Map

Bombay (Munbai) Mint

Coins were issued from the Bombay mint by:

Europeans	British	Bombay Mint 1672-1717
		Bombay Mint 1717-1799
		Bombay Mint 1800-1830
		Bombay Mint Dr Stewart\'s Patterns
		Bombay Mint 1830-1835
	Portuguese	Luis I
		Luis I (Bombay & Calcutta)

History [1]

See Extracts from the IOR

Also Sainsbury E.B. (1935). A Calendar of the Court Minutes etc. of the East India Company

Also Foster (1911). The English Factories in India

Also Fawcett. The English Factories in India 1670-77

Talboys Wheeler J (1878) A History of the English Settlements in India, p 44, reprinted 2003 by Low Price Publications, Dehli

Tindall G, (1982). City of Gold. The Biography of Bombay. Temple Smith London

Also Dispatches to and from Bombay

XRF Analyis of silver coins XRF Analysis of tin coins

Pridmore has identified references to efforts made by the representatives of the EIC to establish a coinage in Bombay starting in 1668. On 6^th October [2], a report to London included the statement:

It would be expedient also to procure a stamp for copper and tinne for small money of exchange, which is much wanted on this island…

This was followed a short time later with a request [3]:

The next is a licence to coyne moneys that may pass currant upon the island, both silver gold and a small coyne of copper and tynne for exchange; which we designe shall somewhat agree with the present vallue, but not to be the same.

The Directors in London agreed to the proposal in a letter to Surat on 22^nd February 1671 [4]:

We doe thinck it convenient for us to have a coyne of our owne there (Bombay). We would have you therefore consider of such a coyne, soe as it bee not our King’s Majesties or any stampe resembling the same, and of such sorts as will best suite with the traffique and exchange of the country, both in bigger and lesser speties. And if you shall find it necessary to have for change a small sort of copper coin, let it apeare to be what it is; but what you shall coyne of gold and silver, let it have an intrinsique value as to what it is stampt for, that it may be to our honnor and the begetting and preserving the esteeme thereof. But wee would not have you coyne any copper or other inferiour mettall before you coyne gold or silver, for to begin with that would be a disparagement to us.

Following this, a mint was founded in 1672 and the first English coins were struck during that year. These early coins had an English design and only the copper coins achieved wide acceptance as a result.

Dr Fryer visited Bombay in about 1674 and went to the Court of Shivaji where he recorded the following [5]:

The Rajah stopt his ears to all affairs, declaring he had granted all the demands, except those two articles, expressing our money shall go current in his dominions, and his in Bombay;…

The first he accounted unnecessary to be inserted, because he forbids not the passing of any manner of coins: nor, on the other side, can he force his subjects to take those monies whereby they shall be losers;but if our coin be as fine an alloy, and as weighty as the Mogul’s, and other Princes, he will not prohibit it…

Some days after, Narainji Pundit sent word the Rajah had signed their articles, all but that about money

The authority to strike these coins was granted by the English King under a warrant dated 18^th September 1676[6] and confirmed by Letters Patent granted on October 5^th of the same year [7].

Of course, things did not always go smoothly and Bombay had difficulty recruiting and keeping experienced mint staff. Pridmore identified a letter from Bombay to the Surat Council in September 1676 [8], informing them that the chief coiner had run away ‘having stolen another man’s wife’ and those coiners left were really not capable of carrying out the necessary work. Bombay requested a replacement, and Surat agreed to send one.

This obviously didn’t happen because, in July 1677, Bombay sent another missive:

There is a coiner in Surat by name Ruttangee, who did promise y^e late Presid^t to come to Bombay, & did engage to coin o^r Dugonys for 6 ½ Larys p.md., whereas we now pay….Lar w^ch will amo^t to considerable sum yearly if we are but supplied w^th good quantities of Copper; & though he came to no agreem^t for coining of Rup^s & Bujerooks, yet he promised to make y^m 20 p. cent, cheaper yⁿ at present they are made; besides wee are given to understand he is a able workman, which will be of great benefit in making all y^e mony of a true and equall weight, w^ch is very difficult to these coiners not being bred up to the trade

Muddam Kissingees son, by name Bagvandas can inform y^e Hon^rs where he lives. Please hasten him hither w^th all speed possible, we being in great want of coin.

In response to this, Govindji Madharji was sent to Bombay from Surat as chief coiner in August 1677 [9].

The name dugony, used in the extract above is apparently the colloquial name for the copperoon or pice. Pridmore believed that this was derived from do-kani i.e. a piece of two Kani, the Kani being the 1/64 of the mediaeval Delhi silver tanka. In later years the term dugani was applied in general to both copper and tin pice, but in 1677, it referred only to the copperoon. The name was still in use as late as 1825. The silver coins were name Anglinas although their local name seems to have continued as rupee, and the tin coins were called budgerooks.

The production of the anglina and copperoon coins addressed the needs of the island itself, but trade with the mainland continued to be problematic because the English silver coins were not accepted there. The Council at Bombay and the Court of Directors in London tried very hard to get permission from the Moghul Emperor to strike Moghul style coins at Bombay. When this failed, it would appear that attempts were made to get the King of England to authorise the production of this type of coin, and in 1686 they did obtain letters patent that have been interpreted as giving them this power. However, Pridmore has argued convincingly that this was not in fact the case. He records that Bruce under the years 1686/87 [10] remarks:

It having been a subject of fruitless negotiation for many years to obtain permission from the native powers to coin the country money, the Court, in this season, adopted the bolder measure of obtaining authority from the King to institute a mint for the express purpose.

Pridmore cites a copy of the charter granting this authority and dated 12^th April 1686 [11]:

and further we do for us and our successors hereby give and grant unto the said Governour and Company their Successors and Assigns for ever full power licence and authority to Coin in their Fort any species of money usually Coined by the Princes of these Countries only and so as the Moneys to be coined by the said Company or their Order be agreeable to the Standards of the said Princes Mints both in weight and fineness. And that they do not make or coin any European Money or Coin whatsoever and that all money or Coins so to be coined as aforesaid and no otherwise shall be currant in any City Town port or place within the Limits of the same Charters or Letters patents.

Pridmore argues that this Charter merely sanctioned the Company to issue coins equal in weight and fineness to those of India, and did not authorise their imitation or forgery. He also cites a letter from the Court of Directors to the Madras Council showing that they too understood quite clearly the extent of the power now granted, for they specified that the coins to be struck should have an English design. However, as usual, he gives no reference to the source of this information. Nevertheless, he concludes that there is no evidence to support the assertion that the Company assumed it had obtained the right to copy native coins in their mints.

Whatever the reasons, attempts were made in Bombay to strike Moghul style coins in the names of James II and then William & Mary, because rupees with the names of these monarchs exist. The use of the English monarch’s name may have started in the reign of Charles II although no coins with his name have been found. The Emperor stamped on these attempts, and the production of this style of rupee was stopped in about 1697/98 (see later).

An extract from Bruce [12], cited by Pridmore, refers to a report written in the 1705-6 season:

the Mogul had refused to allow us a mint to be established (at Surat) which had obliged them to form one in Bombay Castle to prevent the stoppage of the circulating coin.

As discussed above, the Bombay mint had been established in 1672, and had struck coins for several years. The extract above implies that by early in the eighteenth century minting activity had ceased and was then revived. This is confirmed by entries in the Bombay records of 1705 [13] authorising the production of tin bujerooks, copper pice and, most interestingly, countermarked foreign silver coins. Furthermore certain buildings were allocated to this task [14], implying that there were no buildings being used as a mint at the time and that coining must have been in abeyance for some time before 1705. Pridmore refers to yet another petition sent to the Emperor in 1715 [15] requesting permission to strike the Moghul style coins at the Bombay mint. In it is the following statement:

That on the island of Bombay belonging to the English European siccaes are current.

This statement confirms that English style rupees (anglinas?) were still in circulation. What’s more an entry in the records for 1716 [16] confirms that rupees were being struck in Bombay at that date, though of what type is unknown.

It was not until 1717 that the Company eventually obtained authority to strike coins of Moghul design but bearing the name of the Moghul Emperor. These are known as ‘Munbai’ or ‘Mumbai’ rupees.

Diagram of Bombay c1750 showing position of the mint[17]

The Munbai type of rupee was issued from the Bombay Mint throughout the eighteenth century. However, it was only one of many types of rupee issued by different authorities in the region (e.g. Ahmadabad and Surat rupees). In particular the Surat rupee competed with that of Bombay, and the Nawab of Surat found it convenient to debase his rupee by a few percent from time to time. This practice became worse and worse until on 2^nd November 1788 [18] (later he seems to say 1778??) the Bombay Government decided that it was no longer practicable to continue issuing the Bombay rupee. Pridmore states that there were no rupees issued from the Bombay Mint between January 1791 and November 1800.

As stated above, many different rupees were in circulation in the area of Bombay and many of these were of lower quality then those of the Bombay or Surat rupees. This provided an opportunity for the shroffs, buying the lower quality coins on the mainland at a large discount and importing them to Bombay, where they passed in payment for goods at a lesser discount, or at par.

This was obviously not good for Bombay, and on 14^th February 1729 [19], and again on the 3^rd December 1733 [20], action was taken to try to stop the practice. Thenceforth, payment could only be made in coins of Bombay or Surat, anyone with more than ten rupees worth of coins other than those of Bombay or Surat was instructed to take the coins to the mint for exchange for local coins minus 1% for coinage charges.

The exchange rate of copper to silver was fixed at 80 pice to one rupee. Prior to this, in 1728, the rate had been 72 pice to each rupee

An order from the Directors dated 5^th February 1741 [21], required:

For our satisfaction the assay master must report to you in writing that he hath duly assayed every parcel of rupees and aquaint you whether or not they come up to the standard in fineness and weight. He must enter the same upon Consultation, and, as is the custom at Fort St. George, one of the Council must draw five rupees promiscuously out of each months coinage, and seal them up immediately with his own seal, which must be transmitted to us in the packet.

This order was obviously based on an earlier instruction because an entry in the records confirms that the rupees were selected [22] and sent to Madras following instructions given on 6^th February 1740. The coins seem to have been sent to England for assay because records exist of the results of these tests [23] . Presumably this was a way of checking that the local authorities were complying with instructions because the coins could have been assayed locally after an Assay Master, Mr. William Davis, had been sent out from England. That Mr Davis was in Bombay in May 1741 is confirmed by an archival record of him being asked to provide a report to the Bombay Council specifying the standard for rupees and also how to make them more quickly [24]. In October Mr. Davis proposed that a stamping mill and air furnaces should be constructed to help reduce the costs of producing coins. He was asked to determine the cost of such a mill but more importantly was asked if he could produce silver coins more advantageously than the present minters, to which he replied that he could not [25].

In a consultation of the 25^th March 1748 [26] Council expressed its concern with the way that the mint had been managed and chose three goldsmiths as new managers. However, they were unable to find the necessary security and new regulations for governing the mint were issued. The Mint Master was to have a deputy who was to check the movement of silver in and out of the mint, with the movements signed for by the Mint Master as well as his deputy; the mint was to have two locks with the keys held by different people; the bullion and dies were to be removed to the fort at night; and finally, the Mint Master was to ensure that rupees were regularly assayed and their fineness checked.

By 1771 the Surat rupee had been debased to such an extent that all silver was sent to Surat for coining rather than Bombay because of the greater number of rupees received as a result [27]. Pridmore states that the last significant coinage of silver at the Bombay mint took place in 1774, but detailed records have not been found. At this time any rupees struck at Bombay would have been in the name of Alamgir showing the fixed regnal year 9, so the coins themselves do not provide much information.

Some time after 1774 and before 1788, the Bombay mint seems to have ceased production of silver and this activity was not resumed until the production of the Surat style rupees in 1800. The exact date that the mint ceased production is still unclear, but Pridmore examined a number of sources:

One source gives the year as 1778 (Reference??)

2^nd December 1788 [28] the Bombay Government reported that their mint at Bombay had become useless because of the debasement of the Surat rupee, but do not say when this happened.

Prinsep [29] stated that the coinage of silver in the Bombay mint was suspended for 20 years. Pridmore believed that this may have been copied from Milburn [30] (reference)

Dr H Scott, mint master at Bombay, in a report of 28^th November 1800 [31] stated ‘it is but a few days ago, after a long period, that our silver coinage has begun again’.

From this he concluded that minting of silver coins had stopped in 1778. One reference that might suggest a later date is a description of minting at Bombay written in 1794 by Lieutenant Edward Moor [32], and quoted by both Thurston [33] and Lane-Poole [34]. However, as Pridmore pointed out, Moor left Bombay in 1790, and his description of the minting process could have been derived from a much earlier observation

In November 1800, a new coinage based on the Surat rupee replaced the Munbai rupees. These coins were struck at both the Bombay and Surat mints until the latter closed in 1815 and continued to be struck at Bombay until 1832, when machinery was introduced into the mint. Machine struck Surat style rupees were also struck at the Calcutta mint in 1810-1813 and again in 1822-1825.

In 1821 a theft occurred from the Assay Office although a certain number of the coins were later recovered [35].

The standardisation of the coinage of British India, leading to the production of a uniform coinage in 1835, began with the Court of Directors in a despatch dated 25^th April 1806 [36]. This dispatch left the individual Presidencies to decide how they would move towards the standard that was proposed and Bombay chose to follow Madras in 1824, when a proclamation was issued declaring coins of the new weight and fineness to be legal tender [37].

PROCLAMATION

The Honorable the Governor in Council having been pleased to direct, a new rupee, of the following weight and standard, to be struck at the Bombay mint vizt.

	Troy grains			180
Weight	Pure Silver	Grains	165
	Alloy	Ditto	15	180
	Touch or parts of pure silver per Cent		91 2/3
	Alloy		8 1/3	100

Is likewise pleased to declare, the new Bombay rupee and its subdivisions current, from and after the 15^th instant at par with the present Bombay Rupee, and its sub-divisions, with the Territories subordinate to this Presidency, and as such receivable, wherever the present Bombay Rupee and its subdivisions are current, as a legal tender, in all public and private transactions.

Bombay Castle

6^th October 1824

PROPOSAL FOR DECIMAL COINAGE BY HAWKINS IN THE 1820s – SEE DOTY

Exchange Rates

A letter from Burhanpur to Surat in September 1621 refers to 80 pice to the rupee [38]

In 1635 there is a reference to rates of exchange of foreign coins [39]

In 1636 there is a reference to a rate of 58 pice to the rupee [40]

1639 exchange rates [41]

Minting Methods

Coinage at Bombay was not undertaken directly by the Company, but out-sourced to a contractor, who, having paid a large deposit as security, agreed to convert various types of foreign coin and bullion into local coins at agreed rates. The Mint Master, who was also the Assay Master, represented the Company and managed the contract. This was the system used to produce coins at Bombay up until 1831.

In June 1724 [42] a competition took place between two potential mint contractors, Gunsett the Goa Goldsmith and Ragusett, who was the established contractor. Ragusett won the competition, mainly because Gunsett could not provide sufficient guarantees in the event of mistakes or frauds. The Bombay Consultations of 26^th June 1724 [43] record the return at which Ragusett agreed to convert foreign silver coins:

			Rs	qrs	rs
‘For 100	ounces of	Pillar Dollars	248	0	18
100	d^o	Mexico	245	3	32 ½
100	d^o	Duccatoons	250	3	0
100	d^o	French Crowns	245	1	11
100	d^o	Old Sevil Dollars	249	0	61
100	d^o	Crusadoes	244	0	68
100	d^o	Peru	230	1	31
100	d^o	Lion Dollars	198	0	86
100	d^o	German Crowns	232	2	17

And proportionate for any other silver’

[N.B. 100 reis (rs) = 1 quarter (qrs); 4 quarters = 1 rupee (Rs)]

Raguset made his profit from the difference between the value of the silver in the foreign coins and the number of rupees that he delivered to the Company, after paying for the cost of production.

Because of the differing amounts of silver in the different coins, it was important that the foreign coins were identified correctly. Sometimes this did not happen and resulted in loss to the Company [44].

As usual, the mint offered many temptations to less honest employees and Pridmore found the following entry in the Bombay High Court Records of the year 1727:

Vissa Ram and Pandoo, Coppersmiths, being employed to make rupees in the mint and taking liberty to make use of said money to the value of one hundred and twenty rupees without leave or acquainting the mint master, ordered thirty-nine lashes each in the public bazar and continued in prison until satisfaction be made to Ragouset for the whole sum wanting and then sent off the island.

Put here the mint contractors arguments with Council between about 1730 and 1741 [45] ^,[46], [47]

Thurston gives an interesting contemporary account of the method used to mint coins in the Bombay Mint in 1794 [48]:

Tippoo, from his coins being regularly stricken and milled, must have a regular die, which is an apparatus unknown in other parts of India. In Bombay there is no mechanical process either for ascertaining the value of the piece, or of giving it the impression. The manner is as follows: the metal is brought to the mint in bars the size of the little finger, where a number of persons seated on the ground provided with scales and weights, a hammer, and an instrument between a chissel and a punch: before each man’s birth is fixed a stone by way of an anvil. The bars are cut into pieces, by guess, and if, on weighing, any deficiency is found, a little particle is punched into the intended rupee; if too heavy, a piece is cut off, and so until the exact quantity remains. These pieces are then taken to a second person, whose whole apparatus consists of a hammer and stone anvil, and he batters them into something of a round shape, about seven-eighths of an inch diameter, and one-eighth thick; when they are ready for the impression. The die is composed of two pieces, one inserted firmly into the ground, and the other, about eight inches long, is held in the right hand of the operator, who squatting on his heels (the posture in which all mechanics and artists work; the posture, indeed, in which everything is done in India, for if a man has a dram given him, he finds it convenient to squat upon his heels to drink it), fills his left hand with the intended coins, which he with inconceivable quickness slips upon the fixed die with his thumb and middle finger, with his forefinger as dextrously removing them when his assistant, a second man with a mall, has given it the impression, which he does as rapidly as he can raise, and strike with the mall on the die held in the right hand of the coiner. The diameter of the die is about an inch and a half, inscribed with the Great Moghul’s names, titles, date of the Hejra, his reign, &c., but as the coins are not so large, they do not, consequently, receive all, nor the same impression. The rupee is then sent to the treasury, ready for currency, as no milling, or any further process is thought necessary.

This process is very similar to that used at Calcutta at about this time and described in the Calcutta section.

Introduction of machinery into the Bombay mint.

Doty has given a detailed description of the introduction of machinery to the Bombay mint. On 21^st June 1821, Captain John Hawkins wrote to Thomas Reid, Chairman of the Court of Directors concerning the sate of the mint at Bombay and declaring that the need for improvement was even greater than that at Calcutta, given that the only tools then in use for minting coins at Bombay were ‘Hammer, Chisell and Punch’. Negotiations with Boulton, Watt and Co. for a new mint for Bombay (as well as Calcutta, see later) had begun in 1820 and, as early as this, one of the option considered was for the EIC to purchase the working mint at Soho, disassemble it, ship it to Bombay and re-build it there.

Hawkins was the representative of the Bombay authorities in this matter and had arrived in England either late in 1820 or early in 1821. He visited Soho in May 1821 and saw the mint striking the St. Helena coinage and was completely enamoured of the apparatus and totally convinced that this was what was needed for the Bombay mint.

On 25^th June 1822, the EIC asked Boulton, Watt & Co. for an estimate of the cost of shipping the Soho mint to Bombay and also asked them to act as the primary contractor. The total cost came to £ 37,824 which was agreed, although work did not start until February 1823 by when the price had increased to £40,016.

As well as supplying the machinery Boulton & Watt were responsible with their sub-contractors, for supplying the men necessary to get the mint working in India. These are shown in the following table:

Name	Fate
George Cadenhead	Died in Bombay in 1827
James Howard	?
John Clough	?
Henry Bellamy	Dismissed 1826
Henry Ingle	Sent home due to illness 1829
Enderwick	Became head engineer in the new Bombay Mint
John Scott	Dismissed 1826. Died in Bombay in 1827
Joshua Humphreys	Returned to England 1829
George Bilton	Took to drink 1827

Hawkins sailed for India on 18^th April 1824. The machinery for the mint followed on two ships. The Florentia sailed on 14^th September 1824 and the England on 1^st October.

When Hawkins arrived in Bombay he found that nothing had been done to prepare for the arrival of the new mint. Not even the site had been selected. He immediately began work on securing what he needed and the foundation stone of the new mint was laid on 1^st February 1825. The Florentia arrived on 12^th February 1825 and the England by the end of March.

Hawkins soon ran into trouble with the people who had come out to help him build the mint. Cadenhead had taken to drink, whilst the refusal of the Bombay authorities to provide adequate accommodation caused a great deal of unnecessary ill feeling amongst the entire group. He worked hard to drive the project forwards to the extent that he made himself ill and even collapsed once during 1825. By the end of that year most of the buildings were complete and the heavy machinery was in place. However that was not the end of his staff problems. In 1826 he had to dismiss John Scott and Henry Bellamy and chose to appoint and train men from local regiments to replace tem, rather than calling for replacements from England.

Not only did Hawkins have problems with his own staff, but the Bombay Mint committee seemed dead set on making things as difficult as possible for him by imposing all kinds of bureaucratic hurdles for him to jump as well as failing to deliver materials when he needed them.

Trials of parts of the equipment began early in 1827 but Hawkins suffered another serious illness November of that year. Nevertheless, by 6^th January 1828 he was able to report that the machinery was ready. He was still waiting for metal pipes from England to channel water into the mint. Most of 1828 and 1829 was spent recruiting and training staff and awaiting the necessary material from England. Henry Ingle, who had come out from England with the original team, was made foreman of the coining operation and Enderwick, another member of the original team, was made head engineer. He was constantly losing staff due to illness. Four of the soldiers that he had trained, died and he was obliged to recruit and train yet more. In July of 1829 he was promoted to the rank of major.

At the end of 1830 coinage of copper coins finally started although by then Hawkins was very ill. He was sent to the Cape to recuperate but died at sea on 19^th February 1831.

Up until that time, Bombay had received blank dies from Soho and engraved at Bombay. For instance, in July 1825 they received 750 rupee-sized dies from there but it was now decided that in future all (matrix) dies would be engraved in Calcutta and then sent to Bombay. This did not actually happen for some years and Bombay continued to receive blank dies from Soho. However, these proved to be of poor quality and by 1836 the engineer at Bombay (F. McGillevray) had devised a method of making the blank dies himself and using the Calcutta matrices to complete the work. By then, of course, the mint was striking the new Uniform Coinage of British India.

The new mint building was completed in 1829 and commenced coinage operations with a new copper issue on 22^nd November 1830. Bombay was the last of the three Presidency mints to adopt mechanical methods for coining. Both Madras and Bengal had installed machinery in their mints many years earlier. The choice of selecting a copper coinage to commence the operations of the new mint of Bombay was made in order that the workmen could become experienced in modern minting techniques before starting the coinage of more precious metals.

With the completion of the new steam driven mint at Bombay, coinage of silver was moved there from the old mint between the 28^th April and the 1^st May 1831. This brought to an end the system of coinage by contract.

From 1832 until 1835, Bombay issued machine struck coins in the Moghul style bearing the mint name of Surat. The copper coins of the Bombay Presidency continued to be struck right up until 1844, well after the introduction of the uniform coinage in 1835.

References

---

[1] See Pridmore pp98ff, also Pridmore

[2] 6^th October 1668

[3] Short time after 6^th October 1668

[4] Letter to Surat 22^nd February 1671

[5] Talboys Wheeler J (1878) A History of the English Settlements in India, p 44, reprinted 2003 by Low Price Publications, Dehli

[6] Sainsbury E.B. (1935). A Calendar of the Court Minutes etc. of the East India Company 1674-1676. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p 348:

Warrant to the East India Company, September 18^th 1676

‘…and another clause enabling the Company within the Island of Bombay and the territories thereto belonging, to coin money to be current within the limits of their charters, to be known by the name of rupees, pice and budgerookes, or such other names as they shall think fit, so that it be not by the names of any coin current in England or any of the King’s dominions except the East Indies…’.

[7] Sainsbury E.B. (1935). A Calendar of the Court Minutes etc. of the East India Company 1674-1676. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p 356:

Letters Patent granted by His Majesty to the East India Company, October 5^th, 1676

‘The Company and their Successors are given full and free liberty, power and authority, from time to time and at all times hereafter, to stamp and coin, or cause to be stamped and coined within the Port and Island of Bombay, its precincts and territories, monies of gold, silver, copper, tin or lead, or of any mixed metal compounded or made up of them to be current within the said Port, Island, Fort and Towne, its precincts and territories; as also in all the islands, ports, havens, cities, creeks, towns, and places whatsoever within the East Indies, mentioned in former charters or Letters Patent, with such impression or inscription thereupon, and to be called and known by the name of rupees, pices, and budgrooks, or by such other names as the Company and their Successors shall think fit and appoint, provided such monies by them to be stamped and coined, are not called or known by the names of any coins or monies current in England, or in any other of his majesty’s dominions, excepting the said East Indies.

[8] September 1676 Bombay to Surat

[9] August 1677 Govindji Madharji

[10] Bruce, Annals, Vol2 years 1686/87

[11] Charter of 12^th April 1686 granting licence to coin

[12] Bruce, Annals Vol3, p397

[13] See under appropriate sections for more details

[14] Bombay Public Consultations, 24^th April 1705. India Office Collections P/341/2 p174

‘Some of the Tiled shedds w^th in the fort remote from the powder bastions to be made use of for said purpose [i.e. minting silver and copper coins] till a proper and conven^t place for such work can be made within the House of the Fort’

[15] 1715 Embassy to Delhi

[16] Bombay Public Consultations, 5^th January 1716. India Office Collections p/341/4

‘That four chests of treasure be delivered the Goldsmiths for coinage into rupees for the supply of our treasury’

[17] Tindall G, (1982). City of Gold. The Biography of Bombay. Temple Smith London

[18] 2^nd November 1788 decision to stop minting rupees

[19] Bombay Public Consultations, Friday 14^th February 1729. India Office Collections P/341/6:

‘The President acquaints the Board that he has been informed of late considerable quantity of old Punch’d rupees have been bro^t upon this island from the neighbouring places of a less weight and baser alloy than those of Surat & our own mint, which are paid away to the shroffs and shopkeepers at disco’t and by them passed again at parr, to the great abuse of the publick & discouragement of trade in general. To prevent which in future he proposes the issuing out his proclamation forbidding and prohibiting all persons whatever to receive or pay any old Punch’d rupees except those coin’d here under penalty of forfeiting the same after 20^th of this month, but that they bring them into the mint to be anew coined, which is agreed to’.

[20] Bombay Public Consultations, Monday 3^rd December 1733. India Office Collections P/341/7A:

‘Whereas a considerable quantity of silver rupees of different coins and alloys are brought to this island from the inland provinces, of an inferior value to the standard of Bombay and Surat rupees and the same bought up by the shroffs and other people at an unreasonable discount and sometimes at par to the great prejudice and discouragement of trade in general and that this pernicious practice has been carried on with impunity notwithstanding a publication issued by order of this board under the date 14^th February 1728/29 to prevent the evil tendency of which it is agreed that a publication be forthwith issued enforcing the observance of our former under the following penalty, namely that all persons whatever inhabitants of this island who have in their possession any number of rupees above ten of any other coin or alloy besides those of Surat and Bombay shall in ten days after the issuing of the said publication bring the said rupees to the Hon’ble Company’s mint where due attendance shall be given to receive and exchange them for their real value discounting only one p. cent for their recoinage and all persons not duly observing this publication shall forfeit all such sum or sums of foreign rupees as shall be found in their custody ten days after the issuing thereof, one third to be paid to the informer and two thirds to the Hon’ble Company, but all strangers who shall bring the foreign rupees hither and are not willing to exchange the same in the mint but desire to export them again shall in three days after their first arrival declare to the Custommaster for the time being the quantity they desire to export and it is hereby expressly prohibited that any rupee but those of Surat and Bombay shall be tendered or received in payment as current coin under the same penalty to be incur’d by the tenderer or receiver.

Directed that a publication to the [tenure] of this resolution be immediately issued in English, Portuguese and Gentue languages, and that it be added that proper persons are appointed at the land pay office to exchange silver rupees for pice at the rate of eighty pice for a rupee’.

[21] Bombay Public Consultations, 5^th February 1741. India Office Collections

[22] Bombay Public Consultations, Friday 16^th October 1741. India Office Collections P/341/12:

‘Comformable to our Honble Masters directions in their letter of 6^th February 1640, Mr. Dudley has promiscuously taken five rupees out of the money coined this month which he now delivers in, sealed with his own seal. Directed that the same be accordingly enclosed in the Fort St George Packett’.

[23] Assays done in England

[24] Bombay Public Consultations, Friday 15^th May 1741. India Office Collections P/341/12

‘Mr William Davis who was [sent out in quality] of Assay Master by our Honble Masters having hitherto delayed any report of his trials for refining silver notwithstanding the several utensils by him required from England have been received by the Royal Guardian. The secretary is directed to remind him of this particular and that we expect satisfactory account of the progress made in ascertaining the precise standard for rupees and making them in a speedier manner than our people have hitherto found out’.

[25] Bombay Public Consultations, Friday 16^th October 1741. India Office Collections P/341/12:

‘Read a letter (as entered hereafter) from Mr. William Davis, Assay Master, in answer to our queries in consultation of 8^th August, which not being yet esteemed fully clear, the consideration thereof is deferred ‘till another time. But the mill proposed to be erected we will endeavour to get done when we are apprized of the expense, which must be calculated. Mr. Davis being then called in, the following question was put to him Vizt can you by any methods you can devise coin the Company’s silver to more advantage than the present minters do, and will you undertake the same? He declares that he can do not more then he has already. Nor will he undertake the coinage, or does he know anyone that will’.

[26] Bombay Public Consultations, 25^th March 1748. India Office Collections P/341/15

The present undertakers of the mint continuing their base practice of having a large sum constantly in the sweeps to the Honble Company’s detriment, and from indolence or incapacity are not able to coin the silver brought hither unless assisted from the treasury or by the merchants with large transfer bills which by good fortune happened last year, else the mint had been brought to discredit. It id therefore proposed to give the management to Ransorett Luckmansett, Ragousett Bhensett, Ransorrett Isimbucksett of fair characters and capable of the business, who have also a set of able assistants, but as these, nor no other goldsmiths in Bombay can give the necessary security the following regulations will obviate the difficulty by leaving them no power to defraud the Honble Company or the merchants.

The Mint Master to have an Englishman as his deputy, who will be constantly in the mint when no silver can be carried in or out without his knowledge. This person to be paid by the President and the Mint Master.

The Mint to be secured with two locks , one key to be kept by the managers, the other by the Mint Master and never to be opened or shut but when he or his deputy are present.

All bullion to be carried every evening from the mint to the fort and deposited in a chest under the joint charge of the Mint Master and managers.

The dies in like manner to be carried there every night. All receipts of silver into the mint and payments from thence to be reported as usual to the Mint Master and also undersugned by his deputy.

And that the rupees may be kept up to their due fineness it will be the Mint Masters care that the rupees are frequently assayed.

As these methods duly observed will certainly prevent embezzlements which answers the intent of any security that can be given, the Board unanimously agrees thereto.

And the new undertakers being accordingly called in were made acquainted therewith who asserting to the same the terms of the contract to be entered into with them was explained to them as follows:

That the present rates of silver be allowed and which as contained in the consultations the 26^th June 1724 are as follows:

			Rs	qrs	rs
‘For 100	ounces of	Pillar Dollars	248	0	18
100	d^o	Mexico	245	3	32 ½
100	d^o	Duccatoons	250	3	0
100	d^o	French Crowns	245	1	11
100	d^o	Old Sevil Dollars	249	0	61
100	d^o	Crusadoes	244	0	68
100	d^o	Peru	230	1	31
100	d^o	Lion Dollars	198	0	86
100	d^o	German Crowns	232	2	17

And all other sorts of silver to be adjusted agreable to their real value.

That they have always in store woodashes, charcoal, tamarine, earthen utensils etc sufficient to dispatch the coinage of twelve lack of rupees & if the mint business stops for want of any of these articles, they shall forfeit such a sum as the Governor and Council shall direct provided they are not impeded by a warr and other unavoidable actions [unread words].

The rupee to be an exact Tola in weight or 7 dwt. 11 gra. and in fineness 14½ dwt. Better than English standard.

As the mint can employ [x] workmen they shall procure and be assisted to procure this number and when completed they shall be obliged to keep them in constant pay and not discharge them [as] the present practice & if its proved they do, they shall be subject to such penalty as the Governor and Council may judge necessary to inflict.

The managers and their assistants be obliged to give constant attendance at the mint unless prevented by sickness during the time that silver dwells there or forfeit their contract.

That there may be no sweeps in the mint, they shall upon first coinage deliver in a calculate of what they find will remain in a lack of rupees or a less sum, & if on a trial its found just, to agree a time for payment which if they exceed interest to be allowed by them.

So long as these undertakers observe the terms of their contract, the Governor and Council to engage that the management be continued to them or either of them.

As there will be no sweeps & they obliged to keep a number of workmen in pay that theretofore the Honble Company allows them to have lead from their stores at the same rate as the former mint undertakers which is six rupees per pucca maund, and they deliver a calculate of what a lack of rupees may require and must be done after the first coinage.

[27] 1771 silver sent to Surat rather than Bombay for coining

[28] Bombay Public Consultations, 2^nd December 1788. India Office Collections

[29] Princep (1834), Useful Tables p19

[30] Milburn ????

[31] Bombay Public Consultations 28^th November 1800. India Office Collections

[32] Lieut. Edward Moor’s ‘Narrative of the operations of Captain Little’s Detachment, etc’, London, 1794, p500

[33] Thurston (1890) p 31

[34] Lane Poole (BMC 1892, p1x)

[35] Bombay Financial Proceedings, 20^th February 1822. Letter to the Assay Master dated 16^th February 1822. India Office Collections P/408/51 p103

I convey the directions of the Honble the Governor in Council that you report what amount of the coins stolen from your office on the 28^th August last has been recovered from the tank near the mint and military pay offices.

[36] Court of Directors instructions, 25^th April 1806

[37] 1824 proclamation declaring new weight and fineness

[38] Foster W. (1906). The English Factories in India 1618-1621. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p269:

Letter from Burhanpur to Surat, 16^th September 1621

[39] Foster W. (1911). The English Factories in India 1634-1636. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p134:

‘William Fremlin and John Spillar at Tatta to Surat December 18^th 1635

Venetians [sequins] are valued at 12 3/8 rupees per tola of 11 mass; 100 rials of eight are reckoned as equivalent to 205½ rupees; abassees are worth 100 rupees for 110½ tolas; and 112 tolas of silver in bullion have the same value’.

[40] Foster W. (1911). The English Factories in India 1634-1636. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p164:

President and Council at Swalley Bar to the factors at Tatta, February 3^rd 1636

‘….also pice to the value of 200 rupees, at 58 pice to the rupee, which is a very great advance, if many of them might bee procured heere or readily put off theare’.

[41] Foster W. (1912). The English Factories in India 1637-1641. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p120:

President Fremlin and Council from Surat to the Company, January 4^th 1639

The rupee is reckoned at 2½ mahmudis; the Masulipatam pagoda at 10, and the Armagon pagoda at 8 mahmudis; 3½ shahis go to the mahmudi; and 16 laris are taken as equivalent to 13 mahmudis.

[42] Bombay Public Consultations, Friday 19^th June 1724. India Office Collections P/341/5

‘The President informed the Board that one Gunsett a native of Goa and Goldsmith who lately came hither offering to work up the Companys silver fifty per chest more to their advantage then the present undertaker (Ragusett) does it, he had directed a chest of Pillar Dollars to be delivered to each of them to be worked up in the mint under the inspection of Mr Thomas Yeomans the mint master from whose acc^ot of the produce of each now laid before us – there actually appears fourteen rupees two quarters & sixty Raes from that worked up by the Goa Goldsmith than from Ragusett, Mr Yeomans farther relation thereof as follows.

Honble Sir

In obedience to your Honours commands I delivered to Gunsett, goldsmith one chest Pillar Dollars [W^t] two Hundred & Ninety Pounds Eight ounces that I received by your Hon^rs orders from the Hon’ble Companys treasury & had it carefully coined in the mint & likewise delivered one chest of Pillar Dollars to Ragoosett goldsmith [Wt] two hundred & ninety pounds eight ounces that were coined in the mint at the same time. The former produced rupees (when the lead, copper and slag were saved and brought to account) eight thousand seven hundred fifty six one quarter & forty Raes, from which deduct for sundry charges rupees one hundred and four (rupees) three quarters and it leaves neat rupees eight thousand six hundred fifty one, three quarters & forty Raes and as this Gunsett doth make appear by the Accot herewith delivered your Hon^r a greater produce than Ragoosett, the Honble Companys former worker in this employ & I make the calculate from that which is the most profit to my Hon’ble masters and is [xxxx].

Rups qrs R

For each hundred ounces of Pillar Dollars 248 18

Each hundred ounces of Mexico Dollars 245 3 32½

Each hundred ounces of Duccatoons 250 3

Each hundred ounces of French crowns 245 87

‘Tis well known to your Honour that Ragoosett Goldsmith has for some years coined the Hon’ble Company’s foreign silver & hath paid into their treasury for each hundred ounces of duccatoons Rupees two hundred and forty nine two quarters forty eight raes and a half, ditto Pillar Dollars rupees two hundred and forty six two quarters and fifty raes, ditto Mexico Dollars rupees two hundred forty four three quarters & fifteen raes and a half, ditto French crowns rupees two hundred forty four & seventy one raes & is a difference in each per cent Duccatoons forty five decimals, in Mexico Dollars four hundred and twenty four, in Pillar Dollars fifty seven in French crowns four hundred twenty four – which is humbly presented to your Honour

etc

etc

Ragusett & Gunsett being then called in and interegated whereon Ragusett accused the other of using some unfair practice which in some measure he seems to prove on him, by Mr Yeomans allowing thereof, that in his lead which holds the silver there was about double the quantity when separated as there ought to be & could be no otherwise as they averr but by throwing in some silver unobserved by them amongst his charcoal – to this Gunsett had little more to reply then that they should then have detected him.

Ragoosett being ordered to withdraw the Goa Goldsmith was required to inform the Board what security he could give for a post of so much trust, replys he will give security for whatever we would entrust him with, which the President informs the Board he had promised him for five months past but had not yet brought any tho’ he had sometimes offered those who when called for had refused it.

The Board therefore gives him to this day se’enight for bringing his security for our acceptance & then he withdrew.

Mr Thomas Yeomans being further asked his opinion of this person declares he does not think him equal to the office & will be very much confused in working up different sorts of silver which he has already experienced in some lately come from Persia wherein he did show himself much at a loss and adds that when we are in haste for coining of our silver on the arrival of our ships he will not be able to give that dispatch that Ragoosett has done, recommending therefore if Ragoosett can be brought to give the price for the several species as per his calculate, from the produce of the chest of silver worked up by the Goa Goldsmith that he be continued in the employ.

Ragoosett is again called in and the President bid him remember that when he gave him the business from Mr Yeomans he did engage him to make the silver yield the utmost to the Hon’ble Company at the same time telling him that he did not desire otherwise but to leave him a moderate sufficiency for his trouble which he himself allowed twenty five rupees per chest was enough whereas it now appeared that he has gained more then sixty. He makes excuse of lowering his workmens wages by degrees and buying his other necessaries much cheaper than formerly, but that he has at times mett with a great many [bass] Dollars among the Mexico which he has constantly made good and consequently his profits are far less than we esteem them.

Being then told he is an old servant tho’ herein we have found tardy we were nevertheless willing to continue him in the business provided he would pay in according to the calculate made from the produce of the chest of silver worked up by the Goa Goldsmith to which replying that he could not do it without a great loss accruing to himself the Board insisted thereon and gave him ‘till this day se’enight to give his final answer, he thereupon withdrew and the Board adjourned.

[43] Bombay Public Consultations, Friday 26^th June 1724. India Office Collections P/341/5:

‘The competitors for the coining of the Hon’ble Companys silver attending pursuant to our resolution on Friday last, Gunsett the Goa Goldsmith is called upon to produce his security who naming Ponda Sinay – He is thereupon called in and interrogated if he would be security for this persons faithful discharge of the trust, to which he replies he is so far willing as to make a tryal of twenty five chests of silver and according as he finds he complys in coining of them he will continue to engage for him for more, that is, he will see the Ball^ac of the same paid into the treasury that the Hon’ble Company be no loosers but as to any other frauds that business may be liable to he has not to say which Mr Yeomans the Mint Master must look after.

The which taking into consideration that this persons having charge of our mint altho’ under the inspection of Mr Thomas Yeomans ‘tis possible he may unknown to him coin private silver of baser alloy & thereby bring discredit upon it, & if detected thereof is he of any substance to make [reparation] nor can he find security to be liable for any such fraud.

The board is therefore of the opinion that if Ragusett can be brought to give according to the calculate from what the silver produced by Gunsett that the [business] be continued in him. He being thereupon called in does at last agree rather than loose the same to give as follows:

			Rs	qrs	rs
‘For 100	ounces of	Pillar Dollars	248	0	18
100	d^o	Mexico	245	3	32 ½
100	d^o	Duccatoons	250	3	0
100	d^o	French Crowns	245	1	11
100	d^o	Old Sevil Dollars	249	0	61
100	d^o	Crusadoes	244	0	68
100	d^o	Peru	230	1	31
100	d^o	Lion Dollars	198	0	86
100	d^o	German Crowns	232	2	17

& in proportion for any other silver but requests if he shall hereafter make appear to this Board that thro’ any accident he cannot be able to pay in at the above prices that then we will relieve him according as we find reasonable.

And the President informing the Board that he had one hundred & twenty eight rupees surplus on three chests of treasure coined by Gunsett it is agreed that it be returned to him as a reward.

[44] Bombay Public Consultations, Friday 19^th June 1724. India Office Collections P/341/5:

‘The mintmaster, his account of coinage of the Hon’ble Companys silver last month where in chest No. 629 it appears that the bag No 2515 said to be Pillar Dollars is found to contain the following species [W^gt]

lb. Oz.

Pillar Dollars 49 1

& Mexico 1 7

German Crowns 16 10

French Crowns 5 2

_________ lb. Oz

72 8

which being a mixture of coins of baser alloy occasions a loss to the Hon’ble Company of Rupees thirty one quarter ninety four Raes & a half.

Resolved to give our Hon’ble Masters Acco’t thereof in our next advices’

[45] Bombay Public Consultations, [Friday 5^th?] May 1741. India Office Collections P/341/12:

‘The humble petition of Muckansett Padamsett & Luckmanset Ragousett Undertakers to the mint.

That whereas your petitioners in the month of June 1735 did set forth to the then President John Horne’ Esq. Etc etc – They still hadn’t been paid and the decision was deferred to some time later so that Mr Davis the Assay Master could examine the accounts.

[46] Bombay Public Consultations, Thursday 30^th July 1741. India Office Collections P/341/12:

The matter of the mint contractors was discussed and deferred to a future occasion. There are letters from Mr. Davis the Assay Master and a letter from George Dudley, one time Mint Master, who warns that no one other then the complainants could undertake the coinage.

[47] Bombay Public Consultations, Friday 7^th August 1741. India Office Collections P/341/12, p362:

Council again considered the mint contractor’s petition but felt that they needed to direct specific questions to the Assay Master. These are listed:

Council the 30^th ultimo having perused the several papers given in by the mint undertakers, as also the Assay Masters remarks, are of the opinion that they are spun out to considerable length yet they are not conclusive to the points in dispute and therefore it will be necessary for him to give an explicit plain answer to, to which we may the better be enabled to come to an equitable determination, which the secretary is ordered to do by letter, and to the following purport

1. what is the real difference between the new and old Mexico dollars.

2. Supposing that the new are worse than the old, whether the difference demanded by the mint undertakers in their account now sent to you under 30^th June 1735 ought to be paid them, or what part thereof. That is admitting the quantity of new Mexico [etc] as therein specified had been delivered to them.

3. That as the mint undertakers do pretend the allowance given them for waste of one per cent and charges of coinage one per cent more, does not answer, you must again examine by a farther tryal in melting a chest how the same will turn out according to the methods which the minters pursue.

4. You are moreover to make experiments in your own way if possible how the like quantity of silver will turn out; and if practicable bring the minters into the use of your own method, provided it should render the coinage more advantageous to the Company.

5. You are to point out whatever may prove serviceable in regard to the coinage in any respect, knowing first whether the minters can or will execute any proposals you shall make; remembering that amusing us with what cannot be reduced to practice will answer no end.

6. Advise what value you do imagine will remain in the sweeps on the experiment you make of a chest of money as directed under the 3^rd head.

[48] Lieutenant Moor (1794), Narrative of Little’s Detachment, App. Note ii, pp. 499, 500. From: Thurston E., (1890), History of the coinage of the territories of the East India Company in the Indian Peninsula. Government Press, Madras.