Knowledge Is King?

Thanks so much for the overly kind words Dave, I am flattered beyond belief.......It is so much nicer to hear than reference to my being dim witted.

Actually, it 'was' my express intent to keep it simple.
Okay, engineers of today view anything that is of simple design, durable, requiring little maintenance, and working well, as in need of urgent and significant design modification.

I do share your view of the press Dave, however, I do think that it was a complicated machine by mid 19th century standards. There were also some folks in England (in 1883 as I recall) who were assigned on special boondoggle by The Royal Mint to visit its counterpart in Philly . One of their main focuses was this press that could strike with unparalleled precision, efficiency, and reliability. The innovative employment of a fixed collar was of particular interest to these guys.

Engineering, whether of now or then, revolves around basic principles and laws of physical science. Concepts of leverage, gearing, friction, screws, tension, and transfer of energy have been around for many centuries, and are still in use today. Some things just do not change. Compare the mechanical aspects of this press to others of contemporary manufacture, and the basic use of these concepts is identical. The scope of specific parameters of assigned strength, material and ingenuity of design through combined use of basic principles are what set this press in a class by itself.
Is it rudimentary primitive by today's standards? I certainly do not think so. Granted, it was not computer controlled, it was slow compared to the sophisticated horizontal Schulers used today. Hydraulics were missing, no flashing digits, etc, etc, but the Morgan & Orr proved itself, and remained for several decades as THE state of the art press for the rest of the world to envy. Design refinements have been made over the last 150 years, but basic principles remain.

For those who feel that it is an easy matter to criticize the engineer when something doesn't work as it should, keep in mind that engineers are not gods with unlimited resources at their disposal. Engineers are contracted to work within time and budget constraints. They are not given free reign to design anything they want. Virtually all considerations are limited to customer restrictions placed on them based on cost of production and projected maintenance and related monetary outlays. The engineer may require a specific metal to be used for a specific part, but is overridden by the customer due to cost, so not only the part is changed, but interrelated parts are changed, and time becomes a factor affecting cost, The part that the engineer wanted to be metal winds up as plastic, inferior to the engineer's Utopian vision, and disgruntled maintenance and repairmen voices are all that remain.

Edited for spelling.

Why are there so many of these coins available today in uncirculated condition? Yes, I know because they sat in vaults for decades upon decades. (Very impressive history).

What I mean is: Why did the government mint so many of these coins when they knew that the numbers would be far greater than required for circulation? Or do you think that maybe the government didn't know, (despite the ever increasing surplus of these things)? Was there an intended purpose for them beyond circulation?

Right you are Dave....impressive.

1878 was indeed a very important year for the monetary history of the United States. It was the year that Silver Certificates were first issued. In denominations of $1, $2, $5, $10, $20, $50, $100, $500, and $1000, they were much easier to transport than a purse or pocket full of Morgans. Paper money now was the currency medium of both present and future. Silver certificates were America's currency. The 'excess' Morgans were essentially nothing more than collateral $1 units of bullion on hand to back the silver dollar clause printed on the silver certificates. (In an age where the value of our money actually had tangible meaning. Thank the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 for that change).

If a person were to look at any silver certificate printed prior to 1934, the wording below George reads "One Silver Dollar".

In 1934, this was changed to "One Dollar In Silver". (There is a difference). The silver weight of a Morgan or Peace is greater than the 'combined' silver weight of a dollar's worth of lesser denominations.

Below is an example of a 1928 S.C. that was backed by a Morgan or a Peace.

The second note is a 1934 that was backed by a fluctuating market's dollar worth of silver.






Edited to add:

There are many 'coincidences' that occurred in the money making practices of minting and printing. For example, the last silver certificates were printed in 1963, the last silver coins the following year.
Was there some contemporary or impending legislation about that time due to projected or recently realized silver idexes?

Negative Russ. It is not like that at all. The government does not consider things like costs of metals and cost of production. Taxpayer money has all of that covered.

The only real concern is what sort of new design can be arrived at this week, so yet even more dies can be used and the public confused, collectors be bored and investors can hoard.

The costs of new designs are covered as well, and besides, it is good for the economy, more designer jobs either saved or created. Can you think of a better way of stimulating the economy other than growing government and producing more money at the same time?

It's ironic you posted that. I have always called the Morgan dollars 'real' money.

"Negative Russ. It is not like that at all. The government does not consider things like costs of metals and cost of production. Taxpayer money has all of that covered."

What about the 1974 Aluminum penny?
Moral of the story, in anticipation of continually rising copper costs, the mint looked at many metals to replace copper, even going as far as minting over 1.5 million of the aluminum pennies. Some of these were handed out to statesmen to gain support for the new metal, however copper dropped in price, and finally they decided to go with Zinc instead of copper due to cost.

Lou, I detect some sarcasm, but am never sure. I agree with the sentiment about Tax payer dollars. :)