The Copper Coinage of The State of New Jersey: Annotated Manuscript of Damon G. Douglas / Ed. by Gary A. Trudgen

Generated for anonymous on 2015-02-15 18:41 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.
39015061319557
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike / http://www.hathitrust.org/access_use#cc-by-nc-sa-4.0
THE COPPER COINAGE OF THE
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Annotated Manuscript of Damon G. Douglas
EDITED BY
Gary A. Trudgen
THE AMERICAN NUMISMATIC SOCIETY
NEW YORK
2003
Generated for anonymous on 2015-02-15 18:41 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015061319557

THE COPPER COINAGE OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
1953 photo of Damon G. Douglas (left). It appears that he is looking at the photographic plate
of New Jersey coppers that was published in 1881 by Edward Maris, M.D. Specifically, it is
believed that he is pointing to the image of obverse 43. The other gentleman in the photo is not

identified. Courtesy of the Damon G. Douglas Company.
'. at vi
CONTENTS
Foreword Page vii
Preface Page ix
Introduction Page 1
Matthias Ogden Page 5
[Coinage Petitions to the Legislature] Page 9
Walter Mould Page 13
Albion Cox Page 17
Thomas Goadsby Page 23
The Granting of the Copper Coinage Privilege Page 29
The Rahway Mint Page 35
Setting up the Mint Page 39
Operations at the Rahway Mint Page 43
[Legal Disputes Affecting Mint Operations] Page 53
The Morris-Town Mint Page 67
The Elizabeth-Town Coining Page 77
The "New York" Mint Page 89
Uncertain Mints Page 95
Numismatics of the Coinage Page 97
The Coinage Page 103
Discussion Page 115
[Miscellaneous Notes] Page 119

Index Page 123
FOREWORD
More than a half century ago, Damon G. Douglas began in-depth historical research into the
state coinage operations that sprang up shortly after the end of the Revolutionary War in
1783. Using primary source records, he unearthed many new facts previously unknown to
numismatists. Unfortunately, after years of work, Douglas became disenchanted with
numismatics and stopped work on his manuscripts. Later, shortly after his death on February
6, 1974, several of his books and manuscript volumes were donated to the American
Numismatic Society by his son.
Damon G. Douglas was born in Worcester, Massachusetts, but grew up in Jacksonville,
Florida. He attended the Cornell College of Civil Engineering, graduating summa cum
laude. In 1919, he began his engineering career with Turner Construction Co. of New York.
Later, in 1931, he started his own company, the Damon G. Douglas Construction Co. located
at the Griffith Building on Broad Street in Newark, New Jersey. Over the years, his company
helped build hundreds of structures in the Newark area, and it is still in operation today. In
1955, he was elected chairman of the board, a position he held until his death.
Douglas was president of the Building Contractors' Association of New Jersey and the
Essex County Building Contractors' Association. He was active in the Boy Scouts of
America, the Essex County Blood Bank, and the Historical Society of New Jersey and served
as chairman of the Community Fund of Essex and West Hudson campaign in 1949. From
1953 to 1954, he was a chosen freeholder (supervisor) of Essex County and in 1955 he was
freeholder director. Also, he was president of the Clean Government Republican Associa-
tion in Essex. He was a fellow of the American Numismatic Society and a member of the
Standing Committee on United States Coins. During the years 1949 through 1951 he served
as president of the prestigious New York Numismatic Club. He amassed an extensive
collection of Egyptian, Roman and Greek coins.
Starting in the 1940s, he wrote several articles concerning numismatics that were published
by the American Numismatic Association and the New Jersey Historical Society. His paper

titled "The Original Mint of the New Jersey Copper" was especially important because in
it he identified Rahway as the location of the first New Jersey mint.
Douglas' New Jersey manuscript was far from being completed when he stopped work on
it. Nevertheless, even in its incomplete state, the manuscript is an important source of
information concerning the New Jersey copper coinages that were produced during the years
1786 through 1789. Up to now, only a few individuals have had access to the manuscript.
As a result, fragments of the information found in the manuscript have been published over
the years in a variety of publications. Now, for the first time, the complete manuscript (as
it exists today) is available to everyone.
viii
For the most part, the unfinished manuscript is presented as Douglas wrote it. However,
minor typographical errors have been corrected, unless they are found in quoted material,
and a few comments have been inserted in brackets within the manuscript for clarity. A word
or phrase in bold type indicates that there is an editorial comment at the bottom of the page
concerning that portion of the manuscript.
Several numismatists have contributed to this work by providing annotations or editorial
comments. The author of each editorial comment is identified by his initials in bold type.
In alphabetic order, they are David Gladfelter (DG), Roger Moore (RM), Gary
Trudgen (GT), Dennis Wierzba (DW), and Ray Williams (RW). I wish to thank each of the
annotators for volunteering countless hours in the preparation of this work.
Gary Trudgen

November 2002
PREFACE
Sylvester S. Crosby's "Early Coinage of America," published in 1875, was such a
thorough work of research, covering the entire field from the historical as well as the
numismatic approach, that it has tended to discourage later attempts to enlarge upon
it. One of his contemporaries, Dr. Edward Maris, whose assistance Crosby gratefully
acknowledged, continued his search for additional specimens of New Jersey "Horse
Head" Coppers. Published in 1881, his "Coins of New Jersey" presented a new
system of die designation and a single plate photograph of the then known
specimens and their varied mulings which have both served to simplify and assist
further study of these coins. Neither Crosby nor Maris included any attempt to
attribute the different strikings of Jersey Coppers to their particular mints of origin.
Nor has considerable search and inquiry brought to light any attempt of this kind by
others.
This present work is the first result of an extended study which has been undertaken
with such attribution as its goal. To succeed, it must establish a more intimate and
detailed factual history of the mints, the coiners, the die sinkers, the entrepreneurs
and their activities than would have been suitable in Mr. Crosby's more general
work. It must, likewise, build up from the minutiae of the whole coinage a consid-
erably more detailed tabulation of the Coppers, the peculiarities of the dies that
struck them and the planchets used than was necessary to Dr. Maris's purpose.
It is evident that the goal will have been completely achieved only when both the
historical and the numismatic patterns have been developed sufficiently for their
exact dovetailing to become apparent. The present study makes no pretence to such
Maris did not present a new system of die designation as stated above. Numbering obverse
dies and lettering reverse dies was first done by Crosby in his paper titled "The United States
Cents of 1793," published in The American Journal of Numismatics, Vol. Ill, No. 12, April
1869. RW

Credit should be given to Montroville Dickeson, MD, for developing the first New Jersey
Copper die variety classification in his landmark book, The American Numismatical Manual
(Philadelphia, 1859). By the third edition of his book, Dr. Dickeson listed 119 varieties of
NJ coppers. Unfortunately, his method of categorization was to provide a general "descrip-
tive" identification and he evaluated varieties on the basis of the obverse of the coin only.
In spite of this, the impact Dr. Dickeson had on the subsequent identification schemata
provided by Dr. Maris was significant, if for no other reason than Dr. Maris acquired most
of Dr. Dickeson's collection of NJ coppers on his 44th birthday (84 out of his 86 coins). See
"Edward Maris, M. D. - Numismatist," The Colonial Newsletter, Volume 37, No. 3,
December 1997, pp. 1733-49. RM
completeness and is offered as a starting point for further study. Unfortunately there
remain blank spots in both patterns. It is presented with the hope that others may
become interested in undertaking the research that may ultimately fill them in.
Indebtedness is gratefully acknowledged to
(Historical societies)
(Libraries)
(County and Court Clerks)
and for loan of coins to
(Societies)
(Museums)
(Collectors and dealers)
And for specific help (enumerate)
(the staff of the ANS)
The manuscript provides only the above generalized acknowledgment list. No specifics are

given. GT
INTRODUCTION
The earliest published inquiry into the history of the New Jersey Coppers appears in
the minutes of the May 17, 1855, regular meeting of the New Jersey Historical
Society.
Mr. (Samuel H.) Congar submitted an inquiry as to the origin of the old coins
of New Jersey familiarly known as the "Horse Head Coppers" as no authority
could be found for their issue in any act of the Legislature. Dr. Lewis Condict
replied that it was thought they were coined upon individual responsibility at
a house near Morristown, and promised to obtain more definite information.1
The promised information appeared in the Proceedings of the Society for January
1856, as follows:
Memorandum received from the Hon. Lewis Condict, M.D. of Morristown.2
An Englishman named Mould, in or about the year 1781 ,a came to Morristown
with his family, and occupied the premises called Solitude, owned by John
Cleves Symmes, Esq., who had just goneb to take possession of a large
purchase on the Ohio River, then called the Miami Country.
Mr. Mould had been an artisan in some of the shops in Birmingham, and had
brought to this country the tools and implements of his trade.
1. Proceedings New Jersey Historical Society, 1855, p. 132.
2. Ibid, 1856, p. 10.
a. We shall see that Mould did not move to Morristown until 1787.
b. Judge Symmes first visited the Ohio territory in 1787 and did not take up his residence there until
1788 when Mould went with him.
03030303030303030803
Lewis Condict was appointed a director of the State Bank at Morris by the Legislature in
1812. DG
The memorandum from the Honorable Lewis Condict, M.D., contained several errors which

Douglas corrected in his footnotes (a-n) and then excused because they were the childhood
memories of an old man. GT
The Copper Coinage of the State of New Jersey
Coin of any kind was very scarce, and especially copper coin.c No mint then
existed in any of the States of the Union.d The United States, under the
Articles of Confederation, could exercise no power over the currency,6 nor in
any way supply the deficiency/Mould suggested to some of his neighbors,
his knowledge of the process of coining, and his willingness to undertake it,
if permission could be had.
Silas Condict, then and for some years previous, a member of the Legislative
Council of the State,8 and the next door neighbor of Mould,h was consulted by
him, who advised to apply to the Legislative authority. He soon had his
machinery in operation at Solitude, about two miles west of Morristown on
the Turnpike leading to Sussex Court House, where he sold his "Horse heads"
as merchandise, to all who desired to purchase and issue on their own
responsibility.' They were in weight and purity equal to the copper emission
of Queen Anne, a few of which were then in circulation^ the principal
difference consisting in the substitution of a horse's head for the head of her
c. Copper currency was overabundant at this time. Vide Report of Board of Treasury, 8 Apr. 1786,
New York Gazetteer, 14 Apr. 1786, etc.
d. Mints in Vermont and Connecticut were producing copper coin in 1785, 1786 and 1787.
e. The Articles of Confederation vested solely in the Congress of the United States the power of
regulating the value of the currency.
f. The United States had full power of coinage. This they exercised in 1787 by contracting for a total
of over 300 tons of the "Fugio" Coppers, of which a small part was delivered in 1788.
g. Silas Condict, uncle of Lewis Condict, was never a member of the Legislative Council. He was
elected to the assembly in 1791 and had previously served as one of New Jersey's delegates in the
Continental Congress from 1781 to 1784.

h. "Solitude", the site of Mould's Morristown mint adjoined, the Silas Condict homestead but
Mould's removal from Essex to Morristown did not occur until some eight months after the
legislative grant of the coinage privilege.
i. The Act of the New Jersey Legislature permitting the coinage gave them legal tender status in the
state at 15 to the shilling. This status was not revoked until 1790, a year after Mould's death.
j. If any of the halfpence of the copper emission of Queen Anne ever entered circulation in America,
the fact has hitherto been unsuspected.
ogcscscsogcacsoacscg
Silas Condict was appointed by the Legislature as a commissioner to receive subscriptions
of the stock of the State Bank at Newark in 1812. DG
Note j is incorrect. There were no Queen Anne halfpence, just a few patterns and those
mostly of the obverse. There were some circulating farthings. See C. Wilson Peck, English
Copper, Tin and Bronze Coins in the British Museum (London 1970), pp. 175-97. GT
Introduction
Majestyk a change not highly offensive in the nostrils of "rebellious" Colo-
nists, so recently under the ban of her successors.
Mr. Condict subsequently added that he had been informed the manufacture of
"Horse Heads" was also carried on at Elizabethtown and, it was thought, by Mr.
Robert Ogden, Jr.,1 under the auspices of Colonel Matthias Ogden.1 But it was very
certain that Mould's first enterprise"1 was at Solitude near Morristown."
That this was an "eyewitness" account is attested in a letter by W. C. Baker from
Morristown, dated August 8, 1855, stating, in regard to a briefer but similar account,
that "this information is vouched for by Mr. Lewis Condict, of Morristown, who saw
the mint in operation."3
At about this time Mr. John H. Hickcox was gathering material for his work on
"American Coinage." He received a letter dated March 19, 1858 from F. B.
Chetwood of Elizabeth, N.J. giving another "eye witness" account, that of his
mother, Mrs. Mary Barber Chetwood4 which is reproduced in Crosby on page 287.
She recalled that as a child of ten or twelve she saw the actual coining in the house
next to that of her father. It was operated by Gilbert Rindle and a man, she believed,
named Cox. She had no recollection of other than the stamping being done there.
A letter to the Editor from Charles I. Bushnell appeared in the Newark (N.J.) Daily
Advertiser for August 4, 1855. It began "The New Jersey Historical Society having
taken up for investigation the subject of the copper coinage of the State...a few
points...may (be of interest)." There followed a copy of the several acts of the
legislature establishing the coinage and a description of the coins. Mr. Bushnell
evidently continued his research and made his findings available to Crosby who
k. The change from a seated Britannia, on the reverse, to a shield with the legend, E PLURIBUS
UNUM, seems equally significant.
I. This mention of the Ogdens has apparently never before been investigated. We shall see that the

true history of the series starts with these two brothers.
m. Mould participated in the leasing of the Rahway Mills and alleged that he had helped in equipping
it as a mint in 1786 before his removal to Morristown in 1787.
n. Dr. Lewis Condict, born 3/3/1772 died 5/26/1862, was a boy of 15 or 16 when he witnessed the
coining. Thus his recollections in 1855 were of events of 67 or 68 years ago. Thus his errors are not
surprising.
3. Crosby, Sylvester S., Early Coins of America, p.282. Lewis Condict, born 3 Mar. 1772, died 26
May 1862, was a charter member of the New Jersey Historical Society.
4. Mary Barber, daughter of Col. Francis and Anne (Nancy) Ogden Barber, born 1 Nov. 1780, died
18 Apr. 1873, married 24 March 1800 William Chetwood, son of John Chetwood of Elizabeth-Town.
Her son, Francis Barber Chetwood was born 1 Feb. 1806. She was but nine years old in 1789 when
the coining operation had been moved from Rahway to Elizabeth-Town. She and her mother were
living at this time in the house of her deceased grandfather, Moses Ogden. Col. Francis Barber had
been killed in 1783 at Newburgh by a falling tree.
printed the contemporary material in full.5 It consisted mainly of extracts from the
"Votes and Proceedings" of the New Jersey Legislature and from the "Pamphlet
Laws" of the state and, in addition, a petition by William Leddel, an unsuccessful
applicant for the coinage privilege, and an affidavit made in New York City, August
1, 1789 by one John Bailey, cutler. Crosby also credited Mr. Bushnell with another
"eye-witness" account at fifth hand, as follows:
Mr. J. R. Halstead informed me some (20) years ago that an acquaintance of
his knew a Mr. Hatfield, who claimed to have made dies and coined New
Jersey Coppers, in a barn, (Mr. Halstead thought) below Elizabethtown, in
striking which he was assisted by a negro.
In the main, writers who have dealt with the subject have been content to accept the
two principal "eye witness" accounts with minor adjustments to reconcile them with
each other and with the legislative enactments. These accounts were both recollec-
tions of childhood impressions, carried in mind for nearly seventy years before being
recorded. Mr. Edward L. Pierce has pointed out "the wholesome scepticism with
which should be received the narration of elderly persons especially when given long
after the event."6 Thus, for the detailed, factual reconstruction of the various mint
histories, requisite to our purpose, we must look to such of the surviving contempo-
rary records, documents, newspapers and letters as time has sufficed to discover.
In the selection of material, some items, seemingly extraneous to the coinage, will
be included in the hope that they may provide clues by which others may be able to
connect other incidents of now unsuspected meaning and thereby provide answers to
some of the questions which this present work will perforce leave unanswered.
5. Crosby, pp. 275-283.
6. Proceedings, Mass. Hist. Soc, 1896, pp. 473-490.

cgcaogcsescgcgescscg
A short summary of Damon Douglas' extensive notes provided in this manuscript was
published in an article by Damon Douglas, "The Original Mint of the New Jersey Coppers",
which appeared in the Proceedings ofthe New Jersey Historical Society, Vol. 69, No. 3, July
1951. RM
MATTHIAS OGDEN
Since the history of the Jersey Coppers is intimately connected from beginning to end
with Matthias Ogden of Elizabeth-Town, some facts about him and his background
will make a fitting starting place. He was variously described by those who knew him
as "large and handsome,"7 "of good and opulent family in Jersey,"8 "an artful, selfish,
troublesome man."9 At his request, George Washington gave him the following
"letter recommendatory" to assist him on a business trip to France in 1783.
I do certify that Colonel Matthias Ogden, entered the Services of the United
States of America, as a Volunteer, at the commencement of the War with
Great Britain - That he was employed on the Arduous Enterprize which was
attempted against the City of Quebec at the close of the year 1775 - that after
a series of Services, - he was appointed to the command of one of the Reg* of the
State of New Jersey, & that he hath Supported with dignity & reputation the Rank
of Colonel in the Army of the United States through the various vicissitudes
which have attended the present Revolution, until the happy termination of the
Contest & the restoration of general tranquility - 10
This trip was in the interests of a family mercantile partnership composed of Elias
Dayton, his father-in-law, Jonathan Dayton, his wife's brother, William Francis
Barber, cousin of Francis Barber, former husband of Matthias's deceased sister Mary
and then husband of his first cousin Nancy, and Aaron Ogden, Matthias's younger
brother.11 He [Matthias] established connections and credit for imports and may have
secured a desired contract from the French Government for supplying beef and flour
to "the Islands." In Paris he was presented to the court of Louis XVI who honored
him with the "adroit de table." Leaving Paris on September 10th, he arrived at
C8C3C53C53CSC3C3C53C53C53
Footnotes 7 through 12 are missing from the manuscript. GT
See "Matthias Ogden: New Jersey State Coiner," by Gary Trudgen, published in The

Colonial Newsletter, Volume 28, No. 2, June 1988, pp. 1032-51. Matthias Ogden was a
member of the New Jersey Legislature who played a major role in the "horse head" coinage
contract, and the coinage itself, as will be presently seen. GT
Aaron Ogden, as Clerk of the Borough of Elizabeth, issued a series of small change notes
dated March 25, 1790. See Newman, The Early Paper Money of America (4th edition,
1997), p. 261. Aaron became governor of New Jersey in 1812 and president of the State
Bank at Elizabeth in 1813. His portrait is published in Philip L. Kleinhans' history of this
bank (Kleinhans, Philip L., Down Through the Years: The Story of The National State Bank
of Elizabeth, New Jersey, 1812-1937; Self-published, Elizabeth, N. J., 1937). DG
Princeton on October 30th to give Congress the first word of the signing of the
definitive treaty of peace with Great Britain.12
The earliest record that has yet come to light, regarding a copper coinage for the State
of New Jersey, is in the "Journal of the Legislative Council of New Jersey."
Monday, March 20, 1786.
Mr. M. Ogden, with Leave of the House, brought in a Bill intitled "An Act for
establishing a Coinage of Copper in this State;' which was read, and ordered
a second reading.
In January, Matthias Ogden had memorialized the Continental Congress seeking
a contract for the contemplated Federal copper coinage. Ogden may have been
attracted to the subject by his older brother, Robert Ogden, Jr., and by their father.
The latter owned a copper mine in Sussex County, whither he had removed his
residence in 1777. Robert, Jr., had married Sarah Platt of Huntington, Long Island,
in 1772. Her death in 1782 left him with five motherless children. In 1785 he was
courting Sarah's sister Hannah whom he married March 12, 1786. An extract of his
letter to her of August 30,1785 indicates his intimacy with others of the Platt family.
Elizabeth Town
Dear Sister -
.. .God willing I intend to be at Huntington on my way to New Haven in a few
days, I mean to take Betsy (his oldest daughter) with me & leave her there if
agreeable to Sister Broome. Give my duty to our worthy aged parent (Dr.
Zopher Platt) & Love to Mr. Jarvis, Ebenezer (Platt) & his wife - and believe
me your sincere Friend & most affectionate
R. Ogden Junr
May be you will go on with us to New Haven. I really wish you would.

Sister (Phebe Platt) Broome was the wife of Samuel Broome, partner of her brother,
Jeremiah Platt. Their firm of Broome and Platt had removed in 1785 from New York
City to New Haven where they quickly became one of the city's leading mercantile
establishments. The "Company for Coining Coppers" was under discussion and the
successful petition for the Connecticut Coppers coinage was submitted October 18,
1785 to the assembly sitting in New Haven. Broome's son-in-law James Jarvis by
03C5303C53C53C3C5303C3C53
Douglas states that Matthias Ogden memorialized the Continental Congress in January
seeking a contract for a Federal copper coinage. Actually, his proposal was dated March 23,
1787. GT
Matthias Ogden
April 1786 was to acquire a 5/16ths interest in this company and Broome and Platt
were to be active in the affairs of the company. Thus it seems safe to assume that
Robert Ogden did not return to New Jersey without having had his attention attracted
by the possibilities for profit in the coining of copper and that his brother Matthias,
if not previously interested, quickly became so.
In October of 1785 he [Matthias] had been elected the Essex County member of the
New Jersey Legislative Council in which he introduced the coppers bill of March
20, 1786. This bill was passed, nem. con., by the council but was defeated in the
lower house where it met the united opposition of Essex County's three assembly-
men led by Daniel Marsh of Elizabeth-Town, Rahway.
Marsh was one of the owners of a line of stages between New York and Philadelphia
operating by way of Newark. Matthias Ogden in 1785 had acquired an interest in a
competing line which used the Bergen Point route. This he [Ogden] needed to qualify
for the contract for transportation of the mails by stages between New York and
Philadelphia which was awarded to him in November 1785 for the year 1786 to
commence January 1st. Whether or not this stage line rivalry influenced Marsh's
action against Ogden's coppers bill, Matthias promptly took steps to eliminate the
rivalry and place Marsh under obligation to him. On April 17, he secured the passage
by Congress of a resolution directing the postmaster general to alter the contract with
Ogden to permit him to use the route of Bergen Point or of Newark as should "best
suit him." Within a few months he sold his interest in the stages and was patronizing
Marsh's stages for the mail conveyance.
03030303030303030303
The Legislative Council was the upper chamber of the New Jersey Legislature prior to the
Constitution of 1844. DG

Nem. con. is a Latin abbreviation for "nemo contra" which means none opposed. DG
Rahway was then not a separate municipality, as now, but was a ward within the Town of
Elizabeth. DG
[COINAGE PETITIONS TO THE LEGISLATURE]
At the third and last sitting of the 10th legislature two rival petitions were presented
to the general assembly, both praying the privilege of coining copper money for the
State. William Leddel's, reproduced fully in Crosby, page 277, alleged his owner-
ship of suitable factories and of a quantity of native mined copper as guarantees of
speedy delivery and offered the state a royalty of every ninth copper coined. Leddel
was then completing the last of the three permissible consecutive yearly terms as
High Sheriff of Morris County. He was a medical doctor, a prominent Mason and
man of property in the state.
The other petition, presented two days earlier, was submitted in the joint names of
three Englishmen, Walter Mould, Thomas Goadsby and Albion Cox. For the
proceedings of the legislature which resulted in the June 1, 1786 contract with the
English trio, the reader is referred to Crosby, pages 275 to 279, where they are
reproduced in sufficient detail. However, it will be pertinent to note that the "Mr.
Marsh," of the committee appointed to confer with the partners and who brought in
the successful bill, was Daniel Marsh of Elizabeth-Town Rahway and that the
chairman of that committee was Abraham Clark, signer of the Declaration of
Independence and former owner of Daniel Marsh's Mills at Rahway. The bill carried
with the unanimous support of the Essex assemblymen and in spite of the two to one
negative votes of Morris County's representatives, who had all favored Ogden's bill
two months earlier. Their reversal in position may be understood since Leddel's
proposal would have brought the contract to their county. But the about-face by the
Essex delegation is suggestive of more than ordinary salesmanship. The success of
three Britons, then resident in New York City, in securing a contract from the state
of New Jersey, where the estates of loyalists were still in process of confiscation sale,
against the competition of a native son, who offered the state a ten per cent higher
royalty, suggests powerful political backing, operating backstage.

Albion Cox had sailed for New York from London in October 1783 and set up store
there at 184 Water Street with a large stock of goods acquired with money borrowed
from William Cox of Little Britain, England. By 1786 he had removed to 240 Queen
Street where the postwar business collapse had involved him in acute financial
difficulties. He had some knowledge of the metallurgy of coinage, having apparently
been employed by his relative's firm of Cox, Merle & Co. of Little Britain.
Another, recently discovered, New Jersey coinage proposal was made by Jasper Smith &
Co. sometime after June 1786 on the same terms of Cox, Mould, and Goadsby. See "A
Forgotten New Jersey Colonial Coinage Proposal" by David Gladfelter, The Colonial
Newsletter, Volume 31, No. 3, September 1991, pp. 1275-79. DW
10
Thomas Goadsby had registered in New York City during the Revolution as a
loyalist but had escaped any later confiscation of his very substantial personal
wealth. He headed the firm of Thomas Goadsby & Co., 40 Hanover Square, made up
of himself, Maria and Samuel Kirkman, Joseph and Thomas Holmes, importers and
merchants. He was the solvent member of the coinage trio and advanced cash to put
the business into operation.
Walter Mould was listed at 24 William Street in Frank's Directory of 1786 but with
the unusual omission of mention of occupation. Tradition has it that he brought with
him from England implements for coining and experience in using them. The Journal
of the Continental Congress records the receipt on August 19, 1785, of a "Memorial
of Walter Mould offering to conduct a Mint." A Mr. Mould had been arrested in
England in 1776 for illicit coining at Bristol, Hotwells. A still obscure slur at
Mould's background occurred in a later petition to the legislature by Cox and
Goadsby, alleging that something in his past, if known to them prior to their joining
with him, would have stopped them from so doing.
Matthias Ogden's subsequent assistance and participation in the affairs of the
contractors affords a suggestion as to where some of their support in the legislature
came from. In addition, the site selected for their mint may have been a not
unimportant factor in the awarding of the contract to them.
C3C3C3C3C53C3C3C53C53O3
We now know that Thomas Goadsby had emigrated to New York City from London in the
spring of 1783, not long before the British Army evacuated the city in November. Thus, it
is puzzling why he would be listed as a loyalist. See "A Brief Look at the Life of Thomas
Goadsby," The Colonial Newsletter, February 1992, Volume 32, No. 1, pp. 1284-90. GT
This later petition was the petition of November 17, 1786, whereby Cox and Goadsby

requested and obtained a severance of their coinage contract; they to coin two thirds of the
authorized amount and Mould to coin one third independently of them. Douglas intended
to publish this petition in an appendix to this work. It is not in Crosby. DG
Coinage Petitions to the Legislature
11
The exact date, June 22, 1786, is given in Matthias Ogden's 1788 affidavit and
petition for a writ of ne exeat statum to prevent Mould's contemplated departure.
He described the document as "a certain deed of Indenture" entered into with Daniel
Marsh for Cox and Mould's faithful performance of the covenants for which Ogden
had bound himself to Marsh as surety. He had already been forced to pay 65 because
of their default and would be compelled to pay, upon their continuing failure, a total
of"700 or more."
New Jersey Court of Chancery, Mss, unindexed papers.
03030303030303030303
Writ: A written precept, in the name of the State, issued by a court of justice and sealed with
its seal, "addressed to a sheriff or other officer of the law, or directly to the person whose
action the court desires to command, either as the commencement of a suit or other
proceeding or as incidental to its progress, and requiring the performance of a specified act,
or giving authority and commission to have it done." Black's Law Dictionary, Revised 4th
Ed. (St. Paul, West Pub. Co., 1968) (hereinafter Black's), p. 1783. DG
Writ of Ne Exeat Statum (also called ne exeat republica): A Latin term for a writ issued
by a court of chancery reciting that the defendant in the case is indebted to the plaintiff, that
defendant intends to flee the state to plaintiffs detriment, and commanding defendant to
give bail in a certain sum conditioned on defendant's not leaving the state without leave of
the court, and for want of such bail the sheriff shall commit the defendant to prison. John
Bouvier, Bouvier's Law Dictionary (revised ed. by Francis Rawle), Boston, Boston Book
Co., 1897 (hereinafter Bouvier's), vol. II, p. 474. DG
Deed of Indenture: As used here, a surety bond. An "indenture" is a document "distin-
guished by having the edge of the paper or parchment on which it is written indented or cut

at the top in a particular manner." Black's, p. 503. DG
WALTER MOULD
A news article, appearing in a London periodical under date of Feb. 10, 1776, tells
of the apprehension of "two sets of coiners" in the neighborhood of Bristol. "In
Dowby Square, Bristol Hotwells...they found Mould and his wife with a great many
tools belonging to the coining business. Mould formerly lived near Salthill, and kept
his carriage the better to carry on the business of coining without suspicion." This
periodical records in detail the capital convictions at "Old Bailey" and the subse-
quent executions for coining. Since the name of Mould does not thus appear in
subsequent issues, it is likely that his offence was in the field of copper coining,
which was not a capital crime. Convictions for counterfeiting copper half-pence and
farthings carried a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment and usually met
with milder punishment. Whether this Mould was Walter Mould or any connection
of his must be left for others to determine.
Nine years later there appeared in the Journals of the Continental Congress, meeting
in New York City, the following:
0303030303030303C303
At this point, apparently two pages from the manuscript are missing. The manuscript then
continues with a list of legal actions involving Mould. The information that Douglas is
referring to in the Journals of the Continental Congress is Mould's petition of August 18,
1785, for a copper coinage contract. His proposal, which was one of several, was referred
to the Board of Treasury. A contract was eventually awarded by Congress, but it went to
James Jarvis. GT
An extant letter, dated February 20, 1784, from Kinsale, Ireland, from Walter Mould to
James Jarvis indicates that they were planning to go into business together. Commenting
on his efforts, Mould says: "I shall write as soon as I can from England and inform you of
everything I find necessary and in the mean time shall do all in my Power to forward our
Plans I have had an offer by a gentleman from the West of England to fix in the Malting

Business. I told him I could do nothing without your Consent but I really have a great
Opinion of it and it may be carried on in that Place with the Other at a small expense." This
letter was published by Damon G. Douglas in The Numismatist, "Walter Mould to James
Jarvis," July 1947, p. 491. DW
Reading between the lines of Mould's letter, the "gentleman from the West of England"
could have been Samuel Atlee. Atlee emigrated to New York City from Bristol, England in
October 1783 and leased the Harrison Brewery along the eastern shore of the Hudson River.
Here he produced porter under the firm name of Samuel Atlee & Co. The brewery was large
and well suited for a coinage operation. Although circumstantial, this letter adds to the
numismatic evidence that already exists which suggests that Atlee and Mould did mint
copper coins at the brewery after the brewery business failed in early 1786. GT
14
Nov. 21,1785, is alleged, in a suit brought against Mould and carried to the Supreme
Court of New York, July 1786, as the date on which he "at East Ward, New York
City, was indebted (to Thomas Eaves) 200 Pounds for so much money before that
time had and received by the said Walter to and for the use of the said Thomas...but
(Mould) conniving and fraudulently intending, craftily and Subtilly to deceive and
defraud.. ."9 had not paid. The case dragged but Judgment was entered against Mould
April 1, 1788, for 114:3:9 and 6d costs. Aaron Burr was attorney for the plaintiff
while William S. Livingston defended Mould. Livingston, as we shall see later,
represented a number of other coiners and was a cousin10 of New Jersey's Governor
Livingston.
Dec. 6, 1785: Walter Mould sued Andrew Lott (in Morris Town Record) whom the
sheriff was unable to find in his bailiwick through and including the February 1786
term."
Feb. 11, 1786: Frank's New York City directory was distributed bearing the listing
"Walter Mould, 23 William." The absence of the listing of any occupation may have
some significance as it is unusual throughout the directory to find none listed or at
least a listing as "Gentleman."12
May 1786: Walter Mould sued John Stiles who is taken by the sheriff and at the same
term Mould entered his appearance to answer the counter suit of said John Stiles, all
in the New York State Supreme Court.13
C3C530303C5303C3C3C3C53
Supreme Court of New York: In New York State the Supreme Court then was, and still
is, only a trial-level court. The highest court of the state of New York is the Court of
Appeals. DG

East Ward: One of the seven wards of New York City established by the Montgomerie
Charter. It was adjacent to Dock Ward and bounded by Smith St., William St., John St., and
the East River. The wards were redesignated in 1791 and assigned numerical names. DG
Taken: It appears that New York law in 1786 permitted the arrest of a debtor to compel him
to answer the demand against him in a civil action. In civil practice, arrest was "one of the
means which the law gives the creditor to secure the person of his debtor while the suit is
pending, or to compel him to give security for his appearance after judgment." Bouvier's,
vol. I, p. 166. DG
Walter Mould
15
May 1786: Thomas Eaves sued Walter Mould in the N. Y. Supreme Court. The sheriff
returns Mould as "Taken" and is ordered to "Bring in the body" at the next term. This
seems to be the suit given antedated Nov. 21, 1785, with the "r" representing the
gratuitous addition of the court clerk in transcribing. Under date of August 28,1786,
James Johnston, Merchant of New York City, went bail for Mould's appearance in
this case.14
Jan. 1787: Walter Mould obtained judgments by confession of 160 against David
Miller and against Garrett Sickels on "a certain writing obligatory" a bond signed by
David Miller and Garret Sickels at the Dockward Feb. 7, 1787 (sic).15
Sept. 18, 1787: Walter Mould sued James Armstrong in the New York City Mayor's
Court, the sheriff returning the defendant "Taken."16
These New York legal actions indicate little, in the skeleton form in which they are
found recorded, more than a certain amount of commercial activity in New York by
Mould during this period. They are included in this account, as will be a number of
similar suits involving the other personalities, with the hope that readers may supply
details of the transactions that led up to them. The additional knowledge thus
acquired may be of some value in filling in some of the blank spots. While it is the
purpose of the "Antecedents" chapter to give background only to June 1786, the
New York suits filed after that date are included since it is likely that the business
transactions which led up to them may have originated prior to the New Jersey
contract date.
Return: An official statement by an officer, here the sheriff, of what he has done in
obedience to a command from a superior authority. Bouvier's, vol. II, p. 919. DG
Judgment by Confession: "Judgment where a defendant gives the plaintiff a cognovit or
written confession of the action by virtue of which the plaintiff enters judgment. The act of

the debtor in permitting judgment to be entered against him by his creditor, for a stipulated
sum, by a written statement to that effect or by warrant of attorney, without the institution
of legal proceedings of any kind." Black's, p. 978. This practice is curtailed or outlawed in
most states today. DG
Douglas was planning to include the background information on Matthias Ogden, Walter
Mould, Albion Cox, and Thomas Goadsby in a chapter titled "Antecedents." GT
16
03O30303030303O30303
On the back of the final page in the section on Walter Mould is written in Douglas' hand:
Put the events in order, i.e.
1. His first coming to America
2. The duration of his stay
3. His second coming to America
With the documents that prove the dates and other material about coinage.
Put the rest (the suits, etc.) in the Appendix.
This appears to be a note by Douglas to himself concerning the following information on

Albion Cox. GT
ALBION COX
Albion Cox "was a relative of William Cox, of the firm of Cox, Merle & Co., refiners
and bankers, of Little Britain, England, and was recommended by them to Thomas
Pinckney, our Minister to England, as a capable assayer and refiner of gold, silver,
copper and lead of many years experience and the equal of any person in that
country."1 (Mr. Frank H. Stewart, who culled this information from his researches
through the official correspondence and records of the First Mint of the United
States, states in a recent letter that he suspects that William and Albion Cox were
closely related). The recommendation referred to above was that given in 1792 or
1793 and led to his being hired to return to America as chief assayer of our first mint.
Since he seems not to have returned to England from his earlier trip to America until
some time after Sept. 17902 and since his time was taken up rather fully with other
matters than gold and silver in the seven years he, at that time, spent over here, it
seems probable that some of his "many years of experience" must have been gained
in England before his 1783 departure and that he brought at that time to America with
him some knowledge of the metallurgy of coining.
03030303030303030808
A recent book titled Hallmark A History of the London Assay Office, by J. S. Forbes
(1999), provides the following information about Albion Cox and his family. DW
Page 223: "...an annotation by the Clerk [George Fair of the Goldsmiths' Company]
on his copy of the report [Committee of Enquiry held in 1773]; against other evidence
of Albion Cox he has written: 'Little credit given to this witness by those who know
him. He is capable of saying anything.'"
Page 341: "William Cox was one of four brothers who traded as silversmiths and
refiners in Little Britain. The eldest was Robert Albion (or Albin) Cox, an ex-
apprentice of Humphrey Payne and his son John. A third brother named Albion Cox
moved to Sheffield in about 1770 and gave evidence (unfavourable to the Gold-

smiths' Company) at the Parliamentary Enquiry in 1773. The fourth, called Edward,
was apprenticed to his elder brother William. William's son, another Robert Albion
Cox, who received his freedom by patrimony, became an Alderman and was Prime
Warden in 1818. By then the family enterprise had become the foremost firm of
refiners in London, trading as Cox and Merle William Merle, who was Prime
Warden in 1811, being a former apprentice of the first Robert Albion Cox."
Page 342: "Albion Cox, who was in his early twenties, became one of the original
Guardians of the Sheffield Assay Office in 1773 but left the town in the following
year. Twenty years later he died in America where he had been first assayer of the
Philadelphia Mint."
18
In a suit brought against Albion Cox in 1786 in the Supreme Court of New York State,
by Francis Raynes and William Olive, it is alleged that on "the tenth day of October
in the year of our Lord one Thousand Seven Hundred and Eighty Three at London
in Great Britain...(they) were possessed of
24
Mahogany Chairs
Linen Cases for Sophas
12
Octagon Doors
12
Packing Cases
Looking Glasses
Window Bags
Mahogany Card Tables
Dozen Crooked Walking Sticks
12
Linen Cases for Chairs
of value 112:6 Sterling
Dozen Rattans

200 pounds Current New York Money
At London on that day, Albion Cox being about to depart for New York, they
delivered the aforesaid to him. They allege that on March 1,1786, at the City of New
York and at Dock Ward he sold them and in addition was also indebted for "divers
other Goods, Wares and Merchandizes" for all of which he has failed and does still
refuse to pay, wherefore they bring suit. Cox enters a general denial by his attorney
James Giles who 6/20/1786 enters a writ of habeas corpus cum causa, but
Judgment is entered for the plaintiff Jan. 4, 1787. On Jan. 11, 1787, a writ of error
is obtained for Cox by William S Livingston, apparently his new attorney. On the
03030303030303030303
Dock Ward: One of the seven wards of New York City established by the Montgomerie
Charter. Dock Ward was bounded by Broad St., Wall St., Smith St., and the East River. The
wards were redesignated in 1791 and assigned numerical names. DG
Writ of Habeas Corpus cum Causa: "A writ issuing in civil cases to remove the cause, as
also the body of the defendant, from an inferior court to a superior court having jurisdiction,
there to be disposed of." Black's, p. 837. Also called "habeas corpus ad faciendum et
recipiendum." DG
Writ of Error: "A writ issued from a court of appellate jurisdiction, directed to the judge
or judges of a court of record, requiring them to remit to the appellate court the record of an
action before them, in which a final judgment has been entered, in order that examination
may be made of certain errors alleged to have been committed, and that the judgment may
be reversed, corrected, or affirmed, as the case may require." Black's, p. 1785. DG
Albion Cox
19
19th day of February, 1787, the court records the following: "In Court for Correc-
tion of Errors, Cox appears not and his writ lapses by default with further Judgment
of915s6d."3
A similar suit by the same two plaintiffs with the added name of John Jackson adds
the following items to Cox's alleged unpaid for inventory:
3 Beach field Bedsteads with Cotton Furniture
3 four post Bedsteads with"
6 Bolsters
12 Pillow Cases
40 Blankets
30 Cotton Counterpanes
1 Sattin Wood Book Case 104:3 Sterling
185:3:1 Current New York Money
Judgment is entered and on Feb. 19, 1787, an additional judgment when the writ of
error lapses by default.
In the Declaration in his suit "in Debt" against Albion, filed Sept. 27, 1787, William
Cox alleges that Albion gave him the following "certain writings obligatory:"
Aug. 5, 1783 7,000
Sept. 23, 1783 4,550
Both of these he alleges were given "at Trenton" on their respective dates and both
remain unpaid although payment has been demanded. Not too much reliance can be
placed on the allegation as to the place of the gi ving of the obligations since it was
common practice in such suits for debt invariably to name the location of the court
as the place of the incurring of the obligation. This apparently guarded against a
refusal of the court to take jurisdiction and seemingly was never taken exception to

by the defendants in a large number of similar cases where the actual locale of the
note is known to be other than that of the court. These notes may have been given
030303C303C5303C53CJ3C53
Court for Correction of Errors: In New York State, the court to which appeals were taken
from judgments of the Supreme Court. DG
Lapses by Default: Termination or failure of a right or privilege, here the right of appeal,
through neglect to exercise it within some limit of time, here by failure to appear. DG
Writings Obligatory: Bonds. Black's, p. 1788. DG
20
in England before Cox's departure for America and were the financing for his
mercantile establishment in New York City.
It seems equally possible that the Oct 10th date of the Raynes may be postdated and
that he borrowed the money from Wm. Cox of Burlington Co. or Philadelphia after
his arrival in America. Such a generous credit would indeed imply a close
relationship.
Dec. 6, 1785 Simeon Alexander Bayley sued Cox, whom the sheriff reports "taken."
James Giles ordered his appearance for the defendant entered.5
Feb. 11, 1786 Frank's New York City Directory was distributed and lists "Albian
Cox, Merchant, 240 Queens."6
Jun. 6,1786 Thomas Thomas sued jointly George Olive and Albion Coxe. The sheriff
returned Coxe taken, other not found William S. Livingston's appearance is entered
for the defendant.7
Oct. 24, 1786 Samuel Atlee, James F. Atlee and Albion Cox jointly brought suit
through their attorney James Giles against Christopher Duycknick who on Dec. 19,
1786, confessed judgment which was entered with costs.8
Jan. 24, 1787 Suit was brought in Cox's name on a bond against Abraham Akin,
James Akin, Timothy Akin, all of Quaker Hill, Dutchess Co., N.Y. This bond was
assigned by Cox to Richard Perkins on March 24, 1787, with Sam1 Atlee signing as
witness.9
March 1787 Rob Birch sued Albion Cox in the New York City Mayor's Court. The
sheriff returned the defendant "taken." William S. Livingston appeared as Cox's
attorney and on Mar. 25, 1788, the suit was non prossed for the plaintiffs failure to
bring it to trial.10
Raynes and Olive alleged in their suit against Cox that on October 10, 1783, they had

delivered goods to Cox in London which Cox later sold in New York City without making
payment for them. DG
The bond appears to have been one of Cox's few assets. One can speculate that the reason
for the assignment was that Cox owed money to Perkins. DG
Mayor's Court: "A court established in some cities, in which the mayor sits with the powers
of a police judge or committing magistrate in respect to offenses committed within the city,
and sometimes with civil jurisdiction in small causes, or other special statutory powers."
Black's, p. 1131. DG
Albion Cox
21
Apr. 3, 1787 In New York City Mayor's Court Thomas Thomas sued Cox who is
reported by the sheriff "taken.""
July 24, 1787 In N. Y. C. Mayors Court a jury tried the suit of Thomas Thomas vs
George Olive and Albion Cox finding for the Plaintiff 36:18:0d and 6d costs.
Plaintiffs witnesses are John Ustrich, Simeon Alexander Bailey, and John Jarvis.12
Aug. 21,1787 On the capias satisfatiendo issued on the above judgment, the sheriff
returned the defendants "not found" in his bailiwick.13
Sept. 18, 1787 John Murray Junior sued Samuel Atlee, James F. Atlee and Albion
Cox in N. Y. C. Mayor's Court, on Nov. 6, 1787; the sheriff returned the defendants
all "not found."14
Oct. 16,1787 A Mayor's Court jury tried the case of Thomas Thomas vs. Albion Cox,
finding for the plaintiff 70 and 6d costs.
Witnesses for the Plaintiff: For the Defendant:
Capias Satisfatiendo: Probably intended for capias ad satisfaciendum, a means of debt
collection formerly available at common law to a judgment creditor against his debtor. It was
"a writ directed to the sheriff.. .commanding him to take the person therein named and him
safely keep so that he may have his body in court on the return day of the writ, to satisfy.. .the
party who has recovered judgment against him." Bouvier's, vol. I, p. 283. DG
Not Found: Unable to be served because not actually present within the court's jurisdiction.
Bouvier's, vol. I, p. 837. DG
Today the action on October 16,1787, would not be permitted except in the unlikely event
that plaintiffs claim had arisen after July 24, 1787, the date of the first Mayor's Court trial
between these same parties. Generally, a claim existing at the time of litigation is now
forever barred unless it is raised in that litigation. DG
Daniel Halsey

John Russel
Dr. Richard Bailey
Baker Hendricks
John Hendricks
Johan Dayton, Jun.15
0303C3C3C3C53C30303C53
Douglas handwrote page numbers on many of the manuscript sheets. Apparently the final
manuscript page concerning Albion Cox is missing. GT
THOMAS GOADSBY
The earliest record we have been able to find of Thomas Goadsby is that of his name
on a long list of Loyalists in the City of New York during the War of the Revolution,
prepared from contemporary sources by William Kelby.1 After the close of the war
we find, in both New Jersey and New York Court records, details of several actions
brought by him trading as Messieurs Thomas Goadsby & Company, a partnership
including Maria Kirkman, Samuel Kirkman, Joseph Holmes and Thomas Holmes.2
The Supreme Court of New York awarded the partnership a judgment on Feb. 18,
1786, against Andrew Bostwick on an action brought to recover the amount of a note
dated New York 6/2/83 bearing his endorsement and received by the partnership
from one John White.3 In the April Term 1786 the partnership, by Aaron Ogden their
attorney, filed two suits in debt, one against Poole, England,4 the other against the
New Brunswick merchant firm of Bingham, Farley & Smith, consisting of Charles
Bingham, Henry Farley and Fox Smith, "partners in the way of merchandize jointly
negotiating and using commerce together as partners."5 The latter suit was to collect
on a note of seven hundred ninety six pounds, seventeen shillings proclamation
money of New Jersey and was discontinued by the plaintiffs attorney during the
April 17876 term for reasons unstated. Suit vs James Parker mentions Thomas
Goadsby of New York, Merchant. Other suits in which the name of Thomas Goadsby
appears alone are:
Goadsby & Co. v. Bostwick: This seems to be a very early case recognizing the
negotiability of a promissory note. According to the manuscript, the court granted plaintiff
a judgment not against White, the endorser of the note, but against Bostwick, the maker of
the note. Years later, when U. S. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story published his 1845
treatise on promissory notes, the law of negotiable instruments was still confused and
chaotic. In about half the states, negotiability of notes was then still not fully recognized.

Justice Story therein commented that "in some States, the circulation of Promissory Notes
still remains clogged with positive restrictions, or practical difficulties, which greatly
impede their use and value, and circulation." Discussed in Morton Horowitz, [Cases and
Materials on] American Legal History (Camden, Rutgers-Camden School of Law, 1973),
pp. 269-70. DG
Proclamation Money: Money valued at the official Crown par of 133.33 colonial
currency to 100 sterling, as set forth in the 1704 proclamation of Queen Anne and 1708 act
of Parliament. The royal proclamation forbade American colonists to inflate the value of
their money by more than this ratio of 4 to 3. Proclamation Money was also called "lawful
money." John J. McCusker, Money and Exchange in Europe and America, 1600-1775, A
Handbook (Chapel Hill, Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1978), pp. 126, 168-71. DG
24
New York Supreme Court
vs Alexander Robinson for return of 3,000 in certain loan certificates deposited
with him to secure payment of 2,000 due from John Shepard to said Thomas
Goadsby and others.7
vs Peter R. Livingston to enforce payment of a bill obligatory incurred at the
Dock Ward, New York City Aug. 3, 1785. Judgment for 1492 : 9 : 6 New York
money was entered April 13, 1790.8
03030303030303030303
Loan Certificates: A form of paper money used in the American colonies that was issued
to borrowers, for purposes such as paying their taxes, by public or private "loan offices"
which secured this money with collateral offered by the borrower, such as land. The loan
certificates were thus placed in circulation. John J. McCusker, "Colonial Paper Money," in
Studies on Money in Early America, ed. by Eric P. Newman and Richard G. Doty (New York,
American Numismatic Soc, 1976), pp. 94, 100. It is not clear what debt Goadsby owed
Robinson to require Goadsby to deposit the loan certificates. Apparently Goadsby satisfied
this debt but did not get his security back. DG
Bill Obligatory: A bond absolute for the payment of money. It differs from a promissory
note only in having a seal. Black's at 210. DG
New York Money: Money of account issued by authority of the colony, and later the state,

of New York. See McCusker, Money and Exchange ... op. cit., pp. 156-61. DG
Thomas Goadsby 25
New York City Mayor's Court
July 1787
vs John Teayleur in debt. The sheriff returned the capias with the defendant
"taken."9
vs Richard Perkins in debt. Feb. 5, 1788. Plaintiff non prossed for not declar-
ing.10
vs James Tinker in debt. Judgment ordered for plaintiff for want of a plea by the
defendant."
June 1788
vs Isaac Sharpe in debt. Sheriff returned the capias with defendant "taken."12
vs Jacob Sharpe in debt. July 22, 1788. Jury found for plaintiff and judgment
entered.13
vs Luther Baldwin in debt. August 1788. Sheriff returned the writ of capias with
defendant "taken."14
03080303030305030303
Capias: A writ directing the sheriff to take the person of the defendant into custody, to
enforce compliance with a summons or some judgment or decree. Bouvier's, vol. I, p. 282.
DG
Non Prossed: Verb form and abbreviation of "non prosequitur," at common law, a
judgment entered at instance of defendant when plaintiff at any stage of the proceedings fails
to timely prosecute his action. Black's, p. 1204. DG
Declaring: Probably used in the sense of alleging in a pleading; thus, the reason for
dismissal was probably failure to state a claim. Black's, p. 497. DG
Want of a Plea: Failure to answer the complaint, resulting in entry of default against
defendant and judgment by default for plaintiff upon presentation of proofs. Black's,

p. 1309. DG
26
Middlesex County Court Of Common Pleas, New-Brunswick, N.J.
vs Joseph Wilkes on attachment, April Term 1786. John Neilson, Abraham
Schuyler and John Bray appointed auditors. July Term 1790 the auditors find
for the plaintiff in the "sum of 1,200 in Silver and Gold lawful money of New
Jersey & scire facias agst other garnishe."15
vs James Parker on scire facias, April Term 1792. Judgment ordered garnishee
of Joseph Wilkes.16
vs John Van Emburgh on scire facias, July Term 1791. Judgment entered
garnishee of Joseph Wilkes.17
03030303030303030303
Attachment: Here used in the sense of a remedy ancillary to an action by which plaintiff
is enabled to acquire a lien upon property or effects of defendant for satisfaction of a
judgment which plaintiff may obtain. "Attachment" differs from "execution" in that under
an attachment, defendant's property is placed in custody of the law to await final determi-
nation of the suit, whereas an "execution" is a remedy afforded by law for enforcement of
a judgment. Black's, pp. 161, 677. DG
John Bray: He was appointed a director of the State Bank at New-Brunswick by the
Legislature in 1812 and became president of that bank. He was also president of an entity
with the quaint name "The Corporation of the Old Fountain Co." and in that capacity signed
scrip notes dated Feb. 13, 1815, payable at his bank. See Wait, George W.; New Jersey's
Money, (The Newark Museum, 1976), p. 260. DG
Auditors: Officers of the court, assigned to state the items of debit and credit between the
parties in a suit where accounts are in question, and to exhibit the balance. Black's, p. 167.
DG
Scire Facias: A writ founded upon some record, such as a judgment or recognizance,

requiring the person against whom it is brought to show cause why the party bringing it
should not have the advantage of the record. The most common application of this writ is
as a process to revive a judgment after a lapse of time, or on a change of parties, or otherwise
to have execution of the judgment. Black's, p. 1513. DG
Garnishe: Intended for "garnishee," a person against whom process of garnishment is
issued. The "process of garnishment" is one whereby a person's property, money or credits
in possession or under control of another (the "garnishee") are applied to payment of the
former's debt to a third person creditor. Black's, p. 810. Today, garnishment is used to
collect a judgment debt from the debtor's employer by withholding a statutory amount from
the wages to become due to the debtor. DG
Thomas Goadsby
27
William S. Livingston, who appears as Goadsby's attorney in most of the New York actions,
has already been mentioned. Aaron Ogden, who represented him in his New Jersey suits,
was the younger brother of Colonel Matthias Ogden of Elizabeth-Town, and later (1812)

became governor of the state.
THE GRANTING OF THE COPPER COINAGE PRIVILEGE
New Jersey's legislature in 1786 consisted of an upper house, the Legislative
Council, of which Governor William Livingston was president, and a lower house,
the General Assembly. Each of the thirteen counties had one representative in the
Council and three in the Assembly. The Essex County delegation, elected for a one
year term in the fall of 1785, were:
Council Assembly
Matthias Ogden Abraham Clark
Henry Garritse
Daniel Marsh
The disturbed economic conditions which faced this tenth Legislature of the state are
indicated in the following quotations from the press of that day.
As an instance of the deplorable situation in New Jersey for want of cash, a
correspondent assures us that last week he counted, pasted up over the mantel
of a tavern no less than sixteen real estates, taken by execution and adver-
tised by the sheriff of Morris County for sale.1
A great clamor is now raised in New-Jersey about an impression of paper
money. Their papers teem with productions for and against it and petitions are
industriously circulated by each party to carry their point; however a majority
appears to be for it, which not only entitles them to the notice of the legislature
by [but] an absolute claim to a compliance with their requisition.2
1. New York Gazetteer, 3 Mar. 1786
2. New Brunswick, Political Intelligencer & New Jersey Advertiser, 18 Jan. 1786
(^030303030303030303
Execution: Used here in the sense of process to carry into effect a judgment or decree
requiring the payment of money. A writ of execution is a civil proceeding for enforcement
of a judgment against property. Black's, pp. 677-8. DG

Advertised: Gave public notice (of a sheriffs sale of property taken in execution). Black's,
pp. 74, 1505. DG
Footnote 3, along with its quotation, was moved by Douglas to later in this section and is
identified as footnote 15. GT
30
The unsatisfactory condition of the circulating copper medium for small change
drew its share of comment.
The coinage of copper is a subject that claims our immediate attention. From
the small value of the several pieces of copper coin, this medium of exchange
has been too much neglected. The more valuable metals are daily giving place
to base British half-pence, and no means are used to prevent the fraud. This
disease, which is neglected in the beginning, because it appears trifling, may
finally prove very destructive to commerce. It is admitted that copper may, at
this instant, be purchased in America at one-eighth of a dollar the pound.
British half-pence, made at the Tower, are forty-eight to the pound. Those
manufactured at Birmingham, and shipped in thousands for our use, are much
lighter, and they are of base metal, It can hardly be said that seventy-two of
them are worth a pound of copper; hence it will follow, that we give for British
half-pence about six times their value....4
A new and curious kind of COPPERS have lately made their appearance in
New York, the novelty and bright gloss of which keeps them in circulation.
These coppers are in fact similar to continental buttons without eyes; on the
one side are thirteen stripes, and on the other U S A as was usual on the
soldiers' buttons. If Congress does not take the establishment of a mint into
consideration and carry it into effect it is probable that the next coin which
may come into circulation, as we have a variety of them, will be the soldiers
old pewter buttons for they are nearly as valuable as the coppers above
described and hardly so plenty.5
We learn that in consequence of the circulation in this city and environs, of
great quantities of counterfeit coppers, sent from Europe, the Chamber of

Commerce of this city have resolved, to cause the act, in that case made and
provided, to be carried into full effect.6
4. Report of the Board of Treasury, Papers of the C.C. No. 26, folios 537-542, 13 May 1785
5. New Jersey Gazette, Trenton, N. J. 19 Dec. 1785
6. New Brunswick, Pol. Intelligencer & N. J. Adv. 18 Jan. 1786
The 1785 mention of "a new and curious kind of COPPERS" is a contemporaneous
reference to the bar cent described by Sylvester S. Crosby in Early Coins of America, (New
York, 1875) pp. 333-4. DG
The Granting of the Copper Coinage Privilege
31
A petition from Kenneth Hankinson, collector of the county of Monmouth,
was read setting forth that he had received a large sum of money in payment
of taxes in Coppers at twelve to the shilling and half-pence as pence, that the
treasurer and loan officer of this state refuses to receive the said money in any
other way than that of thirty half-pence or fifteen coppers to the shilling.
Ordered, That the said petition be dismissed.7
Much of the Assembly's time during the second sitting of the legislature was devoted
to the preparation and passage of a bill for the emitting of 100,000 of paper
money to be a legal tender for debts. Toward the close of the sitting it was transmitted
to the [Legislative] Council for its concurrence. The final action of the Council on
this measure was delayed until March 23rd. Under date of March 20, 1786, the
"Journals of the Legislative Council of New Jersey" record the first action looking
toward a copper coinage.
Mr. M. Ogden, with Leave of the House, brought in a Bill intitled "An Act for
establishing a Coinage of Copper in this State," which was read, and ordered
a second reading.
On the afternoon of the same day, "The Bill... was read a second time and ordered to
be engrossed." The next day, March 21, it was
read and compared: On the Question, Whether the said Bill do pass? It passed
in the affirmative, Nem. Con. Ordered, That the President do sign the same.
Ordered, That Mr. Kitchel do carry the said Bill to the House of Assembly,
and request their Concurrence therein. Mr. Kitchel reported that he had
obeyed the Order of the House.
The Assembly acted upon the bill with equal promptness and the Council Journal
records their action, under date of March 22, as follows:

Mr. Blair from the House of Assembly acquainted this House that the Bill,
intitled, "An Act for establishing a Coinage of Copper in this State," was
rejected by that House.
7. New Jersey Gazette, Trenton, N. J. Proceedings of the Legislative Assembly, 22 Feb. 1786
The paper money authorization that immediately preceded introduction of the copper
coinage bill was New Jersey's final issue of bills of credit. Although issued under state
authority and bearing the state arms, the bills are denominated in pounds and shillings.
Newman (The Early Paper Money of America, 4th ed. p. 260) states that authorization
occurred on May 17, 1786. Although the issue was a large one, the 1786 bills are scarce
today. DG
32
The Proceedings of the General Assembly record the negative votes of all three of
the Essex County assemblymen among those which defeated their fellow county-man' s
copper bill.
On the following day the Council rejected by a seven to six vote the Assembly's
paper money bill. Mr. M. Ogden was recorded as one of the minority, voting in favor
of the 100,000 emission. However it was he that was designated by the Council to
carry the message of the bill's defeat to the Assembly. Shortly thereafter the
Legislature adjourned this second sitting without further action on either of the
money problems.
The details of Matthias Ogden's bill for a coinage of copper are not now available.
On January 6, 1786, he had addressed a letter to the Continental Congress "in
reference to a mint" which was on January 18 "referred to the Board of Treasury to
report."8 When the Board finally made their report of April 9, 1787, on the
"proposals for coining copper", they stated that, in their opinion, the two best were
"those of Mr. James Jarvis and Mr. Mathias Ogden."9 Matthias's older brother,
Robert Ogden, Junr., on March 12, 1786, four years after the death of his first wife,
was married to her sister, Hannah Platt, sister of Jeremiah Platt and sister-in-law of
Platt's partner, Samuel Broome. Broome & Platt were at this time a leading merchant
house in New Haven and, according to an eye-witness of the Connecticut coinage
being carried on there, "sub-contractors for the manufacture of the state coinage."10
Daniel Marsh, whose negative vote, with those of his other two Essex County
colleagues in the Assembly, had defeated Ogden's coinage bill, was one of the
proprietors of the "New Line" of stages between New York and Philadelphia via
Newark. This line was in spirited competition [with] the "Old Line" which covered
the same route with the exception that from Elizabeth-Town it swung off to bypass

Newark, passing through Bergen Point. Ogden owned a part of the "Old Line" and
used it in the performance of his contract with the Postmaster General for the
conveyance of the Mail between New York and Philadelphia.
On April 17, 1786, by resolution of the Continental Congress, Ogden obtained an
alteration of his Mail contract, which originally specified the Bergen Point route, to
permit him "to transport the Mail by the Rout of Bergen point or Newark as shall best
suit him."" At about this time, he sold his interest in the "Old Line" but reserving
8. Journals of the Cont. Cong. Vol XXX, p. 22n
9. Journals of the Cont. Cong. Vol. XXXII, p. 160
10. Crosby p.[210]
11. Journals of the Cont. Cong. Vol. XXX, p. 197
The Granting of the Copper Coinage Privilege
33
to himself the emoluments arising from the Carriage of the Mail,"12 which was now
performed, at least in part, over the "New Line" of Daniel Marsh and associates.
The defeat of the Ogden-sponsored copper coinage bill apparently passed unnoted
in the contemporary press. However the similar fate of the paper money measure
caused a considerable stir. A few typical reactions follow.
Extract of a letter from a gentleman in New York, dated March 28, 1786....
The Senate of New Jersey have rejected the money bill, and the people
are clamorous for paper money. So violent are people in some parts of the
State, that as soon as the legislature rose, they began to nail up the
court-houses....13
Extract of a letter from New Jersey dated April 1, 1786. Everything is in
confusion here, the mob rules the state, and the people in general are tired of
their present situation, the Governor is under the necessity of wearing a pair
of tin breeches, to stand kicking: one of the Council the other day gave him
a trimming and I yesterday heard the populace intended to burn his house, for
opposing the money bill passed by the Assembly. [Ed. Com.] Thus were the
gentry of St. Johns seasonably fooled.14
St. Johns, May 9. By passengers from New York we are informed that in the
State of New-Jersey the greatest anarchy and confusion prevails; that the
people insist on a bill for emitting a paper currency being passed, threaten to
stop the courts of Justice so far as respects the recovery of debts and in several
counties have refused to chuse assessors in hopes thereby to put off the
payment of taxes for some time at least.15
The third sitting of the Tenth Legislature was convened at New Brunswick on May
17th, 1786. By May 22nd the Assembly had passed and transmitted to the Council

a new paper money bill calling for the emission of 100,000 of legal tender paper.
On the following day it took up consideration of the copper coinage. Proposals
submitted by Walter Mould, Thomas Goadsby and Albion Cox were read and
12. Papers of the Cont. Cong. No. 61, pp 291-292 read 26 Feb.1787
13. Pennsylvania Gazette, 26 April 1786
14. Pol. Intelligencer & N. J. Advertiser, 14 June 1786
15. New York Gazeteer, 23 May 1786
03030303030303030303
Emoluments: Profits or perquisites arising from employment or office, here, from the
office of contract mail carrier. Black's, p. 616. In the vernacular, "perks." DG
34
referred to a five man committee, chairmanned by Abraham Clark and including
Daniel Marsh, both from Essex County, who had helped defeat Matthias Ogden's bill
two months before. On the 24th, acting on a favorable committee report, the House
"Ordered That Mr. Mould and his Associates have leave to bring in a Bill "and, on
the same day, Daniel Marsh "in behalf of the Petitioners presented the draught of a
Bill intituled An Act for the Establishment of a Coinage Of Copper in this
State...."Next day this bill was given a second reading and was ordered engrossed,
but not until a rival proposal had been submitted by Doctor William Leddel, High
Sheriff of Morris County from October 1783 to October 1786.
On the 26th the Daniel Marsh bill was passed by the Assembly with the three Essex
assemblymen voting for it and the Morris County delegation unanimously opposed.
This reversal of the Morris County vote, which had been two to one in favor of
Ogden's previous copper bill, would seem understandable as a tribute to the Sheriff
of their County.
The Council, this same day, concurred in the Assembly's paper money bill by a 7 to
6 vote, Peter Haring of Bergen County having changed sides on the question. The
copper bill did not pass the Council until May 31st but then, with "several amend-
ments made thereto...It passed in the affirmative, nem. con." These amendments
were concurred in by the Assembly on June 1st. The final bill is printed in full in
Crosby and need not be repeated here.
03030303030303030303
Abraham Clark was a New Jersey signer of the Declaration of Independence. He was
authorized to sign bills of credit issued February 20, 1776, but none with his signature are

known. DG
THE RAHWAY MINT
Daniel Marsh owned "a Grist Mill and Saw Mill situate on [the] Rahway River
with a lot of about six acres thereto adjoining and also a house and lot of about two
acres situate on the north side of the main road to Brunswick nearly opposite to the
said Mills."1 For the years 1780 to 1783, the only ones for which these records are
available, the "List of Ratables" of Rahway Ward, Elizabeth Town, Essex County,
list among Daniel Marsh's property, "Grist Mills l."2 A careful search of the
recorded deeds of Essex and Middlesex Counties fails to indicate any other mills ever
in his possession.
The Grantor and Grantee Indices of Deeds, Essex County, establish the recording of
a conveyance of real estate by Daniel Marsh to "Walter Mould," "Albion Cox," and
"Thomas Goadsby et al" on Page 217 of Liber A of Deeds. This Liber A is believed
to have been destroyed in a nineteenth century fire which spared the indices. These
do not show the dates of the early recordings. A search has located a copy of a deed
dated 1793, marked "Recorded April 30, 1793, Liber A page 535."3 Another, shown
in the Grantor Index as recorded on page 418 of Liber A, is dated by the deed covering
a subsequent transfer as "January 1, 1791."4
1. Essex Deeds H645 Ralph & William R. Marsh, Admrs. of Daniel Marsh, Deceased to Johnathan
Squire, filed 1804. This recites that because the personal estate of Daniel Marsh, deceased, is
insufficient to pay his debts, the surrogate orders certain of his real estate, including the above
described Mills, sold for this purpose.
2. N. J. State Library, Ratables, Box 37
3. Deed book of the Society for Establishing Useful Manufactures, Paterson, N. J., into which were
copied deeds in which the Society was interested.
4. Essex Deeds N 441.
03C3C3C53C3C3C3C3C3C3
The first map of American roads was published in 1789 by Christopher Colles. This map

of the Rahway area clearly shows that Daniel Marsh's grist mill and saw mill were
separated by approximately half a mile. The grist mill was located on the Rahway River
while the saw mill was to the northeast on a small stream. See "Which Mill was the Actual
Location of the Rahway Mint?" by Gary Trudgen in The Colonial Newsletter, Volume 32,
No. 1, February 1992, pp. 1281-3. RW
Conveyance of Real Estate: Douglas's text indicates that what was conveyed was only a
leasehold interest, and therefore Marsh retained ownership of the fee. DG
A plaque has been placed by the New Jersey Historical Society on the lot adjacent to where
the old Rahway Mint was thought to have been located. RM
36
Assuming a prompt filing of this January 1, 1791, deed, we can calculate that 117
pages of Liber A held the recordings of nearly twenty eight months. At this rate of
recording, the 201 pages back to Page 217 would have required something over four
years. This would not be inconsistent with a dating of the Daniel Marsh conveyance
at about the time of the passage of the Copper Coinage Act of June 1, 1786.
Insert attached sheet
That the conveyance was in the form of a lease and that it was for the Mills is
evidenced by a rule of reference dated June 7,1788,5 which ordered the differences,
at that time existing between Albion Cox and Thomas Goadsby, to be submitted to
referees. It included a requirement for the return of tools and implements to the
"Copperworks" from whence they had been taken under a writ of replevin6 and a
direction to "exonerate the Security now liable to pay the Rents of the Mills
agreeably to the Contract with Daniel Marsh, Esquire...."
The terms of the lease and the identity of the "Security" are amplified and confirmed
in letters7 written by Jonathan Dayton, Matthias Ogden's brother-in-law, to John
Cleves Symmes in 1789 after the death of Walter Mould. "As the surety of Messrs
5. Appendix A, p. 206
6. For this writ in full see Appendix A, p. 205
7. Bond, Beverly W. Jr., The Correspondence of John Cleves Symmes, p. 231 and p. 238 [New York,
Macmillan Co., 1926]
03030303030303030303
The attached sheet referred to above is apparently missing. Original page numbering does
indicate a missing page at the end of this section. GT
Rule of Reference: An order to send a cause pending in court to a referee or special master
for detailed fact finding and recommendation for disposition. The referee is an officer

exercising judicial powers for a specific purpose. In today's practice a reference requires
consent of the parties. Black's, p. 1445. DG
Writ of Replevin: A writ directing the sheriff to replevy, or redeliver, goods or chattels
which have been unlawfully taken by someone to the original possessor of them, on his
giving bond conditioned on proving title to the goods. Replevin also lies to regain possession
of distrained chattels (taken by a creditor using self-help without benefit of judgment). See
Bouvier's, vol. II, pp. 884-5; vol. I, pp. 586-9. DG
Douglas intended to include an appendix. The above references to Appendix A, along with
associated page numbers, indicate that the appendix did exist but is now apparently missing.
GT
The Rahway Mint
37
Mould & Cox he [Ogden] has been obligated to pay for them.. .one year's rent of the
mill which is 130:0.... You are to transmit Mr. Marsh's bond, which is among
Mould's papers." And later, "Genl. Ogden having made a liberal & advantageous
offer for giving up the mills which Mould & Coxe had taken for seven years at 130
per ann., for the payment of which he had unhappily bound himself as surety."
Direct confirmation that the "Copperworks" were located at the Rahway "Mills" is
supplied by a receipt8 for many of the items listed in the writ of replevin.9 Dated Feb.
9,1788, it starts "Received at Rhaway10 Mills," lists the items as having been "taken
from Mr. Thomas Goadsby... at said Mills, by virtue of a writ of replevin..." and is
signed "M. Ogden" in whose hand it is written. A comparison of the items covered
by the writ and those receipted for on Feb. 9, 1788, show that the coining press and
certain items of copper were not received at this time. That these items had been
carried to Morristown will be developed later.11 That the coining press was one of the
"implements, tools and other property" ordered "to be returned" to the "said Works"
is clear from the Rule of Reference. It contemplated all the coinage property in
workable condition to be held in trust by Matthias Ogden at the Mills, "in the same
state, as much as possible they were in, when taken away." If, prior to the issuance
of the writ of replevin, the coining operation of stamping had been operated at some
different location, the detailed and specific Rule of Reference would have directed
the disposition to be made of the property there located.
The fact that later the coining press was set up and operated at Col. Matthias Ogden's
Elizabeth Town home12 combined with the fact that the first mint location, although
then a Ward of Elizabeth Township, Essex County, is in the present limits of Rahway,
Union County, has until now entirely obscured the true location of this first mint. A
map prepared from early deeds and from a 1926 survey shows the property and the

line of the old "Mill Race" as it formerly ran.13 The mint or "factory" is mentioned
in a contemporary handwritten guide which gives directions for going "To Elisabeth
Town from N. Branch" past the "factory and bridge" one mile past Milton and five
miles from "Elisabeth Town."14
10. This spelling of Rahway seems to have been a family characteristic of the Ogdens. Both Robert,
Jun. and Aaron during their terms as Essex County Clerk have left it thus in both the court minutes
and the recordings of deeds.
11. cf p. 61
12. cf p. 75
13. Plate, p.?
38
Woodbridge in 1787 was contiguous to Rahway Ward to the southeast. The writer of
the following appears to have been humorously referring to the Rahway Mint since
there is no record of any real copper mine discovery in the vicinity that could have
been the referent.
Feb. 10, (1787) We hear a very valuable copper mine has been broke up near
Woodbridge in N. J. and those who have examined the ore, do not scrupple
to assert it is equal if not superior in richness to any that has been yet
discovered on this continent or elsewhere. There are at present a considerable
number of persons working in it.15
Later when the operations of the Rahway Mint are considered it will be shown that
the workmen were from its neighborhood and that John Harper, who in Albion Cox's
words "operated [in] the Jersey Coppers," lived at Milton, a mile to the south.16
Thus, while the evidence of the Rahway Mint is to an extent circumstantial, all the
circumstances point in the same direction and, with the direct evidence of the Rule
of Reference and of Matthias Ogden's receipt, seem to establish it as fact beyond the
possibility of successful contradiction.
The coincidences presented by its selection, viz: that the successful petitioners for
the coinage contract, whose proposal was less favorable to the state by ten per cent
than that of a competitor, should decide to lease for their mint, Mills belonging to a
member of the Assembly committee which had reported in their favor, the very
member who had brought in their Bill, and that the payments under the lease should
be guaranteed by the Essex County member of the Council who had been first to urge
the establishment of a copper coinage, might not today escape, as these seem to have,
the caustic comments of the press.
15. Columbian Magazine, February, 1787

16. cf. P. 47 & Appendix A, p. 208
C53C53C53C53C53C53C53030303
Cox's letter in which he stated that Harper "operated in the Jersey coppers" was written
in Philadelphia on January 18,1795, while he was assayer of the mint. The entire letter was
reproduced in Walter Breen's monograph, The United State Patterns of 1792, p. 14 (Wayte
Raymond, Coin Collector's Journal, No. 154, March-April, 1954), and again, with editing,
by R. W. Julian, "The Harper Cents," Numismatic Scrapbook Magazine, pp. 2370-4
(September 1964). DW
Circumstantial: Evidence of facts or circumstances from which the existence or nonexist-
ence of a fact in issue may be inferred. "Circumstantial" or "indirect" evidence is distin-
guished from "direct" evidence in that the latter tends to show the existence of a fact in issue
without the intervention of the proof of any other fact. Black's, pp. 309, 546. DG
SETTING UP THE MINT
After June 20,1786, when he was released from custody in New York City on a writ
of habeas corpus cum causal,1 Albion Cox does not appear in person in the New York
records for the balance of the year and our record of Goadsby is similarly blank.
Walter Mould was "taken" in New York upon the suit of Thomas Eaves and on
August 28, 1786, there released on bail, the bond being signed by "James Johnston,
Merchant of New York City."2 After that date, there is nothing in the records that
would require his residence in that city to explain.
In the leasing of the "Mills" for establishing the mint, all three of the contractors
participated but there is conflicting evidence as to whether Walter Mould had any
further connection with the Rahway business. The first is given by Goadsby and Cox
in their Memorial to the Legislature,3 read November 17,1786.4 In this they state that
they alone have "made ye necessary establishment of a Rolling Mill, furnaces,
cutting and coining presses, & have purchased large quantities of unwought Copper
and Copper ore" and that "Walter Mould...has hitherto entirely withheld his
aid.. .and has altogether neglected to contribute in money or otherwise in making the
before mentioned necessary establishments."
The other version is given by Walter Mould in the "Declaration in Debt,"5 filed May
10, 1787, when he avers that the defendants, Goadsby and Cox, were on April 10,
1787, indebted to him 187:18, New Jersey money, "for work and labour done,
Articles and materials furnished and provided, money laid out and expended before
that time" at their special instance and request "to enable them to carry on &
1. cf. p. 19
2. N.Y. Supr. Crt., Parchment Roll 29-A-7
3. Appendix A, p. 201.
4. Crosby, p. 279.
5. N. J. Supr. Crt. Actions at Law #24,780 (1st series). This action commenced with a Capias dated

Nov. 20, 1786. Bail Bond signed by Thomas Goadsby and Albion Cox with Matthias Ogden signing
as surety, dated Mar. 16, 1787. Defendants filed Plea in Bar May 10, 1787, and Plea of Nil Debit
July 30, 1787. At the Nov. 1787 term of the court, "This Cause not having been noticed for
Tryal.. .dismissed with costs On motion of Aaron Ogden Attorney for the defendant," as recorded in
the Minutes of the Supreme Court.
Plea in Bar: A defendant's pleading (written statement of defendant's contentions filed
with the court and served on the plaintiff and other parties, if any) which sets up an absolute
defense that if successful would bar the action. Black's at 1310. DG
Plea of Nil Debet: Party's contention that he owes nothing. Black's at 1197. DG
40
Compleat their Coinage of Coppers for the State of New Jersey...." The fact that the
suit was ordered dismissed on motion of the defendants' attorney would seem to
indicate the possibility that it might not have been maintainable.
The legislature, to judge from the action they took upon it, apparently accepted the
allegations in the Goadsby-Cox Memorial as substantially correct. The prayer of the
Memorialists to be permitted to proceed separately and commence the coinage of two
thirds of the originally authorized 10,000 was granted by a Supplemental Act,
passed Nov. 22, 1786.6 In addition it gave them a conditional right to the remaining
third which should be theirs if Mould did not "enter upon the Coinage" of this [his]
third within two months. Whatever Mould's petition, read the same day as the
others', may have alleged in rebuttal, it was to Goadsby and Cox that permission was
granted "to present a Bill agreeably to the prayer of their Petition." Mr. Jonathan
Dayton7 introduced this Bill on the following day and because of the possibility that
politics may have been a factor in its speedy adoption too much reliance cannot be
placed upon the legislature's action as an answer to the question as to whether or not
Mould had assisted in the Rahway establishment prior to his Nov. 20,1786, recourse
to suit against Goadsby and Cox.
Whatever that help might have been before Nov. 20th, it seems certain that the break
between him and the other two took place at some time previous thereto. Thus, if the
actual coining at the Rahway Mint was deferred until after the Supplemental Act of
Nov. 22, 1786, had made it legal to proceed, Mould would have had no part in it. In
the words of the Memorial, the "Memorialists humbly conceive, that as ye Law now
stands they are not authorized thereby to proceed in the business of the Coinage..."
and the inference seems inescapable that they had not yet done so.
A line appearing in the July 1,1786, New Jersey Journal, published in Elizabeth-Town

as received from a Boston correspondent, states "The copper coinage now emitting
in New Jersey is to amount to at least ten thousand pounds a tenth part of which is
to be paid to the state." This peculiarity of the journalism of that day, whereby local
spot news appears only after a lapse of time and then from a "foreign" correspondent,
in this case is surely to be understood as a Boston reaction to the original coinage act,
having no relation to the actual "emitting" of coins.
Further evidence that the coinage was not started until some time after November 22
is supplied by the records of the state Treasurer, James Mott. The June 1st Act
obligated the contractors to "deliver to the Treasurer.. .one Tenth Part of the full Sum
they shall strike...." It further required that "said Tenth Part shall be paid quarterly
6. Crosby p.279 gives the Assembly proceedings and the Act in full.
7. He was the brother of Hannah, wife of Matthias Ogden and had been elected to the Assembly
November 1786. In April, 1787 it was from his "Hands" that the state treasurer receipted for the third
royalty payment for the account of Goadsby and Cox. Appendix p.
Setting Up the Mint
41
unto the Treasurer...from the Time they shall begin to coin as aforesaid during the
Time they may carry on said Business...."8
Since the Treasurer recorded March 16,1787, as the date upon which he received the
first payment from "Thomas Goadsby and Albion Cox, on account of the Sum due
from them to the State for the Privilege of establishing a Coinage of Copper..."9 by
any method of determining the intent of the "quarterly," to have been made on time,
the date of first payment would require that the start of coinage was not earlier than
the middle of December. With "two sufficient Sureties" bound in "the Sum of Ten
Thousand Pounds, conditioned that..." the terms of the contract and specifically the
quarterly payments to the Treasurer should all be fully met, it seems probable that no
chances would have been taken to let more than one quarter elapse after the start
before making the initial payment.
Whether or not Walter Mould assisted in the preparations for this commencement of
coinage, certainly other helpers were used. One of these was William Dudley,
Blacksmith,10 who in January of 1788 started suit" against Goadsby and Cox to
collect for that help. In the Declaration12 Dudley alleged that on January 3, 1787, the
defendants were indebted to him a total of sixty pounds for "work before that time
8. Crosby, pp. 278 & 279
10. "William Dudley, Blacksmith, late of Elizabeth Town Rahway now of Dutch Valey Morris
County" and his wife Elizabeth Dudley on Dec. 22, 1794, conveyed their Rahway farm to Henry
Marsh Jr. Taylor, of Elizabeth Town Rahway. Essex Deeds A2, p. 440
11. By means of a Capias ad respondendum, dated Jan. 15,1788, returned by the Sheriff to the April
Term of Essex Crt of Com. Pleas "Cepi Corpus" for Albion Cox, "Non Est" for Thomas Goadsby.
Essex Co. Clerk's Vault "Writs." A later capias against Goadsby June 1788 is returned "Cepi

Corpus."
12. In full Appendix A, p. 212
03030303030303030303
Capias ad Respondendum: A common law writ commanding the sheriff to arrest and
detain a defendant until he physically appears in court to answer the plaintiff. The writ
procures defendant's arrest until security for plaintiff s claim (such as a bail bond) is
furnished. Black's at 262. DG
Cepi Corpus: Sheriff s return of a capias ad respondendum after successful service of the
writ and the defendant does not give bail, but remains in custody. Bouviefs, vol. I at 283.
DG
Non Est: Intended for "non est inventus," sheriffs return of a capias ad respondendum
which signifies that defendant is not to be found within his jurisdiction. Bouvier's, vol. II
at 507. DG
42
done & performed" and for "meat, drink and board for two Laborers in the
employment of them the said Albion and Thomas" provided before that time at their
"special instance & request." The suit reached a jury at Newark on Jan. 14,1789, and
a verdict was rendered for Dudley in the amount of 35:5 with 6d costs.13
The Court minutes lists the names of three witnesses for the plaintiff. These three,
Henry Widdegan, Hammilton Robertson, and Gilbert Randall, since hearsay evi-
dence was as inadmissible then as now, can safely be assumed to have had personal
first hand knowledge of the "meat, drink and board" or of Dudley's "work, done &
performed." When other evidence directly establishes one of them as a mint
employee,14 a strong presumption must be recognized for some similar connection in
the case of the other two. Future research, it is to be hoped, may disclose the exact
nature of this connection. It may also discover the presently unknown source or
sources of the coining apparatus and more completely fill in the details of the events
of the period from June 1st to December 1786 during which Daniel Marsh's "Grist
Mills & Saw Mills" was converted into the Rahway Mint.

14. cf. p. 47
OPERATIONS AT THE RAHWAY MINT
A meticulously detailed description of the coinage methods in use in the England of
that day is contained in a holograph volume titled "An Essay on Coining by Samuel
Thompson Die-Sinker 1783."1 Mr. Thompson's drawings of the various pieces of
coining equipment are here2 reproduced since the equipment enumerated by Goadsby
and Cox in their memorial to the legislature seems to have been similar.
Briefly, the operations were as follows. From the furnace, the molten copper was run
into thin ingot moulds. After cooling, the ingots were pressed or rolled into narrow
sheets by drawing them between a pair of heavy iron rollers. These sheets were
passed under the iron cutting press by which the planchets were punched out, one at
a time. The blanks came out of the cutting press with sharp edges which had to be
eliminated prior to stamping and the operation was called "milling". Cleaning was
1. Amer. Num. Soc. Mss. Col.
Holograph: A document handwritten by the person drafting and executing it. Black's, p.
865 DG
Footnote 2 is missing from the manuscript. Thompson's various pieces of coining
equipment have been reproduced and discussed in The Colonial Newsletter (Serial Numbers
62, 63, and 64; April 1982, July 1982, and March 1983 respectively) in a study by James C.
Spilman titled "An Overview of Early American Coinage Technology." GT
A hand-drawn table is included in the manuscript at this point. It appears that this table was
an early attempt by Douglas in the construction of the larger table that follows. This table
is shown below: GT
David Rittenhouse 1794
Tom Paine 1792
Copper per lb. N. Y. Currency
2s 1 6/1 Od
Unit

Cent 208 gr
Cost in units per M units
792
Waste
Total cost of copper
Melt & cast
Rolling
37
Cutting
10
Annealing
Cleaning Sal Sal enixum
12
Milling
10
Coining
37
Dies
Packing & shipping
44
sometimes accomplished by "tumbling" in a barrel containing scraps of leather or a
similar mild abrasive. The planchets were then ready for the final operation of
stamping between the upper and lower dies under heavy pressure applied by the
screw of the coining press. The finished product was lawful money in the state of
New Jersey, a legal tender at fifteen to the shilling and receivable in payment of taxes
and all other debts in the state.
Search has thus far failed to discover any of the "books, papers and vouchers"
bearing on the "Accounts, expenditures, and receipts" of the Rahway mint. Similarly
lacking are the actual records of the operating costs of the other contemporary copper
coinages with the single exception of the expenditures at the Massachusetts Mint.
This latter, being operated on the public payroll, might be misleading if its unit costs
were assumed to be typical of those of the private contractors. Also of questionable
accuracy and value for our purpose are the various estimates and proposals made at
about that time. However an analytical comparison of all of them does indicate a
sufficiently close correspondence between the costs to warrant some limited gener-
alizations. The following table shows a breakdown of costs from six sources.
By adjusting to a common cost for copper and for labor wage rate we find a surprising
correspondence between the completed costs of the two bids and the two best
informed estimators. An overhead analysis including amortization of equipment
costs over the authorized issue would indicate for the Rahway setup approximately
200 coppers per thousand.
Mills rent 130:0 per ann. 2 year of cont. 31.2
Equipment Furnaces 80:0
Plating Mill 80:0
2 Cut, Presses 60:0

Coining Press 60:0
12 Ingot Moulds 48:0
Small Tools etc 72:0
Total 400:0 per 2 Milln 60.0
Dies 1 pair at 1:0 per 10M 24.0
Foreman at 200 per ann. 48.0
Transportation 22 Tons at 1:10:0 6.0
General Expense exclusive of contractors' Prof. 32.0
200.0
No evidence has come to light to indicate the price Goadsby and Cox paid for their
copper. In 1785 the Board of Treasury reported that it could be readily purchased for
1/8 of a dollar per pound which would be 261 Jersey coppers for enough to make
1,000 coins. In 1787 the N. Y. Legislature's committee based their figures on 20
ro
-1
ps
<t-
0n
5'
=3
F0gures 0n co0es
0e 100 0o
all 0rices 0n York money
Co0e 0e lb York
Cost Co0e 0e M
Waste
Total Cost Co00e
Labor+Coal Melt+Cast
Plate & Neal
Cut 0lanks
Clean + M0ll
Stam00ng
D0es
S0c0al
Total Labor+lnc. Mat!
Total D0rect Cost
0l0g Cost Amort.

Equ00ment"
Su0t. Salary
Inc00entals
S0c0al
Total Ovehea0
Total Lab. + Oveh0
Total Cost w0thout
[0lleg0ble] 0ns0.
Mass Mass
Swan Swan 2
000 1
1786
0ncl 0n
co0e
0j
82
99
10
09
106
682 605
Mass
Com Est Est
106 100
05
012
Sam T. N.Y. Com 0+W
Re0ort 000
107
12 VII 07
5/0/85
M Og0en M Og0en Mass M Thomas P Rahway El0z ove 00 of Tr 00 of Tr MorrisT
ove
1s 0
107
lis I0|
04
000 1
106-7
liTocT
000 2
46
pence York or 400 coppers per thousand. Thomas Paine, writing from France in
1792, cites a statement made to him by one of the state coiners from New England
that copper was offered to him in the West Indies for 15 lbs. the dollar, which
allowing 6d York for transportation would amount to approximately 1 Od York at the
mint or 220 per thousand. The Board of Treasury in 1787 sold nearly 36 tons of
government copper to James Jarvis for 11 %d sterling York. Using an assumed
median figure as the average cost at Elizabeth the results should have hit somewhere
between the high and low figures given below.
Copper 261 220 what units?
Operating 150 60
Overhead 200 200
Royalty 100 100
711 580
Goadsby, Cox
&???? 289 420
Total 2 years 578,000 840,000
York Money 1,927 2,500
Dollars $ 4,817 7,000
Units: From the context, it appears to be Jersey coppers per one thousand coins produced.
DG
At this point in the manuscript, a handwritten copy of a 1794 report to the Senate by David

Rittenhouse is inserted. The full report is included on the following page. GT
Operations at the Rahway Mint
47
8 February 1794
Report of David Rittenhouse to the Senate
American State Papers Class 3, Vol. 1, p. 273
I have procured from the coiner of the mint an estimate of the regular expenses of the
copper coinage which I have reason to believe is nearly accurate.
The copper necessary for the coinage of 202 dollars is equal to 600 lbs. avoirdupois
weight.This 600 lbs (in blanks) requires 1000 lbs* weight of sheet copper the
clipping of which (viz 400 lbs) remain to be cast over again.
Hands
Days
Dollars
Cutting
1000 lbs out of sheets into slips requires
Rolling
Cutting
d into blanks

Annealing
600 lbs
lA
Cleaning
Vt.
Milling
Coining
VA
7a
Quarter cord hickory wood
151!
Four horses 2 days
ISO
Sal. sal enixum ie for boiling copper
23s
600 lbs copper make 202
600 lbs d cost 160
Difference in favor of coin 42
Deduct expenses of coinage 23.50
Leaves profit to the United States 18.50
Mint of the US
48
During the first year of its operation, the Rahway Mint personnel setup was
approximately as follows:
Thomas Goadsby: Financial Backer & Partner
Albion Cox: General Business Manager and Gen'l Supt. & Partner
He lived in Elizabeth-Town center near enough to Ogden for his chair
(riding), and his cow to be kept there.
John Harper: Mint Foreman.
Cox later speaks of him as "a practical man...who operated the Jersey
Coppers." His home was located about half a mile south of the Mint across the
county line in Milton, Middlesex County. May 7, 1787, List of taxes unpaid
in Essex County lists John Harper 9s 5d and is marked "Paid." He later
assisted during the establishment of the first U. S. Mint and in the cellar of his
Philadelphia shop were struck the 1792 half-dismes. In 1794-5 he was of
assistance to the Congressional committee investigating the mint and made
dies and equipment. In 1795 he was engaged in the saw-making business in
Trenton.
William Dudley: Blacksmith
He performed work for or at the Mint and provided lodging for two of the
laborers. He appears on the May 7 return of taxes unpaid Essex County as
being delinquent 9s 5d. On a similar list of Aug. 1789 he is listed for 1:7:7
marked "Paid". In Dec. 1794 he sells his property in Rahway having moved
to Dutch Valley, Morris County.
Gilbert Rindell: Laborer
He arrived in Essex County in 1786 from England. His wife, Sarah, joined the
First Presbyterian Church in Elizabeth-Town in 1788. After the giving up of

the Rahway Mills, he was employed as foreman of the mint which was at that
time shifted to Ogden's house in Elizabeth. He acquired considerable prop-
erty in Rahway. His grave in the 1st Pres. Church yard, Elizabeth, is marked
with an imposing stone which gives the date of Feb. 28, 1832, for his death,
aged 72 years. The wide variations in the spelling of his name argue for an
humble origin. We have found "Rindle," "Rindall," "Randall," "Rindal," and
"Rindel", and in 1791, an undelivered letter at the Elizabeth Town Post Office
for "Gilbert McRindle." July 3, 1788, it is from his hands the state received
the final payment from Goadsby & Cox on the royalty for their coinage.
Hambilton Robinson: Laborer
In July 1782 he was taxed on 36 acres of improved land on the list of ratables
for the Ward of Rahway; Town of Elizabeth. On the list of July 1783 no land
appeared for him. In Sept 1786 Major John Craig, Rahway Tavern keeper,
49
became security for him in a prosecution by the state. In 1787 Solomon
Taylor sued him in trespass &c. On this case the jury in 1788 awarded
damages of 5 and 6d costs. On Oct. 5, 1788, he sold his livestock, furniture,
kitchen utensils, guns, etc. and one chest of tools to John Craig for 30. On
April 1, 1790, he sued Sayres Crane alleging Crane owed him 51:6:8 "for
work and labour before that time done and performed." Sept. 1792 John Craig
got a judgment against him for a debt of 50. Sept. 1793 he was sued by
Nehemiah Wade on a debt of 36. From, his signature and from the large
number of variations with which his name appears, the designation "laborer"
seems probable. We have found for his first name "Hambilton", "Hambelton",
"Hammilton", "Hamilton", "Hambleton" and for his last name "Robertson",
"Robinson", "Robison", "Robeson". He signed it Hambilton Robinson, Oct.
5, 1788.
David Ross, Camp's deputy, served writ of replevin on Matthias Scudder,
Constable at suit of H[ambilton] R[obinson] D. J. IX, p. 55
Henry Widdegan or Widdoner: Laborer?
Henry Weadegan in a/c's book of Daniel Marsh 1796-1800 in inventory (filed
12/4/1802) his estate charged for meat & cash credited for work Docket 270
DII, p. 114
We have no other justification for his inclusion beyond his testimony for
Dudley vs. Goadsby & Cox. His name appears on return of taxes unpaid to
Aug. 1789 for 8s lld.
Thomas Abney: Apprentice or Laborer?
After Abney was released from his indenture to Walter Mould in April 1787,
Thomas Goadsby was appointed guardian of Thomas Abney, a minor under

the age of twenty-one, for the purpose of prosecuting in his name a suit
against Walter Mould, Jacob Arnold, Esq. and Daniel Halsey in Case for
03030303050303030303
A Suit...in Case: Abbreviated form of "trespass on the case," a form of action at common
law adapted to the recovery of damages for some injury resulting to a party from the
wrongful act of another, unaccompanied by direct or immediate force, or which is the
indirect or secondary consequence of defendant's act. Black's, p. 1675. In practice, says
Bouvier, "trespass on the case" was the common law's way of permitting recovery of
damages for injuries for which "the more ancient forms of action would not lie." He lists 9
categories of wrongful or tortious acts for which "trespass on the case" would lie. Vol. I at
288-289. The false imprisonment action at issue here would fall under Bouvier's category
of "wrongful acts done under a legal process regularly issuing from a court of competent
jurisdiction." One cannot tell from the limited facts set forth by Douglas just what gave rise
to the claim of false imprisonment. DG
50
false imprisonment. Jacob Arnold was the then sheriff of Morris County,
having succeeded William Leddel to the office, and Daniel Halsey was
operating a stage line between Elizabeth & Morristown. In November 1787
the N. J. Supreme Court ordered the venue be changed to Morris County, on
oath of Jacob Arnold and Walter Mould that the cause of action, if any, arose
in Morris Country. No further record has been found of any Thomas or other
Abney.
Matthias Ogden: ??? (new Business Dept.)
In their report to the Continental Congress of April 9, 1787, the Board of
Treasury reports on those of the proposals received for the coinage of copper
which they have felt worthy of consideration. Of these they recommend the
two best to the Congress for them to make the selection. These two are one
from James Jarvis and one from Ogden. Of the latter they report: "The last
proposition is from Mr. Matthias Ogden in behalf of himself and Associates.
These gentlemen propose to receive the public Copper now on hand and to
pay for it (at a price to be agreed) in Copper Coin, delivering every week 350
Pounds, N.Y. currency in Copper until the whole is paid; or to refine, Sheet
and Blank the crude Copper and Coin it under the inspection of a person for
such purpose appointed by Congress, receiving for same 15 pence New York
currency per Pound, free from every expence except the salary of the person
appointed to inspect the Coinage. They further propose to refine, Blank and
coin such a farther quantity as with the Copper belonging to the public will
amount to 300 Tons of Copper Coin and to pay to the United States 15 pounds
of copper coin on every hundred pounds coined. And fifty pounds weight of
it to be furnished previous to the conclusion of the Contract as the Standard

of impression and quality." The seven-year lease taken on the Mills to
perform a state contract limited by its terms to two years needed some
explanation. This negotiation to land the United States Government Coinage
which we have seen started by Matthias Olden in his letter of January 6, 1786,
may supply that explanation. Just about 7 years at 350 per week would be
required for 300 tons of copper. However the Congress selected James
Jarvis's proposal which offered to deliver all coppers coined to the govern-
ment and receive in payment the securities of the Congress payable over a
period of years. Thus the Rahway Mint was not to become the home of the
Fugio's and the United States was never to receive the Coppers contracted for
by Jarvis under the principal coinage contract. The market for the securities
of the Confederation was too poor to allow Jarvis to finance the performance
of this $250,000.00 (specie) order and it was cancelled in 1788 for nonperfor-
mance by the contractor. On a supplemental contract for the sale of the Public
Copper, Jarvis received slightly over 35 tons of copper to be paid for in
coppers of the "Federal Stamp." A delivery of a "parcel of coins" on this
contract is recorded under date of May 21, 1788, but on Sept. 30, 1788 the
Board reports of the whole amount owing (approximately 1 Vi million Cop-
51
pers) "but a small part has been received". The unsatisfactory results of this
private contract for coinage surely had its influence in the later decision to set
up a government-operated Mint of the United States. Had the contract been
awarded to Ogden and his associates on his terms, the performance would
surely have been much more satisfactory even without expansion of the
Rahway Mint. It is interesting to speculate that this might have thus become
the important center of coinage in the United States.
Production Schedule Based on Payts. to State Treasurer
100%
Cumulative
Mar. 16, 1787
109,913
109,913
Apr. 5, 1787
224,825
334,738
Apr. 6, 1787
233,800
568,538
Oct. 4, 1787
84,037
652,575
Oct. 25, 1787
253,125
905,700

Jan. 3, 1788
253,125
1,158,825
Jan. 19, 1788
302,175
1,461,000
Mar. 5, 1788
253,125
1,714,125
Jun. 18, 1788
112,650
1,826,775
July 3, 1788
173,225
2,000,000
2,000,000
Ouarters
568538
337,162
555,300
253,125
285.875
2,000,000
How closely the royalty payments corresponded with the actual minting progress is
conjectural. There is no record of any legislative supervision, inspection or
investigation during this period. Violation of the strict requirements of the act
regarding payments would have justified state act[ion] against the 10,000 bond and
its two sureties. It seems doubtful if highly solvent Goadsby would have allowed the
taking of chances. The documentary evidence thus far seems to provide no clue to
nor indication of the apparent cessation of coinage for the second quarter of 1787.
Trouble between Goadsby and Cox resulting in legal action in Sept. 1787 may supply
an explanation.
[LEGAL DISPUTES AFFECTING MINT OPERATIONS]
Albion Cox's financial affairs seem to have been in an extremely precarious state.
The following judgments were obtained against him in New York:
Feb. 19, 1787 Suits of Raynes, Olive and Jackson in excess of 400:00:0
July 24, 1787 Thomas Thomas 36:18:6
Oct. 16, 1787 Thomas Thomas 70:00:6
There may have been others which have not yet come to light.
In addition, there were the two notes payable to William Cox. These were probably
for half the amounts mentioned in the declaration as it was customary to execute a
bond for double the amount of a loan to secure its payment, and the suits were on the
bonds. On this basis they would appear:
Aug. 5, 1783 William Cox Judgmt Nov. 1787 3,500:00:0
Sept. 23, 1783 William Cox d 2,275:00:0
His obligations to Thomas Goadsby apparently dated from about the middle of 1787
and may have been advanced in part to keep him afloat:
July 7, 1787 Note signed by Cox and Samuel Atlee 1,200:00:0
/? Note of Cox Judgmt by prev confession Sept 1787 940:00:0
On March 16, 1787, two suits of Walter Mould had resulted in Matthias Ogden
furnishing bail bonds [to Cox] and in Nov. 1787 they were both dismissed with costs
against Mould. But Cox's next brush with "Jersey Justice" was to be more serious.
William Cox's action on [Albion] Cox's two obligations began with a Capias dated
May 15, 1787, resulting in the furnishing of bail bond again [by] Matthias Ogden.
(^030303030303030303
Thomas Thomas was a tinman, coppersmith, and brass founder located at No. 206 Queen
Street, opposite Burling Slip, in New York City. GT
The legal action by Goadsby on the 1200 note co-signed by Samuel Atlee resulted in Atlee
fleeing New York City to the Republic of Vermont to avoid the same fate as Cox, debtor's

prison. See "Samuel and James F. Atlee: Machin's Mills Partners," The Colonial Newslet-
ter, Volume 32, No. 3, October, 1992. GT
54
This bond is dated Aug. 18, 1787, and is witnessed by Thomas Goadsby. Judgment
having been ordered against Cox at the November term without stay of execution, he
was turned over to the Essex Sheriff at the common gaol in Newark and the bail
bond endorsed accordingly as discharged. In the mean time Goadsby had become
apprehensive about the safety of his investment in Cox. Possibly to beat William Cox
in recovery, he rushed through the September Pleas, Albion's note and pre-signed
power of attorney to confess judgment thereon. The writ of execution, a fieri facias
de bonis, resulted in the seizure of Albion's goods and chattels on Nov. 6, 1787, for
Goadsby's benefit, just prior to the granting of Judgment to William Cox. Goadsby
started action on the July 7th note of Cox and Atlee on Sept. 28, 1787, but lacking
the power of attorney to confess judgment on it, he had to wait the due process of law
which in those days moved often as slowly as the proverbial mills of the gods. This
action resulted in a judgment on April 14, 1788. No execution appears to have been
taken on this judgment.
The 940 obligation [of Cox to Goadsby] was partially explained by Aaron Ogden,
Matthias's brother [and] Attorney for Goadsby, in a letter written to Sheriff Caleb
Camp on Nov. 8, 1787. Ogden stated that an enclosure listed additional items of
Cox's property, not listed in the inventory of the seizures of Nov. 6th and insisted that
they be added to the inventory because "if left out Mr. Goadsby will be the sufferer
his debt was and is Chiefly for monies advanced to Mr. Cox, monies which Mr. Cox
has received for him." This letter later formed the basis of a suit by Goadsby against
Camp. The amount of the obligation 940:0:0 was equivalent to 225,600 coppers,
which would be half of an average quarter production.
Turned over to the Essex Sheriff at the Common Gaol: Albion Cox's worldly goods
having been seized to satisfy the debt owed by him to prior judgment creditor Thomas

Goadsby, Albion Cox was unable to satisfy William Cox's judgment and thereby was
imprisoned for debt. The New Jersey Constitution of 1844, adopted at a time of "deepening
conflict between the rights of the citizen and the rights of property, [and] the awakening
social consciousness over the plight of the poor," finally abolished imprisonment for debt.
Article I, paragraph 17. Set forth in Julian P. Boyd, ed., Fundamental Laws and Constitu-
tions of New Jersey (Princeton, D. Van Nostrand Co., 1964), p. 167. DG
Writ of Fieri Facias: A writ of execution commanding the sheriff to levy upon and sell so
much of the goods and chattels of a judgment debtor as is necessary to satisfy the judgment.
DG
Suit by Goadsby Against Camp: Probably an amercement action seeking a pecuniary
penalty against Sheriff Camp for neglect of duty for failing to seize items of Cox's property
that should have been subject to levy at Goadsby's instance. Black's, p. 107. DG
Legal Disputes Affecting Mint Operations 55
How long Cox remained in jail at Newark has not been determined. In a letter dated
Dec. (3rd or 31st, illegible) 1787, Cox writes the sheriff:
Dr. Sr. Mrs. Cox was with me last eveng with a letter from Scott to Boudinot
- the purport of which was to request Mr. Boudinot to do in the business as
he pleased & that twas his particular desire that I should be Liberated - as I
already know his sentiments I can have little doubt of effecting my enlarge-
ment provided you would permit me to go with Mr. Gifford to Eliz town Yr
present friendly Indulgence towards me gives me hopes you will not deny this
favor -1 trust that on some future day I shall be able to convince you that you
have not given your friendly assistance to an unworthy object. I am Sr with
the greatest Esteem yr very Hble Svt.
(signed) Albion Cox
A letter from Wm. Livingston dated 12/9/87 refers to Cox as in gaol. Just when and
how Albion Cox satisfied the judgment that William Cox obtained in Nov. 1787
amounting to 11,550 hasn't been unraveled nor how the debt was incurred. The
William Cox (see Ogden's affidavit) may have been his Little Britain relative or the
Burlington Cox father of this Cox and is likely a carryover from Albion's merchant
venture. William Cox seems to have been satisfied because no execution or process
appears on the court records plus we hear no more from him beyond December 1787.
In an application to Chancery for an injunction staying the execution on Goadsby's
Sept. 1787 judgment, it alleged on the part of Albion Cox that although he had
executed a bond to Goadsby for 940 with a warrant of attorney to confess judgment
thereon, it was with "the express stipulation that the same should be deposited in the
hands of Col. Matthias Ogden and that the same should not be put in suit without the
express consent and Direction of the said Matthias Ogden on his determining the
same to be necessary for the safety of the Monies due thereon" and that the consent

of Ogden had not been obtained.
A second action had been brought by Goadsby against Samuel Atlee and Albion Cox
by a writ of Capias dated Sept. 28,1787, in connection with a bond of the said Samuel
and Albion dated at Newark July 7, 1787, promising to pay Goadsby the sum of
1,200 returnable to the January 1788 term of the Essex Common Pleas, on which,
the injunction proceedings state, Cox had been confined.
csegoacsoacsoacaeaeig
Injunction: A prohibitive writ issued by a court of equity forbidding the party enjoined to
do some act, or to permit others to do some act, which he is threatening or attempting to do,
or restraining him in the continuance thereof, such act being unjust and inequitable,
injurious to the party seeking the writ, and for which there is no adequate remedy at law.
Black's, p. 923. DG
56
William Livingston, the Chancellor, on Jan. 19, 1788, granted the prayed for stay of
execution on the 940 judgment and a stop order from proceeding further at law on
the Atlee-Cox action and "from the Sale of the Goods & Chattles of the said" Cox
until Goadsby "shall have answered the sd Premises and we shall have taken further
Order therein." On Jan. 25th an order is given to show cause why the injunction
should not be dissolved and on the 29th it is so dissolved with costs for having been
obtained irregularly. However, it stays in the sheriffs hands all monies realized on
the sale of the seized goods and chattels of the said Albion. (These for some reason
the sheriff does not proceed to sell and a later order in chancery in June 1788 puts a
further stay to their sale.)
However, before this enforced lull, there occurred on Jan. 29, 1788, besides the
above referred to dissolution of injunction, two other noteworthy events. First,
Goadsby inserted an advertisement in the Elizabeth-Town newspaper:
A Caution to the Public
The subscriber having been informed, that application has been made for the
purchase of goods, in the names of Goadsby and Cox, and that they would pay
for them; this is therefore to caution the public from selling on any such
account, as there is no partnership subsisting between the subscriber and Mr.
Cox; nor will the subscriber hold himself accountable for any debts so
contracted.
Thomas Goadsby
Elizabeth-Town, January 29, 1788
This notice may have been prompted by the action of William Dudley in obtaining
a capias dated Jan 15, 1788, against the alleged debt of Cox and Goadsby. This suit
was certainly a reminder that their names were joined in the mind of this creditor. In

view of this advertisement, the allegations of Aaron Ogden regarding the nature of
Cox's debt to Goadsby, and the Chancellor's direction to the referees regarding
property belonging "to the partnership of the said Parties if any such shall be found,"
there may have been some disagreement between these two regarding the nature of
the business relationship existing between them. Albion Cox seemingly held that it
C3C53C3C53030303C53C303
Order...to Show Cause: An order commanding a party to appear before the court and
present reasons why he should not be required to do an act, or why the object of the order
should not be enforced. Black's, pp. 1549, 1497. When the order to show cause contains
words of summons, it can be used as original process in emergent matters, to bring the
subject matter of the litigation immediately before the court. An order to show cause does
not necessarily reallocate the burdens of going forward and of persuasion from plaintiff to
defendant. In general, a party advocating a particular fact has the burden of proving that fact.
DG
Legal Disputes Affecting Mint Operations
was a partnership in which Goadsby was responsible for his share of the losses and
expenses. Goadsby on the other hand may have claimed that his advances, all
evidenced by notes or bonds were strictly loans and that other relations between
himself and Cox were contractual in nature and did not constitute a partnership.
The other event of January 29, 1788, that has an important bearing on the coining
operations at Rahway was the granting by the same chancellor on application in
Cox's behalf of the following writ of replevin:
The State of New Jersey. To our Sheriff of our county of Essex Greeting We
command you if Albion Cox shall give you sufficient Security to prosecute
this Suit and make return of the goods & chattles if return shall be adjudged
that you replevin and deliver to the afd Albion Cox Two Iron Cutting Presses
one pair of Rollers Twelve Ingots for Casting Copper Six hundred Wait of
Blanks for making Copper pence & Sixty Ingots of Copper and one Coining
Press which Thomas Goadsby hath taken & unjustly detains against the sd
Albion Cox and his Pledges and also that you Summon and take safe Pledges
of the sd Thomas Goadsby so that he be & appear before us at Trenton on the
first Tuesday in April next to answer the afd Albion Cox in a plea for taking
and unjust detaining of the said Goods & Chattles and have you there then this
writ. Witness his excellency William Livingston Esquire Captain General
Govenor [sic] & Commander in Chief in & over the State of New Jersey and
Territories thereunto belonging, Chancellor & ordinary of the same at
Elizabeth Town the Twenty Ninth Day of January in the year of our Lord One
Thousand Seven hundred & Eighty Eight
Elish Boudinot Atty W. Livingston Junr Clk
That Cox gave the "sufficient security" and that it was [provided by] Matthias
[Ogden] the following can leave no doubt. Sheriff Camp must have gone to the

Rahway Mint next day and there taken from Goadsby such of the equipment and
materials which had not yet been removed from the premises. Ten days later he
turned these items over to Col. Matthias Ogden upon the following receipt:
Received at Rahway Mills February 9th 1788
from Caleb Camp Esquire high Sheriff of the county of Essex two Iron
Cutting presses, one pair of Rollers twelve Ingot Moulds for casting copper,
four hundred and ninety four blanks for making Copper-pence, fifty seven
Ingots, part of sixty Ingots of Copper, taken from Mr. Thomas Goadsby on
the thirtieth day of January seventeen hundred and eighty eight at said Mills,
by virtue of a writ of replevin against him at the suit of Albion Cox tested the
58
twenty ninth day of said month and returnable on the first Tuesday in April
then next before the Justices of the Supreme Court of Judicature for the State
of New Jersey at Trenton in said State
(Signed) M Ogden
Note the significant omission from this list of the following items covered in the writ
of replevin.
The coining press.
The Difference between 6 cwt of Blanks (at 150 grains average, this would total
28,000 blanks) and 494 (the difference would be 27,506 blanks).
3 ingots of copper.
(There appears in Caleb Camp's handwriting in rough notes from which he at later
date calculates Cox's indebtedness to him "To costs and damages in procuring the
Copper and works caried [sic] to Morris Town 20 ")
Int on 20-0 from Jan 1788
From the following letter it would appear that the foregoing items are the "property"
referred to therein. It has been folded in the manner of the letters of that date and is
endorsed on the reverse in the handwriting of Caleb Camp, among whose papers it
was found, "Wm Leddle." The upper portion is a letter addressed to "W Mold."
Sir
I have informed Mr Camp the Property shall be within call at his command
on Saturday and he Assures me no new Process shall interfere with Trial but
a fair and Candid Decision shall take place, and its Consequences be duly
Executed. Shall be with you this Evening in the mean
Time am Sir
Your Most Obt Sevt

W Mold Wm Leddel [or Leddle]
Friday Evening
(below appears the following)
03030303030303030303
Returnable: To be returned; requiring a return. When a writ is said to be "returnable" on
a certain day, it is meant that on that day the officer must return it. Black's, p. 1481. DG
59
Col1 Ogden agrees that no new process shall issue on account of the property,
either of replevin or Certiorari if brought tomorrow to Chatham.
(Signed) M Ogden
That the above "trial" took place on Saturday Feb. 2, 1788, is evidenced by the
following receipt in the hand of Timothy Day, who was the proprietor of the well-
known Day's Tavern just East of the Stone Bridge in Chatham on the turnpike from
Morristown to Elizabeth-Town near the county line between Morris and Essex.
Reed ye 2th of february 1788 of Calib Camp Esqr 22/6 for Expenses him Self
and Juriers Between Alben Cox & Thomas Goadsbe
Rec'd by me Timothy Day
(It was legal practice of the day, where questions arose as to the identity and
ownership of property replevied, for such questions to be settled by a Sheriffs Jury.)
These "Juriers" evidently decided upon the disposition of the "Property." That their
decision was in favor of Cox is evidenced by the wording of the June 7, 1788, Rule
of Reference in Chancery where "it is further agreed, that the said Complainant
(Albion Cox) Shall within one week After the signing hereof Cause all the imple-
ments tools and other property, taken from said works by a Writ of Replevin to be
returned." We must then consider the receipt of Feb 9, 1788, by Ogden of the items
left at the mills as done by authorization of or in Cox's behalf and also his further
receipt following:
Rec'd Elisth Town. 3rd March 1788 of Caleb Camp Esqr three ingots of
copper being the remainder in full of the articles taken from Mr. Goadsby by
a writ of replevin & those not delivered & receipted for before.
(Signed) M. Ogden
Certiorari: A writ of review or inquiry, issued by a superior to an inferior court of record,

requiring the latter to send in to the former some proceeding therein pending, or the record
and proceedings in some cause already terminated in cases where the inferior court
procedure is not according to the course of the common law. Bouvier's, vol. I, p. 301. DG
Trial: As used here, a proceeding before a sheriffs jury. DG
Chancery: A court of equity, presided over by a chancellor. Black's, p. 293. DG
60
In view of this language, the absence from the record of any receipt for the return of
the coining press fails to create any presumption against its having been returned.
The absence of further documentary evidence regarding the disposition of or
explanation for the approximately 27,500 planchets is unfortunate as it might
materially aid in reconstructing the dovetailing at this point with the coinage.
Connected in some way with the events of this period is a note which Goadsby later
alleged Camp gave him, dated Feb. 6, 1788, promising to pay him 25:18:07 for
value received. In the before referred-to rough notes from which Camp in 1794
prepared a statement of Cox's then debt to Camp appears:
To a note 25 given January Term 1788 25
Int on 25 - 0 from middle Jan 1788
Interest from the middle of January to February 6 would amount to approximately
18s 7d at the then legal rate of six per cent per annum.
Another episode, thus far unexplained, occurred on Jan 31, 1788. In the Court of
Oyer & Terminer & General Gaol Delivery at Newark...The Grand Jury came into
court and presented the following bill Veritas:
The State
vs
Albion Cox
William Liddle Indictments for misdemeanor
Barne Ogden
Thomas Eaton
John Gifford
C53C5303C3C3C303CJ3C3C3
Michael Hodder was the first to mention the existence of Damon Douglas' New Jersey

manuscript in his article titled "Oh, What Tangled Webs We Mortals Weave...," which
appeared in The Colonial Newsletter, Volume 33, No. 3, October 1993, pp. 1396-1400.
Michael also points out that the Caleb Camp papers seem to be missing from the New Jersey
Historical Society library, along with the catalog cards. DW
Court of Oyer and Terminer: A higher criminal court, so-called from the English
commission directed to the judges empowering them to "inquire, hear and determine"
felonies and misdemeanors. Black's, p. 1261. DG
Gaol Delivery: In criminal law, the delivery or clearing of a gaol (jail) of the prisoners
confined therein, by trying them. Black's, p. 809. DG
Bill Veritas: An indictment issued by a grand jury. Black's, p. 212. DG
Search has thus far failed to disclose the details of the offense nor has any further
record of the case been found. The first two names on the list we have already
discussed elsewhere. Barne Ogden was the first cousin of Matthias Ogden and had
been on Aug. 2,1787, discharged from gaol as an insolvent debtor, having complied
with the legal formalities. On Nov. 6, 1787, when the sheriff seized it, Albion Cox's
cow was in his care and custody. Thomas Eaton was ? and John Gifford, appears to
have been the constable ? with whom Cox, in his letter of Dec. 1787, asks to be
allowed to make a trip to Elizabeth. The affair has all the earmarks of having been
an interesting one.
We have no documentary evidence regarding Essex County coining from the date of
the "Juriers" decision of Feb. 2, 1788, and the Chancery Rule of Reference of June
7, 1788. Of the whereabouts of the coining press, there is only the inference implied
in the Rule of Reference that it is in the control of Cox and not at the Mills. Of Albion
Cox's activities during these four months there is some slight implication in the
absence of any trace of bail bond and in the signatures of M. Ogden to the receipts
for the coinage equipment and material. From the language of the injunction hearings
at Elizabeth-Town and of the wording of the writ of replevin at the same place it
seems that he did not appear before the Chancellor in person. His signature appears
as witness to that of Sheriff Camp at Newark on a note dated March 17, 1788, and
again at the same place on May 20, 1788, to Camp's signature to the indenture of
John Ballard of Newark as a servant to Caleb Camp and Isaac Gillam. The Common
Gaol of Essex County, wherein were held debtors under writs of capias, was situated
in Newark.
His goods and chattels, inventoried by the sheriff upon seizure on Nov. 6, 1787,
remained unsold by the sheriff and, as was customary, remained in his residence until
sold, on his covenant to the sheriff to account for the inventoried items when

required.
^030303030303030303
It is not clear why Douglas would infer that the coining press was in the control of Cox,
the absence of evidence that it ever left the physical custody of Goadsby. DG
Indenture: Here used in the sense of an apprenticeship contract. DG
62
On April 9, 1788, there appears in the Elizabeth-Town Newspaper:
To be Let
and entered upon immediately (if required) a two story dwelling house with
a chair house, all in complete order, in an agreeable situation for a private
gentleman or for a store keeper, being near the center of the town, and having
a dock adjoining. Now occupied by Mr. Thomas Goadsby.
Among the records of the Continental Congress are the following records of another
episode in the relationship of Goadsby and Cox:
May 8, 1788 Memorial of Thomas Goadsby relative to a contract for making a die
to strike medals. Referred to Board of Treasury to Report.
June 18, 1788 Report of Board of Treasury on memorial of T. Goadsby. The Board
of Treasury to whom was referred the Memorial of Thomas Goadsby
Beg Leave to Report That the agreement referred to in the memorial
was made by Albion Cox, late of this city, in his own person; and as
the Board Conceived in his own behalf. That when any person duly
authorized by Mr. Cox shall apply for a fulfillment of the conditions
entered into on the part of the United States, the Board will be ready
to execute the same.
All of which is humbly submitted.
Walter Livingston
Arthur Lee
An ad similar to the one of April 9th above appeared in the New-York Packet newspaper on
March 26, 1788: GT
TO BE LET, And entered upon after the first day of April, A TWO STORY
DWELLING-HOUSE, chair-house, stable, and store-house; all in an agreeable situ-

ation for a private gentleman, or for a store keeper, in Elizabeth-Town, being near the
center of the town, and having a dock to lade and unlade merchandize - now occupied
by Mr. Thomas Goadsby.
Board of Treasury: Successor to the Office of Finance, c. 1785, as the administrative arm
for financial affairs of the second Continental Congress. "Though the Congress of the
Confederation was primarily a policy-making body responsible not to the people but to the
state legislatures, inevitably it developed a functioning bureaucracy." Alvin M. Josephy, Jr.,
ed., American Heritage History of the Making of the Nation, 1783-1860 (New York,
American Heritage Pub. Co., 1968), p. 21. The Board of Treasury issued its own notes signed
by the Paymaster General to meet army pay requirements in 1785. Eric P. Newman, The
Early Paper Money of America, 4th ed. (Iola, WI, Krause Publications, 1997), p. 73. DG
63
List of Reports Rendered during Federal year 1787-1788 which were not acted on
during the year.
June 18 On Goadsby Mem1 BdofTreasy.
(See DGD Article on 1st Indian Peace Medal.)
In June 1788 the affairs of the Rahway Mint were turned over in their entirely "to be
& remain possessed by Col0 Matthias Ogden in trust for the purpose" set forth in the
Chancery Rule of Reference, which is reproduced in full.
(June 7, 1788: Two page Rule of Reference naming three referees to determine all
matters in dispute between the parties, Goadsby & Cox.)
There is an implication in the express agreement for the return of all implements and
materials to the Mills and in the order that if the return is not made accordingly the
Rule of Reference shall be of no effect, that it should have been complied with. The
Rule evidently remained in effect, for the sheriff did not proceed further with the sale
of Cox's goods and chattels and no further legal proceedings ensued between the two
principals. The report of the referees is held up until June 3,1790, just four days short
of two years. When it is finally made it is too brief and simple to allow the delay to
be explained by the complexity of the matters requiring analysis. Much more likely
to have been the cause of the delay would be the desire of the referees to heed the
desires of their prominent fellow citizen Matthias Ogden to work himself out of the
difficulties that he found himself in as surety for the Mills lease. This he relieved
himself of by mid 1789 through his offer for giving up the Mills. The following letter
shows the Trustee, Matthias Ogden, was active in the affairs of the mint in the spring
of 1789.
Elizabeth Town 29th March 89
Sir/

The bearer is in Philadelphia to enquire what Copper can be had at
a price that will answer - Mr Goadsby is away, but I expect is on his return
- were he here I judge he would request your credit for six weeks payable in
New York bank notes with the advance of commissions depreciation &c as
formerly, for what could be purchased & ship'd immediately - this I cannot
ask being a Stranger but if the copper can be had & Mr. Goadsby does not
return or should disapprove I will give you any name here with mine for the
amount, or forward you a security in Notes at Cash price - your answer by the
bearer will much oblige your humble Serv1 -
M Ogden
Messrs Fishers & C-
64 The Copper Coinage of the State of New Jersey
Not long after this letter, the Mills were given up and the mint equipment removed,
the coining press, at least, to the home of Matthias Ogden in Elizabeth-Town. In 1813
they [Mills] housed the first hair-cloth manufacturing in America. By 1896 it had
fallen into ruins. Later, a new factory on the site became the home of the Royal Auto
Coach Company. In 1937, after extensive alterations and additions, it became the
retail furniture sales rooms occupied today by the Koos Furniture Company,
Saint Georges Ave., Rahway, N. J.
03030303030303030303
The street number on Saint Georges Ave. is 1859. As of June 8,2002, the furniture company

is out of business, the building vacant, and the owners are in litigation. RW
65
Nov. 1786
to
Dec.l, 1787
Dec.l, 1787
to
99999
to
Jan ??? 1788
Feb.1788
to
Jun. 1788
Jun.1788
to
Mid 1789
Summary of the Rahway Mills Coining
Active Operations
Albion Cox put in jail.
No reason to assume any
interruption in coinage.
Coinage stopped by removal
of coining press by
Goadsby.
No Coining at
the Mills.
? Coinage resumed at the Mills

in charge of Ogden, Trustee.
Difficulty getting new copper.
Production [illegible] Schedule of Payments of 10% Royalty to State Treasure
36-12-9 Coppers
74-18-10 do
Mar. 16, 1787
109,913
109,913
pr stage
Apr. 5, 1787
224,825
334,738
G+C
Apr. 6, 1787
Jonathan
Dayton
233,800
568,538
2nd Q Jon Day.
Oct. 4, 1787
84,037
652,575
G+C
Oct. 25, 1787
253,125
905,700
Ann Barber
Jan. 3, 1788
Ann Barber
253,125
1,158,825
Jan. 19, 1788
302,175
1,461,000
Mar. 5, 1788
Nancy Barber
253,125
1,714,125
Nancy Barb.
Jun. 18, 1788
112,650
1.826,775
THE MORRIS-TOWN MINT
The circumstances which led to the estrangement between Walter Mould and
Goadsby and Cox and to his [Mould's] selection of Morris-Town as the location for
his own coining remain undisclosed. Without further evidence it seems fruitless to
conjecture as to the other reasons "which out of delicacy to Mr. Mould"1 his two
associates forbore mentioning as contributing to the rupture. With regard to the
selection of Morris County, the coincidence that this was the home of William
Leddel, the unsuccessful competitor for the original franchise, warrants the publica-
tion of such information as has been collected regarding him with the hope of
eliciting from readers the further facts that are necessary to a clarification of his
relationship with Walter Mould.
Born out of wedlock, circa 1847,2 the son of William Leddel, 1st, and his friend,
Easter Nightingale,3 he is mentioned by his father as calling himself William Leddel.
He was apprenticed to a Morris-Town doctor, Thomas Blachley, and became
successively a doctor, storekeeper, iron forge proprietor, horse fancier, post rider for
the New Jersey Journal, High Sheriff of Morris County, prominent member of the 1 st
Presbyterian church in Morris-Town and respected citizen of the community. Of
him, Judge David Thompson, deposed, "The said Leddell is a visionary man, almost
continually engaged in wild and fanciful schemes, and frequently changes his plans."
His petition to the legislature alleged the possession of "a considerable quantity of
Copper, the Production of this State."
His wife, Phebe Wick, was a cousin of [one] Tuttle who had been the first wife of
John Cleves Symmes on whose Morris-Town property [Solitude] Mould's coining
1. Recited in Petition of 1 1/17/1786, Appendix A, p.
Footnotes 2 and 3 are missing from the manuscript. Apparently footnote 2 was intended to
correct the obvious error of Leddel's birth. The actual date must be circa 1747. GT
Deposed: Gave evidence under oath in the form of a deposition, or sworn verbatim

transcribed statement made during pending litigation. Black's, p. 526. This particular
statement, however, is one of opinion rather than fact. Douglas does not disclose the
litigation context of this particular sworn statement. DG
The history of "Solitude" was published by Harold Flartey in an article titled, "Razed New
Jersey Home Served as State's Mint" which appeared in the July 7, 1976, issue of Coin
World and was republished in New Jersey Numismatic Journal, Vol 3, No. 1, 1977. Of
interest, it indicates that both copper and silver were mined on the property some "500 yards
west of the house." RM
68
was performed. The only direct evidence connecting him [Leddel] with this opera-
tion that has yet come to light is his letter of Feb. 1, 1788, to Mould, written after his
term of office as sheriff had expired. That one of Mould's sureties for the perfor-
mance of his contract with the state was Thomas Kinney, predecessor to Leddel as
sheriff, is suggestive.
Whatever the circumstances were that led to it, the selection of Morris-Town as a
mint location seems to have taken place by the end of 1786, as Mould's bond,
guaranteed by two sufficient sureties, was forwarded to the treasurer close to this
year end.* An approximate date for Mould's removal from Essex County to take up
residence in Morris County is established in legal action brought in behalf of Thomas
Abney, indentured apprentice to Mould. Thomas Goadsby, having been appointed
Abney's guardian for the purpose of bringing suit, alleged that on February 4,1787,
Walter Mould, Jacob Arnold (Leddel's successor as Morris sheriff) and Daniel
Halsey (operator of the Morris-Town-Elizabeth-Town stage line) made an assault
upon Abney at Elizabeth-Town, there beat, wounded and evil treated him, impris-
oned him and kept him in prison for thirty days thence. In defense against this suit
there brought in an Essex venue both Mould and Arnold filed affidavits to the effect
that the cause of action, if any, arose in Morris County. The Court dismissed the
action as being in the wrong venue. A similar action brought in the Morris County
venue was discontinued apparently because by that time (late 1788) Mould had
removed from New Jersey. On the 14th of April 1787, four of the Justices of the
Essex County Court of Quarter Sessions of the Peace at Newark granted Abney a
final discharge from his apprenticeship. The discharge order recites that the said
* The original letter of transmittal, dated, is claimed as a personal possession by a New Jersey
collector who unfortunately persists in refusing to disclose the date and all other information

regarding it.
C53C3C53C53C53C3C53C53C53C3
Guardian: A person vested pursuant to law with responsibility of taking care of, and
managing the property of, a minor or other person adjudicated to be incapable of managing
his own affairs. Black's, p. 834. DG
Venue: The county, or other geographic division, in the court of which an action or
prosecution is brought, within which a party may require the case to be tried. Black's, p.
1727. Today the court would not dismiss the action, but would transfer it to the right venue.
DG
The letter of transmittal was endorsed January 19, 1787, by State Treasurer James Mott.
See "A Modern Survey of the Copper Coinage of the State of New Jersey" by William T.
Anton, The Colonial Newsletter, Volume 14, No. 2, July 1975, pp. 487-513. This replaced
a former bond by Walter Mould at some earlier date. DW
The Morris-Town Mint
69
Walter Mould had excepted to the jurisdiction of this court "because the said Walter
has been a Resident of the county of Morris for the space of one fortnight last past"
but since he had proved nothing to dispute the truth of Abney's allegations, the
apprentice is "discharged & freed from his said apprentice hood."
Thus it seems reasonable to suppose that Mould's preparations for independently
coining were under way early in 1787 and that Abney was forcibly removed to Morris
County by his master to participate. He seems to have fled back to Essex and to the
protection of Goadsby at about the time Mould removed his own residence to Morris.
The date of Mould's first quarterly payment to the state treasurer, on May 8th, 1787,
would seem to indicate an actual start of coining in February, but the payment may
have been hurried by the provision of the Nov. 22, 1786, act which provided for the
forfeiture of his rights unless he "entered upon the Coinage" within two months from
Nov. 22, 1786.
An extremely meager record of the mint and its personnel is given in the List of
Morris-Town Ratables prepared by the assessor as of September 1787.
1786 1787 1788
John Cleves Symmes 107 acres 46 acres 86 acres
Walter Mould Not Listed 40 acres Not Listed
2 horses
2 horned cattle
4 singel men
1 chair
The fact that the 46 acres of Symmes and the 40 acres of Mould in 1787 add up to the
total of 86 acres appearing as Symmes's in 1788 after Mould's departure seems to
be an inferential confirmation of Dr. Condict's recollection as to the mint location.

If we accept the assessor's figures as correct, the mint personnel would seem to have
consisted of Walter Mould and four other men. The term "singel" seems not to have
referred to the marital status of the employees but to have been used to distinguish
them from men with teams who were added to their employer's assessment at a
different rate. The identity of these four "singel" men has not been determined. Two
names are suggested as possibly connected and it is hoped that further research may
someday result in completing the record.
05030303030303050303
At this point in the manuscript, Douglas lists the names of various people associated with
Walter Mould along with miscellaneous notes concerning some of these people. It appears
that Douglas had not completed work on this section when he halted his efforts on the
manuscript. GT
70
John Russell
1/9/1790 Letter from Symmes to Dayton.
(In Ohio Mould's) "Journeman Russel has run off with many smaller articles of Iron
and Steel...."
7/23/1787 Payment to Treasurer for Privilege of Coining "Walter Mould, by the
Hands of John Russell...."
10/16/1787 Jury trial of Thomas Thomas vs Albion Cox Witness for the Plaintiff...
John Russell...."
7/23/1787 to Feb. 9, 1788 Frequent entries in Day Book of Thomas Nesbit "Spring-
field" Debiting John Russell with purchases of Rum, Peach, Spirits, Tobacco,
Candles, Molasses, indigo etc. Crediting him with "Oisters, Butter, credit by Benj.
Brookfield, yds. of Coating"
1/27/1786 Adv. in [New] Brunswick Gazette by John Russell, living near the Short
Hills, asking for information regarding inquiry for him who is reported to have an
inheritance for him.
New York Gazetteer 27 January 1786
Whereas an adv. seen at New Brunswick seeks John Russel to whom a small
estate is left and said adv being lost the subscriber advertises for information
as to where he shall apply.
JOHN RUSSEL
living in the Short-Hills, back of Eliz-Town, N.J.
1786 to 1788 Caleb Russel represented Mould in various legal actions and made two
payments to the Treas. for him. Caleb was an active attorney at this time.
John H. Russel silversmith of Morristown
C30303C3C53C53CgCSC53C53

Douglas states that the 1/27/1786 newspaper advertisement appeared in the New Brunswick
Gazette but quotes the ad from the New York Gazetteer. It is unknown if this is in error or
if the same ad appeared in both newspapers on the same date. GT
The New Brunswick newspaper was actually titled the Political Intelligencer and New
Jersey Advertiser. DG
71
1790 Federal Census N. Y. C. Out ward John Russel 1-0-1-0-0
1772, May 15 John Russel to Anna Legget, Marriage Licenses issued by Secy of the
Prov. Of NY. MB XVIII 119
Moses Estey
Sept. 7, 1787 Payment to State Treasurer for Walter Mould "per Moses Estey"
Jan. 20, 1786 Diary of Joseph Lewis
Account of fire which destroyed house and property of Moses Estey. Estimates
damage at 1,500:0:0
Jan. 28, 1786 ibid
Mr. Jas. Smith presented a subscription for the relief of Moses Estey.
Jan. 30, 1788 ibid
"I surveyed a lot of 13 acres sold from Nathan Reeves to Moses Estey and wrote the
deed."'
Dec. 11, 1789 ibid
Congr. of 1st Pres. Church voted to build a meeting house and appointed Moses
Estey, Daniel Phoenix and myself as a committee to direct the building. The
congregation considered the difficulty of the times and the goodness of the old
meeting house concluded we should not proceed to provide materials under one year.
Jun. 23, 1790 ibid
Met Mr. Estey at G. O'Hara's where we sat as Referees between J. Stephenson & J.
Walker.
Benjamin Thompson
Dec. 1787 Signs bail Bond for Mould, Morris Com Pleas.
escapes O3C3C3C5S08C93
The 1790 Federal Census recorded five items of information concerning the people within

one household, listed under the name of the head of the household. The items were, from
left to right, free white males aged 16 or older; free white males aged 15 or younger; free
white females; all other free persons; slaves. Thus, the information for John Russel (1-0-
1-0-0) indicates there was one white male over 16 years of age or older (John Russel) and
one white female (probably his wife) living in his household. GT
John Stotesbury
Dec. 1787 witness Mould's signature to bail bond. Connected (Partner) Hibernia
Furnace
Jacob Arnold
Thomas Kenny
William Leddel
John Cleves Symmes
The record of the payments made to the State treasurer on account of Walter Mould's
coinage privilege is of doubtful value in attempting to estimate any schedule of
production. He apparently divided the total royalty accruing to the state from the
entire authorized production of his third of the original 10,000 into six equal parts.
The first four parts were paid close to quarterly dates. The fifth for some reason was
paid in two days after the fourth payment. This January 14, 1788, payment was the
last made by Mould. On November 10,1788, James Mott, the treasurer, wrote a letter
which the next day was laid before the state assembly calling attention to the unpaid
balance owing by Mould. Evidently steps were taken against the sureties on Mould's
Bond, since on January 29, 1789, the last quarterly payment plus interest from June
1, 1788, was received from Thomas Kenney, one of the sureties. The amount of the
one sixth part which was the amount of each payment would be 10% of a production
of approximately 166,667 coppers of the legal weight. It seems unlikely that there
could have been such uniformity of quarterly production figures. Much more likely
was a thought of retiring the royalty payments by regular payments without regard
to production figures.
May 8, 1787
Jacob Arnold
coppers

55-11-1
July 23, 1787
John Russel
Lawf. Mon
55-11-1
Sept 7, 1787
Moses Estey
coppers
55-11-1
Jan 12, 1788
Caleb Russel
coppers
55-11-1
Jan 14, 1788
Lawf. Mon
55-11-1
73
In December 1787 Thomas Kinney and Jacob Arnold took out a capias in debt
200:00 against Mould who was released to bail December Twentieth with Benjamin
Thompson as bail security. On the next day in the Morris County Court of Common
Pleas, Justice Silas Condict ordered that the plaintiffs should have more time until
next term to bring on their suit. Jan. 28, 1788, Mould through his attorney William
D. Hart filed a plea in bar. March 20, 1788, the matter was referred by agreement to
three referees: William Woodhull, Aaron Kitchell and Ellis Cook. The referees on
the following day reported that they find for the plaintiffs in the amount of 99:6:8
and costs. Judgment was ordered accordingly. On Feb. 1, 1788, Mould received the
letter from Wm. Leddel asking that "the property" should be taken "tomorrow" to
Chatham within call of Essex Sheriff Camp. This request was evidently complied
with, in respect, at least, to the coining press. No evidence has been found to establish
the disposition of the approximately 27,500 planchets. In April 1788, in the New
Jersey Supreme Court, Mould, by attorney Wm. D. Hart obtained a Capias in debt
10,000 against Thomas Goadsby. This was recorded in the minutes of the April
term as being returned "C(epi) C(orpus)" and under this record appears the one word
"discontinued" (signed) Wm D Hart. As no declaration was filed, the cause for this
suit is unknown. In this connection it was recorded in the same term that Goadsby,
defendant, was ordered released from bail bond because sufficient cause of action
had not been shown.
The diary of Joseph Lewis recorded for Friday July 18, 1788, "Chiefly clear. J. C.
Symmes Esq. set out for Miami at evening." That Walter Mould left either with him
or at approximately this time is evidenced by the diary of Manassah Cutler, agent of
the Ohio Company. Cutler made a journey to the new Ohio settlements in July 1788,
crossing the Delaware River westward bound on July 31st. He recorded that at

Carlisle, Pennsylvania, he found a "Mr. Mould on his way to Fort Pitt with his family
and one other, a coach and three wagons."
In a letter dated August 15, 1789, Jonathan Dayton, brother of Matthias Ogden's
wife, wrote from Elizabeth-Town to John Cleves Symmes in Ohio, "It gives me great
Capias in Debt: A capias issued in an action for debt, or any claim for money. Bouvier's,
vol. I, p. 512. DG
Declaration: As used here, a specification of the circumstances which constitute plaintiffs
cause of action; a civil complaint. Bouvier's, vol. I, pp. 376,517. Apparently at common law,
the filing of a complaint was not prerequisite to issuance of a writ of capias. DG
74
pleasure to be able to inform you that Gen1 Ogden's demands against the estate of
Walter Mould have been amicably adjusted by him & by Capt. Henry (a brother-in-law
to Symmes). He had, together with his particular friends, thought very hardly of you
for a long time because you had favored & assisted Mr. Mould in avoiding &
escaping his pursuit...." He has prevailed upon "Gen1 Ogden to reduce his demand
from 235 specie, with costs to 175 specie in full for debts and costs. As the surety
of Messrs Mould & Cox he has been obligated to pay for them since he brought his
action in Pennsylvania, one years rent of the mill which is 130-0. Nothing but the
unhappy situation of Mrs. Mould" and Dayton's "assurance that you would pay him
the cash without delay, could have induced him to accept a sum so far short of his just
claim & right. As soon as you have paid him this sum Gen1 Ogden will discharge the
attachment, the actions of ne exeat* &c & will give a final and full discharge of all
his claims against the estate of the said Walter Mould. You are to transmit Mr.
Marshes bond, which is amoung Mr. Mould's papers."
On September 26, 1789, Dayton wrote that Ogden had made an offer for giving up
the mills and "finding it necessary to raise a small sum has applied to me.... I have
accordingly been prevailed upon to advance him in your behalf, a part of Mould's
debt which you had assumed."
January 9, 1790 Symmes wrote to Dayton that "how or when I shall be able to raise
the debt out of the property of Mould's is hard to say - the truth is, there is not much
property left, several of his horses are dead and stolen, his heavy Irons with which
he wrought have no value more than common bar-iron, and his Journeman Russel has
run off with many smaller articles of Iron and Steel and the small amount of furniture
which is found in the widow's house will be hardly spared by her for sale - the fact
is, I am deceived amazingly in the value of the property which Mould has left; nor

do I believe that I shall ever see my money let me do what I can."
* obtained in N. J. Chancery 1788
Concerning General Ogden's demands, Jonathan Dayton wrote to John Cleves Symmes on
September8,1789, saying: "Nothing but the unhappy situation of Mrs. Mould...could have
induced him to accept a sum so far short of his just claim and right." The minister performing
the eulogy at Ogden's funeral made reference to Ogden's long illness and his character
through years of suffering. Ogden was a businessman and he may have accepted a lesser
amount from Mrs. Mould because he wanted to get his affairs in order while he still had the
time. Ogden died on March 31, 1791, at the age of 36 years. RW
New information on the last days of Walter Mould can be found in "Walter Mould, Jr." by
Marc Mayhugh in The C4 Newsletter, vol. 9, no. 4, winter 2001, pp. 20-4. DW

February 1, 1790, Symmes wrote to Col. Patterson in Kentucky requesting his help
in finding a market for Mrs. Mould's pedigreed bay horse, "Union," at sixty pounds,
Virginia money.
76
Summary of Morris-Town Mint Operations
Feb.-Mar. 1787 Coinage started
Jan. 1788 Probably some planchets from Rahway Mint Rec'd.
May-Jun 1788 Probable date of discontinuance.
Payments to Treasurer and Number of Coppers Production thereby paid for.
1787
Pay't By
Paid
10 times Pay't
Cumulative
in Coppers
to date
May 8
Jacob Arnold
55:11:1
166,663
166,663
July 23
John Russell
55:11:1
166,662
333,325
Sept 7
Moses Estey
55:11:2

166,675
500,000
1788
Jan 12
Caleb Russel
55:11:2
166,675
666,675
Jan 14
Caleb Russel
55:11:1
166,663
833,338
1789
By Surety
Jan 29
Thomas Kenny
55:11:1
Apparently not based upon
plus interest
any production since there
from 6/1/1788
2:03:6
seems to have been none
since Mould's departure
This payment by the surety would have been 10 per cent of the remainder of the
originally authorized one million coppers which was Mould's one third of the
10,000:0:0 total.
THE ELIZABETH-TOWN COINING
The account of Mrs. Chetwood is the only evidence uncovered that locates the site
of this coinage venture. Her statement is quite circumstantial and some of the details
are thoroughly corroborated. A map prepared by Ernest Meyer, C.E., from a careful
research of deeds and other contemporary records shows the location.
The will of Robert Ogden in 1733 left to his son, Moses, property on which he erected
in 1759 the large stone "mansion" where was born and lived his daughter, Anne. Her
father died in 1768 when she was ten years old. On March 24, 1778, she became the
second wife of Soldier Col. Francis Barber, who was accidentally killed by the fall
of a tree in Newburgh in 1783 while serving there under General Washington. The
widow and her three children, George Clinton Barber, born Dec. 27, 1778, Mary
Barber, born Nov. 1, 1780, and Frances Barber, born Sept. 20,1782, made their home
in the Moses Ogden House. An advertisement appeared in the March 24, 1790,
newspaper:
To be Let for One Year
The one 'half of that large stone house where Mrs. Barber now lives and 1 Vi
acres of land adjoining the same. For Terms apply to Daniel Sale, Eliz-Town.
A similar advertisement appears Feb. 2, 1791, except that the "l1/2 acres" are
described as "of good meadow with an orchard on the same." Daniel Sale was a
neighbor and a relative by marriage.
Mary Barber, the source of our Elizabeth coining account, was born Nov. 1, 1780.
On March 24, 1800, she married Attorney William Chetwood son of John Chetwood
of Elizabeth-Town. By him she had two children, Mary Anne Francis and Francis
Barber Chetwood, born Feb. 1, 1806. Mrs. Mary Barber Chetwood died April 18,
1873, in her ninety-third year. Her son survived her by but two years.
<^C3C53C3C3C3C30303C53
Account of Mrs. Chetwood: Referred to at page 3 above. DG

In 1814, George Clinton Barber, as clerk of the Borough of Elizabeth, signed promissory
notes of 20 and 30 denominations (Wait 527 and 529: New Jersey's Money by George W.
Wait, published by The Newark Museum, 1976; p. 115) that circulated as small change
following the War of 1812. They were payable at his uncle Aaron's bank, the State Bank
at Elizabeth. DG
William Anton provides an excellent description and diagram of the location of the
Elizabethtown mint in The Colonial Newsletter, Volume 14, No. 2, July 1975, p. 494. RM
78
The property adjoining Moses Ogden's on the west was left in the same will to Robert
Ogden, 2nd, born Oct. 17,1716, and was described as the "House of Jonathan Ogden
on the North East Side of the road from the (Court house) to Elizabeth Town Point."
Robert Ogden, 2nd died Jan. 21, 1787, and his will, proved Feb. 7, 1787, left to his
son Matthias Ogden among other items, "the lot joining my brother Moses, de-
ceased." Into the house on this lot moved Matthias Ogden with his wife, Hannah, as
next-door neighbors to his first cousin, the widow, Mrs. Anne Barber (also called
Nancy Barber). Matthias' mother was nee Phebe Hatfield, daughter of Matthias
Hatfield of Elizabeth-Town. She was the eldest of a family of nine, five girls and four
boys. Of the boys, at least two lived to father a number of sons to carry on the Hatfield
name. Thus Matthias Ogden had several Hatfield uncles and numerous Hatfield first
cousins upon whom to call for help in his last coinage venture. Gilbert Rindle, with
several years of experience gained at the Rahway Mint, was available. Ogden also
owned an eighteen-year-old negro slave, Michael Hardman, whose services were
available.N Without further evidence, it is not possible to more than suggest the
possibility of this as an explanation for Mr. Bushnell's friend's (Mr. Halsted) Mr.
Hatfield who was assisted by a negro in the striking of New Jersey coppers.
The financial opportunity for a highly profitable re-coinage operation as pointed out
in detail by the legislative investigating committee's report of June 7,1790, is amply
substantiated by newspaper articles and letters of 1789. July 1789 saw an acute
"Coppers Crisis" in New York City described by one writer in a letter dated August
1, 1789.
There has been a mighty convulsion here lately on account of the coppers. We
abound with them in this place and they were generally light and bad. On a
sudden the merchants refused to take them at more than half and some at more

than one-third, that they had passed at. At Philadelphia I hear they have fared
much in the same manner.
August 12, 1789. An advertisement by the Bank of North America at Philadelphia
offered 1 d and 3d paper notes dated Aug. 6, 1789, "for the public convenience at this
juncture, when the circulation of Copper Coin is nearly suspended...." On Sept. 17,
1789, a traveler's diary recorded at New York City, "Coppers pass at 24 the shilling.
Only the Jersey coinage are current in the market where are mellons, peaches and
other fruits...." The same diary enters under Sept. 21,1789, at New Haven, "Coppers
seventy-two the shilling at the ferry." On July 25,1789, the New York City Common
Council had recommended "to the inhabitants of this city to receive and pay the said
coin at the rate of forty eight coppers for one shilling." A report from a New York
N This Michael Hardman in 1797 by Jonathan Dayton & Hannah Ogden, Admrs of Genl Matthias
Ogden, deceased, was "emancipated, manumitted & set free" as "a certain Mulatto man named
Michael Hardman of the age of twenty six years who was part of the personal estate of the said
General Matthias Ogden, deceased." The Overseers of the Poor certified that he appeared sound in
mind and body and not under 21 nor above 35 years in age.
The Elizabeth-Town Coining
79
correspondent dated July 20,1789, appearing in a Philadelphia newspaper, described
great "confusion and distress caused by the sudden stoppage of circulation of the
copper coin...yet the base trumpery called coppers (greatly inferior to Wood's
infamous brass money) continues to flow in on us...."
Soon after the convening of the second sitting of the 14th New Jersey General
Assembly their Proceedings recorded under date of May 20, 1790.
Ordered that Messrs Rutherford, Witherspoon and Clement be a committee
to enquire into the cause of the depreciation of the Copper Coin of this State
and report the same to the house.
May 24, 1790
The Speaker laid before the House a letter from the Treasurer, informing the
legislature the disadvantages that the State will lie under in receiving Coppers
in the payment of taxes was read and refered to the committee appointed to
enquire into the cause of the depreciation of the Copper Coin of this State.
June 7, 1790
Mr. Rutherford from the committee, to whom was refered the consideration
of the depreciation of the copper Coin of this state and the treasurer's letter
on that subject
reported as follows:
That the depreciation of the Copper Coin appears to be entirely owing to the
fraudulent practises of persons who have stamped Bermingham and Con-
necticut Coppers with the same impression as those of this state, and have
afterwards passed them to others; That the New Jersey Coppers coined by
law, are superior in weight to the British, are of pure metal, and weigh six
penny weight six grains each, and that most of the counterfeits are on base

metal, and weigh less than five pennyweight each; That the New-Jersey
Coppers lately passed at fifteen for a shilling, the rate directed by law, and the
Bermingham and Connecticut Coppers could at the same time be procured for
forty five for a shilling, and that some persons availed themselves of the
difference and have changed the impression of a considerable quantity of
light and base Coppers, converting one shillings worth of those Coppers into
three shillings worth of New Jersey Coppers, which practice has occassioned
so great a depreciation of the Coppers in this State that in some places they
do not circulate, and in other places they pass at an unequal and uncertain
value from 48 to 36 for a shilling though they lately circulated at their full
value, even in the neighbouring states where no other Coppers would pass.
2. From the above facts, the committee are of the opinion, that it is necessary
for the credit and interest of the State, that an enquiry should be instituted for
the discovery of the persons employed in counterfeiting the Coppers in order
that they may be prosecuted agreeably to law.
3. And as they conceive that the penalty is not adequate to the offence, they
recommend that some ignominious punishment should be inflicted by the law
on these guilty of such practices in future.
4. The committee are at a loss to determine whether it would be proper to
direct the Treasurer to receive the real Jersey Coppers in payment of taxes at
the rate established by law or at their current value; in the former case, a very
great and improper advantage will be given to the Revenue Officers of the
State, as they will be enabled to pay forward the Copper Coin at more than
double the value at which they can procure it; and in the latter case to receive
the Coppers for less than they issued, would appear like a breach of faith on
the part of the State; they therefore submit the subject to the consideration of
the house only observing that it will be extremely difficult and troublesome
and indeed almost impracticable to distinguish the real Jersey Coppers from
the counterfeits.
5. The committee beg leave further to observe, that from the depreciation of
the Coppers and the want of small change, a practice has almost universally
prevailed throughout the state, of private persons issuing notes payable to the
bearer for small sums, this practice the committee conceives to be improper;
the same notes do not circulate throughout the State, and are therefore
inconvenient to the holders; there is no security that they will be paid on
demand, and indeed there are instances of persons issuing notes, and after-
wards becoming insolvent, thereby defrauding the holders who are generally
of the most ignorant class, and who ought therefore more particularly to be
under the protection of the Legislature. Further the notes increase the

circulating paper medium, banish the small silver coins, and are a consider-
able profit to those who issue them, from the great number lost or destroyed
in circulation, and which profit ought to be the emolument of the State and not
of individuals,
The Committee therefore recommend that a law should pass to prohibit all
persons from issuing notes within this state, payable to the bearer for a less
sum than [blank] and which law would be similar to those which several
European nations have been found necessary to pass on the same subject. By
order of the Committee
John Rutherford
Ordered that the said report be read a second time.
June 10, 1790. The report of Mr. Rutherford from the committee to whom
was referred the consideration of the depreciation of the Copper Coin of this
81
State was read a second time - To the 1 st & 2nd part of the said report the
House agreed; to the 3rd the House disagreed; on the 4th paragraph the House
resolved, That the Treasurer be directed to receive no more Coppers into the
Treasury of the State; and to the 5th paragraph the House agreed.
No further records appear in the proceedings of this sitting. However, soon after the
convening of the first sitting of the 15th General Assembly, Mr. Rutherford on Oct.
26, 1790, reports that the 4th and 8th [sic] paragraphs of the committee report
remained to be discussed.
On Oct. 28th, Nicoll, Elmer and R(obert) Ogden were named a committee to bring
in a bill regarding the 5th paragraph.
On Nov. 2nd, Nicoll presented a bill to prohibit the issuance of notes payable to
bearer for less than [blank]. The bill was read and ordered read a second time.
November 6, 1790 This bill was read a second time and it was ordered that it "lie on
the Table."
A check for the balance of this sitting failed to record any further action on this
matter. New-Brunswick in 1791 proceeded to issue Id and 2d notes.
The "hue and cry" all through this period was filled with an inconsistent complaint
of the baseness of the metal and the lightness of the base coppers. Using the figures
regarding weight cited by the New Jersey Committee in 1790, the light coppers
weighed under 120 grains, while the good ones weighed only 25% more, 150 grains.
The implication that this additional weight could add 200% or 300% to the value of
the coin was absurd. The absurdity was dismissed by a vague claim of the baseness
of the metal. The actual facts were for some reason either suppressed or overlooked.
The intrinsic value of pure copper was approximately one third of the fiat value of
the stamped Jersey Coppers of full weight. The limited quantity of the Jersey

Coppers struck on new planchets, but principally the act of the State making them a
legal tender and thus accepting them for taxes at 15 to the shilling, had tended to keep
them close to par. It was not the lack of intrinsic value in the counterfeits which had
depreciated the whole mass of coppers. It was the over-supply and the reasonable
certainty that there would certainly occur the delayed refusal to longer accept them
at the treasury.
82
* Royal Flint purchase
March 25, 1790, the Borough of Elizabeth passed a law entitled "A law for issuing
notes for small change for the Borough of Elizabeth" and soon after, Id paper notes
at least of those authorized were put into circulation by the Borough.
The exact dating of the cessation of the over-striking by the Colonel has not been
determined. It seems likely that the issuance of these notes must have followed a
"stoppage to circulate" or at least a severe depreciation either of which would have
largely eliminated the incentive for the over-striking.
The stern language of the June 7th committee report would certainly have warned
Matthias Ogden that such coining would not be "socially acceptable" and it seems
most unlikely that there was any revival by him at any later date.
It does not seem likely that he or his immediate family were particularly happy about
the whole thing and no doubt [they] were content to give Albion Cox and Goadsby
all the credit for the whole coinage operation from start to finish. It is also possible
that this may account for the fact that for so long Col. Matthias Ogden has remained
"the forgotten man" of the Jersey Coppers.
Albion Cox, himself, during this period was in the custody of the Sheriff of Essex
County, now William Halsted, at liberty on his own recognizance, pending the report
of the referees. These gentlemen hardly by coincidence rendered their report within
two weeks after the appointment of the legislative committee and just four days
before the committee report was read, It follows:
Albion Cox
vs In Chancery of New Jersey
Thomas Goadsby
We the Subscribers referees appointed by a rule of the high Court of Chancery

a copy whereof is hereunto annexed, having met agreeably to due notice given
for that purpose, and the above parties having appeared before us, The said
Thomas by his Attorney and the said Albion in Person, and having exhibited
their respective Alligations and proofs, and the same having been maturely
Royal Flint was a speculator who purchased, on credit, approximately 400,000 Fugio
coppers from the government, in July 1789, in the hope of turning a profit. Shortly
afterwards coppers lost most of their value due to a severe panic and Flint ended up in
debtor's prison on January 29, 1792, for his failure to make final payments for the Fugio
coppers. RW
considered by us we do find that the money which he the said Thomas
recovered against him the said Albion, in an Action of debt in the inferior
Court of Common Pleas holden at Newark in and for the County of Essex, of
the term of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and
eighty seven, before the Judges of the same Court is justly due from him the
said Albion to him the said Thomas, and that there is now due thereon to him
the said Thomas, from him the said Albion the sum of Five hundred & twenty
one pounds eleven shillings & nine pence proclamation money of New
Jersey, besides the cost of suit taxed thereon and we do farther find that there
is also due to him the said Thomas from the said Albion Cox and one Samuel
Atlee the sum of twelve hundred and ninety four pounds fifteen shillings on
an obligation dated the seventh day of July in the year of our Lord one
thousand seven hundred & eighty seven like proclamation money aforesaid,
upon which said obligation a Judgment has also been obtained by the said
Thomas against the said Albion and Samuel in the Court and before the
Judges aforesaid -
We therefore do award and order that the bill of complaint of the said Albion
against the said Thomas be dismissed, and that every Injunction against his
proceeding at law stand dissolved, and that nothing contained in the rule of
reference hereunto annexed, be any farther and longer bar against his
proceeding at Law for the recovery of the money so as Aforesaid due to him,
upon the Judgments above Stated, but that he may proceed thereon immedi-
ately, any thing whatsoever therein to the contrary notwithstanding.
And we do further award that the said Albion pay the expense of the present
reference amounting to the sum of Eighteen pounds Eighteen shilling and
three pence like money aforesaid, and that he pay the Cost in Chancery to be

taxed by a Master And we do further certify that no other demands of any
kind or nature whatever from either of the above parties to the other, have
been exhibited and proved to us, whereby it would appear that any other or
further sums where [sic] due from either of the above parties to the other,
otherwise than as above stated. -
All which we humbly report to the Honorable the Court of Chancery of New
Jersey - As Wittness our hands at Newark this third day of June in the year
of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety
John N. Cumming
John Neilson
John Taylor
84
Thomas Goadsby
adsm In Chancery of New Jersey
Albion Cox
June 15 1790
Present His Excellency the Chancellor
On opening the matter this day by Mr Aaron Ogden of Counsel with the above
defendant [Goadsby], It is ordered on his motion, that the report hereunto
annexed be filed with the register of this Court, and be confirmed in all things,
and the above defendant have leave to proceed at law as therein specified, and
that the Costs be paid as within awarded unless good cause shewn to the
contrary on Monday the twenty first instant.
Wil: Livingston
With this order removing the stays against Goadsby's executions against Cox, ex-
sheriff Camp, in whose custody still remained the Cox goods and chattels seized in
Nov. 1787, proceeded to advertise their vendue for Aug. 19, 1790. The sale was
twice more postponed and finally took place on Sept. 23, 1790, at the house of Major
Samuel Sayres, Elizabeth-Town Point. The sales realized the sum of 130:5:0,
which amount was credited by Camp on his later statement to Cox.
The federal census of 1790 recorded the household of Thomas Goadby, resident at
Hebron Town, Washington County, New York, as consisting of 1 white male over
21, 1 white female, no slaves and no others. Hebron Town was situated on the New
York-Vermont boundary line opposite and approximately eight miles distant from
Rupert, Vermont. It will be remembered that at Rupert was located the copper mint
of Reuben Harmon. In January of 1790 the Essex sheriff had returned William
Dudley's writ of fieri facias de bonis, finally obtained to satisfy the 1789 judgment

against Goadsby and Cox, to the Court with the report "no goods to be found" (in his
03030303030303030303
Adsm: Abbreviation of "ad sectam," at the suit of (also abbreviated "ads."). It is used where
it is desirable to put the name of the defendant first (such as on your client's working file
where the client is the defendant). Bouvier's, vol. I, p. 91. DG
The division age for males in the 1790 census was 16, not 21 as stated above in the
manuscript. GT
85
bailiwick of Essex County). To the June 1790 term was returned a testatum fieri
facias with the notation "Levied to the value of (? 6 ?)" (illegible). The testatum was
a means of extending a writ of fieri facias into counties other than that in which the
original writ was obtained. There has been found nothing to indicate in what
jurisdiction the goods levied on were found nor what or whose they were.
In April 1793 by his attorney, Aaron Ogden, Thomas Goadsby brought suit against
William Halsted, who became Sheriff of Essex County October 22, 1788, and served
as such until October 1790. The declaration filed June 4, 1793, it was alleged that
Albion Cox was in the custody of the previous sheriff, Caleb Camp, from the time
he was taken on the capias ad respondendum in the suit of Goadsby against Cox and
Atlee on their note of July 7, 1787, until Halsted took office. It further alleged that
Halsted then became responsible for Cox's custody but had "without the license and
against the will of the said Thomas, willfully and voluntarily suffered and permitted
the said Albion to escape and go at large out of his Custody wheresoever he
would...to wit on the first day of September" 1790. Wherefore Goadsby was
deprived of his proper recourse against Cox for the recovery of the judgment
obtained in April 1788 against him on this suit. Wherefore Goadsby brought suit
against Halsted for 2,000:0:0. Halsted died before this suit was settled and no
further record appears of any satisfaction.
Goadsby fared better in a suit which he brought against Caleb Camp in the June term
1791 in connection with his confessed judgment against Albion Cox of September
1787. The declaration, filed March 29th, 1792, alleged:
1. that Camp had failed to seize sufficient of the goods of Cox to satisfy the
judgment, although there had been such sufficient goods available in his
bailiwick and although Goadsby had at that time offered to point them out to

Camp.
2. that although requested by Goadsby on the first of June 1790 to do so, Camp
had failed to sell sufficient of the goods of Cox to satisfy Goadsby's
judgment.
3. that although Camp did on the first day of June 1790 "at Newark aforesaid
sell at publick vendue and outcry sundry of the goods and chattles of the said
Albion," he had refused to render unto Goadsby the monies so obtained.
Testatum Fieri Facias: A writ of fieri facias issued by the court of one county to the sheriff
of another county in the same state, when defendant cannot be found in the county where the
court is located. Black's, p. 1645. DG
86
On July 30,1793, Camp, through attorney Matthias Williamson, entered a retraxit of
his previous plea and confessed judgment in the amount of 474:11:11 proclamation
money of New Jersey with costs of suit. Judgment was ordered at the September
term. The receipts for the payments made by Camp to satisfy this judgment are still
extant, stretching out to the final one dated Aug. 28, 1797.
Rec'd from Caleb Camp Esquire one pound thirteen shillings in full of the
Money due on the Execution of Thomas Goadsby against him on an
Amercment [sic] obtained on an action of Goadsby against Cox
(signed) William Chetwood (Future Husb.of Mary Barber)
for Aaron Ogden
1:13:0 Atty for Goadsby
Thomas Goadsby
v In Debt
Samuel Atlee [sic]
Albion Cox
(The inclusion of the name of Samuel Atlee on this receipt is clearly an error on
Chetwood's part, since the amercement against Camp was on the other process
involving Cox only.)
A letter from Aaron Ogden dated Nov. 4, 1795, was addressed to Thomas Goadsby
at Boston, Massachusetts. It apologized for the fact that the final balances from Camp
are not yet at hand and concludes with a thought that must have found its counterpart
in Goadsby's memories of his connection with the New Jersey Coppers: "I lament
much the great trouble and disappointment you receive in this business."
030SC30303030303C803
Amercement: Used here to mean a penalty imposed by a court upon its own officer (the

sheriff) for neglect of duty, or failure to pay over moneys collected; also, a remedy against
a sheriff for failing to levy execution or make return of proceeds of sale. Black's, p. 107.
DG
87
Summary of the Elizabeth-Town Coining
Feb. 1788
to
Jun. 1788
No evidence available to either confirm or deny coinage
during this period. If the press was used it could have
been on Blanks from the Mills.
Jun 1788
to
Mid 1789
Coining may have been at Elizabeth if press not returned
to Mills.
Mid 1789
to
Early 1790
After the Mills were given up the press was installed in rear of
Ogden's home. Planchets were the masses of depreciated
coppers, foreign and other state coppers.
After the depreciation occurred in the Jersey Coppers, the coining press remained in
Ogden's possession and was sold to the Mint of the United States in 1794 by his
widow.
1792 Treasurer authorized to pay out at 24 to shilling indicating coppers again
circulating.

? The Hatfield-negro coinage might date from this period.
THE "NEW YORK" MINT
The evidence so far discovered is of too slight a nature to be said to establish a
presumption for the coining of New Jersey Coppers in New York. However the writer
presumes to offer, merely as an opinion, that there was such an operation and that its
existence will ultimately be proven by still-to-be-collected evidence.
The following somewhat disconnected items are given in the hope that they may
afford some clues that will be of assistance to those who may undertake such a
research into this field.
March 29, 1784 (advertisement in N. Y. Gazeteer)
To be Sold
A very valuable Farm in Fishkill 4 miles from the Landing, on the main road,
containing 200 acres... The Fishkill creek runs thru the center of said Farm....
For further particulars enquire of Mrs. Bailey on the premises or John Bailey
No. 22 Little Dock St. New York where he now carries on the cutlery Business
in all its various Branches....
Oct 1785 (Suit in N. Y. Supreme Court)
John Bailey vs Dirck Brinkerhoff, alleging note for 1,000 dated 1784 and
unpaid.
Oct. 11, 1785
John Bailey serves on a jury in New York City Mayor's Court. Jeremiah Wool
is one of the judges in his elected capacity as Alderman from the Dock Ward.
Nov. 8, 1785 (Suit in New York City Mayor's Court)
Sarah Van Salinger, sole executrix of Gods. Van Salinger, deceased, sues
John Bailey in an action of debt. On March 21,1786, three referees, appointed
to decide the matter, find for the plaintiff 15:2 and interest.
June 6, 1786 ( N. Y. C. Mayor's Court)
John Bailey sues James W. Combes, who is returned by the sheriff "taken."

Oct. 24, 1786
John Bailey serves on a Mayor's Court jury at New York City.
90
Feb. 12, 1787
John Bailey petitions the New York State Legislature for an arrangement to
be allowed to coin a copper coinage for the State of New York; Ephraim
Brasher similarly petitions on the same day. Thomas Machin petitions
likewise on March 3, 1787.
June 26, 1787
John Bailey again serves on a jury in the New York City Mayor's Court.
1785-86
John Bailey represented the cutlers of New York City on the General
Committee of the General Society of Mechanics and Tradesmen at its
organization in 1785.
April 15, 1788
This date he later swears was the last on which he coined Jersey Coppers and
that those made before this date, he made in accordance with and under
authority derived from the act of the New Jersey Legislature of June 1, 1786.
Aug. 1, 1789
The date of the above affidavit sworn to before alderman Jeremiah Wool at
New York City.
03030303030303030303
John Bailey's sworn affidavit concerning his coinage of New Jersey coppers was published
in the August 1789 New-York Packet newspaper. It reads as follows: GT
City of New York, ss. Personally appeared before me, Jeremiah Wool, one of the
Alderman of the said city, John Bailey of the said city of New-York, cutler, who
being duly sworn deposeth and saith, That since the fifteenth day of April, 1788, he
hath not either by himself or others, made or struck any Coppers, bearing the

impression of those circulated by the State of New Jersey, commonly called Jersey
coppers: And that what he so made previous to the said fifteenth of April, was in
conformity to, and by authority derived from an act of the State of New-Jersey,
entitled, "An act for the establishment of a coinage of copper in that State," passed
June the first, 1786. JOHN BAILEY.
Sworn this first day of August, 1789,
Before me, JEREMIAH WOOL, Alderman.
The "New York" Mint
91
1790
The Federal Census lists as a resident of Dock Ward, New York City "John
Bailey 2 free white males over 21,3 white males under 21, 6 white females,
no other free persons and 2 slaves."
Oct. 22, 1762
Md John Bailey to Sarah Cornish
May 6, 1772
Md John Bailey to Ann Boickstock.
Jan 23, 1815 (New York Post)
"Died yesterday morning, John Bailey, 79 years, of this city."
The Coppers "Crisis" in New York City of July 1789 may have been the subject of
an investigation similar to the later one in New Jersey. John Bailey's affidavit would
be quite understandable if made to answer an inquiry of such an investigating
committee. To argue that the absence of any evidence to indicate Bailey's presence
during this period in New Jersey, after a wide spread search, establishes a presump-
tion for his New Jersey Coppers coinage elsewhere, is admittedly weak. Further
search of the New York records is necessary before the location of his activities in
this matter can be described with any confidence.
In 1785, Rufus King, in a letter dated Sept. 3rd at New York, wrote regarding the
establishment of a copper coinage for United States as follows:
The United States have Eighty Tons of copper in their magazines: a company
here who brought with them from England the various machines and imple-
ments for a coinage, and have rendered their services - a coinage in our own
country is more pleasing than one abroad.
The division age for males in the 1790 census was 16, not 21 as stated above in the

manuscript. GT
92
The Congress, sitting in New York City, received in 1785 and 1786 many proposals
connected with such a coinage, of which we have record of the following:
1. Peter Allaire of New York City
2. Messrs Bridgen & Frederick H. Walden (to coin in Europe)
3. James Jarvis
4. Matthias Ogden and Associates.
5. Walter Mould
6. R. Boyd, Smith of New York City
7. Joseph Hopkins of Waterbury, Conn.
8. Marinus Willett, Sheriff of New York
9. Soloman Simpson
10. William Barton
The scope of the present study being confined to a particular series, the New Jersey
Coppers, time has not been spent pursuing these various leads. It is earnestly hoped
that others will be attracted to the field and that the ample information that is surely
accessible in public archives, manuscript collections and private sources will be
searched out and collated. Such studies cannot fail to throw added light on phases of

the New Jersey coinage that we must until then leave unexplained.
The "New York" Mint
93
Summary of Activity of the "New York" Mint.
If we may take Bailey's affidavit as true, he coined under authority derived from the
Legislative Act of June 1, 1786. This gave authority solely to Goadsby, Cox and
Mould. Thus Bailey's authority must have come from one or more of those three.
Since Ogden seems to have been in somewhat of a controlling position in the coinage
activities of the first two [Goadsby and Cox] from Jan. 1788, the chance of them
having made some sort of deal with Bailey seems less than that it was Mould.
Walter Mould, as we have seen, was in difficulties early in 1788 that ultimately
required the assistance of Symmes, one of the three Judges of the Supreme Court, in
avoiding pursuit. It is suggested that the period of his active coining may not have
been sufficient for the completion of the million coppers for which he had contracted
and given security to the State. Thus he may well have received some consideration
from John Bailey for a subcontract empowering Bailey to complete a part of the
whole contract. Thus our hypothetical "New York" mint record would appear:
Early 1788 A coinage differing from the rest
to and on new planchets from a different
Apr. 15, 1788 source. The dating should be 1788.
The absence of any record of Bailey in Morris County, while only negative, combines
with his New York business to indicate that his New Jersey coinage was probably
done in New York in spite of the requirement of the act that it be done in New Jersey.
The failure to make any payment to the Treasury after Jan. 14, 1788, would lend
further support to this theory.
03030303030303030303
Walter Breen attributes Maris varieties 74-bb, 75-bb, 76-cc and 77-dd to Bailey's mint
(Walter Breen's Complete Encyclopedia of U.S. and Colonial Coins, F.C.I. Press, Inc. and

Doubleday, New York, 1988, pp. 79, 86. Also, Don Taxay, Scott's Comprehensive
Catalogue and Encyclopedia of U.S. Coins, Scott Publishing Company, New York, 1975,
pp. 26, 29). DG
UNCERTAIN MINTS
Under this division will be considered such clues as have been observed tending to
indicate coinage of Jersey Coppers at other than the four locations so far discussed.
While these clues are somewhat vague and inconclusive, their consideration may be
of assistance in supplying possible explanations for any apparently unrelated groups
which may appear when the coins themselves are studied. For convenience these
clues will be designated by letters arbitrarily assigned.
A. A committee of the New York Legislature, directed to bring in a bill to regulate
the copper coin in that state, reported on March 5,1787.1 One paragraph of this report
stated, "There has lately been introduced into circulation, a very considerable
number of coppers of the kind that are made in the State of New-Jersey. Many of
these are below the proper weight of the Jersey coppers, and seem as if designed as
a catchpenny for this market." One explanation might be that this referred to
lightweight specimens issued from the Rahway Mint or specially made there for the
New York market. Another might be that unauthorized persons had quickly gotten
into production with a special lightweight unauthorized issue. A study of the coins
should supply evidence for an answer. Mould's establishment was not set up soon
enough.
B. The hearsay evidence from Mr. Bushnell regarding the Mr. Hatfield and the negro
coining in a barn (his informant thought) below ElizabethTown has been mentioned
in connection with the ElizabethTown coining at Col. Matthias Ogden's. This would
require the changing of the word "below" to "in" which would not be hard to
understand in view of the many more serious changes which have been found
necessary in coordinating the account of Dr. Lewis Condict. However, this account
may with equal likelihood of correctness be an explanation for any unrelated
specimen or specimens which the study of the coinage may develop.
C. The report of the New Jersey Legislature's committee on the Depreciation of the

Copper Coin of New Jersey indicated the substantial profits which had been realized
by "the fraudulent practices of persons" in overstriking depreciated out-of-state
coppers with the Jersey impressions. Col. Ogden may not have been the only operator
to have glimpsed this opportunity. If the study of the overstruck specimens should
indicate these as the product of more than one mint, the mints other than Ogden's may
prove difficult to determine.
1. Crosby p. 291 et seq
96
D. In his consideration of the various coinage struck at Machin's Mills, Crosby
conjectures a strong possibility that coins from this mint bore the New Jersey
impressions. Mr. Bushnell informed him that some of the coins minted here bore the
impression of a plough. Crosby pointed out (p. 191) the possibility that they might
have been Vermonts and on page 288 an equal possibility of their having been
Jerseys.
E. There may have been other unauthorized issues of the Jersey Coppers. We have
seen evidence that prior to their 1790 depreciation, the Jersey Coppers had been
preferred to those of other states and according to the New Jersey legislative
committee report had circulated at par while other coppers were sunk to a low rate.
It would seem that anyone intending to manufacture unauthorized coppers in 1789
would have inclined toward the Jersey impressions.
O3O303O3O303O30303O3
Maris varieties 56-n, 57-n and 58-n are attributed to Machin's Mills by Walter Breen (op
cit). But Mossman and Smith attribute these varieties to the Elizabethtown mint (Philip L.
Mossman and Charles W. Smith, "Imported and Domestic Counterfeit Copper Coins in Pre-
Federal America," John M. Kleeberg, editor, Circulating Counterfeits of the Americas,
Coinage of the Americas Conference Proceedings, No. 14, The American Numismatic

Society, 2000, p. 24). DG
NUMISMATICS OF THE COINAGE
2. The Coins
A. Before studying the coins themselves it will be well to consider the kinds of
numismatic evidence available and the sorts of information which we may hope them
to supply. These may be conveniently divided into four major categories, viz., the die
work, the matings of the various dies, the planchets and the facts surrounding any
finds.
a. In differentiating and classifying the various dies, one exceedingly accu-
rate guide is found in the distinctive impressions of the individual letter and
punctuation punches used in sinking the legends. The exact details of these tended
to change very slightly under constant use due to the gradual dulling of punches, and
somewhat more abruptly when the punches were sharpened by filing. Also, occa-
sionally one or more punches would be so seriously damaged as to require complete
remaking or replacement. Thus we can expect to be able to establish a usefully
accurate chronological table of the die-sinking sequence from each of the various
letter punch sets. Another aid will be the general style and specific detail of the hand-
graven work which will tend to set apart and to group the workmanship of individual
03030303030303030303
Apparently Douglas was planning a section 1.0 in this chapter. In the manuscript, the page
is blank under the chapter heading and he starts the following page with section 2.0 GT
It is possible that punches could have been raised from a common matrix, making punch-
linking supportive but not conclusive in die studies. DW
Numerous criticisms have been leveled against the use of die punch comparisons for the
determination of mint site. Criticisms include use of a master matrix in making die punches
which were then used at multiple sites, die cutters traveling from one mint to another plying
their trade using the same die punches, transfer of the dies between mints, and inaccuracy
in determining die punch similarities due to alignment and pressures used during the minting
RM

process. This suggests that die punch data be used only as an indirect indicator of mint site.
Certain New Jersey copper varieties are known to exist nearly exclusively with a "medal
turn" axis, while others are found nearly exclusively with a "coin turn" axis. Though
occasional axis variations do exist for each group, such axis changes are rare. It is doubtful
that an evaluation of variations in axis within a specific variety could provide meaningful
information about the minting site. See "Round and Round We Go," The Colonial
Newsletter, Volume 35, No. 1, April 1995, pp. 1495-99. RM
98
die-sinkers. This will assist in the chronological arrangement of the work of the same
artisan if his work persists over a considerable period during which his craftsmanship
gradually changes.
b. The matings of different obverses with identical reverses and of different
reverses with identical obverses, supplemented by the incidence and progressive
development of die breaks during the various matings, we can expect to establish a
chronological arrangement of the coinage within the limits of the mated group.
However, it must be borne in mind that while a genuine mating establishes the
simultaneous presence of both dies in the same mint, it does not argue against the
prior or subsequent transfer of one or both from or to some other mint.
One property of the various matings that occasionally may be found to have
significance for us is the relationship of the vertical axis of the obverse to the vertical
axis of the reverse with which it is mating. In one type of coining press used at this
time this relationship was determined by the operator when he secured the two dies
in the press and remained fixed unless intentionally changed.* Where more than one
relationship is found among the coins from a single mating, it will mean an
interruption of the coining process for the shifting of at least one die, and if we find
a definite difference in planchets as between one relationship and another, there is
a strong presumption that the interruption consisted of a lapse of time intervening
between the production of the two series. If we find at a given mint a given
relationship in all the coinage up to a certain point, and thereafter the relationship all
reversed, we might be justified in using the die axis relationship in placing one or two
otherwise undatable matings.
* Presses varied in the amount of play in guides
Recent metallurgic evaluations conducted by Charles Smith and Philip Mossman may

eventually be used to shine light on common planchet sources for New Jersey coppers.
However, use of these data to draw conclusions concerning mint site will have the same
potential criticisms as use of die punch comparisons. Planchets from a common source
could have found their way to multiple mints. RM
As more data accumulate concerning undertypes of New Jersey coppers, it may well become
clear that some homogeneity exists on what types of coins were used as undertypes for
specific New Jersey varieties. Whether this information will be of any value in assigning
a specific variety to a specific mint site remains to be seen. RM
One additional method that can be used to determine the mint site is the die states of dies
muled with a variety of coins. Michael Hodder provides an in-depth exploration of this in
his paper "New Jersey Reverse J, A Biennial Die," American Journal of Numismatics,
Second Series 1, (The American Numismatic Society, New York), 1989, pp. 195-237. RM
Numismatics of the Coinage
99
c. The new planchets of this period were manufactured by stamping from
fairly narrow sheets rolled from cast ingots. The diameter of the planchet would be
determined by the cutter then in the press. A given cutter would continue to produce
blanks of a close uniformity in diameter. However when a new or altered cutter was
inserted in the cutting press there might be an appreciable change thereupon and also
the planchets from different presses would usually differ in diameters. Thus, by a
classification of the coins from each mating by planchet diameters we should expect
some evidence as to the striking chronology within the mated groups and as to
relationship between unmated groups.
Because of the lack of precision control for uniform thickness in the rolling of the
sheets, the weights of uncirculated specimens of the same diameters would normally
show some meaningless variation. However the planchets from one producer
working toward a given required minimum weight could be expected to average
nearer to that minimum than those of another, working to a lower or higher
requirement. Thus, by averaging the uncirculated weights of a number of specimens
of the same diameter from a given mating, we should expect the weight to correspond
approximately with the similar average weights of the matings just ahead and
immediately following. Exceptions to this rule should have a definite significance.
Facilities have not been available to determine whether or not there exists in the
various coins any appreciable difference in chemical composition or crystalline
structure. If such differences do exist it is to be hoped that some one will be
encouraged to determine them. When and if available such data should provide
confirmation or correction of the arrangement made without its assistance.
When previously struck coins were used for the planchets, their diameters and
weights lose entirely the above significance but may still be of value in assisting the

identification of the original coin. In cases where the overstriking has been done
under heavy pressure, some degree of circulation wear will entirely obliterate
whatever indications of the under-coin patterns that may have survived the
over-striking. In such cases, only from the heterogeny of diameters and adjusted
weights, are we led to suspect a case of overstriking. Where the under coins can be
determined, a tabulation and analysis of the varieties of coins so overstruck in the
various matings, if the striking date of the under coins can be determined, will
establish an "ante quam non" for the overstriking operation. Also, should it appear
that the coins selected for overstriking were gathered indiscriminately from those in
general circulation at any particular time, the absence from the under types of
particular coins known to be in circulation at a particular time would establish a
highly probable "post quam non" for this operation.
Since the availability of uncirculated specimens for weighing has not been sufficient
to establish averages, it has been necessary to develop a scale of corrections to be
added to observed specimen weights to offset the weight lost by wear. The following
100
schedule was developed from averaging the scale weights of 90 (40) large cents of
1851 (1817) about evenly divided into the various states of wear from Uncirculated
to Good. The corrections for coins poorer than good are included only because
several of the matings are represented in our recordings only by specimens in this
class. In the Fair and Poor categories the loss seems to vary too widely as between
visually similar specimens to establish confidence in any averaging. Conclusions
based on the weights of such pieces should be held suspect until established by other
means.
Table of Weight Adjustments For Wear
Condition Weight to
be added
(grains)
Unc 0
XF 1
VF 2
F4
VG 6
G8
Fair 11
Poor 15
Where three or more specimens Good or better have been available, Fair and Poor
coins have been omitted in determining average weights. In cases where they have
been included the average weights containing them are indicated with an asterisk
(thus 148.2*) as have also those representing the average of less than three speci-
mens.

03030303030303030303
Dr. Charles Smith has studied the issue of weight loss versus grade in his article "Weight
Analysis, Weight Loss, Wear, Porosity and Grade in Copper Coinage," The Colonial
Newsletter, Volume 42, No. 2, August 2002, pp. 2345-57. A copper in VF condition may
be a result of peening (pushing high-relief devices into lower ones with no weight loss)
and/or wear (loss of metal). The typical amount of metal lost by grade is the question. In
a Lincoln cent experiment, a VF coin lost 0.31% of its weight. Damon Douglas has the VF
weight loss at 1.2% or 2 grains. For higher-grade coppers, the small weight loss is less than
the variability of the original planchet weights. Porous and low-grade coppers show greater
weight loss and should be excluded from any weight studies by variety. DW
Numismatics of the Coinage
101
d. The recorded discovery of numerous "hoards" that have been so helpful in
arranging and dating many of the older coinages, unfortunately thus far seems to be entirely
lacking in the case of our early state coinages. Of the many surviving specimens not one that
we can learn of has come down to us with any authenticated record of its provenance that
would indicate its connection with the mint of its origin. Thus, the only help we can get from
our "findings" of the coinage is by determining the relative scarcity of the products of the
various matings. Conclusions drawn from such scarcities have serious objections if used as
arguments for a proportionate scarcity in quantities manufactured. There may be a tendency
for such scarcities to be proportional but the undeterminable exceptions that must exist
would seem to vitiate any conclusions so drawn.
03030303030303030303
A small number of coppers found on the Morristown Mint site are reported to have been
retained by the owner of the site. Everett T. Sipsey, "New Facts and Ideas on the State

Coinages," The Colonial Newsletter, October 1964, pp. 120, 126-7. DG
THE COINAGE
Rahway Mills Mint. (?) (Uncertain, possibly N.Y. City)
7-E Specimens not available
8-F
11 11
11
Rahway Mills Mint. Nov. Dec. 1786
9-G
28.2 x
150.5*
161*
(1 spec, it Fair)
10-G
28.5 x
128.5
tol37.5
137*
(2 spec. Fine)
11-G
Specimens not available
H-jj
IP/2-G

28.0 x
141.5*
145*
(1 spec, it Fine)
12-G
27.8 x 27.8
138.5
157.0
155*
(2 spec. Good)
28.3 x
126.0
140.5
145*
(2 spec. V.G.)
12-1
28.0 x
161.5
165*
(1 spec. Fine)
28.0 x
131.2
145.0
147*
(2 spec. 1 Fair)
28.5 x
157.4
173*
(1 spec. Poor)
Rahway Mills Mint Dec. 1786 to March 1787
Rahway Mills Mint Feb. 1787 to Nov. 1787
It is thought that it will be possible to find some presumption for approximate datings
and arrangements in approximate chronological order for the entire production of all
the mints, as above. Pieces for which no presumption of any sort exists will be listed
last, headed "Uncertain Mint." The mint headings proposed are those appearing in
the text ahead subdivided into as small time intervals as the numismatic evidence will
supply any presumption for.
03C3C53C3C53C3C3C3C53C3

104
of the State of New Jersey
The Copper Coinage

The Coinage
105

106

The Coinage
107

106


108


110

The Coinage
111
112
The Morristown Mint
Dies: Arranged in the order of their sinking.
Rx. C 1785-6
Obv. 62, 63 Rx q, r, s 1787 Betw. April to July
6, 60
61 D, p, t 1787 Betw. July and Dec.
59, 64
new 1787 late or early 1788
65, 66, 67 o, u, v ditto
The Coins: Arranged in approximate order of striking
62-q 1
30.0x
132
145
144
Both Rx & obv. unbroken
30.5x
134
138*
ditto (1 spec
30.5x

145
151*
Obv. only broken (1 spec
63-q |
30.5x
126
148
143
q starting to break and
also badly broken
30.8x
134
153
150
q broken and unbroken
29.3x
131
141
145*
q not broken on 1 other too
poor
63-r I
30.0x
149
159
161
no breaks
63-s I
29.5x
132
155
149
no breaks
30.0x
131
The Coinage
113
New York Mint
Unknown Mints
03030303030303030303
Comments on the histogram data:
P. 104: Variety 11 -H is struck on larger "Morristown-size" planchets in this sample.
P. 105: Variety 19-M at 29.35mm is an outlier. This may be the 19-M found overstruck on
an Irish halfpenny (ex-Jack Leeds, ANA 1977 sale, lot 105).
P. 108: Note the larger "Morristown-size" planchets on some specimens of 50-f, 49-f, 48-
g, 48-f, 37-f, 37-X, and 37-J. It is not know if these were struck at Morristown using a
Rahway press and dies or struck at Rahway using Morristown planchets (perhaps given in
lieu of the missing 27,506 blanks).
P. 109: The 16-d must be the New Jersey Historical Society specimen.
P. 114: Note the 78-dd (running fox) specimen on a larger "Morristown-size" planchet. This
is weak evidence of a connection between John Bailey and the Morristown Mint. DW
Damon Douglas must be given credit for realizing the importance of metrology in the study
of New Jersey coppers. The measurement of planchet diameter, weight, adjustments for
wear, die states, and die orientation was far ahead of its time. DW
Histogram information provided by Damon Douglas suffers from the paucity of specimens
available to him. Informative histograms could be developed with the publication of weight
and diameter data for each coin in conjunction with condition census data. The condition
census for New Jersey varieties was started by John Griffee in Penny Wise back in 1990 and
is being carried on by Ray Williams in the same publication. Comprehensive histograms for
known varieties could be made by the addition of weight and diameter data to these listings.
RM
Included within the manuscript is a blank page with the headings New York Mint and

Unknown Mints. Apparently Douglas also intended to include histograms and metrologi-
cal date for these mints much like he did for the Rahway and Morristown mints. GT
The histogram on the following page includes planchet diameter data versus die varieties.
As before, the diameters are in millimeters and the arrows indicate the die axis. GT

114
DISCUSSION
First it will be noted that three coins heretofore generally considered as New Jersey
pattern pieces have been omitted from the preceding list. These are Maris 3-C, 4-C
and 5-C. The sole reason that we can find that has ever been advanced for such
inclusion is that the reverse die, C, later in 1787 or 1788, appeared in Mould's
Morristown mint mated briefly with his No. 6 obverse. It does appear, from a study
of the letters and general workmanship, that the sinker of this die was the same person
who sank the reverses for the early regular coinage at Rahway Mills and that the first
of these were copied from C but that the sinking of the C die preceded the latter by
a sufficient interval of time and intervening use to effect some considerable changes
in the punches for several of the letters.
Referring to Crosby's Plate VII, the cluster of seven die impressions which surround
the upper 1785 "Confederatio" is seen to include this "C" die [Crosby's reverse G,
p. 317]. Although the other six are all found in specimens muled with the
"Confederatio," no such muling has yet been found with C. Crosby deals with this
group on pages 314 and 315 and in his comments on the fortunate discovery of one
of the mulings will prevent us from placing any significance on the lack of a specimen
muled with "C."
Crosby's conclusion that all of these dies were from the same source seems to be
amply borne out by a careful comparison of their letters in six-diameter photographic
enlargements with the further addition that they must have all been made almost
consecutively by the die sinker, because they show practically no alteration of the
shaping of any of their letters. Taking into consideration Hugh Williamson's design
of May 13,1785, which included the date "1785," the sinker, if working in January
1786, might still preserve the exact numbering of the design. (The Fugio dies all
adhered to the congressional enactment naming " 1787", although the coinage did not
get under way until 1788.) From the 1786 dating of two of the dies we should be

inclined to assign the latter part of 1785 and the early part of 1786 as the time when
the actual sinking was performed.
During this period the Board of Treasury was receiving and studying many proposals
for a copper coinage and it was Sept. 3, 1785, that Rufus King's letter tells of the
company which has brought over their tools and implements. By April 1786 the
Board reports to Congress that as soon as Congress shall "have determined the
certain value of the Money Unit, we shall be ready to report immediately on the
different Propositions" which have been made for the coinage.
We suggest that this later evidence, not available to Mr. Crosby, establishes a very
strong presumption for the third of the three suppositions that he offers for their
purpose, namely, for the "furnishing a coin for National adoption." Consideration of
the designs themselves tends to confirm this conclusion. All of the devices and
116
legends convey ideas strictly national in scope and none of them have the least
implication of New Jersey significance. This is equally true of the "C" as of the rest.
It represents an extreme simplification of the Great Seal of the United States and
involves substantially less work for a die sinker than the less simplified form
represented by [Maris] die "5" [Crosby's reverse E, p. 317].
The records of the proceedings which preceded the passage of the New Jersey
Coinage Act are preserved in considerable detail and nowhere include any slightest
inference of samples having been submitted. William Leddel offered to submit
samples within 5 days but his petition was denied. The Act itself stated that the
coppers "shall have such Marks and Inscriptions as shall be directed by the Justices
of the Supreme Court, or any one of them." The minutes of the Supreme Court fail
to include any reference to any Court action on the subject. The design used
throughout the coinage of the Jersey Coppers for the obverse was a reasonable
simplification of the Great Seal of New Jersey adopted in 1776. Thus it is suggested
that one or more of the Judges [Justices] of the Supreme Court, upon application of
the contractors, directed and agreed that they should bear on one side the simplified
seal of the State and on the other a similarly simplified seal of the Union, and either
that if any samples were subsequently prepared and submitted they were approved
and are now indistinguishable from the remaining product of the dies of the regular
coinage of the Rahway Mills mint, or that the 7-E and 8-F dies were the first two sets
produced and specimens from them submitted to the directing Judge or Judges for
final approval, receiving such approval with the minor correction of the shifting of
the date from just below the beam to the exergue.
Whatever the exact procedure was, in arriving at the final form of "Marks and
Devices," there seems to be no acceptable reason to suggest that mulings of 3-C, 4-C

and 5-C had anything to do with the process.
They warrant further study along with the other pieces with which they seem to be
connected but such a study has no more place in one devoted to the New Jersey
coppers than all the others.
Rahway Mint
Eliz Mint
03030303030303030303
Included within the manuscript are blank pages with the headings Rahway Mint and Eliz
Mint. Apparently Douglas intended to write discussions for these mints, much like he did
for the Morristown Mint (p.l 17). The same can be said for the New York Mint and
Unknown Mints (p.l 18) whose blank pages followed the Morristown discussion. GT
Discussion
117
Discussion: The Morristown Mint
The coins attributed to this mint will be seen to be closely linked together by our
various criteria into a progressive sequence and similarly set apart from the balance
of the Jersey Coinage.
The letters punched into 62, 63, q, r and s are from the same punch set and at about
the same time. The other dies are by an entirely different set of punches which
changed sufficiently during the time that elapsed from the making of the earliest to
the making of the last to permit the reconstruction of their sinking order. The style,
both general and particular, of 60 and 61, two of the first obverses by the second set
of letter punches, so exactly copies 62 and 63 as to establish the similarity as
intentional. The reverses by the first set are closely copied by the earliest Rx p of the
second set. The two sets of letter punches occur in one scarce muling (new)-r. This
is the only known impression of the (new) die which is by the second punch set,
having been made first of the four 1788 by this set. Impressions of the r die are also
somewhat scarce in its other muling with the 63 obverse. Both the r and the 63 are
from the first set. The C reverse, in its single mating (with 6 one of the first made from
the second punch set) appears only on 30.5 planchets. A strong linking is provided
by the 30.5 and the 30.0 diameter planchets of about the same average weights.
Nowhere else in the Jersey coinage does this size planchet appear, excepting a few
specimens found in the over-struck varieties, which do not lessen the strength that
is provided by the planchets in tying together the two sets of dies.
The documentary evidence does not provide any clue as to whether or not Mould had
at his Morristown establishment any equipment for the manufacturing of blanks,
beyond the slight implication contained in the tax assessor's tabulation of 4 single
men employed at the mint in addition to Mould. This is one or two more than would

be expected if the only work was for stamping, assuming that Mould, too, was a
working man. Also, the other state mints that we have record of all made their own
planchets. Morris-Town was somewhat distant from any known sources of ready-
made planchets except the Rahway Mills. The bad relations existing between the
proprietors of that establishment and Mould would make such an arrangement
unlikely and the difference in planchet diameters finally rules it out. William Leddel,
unsuccessful petitioner for the coinage contract, in Jan. 1788 had some rather
intimate relationship with Mould. He told the State in his 1786 petition that he owned
quantities of New Jersey copper.
03030303030303030303
The recently discovered obverse die (Maris 62V2) signed by Walter Mould proves that he
worked as a die cutter. Possibly this die and the reverse (Maris r) that goes with it are the
earliest products of the Morristown Mint. DG
This group of eleven obverses and nine reverse dies thoroughly tied together in such
a way as to establish their use in the same mint, and the specimens which they
produced similarly proven to be the production of that mint, fit the documentary
pattern of no other mint than Morristown and this they fit perfectly. The appearance
in the 64-t, 65-u and 67-v products of quantities of 28.0 and 27.6 diameter planchets
at just about the time 27,500 planchets are carried from Rahway Mills to Morris-Town,
at which time these two sizes are being made at Rahway Mills, provides an even
tighter fitting of our patterns. And similarly, the appearance in the Essex County
coinage in the 37-f, 48-f and 48-g matings of 29.0 diameter planchets may indicate
their delivery, after the sheriffs jury's verdict, to Ogden in repayment of the
undelivered balance of the part of the missing 27,500 planchets used in Morristown.
This diameter planchet (29.0) had not been used at Rahway since the first few months
and the size of the Morris planchets, originally 30.0 and over had been changed in
late 1787 or early 1788 to 29.0 diameter (see 6-D). Another possible explanation
would account for these 29.0 specimens of the Essex die matings. At the time the
coining press was carried from Rahway Mills to Morristown, the 37,48, f and g dies
may have been carried there with it and, while it was there in Mould's possession,
have been put to work and turned out coins on the 29.0 Morris planchets. To argue
against this as being likely, is Mould's possession of another press set up and in good
working condition. To have gone to the trouble of setting up another would seem
pointless. To have inserted the Essex dies in the Morris press would have required
that they be interchangeable. If this were so, we would have to assume that the Morris
supply of dies had run short to provide any incentive for the interchange. Whatever
the true explanation of the observed aberrations occurring at this time in the planchet
diameters of both Essex and Morris die matings, it can hardly be charged off to mere
coincidence that they occur at both mints at about the same time as the Sheriff incurs

"Costs and Damages procuring Copper and works Carried to Morris Town."
New York Mint
Unknown Mints
03030303030303030803
Michael Hodder supports the theory that the 37,48, f and g dies were carried to Morristown
and not the view that Mould returned some of the 27,500 missing planchets. See "Oh, What
Tangled Webs We Mortals Weave...," The Colonial Newsletter, Volume 33, No. 3, October
1993, p. 1399. Note that the head left varieties, 49-f, 50-f and 51-g, are found in earlier die
states than some of the 37-f, 48-f and 48-g varieties. DW
[MISCELLANEOUS NOTES]
PHOTOGRAPHS
Dies Not Included in Maris's Plate
8 & f (Maris photo from poor electro) Adams notebook XF
21 lA Guttag
22'/2 Guttag
79 & ee N.J.H.S.
(81) - gg Ment. in Maris no photo
36 (88) - 88Rx Maris photo only 36 side
83 - ii N.J.H.S. Fair not in Maris
Spiro has a pc which he describes as new-new
Maris sale 1886 #500 described
These all sound like 83-ii
11 - new Spiro
Think not a Jersey coin but an interesting item
Adams notebook mentions Parmalee 369, Mills 480
Obv NonV. VIRTUTE VICI Rx N. J. Shield much like k but
not
24 DIAM ENLARGEMENTS INDIVIDUAL LETTERS
A as mentioned by Crosby
N d
DOCUMENTS
1. Bail Bond with Signatures of Cox, Goadsby & Ogden
2. Affidavit with signature of W. Mold
O3030303030303030303
For an illustration of the 81-gg see plate XIV in the Spiro catalog (Hans M. F. Schulman,
March 18-19, 1955), lot 1628. The "new-new" piece owned by Spiro probably is the

following lot 1629, also plated, "unique counterfeit unknown to Maris." Spiro's obverse die
11 with new reverse "unknown to Maris" is lot 1441 shown on plate X. Parmalee lot 369 (N.
Y. Coin & Stamp Co. June 25-27,1890) is not plated but is described per Douglas, "unknown
to Maris." DG
120
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Catalogues of Source Material
Brigham
Futler?
Public Records Searched
N. J. Supreme Court Minutes 1786-1790
d Index
N. J. Chancery Index
Morris Common Pleas Minutes
Middlesex d d & Warts, Declarations & Deed & Mtge Indice
Essex d d d d
New York Supr Crt. Minutes & Plaintiff Index
d Chancery Minutes
d Mayor's Crt Minutes
N. J. Proceedings of Council
d Assembly
Manuscript Collections
N. J. H. S. Caleb Camp Papers & Index Doc
Account Books
Hist. Society of Pa.
N.Y. H.S.
Rutgers Univ.
Diary
Newspaper
Magazines

Gentleman's Mag. 1751 -1818
Amer. Museum
Amer. Mag
[illegible] Records
N. J. Journal
Brunswick Gazette
1785-1792
1787-1790
1785-1791
1783-1786
1789
N. J. Gazette
N. Y. Gazette
Penn. Gazette
Miscellaneous Notes
INDEX
(Alphabetical index of references to Persons, Places and Subjects)
Subjects indexed to be limited to the following:
Congress.
Mint of the U.S.
Economic Conditions.
Social Conditions.

Currency, Paper.
INDEX
Abney, Thomas 49, 68-69
Akin, Abraham 20
Akin, James 20
Akin, Timothy 20
Allaire, Peter 92
Anton, William T. 68, 77
Armstrong, James 15
Arnold, Jacob 49, 68, 72-73, 76
Atlee, James F. 20-21, 53
Atlee, Samuel 13. 20-21, 53-55, 83, 85-86
Bailey, Dr. Richard 21
Bailey, John 4, 89-91, 93, 113
Baker, W. C. 3
Baldwin, Luther 25
Ballard, John 61
Bank of North America 78
Bar cent 30
Barber, Ann (Nancy) 3, 78
Barber, Col. Francis 3, 77
Barber, George Clinton 77
Barber, William Francis 5
Barton, William 92
Bayley, Simeon Alexander 20-21
Bingham, Charles 23

Bingham, Farley & Smith 23
Birch, Robert 20
Birmingham, England 30, 79
Blachley, Thomas 67
Board of Treasury 32, 44, 50, 62, 115
Boickstock, Ann 91
Bostwick, Andrew 23
Boyd, Julian P. 54
Boyd, R. 92
Brasher, Ephraim 90
Bray, John 26
Breen, Walter 38, 93, 96
Brinkerhoff, Dirck 89
British Halfpence 30
Broome, Samuel 6, 32
Burr, Aaron 14
Bushnell, Charles 1. 3, 78, 95-96
Camp, Caleb 49, 54, 57-61, 73. 84-86
Chetwood, Francis Barber 3
Chetwood, John 3, 77
Chetwood, Mary Barber 3, 77
Chetwood, William 3, 77, 86
Clark, Abraham 9, 29, 34
Coinage of Copper Act 31, 34, 36, 38
Colles, Christopher 35
Combes, James W. 89
Company for Coining Coppers 6
Condict, Dr. Lewis 1, 3, 69, 95
Condict, Silas 2, 73
Connecticut coppers 79
Continental coinage proposals 92
Continental Congress 32, 62
Journals 13
Cook, Ellis 73
Copper coinage 30
Coppers crisis 78-82, 91
Cornish, Sarah 91
Cox, Albion 3, 9-10, 15, 17-21, 33, 35-36,
38-44, 48, 51, 53-63, 67, 70, 74,
82, 84-86, 93, 119
Cox, Edward 17
Cox, Merle & Co. 9, 17
124
Eaton, Thomas 60-61
Eaves, Thomas 14-15, 39
Elizabethtown Mint 77
England, Poole 23
Essay on Coining 43
Estey, Moses 71-72, 76
Fair, George 17
Farley, Henry 23
First Mint of the United States 17
Fisher & Co. 63
Flartey, Harold 67
Flint, Royal 82
Forbes, J. S. 17
Frank's Directory 10, 14, 20
Garritse, Henry 29
Gifford, John 60-61
Giles, James 18, 20
Gillam, Isaac 61
Gladfelter, David viii, 1-2, 5, 7, 9-11, 14-15,
18-21, 23-26, 29-31, 33-36, 38-39,
41, 43, 46-47, 49, 54-56, 58-62,
67-68, 70, 73, 77, 84-86, 93, 96,

101, 117, 119
Goadsby, Thomas 9-10, 15, 23-24, 27, 33,
35-37, 39-44, 48-49, 51, 53-57,
59-63, 67-68, 73, 82, 84-86, 93,
119
Goadsby-Cox Memorial 40
Goldsmiths'Company 17
Griffee, John 113
Halsey, Daniel 21, 49-50, 68
Halstead, J. R. 4
Halsted, William 82, 85
Hankinson, Kenneth 31
Hardman, Michael 78
Haring, Peter 34
Harmon, Reuben 84
Harper, John 38, 48
Hart, William D. 73
Hatfield, Matthias 78, 95
Hatfield, Mr. 4
Hatfield, Phebe 78
Hendricks, Baker 21
Hendricks, John 21
Hickcox, John H. 3
Hodder, Michael 60, 98, 118
Holmes, Joseph and Thomas 10, 23
Hopkins, Joseph 92
Humphrey, John 17
Jackson, John 19
Jarvis, James 7, 13, 32, 46, 50, 92
Jarvis, John 21
Jasper Smith & Co. 9
Johnston, James 15, 39
Josephy, Jr., Alvin M. 62
Julian, R. W. 38
Kelby, William 23
King, Rufus 91, 115
Kinney, Thomas 68, 72-73, 76
Kirkman, Maria and Samuel 10, 23
Kitchell, Aaron 73
Kleeberg, John M. 96
Index
125
Meyer, Ernest 77
Miller, David 15
Mint operating costs 44
Mint summaries
Elizabethtown 87
Morristown 76
New York 93
Rahway 65
Moore, Dr. Roger viii-ix, 4, 35, 67, 77,
97-98, 113
Morristown Mint 67
Mossman, Dr. Philip 96, 98
Mott, James 40, 68, 72
Mould, Mrs. Walter 74
Mould, Thomas 15, 39-40
Mould, Walter 1-3, 9-10, 13-15, 33, 35-36,
41, 49, 53, 58, 67-69, 71-74, 76,
92, 95, 117, 119
Murray, John Jr. 21
Neilson, John 26, 83
Nesbit, Thomas 70
New Jersey coppers
Die marriages
Discussion 97

Morristown Mint 112
Rahway Mint 103
Histograms 103-111, 113-114
Hoards 101
Morristown Mint 117
Numismatics 97
Overstriking 79, 99
Planchets 99
Reverse die C 115
Unauthorized 95, 96
Value 79
Weight adjustment table 100
New York Mint 89
Newman, Eric P. 24, 31, 62
Nightingale, Easter 67
Odgen, Moses 78
Ogden, Aaron 5, 23, 27, 39, 54, 56, 77,
84-86
Ogden, Barne 60-61
Ogden, Hannah 78
Ogden, Jonathan 78
Ogden, Matthias 3, 5-7, 9-11, 15, 27, 29,
31-32, 34, 36-38, 40, 50, 53-55,
57-59, 61, 63, 73-74, 78, 82, 87,
92-93, 95, 119
Ogden, Moses 3
Ogden, Robert 77
Ogden, Robert Jr. 3, 6, 32
Ohio Company 73
Old Bailey 13
Olive, George 20-21
Olive, William 18, 20
Paine, Thomas 43, 46
Paper Money Bill 29, 31-34
Parker, James 23, 26
Payne, Humphrey 17
Peck, C. Wilson 2
Perkins, Richard 20, 25
Phoenix, Daniel 71
Pierce, Edward L. 4
Pinckney, Thomas 17
126
Scudder, Matthias 49
Sharpe, Isaac 25
Sharpe, Jacob 25
Sheffield Assay Office 17
Shepard, John 24
Sickels, Garrett 15
Simpson, Soloman 92
Sipsey, Everett T. 101
Smith, Charles W. 96, 98, 100
Smith, Fox 23
Smith, James 71
Solitude 1-3, 67
Spilman, James C. 43
Stewart, Frank H. 17
Stiles, John 14
Stotesbury, John 72
Symmes, John Cleves 1, 36, 67, 69, 72-74,
93
Taxay, Don 93
Taylor, John 83
Taylor, Solomon 49
Teayleur, John 25
Thomas Goadsby & Co. 10, 23
Thomas, Thomas 20-21, 53, 70

Thompson, Benjamin 71, 73
Thompson, David 67
Thompson, Samuel 43
Tinker, James 25
Trudgen, Gary viii, x, 1-2, 5-6, 10, 13-15, 17,
21, 23, 29, 35-36, 43, 46, 53, 62,
67, 69, 70-71, 84, 90-91, 97, 103,
113, 116
Uncertain mints 95
Ustrich, John 21
Van Emburgh, John 26
Van Salinger, Sarah 89
Wade, Nehemiah 49
Wait, George W. 26, 77
Walden, Frederick H. 92
Washington, George 5, 77
White, John 23
Wick, Phebe 67
Widdegan, Henry 42, 49
Wierzba, Dennis viii, 9, 13, 17, 38, 60, 68,
74, 97, 100, 103, 113, 118
Wilkes, Joseph 26
Willett, Marinus 92
Williams, Ray viii-ix, 35, 64, 74, 82, 113
Williamson, Hugh 115
Williamson, Matthias 86
Woodhull, William 73
Wood's Coinage 79
Wool, Jeremiah 89-90

The Copper Coinage of The State of New Jersey: Annotated Manuscript of Damon G. Douglas / Ed. by Gary A. Trudgen

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Copper Coinage of The State of New Jersey: Annotated Manuscript of Damon G. Douglas / Ed. by Gary A. Trudgen

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Generated for anonymous on 2015-02-15 18:41 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.

THE COPPER COINAGE OF THE

STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Annotated Manuscript of Damon G. Douglas

THE AMERICAN NUMISMATIC SOCIETY

Generated for anonymous on 2015-02-15 18:41 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015061319557

THE COPPER COINAGE OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Generated for anonymous on 2015-02-15 18:41 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015061319557

identified. Courtesy of the Damon G. Douglas Company.

Foreword Page vii

Matthias Ogden Page 5

[Coinage Petitions to the Legislature] Page 9

Walter Mould Page 13

Albion Cox Page 17

Thomas Goadsby Page 23

The Granting of the Copper Coinage Privilege Page 29

The Rahway Mint Page 35

Setting up the Mint Page 39

Operations at the Rahway Mint Page 43

[Legal Disputes Affecting Mint Operations] Page 53

The Morris-Town Mint Page 67

The Elizabeth-Town Coining Page 77

The "New York" Mint Page 89

Uncertain Mints Page 95

Numismatics of the Coinage Page 97

The Coinage Page 103

Discussion Page 115

[Miscellaneous Notes] Page 119

Generated for anonymous on 2015-02-15 18:41 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015061319557

Index Page 123

numismatists. Unfortunately, after years of work, Douglas became disenchanted with

Numismatic Society by his son.

Damon G. Douglas was born in Worcester, Massachusetts, but grew up in Jacksonville,

as president of the prestigious New York Numismatic Club. He amassed an extensive

collection of Egyptian, Roman and Greek coins.

Generated for anonymous on 2015-02-15 18:41 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015061319557

it he identified Rahway as the location of the first New Jersey mint.

it exists today) is available to everyone.

concerning that portion of the manuscript.

Several numismatists have contributed to this work by providing annotations or editorial

annotators for volunteering countless hours in the preparation of this work.

Generated for anonymous on 2015-02-15 18:41 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015061319557

Sylvester S. Crosby's "Early Coinage of America," published in 1875, was such a

Generated for anonymous on 2015-02-15 18:41 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015061319557

NJ coppers. Unfortunately, his method of categorization was to provide a general "descrip-

"Edward Maris, M. D. - Numismatist," The Colonial Newsletter, Volume 37, No. 3,

December 1997, pp. 1733-49. RM

Indebtedness is gratefully acknowledged to

(County and Court Clerks)

and for loan of coins to

(Collectors and dealers)

And for specific help (enumerate)

(the staff of the ANS)

Generated for anonymous on 2015-02-15 18:41 GMT / http://hdl.handle.net/2027/mdp.39015061319557

of New Jersey familiarly known as the "Horse Head Coppers" as no authority

a house near Morristown, and promised to obtain more definite information.1

Memorandum received from the Hon. Lewis Condict, M.D. of Morristown.2

An Englishman named Mould, in or about the year 1781 ,a came to Morristown

purchase on the Ohio River, then called the Miami Country.

brought to this country the tools and implements of his trade.

1. Proceedings New Jersey Historical Society, 1855, p. 132.

2. Ibid, 1856, p. 10.

1788 when Mould went with him.