Help with Colonial currency

Hi,
I found these two old bills when I was a kid. They were in the attic of my great aunt and uncles house. The house was built in the 1790s. I have always wondered if they were real or fakes. And to be truthful what they might be worth. The larger one is 3½" by 2¾" the smaller one is 2¼" by 2¾".
greg

 

It wouldn't surprise me if those were real. The paper and ink both look right.

 

Hi,
I do not know why the photos posted that way. Here is the 6 pence front.
greg

 

http://www.tortugatrading.com/engine/results.asp?Category=Colonial+Currency&Filter=Show+All+Items

I recently saw the Pawn Stars show dealing with this subject.
I think you're good here....but still needs an expert opinion.

 

At least the Half Crown one !
To Counterfeit is death .....is something Rick remarked on , because on seeing these the South flooded the North with copies trying to destabilize the currency.

 

Hi Davey,
Thanks for those links. The red ink on mine is more of a reddish brown than red. I wonder if it might be from storage before I found them. There was a stack of bills but rodents chewed them into tiny pieces and used them for nesting material. The two pieces I have were against the joists and next to a rusty metal box. The box was empty I was hoping for gold doubloons and pieces of eight. I sent some photos to the last site will let you know what they say.
greg

 

Hi Evelyn and Komokwa,
Thank you for your replies. I do not know if they made fakes back in the 50s, I hope not.
greg

 

The fakes were made in the 1770's....and even they are still collectible..!

 

That is a really cool piece!

 

They look OK to me as far as I can tell from the pictures. There was a saying at the time, 'Not worth a Continental' and that reflected the contemporary attitude to the fiat money continental currency.

Nowadays they are more valuable, if not hugely so usually, with condition very important.

 

because on seeing these the South flooded the North with copies trying to destabilize the currency.

Bit of a historical mix-up there, there was no South when these circulated, just the 13 colonies. What is now the south belonged mostly to France till the US bought Louisiana and a whole lot more from the French in the Louisiana Purchase. Paid millions in real gold and silver for it,too.

If the British had not been at war with the French at the time,it is quite likely they would have bought the Louisiana deal, and slavery would have been abolished at that time, leading to a very different North American history.

 

Ya I should stay out of American history....

 

> What is now the south belonged mostly to France till the US bought Louisiana and a whole lot more from the French in the Louisiana Purchase. Paid millions in real gold and silver for it,too.<

We bought the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 for $15 million, 4 cents and acre. Today it is considered the greatest real estate deal in history. Napoleon needed money badly because of you British! We thank you British from the bottom of our cotton pickin' hearts.

Spain still owned the lower tier of the states of Alabama and Mississippi and all of Florida. Later after Col. then Gen. and later Pres. Andrew Jackson "whopped" the pants off the British and sent them running at New Orleans,



he proceeded in trying to wipe out the NA (Seminoles) because of their raiding up into Georgia then escaping down into Spanish held Florida. Our govenment complained repeatedly to Spain but they turned a blind-eye to the NA behavior. Really, Spain didn't have the where-with-all in Florida to even try to control the NA. It was also found at the same time that British agents were working with the Seminoles. The powers to be in the US though these agents were arming and instigating the "Indian" attacks. I don't believe the aiding and abeting the NA has been proven. "Ole Hickory" Andy Jackson, never one to turn down a fight, used this as an excuse to follow the NAs down into Florida. He rounded up the British agents and executed at least one of them and decimated the Seminole tribe. Jackson really had the heart of an Imperialist after the fashion of the British Empire. Kind of ironic for he detested the British. He held the British responsible for the death of his mother and brothers during the Revolution. His father died a few days before he was born. His mother died of cholera while nursing POW on 2 British ships in Charleston Harbor. As only a boy of 13 he was taken prisoner by the British along with an older brother. On refusing to clean British officers boots he was slashed with a sword causing scars on his hands and face for the rest of his life. His brother contracted smallpox as a POW and another brother died fighting. He was an orphan at the age of 14.

Getting back to the Louisiana Purchase, Pres. Thomas Jefferson gets all the credit for that deal in the history books. A little know fact is that a woman, yes a woman, is responsible for that great land deal. The wife of William C. Clairborne (Governor of the Mississippi Territory from 1801-1803) was on a shopping visit to New Orleans from Natchez Mississippi (the seat of the the MS territory government). While being entertained at a ladies tea in New Orleans, Mrs. Clairborne heard from the French ladies, wifes' of the French governing powers, that Napoleon was desperate for money and was thinking about getting rid of the New World possession for cash. On getting back to Natchez, she told her husband what she had heard. Gov. Clairborne immediately called Pres. T. Jefferson on his cell phone with the news. On hearing this Jefferson sent emissaries to France with an offer to buy.

>If the British had not been at war with the French at the time,it is quite likely they would have bought the Louisiana deal and slavery would have been abolished at that time, leading to a very different North American history.<

Hmmmmm.... if the British and French hadn't been at war, Napoleon would not have needed money so there would be no need to sell the Louisiana. As to slavery, can't deny the possibility that slavery might have been abolished sooner in the south; however, with the advent of the Eli Whitney's cotton gin in the late 1700s was a big spur to slavery. If it hadn't been for the cotton gin, slavery would have been abolished much sooner in the US. Here's a bit of irony. The British Slavery Act of 1833 abolished slavery through out the British Empire ***except*** in "the territories held by The East India Company, the Island of Ceylon and Saint Helena". Now look at that, they allowed slavery to continue in most of the empire that was growing cotton. If cotton could have been grown in the British Isles, they would not have banned slavery there either. I know sometime in the 1840s they amended that act to include all of the empire.

What surprises me when I hear the British saying how moral they were to have abolished slavery so much sooner than us is that they were prepared to support/recognize the slavery South during the our Civil War!! Yes, the British were more on the side of the South with slavery rather than the North. Reason, purely economics, they wanted the South's cotton for their textile mills. Also wanted the North to lose because our North was stiff competition for the British. Our North was chuck-full of textile manufacturing. It wasn't until after the defeat of the South at Gettysburg that the hope of the South in getting British recognition were dashed.

--- Susan

 

on his cell phone.

 

Thought I'd add a little jocularity. I wonder if anyone will reply explaining the timeframe for cellphones. I also thought about using:

On hearing this Jefferson had emissaries *fly on the Concord* to France with an offer to buy.

--- Susan

 

It's a neat way to see if anyone is reading what you post.

 

Napoleon had a semaphore system, but it kind stopped at the Atlantic ocean. No signal towers in mid-ocean.

 

>...land lines back then...4 hooves pounding across the land....<



>Napoleon had a semaphore system,<

Now that's a new one on me. I had to look it up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semaphore_line

Another thought, Jefferson could have hollered across the "big pond." According to my step-father, during WWI he and other young boys sometimes would sit on top of a high hill and listen very hard to hear the cannon/artillery fire in France/Belgium. They really believed they could hear the guns. Isn't imagination wonderful sometimes. He was from Rhode Island. I always wondered where he and his friends found a hill, never mind a high hill in RI. His oldest brother was killed in that war.

--- Susan