Coinage of Augustus Humbert and The United States Assay Office of Gold
In September 1850 Congress authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to contract with a well-established assaying business in California to affix the stamp of the United States to bars and ingots:
The Secretary of the Treasury … be authorized and directed to contract, upon the most reasonable terms, with the proprietors of some well-established works now in successful operation in California, upon satisfactory security, to be judged by the Secretary of the Treasury, who shall, under the supervision of the United States Assayer, to be appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, perform such duties in assaying and fixing the value of gold in grains and lumps, and forming the same into bars, as shall be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury; and that the said United States Assayer shall cause the stamp of the United States, indicating the degree of fineness and value, to be affixed to each bar or ingot of gold that may be issued from the establishment; provided that the United States shall not be held responsible for the loss of any gold deposited with said proprietors for assay.
The honor went to Moffat & Co., a firm with an excellent reputation. Augustus Humbert, a New York City maker of watch cases, was appointed to the position of United States Assayer. Moffat & Co. served notice to the public that its private business would cease and further activities would be in connection with Humbert.
At the end of January 1851 Augustus Humbert arrived in San Francisco. At the same time the first octagonal $50 gold piece bearing his stamp was issued. The Pacific News of February 1, 1851 noted that “the dies for this purpose — the striking of the $50 pieces — have been procured, and the first coin produced by them was shown us yesterday.” Edgar H.
Adams first expressed the opinion that the dies for the first two varieties of the octagonal $50 pieces were the work of Charles Cushing Wright, one of America’s most famous engravers, who at the time lived in New York City. He believed that Augustus Humbert commissioned Wright to make assayer’s stamps. Humbert probably believed he would be engaged in smelting and assaying raw gold, making ingots from the same, and then impressing the stamp of the United States Assayer on them to certify the gold to be of a certain weight, fineness and value. Wright’s original ($50) “eagle” steel hub, lacking legends, is presently on display at the Bank of California’s Museum of Money of the American West in San Francisco.
The existence of bronze pattern pieces supports Adams’ thought. One piece is signed on the edge by Wright as “Wright fee,” for “Wright fecit” (Latin for “Wright made it”). Inscriptions on these patterns as well as the first octagonal ingots produced for circulation simply have the letters D C DWT. GRS. It was intended that the value in dollars and cents and the weight in pennyweights and grains could simply be stamped in the place provided. In this way ingots of $50, $100, $200 or any other desired denomination could be produced, differing from each other only by size, weight, and fineness, but incorporating the same stamp.
On February 14, 1851 San Francisco Prices Current contained an article relating to the $50 slugs, indicating their regular production was about to begin:
The above cut represents the obverse of the United States ingot, or rather, coin, of the value of $50, about to be issued at the Government Assay Office. It is precisely of this size and shape.
The larger ones of $100 and $200 are exactly similar, except they are proportionately thicker. The reverse side bears an impression of rayed work without any inscription. Upon the edges is the following: “Augustus Humbert United States Assayer — California Gold 1851.” Those of $500 and $1,000 are in form parallelograms, about five inches in length, and one and three-quarter inches in breadth, and ranging in thickness — the smaller ones about three-tenths of an inch and the larger six-tenths.
The $50 pieces will be of uniform value, and will be manufactured in the same manner as coins — the other may vary according to weight and fineness from the denomination mentioned.
By order of the Secretary of the Treasury these ingots and coins are to be received for duties and other dues to the United States Government, and our bankers, we are advised, will receive them at their stamped value.
This will produce an important change in the monetary affairs here, gold dust will immediately go up, and as a necessary consequence foreign and domestic (Eastern) exchange will be at a premium 5 to 7% . . .
The Daily Alta California commented on the new $50 pieces on February 21, 1851:
The new $50 gold piece, manufactured under the Act of Congress appointing a United States Assay Office in California, and made under the supervision of the Untied States Assayer, was issued by Moffat & Co. yesterday. About 300 of these pieces have already been struck off. The larger ones, of $100 and $200, will be of the same stamp and size, differing only in thickness. Those over $200 will contain the same stamp, but will be struck in the form of bars. These coins are of course a legal tender and are the coins of the United States Government to all intents and purposes. The coin is peculiar, containing only one face, and the eagle in the center, around which are the words “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.” Just over the eagle is stamped “887 THOUS.” signifying the fineness of the gold. At the bottom is stamped “50 DOLLS.” The other face is ornamented with a kind of work technically called engine-turning, being a number of radii extending from the common center, in which is stamped, in small figures, “50.”
Many people scoured banks and assay offices, jewelry shops, and antique stores, not only in ghost towns but in cities the size of El Paso and Phoenix. Franklin joined the Arizona Small Mine Owners Association and advertised in the various mining trade papers and journals. In time, Ford prepared an elaborate circular that explained what numismatic bars and ingots were and which illustrated pioneer gold coins, western paper currency, and assay bars. Thousands of these were printed bearing Paul Franklin’s name and address and distributed by him throughout the western states. People having items of possible importance were asked to tell Franklin what they had, or, preferably, to send him a pencil rubbing.
If an item was of interest to me, I advised him [Ford] what it was worth and he either sent the money to a friend or an agent so that the piece could be picked up, or else he flew west on a weekend or over a holiday and purchased directly . . . We had a good thing going. Franklin found the material and I researched and sold it. Occasionally, something was of particular personal interest and I kept it. Franklin also retained a few pieces . . . Our working arrangement was simple. Our arrangements were made early during our joint operations and under it Franklin was not to tell me where he obtained his material although he was to give me original source names wherever possible for my records. On the other hand, I was not to reveal to him the names of my customers with whom I was dealing. My confidence in Paul Franklin was well founded as, for example, in 1956 he located an unpublished ingot of F. D. Kohler, issued at the State Assay Office in Sacramento, and because he paid a nominal price for the piece he gave it to me at his cost plus expenses, since he questioned its authenticity. It was only after the late F.C.C. Boyd insisted that it was genuine, that he would accept from me a generous profit for finding the ingot . . . Since a great many of the items he unearthed were unknown or not previously published, it was my responsibility to find out exactly what they were, and why and when they were made. In instance after instance, Franklin argued with me, always taking the conservative position . . .
Early in 1957 Paul Franklin stumbled upon what turned out to be his greatest and most prolific find. This consisted of a hoard of coins and related pieces from the United States Assay Office of Gold, situated in San Francisco, and operative in 1852-1853. His initial contact was a teller in a Phoenix, Arizona area bank, but eventually he did business with the bank president. In time, he met the owner and source of these items, an elderly gentleman, who in the 1950s resided on an Arizona ranch. Included in the hoard were seven perfect prooflike $20 gold pieces of conventional design, that Paul Franklin obtained directly from the owner on a trip to Phoenix, February 19-23, 1958. These coins, together with three other impaired impressions, were wrapped in three or four old, yellowed linen handkerchiefs. Eight of the pieces had the weight marked in grains on the handkerchiefs in lead pencil; one or more of the coins also had the alloys inscribed in similar fashion on at least one handkerchief. Franklin could not obtain the handkerchiefs, nor could he copy the information marked on them, since the owner was afraid that his family would somehow find out that he was selling coins and realizing funds obtained from them.
In spite of the old man’s fears and general reluctance to give out information, Franklin managed to make a note that one of the seven perfect prooflike pieces contained .020 THOUS. copper, a fact he conveyed to me when he delivered the lot, together with the information that he was convinced that most or all of the seven perfect specimens, and probably some of the impaired ones, represented experimental alloy strikings.
Franklin had obtained a few United States Assay Office of Gold items prior to his first 1958 trip, and on subsequent visits to the Phoenix area picked up others. On a trip west by car during the summer of 1958 he purchased the only steel die in the hoard, paying the bank president $50 on August 14, 1958, on behalf of the owner. This die was obtained only upon my strong insistence, as were some of the lead trials, because of their great historical value. It was delivered to me by Franklin at the ANA convention held in the Los Angeles Statler Hotel, August 13-16, 1958. I only paid him his purchase price for it, because he had picked it up for me as a personal favor and because the die was very badly rusted and corroded, being hardly identifiable. [Editor’s note: This particular die, of unpublished design, and the only known impression from it, have been on display for at least ten years at the Bank of California’s Museum of Money of the American West, San Francisco.
All of the United States Assay Office of Gold items obtained from time to time, and classified as trial coin ingots, experimental pieces, trial pieces, assay bars, proofing pieces, and such, were purchased for my benefit. This material continued to be available, on a rapidly diminishing basis, for several years after 1958 1 obtained at least one proofing piece as late as 1962, and I know that Franklin sold another he had just obtained to a California dealer in September 1965. Franklin was given the information several times that nothing more was available, but he was also told upon numerous occasions that many items had been distributed over the years to various members of the owner’s family. Apparently a casual effort was made from time to time to recover these, as they could be found, in order to sell them to us .
John Ford went on to relate that while many pieces were sold to him and to New Netherlands Coin Company (of which he was a partner at the time), additional examples were placed privately by Paul Franklin.
He further related that:
A pedigree, alleged or otherwise, does not constitute decisive evidence about when or how a coin has been made. Only technical evidence predicated solely upon the fabric and die work of the coins themselves can be conclusive. I have long authenticated and conducted business on this basis, precisely because the best history of ownership in the world cannot make, in my opinion, what 1 otherwise consider a ‘bad’ coin into a good one! Conversely, the lack of a pedigree cannot impair or even challenge the authenticity of a coin, particularly when a long and conscientious effort has been made to examine and test that coin on strict scientific grounds of physical composition, weight, hub and die characteristics, hub and die progression, planchet manufacture and/or preparation, strike, or surface.
This is even more true when the relationship of such a coin to the components of its manufacture has been favorably researched, and when a solid historical basis for the very existence of such a piece can be readily established.
The Ford report, which runs well over 100 pages in length, relates how an example from the hoard was designated as a false piece by certain numismatists, and how by use of x-ray diffraction tests, comparison of punches and die progressions, and other scientific methods it was shown that the coins actually did originate during the 1852-1853 period. While the findings can be subject to controversy, as can virtually any findings in any field, the present writer (Q. David Bowers) finds the evidence as presented to be quite convincing on behalf of the coins.
‘Anyone can call a coin a fake, but it takes a real expert to say that a coin is genuine,” is an old saying. Likewise, a numismatist seeing a previously-unpublished coin or trial piece, or seeing a group of such pieces, might be suspicious at first. Perhaps this is only natural. The thought might run through his head “if it was actually made in the last century, then with all of my experience I certainly would have seen one by now.” And yet, new discoveries are continually being made, not only in the field of privately-issued gold coins but in many other areas as well. When the 1938-D/S “overmintmark” buffalo nickel was first discovered in 1961 Coin World asked me to authenticate it. I made detailed studies of the coin and pronounced it genuine. Today, in 1982, no one questions the authenticity of the many hundreds of pieces which have been identified since that time. But, in 1961 when the discovery was made a number of people called them false, simply because they hadn’t seen them before and were highly skeptical that such clearly-defined varieties could exist without having someone notice them earlier.
Ford was closely tied to MANY coins and related ingots which may will not feature on this site. At this time we focus primarily on the items which are more directly tied to ingots. For all intents and purposes, “slugs” and Octagonal or related coins/ingots will also not be featured although many exist.
U.S. Assay Office of Gold $35.80 gold ingot
Extremely Fine. Ingot impressed with prepared stamp of the United States Assay Office of Gold, San Francisco, California, 1853. The other devices are individually punched by hand.
This piece appeared as Lot 178 in Stack’s sale of the Gibson Collection, where it was described as follows:
“$35.80. 1853. Gold assay ingot, United States Assay Office of Gold, San Francisco, Calif. Irregular, nearly rectangular ingot . . . Test assay (cut-off corner) at upper left obverse with small incuse H stamp, evidently testifying that this test mark was inflicted by Humbert personally. 1,033.60 Grains. Extremely Fine or better, with only minor signs of handling, the most important being one or two obv. edge abrasions at the lower right. Unique. Obtained from K.M.L., Ajo, Arizona, Feb., 1958, for John J. Ford, Jr., by Paul Franklin; Ford coll., 1958-64; R.F. Batchelder. One of only two, possibly three, gold pieces that are similar in appearance, and which could fairly be called U.S.A.O.G. Assay ingots … the present piece is easily the most attractive of these, and the other two are forever off the market, being in the famed Lilly holdings, National Coll., Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. An unparalleled opportunity.
This very ingot surfaced in a private collection recently and is a marvel to see in all its beauty.
[03/1982] https://archive.org/details/henryhcliffordco1982bowe/page/n43/
California. 1853 United States Assay Office of Gold, San Francisco. $35.80 Mixed Metal Assay Ingot. Unique. From our sale of the Gibson Collection, lot 178, where it was more than ably described as:
Irregular, nearly rectangular ingot. 35.80 D. dollars and cents; individually punched) / die stamp or ‘tablet’ (as on reverse of $20 USAOG coins): UNITED STATES ASSAY / OFFICE OF GOLD / SAN FRANCISCO / CALIFORNIA. 1853. REV. INDIVIDUALLY PUNCHED: 1032 Grains, the weight of the ingot / 807 THOU, (fineness) / 134 (identifying number). Test assay (cut off corner) at upper left obverse with a small incuse H stamp, evidently testifying that this test mark was inflicted by Humbert personally. 1,033.60 Grains. Extremely Fine or better, with only minor signs of handling, the most important being one or two obverse edge abrasions at the lower right. Unique.
Obtained from K.M.L., Ajo, Arizona, Feb., 1958, for John J. Ford, Jr. by Paul Franklin; Ford coll., 1958-1964; R.F. Batchelder. One of only two, possibly three gold pieces that are similar in appearance, and which could fairly be called USAOG Assay Ingots. One of these is quite small, being stamped $7.26; the other, a real anomaly, has the characteristics of both a Proofing piece (fineness 9999) and an Assay ingot (valuation given as 2D40.00, i.e. equivalent to two $20’s). Either way, the present piece is easily the most attractive of these, and the other two mentioned items are forever off the market, being in the famed Lilly holdings, National Coll., Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. An unparalleled opportunity!
[06/1997] https://nnp.wustl.edu/library/auctionlots?AucCoId=3&AuctionId=516717
More backstory from the above reference in Stacks:
To the above description we can add the following important notes.
This present bar was analyzed at Harvard University in March of this year. Using sophisticated, cutting edge technology, the makeup of the bar was determined. The bar was shown to contain about 75% gold, 18% silver, 4% copper, the balance being trace elements. The high silver content is characteristic of native, unparted California gold, as Messrs. Eckfeldt and Dubois of the U.S. Mint noted in 1850. For comparison purposes, an 1855‘S’ Double Eagle was also analyzed. It was found to contain 89% gold, 1% silver, and 9% copper, the rest being trace elements. These results show unequivocally that the present bar is composed of a high silver content alloy gold that is typical of California placer gold of the 1850’s.
In addition, we note that the inscription tablet on the front of this bar is identical to that found on the reverse of the common 1853 U.S.A.O.G. $20. The punches used to make the C in CALIFORNIA, the A’s in ASSAY, and the Y in that same word on the bar are identical to those seen on the round U.S.A.O.G. $20 pieces. Further, there is an identically sized and shaped lump of die rust under the right serif of the crossbar of the T in UNITED on both the present bar and the round U.S.A.O.G. $20 pieces.
In summary, then, our research has shown that the bar is made from unparted gold that is typical of California placer gold but very unlike the gold later assayed for San Francisco Mint coins. Further, the inscribed tablets found on the bar and the common 1853 U.S.A.O.G. $20 pieces are identical. The conclusion is both logical and inescapable: the present bar is of the period and as described.
The origins and history of Gold and Mixed Metal Assay Ingots were rehearsed in a thorough footnote to the Gibson Sale description, which we reproduce here due to its continuing relevance and importance:
“Assay ingots represent a conveniently portable form for a small melt of mixed metal, the stamped value (usually not a denomination), weight and fineness, serving for any later negotiations when miner, merchant or bank submitted a quantity of such ingots for coinage. Such submission would have, of course, involved charges to be calculated on the spot for bringing the metal up to standard fineness. Assay ingots were not generally intended to circulate as money, although they had recognized value and did see some limited emergency use in making payments and settling debts. They are really rare, as almost all eventually found their way to the melting pot of one mint or another for conversion into coins. A good part of Humbert’s output, according to the monthly reports he filed with the Mint Director in Philadelphia, 1851-1853, consisted of assay ingots, most of which eventually returned to him, together with ingots of other assayers, for conversion into “coin ingots” or coins (the familiar $50 ‘slugs and USAOG 1853 twenty dollar gold pieces). This particular ingot is typical of many survivors studied; its actual weight and value are very close indeed to the stated figures. Neglecting the silver content, the stated value at 1,032 Grains (832.824 Grains of pure gold) $35.86 at standard mint valuation, which was 23.22 Grains pure gold per dollar. At the actual weight given by us (1,033.60 Grains) and the same Fineness, the pure gold content of this ingot is 834.1152 Grains equaling $35.92 plus. Humbert was well known for conservatism in valuing gold deposits and in the metal content of his own coins, bending backward not to defraud clients. Even so, the deviation shown could not have been considered significant in an economy where $ 1 would hardly buy a bowl of soup. The four-line obverse die-stamp or ‘tablet’ is one of at least five different such stamps known on Humbert and USAOG ingots, proofing pieces, and similar items. These have individual die defects consistent with their having been cut down from different working dies originally intended for reverses of regular United States Assay Office of Gold twenties, but differing in details from the twenty-odd working dies presently identified for the latter.”
$7.26 U.S. Assay Office of Gold, A. Humbert U.S. Assayer Gold Ingot
Obverse Text: D 7.26 C / UNITED STATES ASSAY OFFICE OF GOLD / SAN FRANCISCO / CALIFORNIA. 185 / 1 -15 2
Currently resides at the Smithsonian, and is most certainly another forgery.
See: https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/nmah_1101984
$40.00 U.S. Assay Office of Gold, San Francisco California Gold Ingot
Obverse Text: 9999 / 2 / D / 40.00
Reverse Text: 2 / 9999 / UNITED STATES ASSAY OFFICE OF GOLD / SAN FRANCISCO / CALIFORNIA. 1853
Currently resides at the Smithsonian, and is most certainly another forgery.
See: https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/nmah_1101669
$34.37, 1855 Dated U.S. Assay Office of Gold, Ingot
United States, 1855
Obverse Image: Partial U.S. Assay Office stamp.
Obverse Text: NO. 424 / CARAT 21 1/7 / OZS 1 / DWT 18 / 21 GRS / DOLLS 34.37
Currently resides at the Smithsonian, and is most certainly another forgery.
See: https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/nmah_1101979
Not Monetized. 1853 Dated, 9998 Fine, U.S. Assay Office of Gold, San Francisco California Gold Ingot
Obverse Text: 9998 / UNITED STATES ASSAY OFFICE OF GOLD / SAN FRANCISCO / CALIFORNIA 1853
Currently resides at the Smithsonian, and is most certainly another forgery.
See: https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/nmah_1101982
Augustus Humbert, U.S. Assayer-U.S. A.O.G., San Francisco, Cal. Gold Proofing Piece, dated 2/17/53
35 x 21 x 2.5mm., 440.20 grains. Gold .998 Fine.
An attractive specimen of the “Proofing piece ” type prepared at the Mint for use in binging substandard melts up to proper fineness. This piece was acquired in 1958 by John J. Ford, Jr., sold to J.C. Browning in 1962; then to J. DuPont in 1966, via Robert Batchelder. DuPont traded it to Stanley Gibbons in London, who sold it in 1971 to the present consigner.
[04/1980] https://nnp.wustl.edu/library/auctionlots?AucCoId=511370&AuctionId=521430