Jeff Rock writes:

Julia Casey writes:

Randy Clark writes:

Dennis Wierzba writes:

Mike Wierzba writes:

Ray Williams writes:

With respect to Mr. McDowell's critique of our article on the state coppers, we wish to make the following points:

First, all authors listed on the byline were emailed several versions of the article while it was in development. The article always had coauthor names clearly listed on byline. Since there was some question on this point, we did provide an example email, with attached article copy, to both Mr. McDowell and the E-Sylum editor.

Coauthors were added to the byline as an acknowledgment of their participation in and contributions to the project. Those participations and contributions included proofreading and general recommendations, editorial changes, content changes, and providing base data or content. Any coauthor wishing to see email copies need only contact the two principal authors and editors, Craig Sholley or John Dannreuther.

As to the intent of the article, the sole intent was to use the historical records to establish the legal denomination (also known as face value or local valuation) for use on PCGS holder labels. Coins may or may not have colloquial and/or official names and official local valuations (denominations). Coin names may or may not be the same as the denomination.

Due to space constraints, PCGS does not use colloquial or official coin names on the holder labels. Rather they use the denomination, or more properly, a monetary abbreviation for the denomination. For example, U.S. gold ten dollar and half dollar coins, whose official names respectively are and are respectively indicated as $10 and 50C on PCGS labels.

The presence of a denomination abbreviation on the PCGS holder label does not prevent collectors from calling coins by whatever name they wish. Coin names such as Capped Bust Half, Seated Quarter, Mercury Dime, etc. are all in common use and thus obviously not by the denomination abbreviation shown on the PCGS label. We have no objection to any collector calling a coin by whatever name they wish, and since PCGS has never, to our knowledge, expressed differently, we presume they corporately feel the same.

To the case at hand, the two principal authors use, and will continue to use, the term or when referring to the coins in general and especially when including the Massachusetts cents and half cents in discussions of the state coppers.

It also should be noted that the denomination used for PCGS labels is the official valuation at the time and place of official authorization. Just as a Canadian dollar was and is not valued the same as a U.S. dollar, it should not be presumed that a half penny from Connecticut had the same value as a half penny from New Jersey or that either coin had the same value when spent in Pennsylvania or New York.

While denomination and local valuation at the time of authorization are the same, valuations in other places and/or at other times are locale and time specific. We thought our presentation of the valuation laws and the way in which various monies are, and always have been, treated around the world made that point clear. Since we were in error in not being more specific, this is intended as the clarification.

We hope that the foregoing clarifies the issues. Those with questions may certainly contact us.

I have discussed this subject with contributors on both sides of the issue. This whole exerciseappears to me to simply be about trying to standardize yet another category ofcoinage into a simple basic unit so it can be more easily to a broader audience ofcollectors. As a long time colonial copper collector and co-publisher of one of the maintextbooks in the New Jersey Copper series, I appreciate the idea and value of making oftenmisunderstood colonials more exciting and collectable to a larger audience of collectors.

The disadvantage of what some might call this noble effort is that it simply distorts reality to abreaking point. Several knowledgeable and published authorities in the field of colonial coppershave already weighed in on the mountains of historical, published and contemporary facts thatmake New Jersey, Connecticut, and Vermont coppers...coppers. Deliberately not half pennies.

An important factor greatly missed by this new halfpenny standard designation is that colonialcollectors collect the vast array of colonial coppers for their diversity and distinct history. Thisincludes differing exchange rates. The historic protection against counterfeit British halfpennies.The feeding of cash starved Colonies with anything round and brown. Differing politicalstatements. This list goes on.

We revel in the difference between 9 Diniers, Nova Constellatio coppers, a Higley , and a New Jersey Copper. Each with a story, reason and purpose that bore littlerelationship to British halfpennies other than they were both money.

The halfpenny designation also seems to fly right in the face of the fact that New Jersey Copperscome struck over just about everything from a Connecticut Copper, to a Virginia 1/2 Penny to aClinton Cent. This is because they all traded at different values. (New Jersey Coppers wereaccepted for tax payment so they held value much better than other coppers and were ALWAYSthe overstrike). In fact, many people collect New Jersey coppers solely by undertype!

So here we are, the choices are: accept a wholly fabricated standardization for colonial coppersto gain a broader audience (I am a bit suspect of this). Or resist, accept facts and history andmaintain the integrity of why we collect early coppers.

I suppose, I come down on the side of not seeing much value in adding 1/2P to these coins. Ifthere is not enough slab space real estate for the word copper, let's not default to 1/2P.

Always reject the incorrect periodic use of Cents, Pennies or half pennies when they arise in thecontext of Colonial coppers. And perhaps let us enjoy the fascinating complexity of these earlycoppers when trading in them was the wild west. Indeed, one can view Machin's Mills as notmuch more than an arbitrage shop. Making coins on the cheap they thought people might acceptfor more value. Overstriking every kind of unwanted copper with a more desirable copper on top(usually New Jerseys).

I prefer collecting REAL ."

Bill Eckberg writes:

To read the full PCGS article, see:
Confederation-Period Copper Coins: Halfpence, Cents, or Coppers?(https://www.pcgs.com/news/confederation-period-copper-coins)

To read the earlier E-Sylum article, see:
PCGS REDEFINES CONFEDERATION-ERA COPPER COINS(https://www.coinbooks.org/v26/esylum_v26n12a17.html)