The Medallic History of the United States of America 1776-1876 Part 1

The Medallic History of the United States of America 1776-1876.

by J. F. Loubat.

INTRODUCTION.

Medals, by means of the engraver's art, perpetuate in a durable form and within a small compa.s.s which the eye can embrace at a glance, not only the features of eminent persons, but the dates, brief accounts, and representations (direct or emblematical) of events; they rank, therefore, among the most valuable records of the past, especially when they recall men, deeds, or circ.u.mstances which have influenced the life of nations. How much light has been furnished for the study of history by the concise and faithful testimony of these silent witnesses! The importance of medals is now universally acknowledged, and in almost every country they are preserved with reverent care, and made the subject of costly publications, ill.u.s.trated by elaborate engravings, with carefully prepared letter-press descriptions and notes. Up to the present time no thorough work devoted to the medals of the United States of America has been published. When I entered upon the task, several years ago, of investigating their history (p. viii) for the period embracing the first century of the Republic, I had little conception of the difficulties to be encountered. The search involved a very considerable expenditure of time and labor, but at last I have the satisfaction of offering to the public the result of my investigations, completed according to the original plan.

Although our political history measures but a hundred years, it records so many memorable deeds, and the names of so many ill.u.s.trious citizens, that our medals form, even now, an historically valuable collection, to say nothing of the great artistic merit of some of them. During the War of Independence alone, how many exploits, how many heroes do we find worthy of being thus honored! How numerous would have been our medals if Congress had not been imbued with the conviction that only the very highest achievements are ent.i.tled to such a distinction, and that the value of a reward is enhanced by its rarity! In voting those struck after the War of 1812-'15 with Great Britain, and after that of 1846-'47 with Mexico, the same discretion was shown. There was still greater necessity for reserve during the late Civil War, and only two were presented during that painful period: one to Ulysses S. Grant, then a major-general, for victories, and another to Cornelius Vanderbilt, in acknowledgment of his free gift of the steamship which bore his name.

Similar national rewards have been earned also by deeds which interest humanity, science, or commerce; as, for instance, the laying of the transatlantic telegraph cable, the expedition of Doctor Kane to the Arctic Seas, and the beneficence of George Peabody. If to these are added the Indian peace medals, bearing the effigies of our (p. ix) successive Presidents, the various elements which compose the official medals of the United States of America will have been enumerated.

As neither t.i.tles of n.o.bility nor orders of knighthood exist in our country, Congress can bestow no higher distinction on an American citizen than to offer him the thanks of the nation, and to order that a medal be struck in his honor. I cannot do better than to quote here the words of General Winfield Scott, when he received from President Monroe the medal voted to him for the battles of Chippewa and Niagara:

"With a deep sense of the additional obligation now contracted, I accept at the hands of the venerable Chief Magistrate of the Union the cla.s.sic token of the highest reward a free man can receive: the recorded approbation of his country."

Our medals number eighty-six in all, most of which were struck by order of Congress in honor of citizens of the United States. Seventeen belong to the period of the Revolution, twenty-seven to the War of 1812-'15, four to the Mexican War, and two to the Civil War. Only five were voted to foreigners: one, in 1779, to Lieutenant-Colonel de Fleury, a French gentleman in the Continental Army, for gallant conduct at Stony Point; another, in 1858, to Dr. Frederick Rose, an a.s.sistant-surgeon in the British Navy for kindness and humanity to sick seamen on one of our men-of-war; and the others, in 1866, to three foreign merchant captains, Messrs. Creighton, Low, and Stouffer, who, in December, 1853, went to the aid of the steamer San Francisco, (p. x) thereby "rescuing about five hundred Americans."

Seven of the eighty-six medals do not owe their origin to a congressional vote: two which were struck in the United Netherlands (1782), one to commemorate their acknowledgment of the United States of America, and the other the treaty of amity and commerce between the two countries; that known as Libertas Americana (1783); the two in honor of Franklin (1784-1786); the Diplomatic medal (1790); and lastly that struck in memory of the conclusion of the treaty of commerce between the United States and France (1822). Although these cannot properly be cla.s.sed as official medals, their historic importance and value as works of art ent.i.tle them to a place in our national collection.

Nearly all of the early medals were executed by French engravers, whose names alone are a warrant for the artistic merit of their work.

We are indebted to Augustin Dupre, who has been called the "great Dupre" for the Daniel Morgan, the Nathaniel Greene, the John Paul Jones, the Libertas Americana, the two Franklin, and the Diplomatic medals; to Pierre Simon Duvivier for those of George Washington, de Fleury, William Augustine Washington, and John Eager Howard; to Nicolas Marie Gatteaux for those of Horatio Gates, Anthony Wayne, and John Stewart; and to Bertrand Andrieu and Raymond Gayrard for the one in commemoration of the signature of the treaty of commerce between France and the United States.

Congress had not yet proclaimed the independence of the thirteen United Colonies when, on March 25, 1776, it ordered that a gold (p. xi) medal be struck and presented to "His Excellency, General Washington,"

for his "wise and spirited conduct in the siege and acquisition of Boston." But this, although the first one voted, was not engraved until after the de Fleury and the Libertas Americana pieces, both of which were executed in Paris under the direction of Benjamin Franklin.

The following letter gives the date of the de Fleury medal:

To His Excellency Mr. HUNTINGTON, Pa.s.sy, March 4, 1780.

President of Congress.

Sir: Agreeably to the order of Congress, I have employed one of the best artists here in cutting the dies for the medal intended for M. de Fleury. The price of such work is beyond my expectation, being a thousand livres for each die. I shall try if it is not possible to have the others done cheaper.

With great respect I have the honour to be, Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant, B. FRANKLIN.

This medal was shown in the exhibition of the Royal Academy in Paris in 1781. The Libertas Americana piece was struck in 1783.

Six of the earliest of the series were designed under the supervision of Colonel David Humphreys, namely, those for Generals Washington, Gates, Greene, and Morgan, and Lieutenant-Colonels Washington and Howard. To insure a due observance of the laws of numismatics, and that they might bear comparison with the best specimens of modern times, Colonel Humphreys asked the aid of the French Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres in the composition of the designs. (p. xii) He explained his action in this respect to the President of Congress in the following letter:

To His Excellency Paris, March 18, 1785.

THE PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS.

Sir: Before I left America, I made application to the Superintendent of Finances for the sword which Congress had been pleased to order, by their resolution of the 17th of November, 1781, to be presented to me, in consequence of which Mr. Morris informed me verbally that he would take the necessary arrangements for procuring all the honourary presents which had been directed to be given to different officers during the late war, and requested that I would undertake to have them executed in Europe. Some time after my arrival here, I received the inclosed letter[1] from him, accompanied with a list of medals, etc., and a description of those intended for General Morgan and Colonels Washington and Howard.

Upon the receipt of these doc.u.ments I did not delay to make the proper inquiries from the characters who were the best skilled in subjects of this nature, and after having spoken to some of the first artists, I was advised to apply to the Abbe Barthelemy, member of the academies of London, Madrid, Cortona, and Hesse-Ca.s.sel, and actual keeper of the King's Cabinet of Medals and Antiquities, at whose instance I wrote a letter to the Royal Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres, of which a copy is inclosed. Being informed at the same time that the description of medals for General Morgan, etc., was not in the style and manner such medals were usually executed, I took the liberty of suspending the execution of them, until I could learn whether it is the pleasure of Congress to have them performed _exactly_ in the manner prescribed--which shall be done accordingly, in case I should not be honoured with further instructions on the subject before their approaching recess.

The medals voted for the capture of Stony Point have been, or I believe may be, all struck from the die originally engraved to furnish one of them for Colonel de Fleury.

As to the swords in question, it is proposed to have them all constructed in precisely the same fashion, the hilt to be of silver, round which a foliage of laurel to be enameled in (p. xiii) gold in such a manner as to leave a medallion in the centre sufficient to receive the arms of the United States on one side, and on the reverse an inscription in English, "The United States to Colonel Meigs, July 25, 1777," and the same for the others.

The whole ten, executed in this manner, may probably cost about three hundred louis d'or, which is (as I have been informed) but little more than was paid for the sword which some time since was presented on the part of the United States to the Marquis de la Fayette.

I have the honour to be, with the most perfect respect, D. HUMPHREYS.

P.S. I forgot to mention that, in order to have the medals for General Morgan, etc., executed in the manner originally proposed, it will be necessary for me to have more particular information of the numbers on both sides, of the killed, wounded, prisoners, trophies, etc., which the enemy lost in the action of the Cowpens.

[Footnote 1: I have not been able to find this letter.]

The following is the letter to the Royal Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres, referred to by Colonel Humphreys in the above:

Paris, March 14, 1785.

Mr. DACIER, Perpetual Secretary of the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres, Rue Chabanais, Paris.

Sir: Having it in charge to procure the honourary presents which (during the late war) have been voted by Congress to several meritorious officers in their service, particularly three medals in gold, one for General Washington, another for General Gates, and a third for General Greene; and, being extremely desirous that these medals should be executed in a manner grateful to the ill.u.s.trious personages for whom they are designed, worthy the dignity of the sovereign power by whom they are presented, and calculated to perpetuate the remembrance of those great events which they are intended to consecrate to immortality, I therefore take the liberty to address, through you, Sir, the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres, on the subject, and entreat that this learned body will be pleased to honour me, as soon as (p. xiv) may be convenient, with their advice and sentiments respecting the devices and inscriptions proper for the before mentioned medals. A memoir,[2] which has been left in the hands of M.

Barthelemy, one of their members, will give the necessary information.

In addressing so respectable an a.s.sembly of _literati_ I do not think myself permitted to enlarge on the importance of this subject, because they must know, much better than I can inform them, in how great a degree such monuments of public grat.i.tude are calculated to produce a laudable emulation, a genuine love of liberty, and all the virtues of real patriotism, not only among the innumerable generations who are yet to people the wastes of America, but on the human character in general. Nor do I make those apologies for the trouble I am now giving, which would be requisite, did I not feel a conviction that whatever is interesting to the national glory of America, to the good of posterity, or to the happiness of the human race, cannot be indifferent to a society composed of the most enlightened and liberal characters in Europe, fostered by the royal protection of a monarch whose name will forever be as dear to the United States as it will be glorious in the annals of mankind.

Being so unfortunate as not to be able to write myself in French, my intimate friend and brave companion in arms, M. le marquis de la Fayette, has had the goodness to make a translation of this letter into that language, which I inclose herewith.

I have the honour to be, with the most perfect respect, Sir, your most obedient and most humble servant, D. HUMPHREYS.

[Footnote 2: I have not been able to find any trace of this memoir in the archives of the French Academy.]

A letter written by Franklin, about the same time, to John Jay, then Secretary for Foreign Affairs, is of much interest in this connection:

To the Honourable John JAY, Pa.s.sy, May 10, 1785.

Secretary for Foreign Affairs.

P.S. The striking of the medals being now in agitation here, I send the inclosed for consideration.

_A thought concerning the Medals that are to be struck by (p. xv) order of Congress._

The forming of dies in steel to strike medals or money, is generally with the intention of making a great number of the same form.

The engraving those dies in steel is, from the hardness of the substance, very difficult and expensive, but, once engraved, the great number to be easily produced afterward by stamping justifies the expense, it being but small when divided among a number.

Where only one medal of a kind is wanted, it seems an unthrifty way to form dies for it in steel to strike the two sides of it, the whole expense of the dies resting on that medal.

It was by this means that the medal voted by Congress for M. de Fleury cost one hundred guineas, when an engraving of the same figures and inscriptions might have been beautifully done on a plate of silver of the same size for two guineas.

The ancients, when they ordained a medal to record the memory of any laudable action, and do honour to the performer of that action, struck a vast number and used them as money. By this means the honour was extended through their own and neighbouring nations, every man who received or paid a piece of such money was reminded of the virtuous action, the person who performed it, and the reward attending it, and the number gave such security to this kind of monuments against perishing and being forgotten, that some of each of them exist to this day, though more than two thousand years old, and, being now copied in books by the arts of engraving and painting, are not only exceedingly multiplied but likely to remain some thousands of years longer.

The man who is honoured only by a single medal is obliged to show it to enjoy the honour, which can be done only to a few and often awkwardly. I therefore wish the medals of Congress were ordered to be money, and so continued as to be convenient money, by being in value aliquot parts of a dollar.

Copper coins are wanting in America for small change. We have none but those of the King of England. After one silver or gold medal is struck from the dies, for the person to be honoured, they may be usefully employed in striking copper money, or in some cases small silver.