Currency Question

[Rhea Cole]

An evaluation by an unrivaled expert might be useful. John Spence & his family owned a hotel, store & other businesses in the square in Murfreesboro TN. Seeing the rising war clouds he began writing a diary before the war started. Too old to serve, he registered his particular views on the ebb & flow of both armies.

In October 1862 the tattered men from Confederate Gen. Bragg's Kentucky incursion returned to Murfreesboro.

Spence reported that they had lots of money & weren't shy about spending it. He described the bills as:

'…resembling nothing more than a picture cut out of a news paper with a promise to pay something, somewhere, somehow printed around it.'

Publication 47: A Diary of the Civil War by John C. Spence – Rutherford County Tennessee Historical Society

 

[Rhea Cole]

Thought it would be useful to compare with a genuine 1861 Charles Upham counterfeit bill.

https://currency.ha.com/itm/confederate-notes/1861-issues/ct-19-137a-counterfeit-20-1861the-samuel-c-upham/a/34041-21122.s

If you are not familiar with Samuel Upham's singular contribution to the collapse of the Confederacy's currency:

https://thebhc.org/sites/default/files/beh/BEHprint/v028n2/p0313-p0324.pdf

 

[Pollaco]

Sam Upham had very little to do with the "collapse of the Confederacy's currency", in my opinion.He was a semi- successful counterfeiter who printed "reproductions" but he really did not do as much damage as he later bragged about.

 

[birdlady]

Sorry for the confusion. I have two items and they are both identical to the images shown in the photos. Both bills have printing on each side.

 

[Pollaco]

Sorry for the confusion. I have two items and they are both identical to the images shown in the photos. Both bills have printing on each side.

So the one shown is both the front and back of the same bill?

 

[Bur Oak]

Sam Upham had very little to do with the "collapse of the Confederacy's currency", in my opinion.He was a semi- successful counterfeiter who printed "reproductions" but he really did not do as much damage as he later bragged about.

I have to agree. Wholeheartedly.

While there are a few uncommon good quality lithographed counterfeits attributed to Upham, the bulk of his production seems to have been the so-called woodcut souvenirs. I have read in things like the paper linked above that these were high quality. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are typically rather crude and lacking in subtlety. Many of the genuine notes may not have been the best, but the engraving even on these is more subtle and skillful. While I have no doubt that some of the Upham notes were introduced into circulation in the South, I have a hard time believing they would have remained undetected for very long.

Judging by surviving notes, the Confederacy had bigger problems than Upham. One finds various higher quality counterfeits that were detected, stamped "Counterfeit" or otherwise marked as such, and obviously removed from circulation. In approximately 30 years of collecting I have seen exactly ONE Upham woodcut so marked. A friend and fellow collector with more experience than I have cannot recall seeing any. Can someone offer an explanation why the most easily noticeable fakes could remain undetected in circulation for a significant length of time?

 

[Rhea Cole]

Sam Upham had very little to do with the "collapse of the Confederacy's currency", in my opinion.He was a semi- successful counterfeiter who printed "reproductions" but he really did not do as much damage as he later bragged about.

Oddly enough the Confederate authorities did not share your dismissive opinion of Mr. Upham.

 

[Bur Oak]

Oddly enough the Confederate authorities did not share your dismissive opinion of Mr. Upham.

I'm sure they were concerned with any and all counterfeiters, North and South. Since Upham openly advertised his offerings, he no doubt drew more attention to himself. They may have initially overreacted as a result, but I suspect they soon became more concerned with anonymous counterfeiters whose work was far more deceptive and dangerous.

Let's look at the type of Upham note you posted a link to above:

Can you tell the difference? I think they could. And this is one of the better Upham notes. Again, why don't we find more surviving Upham notes marked counterfeit? You also never find one cut-canceled like genuine notes which were withdrawn from circulation.

Bear in mind, also, that the Confederacy made enormous efforts to remove and replace the earlier notes when designs were later standardized. I can't imagine the counterfeit 1861 notes would have stayed in circulation while the genuine notes were disappearing.

In his book A Guide Book of Counterfeit Confederate Currency, Tremmel describes numbers of these notes being exchanged for Federal greenbacks, or spent in a way to obtain legitimate change in the boonies where they were less likely to be spotted as bogus. Clearly they sometimes posed significant problems locally. However the impression some seem to have that Upham almost singlehandedly destroyed the Confederate economy is a stretch, to say the least. In a section of the above mentioned book labeled Impact of Counterfeiting on the Money Supply, after some analysis, and including the work of other counterfeiters in addition to Upham, Tremmel sums it up by writing, "So, while certainly meaningful, the estimated percentage of counterfeit currency in the money supply does not seem significant enough to have been a major factor in the large drop in Confederate currency purchasing power."

 

[Rhea Cole]

I'm sure they were concerned with any and all counterfeiters, North and South. Since Upham openly advertised his offerings, he no doubt drew more attention to himself. They may have initially overreacted as a result, but I suspect they soon became more concerned with anonymous counterfeiters whose work was far more deceptive and dangerous.

Let's look at the type of Upham note you posted a link to above:
View attachment 513787
View attachment 513788

Can you tell the difference? I think they could. And this is one of the better Upham notes. Again, why don't we find more surviving Upham notes marked counterfeit? You also never find one cut-canceled like genuine notes which were withdrawn from circulation.

Bear in mind, also, that the Confederacy made enormous efforts to remove and replace the earlier notes when designs were later standardized. I can't imagine the counterfeit 1861 notes would have stayed in circulation while the genuine notes were disappearing.

In his book A Guide Book of Counterfeit Confederate Currency, Tremmel describes numbers of these notes being exchanged for Federal greenbacks, or spent in a way to obtain legitimate change in the boonies where they were less likely to be spotted as bogus. Clearly they sometimes posed significant problems locally. However the impression some seem to have that Upham almost singlehandedly destroyed the Confederate economy is a stretch, to say the least. In a section of the above mentioned book labeled Impact of Counterfeiting on the Money Supply, after some analysis, and including the work of other counterfeiters in addition to Upham, Tremmel sums it up by writing, "So, while certainly meaningful, the estimated percentage of counterfeit currency in the money supply does not seem significant enough to have been a major factor in the large drop in the large drop in Confederate currency purchasing power."

The total volume of fake Confederate currency is unknowable. The point, of course, is that Upham's gravure printed bills were indistinguishable from the official bills.

Rotogravure - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

He stopped printing the souvenir reproductions of CSA currency because so many others had flooded the market. What makes his story so interesting is that he inadvertently created a market in bogus currency that contributed to the devaluation of the mismanaged CSA money supply.

 

[Bur Oak]

The total volume of fake Confederate currency is unknowable. The point, of course, is that Upham's gravure printed bills were indistinguishable from the official bills.

The point I keep trying to make is that his woodcut/electrotype plate printed notes were so crude that they are easily distinguishable from the genuine notes. There are a small number of types attributed to Upham that were lithographed. These are significantly better, but still not perfect. None are "indistinguishable from the official bills." NONE.

Compare this Upham lithographed counterfeit...

... with the genuine example.

Close but no cigar. (Close enough to escape detection by the graders at PCGS, but instantly recognizable to the experienced collector and probably those in the Confederate Treasury as well as informed bankers at the time.) Some of these clearly passed, as, unlike the woodcuts, you can find surviving examples stamped "Counterfeit." Definitely not "indistinguishable."

I have never read anything about him using a gravure process. Tremmel, generally recognized as the leading authority on counterfeit Confederate currency, doesn't mention it having being used by any counterfeiter, neither Upham nor anyone else.

 

[Rhea Cole]

The point I keep trying to make is that his woodcut/electrotype plate printed notes were so crude that they are easily distinguishable from the genuine notes. There are a small number of types attributed to Upham that were lithographed. These are significantly better, but still not perfect. None are "indistinguishable from the official bills." NONE.

Compare this Upham lithographed counterfeit...
View attachment 513806
... with the genuine example.
View attachment 513807
Close but no cigar. (Close enough to escape detection by the graders at PCGS, but instantly recognizable to the experienced collector and probably those in the Confederate Treasury as well as informed bankers at the time.) Some of these clearly passed, as, unlike the woodcuts, you can find surviving examples stamped "Counterfeit." Definitely not "indistinguishable."

I have never read anything about him using a gravure process. Tremmel, generally recognized as the leading authority on counterfeit Confederate currency, doesn't mention it having being used by any counterfeiter, neither Upham nor anyone else.

The point I keep trying to make is that his woodcut/electrotype plate printed notes were so crude that they are easily distinguishable from the genuine notes. There are a small number of types attributed to Upham that were lithographed. These are significantly better, but still not perfect. None are "indistinguishable from the official bills." NONE.

Compare this Upham lithographed counterfeit...
View attachment 513806
... with the genuine example.
View attachment 513807
Close but no cigar. (Close enough to escape detection by the graders at PCGS, but instantly recognizable to the experienced collector and probably those in the Confederate Treasury as well as informed bankers at the time.) Some of these clearly passed, as, unlike the woodcuts, you can find surviving examples stamped "Counterfeit." Definitely not "indistinguishable."

I have never read anything about him using a gravure process. Tremmel, generally recognized as the leading authority on counterfeit Confederate currency, doesn't mention it having being used by any counterfeiter, neither Upham nor anyone else.

The point I keep trying to make is that his woodcut/electrotype plate printed notes were so crude that they are easily distinguishable from the genuine notes. There are a small number of types attributed to Upham that were lithographed. These are significantly better, but still not perfect. None are "indistinguishable from the official bills." NONE.

Compare this Upham lithographed counterfeit...
View attachment 513806
... with the genuine example.
View attachment 513807
Close but no cigar. (Close enough to escape detection by the graders at PCGS, but instantly recognizable to the experienced collector and probably those in the Confederate Treasury as well as informed bankers at the time.) Some of these clearly passed, as, unlike the woodcuts, you can find surviving examples stamped "Counterfeit." Definitely not "indistinguishable."

I have never read anything about him using a gravure process. Tremmel, generally recognized as the leading authority on counterfeit Confederate currency, doesn't mention it having being used by any counterfeiter, neither Upham nor anyone else.

The point I keep trying to make is that his woodcut/electrotype plate printed notes were so crude that they are easily distinguishable from the genuine notes. There are a small number of types attributed to Upham that were lithographed. These are significantly better, but still not perfect. None are "indistinguishable from the official bills." NONE.

Compare this Upham lithographed counterfeit...
View attachment 513806
... with the genuine example.
View attachment 513807
Close but no cigar. (Close enough to escape detection by the graders at PCGS, but instantly recognizable to the experienced collector and probably those in the Confederate Treasury as well as informed bankers at the time.) Some of these clearly passed, as, unlike the woodcuts, you can find surviving examples stamped "Counterfeit." Definitely not "indistinguishable."

I have never read anything about him using a gravure process. Tremmel, generally recognized as the leading authority on counterfeit Confederate currency, doesn't mention it having being used by any counterfeiter, neither Upham nor anyone else.

The point I keep trying to make is that his woodcut/electrotype plate printed notes were so crude that they are easily distinguishable from the genuine notes. There are a small number of types attributed to Upham that were lithographed. These are significantly better, but still not perfect. None are "indistinguishable from the official bills." NONE.

Compare this Upham lithographed counterfeit...
View attachment 513806
... with the genuine example.
View attachment 513807
Close but no cigar. (Close enough to escape detection by the graders at PCGS, but instantly recognizable to the experienced collector and probably those in the Confederate Treasury as well as informed bankers at the time.) Some of these clearly passed, as, unlike the woodcuts, you can find surviving examples stamped "Counterfeit." Definitely not "indistinguishable."

I have never read anything about him using a gravure process. Tremmel, generally recognized as the leading authority on counterfeit Confederate currency, doesn't mention it having being used by any counterfeiter, neither Upham nor anyone else.

It was gravure copies of Confederate bills in a local news paper that inspired Upham's souvenir currency idea. He purchased the plates from the paper & printed them on high quality paper. His name was printed on the bottom margin.

In short order he was receiving large orders from individuals who trimmed off the margin & put the bills into circulation. Upham never engaged in the lucrative purchase of cotton or other commodities that his bills were exchanged for.

 

[Pollaco]

Oddly enough the Confederate authorities did not share your dismissive opinion of Mr. Upham.

Also oddly enough, most of what the authorities supposedly said about him came from Upham, himself.

 

[Rhea Cole]

The quotations by CSA officials that I find do not indicate any input by Upham. I reread this article from my Upham folder this AM. Had forgotten that Sec Stanton had provided him with Confederate banknote paper captured on blockade runners.

https://thebhc.org/sites/default/files/beh/BEHprint/v028n2/p0313-p0324.pdf

 

[Pollaco]

There is no argument that Upham did not do "some" damage and some of what you say is true.But he did have a inflated Ego and was not the "one-man-wrecking crew" to the Confederate Economy that he later claimed.His souvenirs were so crude that damage was minimal. I am sure a piece or two of his handywork resides in some collections along with the real notes. But they probably shouldnt be considered Collectors items by themselves, they aren't that good. But then again they are a part of history.

 

[Rhea Cole]

There is no argument that Upham did not do "some" damage and some of what you say is true.But he did have a inflated Ego and was not the "one-man-wrecking crew" to the Confederate Economy that he later claimed.His souvenirs were so crude that damage was minimal. I am sure a piece or two of his handywork resides in some collections along with the real notes. But they probably shouldnt be considered Collectors items by themselves, they aren't that good. But then again they are a part of history.

OK, "some" is a highly flexible term.

 

[Bur Oak]

It was gravure copies of Confederate bills in a local news paper that inspired Upham's souvenir currency idea. He purchased the plates from the paper & printed them on high quality paper. His name was printed on the bottom margin.

In short order he was receiving large orders from individuals who trimmed off the margin & put the bills into circulation. Upham never engaged in the lucrative purchase of cotton or other commodities that his bills were exchanged for.

Even if the newspaper was printed with a gravure press, it's clear Upham did not receive the plate that would have printed the entire page. The electrotype plate he acquired would likely have been something used earlier in the process of obtaining an image that could be later reproduced in a newspaper, sort of a master.

The overwhelming majority of, if indeed not all of the early Upham woodcut souvenirs are printed on relatively poor quality paper. The only Upham notes I can recall seeing on decent paper are the later and far more dangerous lithographed ones. Judging by surviving examples, these represent a smaller fraction of his total output.

 

[Bur Oak]

There is no argument that Upham did not do "some" damage and some of what you say is true.But he did have a inflated Ego and was not the "one-man-wrecking crew" to the Confederate Economy that he later claimed.His souvenirs were so crude that damage was minimal. I am sure a piece or two of his handywork resides in some collections along with the real notes. But they probably shouldnt be considered Collectors items by themselves, they aren't that good. But then again they are a part of history.

OK, "some" is a highly flexible term.

What we are saying is, the impact he had has been (and evidently continues to be) exaggerated. Other factors had far greater effect.