Can someone elaborate a little more on this coin? I've never heard of such an issue and have never seen any reference to it outside of the Numista catalog.
How does it differ from the KM 618 Cartwheel Penny? The weight and diameter are identical, the portrait and legends are the same. Whoever entered this into the catalog has even used the photograph from the British issued 1d! See both entries below -
Great Britain KM 618 1d 1797
2 Pence - George III 1800 Australian Proclamation Coin
There are three coins in total listed under the heading of "Proclamation Coinage" and each of them seem somewhat contrived. When I say contrived, I don't mean to imply dishonesty, rather that the actual grounds for inclusion seem flimsy based on the evidence on view.
Apart from the penny above, the 1/- 1d coin is identical to the KM 607 1787 UK Shilling, and the One Pound One Shilling coin is a KM 609 Spade Guinea. All three coins seem to have the specifications and lettering information simply copied from the UK listing and even use the same photo. No catalog or other reference is cited for any of the coins. I guess there must be some source as the weight of the Shiling differs according to the entry by 0.02 of a gram! What is the source for this?
It seems like a spuroius entry to the Numista catalog. How is it possible to tell that you have a coin from this particular issue in the absence of any mintmarks or counter punches? Simply because a British coin was perhaps circulated in the various colonies should not, in my view, warrant a seperate entry in the catalog unless the coin can be identified as a completely seperate issue. Many colonies used the coinage of the mother country locally for extended periods or in other cases, coins struck in India. We can't simply duplicate the entire Georgian / Victorian part of the UK / Indian catalog into each of these many former colonies. Failed states such as Zimbabwe have given up producing their own currencies and use US coins, are we going to include these as seperate catalog entries?
I'm quite willing to accept that these coins were used as claimed, even though I've never heard of such, and I'm equally sure that this is an interesting piece of numismatic lore. However I can see no merit in including these coins as mere duplicates of British entries. It doesn't make good cataloging sense.
Am I wrong?