LOT Old Heritage Auctions  /  2007 Signature Coin - Charlotte, NC #434  / 

2441

Louis & Mac Kay Silver Ingot. 4.9 ounces, 999 fine, No.

Currency:USD Category:Coins & Paper Money Start Price:26.00 USD Estimated At:1.00 - 1,000,000.00 USD
Louis & Mac Kay Silver Ingot. 4.9 ounces, 999 fine, No.
<B>Louis & Mac Kay Silver Ingot.</B></I> 4.9 ounces, 999 fine, No. 64. Cataloged by Fred Holabird.<BR><BR><B>Introduction</B></I><BR> This silver ingot, which strongly resembles a mid to late-nineteenth century ingot, is particularly difficult to research. It bears a number of important physical attributes which fit the mold of non-western nineteenth century assayers. Assayers working in remote mining regions of the western hemisphere often eluded census takers, who canvassed by directory companies, and they rarely advertised in local newspapers, if there were any. Additionally, miners were on the lookout for massive silver deposits after the discovery of the Comstock Lode in 1859. Important silver discoveries were made in places such as Ontario, Canada and Broken Hills, Australia. Also, huge silver deposits were exploited in Mexico, generally funded by Americans. Europeans funded silver mines in South America and Wales. Ingots from these locales are only now coming to light. Is the Louis & Mac Kay ingot here one of these? By the way, as research continues into the history of ingots, we only now have located what are thought to be the oldest ingots extant, a group of small gold ingots dating from 2000 to 2200 BC found in Ireland, now residing in Dublin.<BR> Research in American silver districts is also problematic. Early Idaho discoveries had the same problems with census, directories, and newspapers. Maine was a flash-in-the-pan silver rush from about 1879-1882. Other silver rushes shared similar problems. One thing is certain. The more remote the mining camp, the less the historical record exists or reflects specific business activities today.<BR><BR><B>The Louis & Mac Kay Silver Ingot</B></I> This ingot presents a number of problems in historical research. These might be summarized into the following list:<BR><BR> 1. There are no persons with the surnames Louis or Mackay or Mac Kay in an independently prepared and researched assayer database of more than 6,000 entries compiled from American directories, newspaper advertisements, and printed references.<BR> 2. There are no persons in the entire U.S. Census in 1880 with these surnames working as assayers or jewelers, with the exception of three jewelers of the name Louis in 1880.<BR> 3. No partnerships were found with these two names in California or Nevada records.<BR> 4. In a scan of census data from 1870-1900 there are almost no common Louis and Mackay names as miners in specific geographic locales.<BR> 5. The only locales of commonality in the two names are in Wales and the UK, but none were miners. In these cases, each of the people with the surname Louis was of French origin, an important tie to the use of troy ounces on the ingot.<BR><BR> The above data are clearly indicative that Louis & Mackay (or Mac Kay) were not long-term assayers or refiners who regularly worked in mainstream mining or refining circles over several year periods, so they would be easily visible in directory research.<BR> Exceptions to this are the secluded mining regions of America, where few, if any, written records survive. Examples of these would be the Georgia and North Carolina mining regions, where directory coverage is almost non-existent. As an example, an 1879 Georgia State Directory lists Dahlonega as "the most active mining region in the state," yet does not list one single miner, mining company, or mining related business, such as assaying. Other areas such as Unionville, Nevada and remote regions of Arizona or New Mexico are also not covered by directories or the census. Many mining camp newspapers no longer exist, particularly from the smaller mining camps, adding to the lack of definitive information available. The historical research angle alone can thus be insufficient evidence to preclude an opinion of authenticity.<BR> The description of the ingot itself lends important information. It has no typical assay chips at diametrically opposing corners, a method of testing ingot fineness usually used by the U.S. Mint, U.S. Assay Office, and western assayers. It does, however, exhibit several areas on the obverse that have had the edges carved, which essentially is the same as an assay chip, since the process removed metal for assay. This technique has been observed on other ingots.<BR> The fineness of the ingot at 999 fine would indicate that the ingot was made by a refiner, or at the very least, a jeweler, who may have remelted 999 fine silver. Most nineteenth century jewelers did not have refining capabilities. It should be noted, however, that many silver mines and districts produced very fine silver with few impurities.<BR> Close inspection of the ingot surface with a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM), however, revealed a number of small gold particles embedded in the surface. This is not logical nor usually possible from a refiner, and might be considered typical of a "dirty" lab, such as might exist from an inexperienced lab, a remote facility with inexperienced personnel such as might occur in a remote mining region, or maybe in the back of a coin shop. The latter does not necessarily make sense, because why would someone use the specific names of Louis and Mac Kay?<BR> The punch patterns exhibit signs of extreme crudity, in that all characters are individually punched. The anomaly of the "z" in "Oz" here is that it is not a "z" at all, rather it is an "n" turned sideways. Imagine a skilled assayer losing his "Oz" punch, a tool he used multiple times an hour or day. It is not likely, unless, once again, the ingot was produced from a remote mining region where access to punches is minimal to non-existent.<BR> The flat surface of the obverse of the ingot has the appearance of the surfaces having been ground down flat in places. When individual letters are punched, metal is displaced. The displacement can be lateral or orthogonal (show through on the other side of the ingot if it was thin). Near the period after "999" and the period between "4.9" there is obvious displacement of metal from the punch penetrating the bar's surface, as there is around the "999" itself. The same type of displacement should be present around the letters, but none is visible. In fact, the upper edges of several of the letters exhibit signs of having been ground, particularly over the word "fine" and in the assayer's logo punch. This suggests the surface of the ingot has been carefully worked to remove roughness or to enhance the visual appeal. This could be the product of "cleanup" if the ingot were used in an exhibition, showing off high grade ores and their resultant product: bullion.<BR> Further, the even toned black substance that fills in the digits and letters is also an anomaly, suggesting artificial highlighting, which appears to be the case. Highlighting lightly debossed or embossed letters is a commonplace method of making an item more showy in appearance. A classic example are embossed bottles in museum exhibits, or a badly corroded coin where something such as shoe polish is needed to clearly display the letters and make them readable.<BR> The ingot number placed on the reverse is standard to some assayers. On some of the <I>S.S. Central America</B></I> ingots, and others, we see serial numbers on both the front and back. The low number (No. 64), combined with the crude, individual character-punched logo indicates a short period of operation for the company, otherwise it would have had standard logo punches made for the name, and purchased easily attainable "Oz" and "Fine" punches from regular assay supply houses, such as John Taylor & Sons in San Francisco. Examples of legitimate ingots that utilized this methodology are known from the Owyhee region of southern Idaho, as are original photographs from the 1860s of similar ingots from the same region showing the same attributes.<BR><BR><B>Conclusion.</B></I><BR> Conclusions regarding the source of this ingot are difficult to draw. The summary of findings is as follows:<BR> 1. The ingot's method of assay is non-standard for a western ingot.<BR> 2. Louis & Mac Kay were not long-term assayers from mainstream western mining camps, though they may have operated in a remote location.<BR> 3. A refined ingot of this crudity is not normal.<BR> 4. A refined ingot of silver should have no attendant gold.<BR> 5. The ingot's surface has been enhanced.<BR> 6. The crude punch patterns indicate a short-lived operation.<BR> 7. The ingot could be from a remote American mining camp, or be foreign.<BR> 8. The ingot's surface has been enhanced, suggesting an exhibition ingot.<BR> As yet, it is still not possible to date the pour of metal into an ingot mold. Until then, we won't be able to render an opinion regarding authenticity for crude ingots such as this, which exhibit lots of genuine attributes, but potentially fails other tests. One must keep open the thought that an ingot such as this could have been made in a remote region away from the mainstream western mines, such as during the Maine silver rush of ca. 1880-1882 by an inexperienced assayer who never worked in the business for any length of time.<BR> The ingot itself measures 34 mm wide, 56 mm tall, and 6 mm deep. Light gray patina.<BR><BR><b>Shipping:</b> Coins & Currency (<a target="_blank" href="http://www.heritageauctions.com/common/shipping.php">view shipping information</a>)
Sign In to Bookmark Lot