Walter Breen
By Craig Sholley
Much of the appeal of the large cents lies in their vast diversity. Die varieties, blunders, mis-strikes, and varying quality all contribute to the charm of the old coppers. Understanding how these features came about requires an appreciation of the processes by which these coins were made. These processes are most easily understood by considering them in the "P-D-S" order: planchets, dies, striking. Planchets are cut from rolled strip, flattened (and, in some cases, edged), and then struck between dies in a press. Each of these steps contributes specific characteristics to the finished coin. There is no "most important" process in the making of a coin.
Planchet Preparation
One of the most vexing problems for the Mint in producing the early copper coinage was obtaining a sufficient supply of the metal itself. There were no major producers in the United States at the time, thus, initially the Mint had to settle for whatever was locally available, usually scrap, but also at times crude ingots or sheet.
The locally obtained scrap proved to be especially troublesome. Copper is a difficult metal to properly melt and it is far more difficult to roll than silver or gold. The Mint, lacking both experience and proper equipment, was not prepared for either of these operations.
The scrap had to first be melted down and poured into ingot molds; the molten metal being stirred to reduce the occurrence of bubbles (retained gases) in the ingot. Bubbles in the ingot could cause serious problems both in rolling and the finished coins-the copper would split, crack, delaminate, or show pits. These defects can be seen quite often on the 1793 and 1794 Head of '93 cents (which were produced mainly from remelted scrap and locally acquired ingot).
"Whether cast at the Mint or purchased, the ingot had to then be rolled into strip of a thickness and width suitable for cutting planchets. This required several passes through a set of horse-powered rollers. "While Walter Breen theorized otherwise, the rollers were horse-powered solely because the Mint, being under pressure by a stingy and shortsighted Congress, was afraid to spend the money for steam apparatus. (Don Taxay, The U.S. Mint and Coinage, 1966, page 82, letter from Henry Voigt to Mint Director Elias Boudinot. See also Half Cent Encyclopedia, page 15. Here, the author theorizes that the rollers were horse-powered because no one in the United States could make an engine large enough. As the rollers were literally driven by four horsepower, one can easily see the absurdity of this argument. For a discussion of the steam engines of this era, see Grenville and Dorothy Bathe, Oliver Evans, 1924.)
The rolling mills were also a source of problems. The original rollers were purchased on November 10, 1792, from John Bringhurst. In 1794 these were supplemented by a set purchased from John Harper. (Frank Stewart, The History of the First United States Mint, 1924, pp. 76, 125.) Apparently, neither set of rollers were well made, and coinage had to be suspended at least twice, once in 1793 and again in 1796, while they were repaired. (See discussion at 1793 Wreath introduction. Also see Taxay, U.S. Mint and Coinage, pp. 119-120) These problems were somewhat mitigated by implementing the improvements recommended by James Davy's 1794 report. The problems appear to have been finally resolved in 1796 by the purchase of a set of rollers imported from England, as there is no further mention of problems after their arrival. (Taxay, pp. 90, 119-120.)
After the strip was rolled to the proper thickness and drawn on the draw-bench to even out irregularities, it was annealed (heated to a "red heat" and allowed to cool slowly) and sent to the cutting presses to punch out the planchets. Prior to the spring of 1794, the cutting press may have been used, instead, for striking coinage. With the arrival of new presses in 1794 and 1795, (Regional Archives at Philadelphia, "The Records of the United States Mint at Philadelphia," Record Group 104, entries 178 and 181: "Ledgers and Blotters of Ordinary Receipts and Expenditures of the Mint." As many of these records were faithfully reproduced by Frank Stewart, wherepossible this reference will be used for the convenience of the reader. See Stewart, History of the First u.s. Mint, pp. 175, 178-179.) it is likely that the three original presses, being very light presses, were converted into cutting presses.
The entire planchet punching operation was a manual one. The strip was held under the press while the press arm was swung, forcing the punch through the strip. The finished planchet then passed through a hole in the lower die (and the base of the press) to fall into a bucket or basket below. One of the most common accidents in this process was that of failing to advance the strip properly; another planchet was cut overlapping the hole left by the previous cut. Several cents with this type of" clip" defect are known.
The cut planchets were then annealed to soften them for striking, cleaned in an acid bath, dried, and, prior to the adoption of the plain edge in 1795, sent to the Castaing machine to receive the edge impression. This device consisted of two parallel bars, each containing half of the inscription for the edge device. One of the bars was fixed and a crank moved the other. A planchet was fed between the two bars, and the crank turned, rolling the planchet between the bars and thereby imparting the edge design. The blundered edges on cents, half cents, half dollars, and dollars come not from the planchet or machine "slipping," but from the planchet either being fed improperly or the sliding die not being in the right position when the planchet was introduced. (Ivan Leaman and Donald Gunnet, "Edges and Die Sequences on Early Half Dollars", Coinage of the Americas Conference, New York: American Numismatic Society, 1987, pp. 43-45.)
Realizing the problems posed by the uncertain domestic supply and of melting and rolling copper, Mint Director David Rittenhouse arranged in late 1793 to import sheet copper, rolled to proper thickness, from England. (See discussion at introduction to 1794.) While this did avoid the two most troublesome processes, casting and rolling, it was far from an ideal solution, as the scrap from the punching operation had to be remelted and rolled, used in alloying gold and silver, or sold off as scrap.
With the approval of the surety bonds for assayer Albion Cox and chief coiner Henry Voigt in late 1794 the minting of precious metals could legally proceed. The Mint's attention shifted, for the balance of the year and through most of 1795, to minting of silver and gold. As a result, solving the problems of supply and rolling copper for cents was put on hold. A rise in copper prices in late 1795, which resulted in each cent costing more than face value to produce, further delayed a resolution, (See discussion at introduction to 1794, prior to 1794 variety 56, and introduction to 1795.) The beginnings of a real answer to the "copper problem" would have to wait until the following year.
In 1796, apparently as a result of political influence, Mint Director Elias Boudinot ordered 10 tons of finished planchets from the London firm of Governor & Company of Copper Miners. This effort at a real solution to the planchet problem met with disappointing results. Not only was the shipment delayed by several months, but also only part was sent as finished planchets, the rest was supplied as sheet. When the shipment finally arrived, Boudinot was aghast at the poor quality; cut from coarse rolled sheet, they were" almost as rough as sheet iron" and many were" cupped" (technically termed concavo-convex). The blanks had to be scrubbed and, in some cases, straightened and upset to make them usable at all. (Richard G. Doty, "Early United States Copper Coinage: The English Connection", The British Numismatic Journal, Vol. 57, 1987, p. 56. See also discussion at introduction to 1796 Draped Bust cents.)