Sam Upham, Union Counterfeiter of Confederate Notes

Joined
Oct 8, 2021
Samuel Upham was a Philadelphia merchant who made counterfeit Confederate currency. He called them "souvenirs." When you compare this one to the real thing, the differences are obvious. The real thing was made by the Southern Banknote Company of New Orleans, which printed some of the highest quality Confederate notes. The trouble was they didn't have enough capacity to satisfy the Confederate Government's needs.

Here is an Upham note, a copy of variety T-19.

T-19 1861 Upham.jpg



And here is a genuine note.

T-19 1861 $20.jpg


You will note that the Upham made piece has these words at the bottom:

TC-19 1861 $20.jpg


Of course, nothing stopped a crook from cutting those words off the bottom and passing the piece. Many did. The crooks took these down South and bought gold, diamonds, jewelry and cattle with them. One of the big problems that South had was that they issued so many notes in 1861. Thirty-seven of the 70 major varieties of Confederate notes were issued in 1861. I know some people say there are 72 varieties, but two of those are fantasy notes, which are not real. I have no interest in them, especially given the prices.

Bankers warned the government that issuing that many varieties would play into the counterfeiters hands, but the politicians didn't listen.

Sam Upham had an interesting life. Here are some bullet points I made in a presentation about Confederate currency to my local coin club.

• Born in 1819 in Montpelier, Vermont

•Family wanted him to be a farmer or a blacksmith, but he had other plans.

• After a stint as a clerk in New York City, he enlisted in the U.S. Navy. Served for three years, making Master's Mate. Worked as a Bookkeeper in Philadelphia.

• In January 1849 he set sail for the California gold rush. He traveled "the long route" around the tip to South America, landing in San Francisco in early August.

• He failed as gold miner, but started a newspaper in San Francisco. He sold his interest in the newspaper and returned to Philadelphia in 1850.

•Opened a stationary and toiletry shop.

• In 1861 he started make "souvenir" copies of Confederate Currency. They were good enough to fool many people. The Union offices turned a blind eye to it.

•He died in 1885.
 
Upham mentioned in a letter, written after the war, that he had learned that Jefferson Davis had offered $10,000 for his "corpus, dead or alive." Henry Foote, in a speech before the Confederate Congress, said that Upham had done more damage to the Confederacy than the whole Union Army. Needless to say, there were southerners who wanted his hide.
 
I still think a bit of that was his"exaggerting" but He probably did do most of what he said. He did print facsimile notes, of that there is no doubt.Of His turning a profit, again no doubt, it happened. And he escaped prosecution for counterfeiting. But was there really a bounty on his head? And granted he printed alot of bills but did he "flood" the South?
 
I still think a bit of that was his"exaggerting" but He probably did do most of what he said. He did print facsimile notes, of that there is no doubt.Of His turning a profit, again no doubt, it happened. And he escaped prosecution for counterfeiting. But was there really a bounty on his head? And granted he printed alot of bills but did he "flood" the South?
It is a true story. He kept business records. Also, he quit when there were too many copycats that flooded the market. No telling how many fake CSA bills there were in circulation. The new photo gravure process made it possible to make exact copies of the CSA bills which were printed in London. The serial numbers & signatures were printed here. I posted a thread on this subject last year.

He got the idea for souvenir bills from a newspaper article thst stated that it contained exact copies of CSA currency using the novel photo gravure process. He bought the plates from the paper. The souvenir CSA bills had his store’s name in the margin. There is no reason to doubt his assertion that he merely wanted to sell a souvenir.

It was smugglers who had the inspiration to trim the bills & use stacks of them to buy cotton, etc. in the South. He advertised nationally & sold wholesale lots all up & down the Ohio & Mississippi River valleys. He made a tidy sum before competition drove the price down. There is no indication that he was very impressed by threats from CSA treasury officials. Selling souvenir CSA bills was perfectly legal in the Union.

When I was in South America in the 1970’s many of the bills had Thomas LaRoue & Co London or American Banknote Co on them. Countries did the same thing, printed serial numbers & signatures on them to create currency.
 
Last edited:
I have little doubt others/copycats did alot of harm by printing up many counterfeit bills. Some of these bills are now collectors items. I was not aware some of them were printed overseas. I've been under the impression by a certain book that counterfeit, facsimile, and bogus are all different. They're all fakes or phonys aren't they?
 
It is a true story. He kept business records. Also, he quit when there were too many copycats that flooded the market. No telling how many fake CSA bills there were in circulation. The new photo gravure process made it possible to make exact copies of the CSA bills which were printed in London. The serial numbers & signatures were printed here. I posted a thread on this subject last year.

When I was in South America in the 1970’s many of the bills had Thomas LaRoue & Co London or American Banknote Co on them. Countries did the same thing, printed serial numbers & signatures on them to create currency.
So it wasn't the Southern Economy that was flooded but the market for fake bills that was flooded?
 
So it wasn't the Southern Economy that was flooded but the market for fake bills that was flooded?
Yes on both accounts. My thread from about this time last year had references & quotes from a scholarly paper. As local businessman John Spence here in Murfreesboro TN stated, a lot of the money carried by CSA soldiers in October 1862 looked like it was nothing more than a photo cut out of a newspaper. At least Upham’s fakes were printed on nice banknote stock.
 
Yes on both accounts. My thread from about this time last year had references & quotes from a scholarly paper. As local businessman John Spence here in Murfreesboro TN stated, a lot of the money carried by CSA soldiers in October 1862 looked like it was nothing more than a photo cut out of a newspaper. At least Upham’s fakes were printed on nice banknote stock.
I recall that thread about Confederate notes looking like flimsy newsprint. I even replied how when my first notes arrived I was disappointed in their "lack of quality."
 
Last edited:
I have little doubt others/copycats did alot of harm by printing up many counterfeit bills. Some of these bills are now collectors items. I was not aware some of them were printed overseas. I've been under the impression by a certain book that counterfeit, facsimile, and bogus are all different. They're all fakes or phonys aren't they?
High quality Banknotes were printed in London without seals, signatures or serial numbers. It was the CSA mint that turned them into currency. Hoards of soldier’s widows were hired to sign the sec. of the treasury’s name on them. Eventually, don’t recall the details off hand, the CSA began printing their own bills. I am sure a collector knows all about that & might chime in.

I am away from my studio, so don’t have the citations at hand. Google Upham & a number of scholastic papers about the effect of counterfeit CSA bills will answer your questions.
 
I have little doubt others/copycats did alot of harm by printing up many counterfeit bills. Some of these bills are now collectors items. I was not aware some of them were printed overseas. I've been under the impression by a certain book that counterfeit, facsimile, and bogus are all different. They're all fakes or phonys aren't they?
A facsimile is printed a different size & otherwise is clearly marked as a reproduction. It is in no way intended as a counterfeit which is intended to act as a substitute for a valuable original. Facsimiles of famous statues are sold in art museum gift shops, for example.
 
High quality Banknotes were printed in London without seals, signatures or serial numbers. It was the CSA mint that turned them into currency. Hoards of soldier’s widows were hired to sign the sec. of the treasury’s name on them. Eventually, don’t recall the details off hand, the CSA began printing their own bills. I am sure a collector knows all about that & might chime in.

I am away from my studio, so don’t have the citations at hand. Google Upham & a number of scholastic papers about the effect of counterfeit CSA bills will answer your questions.
I want to apologize in advance if I get some of these incidents wrong.Maybe I cracked the wrong book or read it wrong.. I feel some of the events you describe did happen(kind of) but you might be giving the wrong impression to some who don't bother to "Crack a book" about the subject. Which bills were printed in London? The only high quality Banknotes that I'm aware of were printed in New York and New Orleans.The U.S. Government seized the plates that Confederate agents were to pick up from the National Bank Note Co. in New York not London. Some ($50.00 + $100.00))were printed in New Oleans by the Southern Bank Note Co.(formerly the American Bank Note Co.) The Confederate Treasury found that the Southern Bank Note Co. was lacking in resources.Plates, stones, ink,"high quality paper" , etc.was smuggled through the blockade from Europe. But was the finished or almost finished product (but unsigned) smuggled in as well? I've read the paper was but not the notes themselves. And I'm a little puzzled about the Secretary of the Treasury's signature that you mentioned the "hoards of soldier's widows" signing for. I can't find it on any of my bills. They did print on the serial numbers and sign in place of the Register and the Treasurer but not the Secretary of the Treasury.Oh and I don't recall the CS having a mint.
 
I want to apologize in advance if I get some of these incidents wrong.Maybe I cracked the wrong book or read it wrong.. I feel some of the events you describe did happen(kind of) but you might be giving the wrong impression to some who don't bother to "Crack a book" about the subject. Which bills were printed in London? The only high quality Banknotes that I'm aware of were printed in New York and New Orleans.The U.S. Government seized the plates that Confederate agents were to pick up from the National Bank Note Co. in New York not London. Some ($50.00 + $100.00))were printed in New Oleans by the Southern Bank Note Co.(formerly the American Bank Note Co.) The Confederate Treasury found that the Southern Bank Note Co. was lacking in resources.Plates, stones, ink,"high quality paper" , etc.was smuggled through the blockade from Europe. But was the finished or almost finished product (but unsigned) smuggled in as well? I've read the paper was but not the notes themselves. And I'm a little puzzled about the Secretary of the Treasury's signature that you mentioned the "hoards of soldier's widows" signing for. I can't find it on any of my bills. They did print on the serial numbers and sign in place of the Register and the Treasurer but not the Secretary of the Treasury.Oh and I don't recall the CS having a mint.
I am away from my studio, so am as I said, working from memory & encourage looking all this up. I did last year this time as I recall & posted on CWT.
 
I am away from my studio, so am as I said, working from memory & encourage looking all this up. I did last year this time as I recall & posted on CWT.
Not a problem,it happened to me yesterday. I was over 400 miles from home and all I had with me was my phone and tablet. Not exactly notes or other resources and I surely can't rely totally on memory.
 
I recall that thread about Confederate notes looking like flimsy newsprint. I even replied how my when first notes arrived I was disappointed in their "lack of quality."
Spence’s quip is a memorable one. He is one of my living history impressions, great fun because he was a curmudgeon. His family still ownes about 1/4 of the courthouse square still.
 
The thing that gets me is....you have to pay good money today for worthless Confederate money....BUT!!!...you pay even more money for counterfeit Confederate money that was printed/circulated during the war. That's right, the counterfeits are worth more than the real stuff. So, one would logically conclude...errrrrrr, ummmmmmm....the more worthlless the money was back in history, the more valuable it is today. I don't understand the logic, but go ask any of the "paper pushers" at the shows and they'll tell you that the counterfeits are worth more....crazy!!!!!
 
Last edited:
I want to apologize in advance if I get some of these incidents wrong.Maybe I cracked the wrong book or read it wrong.. I feel some of the events you describe did happen(kind of) but you might be giving the wrong impression to some who don't bother to "Crack a book" about the subject. Which bills were printed in London? The only high quality Banknotes that I'm aware of were printed in New York and New Orleans.The U.S. Government seized the plates that Confederate agents were to pick up from the National Bank Note Co. in New York not London. Some ($50.00 + $100.00))were printed in New Oleans by the Southern Bank Note Co.(formerly the American Bank Note Co.) The Confederate Treasury found that the Southern Bank Note Co. was lacking in resources.Plates, stones, ink,"high quality paper" , etc.was smuggled through the blockade from Europe. But was the finished or almost finished product (but unsigned) smuggled in as well? I've read the paper was but not the notes themselves. And I'm a little puzzled about the Secretary of the Treasury's signature that you mentioned the "hoards of soldier's widows" signing for. I can't find it on any of my bills. They did print on the serial numbers and sign in place of the Register and the Treasurer but not the Secretary of the Treasury.Oh and I don't recall the CS having a mint.
this-look-here.gif
 
The thing that gets me is....you have to pay good money today for worthless Confederate money....BUT!!!...you pay even more money for counterfeit Confederate money that was printed/ciculated during the war. That's right, the counterfeits are worth more than the real stuff. So, one would logically conclude...errrrrrr, ummmmmmm....the more worthlless the money was back in history, the more valuable it is today. I don't understand the logic, but go ask any of the "paper pushers" at the shows and they'll tell you that the counterfeits are worth more....crazy!!!!!
Who said any of this had to make sense?
 
Back
Top