Chapter XII: Part 12

Bronze costs £100 a ton, and a ton of bronze is, on an average, converted into £358 when coined—that is to say, £100 intrinsic value receives by the act of coining an extrinsic value equal to £358, and so yields a profit of £258. Yet the Chancellor of the Exchequer last year asked for, and obtained, £1,000 _to defray the loss on bronze_, the fact being that on the value coined—£10,010—there should have been a clear profit of £25,825. And it so happens that, by the return No. 157, 1869, a profit is admitted to the modest extent of £6,318 0_s._ 2_d._ Why was the £1,000 asked for, and what became of the £6,318 0_s._ 2_d._? and further, why was that modest sum allowed to take the place of the proper profit, or £25,825?

The return above quoted, No. 157, 1869, shows that in the nine years, 1860-1868, the purchase value of copper bought for coinage was £489,071, and the same return shows that this intrinsic value was converted into money of the nominal value of £991,833; therefore, by deducting the cost from that sum, there appears a clear profit of £502,762 on bronze since 1860, which is at the moderate rate of £102 per cent. on the outlay. It will be well to investigate farther, and perhaps to take the contract given to Messrs. James Watt and Co. for 1,720 tons in 1860. The sum paid to that firm, added to the cost of copper supplied to them for the manufacture of bronze to produce 1,720 tons of coin, was £229,200; and the 1,720 tons of bronze money forwarded to the Mint by the terms of that contract was, in nominal value, when delivered, £696,293, so that the profit on that one transaction was £467,093, or at the rate of £203 per cent. on the outlay. The last coin (a penny) to complete this contract was struck by Messrs. Watt at 9 A.M. on Thursday, the 11th of June, 1863; so that the coinage, which has been conducted since that period, has been struck under the superintendence of the present Mint officials. The return No. 157, 1869, shows that, at the period when the Mint was receiving bronze coin from the contractors, and was at the same time coining bronze—viz., from 1860-1863, the profit was diluted from 258 to 108 per cent.; but when the Mint took the whole manufacture from 1864 to 1868, under Mr. John Graham alone, that profit was further lessened to 78·70 per cent., or rather less than £78 15_s._ was made where £258 should have been made.

The Mint officials may, and probably will, plead that this return, as well as that relating to silver, is “false;” still they must stand or fall by their own figures, or issue intelligible and trustworthy returns to the orders of the House of Commons; and these exhibit the fact that Messrs. Watt’s contract gave a profit of 203 per cent.; the Mint and Messrs. Watt’s contract jointly of 108 per cent.; the Mint solely, of only 78¾ per cent. It will probably be asserted that the purchase of the old copper money caused the apparent loss; but this argument will be disposed of if we take the case of 1863, up to which period 1,651 tons 8 cwts. 2 qrs. 27¾ lbs.; of worn copper coin had been purchased at an absolute cost of £234·80 per ton. To assume then that this was the cause for diminished profit, let us see if it can be proved to demonstration. I have shown that a ton of bronze money is worth £358, and a ton of copper, when bought as old coin, £234·80; therefore, the copper so bought should yield profit of about £152·50 per centum. But it should do more than this; for I, of my own knowledge,—because I ordered it,—state that bronze was bought to a considerable amount at the then current rate of new copper. The following, however, is the worst that could happen:—If the whole of the old copper cost £234·80 per ton, when converted into bronze money, it would produce £358, or equal to £152·5 per cent. profit. Upon what ground then can the profit—when new copper at the lower price is bought—be reduced so low as to 108 per cent., and then fall to £78·70 per cent. on the copper purchased? Were any prosecutions made, or were men simply told their “services were no longer required?” If the accounts were investigated by a professional accountant, what amount of loss in weight—in addition to the loss by dirt which amounted to 0·41 per cent. on each ton melted—would be shown when they were balanced? Another curious inquiry might be made:—At what rate for labour was bronze money coined in the Royal Mint after the cessation of the contract? It might be found to be exorbitant.

Since, however, Lord Kinnaird directed attention to this subject, Mr. Fremantle has adjusted the return No. 157, as regards bronze, in a manner similar to, yet differing from, that relating to silver. I propose to insert copies of these returns, following the arrangement adopted for those relating to silver; and it will be seen that whereas Mr. Graham showed a profit of £502,761 11_s._ 11_d._ between the years 1860-68, _without an instance of loss_, Mr. Fremantle not only alters all the figures relating to the copper purchased, but reduces Mr. Graham’s profit to £403,376 18_s._ 6_d._ and shows _a loss_ in 1864 to the extent of £31,896 13_s._ 4_d._; which sum, deducted from £435,273 11_s._ 10_d._, yields the profit Mr. Fremantle is willing to admit. I am fully aware that “figures may be made to tell anything;” but until the year 1870 I was not aware that Parliament would permit its returns to be altered, amended, or adjusted without leave or a word of explanation. Surely such an occurrence, added to evidence previously adduced, will cause some independent member to “tackle” even Mr. Lowe in the House of Commons. Why Mr. Fremantle, in the case of silver, converts loss into profit, and in that of bronze reduces, apparently without reason, the amount of profit, should be explained. I have done my share in calling attention to the facts. It should be pointed out that the figures relating to 1869 in the following return are inserted, but not demonstrated, because I wish to mark emphatically the fact that it is Mr. Graham’s figures alone which are made to perform these operations, while those of Mr. Fremantle yield a profit of £12,476 4_s._ 6_d._, or at the rate of £137·35 per centum on the copper purchased.

NO. 157.—RETURN TO AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE THE HOUSE
OF COMMONS, DATED 21ST APRIL, 1869, FOR ACCOUNT “OF ALL GOLD,
SILVER, AND COPPER MONEYS OF THE REALM COINED AT THE MINT, FOR
EACH YEAR FROM THE 1ST DAY OF JANUARY, 1859, TO THE 31ST DAY OF
DECEMBER, 1868, &C.,” IN CONTINUATION OF NO. 340, 1857-68. (MR.
AYRTON, PAGE 4.)

+--------+---------------+--------------+--------------+-----------+
| Date. |Total Value of |Purchase Value| Profit on | Loss on |
| |Copper Coined. | of Copper. | Coinage. | Coinage. |
+--------+---------------+--------------+--------------+-----------+
| 1860: | £ _s. d._| £ _s. d._| £ _s. d._| £ _s. d._|
|Copper | 134 8 0 | | | |
|Bronze | 37,856 0 0 | 9,185 2 11 | 28,805 5 1 | |
+--------+---------------+--------------+--------------+-----------+
| Bronze:| | | | |
| 1861 |273,578 13 4 | 96,735 6 8 |176,843 6 8 | |
| 1862 |352,800 0 0 |203,389 0 0 |149,411 0 0 | |
| 1863 |151,648 0 0 | 82,482 0 0 | 69,166 0 0 | |
| 1864 | 18,069 6 8 | 9,660 0 0 | 8,409 6 8 | |
| 1865 | 57,493 6 8 | 31,740 0 0 | 25,753 6 8 | |
| 1866 | 50,624 0 0 | 26,910 0 0 | 23,714 0 0 | |
| 1867 | 33,301 6 8 | 18,960 0 0 | 14,341 6 8 | |
| 1868 | 16,328 0 2 | 10,010 0 0 | 6,318 0 2 | |
| +---------------+--------------+--------------+-----------+
| |991,833 1 6 |489,071 9 7 |502,761 11 11 | |
+--------+---------------+--------------+--------------+-----------+
THOS. GRAHAM, MASTER OF THE MINT.
ROYAL MINT, _19th April, 1869_.

NO. 262.—RETURN TO AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE THE HOUSE OF
COMMONS, DATED 30TH MAY, 1870, IN CONTINUATION OF PARLIAMENTARY
PAPER, NO. 157, OF SESSION 1868-9. (MR. STANSFELD, PAGE 4.)

LEGEND:
(A) = Total Value of Copper Coined.
(B) = Total Amount Paid for Copper Bullion and Old Copper Coin.
+-------+----------------+---------------+---------------+------------+
| | | | | |
| Date. | (A) | (B) | Profit on | Loss on |
| | | | Coinage. | Coinage. |
+-------+----------------+---------------+---------------+------------+
| 1860: | £ _s. d._| £ _s. d._| £ _s. d._| £ _s. d._|
|Copper | 134 8 0 | 16,317 10 0 | 21,672 18 0 | |
|Bronze | 37,856 0 0 | | | |
| | | | | |
|Bronze:| | | | |
|1861 | 273,578 13 4 |117,963 10 0 |155,615 3 4 | |
|1862 | 352,800 0 0 |230,784 3 0 |122,015 17 0 | |
|1863 | 151,648 0 0 |136,315 0 0 | 15,333 0 0 | |
|1864 | 18,069 6 8 | 49,966 0 0 | |31,896 13 4|
|1865 | 57,493 6 8 | 16,518 0 0 | 40,975 6 8 | |
|1866 | 50,624 0 0 | 9,273 0 0 | 41,351 0 0 | |
|1867 | 33,301 6 8 | 6,260 0 0 | 27,041 6 8 | |
|1868 | 16,328 0 2 | 5,059 0 0 | 11,269 0 2 | |
|1869 | 20,832 0 0 | 8,355 15 6 | | |
| +----------------+---------------+---------------+------------+
| |1,012,665 1 6 |596,811 18 6 |435,273 11 10 |31,896 13 4|
+-------+----------------+---------------+---------------+------------+
C. W. FREMANTLE, DEPUTY MASTER OF THE MINT.
ROYAL MINT, _31st May, 1870_.

The foregoing is demonstrative of the processes of coining as conducted in the Royal Mint, and of the system which prevails in that Department; I feel it right, however, to add an epitome of the trial of the pyx, a custom established by the Mint Indenture of 18th Edward III.

I will describe the trial which took place on the 17th of July, 1861, when the Lord Chancellor Westbury presided in the absence of the Queen, whom he represented as though she were personally present. It should have commenced at nine o’clock in the morning, but some delay was caused by the inability to open the pyx chamber in Westminster Abbey, owing to the rusting of the locks. The Lord Chancellor was supported by the following members of the Most Honourable the Privy Council, Lord Granville, the Duke of Argyll, Sir Edward Ryan, and the Right Hon. Robert Lowe; Lord Monteagle attending officially with the trial plates in sealed packages. The jury of twelve men selected by the Goldsmiths’ Company was then sworn in due form. Lord Monteagle next declared that the trial plates were standard according to law, and that they were in the same state, and that the seals were in the same state, as when deposited in the pyx chamber. The Lord Chancellor then charged the jury, telling them of the prerogative of the Crown, and that the Sovereign has a right to issue money bearing her image and superscription, and that the people take such money in commerce because it is guaranteed of certain purity, that this guarantee also insures the receiving of the money by foreign nations; and that these facts made the attesting of its purity a vital point, that all people might be assured by their verdict that the money issued is in accordance with the law, both as to weight and fineness. The Lord Chancellor then explained the laws relating to the coinage, and that the Master of the Mint, who was present, would, if their verdict were favourable, be discharged from further liabilities as to the coin he had made up to the 31st of December, 1860. After this the Lord Chancellor dwelt upon the antiquity of the trial of the pyx very briefly, and then explained that the word _pyx_ is of Greek origin, and means “box”—the box in which is placed the money to be tested by the jury. He then explained the law as to the custody of the pyx and of its keys, and passed on to the latitude allowed for errors as to the standarding of the alloy, and for the remedy by weight for each pound of manufactured coin;[125] stating that there had been one adverse verdict found by a jury at the trial of the pyx, but that the present verdict would doubtless be favourable to the Master of the Mint, who would then be discharged from further liabilities by Royal letters-patent. He then adjourned the jury to the Goldsmiths’ Hall to make the necessary tests and trials of the coin, desiring that they should afterwards deliver their verdict to him, either at the House of Lords at six o’clock, or at his residence at eight o’clock. Lord Monteagle then handed the trial plates to the foreman of the jury. The trial plates are wide ribbons of gold and of silver, about as thick as a florin, and indented on the edges. The face of each plate is stamped with the obverse impression of a sovereign die; and the date of its manufacture, with the proportion of its alloy, is engraved on each plate.

[Footnote 125: Specified by the Mint Indenture, which was legalised by the Act of Parliament 56 Geo. III. cap. 68, sec. ii.]

The jury, having arrived at the Goldsmiths’ Hall, proceeded to count and weigh the gold and silver moneys of Sir John Herschel, and of Thomas Graham, Esq.; they then selected a fixed number from the coins of each Mastership for trial by assay, following a process similar to that described at pages 10-14. The jury also tested the coined money by weight, but did not test any individual coin (see new law, pages 70-73) as to its weight, because the old law only required the coined money to be within the limits of weight allowed, supposing a fixed number of any coins to be weighed against a standard pound. The limit, or remedy, was 12 grains on each pound weight troy of gold coin, or about O·2568218 grain on each sovereign, and 24·00 grains on each pound weight troy of silver coin. After the assay the jury agreed upon a verdict, which was to the effect that the moneys of both Masterships were found by them to be within the remedy, both as regards weight and fineness. This verdict was delivered at eight o’clock P.M., at the Lord Chancellor’s private residence. The Master of the Mint was present, with his Deputy Master and other officers, during the trial. The total amount in the pyx at this trial was £36,417 10_s._ in gold moneys, and £807 4_s._ 3_d._ in silver moneys, and from these the jury selected a total of 60·616 ounces of gold and 71·018 ounces of silver for the assays.

In the same manner the trial of the pyx was held at Westminster on the 19th January, 1866, the only difference consisting in the fact that at that time £34,927,008 8_s._ 0¼_d._ in coined gold, and £1,556,100 11_s._ 10_d._ in coined silver were submitted to this test.

In an earlier page[126] I have expressed my views as to the worthlessness of the farce called the _Trial of the Pyx_. While I studiously avoid altering that expression of opinion, I am sorry that the _last_ Trial of the Pyx under the ancient law took place on Tuesday, the 15th day of February, 1870. I could have felt less regret at the removal of this ancient custom from one law to another, had there been provision for its better execution; but simply to do away with the sacred charm of antiquity, and to enact a troublesome deception, is worse than a blunder; it is, in my antiquarian view, a crime.

[Footnote 126: See pages 53-56.]

The _Trial of the Pyx_—now, without meaning, as well as a farce—is to be held, under the Act 33 Victoria, chap. 10, at least once in every year. Why not daily throughout the year—that its absurdity may be demonstrated more markedly? Had it been as it should have been, a real trial of the Pyx, instead of an examination with a foregone conclusion of certain coins; “at least once in every year,” would have been not only justifiable but right.

CONCLUDING REMARKS.

Throughout the foregoing pages I have endeavoured to point out the causes which lead to mismanagement in the Royal Mint, and I should be glad if I could see a reason to hope that this state of things was likely to terminate. However, there seems to exist an obstinate determination to maintain the present arrangements. If proof of this be required, it exists in the re-issue of Pistrucci’s device on the sovereign of 1871, which meets with deserved condemnation from all classes of opinion. It is a wrong to Pistrucci’s memory to append his initials to a coin so mutilated. While, however, Mr. Fremantle thinks it economy to continue—_vide_ “European Mints”—the present system of the die department of the Royal Mint, the nation must bear the disgrace inherent to such determination. There is, however, reason to believe that this subject will be forced upon the Master of the Mint, for it is now attracting considerable attention. That St. George, seated on his horse, should be placed in a concavity, is perhaps intended to symbolise the necessity for washing from him the dirt in which he has of late been bathed; but that thus sinking the work on a coin is wise may be questioned, for our coins should represent medals, not saucers of tarnished copper. Instead, however, of altering the effigy of her Majesty, they at the Mint have made an unwise alteration of the eye alone, and which gives a very unpleasant expression. The necessity for the issue of this new coin arose from the fact of the alteration from base to standard coin (see pages 54-56), and its design is really a Hall mark to point out to the Mint authorities the real value of the coin. When purchased for melting, five hundred of these coins will be worth £500, but an equal number of coins of the previous issue is worth only £499; so that by the alteration the Bank of England now loses £2,000 which it before enjoyed from this source, quite independently of the profit demonstrated at pages 126-127.

I have insisted on the necessity for a different system as applied to the chief engravership of the Royal Mint, and, consequently, for a new effigy of her Majesty on the coins of the realm. I had hoped that when the George and Dragon was issued, a new device would also appear, and that this did not take place is a subject of universal regret. There appears to be a want of knowledge as to the cause for retaining the present obverse; I therefore mention it. The objection to change arose with his late Royal Highness the Prince Consort, who resisted any alteration of the design in the die of the face of her whom he loved so well. This fact probably prevents the issue of a coin from the new pattern die which is prepared in the Mint.

The want of knowledge exhibited in the Royal Mint is further demonstrated by the recommendations of Mr. Napier, who has not been at the pains to understand the cutting-out presses which he condemns. I concur, however, in that condemnation; for these machines should be small, powerful, and diaphanous, if I may so interpret that word; not heavy and light-obstructing as at present. Such a machine can readily replace the present machinery, which, with one coining press and its complete accompaniments, will find a fitting home in the South Kensington Museum. Had we in these days the inventive minds of past generations, we might hope to see the principle of the screw press of Mr. Boulton so modified and applied to the other presses in the Mint, that they would require but little more space than that occupied by themselves alone; indeed, such an instrument seems but a natural result of the existence of Mr. Boulton’s press, and coins, intended to represent medals, should be formed by a blow, not by gradual pressure. That the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the time being should be Master of the Mint is perhaps the strongest proof of the ignorance on the subject of the Parliament which passed the Act that can be produced. It keeps the Deputy-Master of the Mint, by his own admission, continually journeying between the Mint and the Treasury Chambers to instruct the Master, instead of, as he should be, attending to the arrangements of the Mint. Parliament, I hope, will yet see that the master of a working Department should be a practical, not merely a financial or political man.

When the new Coinage Act was passing through Parliament, a clause was introduced which has enabled any person to send gold to the Mint for coinage free from expense, except loss of interest. Colonel Tomline, M.P., has been the first to avail himself of this right, and I happened to be with that gentleman on the 4th February, 1871, when he received from the Mint £100 in coined gold, of which he gave me a specimen. This is the first time that a private person has attempted such an invasion of the prescriptive rights of the Bank of England, and by it he has made a clear gain of 1¾_d._ (although in this instance he lost profit by assay and trade practice), for he sent an ingot which weighed 25·681 ounces—seller’s weight at £3 17_s._ 9_d._ an ounce—and received back from the Mint 25·684 ounces of sovereigns, or in excess weight 0·003 ounce. The time occupied was twenty days. The principle thus established is a great one, and it is to be hoped that Colonel Tomline will carry his point against the Master of the Mint as regards a free coinage of silver; for while the Government claims the exclusive right to coin silver, its workshop—the Mint—refuses to issue coined silver to the public. That department sells threepenny pieces because the Bank of England will not take the trouble; but all other silver coin goes to that institution, to be issued by it to bankers alone in bulk.

Colonel Tomline will perhaps consider the wisdom of re-establishing an Exchange where those who have an excess of bronze or silver can exchange it for gold, and those who wish it can obtain the subservient coinages.

There are strong reasons why the Royal Mint, instead of the Bank of England, should purchase gold bullion and pay for it in Mint notes, but, leaving the full consideration of this part of the subject for a future opportunity, it seems that there can be little doubt of the fairness of my proposition to charge one pound for the coining of each thousand sovereigns, this sum being quite sufficient even under the present system to protect the Mint from loss, while it is certain that it would, under efficient management, yield a profit. If, then, beyond this degree of protection against pecuniary loss by the gold coinage the average amount of silver and bronze were coined, the Royal Mint should be—and under proper control would be—not only a self-supporting Department, but one of actual profit, just as the Post Office has become, instead of, as at present, a vast abyss into which a great amount of money is thrown, never again to appear. It must not be conceived that my wish or intention is to do violence to those who hold office; my desire has been to point out the irregularities which prevail, and at the same time, from experience gained under exceptional opportunities, and by perseverance under adverse circumstances, to develope the actual facts, so that when these are known the irregularities, to say the least of it, may be remedied.

I cannot assert that my descriptions explain the operations at the Mint as now conducted; but this I do feel, that if such suggestions as I have made for improvements in the operative department were alone followed in their entirety, the result would be a clear saving of at least £4,000 a year; while, if the other propositions which I have endeavoured to demonstrate are carried into effect, it seems perfectly clear that the Chancellor of the Exchequer need not apply year after year to include in the estimates the large amount required to meet the losses of the Mint.

It is due to myself to state that the manuscript for my late edition was in the hands of the Publisher at the time of Mr. Graham’s death, and on the occurrence of that event I, at great expense, altered many passages which I had written, with an especial view to Mr. Graham’s replying to them.

I wish to state that my object is to point out the system and its results; and in case the feelings of any gentlemen should be hurt, I must apologise to them, pleading the necessity, when a discussion on the Mint is pending, that all who are acquainted with the subject should exhibit facts relating to it, that when the whole matter is fairly considered a true judgment should be arrived at; for, as Archbishop Whateley has truly said, “The deadliest of all falsehoods is the lie of suppression.”

APPENDIX.

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LORD KINNAIRD, K.T.

27, BERNARD STREET, RUSSELL SQUARE, W. C.
_February 8th, 1871._

MY LORD,

I shall feel obliged if I may thank you for your Lordship’s letter of the 7th inst., in which you request from me—in consequence of the remarks made on my character by Mr. Lowe in the House of Commons, and by the Duke of Argyll and Lord Lansdowne in the House of Lords—a history of my connection with the Mint.

In compliance with your Lordship’s request, I proceed to put in writing an account of my association with and severance from the Royal Mint. That I may occupy as little of your Lordship’s valuable time as possible, I have selected certain passages from the Treasury correspondence which relate to myself. I am not aware that I have at all unduly interpreted those letters, or that, by omitting parts, I have made them appear more favourable to myself than they were intended by their authors to be. If, however, the Government should so view these extracts, may I beg of your Lordship to move for the complete correspondence, the publication of which would, I believe, more fully demonstrate my “case.” I possess copies of that correspondence, but extracts from it will convey all that concerns myself; to this there is one exception, and I beg to submit a considerable portion of one letter from the Master of the Mint to the Treasury, because its contents fully bear out my statement that great irregularities had existed and were checked. Indeed, I now invite your Lordship’s attention to a passage in that letter because the Mint is at present conducted at extravagant expense, while its losses of bullion reach far towards the former average. Mr. Graham says, “The diminished waste of late years (1857-60) is further attended with increased economy in working, of which, indeed, a low waste return is one of the surest indications.”

The correspondence which your Lordship has so generously placed at my disposal, I also include that my account may be complete, although necessarily brief. I should also state that, by the rules of the Civil Service, an extra clerk cannot approach the head of his Department without permission from his superior officer. Yet your Lordship will observe that the Master of the Mint not only received my reports, but addressed orders to, and treated me as, the chief on whom he relied, as is proved by his writings now copied as well as by those in my possession.

In the early part of the year 1856 the Master of the Mint found himself so beset with difficulties arising from irregularities committed by those who should have supported him, that he formed a determination to engage a person on whom he could rely in the Coining Department, and who at the same time had sufficient personal influence and knowledge of the work to check those irregularities which he knew were taking place, but which were beyond his personal supervision. These irregularities were known to the Government of that period, and had caused so vast an expense that that Government, which was presided over by Lord Palmerston, had intimated to the Master, that unless the Mint could be conducted more satisfactorily and economically, it would be broken up as an imperial establishment, and thus necessitate the placing of the coinage in the hands of contractors. With this view papers were printed and issued to various firms; but Mr. Graham, being very sincere and energetic in his desire to so conduct the Mint as that this necessity should not arise, sought the advice of engineers and others, with a view to finding such a man as combined within himself the qualities which he saw to be necessary. Finally, by the advice of Dr. A. W. Hofmann, he called upon me at my residence in October, 1856, and related to me in detail the facts above alluded to, and explained precisely the position of affairs at the Mint, giving me the names of the troublesome persons, and showing his own position to be so intolerable, that without some one on whom he could rely, it would be impossible for him to continue his Mastership. Mr. Graham then proceeded to tell me what had passed between Dr. Hofmann and himself as to my fitness for the work required, and explained clearly the impossibility of placing me in a secure position or in high office at first, but that if I would accept a supernumerary clerkship temporarily, he would, when I had effected the object of his desires, advise my promotion to the office then held by Mr. W. T. Brande, when that office should become vacant. With this understanding I agreed to accept the position proposed if duly appointed; but that I might be able to carry out such reforms as were necessary, I insisted on sufficient power being given to me by himself or by the Government. In pursuance of this agreement, Mr. Graham recommended my appointment in a letter to the Treasury, dated 29th October, 1856, in the following terms:—

“I desired to introduce a young man, recommended by scientific and technical information available in coining, by energy of character, and by tried ability in the supervision of workmen—a faculty by no means common. After applying to Mr. William Fairbairn and to Mr. George Rennie, who both recommended candidates, and making inquiry in various other quarters, I have been led to propose the name of Mr. George Frederick Ansell as temporary clerk. Mr. Ansell was educated under Dr. Hofmann, and acted for some years as his laboratory assistant. He has since been Scientific Director in the Panopticon, Leicester Square, which was lately broken up. He appears to be a person of superior education and ability, and great activity and vigour of character, and, as I have been assured, has shown much discretion in the management of both pupils and workmen.”

Mr. Graham announced to me my appointment in the following note:—

“_Royal Mint, November 6th, 1856._
“MY DEAR SIR,—
“I am happy to inform you that your nomination to office in the
Mint has been approved by the Treasury.

“Would you favour me with a call to-day before three o’clock, if
quite convenient; or, if not, to-morrow morning after eleven.

“Ever truly yours,
“GEORGE FREDERICK ANSELL, ESQ.” “THOMAS GRAHAM.

I was thus appointed to a supernumerary clerkship, and took office in the Rolling Room of the Royal Mint; but before doing so I particularly inquired of Mr. Graham, in the presence of Mr. W. H. Barton, the then Deputy-Master, what authority I should have, and how far I should be supported if I attempted to enforce obedience, and whether I was at liberty to call for statements and examine original documents and books. He verbally authorised me to examine such books as I wished to examine, and desired Mr. Barton to give me such statements or information as I might ask for; and as to my authority, he said, “If you order the men to dance a hornpipe on the table, they shall do it, and all orders shall pass through your hands.” With such power, and a salary of £120 a year, or rather £10 a month, I took office on the 12th November, 1856.

An examination of the books in the Royal Mint will prove that I quickly corrected the irregularities in the Rolling Room, and increased the amount of finished work by 100 per cent. Loss of bullion became unknown in that room.

In the Adjusting and Cutting Room, however, the losses and rejected work continued to be astounding, the loss averaging seven ounces of gold per diem, and for days together running so high as twelve ounces. The Master had many times urged me to relinquish the direction of the Rolling Room, and to take charge of the Cutting Room. I, however, maintained that it was wiser “to begin at the beginning and clear up as I went.” To this he reluctantly assented, but on the 25th of February, 1857, the officer who had charge of that department, as well as of the Weighing Room, exhibited so decided an opposition to the written order of the Master, that it became necessary for me to yield the point. On that day I changed duties with the officer alluded to. The Master wished me also to superintend and assist the officer so removed to the Rolling Room, and I made a note to that effect in the official book of that department, which doubtless still remains.

It had been the custom with officers in the Mint to consider it derogatory to understand practically the machines in use, and the officer whom I replaced did not know for years afterwards whether the cylinders used in the Drag Bench were fixed or movable, and described them as “going round like the rollers!!!” I had, however, a different opinion; and, notwithstanding the scorn and contempt of the “gentlemen” of the Mint, made myself minutely acquainted with all details, so that I could perform the manual labour of each workman; this had been observed, and when I took charge of the Adjusting and Cutting Rooms the foreman of those rooms barricaded himself in his recess with a determination to prevent me seeing his operations. I stepped from one copper trough to another, and thus placed myself at his side, greatly to his astonishment. His remarks were significant, “You mean to learn the duties?” “I do.” To which he replied, “Man proposes, God disposes.” I directed the removal of the barricades, and invited the foreman into my private room, where a little conversation enabled him to understand his new officer.

I then delegated to Mr. Richard Pilcher the charge of the Weighing Room, and gave him the key of the stronghold in that room: while I remained in the Mint he retained that position, and still holds it. He served me faithfully and fearlessly.

Subsequently I weighed to the foreman of the Cutting and Adjusting Room, in the presence of himself and the workmen, a given weight of gold, which I watched in its progress, and weighed at each stop. As was to be expected, there was a final increase of weight: many explanations were asked, and given; but I firmly demanded all the gold so delivered, each day, and thus replaced _habitual loss_ by habitual gain.

Without passing into too minute detail, it is sufficient to state, that while some men were removed, others were introduced. That these changes were made by me I can conclusively prove by the Master’s written orders and letters to that effect. But the following letter to the Treasury seems to tell an indisputable tale.

EXTRACTS FROM LETTER OF MASTER OF THE MINT TO THE
LORDS OF THE TREASURY.
_Royal Mint, August 6, 1857._

“The late foreman, who was dismissed.... The dismissal of
J—— B——, late foreman in the Adjusting and Cutting
Rooms, arose out of an investigation respecting the nature
and extent of the waste of bullion in the operations of
coining, which is a subject demanding the most watchful
attention in the direction of a Mint. This loss is
understood to have been represented by the moneyers as
averaging 7 parts in 10,000 parts of gold coined, or £700
in one million sterling coined; and it has continued
undiminished under the new arrangements. Such an amount of
loss of metal appeared to me excessive, and certainly is so
when compared with the corresponding loss in the Mint of
Paris, which I am informed on good authority lies between
3 and 5 parts only in 10,000 parts of metal, and this with
much hurry of execution, and with inferior machinery, and
other circumstances against the Paris Mint.

“The appointment of the new officers, Mr. —— and Mr.
Ansell, in the Coining Department gave me means of laying
out the inquiry with effect. It is a subject of considerable
difficulty from the circumstances that the losses to be
detected, as they occur, are minute in themselves, although
their cumulative effect is great; and such losses are
often masked and concealed by legitimate change of weight
in the bullion, due to oxidation of the alloy, adhering
oil, &c. Without entering into details I may state that I
have reasons to believe the inquiry will result in a large
reduction of our waste, and great profit to the Mint, which
I trust will appear in the returns of the next gold coinage.
A portion of the loss is traced to culpable proceedings on
the part of the dismissed foreman, who, as tryer of fillets,
appears to have occasioned much mischief by producing bad
work (blanks out of remedy) seemingly with a purpose.

* * * * *

“By the vigorous action of two of these officers, Mr. ——
and Mr. Ansell, great economy has been enforced throughout
the Coining Department. Mr. Ansell, since his appointment in
November last, has been acting on the salary of a temporary
clerk, £10 a month, with the addition of £2 10_s._ per
month when engaged from 8 A.M. till 6 P.M.
I now beg strongly to recommend that Mr. Ansell’s
monthly salary shall be increased to £12 10_s._, in
consideration of his valuable services, with the addition of
£2 10_s._ per month when engaged from 8 A.M.
to 6 P.M. as heretofore.

* * * * *

(The master then goes on to request my Lords to do this
for Mr. Ansell.)
“THO. GRAHAM.
“_August 6, 1857_ (No. 1114).”

In this letter the Master justly attributes the stoppage
of the losses to the dismissal of J—— B——, at my
recommendation, and in consequence of my investigation, as
is proved by my Report to the Master, and by his letter to
the Treasury, copies of which I can furnish; but that this
was the case is demonstrated by the following order:—

“_Royal Mint, 10th July, 1857._

“Ordered that J—— B—— be discharged from the service of
the Mint, in consequence of frequent neglect and inaccuracy
as Tryer in the Adjusting and Cutting Rooms of the Coining
Department, in accordance with the Report of Mr. Ansell, of
July 8th. Confirmed by Mr. Buckle.

(Signed) “THO. GRAHAM.”

(EXTRACT.) LETTER FROM THE TREASURY TO THE MASTER OF THE MINT.

“_25th August, 1857._

“My Lords sanction proposed arrangements of the 6th, but
desire to receive a Report of the circumstances connected
with the dismissal of J—— B——, in consequence of the
investigation respecting waste of bullion.

(Signed) “W. H. STEPHENSON.
“_Mint (No. 1163), 27th August, 1857._”

I, in consequence of this letter from the Treasury, went to Somerset House and to Doctors’ Commons, and obtained many particulars relating to J—— B——; and the Master wrote a Report to the Treasury, of which I have, and can produce, a copy: it is dated 15th June, 1858.

(EXTRACT.) LETTER FROM THE LORDS OF THE TREASURY TO THE
MASTER OF THE MINT.

“_Treasury Chambers, 3rd September, 1858._

“SIR,

“In reply to your letter, dated 17th ultimo, recommending
the grant of increased salaries to Messrs. —— and Ansell,
I am commanded by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s
Treasury to state, that although they readily admit
Messrs. —— and Ansell’s claims upon their favourable
consideration, they cannot authorise the full amount
recommended for them: their Lordships are pleased to fix
Mr. —— and Mr. Ansell’s salary at two hundred and twenty
pounds a year, including the allowance hitherto received by
him for additional attendance—both these augmentations to
take effect from the commencement of the present year.

(Signed) “C. E. TREVELYAN.
“_Treasury (No. 14409), 3rd September._
“THE MASTER OF THE MINT.”

Notwithstanding these facts the Master of the Mint, towards the end of 1859, showed by his actions that he meant to introduce his bankrupt brother, to whose character your Lordship alluded in the House of Lords; and whose ignorance of the duties, coupled with great inequality of temper and intemperate habits, rendered him totally unfit for the office. Such being the unmistakable intention of Mr. Graham, who disregarded the advice tendered to him by influential persons, I addressed to him the letter which follows:—

TO THE MASTER OF THE MINT FROM GEORGE F. ANSELL, ESQ.

“_Royal Mint, January 6th, 1860._

“SIR,

“I trust you will accord to me the regret with which I bring
to your notice affairs relating to myself. Circumstances
have placed me in a position which is very anomalous, while
my salary is such that I find it quite impossible to manage
my payments so as to keep free from debt, and I now most
unwillingly approach you upon the subject, hoping that
you will permit me to place in your hands the grounds on
which I rest my hope, that my application will receive your
favourable and early consideration. On the 12th of November,
1856, I entered the service of the Mint as a Supernumerary
Clerk, and subsequently passed the examination which was
enforced by the Civil Service Commissioners, as that process
was thought by you to be to my ultimate advantage.

“In my first interview with you I expressed surprise at the
large losses which you said were occurring, notwithstanding
the weight of oil which was added to the precious metals in
the processes of coining. My conviction of the impossibility
of this loss arising if proper supervision were exerted was
so great that I at once stated to you, in the presence of
Mr. Barton, that there should be no loss at all upon either
gold or silver; but that if oil were used there should be an
increase of weight.

“You, sir, gave me such authority in the Coining Department
as would enable me to establish my proposition, which you
then said was contrary to the facts as found in the Royal
Mint, as well as in the Paris Mint.

“By your orders I commenced my duties in the Rolling Room,
and was soon satisfied that the irregularities which
existed would quite explain the losses which had taken
place. I reported to you faithfully from day to day all
irregularities, but upon none did I dwell so earnestly as
upon the errors in, and differences of, weighing, attended
by circumstances of which I feel it unnecessary to remind
you, unless I say that they were reduced and overcome by no
ordinary perseverance and at great personal risk.

“While the balances were in error it was impossible to
determine how great the losses were, for they were stated
to be more differences of weighing than anything else; but
I felt it incumbent on me to experiment carefully on the
gold which we were then coining, that I might thus satisfy
myself and you of the truths of my proposition. The average
of five preceding year’s gave a loss of 597·55 ounces on
each million ounces coined; and the result of my first
years experimenting was an average loss of 31·06 ounces on
the million ounces coined. While the second year gave an
absolute increase of weight of 9·22 ounces on the million
ounces coined.

“Your mind will picture the interests which I disturbed, and
give me credit for the moral courage which became necessary
to support the violent enmity which my course drew down on
me, for you are aware of the vigour with which I was met by
adverse opinions from Messrs. ——, ——, ——, and ——;
these gentlemen, as well as the Junior Clerks, who were
supposed to be my colleagues in the Coining Department,
openly maintaining that there were, and had been, no
unnecessary losses. Threats of personal violence did not
deter me from my duty; but the men being well plied with
arguments by the Messrs. ——, ——, who were supported by
Mr. ——, rendered my course extremely difficult.

“Mr. —— accused me of adding more oil than he used to
permit, and so explained the—as he called it—“apparent
stoppage of the losses;” but the fact of my using less
oil than had ever been known was so notorious that he
subsequently admitted it; nevertheless, the accusation
induced me to experiment, and these experiments resulted
in the total abolition of the use of oil in the Rolling
Room, and on the Cutters; while the minute amount which was
necessary at the Draw-Bench was carefully wiped off before
the blanks were cut out.

“Now that the use of oil is abolished gain is impossible,
but the loss is invariably covered by the amount for which
the sweep is sold, so that my proposition is now more
satisfactorily proved than ever. Contemporaneously with
these facts I had to encounter equally serious difficulties
in the subject of rejected blanks, which reached 70 per
cent. on the whole number of blanks cut; but the common
average was from 30 to 35 per cent. By rigid experiments,
conducted by my own hands, I reduced these abominations to
1·00 per cent. on silver, and to 4·00 per cent. on gold,
without the aid of Mr. Pilcher’s excellent filing machine.

“In the year 1857-58, I coined by my own
arrangements—although my plans were strongly combated at
the time—the largest amount of gold coin ever yet produced
in a given time, conducting the coinage without loss, and
with a total of 4·50 per cent. of rejected blanks. A large
quantity of this gold contained osmium-iridium, but I coined
it without its being first refined.

“In 1859 I coined about £250,000 (64,790·224 ounces) of a
peculiarly brittle gold, which was delivered to the Bank
of England in June and July, 1859. I believe this to be
the first time that brittle gold has been coined so as to
produce perfectly good and tough coins.

“Permit me to remind you that all the elements of wrong
still remain in the Mint, and would be re-exerted in the
absence of your Mastership; for not one of those officers
who permitted these things has been removed.

“As a consequence of the abolition of the use of oil in the
Coining Department, the losses in the Melting-House are
greatly reduced.

“In addition to my works in the Coining Department, I beg to
state that I have, by my own hands, reduced the losses in
the Melting-House (this was done during the time of using
oil in the Coining Department) 33 per cent.; and my figures
were not only admitted by Mr. Mushet, but absolutely proved
by him to be below the truth.

“It would be wrong in me to lead you to suppose that I
have performed these works without active co-operation; I
therefore freely acknowledge the services of Mr. —— during
these past two years, and I beg to be permitted to say that
he is now rendering you most efficient services.

“If I have to acknowledge the services of Mr. —— I feel
myself bound in justice to say more of Mr. Richard Pilcher,
who has, under peculiar circumstances, rendered you through
me most valuable services; he has done many things greatly
to the advantage of the Mint. In times past, Mr. Pilcher
has borne a life best described as that of ‘a toad under
a harrow,’ and his position remaining the same, although
his present circumstances are altered, he would be again
thrust back into the trouble he has just escaped from. I
therefore, trusting that you will not think me presumptuous,
beg of you to recommend to the Lords of the Treasury, as a
temporary measure, that Mr. Pilcher be recognised as holding
a position equal to that of a Junior Clerk, and that he may
have sole charge of the Weighing Room, with a salary of £200
a year, which would be an addition of only £8 18_s._ a
year to his present pay. I assure you, most honestly, that
Mr. Pilcher is thoroughly competent to conduct the duties
of the Weighing Room, for he has conducted them without a
single fault for three years.

“As regards myself, I feel that if you will give me your
consideration, you will determine that my works are worthy
a special application to the Lords of the Treasury; that my
position and salary may be commensurate with my services,
which have been rendered in profound confidence in your
sense of justice towards those who do their duty to you.

“You are aware, sir, that of necessity, I have placed myself
in direct antagonism with those by whom you are surrounded,
and that I can therefore hope for reward at your hands only.

“With unmeasured hope and confidence,

“I am, Sir,
“Your most faithful servant,
“GEORGE F. ANSELL.
“TO THE MASTER OF THE MINT.”

After the “receipt of that letter” the Master told me he would at once establish me, but could not make a fresh appointment, because the Treasury looked with such distaste on new appointments; but he promised me “the first place:” “you shall be first—above them all.” That he admitted my claims is proved by the fact that he told a mutual friend—whom I had consulted, and by whose advice I wrote that letter—that “Mr. Ansell’s claims were stronger than he had represented;” but that this was his real opinion is clearly proved, not only by his former letters to the Treasury, but by the written orders and notes addressed to me, now in my possession, and by the letter which he wrote to the Treasury on the 7th June, 1860.

(EXTRACT.) LETTER FROM THE MASTER OF THE MINT TO THE
LORDS COMMISSIONERS OF HER MAJESTY’S TREASURY.
_Royal Mint, 7th June, 1860._
“SIR,

“In continuation of the account of the waste or loss of
bullion sustained in coining gold during the periods from
1851 to 1858 which was submitted to the Lords Commissioners
of Her Majesty’s Treasury, in my letter of the 22nd May,
1858, I beg now to add a return of the waste upon the gold
coinage of another year, 1858-9.

“The waste in the Melting and Coining Departments will be
stated separately.

WASTE IN THE MELTING DEPARTMENT—GOLD COINAGE.

+--------------+-----------+----------------+-------+-----------+
| | Weight of | |Amount | |
| Date. | Gold | Value of Gold | of | Value of|
| | Coinage. | Coinage. |Waste. | Waste. |
+--------------+-----------+----------------+-------+-----------+
|April 1, 1858,| Ounces. | £ _s. d._|Ounces.| £ _s. d._|
| to March | 736150·582|2,866,386 6 6¾ |248·804|968 15 7¼ |
| 31, 1859. | | | | |
+--------------+-----------+----------------+-------+-----------+
+--------------+-----------+------------+-----------+
| | Value | Value of | Value of |
| Date. | of Sweep | Waste per | Sweep per |
| |recovered. | Million. | Million. |
+--------------+-----------+------------+-----------+
|April 1, 1858,| £ _s. d._| £ _s.d._ | £ _s. d._|
| to March |231 2 1¼ | 337 19 7 | 80 12 6¼ |
| 31, 1859. | | | |
+--------------+-----------+------------+-----------+

“The net loss of the department will be obtained by deducting the value of the sweep recovered from the value of the waste, reported above, and is as follows:—

“On a gold coinage of £2,866,386 6_s._ 6¾_d._ the net loss by account in the Melting Department is £737 16_s._ 5¾_d._; this gives on a million coined a net loss of £257 7_s._ 0¾_d._ Of the loss by account a portion is apparent only, and depends upon the dissipation during the melting of the oil and other impurities adhering to the gold scissel. The adventitious matter described was acquired by the scissel in the coining operations, and it has the effect of lowering the amount of loss reported in the Coining Department (as will be seen immediately) in the same proportion that it elevates the loss by account of the Melting Department. But after making allowances for the circumstance just stated, the loss of gold in melting remains higher in my opinion than it ought to be, and it will, I trust, be found to admit of some further reduction in future years.

WASTE IN COINING DEPARTMENT—GOLD COINAGE.