What is the definition of “dollar”?Posted: July 3, 2011 | |
Harmon Taylor explains things so directly and logically. I hope this helps explain why we have so much confusion about money, today. You can subscribe to Harmon’s FREE newsletter at the link on the bottom of this post.
The answer, of course, is, “That depends.”
11 November A.D. 2009
Depends on what? At least two things: (1) The fundamental “choice of law,” of course, and (2) the time (period) of focus for that “choice of law.”
Several very beneficial exchanges of ideas have followed from the recent note about Jim Ewart’s book, “Money–Ye Shall Have Honest Weights And Measures.”
There truly is no issue more foundational to our getting our minds around our present legal reality than the Money/”funny money” issue. There may be some points equally foundational, but there is no point more foundational than the Money issue.
Included below are some website links, and some content within those sites, regarding the definition of “dollar.” This very first link goes to great trouble to distinguish (A) the definition of “dollar,” which is in terms of a weight of fine grains of silver, from (B) the definition or purity ratio of this or that “coin,” e.g., the “Eagle,” which coin happens, unfortunately, to be stamped with the term or symbol of “dollar,” along with a fixed numerical number of “dollars.” That discussion encourages our understanding of certain very significant details in this study of Money.
Why do we talk about Money? Because in the “place” called “this state” there is no definition of a “dollar,” period. Thus, the definitions for “dollar” that are included below are valuable and relevant ONLY to a “Law of the Land”-based system. They have no relevance to a “Law of the Sea”-based system, such as the system(s) in/of “this state.”
To understand that “dollar” IS defined, in terms of grains of fine silver, for one choice of law, and IS NOT defined, at all, for the other choice of law, is to recognize the “best evidence” of the duality of the “choice of law” that we need to come to terms with in order to recognize the legal mechanisms being used against us.
Again, “dollar” is defined for purposes of Law of the Land, and it’s defined in terms of grains of fine silver. “Dollar” is not defined for purposes of Law of the Sea, at all. Thus, “dollar” is “defined” on a per-transaction basis in “this state.” In other words, in “this state,” the term “dollar” takes on much more of a “choice of law” meaning/reference than an economic meaning/reference.
To understand why “time” is mentioned, let’s look at what should be a couple of intuitively obvious examples. (A) People used to be drawn and quartered. Why has that stopped? Because, “in time,” the moral response to, moral evaluation of, that form of punishment has changed. (B) Horse thieves used to be punished by hanging. Why is horse-stealing no longer a death penalty offense? Because, “in time,” the moral response to, moral evaluation of, that crime has changed.
Why, then, has the definition of “dollar” changed? Because, “in time,” the moral connection to, commitment to, the Scriptural standard has changed.
“Law” is a moving target. The “law” is different not only geographically but also within one “place” through time. (This “change in time” factor tends to be a huge stumbling block for many pro se litigants these days, who don’t appreciate, yet, the distinctions between the concepts generally applicable prior to the JFK assassination, i.e., while we still had an honest system of weights and measures in general circulation, and the concepts generally applicable after the JFK assassination, i.e., after the “passing” of the UCC, which exists for the primary purpose of justifying circulation of “funny money” at the “state” level. The fundamental “choice of law” changed when the “money” changed.) One of the best discussions about this “change in time” factor is the book, “U.S. of A. v. U.S., — The Loss of Legal Memory of the American States,” by Kegley, Henderson, and Wahler (HKW Publishing 2006).
In this context, what we “see” in the money issue is the classic dichotomy. We get to pick our Master. If we pick God, then we use His Standards for the Law, including His Standard for an honest system of weights and measures. If we pick “man,” then we use “man’s” standards for the law, including “man’s” standards for the fiat, i.e., “funny money,” system.
To supplement my five-part study of Money from the Scriptural side, which should still be available on the web at this link,http://www.diametrics.info/text/sp_money.shtml (a 5-part series), I send you the information that follows.
That information is just a sampling of the information available via the internet. To find a whole slew of sites that talk about the definition of “dollar” (which information gets rather repetitive after a while), do a search using this string: silver dollar grains (those three terms, no quote marks).
Harmon L. Taylor
Subscribe / unsubscribe : email@example.com
A quiet evening perusing the world wide web reveals a surplus of web sites attempting to discuss various monetary issues. Invariably, one of the more common topics is “constitutional” currency. This essay does not address the political side of those discussions, but provides several facts and clarifications. The objective is to show that a person can be easily misled while researching such topics. If anything, perusing the web reveals there is much confusion about “constitutional” currency.
Consider the following statement:
The U.S. Coinage Act of 1792 specifically defined a dollar as “one twentieth of an ounce of gold (25.8 grains of 90 percent fine) or a silver coin containing one ounce of silver (412.5 grains of 90 percent fine).”
Fact: There was indeed a Coinage Act passed in 1792. You can a read a copy at this web site.
Fiction: The U.S. Coinage Act of 1792 specifically defined a dollar as “one twentieth of an ounce of gold (25.8 grains of 90 percent fine).”
Fiction: The U.S. Coinage Act of 1792 specifically defined a dollar as “…a silver coin containing one ounce of silver (412.5 grains of 90 percent fine).”
The Act of 1792 established a definition of a dollar. A dollar was defined as a coin containing 371.25 grains of silver and 416 total grains of metal (silver and alloy). The purity ratio was 1445:1664. Thus, a dollar was not a unit of value, but a unit of weight based upon a precious metal commodity.
The Act of 1792 established a coin called an Eagle. An Eagle was defined as containing 247.5 grains of gold and 270 grains total metal. The purity ratio was 11:12. By statute the Eagle was established with a market exchange value of 10 dollars.
The Act of 1834 redefined the Eagle to contain 232 grains of gold and 258 grains total metal, thereby establishing a new purity mixture ratio of 232:258. The Eagle maintained a market exchange value of 10 dollars.
The Act of 1837 changed the purity ratio of both silver and gold coin to 900:1000 (9/10 purity). The new ratio changed the total metal grains of a silver dollar coin to 412.5, but did not alter the original silver content of 371.25.
The Act of 1837 maintained the 1834 total metal content of the Eagle at 258 grains, thus with the new purity ratio established a gold content of 232.2 grains.
The Act of 1849 created a new gold dollar coin to contain 25.8 grains of total metal and maintained the purity ratio of 900:1000. The Act also created the Double Eagle or $20 gold piece.
The following numbers are useful when discussing precious metal coins:
* 1 grain = 0.06479891 grams
* 1 pound, Troy = 373.2417216 grams;
* 1 pound, Troy = 12 ounces, Troy;
* 1 pound, Troy = 5,760 grains;
* 1 ounce, Troy = 480 grains
Many people erroneously refer to the dollar as containing an ounce of silver.
A Troy ounce contains 480 grains (5,760 ÷ 12 = 480). Therefore, by definition a dollar cannot contain one ounce of silver, but approximately 0.7734 of an ounce (371.25 ÷ 480 = 0.7734).
Using the numbers for a standard silver dollar coin as mentioned in the Act of 1792 (standard silver is normal grade ore, not purified), the numbers would be 416 ÷ 480 = 0.8667, still short of an ounce.
In the Troy system of weights and measurement, “one-twentieth of an ounce” (.05 ounces) would contain 24 grains (480×1/20 = 24), not 25.8 grains. Although many people refer to gold as at one time being 1/20 of an ounce, that number is actually an approximation/average of the various coinage acts as Congress tried to regulate the exchange value of gold coin. More importantly for this discussion, notice that the Act of 1792 never used such terminology as “one twentieth of an ounce of gold.” (In fact, try searching the entire Act for the word ounce or ounces.)
As a side note, the Avoirdupois measurement system defines one pound as 16 ounces and contains 437.5 grains per ounce.
Section 9 of The Coinage Act of 1792 established the definition of a dollar as “three hundred and seventy-one grains and four sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or four hundred and sixteen grains of standard silver.”
The Act established silver as the standard bearer of the definition of a dollar, not gold. Section 20 defined the dollar as the “money of account.” However, Section 9 of the Act established a gold coin called an Eagle, to have an exchange value of 10 dollars. If you read the Act you will notice that there was no gold dollar coin. Only Eagles, Half Eagles, and Quarter Eagles.
By establishing a gold coin for circulation, Congress was exercising its constitutional mandate to regulate the value of coins. Congress was not establishing two definitions of a dollar.
Section 11 introduced a gold exchange ratio of 15 to 1, according to weight. Therefore, under the Act of 1792, although a dollar was defined as 371.25 grains of silver, gold exchanged for a dollar at 24.75 grains of gold. Mathematically then, we can calculate that an Eagle ($10) contained 247.5 grains of gold (10 x 371.25 ÷ 15). Section 9 of the Act defined the Eagle as containing “two hundred and forty-seven grains and four eighths” of pure gold. Notice the numbers match the calculations and therefore the two sections of the Act agree. Apparently members of Congress back then possessed a good grasp of mathematics.
In 1792 a $10 Eagle contained 247.5 grains of gold. Therefore, a dollar—in terms of gold—was 24.75 (247.5 ÷ 10) grains of gold. An equivalent dollar in terms of ounces of gold would have been 24.75 ÷ 480 = .0515625 oz., or about 1/19.4 (19.393939) of an ounce. The reciprocal of that number implies that an ounce of gold had a purchasing power of $19.39.
Similarly, because a dollar was defined as 371.25 grains of silver, under the Troy system that equals 0.77344 ounces. In other words, the ratio of one dollar to ounces is 1:0.77344. Taking the reciprocal of that ratio means there are 1.29 dollars in an ounce, or $1.29/oz. However, bear in mind that statutorily declaring that silver is fixed at $1.29/oz. is an arbitrary mathematical relationship, not a market exchange relationship. Such a numerical relationship has meaning as a standard only.
Using the 1792 purity ratio numbers, calculating total grains of metal in a silver dollar would be 416 (371.25 ÷ [1485/1664] ) and for a gold Eagle 270 ( [10 × 371.25 ÷ 15] ÷ [11/12] ). Those are the exact numbers seen in Section 9.
In 1792, although no gold dollar coin existed, using those same numbers to calculate the equivalent gold in a dollar, there would be 24.75 grains of gold (247.5 ÷ 10), but total grains in the coin would be 27.
The Coinage Act of 1792 established one unit of account—the dollar—but provided a bimetallic system of coinage. That two forms of metal would circulate as currency was not a problem in itself, but some problems of bimetallism quickly became apparent soon after enacting the Act. Congress tried to make the two types of coin equal in purchasing power. If Congress had merely fixed the weight of the Eagle (or vice-versa with silver), the market would have determined the purchasing power of the Eagle with respect to the silver dollar coin. That decision likely would have kept both types of metal in circulation. Unfortunately, the Act fixed the exchange rate of gold coin. Soon after enacting the Act, for consumer reasons the commodity value of gold appreciated; thus the value of the Eagle as currency was less than the market value as a commodity; and gold soon ceased circulation as currency.
After many years with almost no gold coin in circulation, in 1834 Congress attempted to correct the problem by changing the gold exchange ratio to approximately 16 to 1. Congress therefore reduced in the Eagle the number of grains to 232 (10×371.25 ÷ 16 = 232). Total grains of metal was established at 258.
This Act was intended to encourage gold to reenter circulation and that indeed did happen. Yet, as you might imagine, the market again determined the perceived value of both metals as commodities. Later, discovery of new gold deposits (Australia and California) flooded the market with gold. By being more abundant for currency circulation than silver, silver coins soon dropped from circulation and became more valuable as a commodity than as currency. Gresham’s law took effect and silver almost completely ceased circulating as currency.
In 1834, an equivalent dollar in terms of gold was 23.2 grains of gold. A dollar in terms of ounces of gold would have been 23.2 ÷ 480 = .04833 oz., or about 1/20.69 (20.6896) of an ounce. The reciprocal of that number implies that an ounce of gold had a purchasing power of $20.69.
Notice the Act of 1792 has no “9/10” rule of purity. Section 12 of the 1792 Act defined the purity of gold coins to be 11:12 (.9167) and Section 13 defined the purity of silver coins to be 1485:1664 (.8924). The 1834 Act changed only the gold ratio of an Eagle.
This “9/10 pure” content is often found in many essays at many web sites but is incorrect when used in reference to the 1792 and 1834 Acts. The precious metal content of both silver and gold coin were close to a 9/10 ratio, but that is all. However, there is a basis for the “9/10 pure” ratio. The Coinage Act of 1837 changed the precious metal content of both coins to a 900:1000 ratio.
The 1837 Act maintained the silver content of the dollar at 371.25 grains; thus changing the total grains of metal (silver and alloy) from 416 to 412.5.
With that new ratio the Coinage Act of 1837 also adjusted the gold content of the Eagle to 232.2 grains (258 grains total metal and 23.22 grains for an equivalent dollar).
Using a ratio of 9/10 pure, the commonly seen number of 25.8 grains of gold can be derived by dividing 23.22 by 0.90. However, those numbers apply only to the Act of 1837, not the Acts of 1792 or 1834. That is, the 1837 Eagle contained 232.2 grains of gold (258 grains total metal), not the 1792 or 1834 Eagle.
Although the Acts of 1834 and 1837 combined with the subsequent gold rushes caused gold to be the standard coin of circulation, the fact remains that the nation was still on a statutory silver standard because the definition of a dollar remained unchanged. However, for much of that time the United States was on a populist gold standard.
The Coinage Act of 1849 introduced a gold coin that had a market exchange value equivalent to a silver dollar coin. However, that coin was not declared the unit of value or account. The gold dollar coin was considered a subset of the Eagle series (Eagle, Half-Eagle, Quarter-Eagle), but because silver had all but vanished from circulation as currency, Congress introduced the gold “dollar” coin. The purity ratio of that coin was the same as the other coins (900:1000). That ratio was maintained into the next century. Additionally, notice that Congress maintained the 16:1 ratio between silver and gold. That fixed ratio between gold and silver would continually agitate the American monetary system.
This essay shows that although there are many meaningful and sincere people all trying to help reform current monetary policy, many fictions float around the web disguised as fact. We hope you will forward this educational information to your friends and neighbors.
The market in question was the Orient, particularly China. Some U.S. silver had found its way to that region previously, but now a full-fledged offensive was planned. The Chinese had shown a decided preference for silver coins, and up to then the bulk of American trade with China had been carried out with Spanish and Mexican dollars. The trade dollar’s architects set out to supplant those rivals by giving the new coin a higher silver content. They even had it inscribed on the coin: “420 GRAINS, 900 FINE.” At first glance, the trade dollar looks much like a regular silver dollar. It’s the same diameter and about the same weight as its predecessor the Seated Liberty dollar, and its portraiture is similar: a seated female figure representing Liberty on the obverse and a naturalistic eagle on the reverse designs prepared by Mint Chief Engraver William Barber.
In contrast to the new trade dollar, the regular U.S. silver dollar contained just 412.5 grains, and the Mexican dollar had only 416. But the architects had miscalculated; though it weighed slightly less, the Mexican coin had a higher fineness and therefore contained slightly more pure silver. The astute Chinese recognized this and, in many provinces, gave the U.S. coin short shrift, favoring the Mexican coin.
The currency law of 1873 created a special silver dollar, weighing 420 grains instead of the standard 412.5 grains, ostensibly to encourage trade with China, but more probably to provide a market for domestic silver producers (see Crime of 1873). The bulk of the 36 million pieces coined went to China, but at least 6 million were forced into circulation in the United States, despite the fact that after 1887 they were no longer legal tender. Many were bought at a discount and paid out at par to immigrant laborers who were forced to take the loss. Hoping to force the government to buy new silver, the silver interests delayed government redemption of the coins until 1887.
SILVER DOLLARS 1794-1935
Peace Dollars – Early Dollars – Silver Dollar Prices
The silver dollar was authorized by Congress April 2, 1792. Weight and fineness were specified at 416 grains and 892.4 fine. The first issues appeared in 1794 and until 1804 all silver dollars had the value stamped on the edge: HUNDRED CENTS, ONE DOLLAR OR UNIT. After a lapse in coinage of the plain or reeded edges and the value was placed on the reverse side.
The weight was changed by the law of January 18, 1837 to 412 1/2 grains, fineness .900. The coinage was discontinued by the Act of February 12, 1873 and reauthorized by the Act of February 28, 1878. The dollar was again discontinued after 1835, and since then only the copper-nickel pieces first authorized in 1971 have been coined for circulation.
Origin of the Dollar
The word Dollar evolves from the German Thaler, the same name given to the first large-sized European silver coin. Designed as a substitute for the gold Florin, the coin originated in the Tyorl in 1484. So popular did these large silver coins become during the 16th century that many other countries struck similar pieces, giving them names derived from “thaler”. In the Netherlands the coin was called Rijksdaaler, in Denmark Rigsdaler, in Italy Itallero, in Poland Tolar, in France Jocandale, in Russia Jefimik. All these names are abbreviations of “Joachimsthaler.” Until the discovery of the great silver deposits in Mexican and South American mines, the mint with the greatest output of large silver coins was that of Joachimsthal in the Bohemiam Erzgebirge.
The Spanish Dollar, or piece-of-eight, was widely used and familiar to everyone in the English-American colonies. It was only natural therefore that the word “dollar” was adopted officially as the standard monetary unit of the United States by Congress on July 6, 1785.
FLOWING HAIR TYPE 1794-1795
Varieties listed are those most significant to collectors, but numerous minor variations may be found because each of the early dies was individually made. Blanks were weighed before the dollars were struck and overweight pieces were filed to remove excess silver. Coins showing old “adjustment marks” may be worth less than values shown here. Some Flowing Hair type dollars of 1795 ere weight-adjusted by inserting a small (8mm) silver plug in the center of the blank planchet before striking the coin. Values of variations not listed depend on collector interest and demand.
Designer: Robert Scot
Weight: 26.96 grams
Composition: .8924 silver, .1076 copper
Edge: HUNDRED CENTS ONE DOLLAR OR UNIT with decorations between words
DRAPED BUST TYPE, SMALL EAGLE REVERSE 1795-1798
HERALDIC EAGLE REVERSE 1798-1804
The two earliest dies of 1798 have five vertical lines in the stripes in the shield. All dollar dies thereafter have four vertical lines.
THE 1804 SILVER DOLLAR
1804 First reverse, Original (Childs specimen sold for $4,140,000 in 1999,) 1804 Second reverse, Restrike (Adams specimen sold for $220,000 in 1989)
The 1804 dollar is one of the most publicized rarities in the entire series of United States coins. There are specimens known as originals (first reverse), of which eight are known, and restrikes (second reverse), of which seven are known.
Numismatists have found that the 1804 “original” dollars were struck at the mint in the 1834-1835 period, for use in presentation proof sets. The first known specimen, a proof, was obtained from a mint officer by Mr. Stickney on May 9, 1873, in exchange for an “Immune Columbia” piece of gold. Later, in 1859, the pieces known as restrikes and electrotypes were made at the mint to supply the needs of collectors who wanted specimens of these dollars.
Evidence that these pieces were struck during the later period is based on the fact that the 1804 dollars duffer from issues of 1803 or earlier and conform more closely to those struck after 1836, their edges or borders having beaded segments and raised rim, not elongated denticles such as found on the earlier dates.
Although the mint records state that 19,750 dollars were coined in 1804, in no place does it mention that they were dated 1804. It was the practice in those days to use old dies as long as they were serviceable with no regard in the annual reports for the dating of the coins. It is probable that the 1804 total for dollars actually covered coins that were dated 1803.
GOBRECHT DOLLARS 1836-1839
Suspension of silver dollar coinage was lifted in 1831; however, not until 1835 were steps taken to resume coinage. Late in that year Director R.M. Patterson ordered Engraver Christian Gobrecht to prepare a pair of dies from designs by Thomas Sully and Titian Peale. The first obverse die bore the seated figure of Liberty in the obverse with the inscription C. GOBRECHT F. (F. is the abbreviation for the Latin word Fecit or “made it”) below the base of the Liberty. On the reverse was a large eagle flying left surrounded by twenty-six stars and the legend UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ONE DOLLAR. Criticism nay have forced Gobrecht’s name to be moved to the base of Liberty on a new die and, with this, pieces were struck in late 1836 on the 1792 standard of 416 grains.
In early 1837 the weight was lowered to 412 1/2 grains and pieces were struck o the new standard in March, 1837, using the dies of 1836. To distinguish the 1837 coinage from that of 1836, the reverse die was oriented in “medal” fashion.
Between 1855 and 1870 the Mint produced restrikes to satisfy collector demand. Mules (mismatched combinations of dies) were also struck in the demand. Restrikes and mules are seldom seen in worn condition.
Dollars issued in circulation in 1836, 1837, and 1839 are found with many different die alignments. The “original” issue of December 1836 has the normal “coin” alignment with eagle flying upward. These coins were usually made on heavy weight (416 grain) planchets. The special issue of 1837 (made from dies dated 1836) is different than the 1836 issue in that the dies are oriented in a “medal” alignment. Those coins were made from either heavy or light planchets because the change in standards that occurred in 1837, and because some of the coins minted in 1837 used planchets held over from the previous year.
Restrikes incorporated both “medal” and “coin” turns, and use the same die combinations as originals, but with the eagle flying level when rotated. Mules with wrong edge or die combinations also exist and are all rare.
LIBERTY SEATED TYPE – HARALDIC EAGLE 1840-1873
Starting in 1840 silver dollars were issued for general circulation, but by spring 1853 the silver content of such pieces was worth more than the face value, and later issues were not seen in circulation but were used mainly in export trade. This situation continued through the late 1860s. The seated figure of Liberty device was adopted for the obverse, but the flying eagle design was rejected in favor of the more familiar form with olive branch and arrows used for the other silver denominations.
The 1866 proof quarter, half and dollar without motto are not mentioned in the Director’s Report, and were not issued for circulation.
Designer: Christian Gobrecht
Weight: 26.73 grams
Composition: .900 silver, .100 copper
Mints: Philadelphia, New Orleans, Carson City, and San Francisco
New weight: .77344 oz.
TRADE DOLLARS 1873-1885
This coin was issued for circulation in the Orient to compete with dollar-size coins of other countries. It weighed 420 grains compared to 412 1/2 grains, the weight of the regular silver dollar.
Many of the pieces that circulated in the Orient were counterstamped with Oriental characters, known as “chop marks”. These are generally valued lower than normal pieces. When first coined they were legal tender in the United States to the extent of $5.00, but with the decline in price of silver bullion Congress repealed the legal tender provision in 1876 and authorized the Treasury to limit coinage to export demand. In 1887 a law was passed authorizing the Treasury to redeem, for six months, all Trade dollars that were mutilated.
The Trade dollars of 1884 and 1885 were unknown to collectors generally until 1908. None is listed in the Director’s Report and numismatists believe that they are not a part of regular mint issue. After 1878, strikings were specimen proofs only.
The law authorizing Trade dollars was repealed in February, 1887.
Designer: William Barber
Weight: 27.22 grams
Composition: .900 silver, .100 copper
Mints: Philadelphia, Carson City, and San Francisco
Net weight: .7874 oz. Pure silver
MORGAN TYPE 1878-1921
The coinage law of 1873 made no provision for the standard silver dollar. During the lapse in coinage of this denomination the gold dollar became the unit coin, and the trade dollar was used for our commercial transactions with the Orient.
Resumption of coinage of the silver dollar was authorized by the Act of February 28, 1878, known as the Bland-Allison Act. The weight (412 1/2 grains) and fineness (.900) were to conform with the Act of January 18, 1837.
George T. Morgan, formerly a pupil of Wyon in the Royal Mint of London, designed the new dollar. His initial M is found at the truncation of the neck, at the last tress. It also appears on the reverse on the left-handed loop of the ribbon.
Coinage of the silver dollar was suspended after 1904 when the bullion supply became exhausted. Under provisions of the Pittman Act of 1918, 270,232,722 silver dollars were melted and later, in 1921, coinage of the silver dollar was resumed. The Morgan design, with some slight refinements, was employed until the new Peace design was adopted later in that year.
Sharply struck, “proof-like” coins have a highly reflective surface and are very scarce, usually commanding substantial premiums.
Designer: George T. Morgan
Weight: 26.73 grams
Composition: .900 silver, .100 copper
Mints: Philadelphia, New Orleans, Carson City, Denver, and San Francisco
Net weight: .77344 oz. pure silver
PEACE TYPE 1921-1935
The dollar issued from 1921 to 1935 was a commemorative peace coin, which might easily have been a half dollar. The Peace Dollar, in fact, was issued without congressional sanction, under the terms of the Pittman Act, which referred to the bullion and in no way affected the design.
Anthony De Francisco, a medalist, designed this dollar. His monogram is located in the field of the coin under the neck of Liberty.
The new Peace Dollar was placed in circulation January 3, 1922. 1,006,473 pieces were struck in December, 1921.
The high relief of the 1921 design was found impractical for coinage and was slightly modified in 1922 after 35,401 coins of that date were made and melted at the mint. The rare matte and satin finish proof specimens of 1922 are of both the high relief style of 1921, as wells as of the normal relief.
Legislation date August 3, 1964 authorized the coinage of 45 million silver dollars, and 316,076 dollars of the Peace design dated 1964 were struck at the Denver Mint in 1965. Plans for completing this coinage were subsequently abandoned and all of these coins were melted. None were preserved or released for circulation.
Designer: Anthony De Francisci
Weight: 26.73 grams
Composition: .900 silver, .100 copper
Mints: Philadelphia, Denver and San Francisco
Net weight: .77344 oz. pure silver