The Short-lived Mint of Tlalpam

by Carlos Jara

In 1825 the legislature of the State of Mexico decided to establish a mint in their state, based on the higher population than other Mexican states where mints existed and on the Ley de Clasificación de Rentas (Revenue Classification Law) of 16 November 1824. To this end, after much discussion, the followind decree was issued on 1 July 1825:

The Constituent Congress of the State of Mexico, in order to provide benefits to individuals in the minting of their metals, has decreed as follows:
Article 1. The State will establish on its account a mint with its corresponding refining office.
Article 2. This establishment will function as a concession to an individual or a company.
Article 3. Buying funds will be established by the State and for now in Pachuca, Temascaltepec Zimapán and Taxco.
Article 4. The governor will propose to the Congress the amount for the buying fund in each of these mines.
Article 5. Silver and gold metals acquired through these funds shall be coined in the mint of the state.
Article 6. The employer shall specify a fixed term, within which the coined metals shall be delivered to their owners.
Article 7. The employer shall be accountable for all the faults noticed in the weight and fineness of the coinage and for the compliance to the obligations indicated in the bases of the present contract.
Article 8. The governor of the state shall ask for bids from entrepreneurs under the aforementioned terms and after hearing the opinion of the Board will proceed to formalize the corresponding contract considering the most advantageous offers and requiring the necessary warranties.
Article 9. The formalized contract will be forwarded to the Congress for its approval.
Which is hereby communicated to the governor of the state who will ensure its compliance, printing, publication and circulation.

The reasons expressed by the Congress of the State of Mexico to install a mint in Tlalpam were threefold: that the surrounding mines - among the richest of the Republic - justified it, that this would save the miners mining transportation costs, and lastly that establishing the mint would open a new industry of some benefit to the Treasury. Public officials were so sure that interested bidders would be plentiful for the projected mint, that a sum of $95,000 was authorized in advance – on 12 September - for the purchase of metals to comply with Articles 3 and 4 of the aforementioned decree: $40,000 were to be employed in the region of Taxco, $20,000 in Temascaltepec, $20,000 in Pachuca , and $15,000 in Zimapán .

A beautiful essay for pieces of eight, believed, based on its style, to be from engraver José Guerrero, who had also prepared the dies for the famous medal in honor of General Guadalupe Victoria, was also prepared: it bears the Mexico Mo mintmark and the JM initials corresponding to the assayers José García Anzaldo and Manuel Ruíz de Tejada.

The miners of the region did not share the political enthusiasm to establish a mint in Tlalpam and refused to support the project. Moreover, the Mexico City mint, only 16 km away, inspired them with greater confidence than a new company apparently managed by venal and ambitious politicians. As a result, the government did not receive a single bid to lease the mint. This failure did not discourage the members of the government who managed to bring about modifications in the decree of 19 July 1825, enabling the Government of the State of Mexico to install and operate its own mint and assay office. Not deterred by the obstacles arising - including the inexperience of the staff that were appointed and the costs involved - Acts deemed necessary for the mint were approved in quick succession.

Melchor Múzquiz - governor of the state and later President of the Republic - proposed an old house in ruins for the mint’s location which he valued at $17,500. He then appointed a board to buy on credit all the necessary coining equipment from the Mexico City mint. Juan Nepomuceno Sanabria drew up plans for the building of the mint but the reconstruction of the old house sold by Melchor Múzquiz was commissioned instead to Manuel Rionda. The budget presented by Rionda to the legislature for the repairs and remodeling of the building amounted to $11,625. It was approved by the Chamber and works began on 9 July 1827. By mid-October, $18,183.17 had already been spent but the advances were slow and more funds were required to complete the works. Another budget was hastily proposed for a total of $52,675 and immediately passed by the legislators. This requested increase in the budget raised suspicions against the contractor and an expert, Teodoro Latropinier, was appointed by the Governor to inspect the works. His report not only approved the works done but also made a warm eulogy of all the works that had been completed. Nevertheless, the costs continued to rise and had reached $106,776 before the building was even able to accommodate the mint.

At first, when Múzquiz’s offer was made public, high praise was given for his magnanimity and munificence, but as the cost of the work kept augmenting, the general feeling turned against him and in the end he was vilified by most who believed the operation had left him a handsome profit.

Shortly after starting the reconstruction works, the Governor appointed the employees of the projected mint and each began to receive his salary even though the facility was not yet functioning. The legislature became aware of this anomaly and on 8 January 1828 requested the suspension of these payments, and a detailed and updated daily report of expenses with a final budget of the funds that were needed for the completion of the work.

On 28 February 1828 the Chamber approved the expenses related to the projected mint, but revoked the appointments that had been given to the employees. It is doubtful whether the Governor took this censorship into account since on the 20th of that same month, he informed the legislature that orders had been delivered to the employees appointed to the mint to ensure their observation of the federal regulations for establishments of that nature.

When dies were requested to start the minting operations, it was agreed that they could not bear the “Mo” mintmark since that belonged by right to the mint of Mexico City. The abbreviations “Eo Mo” which corresponded to the name Estado de México would thus be used for the coins that would be minted at Tlalpam.

The Provisional Government Junta had, on 11 June 1822, established a tax of 2% on minted silver and gold which was systematically used on payment of a contracted debt of a forced loan. This tax was still collected in 1828 under the designation of “Extraction rights” and the state legislature on 24 May 1828 decreed that the coinage circulating within the state without the paperwork proving the payment of the aforementioned right was not only subject to the immediate payment of said right but also to a 3% penalty. The resulting profits would then be split equally between the denouncers, the apprehenders and the municipality.

Numerous documents related to the establishment of a mint in Tlalpam can be found when studying the decrees of the Constituent Congress of the state of México. Between 1827 and 1831 many resolutions were passed on this matter by the legislature, some related to the designation of the employees, others to the accounting of the mint, etc. There is also evidence that by 5 September 1828 the legislators were agreed that installing the mint had been a huge mistake and that prudence seemed to suggest its immediate closure. On 29 May 1829 a serious dissension occurred between the mint’s employees and the state governor threatened to sack the ones responsible. At this point, the legislature intervened and instructed the mint not to make changes in the personnel without its authorization.

The staff of the mint included:

The “LF” initials that appear on the coins of this mint correspond to the first names of Luis Velázquez de la Cadena and Francisco Parodi Pagani.

In a communication addressed to the state governor on 29 January 1829, Rionda lamented that his duties as director of the mint had become a heavy burden for him. It is not known whether this gentleman was removed from office or resigned voluntarily but considering the later events, it is very likely that he resigned and that, fearful of the fate that awaited him as a result of the failure of the mint, he sought safety before the storm broke out. In any case, the fact is that he left Tlalpam and soon afterwards was appointed as director of the mint of Mexico City.

On 22 May 1829 the legislature was asked to authorize the expenditure of $5,711.15 to be invested in making some repairs needed at the mint, including $711.15 that would be spent on works requiring immediate attention with the remaining $5,000 to finish what had not yet been completed. A series of events ensued, culminating on 2 June with an indictment filed against former director Rionda. On 16 June the Secretary of State publicly guaranteed Rionda’s integrity but could not stop the wave of indignation that had arisen. On 14 July four prominent jurists asked for Rionda to be prosecuted for embezzlement and fraud against the public finances. The defendant was officially notified and testified in one of the courts in Mexico City. The process continued later in Tlalpam in absentia of the defendant and on 25 August 1830 he was finally convicted and sentenced to banishment from the territory of the state and the confiscation of his urban properties. It is likely that the charges against Rionda led to his eviction from the direction of the Mexico City mint at the end of 1829 when Ildefonso Maniau took over. Rionda later sought to vindicate himself and published a 47-page booklet entitled Rara aplicacion de la ley en la sentencia de D. Manuel Rionda.

The second treasurer of the mint of Tlalpam was Colonel José Vicente Villada whose provisional appointment was extended on 10 March 1829. He resigned on 15 October 1829 and Governor Joaquín Lebrija granted him a bonus of $1,000 in recognition of his services. Nevertheless, it was soon established that Villada’s accounts were not in proper order: when requested to reimburse the missing funds, he responded that he was not able to do so and the government immediately confiscated his properties in the state of México and sold them to cover the embezzled amount.

Based on some official documentation, including the minutes of the legislature from its session of 18 September 1830, it appears that the mint had a good number of assayers, who were left unemployed and almost helpless after the mint had closed. Pressed by need and encouraged by the paternalistic attitude of the authorities, they asked to continue receiving their salaries until employed again. The legislature was sympathetic towards the request and would have approved it had there been funds available in the State Treasury. In consequence, the Congress agreed to give preference to these assayers whenever a position of similar category opened at any of the government’s dependencies. Sadly, the names of these assayers have been lost to history.

KM 383.4 8 Escudos 1829 (lot 31253, Heritage Long Beach auction, September 2014)

The minting operations in Tlalpam started on 23 February 1828 but that mint was short lived. On 29 May 1830 a decree of the state legislature ordered the closure of the mint: the last coins would be struck on 9 June of that year and operations stopped four days later. The employees of the mint sent a formal protest to Governor Melchor Muzquiz through Director Joaquín Lebrija expressing their consternation at the ruin that awaited their families. A special mention was made of the fact that many of them had quit better positions at the Federation to serve the State. On 3 June Lebrija requested Muzquiz to suspend the closure and stated that the employees of the mint had agreed to accept only a partial proportional payment of their salaries if the mint’s funds had become insufficient. This rather magnanimous attitude out of imperious need was not considered and on 8 June a new, more threatening, letter was sent to the governor. An excerpt of this letter follows:

We consider the Constituent Congress to have no authority to issue providences other than those absolutely necessary for the celebration of elections and the reunion of the new Constitutional Congress; any other legislative act that it exerts can only be considered as an attack against the sovereignty of the State. The citizen, on another hand, is obliged to obey only the law and it must be understood that obeying the dispositions that the Constituent Congress has issued outside its faculties would only mean yielding to brute force. Your Honor has the obligation to protect our political rights and particular interests guaranteed by law, and thus we exhort him to pay us the corresponding owed warranties…

Muzquiz evidently refused to acquiesce to this petition since on that same date the following note was sent:

All the petitions guided by moderation and the respect to the authority from the employees of this mint have been ignored… (and now they) must speak as free citizens… In consequence …they protest … and comply by force and not the law … which had conceded them the warranties of their employments.

The following were the amounts minted at the Tlalpam mint:

KM 370.4 ½ Real 1829 (Stack's Bowers Baltimore auction, March 2011, lot 8132)

8 Reales 1829 (Stack's Bowers Baltimore auction, November 2010, lot 6276)

Only the following partial mintage figures detailed by denomination have been found, but they are of the utmost importance since they detail some of the denominations that were struck. From 23 February 1828 to 15 October 1828: $346,874.75, divided as follows:

From 16 October 1829 to June 1830: 156,301.00, divided as follows:

The government of the State of México tried to lease the mint and its rights but to no avail and on 29 May 1830 decreed its closure. Finally, the legislature decreed on 3 October 1831 to return the equipment to the Mexico City mint and to sell the building. According to historian Father Mariano Cuevas{footnote}Historia de la Nación Mexicana, México, 1953, Vol. II{/footnote}, Lorenzo de Zavala confiscated the equipment and never returned it.

The mint was never able to produce sufficient profits to cover its operational costs: net losses amounted to $9,491.63 on its first year of operations, then $14,966.42 on its second year, and $18,539.95 in its third and last year. After the building was sold and the equipment returned to the Mexico City mint, the total net loss was of $149,774.93.

After the state of México was dismembered, its capital was transferred to Toluca. On 7 December 1847 Governor Francisco M. de Olaguibel signed a decree authorizing the reopening of the mint. However, since Toluca was only 73 km away from Mexico City and thus within the limits exclusively reserved to the mint of that city, the project was dismissed after the director of the Mexico City mint, Alejandro Bellange, protested. No further attempts to reopen the mint were made although it is somewhat ironical that one was made at all, considering the blatant failure of the mint of Tlalpam.

The Alamos mint

by Alberto Francisco Pradeau

{footnote}Alberto Francisco Pradeau, The Mexican Mints of Alamos and Hermosillo, NNM, No 63, American Numismatic Society, New York, 1934{/footnote}

Shortly after Mexico obtained its independence from Spain, when Sonora was still a part of the Province of Nueva Viscaya, a movement was started to have a mint in Alamos. Espinoza de los Monteros, in his project of separation presented 29 February 1823, has embodied the plan of erecting and operating a mint in Alamos. In 1828, Leonardo Santoyo arrived in Alamos with a concession or grant, obtained from the Federal Government, permitting him to coin copper coins of "una cuartilla" denomination - three and one-eighth cents.

The inhabitants in Alamos, however, refused to accept them .They were coined in very small quantities during the years 1828 and 1829. In 1832 we find that Mr. Santoyo had obtained a change in his grant and had gone to Hermosillo, where he coined a different type of “una cuartilla”. Hermosillo was then capital of the State of Sonora. The inscription on the obverse is EST. D. SONORA. UNA CUART.: on the reverse, A. de 1835 L. S. HERMOSILLO., which signifies "Año de 1835 Leonardo Santoyo Hermosillo."

The chief reason for the establishment of a mint in Alamos was the bonanza existent in the mining districts in and around the city. Owing to the isolation of this mining center which had no railroad until 1907, communication with other cities was possible only by stage-coach, saddle and pack animals. This means of conveyance was anything but safe, and while the convoys, carrying out the silver bars or bringing in the coined gold and silver, were properly escorted by armed guards, these were often outnumbered and massacred by the marauding Yaqui Indians or bandits constantly roving in search of plunder along the routes that led to Alamos.

Whether this mint was established by federal or state decree I have not been able to ascertain, but it is reasonable to assume that due to the French intervention existing from 1862 to 1867, and the inaccessibility of the region, the local authorities had much to do with its foundation. During this period, when the central government was constantly being changed from one locality to another, the states exercised the rights of independent governments, subject to approval of the federal government at such times as it was possible to get in touch with it.

According to official records the first coinage of this mint is given as 1868, but J. W. Bastow, writing in the American Journal of Numismatics, Volume XXXII, No. 1, of July 1897, page 17, gives the date of the first minting operations as 1864. I am wholly in accord with this, as I have in my collection an eight escudos piece dated 1864.

Orozco y Berra in his articles entitled "La Moneda en Mexico " published by the newspaper El Renacimiento in 1869, says in his second article: "Of the mints at Alamos and Hermosillo I have not been able to obtain any information through official channels or in any other manner." (Free translation.) Santiago Ramirez in his Noticia Historica de la Riqueza Minera de Mexico edited by the Government of Mexico in 1884, page 47, gives the beginning of coinage for the Alamos mint as of 1868. And one after another a number of writings on Mexican numismatics might be quoted in which everyone has used the official archives, which, as I have stated, are incorrect. The error was caused by the unsettled condition of the country due to the French intervention and the subsequent monarchy with Maximilian of Austria as Emperor, which lasted until 1867. It is more than probable that the records of the mint, which were supposed to be sent to the treasury department (Secretaria de Hacienda), were either lost in transit or destroyed.
The following statements of tremendous importance were taken from the book entitled Cuentas, gastos , acreedores y otros asuntos del tiempo de lo Intervencion Francesa y del Imperio written by Manuel Payno, and published in 1869 by order of the Constitutional Government of Mexico, pages 369-373. Free translation: "Not a single document is to be found in the national archives, that will throw light on the revenue-yielding industries of the country during the five years of French intervention in Mexico (1862-1867) excepting those of the mint at Mexico City, the records of which were kept quite accurately." The Minister of Finance (Secretario de Hacienda) in a circular letter addressed to all the mints of Mexico, asking for information about the amounts coined in each, during the years of 1857 to 1867, failed to bring in a report for the mint at Alamos, which is not even mentioned."

The very fact that coins of all denominations bearing the dates of 1864, 1865, 1866 and 1867 are to be found is conclusive proof that the Alamos mint was in operation from 1864 until 1895 at which time it was closed. The information concerning the opening date is corroborated by the statement of Mr. Bastow who obtained the information directly from the officers of the mint, while still in operation or shortly after its closing. This mint was turned into a federal assay office. The personnel of the mint was retained.

From Manuel Larraguibel, last mint master, and from Jorge LeBrun, son of the director of the mint during the years 1878 to 1883, and from Lauro B. Quiros, all old residents of Alamos, I learned that the Alamos mint was established with modern machinery propelled by steam power, but that hand presses were available and used for coining silver pieces of small denomination such as half and one real pieces, which from 1874 became five and ten cent pieces.

During most of its life, this mint was leased to private individuals or companies, and although the official records only show the leasing of this mint for the years of 1876 to 1880 inclusive, I have obtained from the above mentioned sources, statements that several companies leased this mint. The most prominent and the one which had it under contract the longest, was the English firm of Symon and Camacho. Several attempts to obtain a copy of this or any other contract have proven futile.

At the time of this writing, 12 February 1933, Manuel Larraguibel, the last mint master of Alamos , a grand old man 83 years of age, whom I had the privilege of knowing in Alamos some thirty years ago, and now a resident of Navojoa, Sonora, Mexico, writes to me and states that the mint in Alamos was established by Robert R. Symon, a British subject, and that in later years Robert R. Symon and Sebastian Camacho, formed a company under the name of Symon y Camacho and leased the mints of Alamos , Hermosillo , Culiacan and Durango .

On 1 March 1933, Manuel Larraguibel writes: "No coin could carry any other initials than those of the assayer" and that "Frequently when the dies for the new year were not available, those for the previous year were used."

In the "Anuario estadistico de la Republica Mexicana" for 1900, No. 8, and issued by Antonio Penafiel, I find the following information having reference to the mint at Hermosillo: "It seems that the opening of the mint at Hermosillo took place during the year 1852, but the first records of the amounts coined in this mint are dated 1861, in which year, this mint as well as that of Alamos, was leased to private individuals by the state government for a period of twenty years. The terms of the lease were that for the first ten years they could coin gold, silver and copper, without paying revenue to the government, having also the right of importing free of customs duty all the necessary materials for the operation of these mints, during a similar period. At the end of twenty years the title of the property was automatically to revert back to the state." (Free translation .)

Robert R. Symon, a British subject, received authority to establish the Hermosillo mint from the local government of Sonora. Later the same privilege was extended to the same individual for the establishment of the Alamos mint. Mr. Symon was ably assisted by Quintin Douglas, an American engineer, in the establishment and manufacture of the mint machinery. Manuel Larraguibel in letter of 30 March 1933, says: "In Alamos we used at the mint a set of large scales, so well constructed that when weighing 30 or 40 kilos (66 to 88 pounds ) it would register half a gram (8 grains ). These balances were made by Mr. Douglas."

Nothing is mentioned about the revenue that the lessors were to pay during the second ten years of operation, but two facts are definitely established; first that the mint at Alamos was founded in 1861, or at least contracted for, and operations must have begun almost immediately, as Manuel Larraguibel, the last mint master, in his letter of 7 February 1933, gives the year of 1862 as the date in which the first minting operations took place in Alamos; and secondly that the state and not the federal government was responsible for the establishment of these mints.

Date of closing of the mint

The Alamos mint was closed by order of the federal government on the last day of June of 1895. The machinery and dies were sent to the mint at Culiacan, State of Sinaloa. The building occupied by the mint continued as the federal assay office and the officers of the mint were retained until 1911, and discontinued after that.

The mint building

The building was located on the corner of "Calle de las Flores" and " Callejon de la Casa de Moneda." This street is only two blocks long. After the government had given up the federal assay office, the building was then purchased by Reynaldo Ramos, who by using more modern methods of assaying was able to obtain from the discarded tailings left in and around the old mint, a sufficient profit to repay him for his labors. There was also a period in which the whole lot occupied by the mint was excavated to a considerable depth in the belief that there might be a buried treasure, frequently found in the old houses of the city of Alamos. In the latter part of the month of December 1927, it rained in Alamos twenty-four inches in seventy-two hours, and this as well as the excavations that had preceded, caused the walls of the old edifice to crumble. So, today, 25 April, 1933, nothing remains. The useable wood and iron work were transported by Mr. Ramos to Navojoa and used in the construction of another building.

Assayers

The assayers{footnote}lost updated{/footnote} were:

Early Die Lineage of the First Oaxaca Mint

By Kent Ponterio

The early 8 Reales of the first Oaxaca mint reflect a wide variety of interesting die varieties, each drastically different from one another in quality of workmanship and artistic expression. Within the span of a few years, styles range from quite detailed and well-executed to what could be described as among the poorest quality in the entire Cap & Ray series. It is fairly evident from the coins themselves that the Oaxaca mint encountered numerous problems in its early years of production including flatness of strike and improperly annealed dies that wore out or broke prematurely. Clearly, the mint was operating at a technologically level inferior to that of other Mexican mints.

One of the most interesting features of these early coins is that they permit us to correlate the coins to each other and thus trace the die lineage. Several of this period’s early die styles were produced in very small quantities and in some cases, only one set of dies were made. This permits us to link one style to the next in a conclusive manner. For example, the reverse die of the 1858-0 (fig. 2) is the same as that for the 1859-Oa (fig. 3).

However, the obverse die style of the 1859-Oa is unique to this year (figs. 3-4). Coins from this die often have large vertical die crack, sometimes spanning the entire length of the die, confirming that this die style was only used in 1859. Obviously, the die broke and became so damaged that is could no longer be used, leading to a new obverse die style the following year. As is evident from the diagonal die crack (starting at about 7 o’clock), the first issue of 1860 (fig. 5) continued using the same reverse die of the 1859. It appears that this die was retired temporarily since the second issue of 1860 (fig. 6) uses a reverse die unique to this year. However, the second reverse die used in 1860 seems to have not lasted very long. As it is clear from the coin pictured in fig. 6, this reverse die had broken to the point where it could no longer be used. Due to its extreme rarity, it is certain that this reverse die broke fairly early after its production.

The coin pictured in fig. 7 represents a previously unpublished muling in which the obverse die style of 1861-1862 is paired with the reverse die of 1859-1860. Apparently, after the reverse die of 1860 broke, the mint reverted to using the reverse die 1859-1860, since that die was still functional. This coin, along with several other examples was part of a large hoard of Oaxaca mint 8 Reales of this period found in the 1990s.

In terms of the quality of its die workmanship, the coinage of the die style of 1861-1862 can be considered among the crudest in the entire Cap & Ray series. The overall design elements lack artistic refinement, the letters in the legends are placed unevenly and crudely engraved local punches replace worn out or broken punches (e.g., the “EP” of “REPUBLICA”, see figs. 9-12). As with the previous dates in this series, these coins exhibit multiple problems in manufacture, such as flatness of strike, improperly annealed dies, etc. However, unlike the earlier coinage, many different dies were produced in the style of 1861-1862, some examples of this can be seen in figs. 8-12.

In 1863, a reformation took place and remedied many of the problems associated with the coinage issues of the previous two years. Several new die styles were introduced and gradually evolved until the end of 1863, at which point the mint ceased to strike coins until it re-opened in 1867 (see figs. 13-18, for examples).

The San Luis Potosí mint

The San Luis Potosí mint opened late in 1827 and began striking 8 Reales. With the exception of two interruptions Cap and Rays 8 Reales were struck at this mint from its opening until its closing on 1 May 1893. The first occurred during the Maximilian era, when the mint was occupied by Imperial forces from 25 December 1863 until 25 December 1866. Apparently, the mint continued operations issuing Republican coi ns for a brief time after the occupation. Four and eight reales are known dated 1864 and both are very rare. In 1864 this mint issued Imperial type five and ten centavos and in 1866 Pesos with the portrait of Maximilian. It is also possible that the Imperial Government struck coins in the Potosí mint with dies datcd 1863. The second interruption took place when 8 Reales coinage was suspended from 1870-1873 in favor of the Balance Scale Peso.

Mint owners or lessees and their tenures

Assayers and their tenures (as evidence by coinage)