Q. David Bowers
Analysis: Step 1
A quick look at the preceding numbers, especially the government mintage figures in comparison to the theoretical mintages computed by taking the average of the Economite and certified adjusted mintages, indicates the following:
1794: As the numbers are so small, the data are not applicable. Only the government mintage figure is used.
1795: It seems at this point that the ratio of surviving coins indicates that more 1795-dated coins may have been minted than the government figure suggests. The idea that more 1795 dollars were saved as the first readily available year of issue (disregarding the tiny coinage of 1794) can be dismissed, as relatively few surviving coins are in the Mint State categories of hoarded coins (coins saved for their novelty by the public tend to survive in quantity in Mint State; e.g., the 1883 No-CENTS nickel, 1909 V.D.B. Lincoln cent, and others).
1796 and 1797: It is obvious that the quantities coined of 1796-dated and 1797-dated dollars are much closer together than the government mintage figures indicate. 1797-dated dollars must have been struck in early 1798, in addition to 1797. It could have been that 1796-dated dollars were also minted in early 1798 (thus allowing for some of the 1796 calendaryear figure to include coins dated 1795).
1798: The theoretical mintage figure is significantly smaller than the government number. I suggest that much of the mintage accomplished in the early part of calendar year 1798 consisted of coins of earlier dates, as obsolete dies were used before the inauguration of the new Heraldic Eagle reverse.
1799: The numbers are more or less in synchronization for this year. The 423,515 government figure is not far off the 409,488 theoretical mintage figure. The difference is less than 5%.
1800: The government mintage is much higher than the theoretical mintage. I suggest that some of these coins may have been dated 1798 and/or 1799.
1801-2-3 as a group: The theoretical mintage is 17% higher than the government mintage.
Analysis: Step 2
As no specific records survive, it is impossible to tell with accuracy what happened at the Mint from 1794 to 1804 concerning the relationship between fiscal year coinages and the actual dates appearing on the coins. The alternative is to consider various possibilities, and make what I hope are informed guesses.
In contemplating the preceding, what facts not already considered could affect the numbers? Here are some of my ideas:
1. The government reported that in calendar years 1801, 1802, 1803, and 1804 combined (in the above charts, the 1804 numbers are incorporated into the year 1803), the total number of silver dollars minted was 181,738. We know that some of these may have borne earlier dates, such as 1800, 1799, 1798, or whatever. In any event, no more than 181,738 dollars were minted bearing the combined dates of 1801,1802, and 1803.
2. The imputed mintage based upon Economite Hoard data is. 232, 760 coins minted with the total combined dates of 1801,1802,and 1803, and the imputed mintage based upon NGC and PCGS certification service data suggests a mintage of 194,206; the average of the Economite and certification figures is 213,483. Each of these figures is above the government mintage figure of 181,738. As no more than 181,738 could have been minted, and it is probable that the mintage wasn't even that much (as some were probably struck from dies with earlier dates), the only possibility is that on the average, a higher percentage of later-dated dollars survived in relation to their mintage. After all, the Economite and certification data deal only with the numbers of coins surviving.
3. In the introduction to the present text, R.W. Julian stated that silver dollar coinage was suspended in 1804, as by that time large quantities were being exported, primarily. to the Chinese port of Canton, never to return.
Neil Carothers told of another export situation: (Fractional Money, p. 75.)
"In the West Indies the United States silver dollar was accepted as the equivalent of the Spanish dollar. There was a small profit in exporting American dollars, exchanging them for Mexican and Spanish dollars of larger silver content, and recoining the foreign pieces .. It was the first of the "endless chain" type of phenomena that has at intervals disturbed our national finances. In 1806, Jefferson put a stop to the practice by directing the Mint to coin no more silver dollars [but by that time the order was moot; coinage had ceased two years earlier]."
It seems evident that by the late 1790s and/or the early 1800s, large numbers of American silver dollars were leaving our shores. Apparently, this situation had been going on for a number of years.
4. Accordingly, the longer a silver dollar was in existence, the greater were its chances of being melted or exported. By 1804, a dollar dated 1795 had been in existence for nearly a decade, and the chances of its being acquired by a bullion dealer or money broker during that period were greater than the chances of a two-year-old 1802 silver dollar being obtained. Because of this, I suggest that later-dated silver dollars, such as those dated 1801, 1802, and 1803, had a higher survival ratio than did earlier ones, such as those dated 1795, 1796, and 1797.
5. To compensate for this, and knowing at this point that the comparison of government mintage figures with the imputed mintage figures (from the Economite and certification data) shows that 17% more coins survived than expected, I suggest the following:
Disregarding 1794 and its minuscule mintage, the years of early dollars can be divided into three blocks of three years each:1795, 1796, and 1797; 1798, 1799, and 1800, and the previously discussed 1801, 1802, and 1803.
The 1795-, 1796-, and 1797-dated coins had a survival rate 17% lower than average, as the coins were older and had more chances of being exported or melted.
The 1798-, 1799-, and 1800 -dated coins represent the average; coins that had an average survival rate.