St. Patrick Coinage. Who/where & when???

I started to really pay attention to the St. Patrick edges about three
years ago. I have examined the Griffee, Ivey and my own collection and
have taken notes about each coin. This adds up to about three hundred
coins. There is a midwestern collector as well a Boston collector who
are also very interested in the edges and this adds up to another three
hundred plus coins. At this point in time there are several dozen high
grade farthings that were bought already in plastic and they have not
been broken out yet. I expect they will be when push comes to shove but
that is not my decision. The situation with the high grade shillings is
similar but different. They are scattered here and there and most of
them are now entombed which is a real problem for edge research. So I
expect the farthings will have to be the basis for the initial research
and after we have come to some conclusions the people with slabbed
shillings might be interested enough to break them out and study them on
a one by one basis.

I like Brian and very much respect the effort he has put into his St.
Patrick research. However I am not onboard with either the "one step
process" or the late 1660s and Lord Ormonde.

We need to think outside of the box and that may mean outside of England
or Ireland as far as point of origin. I will throw out this bone, the
Vatican was very involved with the Confederation and the Civil War, much
more than I realized when I first started looking into that time period.
This brings into play many of the mints of papist Europe.
Stan Stephens

In and around 1663 the screwpress entered the Tower Mint. Here is why ...

An Act to Prevent Counterfeiting and Clipping the Coin of this
Kingdom." London: Charles Bill and the Executrix of Thomas Newcomb,
1695. [2], 431-440pp. ESTC t300105. [with] An Act for Remedying the
Ill State of the Coin of the Kingdom." London: Charles Bill and the
Executrix of Thomas Newcomb, 1695. [2] 3-18,[2]pp. Wing E1059B.
ESTCR r22792. [with] An Act for taking off the Obligation and
Incouragement for Coining Guineas for a certain time therein
mentioned." London: Charles Bill and the Executrix of Thomas
Newcomb, 1695. [2], 363-367,[1]pp. ESTC r222805. [with] An Act to
Incourage the Bringing Plate into the Mint to be Coined, and for the
further Remedying the ill State of the Coin of the Kingdom. London:
Charles Bill and the Executrix
11 Acts of Wiliam III about the 1695-9 Recoinage of England.]

Book Description: London: Folio. Charles Bill and the Executrix of
Thomas Newcomb, 1695-8. Disbound acts, minor soiling. First
editions. "Before the 1660s all English coin was produced by hand;
contemporaries called it ÒhammeredÓ money. It wasnÕt uncommon for
ÒclippersÓ to scrape away small amounts of precious metal from the
edges, pass the coin back into circulation, and pocket the illicit
proceeds. In 1662, in a bid to halt clipping, the Mint introduced
mechanized production; ÒmilledÓ coins bore a serrated edge that made
it easy to detect when a coin had been clipped. But many older
hammered silver coins remained in circulation, and upon these
clippers went on plying their trade. Hammered coins naturally shrank
over time, but so gradually that they continued circulating at
normal face values. Clipping quickened with the onset of the Nine
Years War (1689-97); by 1695 hammered coin had dwindled to a mere
50% of its original weight (compared to 85% in 1688). Rumours spread
early in 1695 that it was about to be de-monetized. Henceforth it
would only be worth its value by weight as bullion Ñ about half its
value as coin. People became reluctant to hold clipped silver and
strove to acquire gold coin instead. The latter had no officially-
declared value at the time; with rising demand its market price rose
by almost 50%. Enterprising merchants started importing gold to
profit from the large difference between foreign and domestic
prices. This in turn lowered the London-Antwerp exchange rate by
some 16% in just a few months. As this dramatically increased the
cost of supporting the large English army fighting in Flanders, the
government was forced to take action. It was soon resolved to have
all hammered silver coin melted down and manufactured into milled
money. The big question was whether and how to compensate people for
the resulting loss in face value, estimated at £2 million Ñ more
than the governmentÕs entire annual expenditure in peacetime, coming
on top of the already very heavy burden of war taxes. William
Lowndes, Treasury Secretary, proposed raising the face value of all
silver coin by 25% (for instance the 5s. crown would be rated at 6s.
3d.). This would directly lower the losses on clipped coin and
confer additional benefits upon those owning full-weight silver
coin. Philosopher and monetary theorist John Locke complained this
would benefit mostly bankers and tax collectors (whom he believed
principally responsible for clipping in the first place) and
recommended letting the losses fall upon those presently holding
clipped coin. In the end Parliament appointed a new tax sufficient
to cover the estimated losses, and granted compensation only to
those bringing in their clipped coin for tax payments or war loans.
On 4 May 1696 hammered silver money was officially demonetized and
the work of recoinage begun in earnest. Under the guidance of Sir
Isaac Newton, recently appointed Warden, steps were taken to
increase production capacity at the Tower Mint in London. Smaller
temporary mints were also opened in six other cities across the
country. Unfortunately production proved much slower than
anticipated; by the end of June only 12% of the eventual output had
been returned to circulation. Since public confidence in bank notes
had collapsed in May and Parliament had forced down the market price
of gold coins during the spring (causing further large losses for
many), a general currency crisis ensued. Over the summer months
there was widespread resort to barter and the government found it
almost impossible to borrow or to pay the English army in Flanders.
Financially exhausted, William III resolved to pursue a peace with
France. The Treaty of Ryswick was signed in 1697. The recoinage
itself was not completed until 1699.

This should answer Stan Stephens recent inquiry that the
counterfeiter was most likely producing hammered counterfeit money
unless he was moonlighting with the new equipment. Can't be certain -
of course ...

John Lorenzo

Is there any MODERN analytical techniques which could assist in
identifying this coinage. Anyone in this group have any ideas?