1860s replacement of the British copper coinage

1837 William IV copper halfpenny, worn and oxidised

Beginning in 1860 and continuing for several years, Britain replaced its copper coinage with bronze pieces. The copper coins (principally the penny, halfpenny and farthing) had been struck since 1797 in a variety of sizes. The copper metal wore or oxidised, or had advertising punched into it, and there were also counterfeits and foreign coins in circulation.

The state of the copper coinage was ascertained by a survey done in 1856 and 1857 in connection with the Royal Commission on Decimal Coinage. Whilst the commission recommended no action on moving toward decimalisation, the Master of the Mint, Thomas Graham, persuaded the Chancellor of the Exchequer, William Gladstone, that it would be an opportune time to replace the copper coinage with lighter coins of bronze, which would be more durable. Gladstone secured authorising legislation and a vote of funds in parliament. The chief engraver of the Royal Mint, Leonard Charles Wyon, was tasked with rendering designs for the new coinage.

Wyon produced an obverse for the new coins depicting Queen Victoria, who modelled for him multiple times, and who let her views be known, leading to delays as Wyon sought to secure her approval. The reverse side of the coin featured Britannia, as Wyon had been directed. With the aid of two outside firms, the Royal Mint struck sufficient of the new bronze coins that it started calling in the copper coins in 1861, a process complete after 1877, though less than half, in terms of value, of the extant coppers were paid in. The new coins remained current until the run-up to decimalisation in 1971, though the farthing was demonetised earlier.

## Background

[edit]

1831 William IV penny marked by advertising

By the late 1850s, it was clear that the copper penny and its fractions were too large to be acceptable in daily use. Copper was an expensive metal to be used for small denominations.[1] There were, however, sufficient copper coins in circulation to satisfy demand in Great Britain, thanks in large part to the huge numbers of coins struck under contract by Matthew Boulton fifty or more years previously.[2] Nevertheless, the copper coinage (the penny, halfpenny, farthing and the rarely-seen twopence and half-farthing pieces) remained, according to the numismatic scholar G. P. Dyer, "heavy, cumbersome and inconvenient".[3]

Matthew Boulton's 1797 penny struck at the Soho Mint

Those copper coins depicting Queen Victoria showed her as she had looked as a young woman, a design created some twenty years previously.[1] Three newly-struck pennies weighed 2 ounces (57 g), as did six halfpennies or twelve farthings. Boulton's 1797 pennies, of which many remained in circulation, weighed in at 1 ounce (28 g), though not all did as many had the soft copper metal heavily worn. Confusion was increased by coins struck to two other standards also remaining in trade: halfpennies and farthings struck by Boulton beginning in 1799, and Irish coins made legal tender in Great Britain in the 1820s. Coins of each of these standards often showed considerable wear, which could make it difficult to ascertain whether a coin was a small penny or a large halfpenny. Also circulating were counterfeits, coins that had been stamped with advertising, and foreign issues.[4] Chamber's Journal wrote in 1860, "what a bruised, ill-matched, ill-conditioned lot are a shilling's worth of halfpence: large and small, thick and thin, old and new, pierced with holes, dented and scarred by wanton ill-treatment, disfigured by advertising newspaper proprietors, and that numerous but disgusting class of people who persist in placing vulgar names or initials where they are least to be desired."[5]

Badly worn 1822 George IV farthing

The poor state of the copper coinage was demonstrated by investigations carried out by the Royal Mint in 1856 and 1857 in connection with the Royal Commission on Decimal Coinage, for it was considered likely that if decimal coinage was adopted, that the copper coinage would have to be replaced.[6] Although the commission found the idea of decimalisation had "few merits",[7] the Master of the Mint, Thomas Graham, persuaded the Chancellor of the Exchequer, William Gladstone, that the copper coinage should still be replaced.[8] Bronze was chosen as harder than pure copper, and the Royal Mint had at least some experience in it, having recently struck bronze coins for Nova Scotia and for the Province of Canada. Graham evidently enjoyed the contact with cabinet ministers, writing to his sister, "it is a little curious to find myself taken into council by the Government ... and to be talking over affairs of state with the Chancellor of the Exchequer ... over a parlour fire in Downing Street".[9]

## Preparation

[edit]

On 4 August 1859, Gladstone, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, obtained a vote of £10,000 to be used to replace the copper coinage.[10] The original request had been for £50,000, but Gladstone told the House of Commons that the lesser sum would be sufficient to call in the heavy copper coinage and restrike it into lighter bronze pieces. He reminded members that there was a bill pending before parliament to extend those provisions of law that applied to copper coins to coins of mixed metals, such as bronze. He stated that the Royal Mint would profit on the exchange, but the £10,000 was needed for preliminary expenses.[11] The bill extending the laws relating to copper coins to those of mixed metal gained royal assent on 13 August 1859.[12][13]

Gladstone in 1860

Although there were calls for a public competition,[14] Leonard Charles Wyon, the Chief Engraver of the Royal Mint, was called upon to prepare designs for the new bronze coins.[15] He was already working on the project, and several days after the vote in the House of Commons, Gladstone expressed his satisfaction with pattern coins that had been sent to him by Graham. The prospect of new coins excited some reaction in the press: Literary Digest hoped for something that would be a credit to the country, and that would show the Queen, by then a grandmother, as "more matronly"; The Mechanics' Magazine similarly wanted the new coins to "tell the truth".[10]

Wyon was instructed that Britannia should be on the reverse of the new bronze penny; she had appeared on the copper coinage since the reign of Charles II. According to the numismatic scholar, Howard Linecar, it was felt that to remove Britannia from the coinage would be to acknowledge that Britain no longer ruled the waves.[15]

After Wyon had worked on designs for both sides of the coins, he went to Osborne House on the Isle of Wight on 7 December 1859, where, according to Wyon, Victoria "sat, or rather stood, to me, and told me that she would do so again when I was ready". Wyon went to Osborne House again on 16 December, and both the Queen and Prince Albert expressed their pleasure at the work so far.[16]

On 20 February 1860, a question was asked in the House of Commons as to why the coins had not yet appeared. Gladstone responded that the artist had not yet completed the work, and that he was loath to interfere, lest he cause the work to suffer. This exchange caused The Mechanics' Magazine to express astonishment that six months' work had not yet produced designs for three coins, and to regret that there had not been a public competition. On 23 February, Wyon went to the Royal Mint to show Graham two pattern coins for the penny, which the Master of the Mint thought were satisfactory.[16]

Wyon continued to prepare pattern coins. One was likely given to the Queen by Gladstone in late March, for on 26 March, Wyon went to Buckingham Palace, where both the Queen and Prince Albert criticised the work. He returned on 30 March; Albert was not there but Victoria had slight criticisms. Wyon went to Windsor Castle on 9 April; he did not see the royal couple, but the coin he brought was taken up and was returned with the Queen's approval.[17] According to some accounts, the example that the Queen approved was stolen when posted to the Royal Mint, though Linecar was sceptical of this story, suggesting that such an important piece would have been taken from Buckingham Palace to the Royal Mint by brougham rather than be entrusted to the post.[18]

Graham took a coin, possibly the one Victoria had approved, to show Gladstone on 16 April. Wyon had been instructed to have the inscription on the coins, to be found on the obverse, to read, VICTORIA D.G. BRITANNIAR. REG. F.D. (short for "Victoria, by the grace of God, Queen of the Britains, defender of the faith"). He found, though, he did not have room for F.D., unless he shortened BRITANNIAR, which was already short for BRITANNIARUM. Wyon had put BRIT on the approved coin. Gladstone concurred with the inclusion of F.D., likely remembering the public outrage when in 1849, the new florin had omitted D.G. (Dei Gratia, by the grace of God) and F.D. (defender of the faith), and been dubbed the "godless florin". Gladstone, a classical scholar as well as a politician, insisted on BRITT rather than BRIT, noting that the abbreviation of a plural noun in Latin should have its final consonant doubled. Graham checked Gladstone's ruling with Edward Hawkins of the British Museum, who agreed with the Chancellor.[19]

The alteration to BRITT was completed by 20 May 1860, after which Wyon worked on the master coinage dies and other necessary equipment. He had completed all but the reverse of the farthing by 13 June, and that followed two days later. Production began, and on 30 June, Graham submitted specimens of the new bronze coinage to Gladstone, seeking final approval.[20]

Wyon entered in his diary for 4 July 1860, "bad news today: - The Queen wishes the portraits on the new copper  [sic] coins to be altered".[21] It is not clear what Victoria was dissatisfied with, but approval of revisions came on 9 July. There were, however, still unspecified difficulties. On 16 July, Gladstone was questioned in the Commons about the delays; he attributed the problems to "a mysterious secret of art".[20] The delays threatened Wyon's departure to the Continent on holiday, but he departed as planned on 23 July. Work continued in his absence, and on 6 August, Gladstone wrote to Graham that the Queen had approved the new coins. By the end of September, they were being produced in large numbers.[22]

The result was the "Bun" penny, called after the Queen's hairstyle; examples remained in circulation until decimalisation 110 years later.[18]

## Release and reaction

[edit]

> —The new bronze coinage, the issue of which has been announced this week, is now stated to have been called in. The reason assigned is that objection is taken to the use of the term "Britt." as an abbreviation for "Britanniarum," the repetition of the "t" being deemed erroneous.
>  —We are required to state that the report in a morning paper that the new copper coinage had been recalled on any ground is without foundation, and that the issue proceeds.—Times.

—"Trade and Commerce", The Royal Cornwall Gazette, Falmouth Packet, and General Advertiser (Truro, Cornwall), 7 December 1860, p. 2.

The new bronze coins were released beginning 26 November 1860, although they had not been made current by proclamation;[23] this did not occur until 17 December.[24] There was considerable reaction, much of it focused on the use of BRITT. There were rumours that this was an error, and that the coins would soon be called in. BRITT had appeared on the sixpences and shillings of 1817, but BRIT on the current issue of florins,[25] which were not altered to read BRITT until 1868.[26] The BRITT controversy resulted in a series of letters to The Times, with one likely written by Graham, and a paper read before the Numismatic Society of London.[27] Stated The Mechanics' Magazine: "The advantages which will accrue to the public from the introduction of the new money form a consideration of much more practical importance than pedantic quibblings about the second t in 'Britt'."[28]

The new coins were 95 percent copper, 4 percent tin and 1 percent zinc. The penny weighed 9.45 g and was 30.81 mm in diameter, with the halfpenny 5.66 g and 25.47 mm and the farthing 2.83 g and 20.16 mm. To correlate the metric and Imperial systems, 10 pennies, 12 halfpennies or 15 farthings laid side by side measured 1 foot (0.30 m).[29]

The Morning Post, as reproduced in the Essex County Journal, found that the likeness of Victoria is "unsatisfactory, as, except on the halfpenny, it bears no resemblance whatever to the Queen".[30] The Globe found that the new bronze coinage had "many advantages", including the hardness of the metal, but "as a work of art it hardly comes up to what might have been expected at the present day".[31] The Morning Chronicle predicted that the new coins "will prove a great convenience when time has made the public accustomed to them".[23]

Victoria in 1860

The Mechanics' Magazine felt that Wyon had captured the Queen's features adequately, but there was something inaccurate about the form of her head. It disliked the rendition of Britannia, though stating that Wyon had done the best he could. Other than these criticisms, it felt that the new coins were a complete success:[27] their lightness, and the fact that the denomination of the coin was stated on the reverse (ending confusion about the value of worn pieces) would lead to great public convenience.[28] Sebastian Evans, in a paper read for him before the Numismatic Society by John Evans, questioned the likeness of Victoria and disliked the placement of a sailing ship and a lighthouse of almost equal size on either side of Britannia: "altogether, on both obverse and reverse, the design is feebler and the work less satisfactory than in any former coin of the reign".[27]

## Production and aftermath

[edit]

1860 Victoria bronze penny

Large-scale production of bronze coins was new to the Royal Mint, and several difficulties were encountered at the start, resulting in broken or prematurely-worn coinage dies.[32] Replacing the copper coinage with bronze was beyond the capacity of the Royal Mint, which was busy with the production of silver coins and gold coins.[33] The Mint put out to tender a contract to strike 1,720 tonnes of the new bronze pennies, halfpennies and farthings. It was awarded to James Watt & Co of Birmingham. When the company proved slow to begin, Ralph Heaton & Sons, also of Birmingham, were awarded a supplemental contract to strike 60 tonnes of coins. This was not fulfilled in its entirety as by mid-1861, Watt's were making progress towards fulfilling their contract, which they completed on 11 June 1863: Heaton's had struck 41 tonnes by March 1862 and did not again strike bronze British coinage in the 1860s.[33] These two firms were experienced in the production of bronze coinage, having struck between them much of the recent French and Belgian bronze issues. Each charged £4 10s (decimalised as £4.50) per tonne more than it would cost to strike the same number of coins at the Royal Mint. [34] The weight of the penny was halved, so that 48 of them would weigh a pound avoirdupois (454g), and it was made thinner to make it as large in diameter as possible. Out of concerns that the farthing would be too small if it were lightened to the same standard, that coin and the halfpenny were put on a standard so that 40 pence worth would weigh a pound avoirdupois. The Royal Mint were concerned that the public would object to the new bronze coins as having metal worth considerably less than their face values, but found that the public did not expect a penny to contain copper worth a penny.[35]

Since speed of production was a priority, and there were three different sources of supply, there are a large number of varieties in the early years of the bronze coinage.[36] Over £1 million in bronze coins was struck in the first three years, and by 1877 the figure had risen to £1,367,963, of which about £60,000 was shipped to the colonies.[34]

To get the new coins quickly into circulation, the Royal Mint paid for their carriage to any part of the country; this programme led to local surpluses and was stopped at the end of 1872.[34] Withdrawal of the copper coinage began in mid-1861, and the facilities of the Post Office were used. In urban areas, copper quickly vanished from circulation, but in country districts, the transition took several years.[14]

The Royal Mint offered a premium of 2 percent for the old copper coins to the end of 1869, at which time the coppers were demonetised within the United Kingdom, but the Mint still accepted them at face value. In February 1873, Charles William Fremantle, deputy master of the Royal Mint, recommended that the coppers no longer be accepted, as the amounts being submitted had become insignificant, and this was done effective 31 July 1873.[34] In spite of this, the Royal Mint received applications to exchange the old copper coinage, generally from those in country districts, for several years afterwards. All were refused.[37]

An extension was granted to the colonies as no steps had been taken in some of them to call in old coppers. Originally, the date of demonetisation was to be 30 June 1876, but it was extended to 31 December 1877.[34][38]

On 20 June 1876, the Royal Mint received a shipment of old copper coins of the face value £256 5s. (256 pounds and five shillings), from the Crown Agents for the Colonies, who requested that payment of £200 be made in the form of pennies, halfpennies and farthings, with the remaining sum to be paid in the form of newly-minted third farthings. All were to be sent to Malta, where the third farthings were legal tender. The Royal Mint did so, striking 162,000 third farthings.[39]

In the Australian colonies, the copper coinage could be exchanged at the Sydney Mint from 1868 to 1877, and at the Melbourne Mint in 1877.[40] In the colony of South Australia, a proclamation was issued on 17 December 1876 declaring the copper coins no longer legal tender, but in January 1877, it was announced the colony's treasury would accept the coppers in amounts of not less than five shillings until 11 April 1877.[41][42]

Little was done in Cape Colony in South Africa or in New Zealand to call in the coppers, but some £32,000 came from Ceylon (later Sri Lanka).[43] A total of £580,000 in the old coppers was withdrawn from the United Kingdom, with £44,000 more taken from overseas. This still left £656,376 in coppers struck between 1797 and 1860 unredeemed.[34]

The Bun penny, with Wyon's obverse, and its analogue for the halfpenny and farthing, continued to be struck until replaced with the Old Head coinage in 1895.[44] The three coins continued to bear the same reverses until the halfpenny and farthing were given their own designs in 1937 under George VI;[45][46] the penny continued to display Wyon's Britannia reverse, with slight modifications, until decimalisation in 1971, ceasing to be legal tender on 31 August of that year.[47] Remaining "Bun" halfpennies ceased to be legal tender on 31 July 1969,[48] and the farthing after 31 December 1960.[49]

## References

[edit]

1. ^ a b Linecar, p. 108.
2. ^ Dyer & Gaspar 1992, p. 508.
3. ^ Dyer 1996, pp. 60, 62.
4. ^ Dyer 1996, pp. 60–62.
5. ^ "Our Copper Coinage". Chamber's Journal. 29 December 1860. p. 6. Retrieved 16 June 2024 - via The Huddersfield Chronicle and West Yorkshire Advertiser and Newspapers.com.
6. ^ Dyer 1996, pp. 61–62.
7. ^ Pickup, David (29 December 2019). "The Decade and Decimalisation". The E-Sylum. Retrieved 15 June 2024.
8. ^ Dyer & Gaspar 1992, p. 509.
9. ^ Dyer & Gaspar 1992, p. 510.
10. ^ a b Dyer & Gaspar 1984, p. 263.
11. ^ "The Copper Coinage". Essex Chronicle. 12 August 1859. p. 2. Retrieved 16 June 2024 - via 'Newspapers.com.
12. ^ "The Act on the New Coinage". Stockport Advertiser. 16 September 1859. p. 2. Retrieved 16 June 2024 - via 'Newspapers.com.
13. ^ "Proroguation of the Parliament". Hansard. 13 August 1859. Retrieved 16 June 2024.
14. ^ a b Dyer & Gaspar 1992, p. 511.
15. ^ a b Linecar, pp. 108–109.
16. ^ a b Dyer & Gaspar 1984, p. 265.
17. ^ Dyer & Gaspar 1984, p. 266.
18. ^ a b Linecar, p. 109.
19. ^ Dyer & Gaspar 1984, pp. 267–268.
20. ^ a b Dyer & Gaspar 1984, p. 268.
21. ^ Dyer & Gaspar 1984, p. 267.
22. ^ Dyer & Gaspar 1984, pp. 268–269.
23. ^ a b "Money Market and City News". The Morning Chronicle. 26 November 1860. p. 2. Retrieved 16 June 2024 - via Newspapers.com.
24. ^ Peck, p. 418.
25. ^ Dyer & Gaspar 1984, pp. 269–270.
26. ^ Spink, p. 516.
27. ^ a b c Dyer & Gaspar 1984, p. 270.
28. ^ a b "The Bronze Coinage". The Mechanics' Magazine. 8 December 1860. p. 6. Retrieved 16 June 2024 - via The Morning Post and Newspapers.com.
29. ^ Freeman, pp. 10–11.
30. ^ "The New Copper Coinage". The Morning Post. 12 December 1860. p. 4. Retrieved 16 June 2024 - via The Essex County Journal and Newspapers.com.
31. ^ "Our New Bronze Coinage". The Globe. 29 December 1860. p. 6. Retrieved 16 June 2024 - via The Huddersfield Chronicle and West Yorkshire Advertiser and Newspapers.com.
32. ^ Peck, p. 416.
33. ^ a b Dyer 1982, p. 236.
34. ^ a b c d e f Craig, p. 325.
35. ^ Craig, p. 324.
36. ^ Freeman, p. 12.
37. ^ Fremantle 1879, pp. 11–12.
38. ^ Fremantle 1878, p. 9.
39. ^ Fremantle 1877, p. 10.
40. ^ Fremantle 1878, p. 8.
41. ^ "Items of Intelligence". Australasian Sketcher with Pen and Pencil. 23 December 1876. p. 16. Retrieved 18 June 2024 - via Newspapers.com.
42. ^ "The Old Copper Coinage". Saturday Journal. Adelaide, South Australia. 12 January 1877. p. 2. Retrieved 18 June 2024 - via 'Newspapers.com.
43. ^ Fremantle 1879, p. 10.
44. ^ Freeman, p. 21.
45. ^ Seaby, pp. 169–170.
46. ^ Spink, p. 585.
47. ^ Lobel, p. 584.
48. ^ Lobel, p. 604.
49. ^ Lobel, p. 615.

## Sources

[edit]

* Craig, John (2010) [1953]. The Mint (paperback ed.). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-17077-2.
* Dyer, G. P. (1982). "Numbered strikings of Victorian bronze coins, 1860-68" (PDF). British Numismatic Journal. 52: 232–240.
* Dyer, G. P. (1996). "Thomas Graham's Copper Survey of 1857" (PDF). British Numismatic Journal. 66: 60–66.
* Dyer, G. P.; Gaspar, P.P. (1984). "Richard Sainthill and the New Bronze Coinage" (PDF). British Numismatic Journal. 54: 263–273.
* Dyer, G.P.; Gaspar, P.P. (1992). "Reform, the New Technology and Tower Hill". In Challis, C.E. (ed.). A New History of the Royal Mint. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. pp. 398–606. ISBN 978-0-521-24026-0.
* Freeman, Michael J. (1985) [1970]. The Bronze Coinage of Great Britain (revised ed.). London: Barrie & Jenkins Ltd. ISBN 978-0-09-155240-4.
* Fremantle, Charles (1877). Seventh Annual Report of the Deputy Master of the Mint. Royal Mint. OCLC 941810864.
* Fremantle, Charles (1878). Eighth Annual Report of the Deputy Master of the Mint. Royal Mint. OCLC 941813808.
* Fremantle, Charles (1879). Ninth Annual Report of the Deputy Master of the Mint. Royal Mint. OCLC 941812794.
* Linecar, H.W.A. (1977). British Coin Designs and Designers. London: G. Bell & Sons Ltd. ISBN 978-0-7135-1931-0.
* Lobel, Richard, ed. (1999) [1995]. Coincraft's Standard Catalogue English & UK Coins 1066 to Date (5th ed.). London: Standard Catalogue Publishers Ltd. ISBN 978-0-9526228-8-8.
* Peck, C. Wilson (1960). English Copper, Tin and Bronze Coins in the British Museum 1558–1958. London: Trustees of the British Museum. OCLC 906173180.
* Seaby, Peter (1985). The Story of British Coinage. London: B. A. Seaby Ltd. ISBN 978-0-900652-74-5.
* Spink & Son Ltd (2022). Coins of England and the United Kingdom, Decimal Issues 2023 (9th ed.). London: Spink & Son Ltd. ISBN 978-1-912667-93-2.