The South African Square Quarter Penny Pattern

[<k>]

Image copyright of Coins and Australia.

Many of us will have seen illustrations of the Australian pattern pennies and halfpennies of 1919–21. These were all square in shape, with rounded corners, and on the reverse they carried a design of a kookaburra. Several suchpatterns were produced with slightly different design variations and legend layouts. These charming pieces were never adopted, which is probably just as well since square coins could not be used in mechanical vending machines, though no doubt there were few such machines around at that time. The actually issued pennies and halfpennies remained round and circulated until Australia adopted a decimal currency in 1966.

[<k>]

Less well known is the fact that South Africa also made similar experiments in the 1920s. The Union of South Africa was a Dominion under the British crown, and its first official national coinage was issued in 1923. Hern's Handbook on South African Coins and Patterns, by the South African numismatist Brian Hern, documents ten different pattern coin types that were produced in 1924 and 1925. Of these, nine were quarter penny variations and one was a half penny.

The common obverse design of these patterns featured Edgar Bertram MacKennal's crowned effigy of King George V that was used on the Imperial overseas coinage of the day. The lone pattern half penny was scalloped and made of bronze, with a diameter of 25.4mm. Its reverse design featured George Kruger-Gray's design of the ship, the Dromedaris—the same ship design that appeared on the actually issued round penny.

[<k>]

All the trial quarter penny coins carried on their reverse the standard sparrows design, also by George Kruger-Gray, which had appeared on the already issued coins of that denomination. Some of these trials were round in shape, some were square with rounded corners, and some were scalloped. The two round versions had a square design struck on a circular blank, making the piece appear round but with a squarish inner rim. One of the trials was square but oriented as a rhombus, similar to the well known Guernsey 10 shillings collector coin of 1966. Of the two square types that were not oriented in rhomboid fashion, one type was stamped on the obverse with the letters
"PAT", to indicate that the piece was a pattern.

[<k>]

Since Hern's Handbook lists these patterns as probably having been minted in England, I asked the Royal Mint if they had retained any examples. The dedicated staff of the Royal Mint Museum found only a single example still in their possession, which is catalogued as item RMM41597. They kindly produced large images for me of the obverse and reverse designs. This particular piece is one that includes the letters "PAT" on the obverse, but otherwise, the obverse and reverse designs are the same as on the issued quarter penny, apart from an ornamental device that appears in each corner of the reverse design.

According to Hern's Handbook, only two examples are known of this pattern farthing. It is made of bronze, with a diameter of 19.2mm and a weight of 3.6 grams.

[<k>]

The obverse of the square quarter penny pattern.

Image © Royal Mint Museum.

[<k>]

The reverse of the square quarter penny pattern.

Image © Royal Mint Museum.

[<k>]

Trials and patterns are experimental in nature and test the feasibility of a potential coin type.

For whatever reasons, this particular pattern did not pass the test, but it is a fascinating historical oddity.

[<k>]

Here you see the actually issued South African quarter penny of 1924.

Image copyright of Heritage Auctions.

[Figleaf]

Inneresting. At the time, both mints were colonial and considered part of the old or white Commonwealth, considered "civilised" and loyal.

I can only speculate on why these tests were made. I would think that the UK farthing was in the well-known situation of high demand, little use (compare e.g. the US cent or the 1 and 2 eurocent today) and possibly making a farthing cost more than a quarter penny. That would have made a case for a cheaper farthing. Since an aluminium farthing would not have done and a holed coin was equally out of the question, the most obvious option would have been a smaller coin, but that space was already taken by silver coins. A coin that could pass for a higher denomination when silvered would surely be rejected. A squarish farthing would have solved the conundrum.

So why test the solution outside the UK? The UK was at the summit of its power and highly conservative in the 1920s, which makes sense. If you are at the top of the food chain, you don't want change. The powers that be might have been afraid of a backlash against any change. Perhaps the thinking was "if it works in the colonies, there would be good argument to do the same thing in the home country. The precedent is of course the Indian coins with the incuse-lettered edge produced in Birmingham that were the predecessors of the cartwheels.

The only argument against the squarish coins I can think of is that vending machines have difficulty handling them, so e.g. the Post Office or the Railroad would be against the idea. In that sense, these coins can be thought of as forerunners of the 50p.

Peter

[<k>]

The only argument against the squarish coins I can think of is that vending machines have difficulty handling them, so e.g. the Post Office or the Railroad would be against the idea. In that sense, these coins can be thought of as forerunners of the 50p.

Peter

Vending machines do not have difficulty handling square or squarish coins. They simply cannot handle them at all.

The seven-sided UK 50 pence had to be given curved edges so that it would roll inside vending machines.

Coins with an even number of coins roll less easily than those with an odd number.

The 12-sided UK pound therefore needed special tweaks before it would roll properly.

[Pabitra]

There are newer techonology vending machines which need to scan the face of the coin and use tray instead of slot. The coin need not roll down. Such machines will happily accept non circular coins.

[<k>]

I see. They certainly were not around in the days of this particular pattern, of course.