dollars of New South Wales", featured in "The Report of the ANS for the 2006 Biennial Conference", John explored Henshall's likely production rate per hour and week, and the consequences these statistics have for our understanding of the production of the Holey Dollar.

Importantly, George stated (with some compelling logic I might say) that Macquarie's estimated time-frame for the production of these coins was "wildly inaccurate", and further that he did not see how Henshall could have worked by himself, and maintained the output that he did.

Were Dumps With a Diameter of 20mm Struck First?

The article that George wrote in "The Report of the ANS for the 2010 Biennial Conference" was titled "Holey Dollars and Dumps - Some Further Comment", explored the ratio of sizes between the Holey Dollar and the Dump, more to the point he touched on what this ratio of sizes, and the different sizes means for our understanding of the way in which these coins were produced. The relationship between planchet thickness and diameter was another area George touched on - he suggests that Dumps with a diameter of 20mm could well have been struck very early in Henshall's production run.

The article that George wrote in "The Report of the ANS for the 2012 Biennial Conference" was titled "Dies of the Holey Dollars and Dumps of New South Wales" and discussed how the dies used to strike all of the known genuine Holey Dollars and Dumps were produced using one set of punches - this is an incredibly important fact when it comes to authentication, and also has implications for our understanding of the way these coins were produced.

The upshot of these conversations with George, and this new reading material is that we now have a real sounding board to add to the body of knowledge about how these coins were struck. Two heads are certainly better than one when it comes to numismatic research - theories can be tested and more resources can be thrown at difficult questions. I also have a lot more questions! This shows that the New South Wales Holey Dollar and Dump remain a rich area for numismatists to explore in the coming years - even though they were struck more than 200 years ago. I'll be posting more research as it gets completed - if you'd like to pitch in on any aspect of this, or have any corrections or suggestions, please get in touch.

Aligned Counterstamps on a NSW Holey Dollar - Do They Indicate a "Special" Strike?

andrew — Mon, 13 Jun 2016 08:31:39 +0800

A number of times over the past four decades, several Holey Dollars have been described by a range of dealers and auctioneers as having been “specially” struck - that is, for archival or presentation purposes.

One characteristic shared by each of these coins were counterstamps that were struck in alignment with the design on the host coin.

Very few Holey Dollars have this characteristic, where if the top of the king’s head or the top of the pillars on the obverse and the peak of the crown on the reverse are positioned to sit at 12 o’clock, then the words “FIVE SHILLINGS” and “NEW SOUTH WALES” in the counterstamps run evenly across the top of the inner circle from approximately 9 o’clock to 3 o’clock.

Although past studies of the Holey Dollars of New South Wales have catalogued numerous technical aspects of each Holey Dollar known in great detail, statistics summarizing the position of each counterstamp relative to the design of the host coin upon which it was struck haven’t yet been collated, studied or published.

If it is indeed correct that a Holey Dollar featuring counterstamps aligned with the designs of the host coin was actually struck for archival or presentation purposes, having sufficient research to verify that supposition really is quite important.

In the absence of any published information being available, I’ve started doing some research to either prove or disprove this theory.

This article presents the statistics I’ve accumulated covering the alignment of the counterstamps on known Holey Dollars, and puts forward a few conclusions I believe are likely, once those statistics are taken into consideration. I don’t presume to have all the answers yet, and hope that this article starts some meaningful discussion on the subject, and adds to the body of knowledge of the first coins struck on Australian soil.

Historic and Desirable Holey Dollars Featuring Upright Counterstamps

My first avenue of research in proving or disproving this theory was to identify each of those Holey Dollars that have been previously described as having been “specially” struck. The following coins are on that list.

The Montagu / Garrett Holey Dollar (1788/3):

One of the most desirable of all known Holey Dollars is the Montagu / Garrett coin - struck in 1788 at the Mexico City Mint, with the portrait of King Charles III. Mira and Noble have recorded the counterstamps as being I/9, and B/10 - they are extremely well aligned. The historical date of the Montagu / Garrett host coin, coupled with the near perfect alignment of the counterstamps and the impeccable condition it has been preserved in, has led to speculation as to whether it was specially struck before being presented to a dignitary in colonial NSW, then preserved for posterity.[1]

The West / Baldwin / Worth Holey Dollar (1792/6):

The desirability of the upright positioning of the counterstamps is further seen in the description of lot 1039 in Noble Numismatics Auction 24b, the West / Baldwin / Worth Holey Dollar struck in 1789 at the Mexico City Mint, with the portrait of King Charles III. The Paul Worth collection of Holey Dollars was described as being “…the best private collection known…”, one that included some of the finest and rarest Holey Dollars…”[2] Mira and Noble have recorded the counterstamps of this coin as being I/10, and B/11. The auction description states “…well struck with the countermarks in the most desirable upright position relative to the original coin….[3]”

The Scottish Family / Ahbe Holey Dollar (1792/2):

Another Holey Dollar that Mira and Noble make comment on regarding the position of the counterstamps is the coin that has an enigmatic (albeit unattributed) provenance originating from a “Scottish family” (possibly from Governor Macquarie).[4]

This coin was struck in 1792 at the Mexico City Mint, with the portrait of King Charles IIII. It is clear that Mira and Noble took the careful positioning of the counterstamps to be an indication of care and attention paid during the production of this coin, the further implication being that this care and attention increases the likelihood that the “Scottish family” from which the coin apparently originated was that of Macquarie.

The Macquarie Tower Holey Dollar (1798/12):

Another Holey Dollar with upright counterstamps to have drawn comment from Mira and Noble is an example currently held in the National Maritime Museum.[5]

This coin was struck in 1792 at the Mexico City Mint, with the portrait of King Charles IIII. Mira and Noble have recorded the counterstamps as being I/10, and B/9. Governor Macquarie’s personal journal records that he laid the foundation stone for the first lighthouse at South Head on July 11th 1816.[6] An article in the Sydney Morning Herald dated August 13th 1982, states that “Governor Macquarie placed [a] holey dollar under the first light house on South Head when he laid the foundation stone on July 11 1816”[7], and further that the Holey Dollar “…owned by Governor Lachlan Macquarie”[8] was recovered from underneath the foundation stone “…when the first lighthouse was demolished in 1932.[9]”

In an article written for the Commonwealth Department of Motor Transport, Bill Mira pointed to “…knowledge that [these coins] were the personal possessions of Lachlan Macquarie.[10]” As the governor named the lighthouse “Macquarie Tower”, and intended it to be a symbol of “…an emerging, thriving colony … an icon of the British presence in New Holland…”[11] , it is reasonable to presume that Macquarie took some care in selecting the coin. If this is indeed the case, it illustrates the technical characteristics that appealed to the man that was the driving force behind the production of the Holey Dollar.

The Heuzenroder Holey Dollar (1804/12):

A Holey Dollar with upright counterstamps that has a notable provenance, but is not in private hands, is the coin formerly in the collection of H. Heuzenroder, and now held by the Art Gallery of South Australia. This coin was struck in 1804 at the Potosi Mint, and features the portrait of King Charles IIII. Mira and Noble have recorded the counterstamps as being A/9, and I/10.

Heinrich Heuzenroeder was a pharmacist in Adelaide, and had a collection of over eleven thousand coins and tokens. He has been described as being “The leading light in the South Australian numismatic fraternity …”[12] in the late 1800’s. Following Heinrich’s passing, the Heuzenroder collection was purchased by the mining magnate and philanthropist William Austin Horn. Horn in turn donated the Heuzenroder collection to the Art Gallery of South Australia in 1890.

The Roth Family Holey Dollar (1802/9):

The final Holey Dollar to have drawn comment from Mira and Noble is that owned by two important numismatists, both members of the same family (Roth). This Holey Dollar is presently believed to have been purchased by Walter Edmund Roth prior to 1893, and that it was then gifted or in some way transferred to his brother Bernard Matthias Simon Roth. Walter Roth’s collection of Australian tradesman’s tokens was purchased by David Mitchell, and then formed the basis of the numismatic collection held by the Mitchell Library in the State Library of New South Wales.

The preface to “Australasian Tokens & Coins” by Dr Arthur Andrews acknowledges the contribution Roth’s research into Australian tokens made. Bernard Roth was Vice-President of the British Numismatic Society (BNS) and of the Royal Numismatic Society. The obituary for Bernard Roth in the British Numismatic Society Journal stated that “…he was one of the leading collectors of the day”[13], and further that he “…assisted in the formation the Society.”

Why Are Aligned Counterstamps Considered Ideal?

It is interesting to consider why symmetrical placement of the counterstamps might be considered to be optimal or ideal.

The answer most likely lies in the sub-conscious or unconscious preference for symmetry that all human beings share.

Evolutionary biologists have asserted that one reason explaining a universal preference for symmetry is that parasitic infestation (a condition that affects fertility) often produces lopsided, asymmetrical growth and development. Parasitic infestation adversely affects fertility, and human beings therefore have developed an evolved preference for symmetry in the appearance of potential mates.[14]

Symmetry is also thought to facilitate comprehension of information.[15]

The optimal placement of the counterstamps on a Holey Dollar is directly in line with the design on the host coin. In such a situation, NEW SOUTH WALES on the obverse counterstamp runs around the upper half of the inner rim of the coin, while the 1813 date sits in the middle of the bottom half of the inner rim. On the reverse counterstamp, FIVE SHILLINGS runs around the upper half of the inner rim of the coin, while the stems of the twigs sit in the middle of the bottom half of the inner rim.

The obvious question then is, if perfectly aligned counterstamps are the ideal way for these coins to have been struck, why weren’t all Holey Dollars struck in that manner? Could it be that the conditions and circumstances that Henshall was working in have affected his attention to such fine detail?

Henshall’s Working Conditions

It is known that the HMS Samarang arrived at Port Jackson on November 25th 1812,[16] and that the 40,000 silver dollars it carried from Bengal were delivered to Government House for counting and storage on December 5th, 1812.[17]

Acting on advice from Henshall, on June 28th 1813, Governor Macquarie wrote that he expected production of the Holey Dollars would be complete by October 1813: “…the man engaged promises to have the whole cut, stamped and milled in less than three months.[18]” Macquarie issued the first public notice of the coins via Proclamation several weeks later July 10th 1813.[19] In that proclamation, Macquarie stated that “…the silver money shall be a legal tender…after the said Thirtieth Day of September…”[20]

Despite that apparent deadline, the Deputy Commissariat advised that the first Holey Dollars and Dumps were received by the Commissariat on January 25th 1814, and that the remaining coins were delivered in 10 different batches, the last being received on August 2nd 1814.[21] The difference in these dates shows that Henshall’s production of the Holey Dollars was at least four months behind schedule.

Governor Macquarie is widely described as being an energetic and determined man, he would surely have regularly reminded the convict Henshall of the colony’s chronic shortage of specie, and the need to meet the deadline published. Macquarie stated that “…the machine for stamping, milling and cutting out the centre… failed more than once…”, and that there were “…many failures and trials…”[22]

Four different dies were used in the production of the Holey Dollar, clear confirmation that production of the Holey Dollar and the Dump was not a process without challenges. Perhaps uncharitably, Coleman Hyman presumed that “...the die sinker was insufficiently skilled to properly temper the metal from which the dies were made, and they consequently became useless.[23]”

Further evidence of production difficulties is seen in the final mintage of 39,908¼ Holey Dollars. This is widely taken as an indication that “…some of the dollars were destroyed during the operation.[24]” Hyman’s further observation that “Many of the holey dollars are buckled or dished from the effects of the means adopted to perforate and stamp them[25]” emphasizes the challenges Henshall faced in striking the Holey Dollars accurately. Given the challenges encountered with the dies and the machinery, and as production was some 4–5 months behind schedule, it is highly likely Henshall chose expediency over aesthetics when striking the Holey Dollars.

At the time, it was perhaps enough to simply strike a Holey Dollar, let alone produce one that was not dished, and had aligned counterstamps.

The Photographic Representation of Holey Dollars Over Time

If we accept the premise that the optimal placement of the counterstamps on a Holey Dollar is directly in line with the design on the host coin, it is interesting to explore how Holey Dollars have been represented photographically over time. Such imagery can give an idea of how different numismatists at different times have determined the relative importance of the New South Wales counterstamps to the host coin.

As the Holey Dollar is exponentially rarer than a Spanish colonial 8 reales that has not been cut or counterstamped, we could presume that the relative importance of the NSW counterstamps would always be emphasized when a Holey Dollar is photographed.

This is not the case however - current convention appears to be that Holey Dollars are nearly always photographed with the designs host coin vertically aligned, and with the counterstamps falling where they may. It is interesting to explore whether this has always been the case, and if not, why this informal convention might have come about.

Statistical analysis of a summary of how Holey Dollars have been photographed in numismatic books, auction catalogues and price guides over time does not yield any real pattern at all. Just as many Holey Dollars have been photographed with the counterstamps aligned vertically as there have been Holey Dollars with the host coin aligned vertically. No pattern is evident to the way Holey Dollars have been photographed, regardless of which type of publication the photograph appeared in, the year in which the photograph was taken, or the country the photograph was taken in.

Only in the 1970’s is there a discernible preference in the way these coins have been photographed - twice as many photographs in that decade showed Holey Dollars with the counterstamps upright, than showed the host coin upright.

A Statistical Review Of The Alignment Of The Counterstamps On The Population Of Known Holey Dollars

A statistical review of the alignment of the counterstamps on the population of known Holey Dollars reveals that 44 have an obverse counterstamp aligned with the host coin, and 48 have a reverse counterstamp aligned with the designs of the host coin. Just 14 known Holey Dollars have both counterstamps aligned with the host coin.

It is interesting to consider whether this frequency merely reflects the normal probability of die alignment in random circumstances, or whether it is more or less than might be expected. Making use of the clock-based schema devised by Mira and Noble to record the position of the counterstamps on a Holey Dollar, we can begin by concluding that there is a probability of around 8% (1/12) that the counterstamps will begin at any particular “clock” point on a coin. The probability that any obverse / reverse pair of counterstamps might appear in any particular “clock” direction is 0.69% (1/(1212)).

A study of past auction sales records shows that various Holey Dollars have been ascribed as being struck with aligned counterstamps when they begin at either the 9 or 10 o’clock position. This then increases the probability that any obverse / reverse pair of counterstamps might appear to be aligned with the host coin designs is 2.78%. (4/(12*12))

All things being equal, if Henshall did indeed strike the Holey Dollars with the counterstamps struck on the host coins randomly, we would expect to see around 2.78% of known examples (6 or 7 coins) to feature upright counterstamps.

N.B. - It should be noted that the alignment of the counterstamps on a number of known Holey Dollars cannot be discerned as they have been worn away. The statistics referred to here are based on the population of Holey Dollars whose counterstamps can be identified, and so may be slightly different to those expected.

A review of the statistics of the counterstamp alignment on all known Holey Dollars shows that 44/275 (16%) feature an obverse counterstamp aligned with the host coin, and that 48/275 (17.45%) feature a reverse counterstamp aligned with the host coin.

Research shows that no less than 14 Holey Dollars feature aligned counterstamps (that is, with both the obverse and reverse counterstamps beginning at either the 9 or 10 o’clock positions), which is 5.09% of known examples. This is a statistically significant difference to the number of coins that we would expect to see with those characteristics, if the coins were indeed struck randomly.

How then can this statistically significant difference be verified as not being random? My thoughts to date have been that provenance and condition are characteristics that can also be analysed to substantiate or disprove this theory.

Provenance as Verification of an Archival or Presentation Strike

If each of these 14 coins each have a “named” provenance that dates back to the 1800’s, that would be confirmation that such coins were specially struck for archival or presentation purposes.

If these each of these 14 coins remain in superior condition, this also could be an indication that the majority of the Holey Dollars with aligned counterstamps were preserved for archival or sentimental reasons, rather than entering circulation.

Condition as Verification of an Archival or Presentation Strike

12 of the 14 coins (85.71%) with upright counterstamps remain in Very Fine condition or better - this adjectival grade is clearly superior quality to the majority of Holey Dollars known, most of which have been designated lesser adjectival grades.

This superior quality could be an indication that the majority of the Holey Dollars with aligned counterstamps were preserved for archival or presentation purposes, rather than simply being entered into circulation.

Despite that rather overwhelming statistic, only 5 of the Holey Dollars with aligned counterstamps (35.74%) have a provenance that stretches back to the 1800’s. In my opinion, this relatively low percentage does not confirm that these coins were specially struck for presentation or archival purposes.

A further 8 of the 14 coins have “named” provenances, however as those provenances do not stretch back towards the 1800’s, they cannot be taken as an indication that the coins were “specially” struck.

With these statistics in mind, I do not presently believe that either of these supporting characteristics (superior condition and provenance) definitively confirm that Holey Dollars with aligned counterstamps were specially struck for archival or presentation purposes.

These facts do not at all mean that I believe aligned counterstamps are a technical characteristic are of no importance at all - on the contrary, I believe they are very important - more important than the country or date of the host coin, more important than which monarch or portrait type is shown.

While it may not be possible to definitively conclude that these coins were specially struck, as 13 of the 14 coins (92.85%) with aligned counterstamps have been located in “named” collections, this is a very clear indication that such coins appealed to knowledgeable and discerning collectors. The facts may not prove that these coins were specially struck, however they do certainly prove that each of those coins was specially selected by knowledgable and important numismatists.

Alignment and symmetry after all remain aesthetically pleasing, a characteristic that appeals to all discerning numismatists. The alignment and symmetry that each of these coins exhibits is a rare reminder of the challenges Macquarie and Henshall faced when bringing order to Australia’s emerging colonial economy.

http://www.smh.com.au/money/holey-sound-decisions–20130924–2ub1g.html ↩
Noble; Jim, “Australian & World Coins For Sale By Auction”, Noble Numismatics, Sydney, March 16–17 1988, p 87. ↩
Noble; Jim, “Australian & World Coins For Sale By Auction”, Noble Numismatics, Sydney, March 16–17 1988, p 94. ↩
Mira / Noble; , “The Holey Dollars of New South Wales”, Australian Numismatic Society, Sydney, 1988, p 24. ↩
Gesner; Peter, “Governor Macquarie Lights Up South Head” in Signals - The Australian National Maritime Museum’s quarterly journal, 91, June 2010, p 38. ↩
http://www.library.mq.edu.au/digital/lema/1816/1816july.html
Glasgott; Joseph, “Govt in the money with Macquarie’s dollar” in the Sydney Morning Herald, August 13th 1982, p 2. ↩
Glasgott; Joseph, “Govt in the money with Macquarie’s dollar” in the Sydney Morning Herald, August 13th 1982, p 2. ↩
Glasgott; Joseph, “Govt in the money with Macquarie’s dollar” in the Sydney Morning Herald, August 13th 1982, p 2. ↩
Mira; William, “A unique holey dollar and dump”, Transport Australia, No 24, 1980, p 3. ↩
Gesner; Peter, “Governor Macquarie Lights Up South Head” in Signals - The Australian National Maritime Museum’s quarterly journal, 91, June 2010, p 35. ↩
Lane; Peter, “Francis (Frank) W. Giles, a forgotten Adelaide numismatist: his era and legacy” in the Journal of the NAA, 20, 2009, p 97. ↩
http://www.britnumsoc.org/publications/Digital%20BNJ/pdfs/1916_BNJ_12_16... ↩
Ramachandran, V.S.; Hirstein, William (1999). “The Science of Art: A Neurological Theory of Aesthetic Experience” (PDF). Journal of Consciousness Studies 6 (6–7): 15–51. ↩
Enquist, M., Arak, A. & others (1994). Symmetry, beauty and evolution. Nature, 372, 169–172. ↩
812 ‘Sydney.’, The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser (NSW : 1803 - 1842), 28 November, p. 2 ↩
Andrews; Arthur, “Australasian Tokens & Coins”, Government Printer, Sydney, 1921, p115 ↩
Andrews; Arthur, “Australasian Tokens & Coins”, Government Printer, Sydney, 1921, p115 ↩
1813 ‘Proclamation, By His Excellency LACHLAN MACQUARIE, Esquire, Captain General, Governor and Commander in Chief, in and over His Majesty’s Territory of New South Wales and its Dependencies, &c. &c. &c.’, The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser (NSW : 1803 - 1842), 10 July, p. 1, ↩
1813 ‘Proclamation, By His Excellency LACHLAN MACQUARIE, Esquire, Captain General, Governor and Commander in Chief, in and over His Majesty’s Territory of New South Wales and its Dependencies, &c. &c. &c.’, The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser (NSW : 1803 - 1842), 10 July, p. 1, ↩
Mira, W.J. Coinage and Currency in New South Wales (1788 – 1829) – Metropolitan Coin Club, Sydney, 1981, p26. ↩
Historical Records of New South Wales, Volume 7, page 722. ↩
Hyman; Coleman, “An Account of the Coins, Coinages and Currency of Australasia”, Government Printer, Sydney, 1893. ↩
Myatt & Hanley; Bill & Tom, “Australian Coins, Notes and Medals”, Horwitz Graeme, Sydney, 1980, ↩
Hyman; Coleman, “An Account of the Coins, Coinages and Currency of Australasia”, Government Printer, Sydney, 1893. ↩

Australia's Next Generation Banknotes - A New Era

andrew — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 03:26:12 +0800

New $5 Banknote

The release of the designs to be used on a new $5 banknote to be introduced into circulation in Australia in September 2016 took social media by storm - there was no shortage of keyboard warriors foaming at the mouth about whether the Queen should still be on an Australian banknote, and just how (apparently) unattractive the designs were!

As much as the titans of social media would like to think otherwise, the designs were arrived at after a long and considered process, and is just one stage in what the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) is calling the Next Generation Banknote (NGB) Project. Although this project was formally announced in September 2012, work on a revised series of Australian currency notes was formalised in 2007, and is thought to have started at least 12 months before that.

So Australia’s new $5 note was at least a decade in the making, and we’d have to be crackers to think that at no stage during that period, not one person in a focus group would have said “Hey, those yellow flowers on the back of the note are pretty bright!”

There are a number of aspects of the Next Generation Banknote (NGB) Project that are of interest to collectors, and rather than pile them all into one long article, I’m going to break them down into a series of smaller articles:

1. Australia’s Next Generation Banknote Project - Background, Budget and Timeframe;

2. Australia’s Next Generation Banknote Project - New Security Features;

2. Australia’s Next Generation Banknote Project - Connor McLeod and the New Tactile Banknote Features;

3. Australia’s Next Generation Banknote Project - Apparent Controversy in the Designer Selection Process;

4. Australia’s Next Generation Banknote Project - the Machine Readiness Program.

Background, Budget and Timeframe

A number of press releases from the RBA since the NGB Project was announced have pointed towards research that shows that banknotes around the world tend to have a life-cycle of around 7-10 years. Counterfeiting technology progresses over time of course, and that 7-10 year period is as long as most governments and issuing authorities around the world are prepared to wait before taking preventative steps to ensure the public’s confidence in the national currency isn’t dented by sporadic outbreaks of counterfeit notes being passed, no matter how poor those counterfeits might be.

Australia’s notes really are the exception to the rule however - we know that our current (and first) series of polymer notes was issued in stages between 1992 and 1996, which means they’ve lasted for more than 20 years - between double and triple the average lifetime for notes from other countries around the world.

Despite the built-in security that our polymer notes have, a concerted attempt in by a Mexican criminal organisation to counterfeit the (polymer) Mexican 50-Peso note may have been the cue for the RBA to get cracking on the long-term project of upgrading our national currency.

The first counterfeit Mexican polymer notes were identified in June 2010, and over the next two years, no less than four different types of counterfeit polymer 50 Peso note were sighted in circulation. Each series of counterfeits had apparently had been printed significantly better than those printed previously. Mexican Federal Police arrested four people in November 2012, at which time 220,000 counterfeit notes were eventually seized, for a total face value of around A$1,000,000.

This attack on Mexico’s polymer notes came off the back of a concerted attempt by a cartel in Colombia to counterfeit the Australian polymer $100 note - Australian Federal Police were confident they’d seized the entire print run of the notes before they could be shipped to Australia, however just that batch alone had a face value of A$5,000,000.

The rates of counterfeit notes in Australia are extremely low when compared to other countries - experts have determined that Australia has had between 8 and 12 counterfeit notes per million notes in circulation over the past decade or so. To put that figure in perspective, the UK has apparently recently had as many as 220 counterfeit notes per million in circulation…

Even though the rate of counterfeit notes in Australia remains quite low, the total dollar value perhaps isn’t as innocuous - the total value of counterfeit Australian notes seized across 2013 and 2014 came to A$1.083 million - no small amount of money at all.

Replacing a national currency is no small job of course, particularly when it comes to developing the technological features that are needed to stay in front of the ever-opportunistic counterfeiters around the world in the 21^st century. The complexity of the task of upgrading our national banknotes is such that it needed a decent lead time before it could be implemented.

When news of the NGB project was made public by Adam Shand in the Australian newspaper in September 2012, much was made of the fact that the NGB project was “over budget” and “behind schedule”. The RBA issued a press release in response that morning, and another the next day. Both press releases pointed out that “Considerable work has already been undertaken on this project, including the development and review of banknote designs and production trials of new security features. But it is important that the new features are rigorously tested, durable, and effectively incorporated into the banknote designs. The Bank will also consult extensively with relevant stakeholders to ensure that Australia's banknotes continue to meet community needs. As such, it is anticipated that it will be several years before the first of the upgraded banknotes will be issued. Other denominations will be issued progressively in subsequent years.”

Under questioning in an Australian Senate Standing Committee on Economics session in February 2013, RBA staff understandably disagreed, and stated that: “The Next Generation Banknote (NGB) project is not behind schedule. While there are indicative dates for completion of various stages, these dates were always intended to be subject to review as the project progressed. The need for flexibility in the program reflects the complexity of the process of designing and developing a new banknote.”

Regarding the question of whether the NGB Project was over budget, RBA staff stated: “The preliminary budget for the development of the NGB series is around $25 million, of which around $10.5 million has been spent to date on design, development and testing… The final budget will depend on the number of trials conducted and the extent of public education required.”

While we all know that there can be a lot of waste in certain government departments, however the explanations provided above certainly appear to be reasonable.

Regarding the timeframe for the remainder of the NGB Project, the RBA has announced that the first Next Generation note to be released is the $5 note, which will be put into circulation on September 1^st 2016. Each of the other denominations will be released over a period of time, perhaps one per year for the next 4-5 years.

So there we have it, Australia’s Next Generation polymer banknotes are being printed even as we speak - they’ve been the subject of a careful design and testing process, are within budget, and on schedule.

The Bank of Australasia in Western Australia

andrew — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 02:42:24 +0800

Banks of Western Australia

West Australians are often rightly characterised as generally being a parochial bunch, this provincialism mean that in the days before the Commonwealth Government assumed control over the issue of Australia’s circulating currency notes in 1910, most West Australians preferred to bank with either the Bank of Western Australia or the Western Australian Bank.

Banks that had been founded outside the colony of WA found it difficult to establish a presence here, the Bank of Australasia prime among them.

Strong Local Support

The history of the Bank of Australasia in West Australia has two chapters - the first runs between 1841 and 1846, when a branch was established in Perth. Mick Vort Ronald's research indicated that there was "strong local support" for the Western Australian Bank at that time, and that the Perth branch of the Bank of Australasia was closed in 1846.

Several other banks entered the Western Australian market before 1910, these included the Bank of New South Wales, the National Bank of Australasia, the Union Bank of Australia, and for a very short period of time, the Commercial Bank of South Australia.

The Discovery of Gold in Kalgoorlie in 1893 - A Truly National Bank

The discovery of gold in Kalgoorlie in 1893 led many to believe there would be a gold rush in West Australia, bringing with it a surge of prosperity and an influx of British capital. The Bank of Australasia opened it's second branch in Perth in 1894, and quickly afterwards opened branches in Fremantle, Coolgardie and Cue also. Branches were opened in Menzies and Kalgoorlie in 1895.

The official history of the Bank of Australasia makes much of the fact it was one of the few Australian banks to survive the banking collapse of 1893, that it had protected it's depositors in a time when so many other banks had failed, "...giving peace and security of mind alike to depositors, borrowers and shareholders."

While the executives and staff of the bank reflected on the historic anniversary with pride, that fond regard was not necessarily shared by many members of the Australian public.

Stronger Ties to "The City of London” Than to Perth

The Bank of Australasia was ultimately owned by a small number of private shareholders in London, and more than a few Australians felt that it placed profits for those shareholders before the best interests of their Australian customers.

A quick review of the structure and history of the Bank of Australasia makes the reasons for this latent antagonism clearer.

Although the name of the bank indicates it was an enterprise founded in Australia, it was in fact very strongly linked to England, specifically to London. The Bank of Australasia was incorporated by Royal Charter, it had mainly English directors and shareholders, their conduct was regulated by English law, and was under the control of the Bank of England.

All of the Bank's directors lived in London - nearly all of them were British born, and nearly all were Oxford educated. Many were the sons of wealthy and successful families, and had succeeded their father or an uncle in their role. Although some had served as Directors of the Bank of England, very few had actually ever visited Australia.

While the standing and connections of the bank's board members in the the vitally important commercial district of the City of London (specifically, the Corporation of the City of London) gave it a major commercial advantage over banks that had been founded in Australia when it came to raising capital, those same connections to London made it far more difficult in the court of public opinion.

The Bank of Australasia's own official history states that decision making at the bank was highly centralised - staff carried out each of their their duties in line with a comprehensive set of written procedures. All aspects of their work were closely supervised, discipline was strict.

The Bank of Australasia truly became a national bank when it opened the first branch in WA in 1894. It was a large, strong, well-connected and secure organisation, and although it was tightly controlled by a formidable bureacracy emanating from the other side of the world, it is not hard to see why a number of West Australians trusted it.

In 1951, the Bank of Australasia merged with the Union Bank of Australia to form the ANZ Bank, one of the "Big Four" banks remaining in operation in Australia today.

The activities of the Bank of Australasia in the time between its return to WA in 1894 and it being absorbed into the ANZ bank have not been written published in an accessible format, if at all.