Three-cent nickel

The silver three-cent piece was issued beginning in 1851.

The great influx of bullion from the California Gold Rush and other finds caused the price of silver relative to gold to increase starting in 1848, and silver coins were hoarded or exported for melting. In 1851, a bill for a three-cent piece in 75% silver and 25% copper was introduced in Congress by New York Senator Daniel S. Dickinson, who wanted to lower postage rates from five to three cents. This percentage of silver was less than the normal 90% so that the coins would circulate at a time of hoarding. The copper large cent did not circulate in the Pacific Coast region or South due to prejudice against coins that did not contain precious metal, and some means of allowing the purchase of a postage stamp without the use of copper cents was necessary.[2] Dickinson's bill passed on March 3, 1851, and in addition to authorizing the new three-cent silver, lowered rates for most domestic mails.[3] By 1854, the imbalance had abated, and Congress increased the silver content of the three-cent piece to the standard 90% for silver coins, though its weight was reduced.[4]

The large cent was replaced by a smaller version made of 88% copper and 12% nickel in 1857.[5] In 1861, the Civil War began, and when efforts to finance the war via borrowing failed, the Treasury stopped paying out gold in December 1861. The United States shifted to a paper money-based economy with little disruption. By June 1862, the price of silver had risen to the point where coins of that metal vanished from circulation, many exported to Canada, where they were both acceptable in circulation, and could be exchanged for gold. This departure of low-value coins was far more disruptive to commerce than the loss of the high-denomination gold coins, and change in transactions was made by a variety of makeshifts. These included currency issues by cities and businesses, encased postage stamps, and federally issued fractional currency—paper notes in denominations as small as three cents. The low-value paper currency, whether issued by government or business, were called shinplasters by the public, which disliked them. On the Pacific Coast, where paper money was not favored, silver and gold continued to circulate.[6]

The bronze two-cent piece was issued pursuant to the Act of April 22, 1864.

Since fractional currency in three-cent denominations did not appear until late 1864, the cent was the only means then circulating of making change from the five-cent note, and came, in 1862 and 1863, to command a premium when sold in lots, of about 4%. The Philadelphia Mint tried to keep up with demand, limiting public purchases of cents to five dollars, and sending shipments to major cities. Despite these attempts, Mint Director James Pollock noted in his annual reports that cents were almost unobtainable, hoarded despite the fact that their metallic value remained less than one cent each. Numismatist Neil Carothers theorized that they were put aside by the public as the only circulating federal coinage, made of metal at a time when the public was forced to accept flimsy pieces of paper instead of silver and gold.[7]

With cents from the Philadelphia Mint selling at a premium, many private token issues were issued in 1863, and passed as cents in commerce. Mint officials took notice that the tokens, often made of bronze rather than the copper-nickel alloy then being used in the cent, were not hoarded and began to consider issuing bronze coins. When Pollock proposed legislation for bronze one-, two-, and three-cent pieces, it was opposed by industrialist Joseph Wharton, owner of the major source of nickel in the United States at the time, a mine at Gap, Pennsylvania.[8] Pollock's bill, as introduced, provided for one- and two-cent pieces of bronze, and the Wharton interests opposed it. According to Carothers,

Congress declined to compromise with the nickel interests ... In the House, its opponents managed to delay its passage for a month. Thaddeus Stevens, one of the most influential men in the House, fought it bitterly, admitting, however, that he objected to it because it adversely affected Wharton's interests.[9]

The Coinage Act of 1864 passed into law on April 22 of that year. After entering circulation several months later, the bronze cent and two-cent piece circulated in trade without being hoarded.[10] The bronze alloy was easier to strike than the copper-nickel one, allowing details to be brought forth sharply and extending the life of coinage dies.[11]

Nickel, formerly used in the cent, now had no place in American coinage. This was unsatisfactory to Wharton, who sought its return. Although Pollock made no mention of further nickel coinage in his 1864 annual report, Wharton in April of that year published a pamphlet proposing that all non-precious metal coinage be composed of 75% copper and 25% nickel. The copper-nickel cents had contained only 12% nickel, and even so had been difficult for the Mint to strike due to the hardness of the metal, the use of which damaged equipment and quickly broke dies. An alloy of 25% nickel would be even more difficult to coin. Wharton argued that the tough alloy would be difficult to counterfeit.[12]

A worn three-cent fractional currency note of 1864

Congress had by the Act of March 3, 1863 authorized fractional currency in the denomination of 3 cents; when these notes reached circulation the following year they proved wildly unpopular. The 1864 law which had substituted bronze for copper-nickel had also outlawed "copperheads" or private token issues. Even though these could now only be issued anonymously, and so could not be redeemed, the copperheads were preferred to the 3-cent shinplasters. Some copperhead tokens even read "Substitute for shinplasters". The notes soon became filthy and ragged, making them even more disliked. They were more difficult to value in quantity than notes with denominations divisible by five. According to Walter Breen, "This was the moment Wharton's supporters had been waiting for."[13] Wharton and his advocates argued that the three-cent notes should be redeemed with equivalent coins. They contended that were Congress to order a three-cent bronze coin, such a piece would be as big as an obsolete large cent, and might be used to deceive the blind into accepting the pre-1857 cent rather than the more valuable coin.[14] Pollock, previously an opponent of nickel coinage, had a change of heart and became a supporter.[15]

There are several slightly varying accounts of why the bill for the three-cent nickel passed. Breen told of the pressure advocates for nickel put on House Coinage Committee chairman John Adam Kasson, finally winning him over to the position that even 25% nickel coins (which would be hard on the Mint's equipment) would be better than the continued use of shinplasters, and presenting him with a draft of a bill for a three-cent piece of that alloy. The bill made the new coin legal tender to sixty cents. The 1864 act had made the cent legal tender to ten cents, and the two-cent piece to twenty; both limits were reduced to four cents. The bill did not abolish the three-cent silver piece, which was still being struck in small quantities. The new copper-nickel coins would be issued in exchange for three-cent shinplasters—the Currency Bureau was instructed to print no more three-cent notes.[13][16]

Abraham Lincoln was sworn in for a second term as president only minutes after signing the bill authorizing the three-cent nickel.

The bill passed the House of Representatives on the evening of March 3, 1865. At the time, it was usual to extend the final day of the congressional session in odd-numbered years to noon on March 4, and this occurred. The Senate took up the bill late on the morning of March 4. Action was repeatedly interrupted, first by Ohio Senator John Sherman reporting progress on an appropriations bill, then by Iowa's James Grimes stating that ticket holders for the inaugural festivities at noon were being soaked by rain outside the Capitol, causing some debate as to whether they should be admitted early. Once female guests were admitted (males were left outside), the Senate passed the three-cent nickel bill without debate, and it was shortly thereafter signed by President Abraham Lincoln.[lower-alpha 1][17]

Q. David Bowers said of the sudden passage of the legislation "We can only guess what happened behind the scenes".[15] Carothers wrote that Kasson had opposed nickel coinage, but nevertheless introduced the bill for it during the rush of the final day of the congressional session, "There was no report and no explanation ... The influences that brought about the passage of the measure in this fashion were never revealed."[18] Numismatic historian Don Taxay suggested that by March 3, 1865, "the wide circulation of the bronze cent and two-cent piece had made a three-cent coin superfluous."[19]

Mint Chief Engraver James B. Longacre had, since 1849, designed coins with various visages of the goddess Liberty, based on a bust, Venus Accroupie, he had seen in a Philadelphia museum on loan from the Vatican. Although the Liberty as used on the three-cent nickel piece is closest to Longacre's experimental cents of 1857 and quarter eagles of 1860, she resembles most of the Chief Engraver's other depictions of Liberty. On the three-cent piece, she wears a coronet with her name on it, and a ribbon binds her hair. For the reverse, Longacre combined the Roman numeral III as rendered on the silver three-cent piece with the laurel wreath used on the 1859 Indian Head cent reverse. Breen suggested that the similarity of design to other Longacre coins has contributed to the low level of collector interest in the three-cent nickel.[20]

According to Lange, "resourceful as always, J.B. Longacre simply revised an existing image of Liberty for the obverse of the nickel three-cent piece. The same classical profile that appears on the Indian Head cent, the gold dollar, and the $3 piece is seen fitted with a new hairstyle and a studded coronet inscribed Liberty."[21] The act that authorized the three-cent nickel contained a provision requiring the use of the motto "In God We Trust" on all pieces large enough to bear it, but the new coin was deemed too small.[22] No change was made to the design of the three-cent piece in nickel during its lifetime.[23]

1887/6 three-cent nickel

According to the 2018 edition of R.S. Yeoman's A Guide Book of United States Coins, only the pieces from 1882 to 1887 catalog for more than $100 in worn Good-4 condition; common dates list for $15 to $20 in that condition. The highest value listed is for the 1877, struck only in proof with a mintage of 900, at $2,000.[1] David F. Fanning, in his 2001 article on the three-cent pieces, suggested that rarer specimens of the nickel three-cent piece are relatively inexpensive compared with coins of similar mintage in more popular series, such as the Morgan dollar.[47]

The design of the three-cent nickel piece remained stable throughout its run, and there are few varieties. An overdate is known, 1887/6. The die that struck those coins was originally dated 1886, when no circulation strikes were made. So the die would not be wasted, the Mint altered the last digit from a 6 to a 7; evidence of both numbers is visible.[48] Some 1865 pieces in proof condition display a wreath on the reverse that comes much closer to touching the rim than on later issues. These were most likely pattern coins but they are accepted as issued because the Mint placed them in some 1865 proof sets.[49] Many of the three-cent nickel pieces were not fully struck, and are missing details of the design; this is because the head of Liberty is directly opposite the III, and the Mint had trouble getting the hard metal alloy to adequately flow to the high points of both sides.[47]

Notes

Citations

Bibliography

• Bowers, Q. David (2006). A Guide Book of Shield and Liberty Head Nickels. Atlanta, GA: Whitman Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7948-1921-7.
• Breen, Walter (1988). Walter Breen's Complete Encyclopedia of U.S. and Colonial Coins. New York: Doubleday. ISBN 978-0-385-14207-6.
• Bureau of the Mint (1904). Laws of the United States Relating to the Coinage. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. OCLC 8109299.
• Carothers, Neil (1930). Fractional Money: A History of Small Coins and Fractional Paper Currency of the United States. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (reprinted 1988 by Bowers and Merena Galleries, Inc., Wolfeboro, NH). ISBN 0-943161-12-6.
• House Committee on Coinage, Weights, and Measures (1912). Coinage of a Three-Cent Piece. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office. OCLC 576522762.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• Lange, David W. (2006). History of the United States Mint and its Coinage. Atlanta, GA: Whitman Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7948-1972-9.
• Senate Committee on Banking and Currency (1936). Bills on Issuance of Commemorative Coins. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office.
• Taxay, Don (1983). The U.S. Mint and Coinage (reprint of 1966 ed.). New York: Sanford J. Durst Numismatic Publications. ISBN 978-0-915262-68-7.
• Yeoman, R.S. (2017). A Guide Book of United States Coins (The Official Red Book) (71st ed.). Atlanta, GA: Whitman Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7948-4506-3.

Other sources

• Fanning, David F. (January 2001). "Silver and Nickel 3-Cent Pieces: An Overview". The Numismatist. Colorado Springs, CO: American Numismatic Association: 36–38, 97–98.
• Goldstein, Bruce C. (June 6, 2011). "The Power of 3s". Coin World. Sidney, OH: Amos Press, Inc.: 4–5, 14–15, 18.
• Greenbaum, Gary M. (November 2015). "A Share of Glory". The Numismatist. Colorado Springs, CO: American Numismatic Association: 25.
• "Chile asks Longacre for dies in 1866". Iola, Wisc.: Krause Publications. Retrieved March 4, 2014.

• Vermeule, Cornelius (1971). Numismatic Art in America. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-62840-3.