MAY 18
1908•IN GOD WE TRUST Restored to U.S. Coinage
2020•Weir Farm 5-oz Silver Coin Released
Congress Orders the Return of In God We Trust
A short law changed the new Saint-Gaudens gold coins and created a visible dividing line between No Motto and With Motto issues.
◆
American Coin History Calendar · Article 138 · May 18
On May 18, 1908, a federal act required the restoration of In God We Trust to certain gold and silver coin denominations. The law was brief, but its consequences remain plainly visible on surviving coins. The new Saint-Gaudens eagle and double eagle had appeared without the words; the revised versions carried them again. Collectors still distinguish the relevant issues as No Motto and With Motto.[1][5][6]
This was a restoration, not the motto's first appearance on American money. It also was not the 1956 declaration establishing the national motto. The May 18 anniversary belongs to a specific intervention in coinage design at the beginning of the twentieth century. Reading that intervention carefully reveals how artistic reform, presidential judgment, congressional authority, and public expectations met on small pieces of gold.
A short act with a defined reach
The statute applied to gold and silver denominations that had previously carried the motto. It required the words to be inscribed on those denominations as before. Its second section delayed the act's effect until thirty days after presidential approval. The signature date therefore cannot be treated as proof that every applicable coin struck on May 18 already displayed the restored inscription.[1]
The wording is narrower than a general command that every American coin, of every metal and value, immediately receive the phrase. Congress addressed an existing practice on specified denominations. That scope explains the use of restoration in the act's title and prevents a modern reader from projecting today's familiar inscription pattern onto the coinage of 1908.
The distinction also separates three events that a calendar entry can easily blur: approval of the law, the law's effective date, and physical production using revised dies. Those events belonged to the same change, but they were not interchangeable. A coin is the tangible result of manufacture; the statute records the authority governing that manufacture. Both are evidence, and each should answer the question it can actually support.
The motto's Civil War beginning
The Smithsonian identifies the 1864 two-cent piece as the motto's first appearance on United States coinage. It places the development in the context of a nation divided by the Civil War. The phrase thus had an established history before the controversy over the new gold designs. By 1908, it was more than a recent decorative experiment.[3]
The Library of Congress traces the legislative background through the April 22, 1864 law, which allowed the Mint director to determine devices and mottoes for the relevant copper coins. Further legislation in 1865 provided authority for the words on other coins. These steps matter because the familiar inscription did not simply arrive outside the legal framework governing national coin designs.[4]
For a collector, a two-cent piece can make the earlier chapter concrete. Its shield and ribbon belong to a different denomination and a different design vocabulary from the Saint-Gaudens gold coins. Yet the same words connect the objects. The continuity lies in the inscription and its public meaning, while the artistic setting changed substantially across the intervening decades.
Why the early source needs careful reading
The Mint preserves an excerpt from its annual report for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1908. That document explains the omission from the new gold designs and records the restoration act. It is particularly valuable because it reports the change from within the institution responsible for coinage, close to the time the controversy occurred.[2]
The excerpt nevertheless contains an incorrect September 22 date for the 1864 two-cent authorization. The law's history and the Library of Congress account support April 22 instead.[2][4] An official historical source can be highly useful without making every printed date immune from correction. Preserving the distinction allows the article to rely on the report's direct evidence about 1908 while avoiding transmission of its earlier dating error.
This small discrepancy illustrates an important part of coin research. Authority depends on the relationship between a source and a question, not simply on an institutional label. The annual report is direct evidence of the Mint's contemporary account of restoration. The enacted statute is the stronger source for precisely what Congress required. For the 1864 authorization date, the corresponding legal history provides the necessary check.
The omission arose in the ambitious reform associated with President Theodore Roosevelt and sculptor Augustus Saint-Gaudens. The new ten-dollar eagle and twenty-dollar double eagle appeared in 1907. The Mint's account of historic gold designs describes Roosevelt's objection to placing religious sentiment on coins, and PCGS identifies the omission on the first issues.[5][8]
It is too simple to describe this as forgetting to add a line of lettering. The issue involved a judgment about where religious language belonged and how national coinage should look. Roosevelt's position was not a claim that the words had never appeared before. Their removal was controversial precisely because viewers already knew them as part of the established designs.
The reform itself was much larger than the motto question. The eagle's head wearing a feathered headdress and the double eagle's full-length Liberty offered dramatic departures from the preceding gold types. A collector viewing those new designs can understand why contemporaries discussed artistry and national representation together. The inscription dispute emerged within that broader attempt to change the appearance of American money.
The double eagle before the change
The Saint-Gaudens double eagle places Liberty in an active forward movement on one face and an eagle in flight on the other. The No Motto reverse left the area above the sun without the familiar words. Its absence became one of the defining distinctions used to organize the early low-relief issues of 1907 and 1908.[5]
No Motto is a descriptive collecting term, not an assertion that the coin had no inscriptions at all. The denomination and national identification still existed within the design. The label isolates the absence of this particular phrase. That precision is helpful when discussing other American series, where different mottoes and different design changes can create superficially similar terminology.
The designation also should not be confused with high relief. Relief describes the depth and modeling of the design; motto status describes lettering. The earliest Saint-Gaudens production history includes more than one technical development. Combining them into a single before-and-after label would obscure how the design evolved. A coin can belong to a low-relief form and still be a No Motto issue.
On the With Motto double eagle, the restored words appear above the sun on the eagle face. PCGS identifies that placement as the major type distinction. The added inscription occupies space within a design that remained recognizably Saint-Gaudens's, rather than replacing the entire composition with a different image.[6]
The change affects how the eye moves through the reverse. The eagle still commands the central scene, but the line of words adds another horizontal element above the sunrise. A viewer can compare the two types without relying on a magnifying glass to find an obscure die detail. Here, the result of a congressional decision occupies a visible position within the artwork.
Jeff Garrett's study of early double eagles notes other modifications to the 1908 With Motto reverse, including changes to lettering and details of the eagle and sun rays.[7] The familiar subtitle captures the most conspicuous addition, while the revised dies also embody a broader adjustment of the working design. That makes the comparison useful for both political history and close numismatic observation.
Two forms within one year
The 1908 date appears on both No Motto and With Motto double eagles. That coexistence gives collectors a particularly direct way to study the transition. They do not have to compare coins separated by decades or entirely different artistic programs. The year remains the same while the inscription marks the change in requirements.
Garrett reports substantially different production totals for the Philadelphia No Motto and With Motto issues, and discusses Denver examples in both forms.[7] The existence of those categories makes clear that a date alone is insufficient identification. A description reading merely 1908 twenty-dollar gold leaves a major historical feature unspecified.
Production totals and surviving populations must also be kept apart. Coins moved through commerce, banks, overseas holdings, and later collector markets. A large original mintage can leave very different numbers in particular grades or locations. The restoration story can be told accurately without turning historical production statistics into a current price forecast or a promise of rarity for any particular specimen.
The Indian Head eagle belonged to the same controversy. Its first new-design issues lacked the motto, and the restoration reached that denomination too. The Mint's gold-coin overview links Roosevelt's objection to the omission on the 1907 eagle.[8] The May 18 law should therefore not be described as a measure affecting only the twenty-dollar piece.
The two designs give the lettering different visual surroundings. The double eagle presents an eagle in flight above a sun; the ten-dollar coin uses a standing eagle. Restoring the same words did not require identical artistic placement on every denomination. The statutory instruction specified what had to return, while the revised design had to accommodate it within each coin's own composition.
A pair of eagles and a pair of double eagles can consequently illustrate the same legal event through two different artistic solutions. The comparison highlights the difference between a national inscription requirement and a uniform design requirement. Congress restored a phrase. The coins retained their distinct denominations, imagery, and identities.
The Mint's account of implementation
The 1908 annual-report excerpt says the motto appears on the gold and silver coins struck since July 1, 1908, except the dime.[2] That is a contemporary institutional statement about the practice after restoration. It should be reported as such, rather than used to erase the statute's separately stated thirty-day effective period.
The exception also helps establish the law's limits. The dime did not acquire the phrase simply because Congress approved the May act. Smaller denominations and later design programs have their own chronology. A reader familiar with a modern dime may expect the inscription automatically, but the historical sequence must be reconstructed from the coins and legislation of the period being discussed.
The restoration did not require recalling every existing No Motto coin and adding lettering to it. A surviving early gold piece remains an authentic example of the earlier design. Its absence of the words is evidence of an authorized stage in the series, not proof that somebody damaged the reverse by removing an inscription. That point matters when an unfamiliar type is first encountered.
A national motto came much later
The Library of Congress identifies the July 30, 1956 resolution declaring In God We Trust the national motto. It also places the phrase's appearance on paper money in 1957.[4] Those later milestones belong to the broader history, but they should remain distinct from the 1908 coinage restoration.
The same phrase can have several legal and material histories. Its use on a coin, its designation as a national motto, and its appearance on a banknote are different developments. Combining them under one anniversary makes a short account seem simpler while making the chronology less accurate. The May 18 article is strongest when it gives the specific coinage event its proper scope.
The distinction also explains why an older coin can carry language that became the national motto only much later. A design inscription does not need to wait for a subsequent formal designation to have historical meaning. The phrase was familiar through money before the later resolution changed its official national status.
A careful examination starts with the denomination, date, and mint, then turns to the motto's presence and location. For a 1908 double eagle, that approach separates the major subtypes directly. It also keeps the historical question from being submerged in the grade assigned to an individual coin. The inscription is a design feature, while grade describes preservation.
A circulated With Motto piece still illustrates the legal change even if its details are softer than those on an uncirculated example. Conversely, a beautifully preserved No Motto coin illustrates the preceding stage rather than the restored design. The most expensive example is not automatically the most informative one for a calendar article. The coin must match the historical point being explained.
May 18, 1908 marks a moment when Congress required continuity within a major artistic redesign. The new gold imagery survived, and the familiar words returned. Those few letters created a lasting boundary in the coin series, preserving a public debate in metal. Today, the No Motto and With Motto pieces make that boundary visible in a way the brief statute alone cannot.
ALSO ON THIS DAY
2020 — Weir Farm 5-oz Silver Coin Released — The U.S. Mint opened sales for the Weir Farm National Historic Site five-ounce silver uncirculated coin.