Odd and Obsolete:
North Carolina’s Wallpaper Note?
During the Civil War, the South issued much paper money, not just the famous notes of the Confederacy, but also issues from the Southern States, banks and merchants. But the war cut the South off from its suppliers of paper and steel plate printing technology, resources responsible for the great beauty of paper money in the 1850’s. Many Civil War era notes were simply printed, sometimes using the reverse of remaindered paper money to conserve paper.
The 50 cent scrip note of North Carolina’s Greensboro’ Mutual Life Insurance and Trust Company, dated March 1, 1862, is known as the wallpaper note, because it is allegedly printed on wallpaper pressed into service as note paper. The paper is tan with black lettering and figures. It is embellished with the banner "50 CENTS" in the center, the large fleur-de-lis-like figure in the top right, "C" on the right, and "CENTS" to the left, all in dark yellow-orange. The note takes its name from the pattern of smaller fleurs, printed in green, that constitute the patterned background for the note.
But is it really wallpaper? Not likely. The best evidence for this conclusion is that the pattern is contained within the note borders, at least on the sides and top of this example, and probably also at the bottom, although the close trimming there doesn’t permit a similar conclusion. Wallpaper would have a pattern larger than the note’s approximately 6 ½ by 3 inch size.
The background pattern exists for a couple of purposes: 1) it adds eye appeal to the note, perhaps contributing to its acceptability to the public, and 2) the color and design complexity provide a degree of counterfeit protection. The orange “protectors,” as these devices are called, serve the same purposes, and such usage was common on obsolete paper money.
The note was printed by Sterling, Campbell, & Albright of Greensboro. Observe that the city name is spelled two ways: The current spelling for the company name and the printer’s location (the imprint is in tiny print in the lower left edge) and Greensborough for the place name at center left.
The “wallpaper note” designation adds a romantic touch to this note, but it’s a misleading name. The note is, however, an attractive example of how the South used available resources to produce an interesting and appealing piece paper money.
February 3, 2001
Odd and Obsolete:
Two Notes, One Signature
During the difficult economic times of 1837, there was a proliferation of scrip, paper money issued by merchants for use as small change. Some of the scrip was payable in the commodities the merchant sold. The Philadelphia note shown in Figure 1 is payable in beef. It bears the distinctive signature of L. Shuster, whom we might conclude was a butcher. He tells us he operated stall 31 High Street Market, corner of Front.
Figure 1
Long after I obtained the beef note, I saw the note in Figure 2 on eBay, and recognized the signature, the same L. Shuster, and I bought it. It is a note of the Corporation of Spring Garden, signed by the assistant treasurer. Oddly, the note also lists Philadelphia with the date. Both notes are dated in May 1837. The signatures seem clearly from the same person, although the beef note signature is bolder and slants to a greater degree.
Figure 2
If L. Shuster was a merchant in Philadelphia and also assistant treasurer of Spring Garden, we might conclude that he lived in Spring Garden, which ought to be within 1837 commuting distance of his shop. Could this be verified?
I went to my road atlas. There is no High Street in Philadelphia, but Shuster's stall could be at the corner of Market and Front Streets, a prime downtown location. There is also a Spring Garden Street not too far from this intersection.
Spring Garden as a municipality exists in my road atlas, but it is a suburb of York, about 100 miles from Philadelphia, no 1837 commute.
Could I get better information from a contemporary map? I went the the map collection of the library at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a great resource. The helpful librarian quickly found 1811 and 1838 Philadelphia street maps.
From the 1838 map, what is now Market Street is listed as High or Market Street--both names were apparently used then. Spring Garden was a community of 11,141 people just north and a bit west of the downtown area, clearly within 1837 commuting distance. Philadelphia in 1838 had "more than" 200,000 people. Apparently once a separate municipality, Spring Garden is now a part of Philadelphia. The present Spring Garden street runs through that area. The 1811 map provided additional information. Market/High Street is listed simply as High Street. Spring Garden is there, though it is much smaller.
Markets in the middle of High Street were the center of an active commerce, as shown in the illustration from the Philadelphia Inquirer, about 1838, Figure 3.
Figure 3
The notes have more to tell. The Corporation of Spring Garden notes are listed in Richard T. Hoober's Pennsylvania Obsolete Notes and Scrip, the standard catalog for this state. Hoober displays a 50 cent note, Figure 4 (that note is now in my collection). The date of both Spring Garden notes is May 15, 1837. But the signers are clearly different. Were there two assistant treasurers at the same time? That certainly is possible. Another possibility is suggested by the word "counterfeit" lightly written on the back of the note in Figure 1. Could this be either a counterfeit or a genuine note with an illegal signature? Maybe, but it seems unlikely that L. Shuster, an established business man with his own scrip, would risk illegally signing his name on a one dollar note. Figure 5 shows a likely counterfeit from Spring Garden. Notice the crudeness of the Washington portrait. Hoober lists no such note.
Figure 4
Figure 5
More could probably be learned about L. Shuster and the government officials of Spring Garden, but that would almost certainly require a trip to Philadelphia to examine local historical records such as city directories and municipality records. Perhaps a Philadelphian reading this article is moved to carry this work to the next step.
Learn more about the map collection at UNC-CH at http://www.lib.unc.edu/maps
Odd and Obsolete:
South Bend Banknotes
A few months ago I obtained an obsolete banknote from my hometown, South Bend, Indiana, shown in figures 1 and 2. The Bank of the State of Indiana had branches in several Indiana communities, including South Bend. The standard catalog of Indiana Obsolete Notes and Scrip, by Wendell Wolka, Jack Vorhies, and Donald Schramm, didn't list a surviving example from South Bend, but records indicated there was a branch there. The dealer I bought the note from, a man of considerable experience and knowledge, believes it to be a genuine note, as compared to a contemporary counterfeit. Counterfeits often survive in greater numbers because genuine notes of honest banks (and this one was) were usually redeemed and destroyed.
Figure 1
Figure 2
I was curious about the signers of the note. Most banknotes of the era were signed by ranking bank officials, usually the president and the cashier. In nineteenth century banking, the position of cashier was one of high rank, without the clerical connotation that the term now possesses. I had recently read a 1927 history of South Bend, and one of the prominent citizens in business and church matters was Horatio Chapin. His adult life was contemporaneous with the note's date, 1857. The signature, shown in detail in figure 3, could be that of H. Chapin, even though it looks more like A. Chupin. But was he ever a banker? Wolka's book didn't mention him. I did a little research in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill library, and found two different journal articles that say that he did become a prominent banker in South Bend. That discovery was really exciting! Wolka's book does state that Hugh McCulloch was the bank president, and it pictures genuine notes from other branches with McCulloch's signature, clearly the same signature as on my note. McCulloch later became the United States' first Comptroller of the Currency and also Secretary of the Treasury under several presidents.
Figure 3
Another note in my collection, one from the State Bank of Indiana, branch at South Bend, provides an interesting comparison (see figure 4). This bank preceded the Bank of the State of Indiana, and my note is dated 1848. Unlike the 1857 note with its distinguishing back, the 1848 note has a blank back, the norm for obsolete currency. The note design is common for all branches, with the branch name filled in on issue. I had not earlier paid attention to the signers, but was thrilled to see that this note, too, was signed by Chapin as cashier. The president was James Morrison, not that this is at all obvious from the note's signature. But Wolka provides this information, and illustrates notes from other branches with the same signature as my note. He lists any note from this bank from the South Bend branch as rarity R-7, 1-5 known.
Figure 4
I happened to show the 1848 note to Wolka, who was at the convention where I found it. He indicated that they were not as rare as once thought, and that all examples he had seen were contemporary counterfeits, including mine. He is the Indiana expert, and I shouldn't doubt him, but I do.
Figure 5 shows the Chapin signature from 1848 blown up. It looks a lot like the other signature, but not close enough that I am sure. When I can locate a handwriting expert, I hope to learn more! There is another step I will take, and that is to write the Northern Indiana Historical Society, located in South Bend, and ask if they have Chapin's signature in their archives.
Figure 5
One of the joys of collecting obsolete paper money is that the notes are usually also historical documents with autographs from local people, many who remain obscure, but a few who became famous. I treasure my two South Bend notes not only as money collectables, but even more as personal artifacts entwined with the place of my origin.
To read more articles from the Odd and Obsolete series visit Bob's webpage at http://www.unc.edu/~rcs/odd/index.htm
ã Copyright Raleigh Coin Club - 2001, 2002
The RCC grants permission to reprint any articles not copyrighted by the author for non-profit educational purposes only, provided the Raleigh Coin Club and the author are cited as the original source.