Chapter XIII: Part 13

+--------------+-----------+----------------+-------+-----------+
| | | |Amount | |
| Date. | Weight of | Value of | 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 |16·603 |64 12 11¼ |
| 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 |209 16 7 |22 11 0¾ | 73 4 0¾ |
| 31, 1859. | | | |
+--------------+-----------+-----------+------------+

“On a gold coinage of £2,866,386 6_s._ 6¾_d._ the account shows a waste amounting to £64 12_s._ 11½_d._, with sweep recovered amounting to £209 16_s._ 7_d._ The Coining Department therefore returns a surplus by account of £145 3_s._ 7½_d._; that is, £209 16_s._ 7_d._ less £64 12_s._ 11¼_d._

“A surplus by account instead of the usual loss was exhibited for the first time in the return of the preceding year. A true surplus or increase of metal is of course unattainable in any minting operation. The increase of weight recorded arises from adventitious matter acquired by the gold scissel in the Coining Department, to be again lost in the melting, as was just explained. The surplus by account of the Coining Department amounts to £50 13_s._ 0_d._ on £1,000,000 coined.

“A correct estimate of the whole waste in coining is obtained by combining the returns of the two departments:—

£ _s. d._
“Loss of Melting Department 257 7 0¾ per million.
Loss of Coining Department 50 13 0 ”
--------------
Difference 206 14 0¾ ”

“It thus appears that in 1858-9 the net loss in minting £1,000,000 gold was £206 14_s._ 0¾_d._

“The annual loss since the reconstitution of the Mint in 1851 is as follows.

“Loss of bullion (waste, less sweep recovered) in minting £1,000,000 gold—

£ _s. d._
In 1851-52 479 5 8
” 1852-53 921 10 7
” 1853-54 795 11 7¾
” 1854-55 661 2 4¼
” 1855-56 724 1 3
” 1856-57 691 14 1¾
” 1857-58 140 4 7[127]
” 1858-59 206 14 0¾
” 1859-60 187 0 0 partly by estimate.

[Footnote 127: Understated at £99 14_s._ 5½2_d._ in previous letter of May 22, 1858, in consequence of the sweep recovered per million having been taken at £136 13_s._ 9_d._ instead of £93 3_s._ 7_d._, the correct amount.]

“An additional year just completed, 1859-60, which appears in the preceding statement, is given subject to a subsequent correction of a few pounds more or less, as the sweep of that year (being still unsold) is taken by estimate.

“It appears by the table that the average loss on the gold coinage of the first six years is £784 0_s._ 0¾_d._; and on the gold coinage of the last three years, £172 8_s._ 11½_d._ per million coined; showing an improvement of £611 11_s._ 1¼_d._ per million coined. On the twelve millions of gold coined, during the last three years, the saving exceeds twelve thousand pounds.

“The diminished waste of the late years is further attended with increased economy in working, of which, indeed, a low waste return is one of the surest indications. The proportion of sovereign blanks rejected in passing through the weighing machines, and which require to be remelted, causing thereby additional waste of metal and loss of labour, has been gradually diminished. This is shown by the following returns respecting the work performed in similar circumstances at various periods.

PROPORTION IN 100 SOVEREIGN BLANKS CUT.

“In 1855 21·49 per cent.
” 1856 18·51 ”
” 1859 13·78 ” Under present officers.
” 1860 4·11 ” ” ”

“The last small proportion of 4·11 per cent. of rejected blanks was further reduced to 2·07 per cent. by submitting the heavy portion of the blanks to the action of a new filing machine. I may be allowed to recall to your recollection that a Parliamentary grant of £1,100 was obtained by the Mint in 1856 for the purchase of two automaton filing and adjusting machines, which it was proposed to have constructed by Messrs. Napier and Sons, the eminent engineers. No part of this grant has been appropriated.

“The rapid amendment in the blanks which took place immediately afterwards led me to suspend the order for those machines, and ultimately to abandon the idea of any great expenditure for the object contemplated. In the meantime also a machine of a much more simple construction was contrived by Mr. Richard Pilcher, of the Weighing Room, and was constructed in the Mint with no assistance from without. Pilcher’s adjusting machine has proved sufficiently effective, costs nothing for labour, and has now been in constant operation for two years. The cost of making a pair of machines such as we now possess is estimated at £60, a sum which was saved to the public by the mode in which the work was executed. Trusting that the Lords Commissioners of her Majesty’s Treasury will be disposed to consider favourably the merit and practical value of such an invention, I venture to solicit their Lordship’s sanction to the application of £60, the sum just stated, to the benefit of the inventor, jointly with an ingenious mechanic on the establishment who gave material assistance in the construction of the machine. I would propose the following awards, if agreeable to their Lordships:—

“To Mr. R. Pilcher £40.

“To Meredith Jones £20.

“Their Lordships have afforded encouragement on previous occasions to voluntary efforts made within the Department in improving the machinery.

“On one additional point I would take the opportunity to offer information, and also submit a proposition for their Lordships’ consideration. A correspondence between the Governor of the Bank of England and myself, on the property of the gold occasionally imported into the Mint to be coined, was formerly brought under your notice in my letter of the 21st of March, 1857. The evidence of the evil in question was not confined to the Royal Mint, but has, I believe, been felt at all other Mints, and also by goldsmiths generally, since the recent gold discoveries. It was, however, traced to the presence in the gold of a minute portion of antimony or arsenic (often not greater in quantity than one-tenth of a per cent.), which escapes the observation of the assayers. But no remedy in dealing with such gold presented itself, except the expensive one of having the brittle gold refined.

“An unusually large proportion of the gold received for coinage last year was of this defective character; but the whole of it was successfully coined, notwithstanding, and no part returned to the Bank to be refined, as on former occasions.

“This improvement in the practice of the Mint is the result of a laborious investigation made in the coining department, of which I am happy to assign the chief merit to Mr. Ansell. It now appears that the antimony or arsenic acts injuriously when the gold blanks are allowed to cool gradually, but not when cooled suddenly after annealing; the gold appearing to have time to crystallise and become granular under the influence of the antimony particles in the one case, but not in the other. The improvement may be justly represented as one of considerable value. It saves entirely much extra labour hitherto applied to brittle gold without any beneficial result. It will also lead to the diminution of waste, of which indeed brittle gold was always a fruitful source.

“The services of Mr. Ansell in effecting this improvement appear to me well deserving of recognition; and I would strongly recommend the award to that gentleman of a moderate grant of such amount as their Lordships may be pleased to accord, on account of these services. Mr. Ansell is a valuable officer, and no one has contributed more to the reduction in other ways of the expenditure of the establishment. Both he and Mr. ——, another junior officer of the Coining Department, are also engaged at salaries (...) which are certainly very moderate, considering the responsible duties these gentlemen are called upon to perform.

(Signed) “THO. GRAHAM.
“To GEORGE A. HAMILTON, ESQ., Treasury.”

I quote thus much of this letter to prove to your Lordship that THE MASTER ADOPTED MY RECOMMENDATIONS; indeed, he specifically stated to me that the recommendations for Mr. Pilcher and myself were made with a view to support a future application. I would also observe that the actual money saving effected by the coining of the brittle gold here alluded to was £1,562 7_s._ 11¾_d._, and I desire to be very clear in stating that I copied this letter from Mr. Graham’s own writing. That a copy of it was sent to the Treasury would seem to be certain, for the following reply was received and handed to me by the Master:—

FROM THE TREASURY TO THE MASTER OF THE MINT.

“_Treasury Chambers, 22nd September, 1860._

“SIR,

“I am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s
Treasury to acquaint you that the general result of your
Report of the 7th June last on the loss of bullion in
coining gold in the year 1858-1859 is, in the opinion of
my Lords, very creditable to the Department under your
management. My Lords willingly accede to your recommendation
that £40 should be granted to Mr. R. Pilcher, and £20 to
Meredith Jones for their services in the invention and
construction of an adjusting machine under the circumstances
represented in your Report. My Lords will also be prepared
to grant a suitable payment to Mr. Ansell, in recognition
of his services in obviating the difficulty in coining gold
containing minute portions of antimony or arsenic, and they
request that you will report to them the amount that you
recommend to be granted to Mr. Ansell.

(Signed) “GEORGE A. HAMILTON.

“THE MASTER OF THE MINT.
“_Mint Number, 2988, 24th September, 1860._”

In answer to this the Master wrote to the Treasury, recommending a payment of £100 to Mr. Ansell, and the Treasury reply was as follows:—

FROM THE TREASURY TO THE MASTER OF THE MINT.

“_Treasury Chambers, 19th October, 1860._
“SIR,

“With reference to your letter of the 13th instant, I
am directed by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s
Treasury to acquaint you that my Lords are pleased to
authorise, in accordance with your recommendation, the grant
of £100 to Mr. Ansell in recognition of his services in
obviating the difficulty of coining gold containing a minute
portion of antimony or arsenic.

(Signed) “GEORGE A. HAMILTON.
“THE MASTER OF THE MINT.
“_Mint Number, 3024, 20th October, 1860._”

Under my advice, the Master addressed a letter to Mr. Pilcher, conveying to that gentleman the £40, having previously written to me the following letter:—

THE MASTER OF THE MINT TO G. F. ANSELL, ESQ.
“_Royal Mint, 20th October, 1860._

“DEAR SIR,

“Your success in obviating the difficulty of coining
gold containing a minute portion of antimony or arsenic
is a benefit to this department which calls for my most
grateful thanks. In recognition of your services, I have the
pleasure, with the approbation of the Lords Commissioners
of Her Majesty’s Treasury, to present to you the sum of one
hundred pounds, for which cheque is enclosed.

“I have the honour to remain,
“Dear Sir,
“Most faithfully yours,
(Signed) “THO. GRAHAM.

“GEORGE F. ANSELL, ESQ.
“_Mint Number, 3026, 1860._”

I was not at the time aware that the Master wrote to the Treasury on the 8th of June, 1860. That he did so, would seem to be proved by the following letter in reply; but that he should write on the next day after his letter of the 7th June, 1860, renders it possible that he made some alteration after that letter left my hand. I have not, my Lord, seen the letter written on the 8th June and alluded to in the next.

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

“_Treasury Chambers, 25th September, 1861._
“SIR,

“I am commanded by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s
Treasury to inform you that, having in consideration the
very favourable opinion expressed in your Report of the
8th June, 1860, as to the ability and vigilance displayed
by Messrs. —— and Ansell, and the saving which has been
effected in the processes at the Mint under your direction,
their Lordships are pleased to sanction the increase of £30
a year to the salaries of those gentlemen, to take effect
from the commencement of the present quarter, as recommended
in your letter of the 6th instant.

(Signed) “GEORGE A. HAMILTON.

“THE MASTER OF THE MINT.
“_Mint Number, 454, 26th September, 1861._”

On the introduction to the Mint of Mr. John Graham all was changed, and it became clear that I was to be sacrificed. Mr. Barton, then Deputy-Master, therefore advised me to bring the matter to an issue by applying for the first vacant office. This I did, but my note was not even acknowledged; the Master, however, obtained a “Minute” from the Lords of the Treasury to the effect that _extra clerks were not at liberty to apply for promotion_, and this was conveyed to me by a messenger. To the office for which I had thus applied, Mr. John Graham who was then an extra clerk, was subsequently appointed. Upon the occurrence of the death of Mr. W. T. Brande, whose office had been specifically promised to me, I spoke to the Master of the Mint; but he assured me “The Treasury would fill up the vacancy, for they were dissatisfied with the whole of the Mint appointments.” He, however, appointed his brother, notwithstanding his acknowledged incompetence and unfitness. It was on the occurrence of that event that Mr. Barton strongly “advised me, on the event of the next vacancy to apply for it over the Master’s head, if you can get an influential person to back you.”

Finding the ground thus removed from my feet, I sought counsel with my friends, and determined to renew my studies in chemistry—having, in consequence of the Master’s promises, relinquished that profession when I entered the Mint.

It now becomes necessary to show by what occurrences my name was brought to your Lordship’s notice, and this I will do briefly.

When I had completed my laboratory in Bernard Street, I called on Mr. Robert Hunt, F. R. S., and asked him what subject would be likely to do me most service. He at once kindly suggested “a means to find fire-damp in coal mines—one that will act unerringly, and require no attention from man.” I at once adopted the subject for study, and Mr. Hunt gave me many kind letters of introduction that I might “see my enemy at home,” especially a note to Mr. Oakes of Riddings House, Alfreton, whose generosity and hospitality were very prominent. I told that gentleman the object of my visit, and talked with him at considerable length, for I found in him a man singularly desirous to help his fellow-men. Mr. Oakes invited his brother to take me to a pit at a distance of about four miles, where I should be almost sure to find some fire-damp, and to this pit Mr. Oakes, junior, most kindly took me. The coal pit was itself a very remarkable one, and contained singular evidences in the history of the past. It will ever be associated with the invention of my “Fire-damp Indicator,” for it was in this pit that the idea for its formation occurred to me. If, therefore, this instrument should fortunately be the means of saving life, that benefit will have arisen from the kindness of Mr. Oakes. When I had made my instruments, I took them to the Mint, and showed them to Mr. Graham. Diffusion being fitly styled GRAHAM’S LAW, I took it for granted he would be pleased to find that force applied practically. I said to him, “I have proposed, Mr. Graham, to indicate the existence of fire-damp in coal mines.” He replied, “Ah, yes; that subject comes up every seven years.” I placed an instrument on his table, and asked if he would look at it, saying, “I propose to use your law of diffusion.” Before I had finished the word _diffusion_ he cut in upon me with an exclamation of great force, “Good God! what would I have given for that thought!” I said, “God gave it to me.” To which he said, “I was on the Coal Mines Commission, and I did all I could to find a means of discovering the presence of that dreadful gas.” He refused to examine my apparatus, on the ground that he objected to the smell of gas, but said, “the honour of being associated with you in it would be so great that I shall be glad if you will allow me to pay all expenses, and you can make your experiments in my laboratory; the apparatus shall be left there.” I, however, declined his offer.

I exhibited the apparatus, as was but natural, in the first instance to Mr. Robert Hunt, at his residence, and afterwards to many other scientific men. It was subsequently noticed in the _Times_, in very high terms. A few days after that event, I received a note from Dr. Angus Smith, F.R.S., asking if I could “exhibit my experiments to Lord Kinnaird at 2 P.M. to-morrow.” I gladly accepted the proposed appointment, and suggested whether “his Lordship could obligingly come to me at 27, Bernard Street,” which he courteously did, accompanied by Mr. P. H. Holland and Dr. Angus R. Smith. I then found that Lord Kinnaird was Chairman, and Mr. Holland a Commissioner, of the Royal Commission of Mines. Your Lordship, as you may remember, honoured me by remaining in company with Mr. Holland and Dr. A. Smith for more than two hours, examining minutely every detail. From that day you have spared neither time nor labour to induce coal owners to adopt and use my “Indicator,”—which your Lordship also brought under the notice of Her Majesty, who deputed H.R.H. the Duke of Edinburgh to examine it on her behalf. This His Royal Highness graciously did at my residence. It has also been distinguished by mention in the Preface to the last edition of Ure’s Dictionary, in which work it is fully described. In practical operation it has proved to be entirely successful even in the hands of working colliers, who have, on more than one occasion, said to me, “When men’s lives are as valuable as those of horses, your instruments will be used; but, you see, they buy horses, and men they get for nothing.”

I took occasion to speak with your Lordship about my troubled position at the Mint, and asked permission to make known to you all the circumstances. You having thus heard from me a statement of my views, advised me to await the arrival of the proper time, and stated that then you would assist me. I have already said that Mr. Barton advised me to apply over Mr. Graham’s head for promotion when a vacancy should occur, and I therefore waited that event. Unfortunately for me, Mr. Barton was the first to be removed by death, he having died on the 25th August, 1868. I had, therefore, no powerful friend left in the Mint.

It was amidst such circumstances that I sought the assistance of your Lordship; which commenced with the following correspondence:—

FROM THE RIGHT HON. LORD KINNAIRD, K.T.,
TO THE RIGHT HON. B. DISRAELI.

“_Rossie Priory, Inchture, N.B._,
“_August 28th, 1868._
“DEAR SIR,

“May I ask you to read the enclosed—I cannot, of course,
ask you as from myself to attend to the application
therein—but having become acquainted with Mr. Ansell during
the time I was Chairman of the Mines Commission, I was so
struck with his intelligence and ingenuity, combined with
a great knowledge of chemistry, that I felt he was a very
valuable public servant. Mr. Ansell has invented a machine
for the discovery of fire-damp in mines, which, if generally
adopted, would be the means of preventing great loss of
life from explosions in coal mines, and I am convinced that
if you could find time you would be much interested in
witnessing his experiments.

“Mr. Ansell has no friends in high quarters to bring his
claims under your notice; I venture therefore to do so,
however unwillingly, because I feel that he is deserving,
and especially well fitted for the appointment. With many
apologies for troubling you,

“I remain,
“Yours faithfully,
(Signed) “KINNAIRD.

“THE RIGHT HON. B. DISRAELI.”

ENCLOSURE.

“_Royal Mint, August 28th, 1868._
“SIR,

“I most respectfully request your attention to the following statement of my claim for promotion consequent on the death of the Deputy Master of the Mint, Mr. Barton. By a letter dated 29th October, 1856, addressed to the Treasury, I was recommended by Mr. Thomas Graham, F.R.S., the Master of the Mint, as fit to be appointed to a Supernumerary Clerkship in the Royal Mint.

“On the 12th of November, 1856, I was appointed to that office at a salary of £120 per annum, having previously passed the necessary examination before the Civil Service Commissioners. The internal management of the Mint then was, and had for some time previously, been in great confusion; the workmen were disorderly and dishonest, peculation was of daily occurrence, and it was universally believed that the processes of coining could not be carried on without considerable loss. Moreover, in consequence of the various modes by which bullion was then weighed, it was almost impossible to detect dishonesty. Nor was this all, for the blank coins were so imperfectly executed that it was always necessary to reject and return to the melting-pot from 15 to 35 per cent.

“From 1851 to 1856 the average ‘loss by coining,’ as it was then called, was

In gold, £581·42 per million pounds sterling.
In silver, £271·00 per million ounces coined.

“During the same years the average number of blank coins rejected was

In gold, 17·92 per cent.
In silver, 25·00 ”

“At this period, owing to the use of oil on the metal in the processes of coining, an additional loss was incurred in the melting. The average loss by melting during the same period being,

In gold, £356·33 per million pounds sterling.
In silver, £210·75 per million ounces coined.

“Soon after I entered the Mint I was taken into the confidence of the Master.

“I satisfied him that by proper management and vigilance no loss ought to be incurred by the processes of coining; that if due care were taken, scarcely any of the blank coins, when completed, would be rejected, and that a further saving to the Government would be effected by abolishing the use of oil in the processes of coining.

“Mr. Graham entrusted to me the sole task of carrying out these reformations, at the same time promising that if I were successful I should be amply rewarded by promotion.

“You, Sir, will be able to judge of my success by the following results:—

“Instead of any ‘loss by coining’ since 1856 to the present date, there has been, on the average, a positive gain:—

In gold, £20 per million pounds sterling coined;
While for silver, £55·75 per million ounces coined is the total average loss.

“During the same time the average number of blank coins rejected has been

In gold, 2·07 per cent.
In silver, 1·00 ”

“During the same period the average loss by melting has been reduced to,

In gold, £271·90 per million pounds sterling.
In silver, £57·90 per million ounces coined.

“In 1857, as you, Sir, will doubtless perfectly remember, there arose a very great pressure on the Bank of England for coined gold; any endeavour to supply this unusual demand necessitated great exertion on the part of the Mint, and the Master of the Mint placed the matter entirely in my hands. I produced, without a single instance of loss by peculation, and with an average of only 6 per cent. rejected blank coins, 1,100 journey weights of sovereigns per week, being more by 200 journey weights than had ever before been obtained. I thus was the humble means of saving the country from experiencing the disastrous effects consequent on the Bank of England being unable to meet the demand for gold—a state of things almost universally expected at the time as the unavoidable result of the then monetary crisis.

“In 1858, during the temporary absence on leave of the Master Melter, the Master of the Mint, by a written order, directed me to conduct the melting department. This I did with such success as to reduce the then ordinary loss by melting by no less than 33 per cent.

“By a letter to the Treasury, dated 17th August, 1858, Mr. Graham recommended my salary to be increased to £220 per annum. This was done soon afterwards.

“In 1859 I endeavoured to coin a large quantity of brittle gold, which had up to that time, not only in the Royal Mint, but also in the mints of other countries, been invariably rejected, under the impression that it was totally unfit for coining purposes in consequence of its extreme brittleness. I coined and sent to the Bank of England upwards of a quarter of a million pounds sterling of this brittle gold, the coins having proved to be so tough that they could not be broken by ordinary means. For this service I received from Mr. Graham a letter, dated 20th October, 1860, conveying to me ‘his most grateful thanks,’ and from the Lords of the Treasury a small gratuity of £100, awarded to me in consequence of a letter to the Treasury from the Master of the Mint, dated 13th October, 1860, recommending that such a donation should be made.

“By a subsequent letter, dated September 6th, 1861, Mr. Graham recommended the Lords of the Treasury to raise my salary to £250 per annum. His recommendation was at once acceded to on the part of the Treasury.

“In 1862, at the request of the Master of the Mint, I undertook the destruction of the old copper money, and destroyed from 10 to 16 tons per diem, at the comparatively small cost of 8_s._ 4_d._ per ton. Before this work was put under my charge 2 tons per diem had never been destroyed; and in the Paris Mint, where a similar process of demonetising had been in operation, the cost had never been less than £10 per ton.

“On several occasions offers were made to me of situations (unconnected with the Royal Mint) in which I should have earned a much greater salary than that which I now receive, but I have always been induced to refuse them by the express promises made to me from time to time by the Master of the Mint, Mr. Graham, that he would ensure my being placed in a safe position in the Mint.

“In the month of November, 1863, the office of Assistant Coiner became vacant. No one, so far as I am aware, had performed so many or so important services as to give him such a claim to that appointment as I possessed; but, much to my surprise, Mr. Graham ignored my claims, and appointed to the vacant office his brother, Mr. John Graham, a gentleman considerably junior to me in the service of the Mint. Smarting under what I conceived the injustice I had experienced from the Master of the Mint, I wrote perhaps too strongly, but for this I have apologised, and he has accepted my apology, but I feel that it is probable that the Master of the Mint will, consequently on the estrangement between us, not recommend me for the appointment, and I can only rely on my services (into which I hope you will kindly cause inquiry to be made), as giving me a claim, and therefore venture to address you by the advice of Lord Kinnaird.

“The unwillingness which I have cause to fear on the part of the Master of the Mint to recommend me will not, I am sure, arise from a belief of my unfitness—as in 1864 he offered to secure to me the appointment of Chief Coiner and Melter to the Hong Kong Mint, at a salary of £1,000 a year—an appointment which, being the father of a family, I was compelled to decline.

“I have to apologise for thus venturing to address you, which I could only think of doing under the belief that you will take into your favourable consideration the application of one who has endeavoured faithfully and zealously to fulfil his duty, and not without some success, as I have endeavoured to point out.

“I have the honour to be, Sir,
“Your most obedient servant,
(Signed) “GEORGE P. ANSELL.

“THE RIGHT HONOURABLE B. DISRAELI,
“Hughendon Manor, Buckinghamshire.”

This application, I would remind your Lordship, was made while Mr. Disraeli was First Minister of the Crown, and was acknowledged as follows:—

“_10, Downing Street, Whitehall, August 31st, 1868._

“MY LORD,

“I am directed by Mr. Disraeli to acknowledge the receipt of
your Lordship’s letter of the 28th inst., and to acquaint
you that he has made a note of its contents.

“I have the honour to be, my Lord,
“Your obedient servant,
(Signed) “MONTAGU CORRY.

“THE LORD KINNAIRD.”

On the 3rd September, 1868, Mr. Montagu Corry called on the Master of the Mint and remained with him some considerable time.

On the 28th September I received by a messenger, without any further intimation, the following note:—

THE MASTER OF THE MINT TO G. F. ANSELL, ESQ.
“_Royal Mint, 28th September, 1868._

“DEAR SIR,

“I regret to have to inform you that it is not in my power
to continue your present engagement as an extra officer in
the coining department while the Mint is only so partially
occupied as it has been for some time past.

“Your assistance will not, therefore, be required beyond the
31st December next.

“I remain, faithfully yours,
(Signed) “THO. GRAHAM.

“G. F. ANSELL, ESQ.”

Which I immediately forwarded to your Lordship, asking advice, when you were so good as to write as follows:—

THE RT. HON. LORD KINNAIRD, K.T., TO THE RT. HON. B. DISRAELI.
“_Rossie Priory, Inchture, N.B., September 30th, 1868._

“DEAR SIR,

“I venture to trouble you on behalf of Mr. Ansell, of the
Royal Mint, who I had advised to apply to you for the
appointment of Deputy Master of the Mint, as from his
long experience in the Department, and great ability as a
chemist, I felt he deserved promotion, and was in every
way fitted for the office. It seems however, that his
application has drawn down the ire of the Master of the
Mint, who, I suppose, wished to have some friend of his own,
consequently Mr. Ansell has received a very curt dismissal
(copy enclosed).

“It is very hard on a public servant who has done his duty
for so many years to be thus summarily dismissed, and I
therefore venture again to trouble you on the subject,
feeling confident that your sense of justice will dispose
you to view the matter favourably.

“Yours faithfully,
(Signed) “KINNAIRD.

“THE RIGHT HON. B. DISRAELI, GROSVENOR GATE.”

Your Lordship also wrote letters to the noblemen and gentlemen who had supported my application.

On the 2nd December, 1868, Mr. Disraeli, on the eve of his resignation, appointed Mr. C. W. Fremantle—his private secretary—to the vacant office of Deputy-Master of the Mint.

THE RT. HON. LORD KINNAIRD, K.T., TO THE RT. HON. W. E. GLADSTONE.
“_Rossie Priory, Inchture, N.B., December 25th, 1868._

“DEAR MR. GLADSTONE,

“I should not have troubled you at present, as you still
must have much to occupy your time and attention; but the
case I have to bring before you is _pressing_, as, if
anything is to be done in the matter, initiatory steps must
be taken before the 31st.

“During the time I was engaged on the Mines Commission, I
became acquainted with Mr. G. F. Ansell, of the Mint, who
has invented a most ingenious instrument for detecting
fire-damp in mines, which, if generally adopted in working
coal pits, would, I am perfectly satisfied, be the means
of saving life to a very great extent. I have, therefore,
taken great interest in Mr. Ansell, and on the occasion of
the death of the Deputy Master of the Mint, I and other
friends of his applied to the late Government to appoint him
to the vacant office, and we believed that he would get the
appointment for which he is so well qualified. Some delay,
however, took place, which, we were led to believe, was
owing to the Master of the Mint, Mr. Graham, being opposed
to it, and he at the same time, on the plea that Mr. Ansell
was a supernumerary clerk, though _he had been twelve
years_ in the service, gave him notice to quit on the
31st of this month, and the office of Deputy has been filled
up.

“Now Mr. Ansell, who is a very able chemist, and has got
the very highest testimonials, gave up his profession under
a promise that he was to get a permanent appointment in
order to undertake a most difficult task—that of detecting
peculations which were taking place in the Mint. In this he
succeeded, and was highly complimented by the Master of the
Mint in letters to the Treasury which can be seen.

“The fact is, he saved the country, as the tables will
show, upwards of £27,000, to say nothing of the advantage
of putting a stop to peculations, and introducing order and
economy in the working of the Mint.

“Mr. Graham, though having borne, and still bearing, witness
to Mr. Ansell’s high qualifications to the office, has
conceived a strong dislike to Mr. Ansell, because, as I
understand, Mr. Ansell remonstrated with him, and has spoken
to the Master in strong terms, on the appointment of his
brother, Mr. John Graham, to an office in the Mint.

“In consequence of this ill-will, and of Mr. Ansell having
applied to the late Government for the appointment of Deputy
Master, Mr. Ansell has been dismissed, _after twelve
years’_ service, on the _plea_ that there is no work
for him. Although a fresh coinage is about to take place
immediately, and I think there is every probability of these
peculations being again carried on if inefficient men are
appointed, and there is no one to check them as Mr. Ansell
did, I think I am justified, for the sake of the public
service, independent of the hardship of the case, in asking
you to _cause an inquiry_ to be made into the reason
of a public servant being dismissed after twelve years of
service, and, in the mean time, to order the dismissal to be
suspended till the inquiry is made.

“If you would get one of the Junior Lords of the Treasury to
hear Mr. Ansell’s statement, he will, I am sure, be able to
satisfy himself as to the truth of what I have stated, and
be able to enlighten you as to what has taken place in the
office of the Mint. With many apologies for troubling you,

“I remain, yours faithfully,
(Signed) “KINNAIRD.

“THE RT. HON. W. E. GLADSTONE, &c., &c.”

On the 30th December your Lordship wrote me a letter, in which you said:—

“Mr. Gladstone writes me, ‘I have at once transmitted your letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to whose cognisance it belongs.’ I have written to Mr. Lowe.”

Your Lordship again wrote on the 5th January, 1869, enclosing a letter

FROM THE RT. HON. ROBERT LOWE TO THE RT. HON. LORD KINNAIRD, K.T.
“_11, Downing St., Whitehall, 4th January, 1869._

“MY DEAR LORD,

“Mr. Ansell, in whom you have interested yourself, is, I
have ascertained, a temporary clerk in the Mint, and the
duration of his employment must accordingly depend on the
necessities of the Department, of which the Master of the
Mint is the only judge. The Treasury could not, therefore,
interfere with Mr. Graham’s discretion in such a case.

“I have, however, felt it my duty to make a particular
inquiry as to the nature of the expectations held out to
Mr. Ansell when his engagement commenced, and which you
have been informed amounted to a promise that he was to get
a permanent employment; but I am informed by the Master of
the Mint—the only person who could, I imagine, have made
such a promise—in the most positive terms, that he never
gave Mr. Ansell, either before or after he went to the Mint,
any encouragement to look for a permanent engagement. Under
these circumstances, whatever the merits of Mr. Ansell may
be, I am afraid I cannot undertake so serious a proceeding
as to interfere with the course which the Master of the Mint
may consider it proper to pursue in this matter.

“Believe me,
“Yours truly,
(Signed) “ROBERT LOWE.

“LORD KINNAIRD.”

On the 6th January, 1869, I, by the advice of your Lordship, took the opinion of eminent counsel, before whom I laid proofs of my statements. Counsel advised me to draw up a Memorial, and ask your Lordship to present it to the Treasury. This I did, with the assistance of a well-known solicitor, who used infinite pains. The Memorial was as follows:—

“TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORDS COMMISSIONERS OF
HER MAJESTY’S TREASURY.

“THE Humble Memorial of GEORGE FREDERICK ANSELL,
of No. 27, Bernard Street, Russell Square, Analytical Chemist.

“Sheweth as follows:—

“In the month of October, 1856, the Master of the Mint
called upon your Memorialist, and offered to nominate him
to a position in Her Majesty’s Mint, and promised that he
should be promoted if he succeeded in effecting the object
the Master of the Mint had in view, which was to reform
certain abuses which prevailed extensively in the coining
department, in which there was then, and had been for some
time previously, great waste, owing to the carelessness
and peculations of those employed in conducting some of
the processes in that department. There were also great
irregularities and disobedience of orders and disregard
of regulations. All those circumstances combined, caused
considerable loss in the operation of coining, and the
Master of the Mint informed your Memorialist that he
understood it to be the intention of the Government to put
the coinage out to contract, unless it could be conducted
with greater economy in the Mint. Upon the understanding and
in the belief that he was to be promoted when any vacancy
in a higher office should occur, your Memorialist accepted
the offer made to him, and relinquished the professional
pursuits he was engaged in prosecuting, and agreed to devote
the whole of his time and energies to the service required
of him. Consequently upon this, the Master of the Mint, in
a communication dated the 29th of October, 1856, submitted
a proposition for the consideration of your Lordships’
predecessors in the following terms:—

“‘Under this designation I desire to introduce a young man
recommended by scientific or technical information available
in coining, by energy of character, and by tried ability in
the supervision of workmen—a faculty by no means common....
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
Royal Panopticon, in 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. Ansell, if
appointed, would be placed in the rolling room, and have
charge of putting the bars into work.’

“On the 4th of November, 1856, your Lordships’ predecessors
approved of the recommendation of the Master of the Mint,
and on the 12th of November, 1856, your Memorialist entered
upon his service. Before taking active duty, he inquired
of the Master what latitude was allowed in case of any
difference of weight between the bullion given to the men
and the return. The Master replied that he did not know, but
that there had always been considerable loss in the room
your Memorialist was to enter. Your Memorialist assured the
Master that there ought to be no loss, and stated that if he
were supported he would demonstrate it. The Master of the
Mint promised to give your Memorialist full authority, and
also assured him that he might depend upon promotion if he
were able to carry out what he had stated.

“In a very short time after your Memorialist had entered
upon his duties the losses were stopped, the men became
obedient to orders, and all irregularities ceased; but it
was not without exciting considerable ill-will amongst some
of the men and officers employed that your Memorialist
succeeded in accomplishing the ends in view.

“Previously to your Memorialist entering upon his duties,
peculation had been of almost daily occurrence. In
consequence of the various modes by which the bullion was
then weighed, it was almost impossible to detect dishonesty.
In addition to this, the blank coins were so imperfectly
made, that it had always been necessary to reject and return
to the melting-pot quantities ranging from 15 to 35 per cent.

“During the six years, 1851 to 1856, the average loss by
coining, as it was termed, was as follows:—

In gold, £581·420 per million pounds sterling.
In silver, £271·000 per million ounces coined.

In addition to this, a loss was incurred in the melting,
owing to the use of oil in the processes of rolling and
cutting out, and the average of this loss during the same
period was:—

In gold, £356·330 per million pounds sterling.
In silver, £210·750 per million ounces coined.

“During the same period, the average number of blank coins
rejected was:—

In gold, 17·92 per cent.
In silver, 25·00 ”

“The Master of the Mint entrusted solely to your Memorialist
the task of carrying out such reforms, and taking such steps
as your Memorialist considered necessary to put a stop to
the peculations and waste above mentioned.
“The result of such superintendence by your Memorialist
has been that, during the years from 1857 to 1866, instead
of any loss by coining, there has been, on the average, a
positive gain, inasmuch as the gain on gold amounted to
£20 per million sterling, whilst the loss in silver was
reduced from £271 per million ounces, to £55 per million
ounces. During the same period, the average number of blanks
rejected has been, in gold, only 2·07 per cent., and in
silver, only 1·00 per cent. The average loss by melting was
also reduced to the following:—

In gold, £271·900 per million pounds sterling.
In silver, £57·900 per million ounces coined.

“The following tabular statement, compiled from the
official books of the Royal Mint, shews the average loss by
peculation during the six years 1851-1857, and the saving
effected under your Memorialist’s management during the
years 1857-1866:—

+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Coining Department. |
+-------+----------+------------+-----------------+---------------+
| | | Absolute | Averages per |Absolute saving|
| Date. | Money | loss by | £1,000,000 | effected by |
| | coined. |peculations.| coined. | stopping |
| | | | | peculation. |
+-------+----------+------------+--------+--------+---------------+
| | | | Loss. | Gain. | |
| | | +--------+--------+ |
| | £ | £ | £ | £ | £ |
|1851-57|40,345,185| 20,030 | 491 | — | — |
|1857-66|50,894,385| Nil. | Nil. | 26 | 27,736 |
+-------+----------+------------+--------+--------+---------------+
+------------------------------------------+
| Melting Department. |
+-------+--------------+-------------------+
| | Average loss | Absolute average |
| Date. | by melting | saving effected |
| |per £1,000,000| by the disuse of |
| | coined. |oil on the scissel.|
+-------+--------------+-------------------+
| | | |
| | | |
| | £ | £ |
|1851-57| 261 | — |
|1857-66| 233 | 28 |
+-------+--------------+-------------------+

“The result from the above table is that in the period 1851-1857 £40,345,185 in gold was coined at a loss to the Government by peculations and waste in coining of upwards of £20,000, whilst by the gains and savings effected by your Memorialist, amounting to £545 in each £1,000,000 coined, the gain to the Government during the years 1857-1866 amounted to £27,736, and this in the gold alone, and quite independently of the saving effected in the coining of silver.

“In the year 1857, shortly after the appointment of your Memorialist, there was a great demand and pressure on the Bank of England for gold coin, and the endeavour to supply this unusual demand necessitated great exertion on the part of the Mint. The Master of the Mint placed the matter entirely under the direction of your Memorialist, who was the means of producing, without a single instance of loss by peculation and with an average of only 6 per cent. of rejected blanks, 1,100 journey weights of sovereigns per week, being more by 200 journey weights than had ever before been obtained. This extra production undoubtedly contributed largely to meet the demand for gold and relieve the pressure on the Bank during the monetary crisis of that year.

“In the year 1858, during the temporary absence on leave of the Master Melter, the Master of the Mint directed your Memorialist to conduct the melting department, and during such superintendence of it your Memorialist reduced the then ordinary loss in melting by no less than 33 per cent.

“In the month of August of that year the Master of the Mint recommended your Memorialist’s salary to be increased from £120 per annum to £220.

“In the year 1859 a large quantity of brittle gold had been brought to the Mint, and up to that time that kind of gold had been invariably rejected by the Royal Mint, as well as by the Mints of other countries, under the impression that it was totally unfit for coining in consequence of its extreme brittleness. Your Memorialist endeavoured to turn this gold to account, and succeeded in coining it; and upwards of a quarter of a million sterling of this coined gold was sent to the Bank of England, and the coins proved to be so tough that they could not be broken by the ordinary means. For this service your Memorialist received from the Master of the Mint a letter expressing his ‘most grateful thanks,’ and upon his recommendation, in the month of October, 1860, a gratuity of £100 was awarded to your Memorialist by your Lordships’ predecessors, and in the year 1861 your Memorialist’s salary was raised from £220 to £250 per annum. Your Memorialist also originated and developed the plans by which the new bronze money was coined previous to its issue in 1860. Those plans are still followed, and in consequence of your Memorialist’s investigations of the subject, Messrs. Heaton and Messrs. Grenfell were referred to him for information and assistance by the Master of the Mint.

“In the year 1862 your Memorialist, at the request of the Master of the Mint, undertook the destruction of all the old copper coinage, and destroyed from 10 to 16 tons per diem, at the comparatively small cost of 8_s._ 4_d._ per ton. Before this work was put under your Memorialist’s charge, scarcely so much as 2 tons per diem had ever been destroyed; and in the Paris Mint, where a similar process had been in operation, the cost had never been less than £10 per ton.

“Down to this period, offers had been made to your Memorialist on several occasions of situations unconnected with the Royal Mint, at a much higher salary than he was in receipt of there, but your Memorialist was induced to decline them in consequence of the assurances of the Master of the Mint that his position there should be greatly improved. In the month of November, 1863, the office of Assistant Coiner became vacant. No one, so far as your Memorialist is aware, had performed so many or such important services in the establishment as he had done; but his claims were ignored, and the Master of the Mint, passing over him, appointed his own brother, Mr. John Graham (who was considerably junior in the service), to the vacant post.

“Upon the death of the late Mr. Barton, Deputy-Master of the Mint, your Memorialist applied to the Right Honourable the then First Lord for promotion, but he appointed Mr. Fremantle, his private secretary, to Mr. Barton’s office, and no other change or promotion was made.

“On the 28th of September, 1868, your Memorialist received his dismissal from the service, in the following letter from the Master of the Mint—

‘_Royal Mint, 28th September, 1868._
‘DEAR SIR,

‘I regret to have to inform you that it is not in my power
to continue your present engagement as an extra officer in
the coining department while the Mint is only so partially
occupied as it has been for some time past. Your assistance
will not therefore be required beyond the 31st of December
next.
‘I remain,
‘Faithfully yours,
‘THO. GRAHAM.

‘G. F. ANSELL, ESQ.’

“Notwithstanding the intimation conveyed by the above letter that your Memorialist’s services were no longer required in consequence of the coining department being only partially occupied, it is the fact that another gentleman, who was an extra clerk in the bronze store department, and considerably your Memorialist’s junior (but who is private secretary to Mr. John Graham, the brother of the Master), has been appointed to the same post as your Memorialist held; and it is also the fact that the Mint is now executing a new coinage of about £5,000,000 of gold, and your Memorialist believes that it will be found, on investigation, that losses have again occurred, upon this and the last preceding coinage, which was not superintended by your Memorialist.

“Upon a reference to the communications to the Treasury from the Master of the Mint, under the dates of

29th October, 1856,
6th August, 1857,
17th August, 1858,
7th and 8th July, 1860,

it will be seen that your Memorialist’s services have been referred to by the Master of the Mint in terms of high approbation, and your Memorialist can confidently assert that his dismissal has not been owing to any want of efficiency or attention to the public service on his part; and, on the other hand, others who have less effectually served the public interest, and have been junior to your Memorialist in the service, have been promoted over his head. The Master of the Mint at one time offered to recommend your Memorialist to an appointment in the Mint at Hong Kong; but the climate would have been unsuitable to your Memorialist and his family, and he was compelled to decline it.

“Your Memorialist has spent twelve of the best years of his life in the public service at an insignificant salary, and has effected savings to the public to the amount of £35,000 and upwards in the gold coinage alone, besides many other savings in other branches of his department, and has now been dismissed without, as he humbly submits, any adequate reason at three months’ notice (which your Memorialist is advised is insufficient according to the usual course of law) and without compensation of any kind.

“Your Memorialist therefore humbly prays your Lordships to
cause inquiry to be made into the circumstances stated by
your Memorialist, and his special services in connection
with the Royal Mint, and that your Lordships will be
pleased to continue his services in some other department
in which they may be made available, or to award some
compensation to him in consideration of the considerable
sums he has been the means of saving to the public during
the course of his employment at the Royal Mint, and of his
abrupt dismissal by the Master without any just cause.

“GEORGE F. ANSELL.

“_10th February, 1869._”

On the 19th February, your Lordship enclosed to me the following letter:—

FROM C. RIVERS WILSON, ESQ., TO THE HON. A. KINNAIRD, M.P.
“_11, Downing Street, Whitehall, 15th February, 1869._

“DEAR SIR,

“The Chancellor of the Exchequer has received the Memorial
from Mr. Ansell, forwarded in your letter of Saturday,
and has caused it at once to be laid before the Board of
Treasury, in compliance with the wish expressed by Lord
Kinnaird.
“I am, dear Sir,
“Yours faithfully,
(Signed) “C. RIVERS WILSON.

“HON. ARTHUR KINNAIRD, M.P.”

On the 22nd February, 1869, Mr. John Graham died, thus leaving the office of Chief Coiner vacant. I immediately informed your Lordship of this unexpected event, and you, on the 23rd, wrote to the Hon. A. Kinnaird, asking that gentleman to go immediately and see Mr. Lowe, and to take him a copy of my book of testimonials; and on the 24th your Lordship wrote to the Hon. A. Kinnaird, asking him to see Mr. Gladstone, in whose gift the office of Chief Coiner is. On the 27th February, 1869, a friend suggested that I should “ask Lord Kinnaird to mediate between Mr. Graham and myself.” Your Lordship permitted me to make that suggestion, and wrote as follows:—

THE RT. HON. LORD KINNAIRD, K.T.,
TO THOMAS GRAHAM, ESQ., F.R.S., D.C.L.
“_Rossie Priory, Inchture, N.B., March 1st, 1869._

“SIR,

“I do not know whether you are aware that Mr. G. F. Ansell,
by my advice, has presented a Memorial to the Lords of the
Treasury, praying for compensation for his dismissal from
the Mint.