Walter Breen's Encyclopedia of United States and Colonial Proof Coins 1722-1989

V. DIPLOMATIC AND OTHER V.I.P. COINS AND SETS, 1834-39

1834
We now get into very interesting territory. On Nov. 11, 1834, John Forsyth wrote to Samuel Moore, Mint Director, as follows:

Dept. of State Washington, Nov. 11, 1834

Sir:
The President has directed that a complete set of the coins of the United States be sent to the King of Siam, and another to the Sultan of Muscat. You are requested, therefore, to forward to the Department for that purpose, duplicate specimens of each kind now in use, whether of gold, silver or copper. As boxes, in which they are to be contained, may be more neatly and appropriately made at Philadelphia, under your direction, than they could be here, you are desired to procure them, if it will not be too much trouble, and have the coins suitably arranged in them before they are sent on. They should be of as small a size as is consistent with the purpose in [=for] which they are intended; and should be of wood, covered with plain morocco. The color of one should be yellow, and the other crimson.

You are authorized to draw upon the Department for the value of the coins, and the expense of the boxes.

I have the honor to be, Sir,
Very respectfully, Your obed. Serv. John Forsyth

To
Dr. Samuel Moore
Director of Mint

The expressions "complete set" and "specimens of eachkind now in use" appear to have meant "set of all denominations now in use." This would mean, as evidently Dr. Moore took it to mean, proof sets from half cent through half eagle. But the Mint Act of 1792 authorized dollars and eagles, and this act had not been countermanded by any subsequent law. Nevertheless, by executive order (unconfirmed by any Act of Congress), President Jefferson had stopped coinage of dollars and eagles in 1804. Mint Director Moore was therefore in a quandary. Was he supposed to strike dollars and eagles or not? No further correspondence on this point has survived.

The discovery by David Spink (1962) of the 1834 proof set originally presented April 5, 1836 by Special (State Dept. Diplomatic) Agent Edmund Roberts to the King of Siam has solved the century-old problem of the occasion for manufacture of the dollars of 1804 and the plain 4 proof eagles bearing the same date. (For further details, see the Newman-Bressett book The Fantastic 1804 Dollar, passim, and the chapter Restrikes and Fantasy Pieces below.) However, it has opened up many other problems not hitherto recognized as problems. Why were the restrikes of the half dollars of 1833, 34, 35 made? Were these coins perhaps struck originally for some similar 1836 diplomatic presentation? Were they made specially for Alexandre Vattemare in 1837 or '38 at his first visit? Why no earlier dates? What was the purpose of the antedated proof dollars dated 1801, 02, 03 using the reverse of the Class I 1804's? Why were the dollar and eagle antedated to 1804 rather than some earlier or later date? If one president could order interruption of coinage denominations without congressional approval, why could not a subsequent president countermand that order? Note that it took no act of congress to put eagles back into circulation in December 1838. And did not the order from President Jackson, authorizing mintage of these proof sets, imply that the denominations had to conform to the existing laws governing weight, fineness and date? Why not then date the coins 1834-35? Were any other proofs of 1834 restrikes? It can be shown that the proofs of 1834 fall into early and late series, the early being far more rare, the late presumably made in larger numbers to cover other possible demands for diplomatic presentation sets. For what occasion were the early sets? Why were so many more quarter eagles with motto coined in proof than half eagles, despite the larger number of business strikes of the half eagles? Note that the sets for Siam, Muscat, and presumably Japan and Cochin-China (1835) had no space for the 1834 half eagle with motto but did contain quarter eagles with motto, again somewhat contrary to proper practice as these were no longer current (being worth more than 6% above face). And so on ... questions could be asked all night.