Chapter VI: Part 6

As dies are the means by which metal becomes COIN, it will be material to add the processes of their manufacture. Experience alone can indicate the proper steel to be used, so that it is useless to attempt a description. But the form of the steel is a matter upon which die-makers differ. Some use square bars of that metal, and cut off pieces, which are forged into the proper form for dies; however, the more experienced die-makers use round bars of steel, which are cut by a tool somewhat of the shape of the bar, so that when the tool is struck every part of its edge begins to cut. The tool is so shaped as to leave the end of the bar from which the piece has been cut quite square, so that it may form the bottom for the next piece cut off. The piece of steel thus cut off is taken to a lathe, where its upper end is turned somewhat into the form of the top of a sugar-loaf; the depth of this form being determined by the style of work to be impressed upon the steel when it is to be formed into a die. For the original matrix the piece of steel is turned to a flat end, and is usually strengthened by driving a carefully-welded ring of hot iron on to it: although some prefer thus to simply shrink on a ring of iron, the more experienced choose welding, because that which is shrunk on is never so solid, and is apt to enclose air bubbles, which prevent the mass becoming one, thus permitting an undue yield in a faulty spot when pressure is applied. In the making of a matrix, the steel is softened to different extents by different engravers, but all soften more or less. The steel having been softened, the engraver cuts with a kind of hand chisel, by a motion of the wrist, such design as may be required, and after many months of work produces a finished matrix, from which he requires to produce many copies, because this one matrix would itself soon wear out, and by frequent use would be more exposed to risk. It is, therefore, hardened to admit of its being submitted to such pressure from another piece of steel as to impart its design to that steel without itself being distorted by the pressure. For this purpose the matrix is fitted with a ring of iron round its upper part, which, when fitted on, gives the engraved part the appearance of being the bottom of a cup; this cup is filled with a paste made of beer grounds and fine charcoal dust, or, better still, with that small charcoal which is found behind the flue of the forge—a kind of soot produced by the spent sparks which fly upwards, and which is so much in request by the file-makers. Thus protected, the matrix should be placed in the naked fire wholly enclosed with fuel, and heated as rapidly as possible, keeping it constantly turned round and round, so as to insure each particle of its mass being equally heated; a quarter of an hour should be long enough to produce the necessary temperature. It must be borne in mind that the great principle is to avoid the decarbonisation of the steel, therefore the less time that is occupied the better. The temperature of the matrix should be that rich and peculiar full red which for a few seconds is visible before white heat supervenes, for a white heat once gained causes the steel to scale off, and renders the matrix partially worthless. This peculiar temperature once gained, the matrix must be permitted to remain for three minutes in the fire without any blast. If it should get too hot it must be cooled by adding exhausted fuel from the hearth. At the end of three minutes’ quiescent heating it may be assumed that the centre of the matrix has become of the same temperature as its outer particles; it is then taken quickly from the furnace and placed in a kind of colander, so that water may wholly envelope it, and yet flow freely past it while its under surface is wholly exposed. The matrix C is placed in the colander D, Fig. 22, bottom upwards, and is then brought immediately under the pipe dependent from a kind of funnel A, which should hold at least a hundred gallons of cold water; the bottom of the pipe must be secured by a plug of wood B, capable of being knocked out instantaneously. This is the most important process in the hardening of the matrix, and requires considerable steadiness with great rapidity of motion. The matrix being held in the colander about half an inch above a large surface of water E, and immediately under the centre of the plugged pipe from the funnel, the plug B is knocked out from the pipe, and the water falls in a continuous stream wholly unbroken until striking the very centre of the base of the matrix, thus securing the commencement of the process of hardening FROM THE CENTRE. So soon as this first shock of the flowing water has been effected, the matrix must be sunk into the vessel of water below, until it is uniformly covered to the depth of half an inch, and must be held there until the whole of the water from the funnel has run out; then the matrix must be sunk to the bottom of the vessel of water, and allowed to remain till absolutely cold. If it be removed before it be cooled throughout, there is great danger of a crack on its surface being produced by the expansion from within. The plug is preferred to a tap in the pipe from which the water is to flow, because the turning of a tap gives a motion to the water, which causes it to fall in a hollow stream, and thus obviates the very effect which it is desired to produce. This process has been followed for more than thirty years, and during that time the manufacturer who uses it—one of the most eminent engravers and die-makers in Europe—has never met with any accident, nor has he found any failure. I have recently visited a manufactory in South Yorkshire in which many thousands of dies are made annually on this system, without an instance of failure. Die-makers, after the hardening, proceed as follows:—Remove the paste of charcoal from the face of the matrix, and then clean the face of the die with hydrochloric acid. After this it is tempered—that is to say, it is raised to a temperature which somewhat relaxes the rigidity of its particles; this is commonly judged of by the COLOUR which the face of the matrix assumes; but since no two men are likely to distinguish the same tint, nor can any one actually judge of colour unerringly, it is wise to adopt another standard, the one most preferred being to temper the matrix until the engraver can make a good graver _bite_ while the die is hot. The tempered die may be cooled by plunging it either into oil or into water as soon as the tempering has reached the desired point. If at this instant the tempering cease, when the die is dead cold the graver will no longer touch the steel, which is now just so hard as to resist a blow without fracture. It is next polished, and is then fit for use; that is to say, is fit for the multiplication of dies from itself.

The multiplication consists in the taking a set of punches, each being an exact copy of the matrix. The steel, having been formed into masses with sugar-loaf tops in accordance with the depth of the engraving, is ready to receive the impression from the matrix, just as hot sealing-wax is ready to receive the impression from a signet. The matrix is placed beneath a press, and on its face is placed the sugar-loaf end of the annealed mass of steel; a very light blow is given by the press, so as to obtain simply the sinking of the first portion of the cone, for if a violent blow be given at this stage it is manifest that a large mass of steel is forced into a smaller space; in other words, the particles of steel which formed the cone are pressed into a dense mass on the surface of the intended punch, and prepare a crack, which by-and-by developes itself. After this light blow, the partly-formed punch is placed in a covered pot filled with charcoal, and heated in a furnace just as was described for the hardening of the matrix, bearing in mind that it is the cooling, not the heating, which softens the steel. So soon as the heating has been raised to the point before indicated, the pot containing the punch is removed, and bedded in hot ashes, and there left to cool as slowly as possible; it should be forty hours before it becomes cold. When cold it is cleaned, receives a second very light blow under the press, examined, afterwards receiving a third very light blow, and is then a second time annealed, &c. The number of blows required to bring out to perfection on the punch the work on the matrix, depends entirely upon the size of the matrix and the depth of the work engraved upon it. For these reasons, no accurate instructions can be given; but for all cases light blows should be made, because all metals mould more readily under gentle treatment.

From the punch is obtained, by processes which should be in every way similar, a series of dies for the use of the coining press. Each die from the punch is examined, and has the figures for the date impressed upon it before it is hardened. The dies are of two kinds: one, C, the obverse, with a long neck, upon which the collar B fits freely, and a second, the reverse, with a short neck, so that the face of the die just enters the collar sufficiently to meet and compress the blank. Fig. 23 demonstrates these two dies, and exhibits the collar, showing at B the milled interior circle, which gives the crenated edge to the finished coin at its formation. For the past few years the reverse die has been made to carry, in addition to its recognised device, a small number, with a view to determine at which coining press, and on what particular day, that die was used, that bad work might be traced to an individual. It need hardly be said that the accidents encountered in daily work overcome the object thus sought, for a die may last either minutes or days in wear owing to the irregularities of the steel from which it is made, and besides, the boys who work the presses are of necessity changed at irregular intervals.

The long-necked die is fitted into a bolster D, as shown in Fig. 23, and is prevented from shifting its position in that bolster by a plug of iron indicated at E. The bolster, with its die, is secured in a kind of dish beneath the screw of the press by a series of screws, which admit of adjusting the bolster so that the die it carries shall be placed immediately beneath the upper die, which is carried on the main screw G of the press, as may be seen at page 60.

There is little doubt but that certain stages of die manufacture would be rendered more effective if more reasonable treatment were employed. It has yet to be demonstrated that carbon steel is the best metal that can be employed, for it seems more than probable that some alloys would render a metal which would possess within itself more of the properties which are necessary for the perfecting a die, and for its duration when in use. For the elimination of such an alloy we must await the time when the non-resident assayers are replaced by resident chemists who, during the leisure times in the Mint, will be willing and glad to experiment on some of the compounds of iron with the rarer metals, for in that field will surely be found a combination which will be definite, and therefore homogeneous and unvarying. There can be no doubt that the cause of the uncertainty which prevails as to the endurance of steel for dies arises from its unequal composition.

Gold possesses as many colours, and exists in as many conditions, as any substance ordinarily met with. Those various changes are due to the existence of impurities in the metal, which are neglected in assaying, because the only business of the assayer is to determine that the sovereign actually contains the lawful weight of pure gold, and also so much alloy as is specified: what this alloy shall be is, in the abstract, a small matter so that it is not silver, because if it be silver it is worth the expense to separate it, and thereby destroy the coinage. Yet, although the existence of such metals as lead, bismuth, tin, antimony, and arsenic, as well as palladium and osmium-iridium is not illegal, it becomes necessary to separate them, because these metals affect the coin in various ways. Palladium and platinum alloy with the gold only after considerable time, therefore these metals may generally be seen in the finished coin, frequently as a slight bar across its surface, sometimes as spots on its crenated edge. Osmium-iridium causes trouble, inasmuch as it is so infusible, that it simply floats about in the melted gold, and several crystals agglomerate; where this takes place, the difficulty of manufacture is so great, that it is impossible to produce the desired amount of coin within the limits of remedy as to weight. The simplest means for the removal of these substances is to allow the fused metal to remain for a considerable time, when they settle to the bottom, and the clear metal can be poured off; the dregs, if so they may be called, are then sent to the refiner, but the process of separation is too long, and hardly adapted for a description in this place.

As a practical matter, the other, or volatile metals, and lead, may be, and generally are, removed by means of corrosive sublimate. This is an expensive measure, and does not answer its intention, for some of the mercury combines with the gold and renders it brittle. In practice, the best process is that recommended by Mr. Warington, who proposed to add to gold found to contain tin, antimony, or arsenic, 10 per cent. of oxide of copper. The gold is fused in a Payen crucible, and the oxide of copper is then added and stirred into the gold by a rod made of the same substance as the crucible. This operation is easy of performance, because the infusible oxide of copper stirs up with the gold readily, and each particle of antimony, arsenic, or tin, as it comes into contact with the oxide of copper, reduces it to the metallic state, the volatile metals combining with the oxygen, while an equivalent of copper alloys itself with the gold. The impurities, as they oxidise, mix or combine with the oxide of copper. One or two experiments tell how much copper is thus added to the gold; consequently, how much fine gold is to be added to keep the alloy standard—and subsequent treatment by the oxide of copper simply removes the volatile metals. Gold treated by this process is perfectly workable on a large scale, and there is no trouble. A condition of success is, that no reducing agent, such as carbon, be present, and therefore plumbago pots cannot be used. In practice, half an hour is the best time to keep the metal in contact with the oxide of copper. The objection is frequently expressed, that to refine gold is not the business of the coiners. This opinion, however, will bear modification, for the expense of the oxide of copper is trifling as compared with the cost of labour in treating brittle gold.

I now advert to a most important matter in relation to coining, viz., that of the loss sustained, its cause, and prevention.

It appears that the Royal Mint should sustain less loss than any other mint by the coining of gold and silver. If allowance be made for the sale of the sweep or dust[46] which results from a coinage, the total loss, inclusive of every operation in coining, should be so small that it might be passed without notice; in fact, there ought to be a minute increase of weight from traces of oil which are left on the fillets to enable them to pass through the cylinders of the draw-bench;[47] by melting[48] there seems to be too great a loss of metal: this should reach about £100 per million coined, and such loss would be wholly explained by the refining, which takes place through the removal of copper by oxidation; although this is minute, still it is enough to explain the loss which I indicate. If the assays be closely watched there can be no loss, for the trial of the pyx invariably shows the gold coin to err on the side of purity, so that if the Master of the Mint should determine to issue gold of exact standard, and refuse to avail himself of the latitude allowed, he may fairly cover every source of loss, and coin money WITHOUT WASTE OF METAL. Each grain that is found in excess of the standard upon the pound weight of gold causes a loss of about £180 upon each million coined. The moneyers asserted that they sustained a loss of £700 for each million coined, such loss being exclusive of melting. This has never been believed to have been a truthful statement, nor has the loss by coining alone often reached so high an amount, although so large a sum as £373 per million would seem to have been determined, by some careful experimenters, as the necessary loss. Where the gold went to was not stated; but supposing such a loss to accrue, it is manifest that either the gold volatilised or the floors must be paved to many inches in thickness with gold, but it is an established fact that matter once existent cannot be annihilated; yet it has required many arguments to convince those most interested in coining that the mere cutting up of bullion into small pieces does not alter its actual weight: the present Mint Authorities entertain the fallacious notion that large loss of gold is, for metallurgical reasons, NECESSARY. Notwithstanding Mr. Graham’s opinion that a loss of £206 on a million _was too high_,[49] they in their “Reports on European Mints” have arrived at the conclusion “that the ‘waste’ shown to have existed of late years in the English Mint _has not been excessive_.”

[Footnote 46: See pages 86-88, 140.]

[Footnote 47: See pages 29, 32-33.]

[Footnote 48: See pages 98-99.]

[Footnote 49: See page 178.]

To leave, then, the realms of speculation, and for a short time to examine figures, a matter which is little understood will be reduced to one of easy comprehension. Mr. W. T. Brande, in connection with others, carried on a series of experiments between 1851 and 1856, the results of which he gave me in writing, and which induced him to arrive at the conclusion that by coining alone there was a loss varying from 1·20 grains on the pound, to 3·10 grains on the pound troy, or a mean of 2·15 grains on each pound troy coined. This loss was thought to be a necessary consequence of coining, and by a simple rule-of-three it tells as follows:—

A loss of 1·20 grains on the lb. = £208·33 on each £1,000,000.
” 3·10 ” ” = £538·18 ” £1,000,000.
Mean loss 2·15 ” ” = £373·26 ” £1,000,000.

Mr. Brande and his colleagues, by his own admission, did not know the value of the sweep recovered, therefore this loss was believed to be absolute. We will next examine the accounts and see the fruit of that belief, and then determine the effect of a contrary faith. And in the following statements, given in a tabular form, I would observe that the facts recorded were compiled by the Mint officials for the Master at my suggestion, and that copies were given to me by the late Master, who indeed invariably, when such statements were prepared, handed them to me to copy and examine for my own information, and to see that they were accurate.

It is a fact that the Mint books do not record the loss upon the gold coined in November and December, 1851; or, if they do, these accounts have been only quite recently balanced. In the following statement I omit the coin of those two quarters, because the late Deputy Master assured me that the accounts were not made up. This, I am aware, lays me open to a correction; I therefore state that the coined money of these two months is not included in my calculations.

STATEMENT SHOWING THE RATE OF COIN OBTAINED AND THE LOSS OF METAL INCURRED IN EACH QUARTER FROM MARCH, 1852, TO DECEMBER, 1857.

(A) = Proportional Loss of Metal on each Million Ounces Coined.
+------------------+---------------+-----------------+---------+
| |Total Amount of| Rate per Centum | |
|Quarter ending:— | Gold Coined | of Coin obtained| (A) |
| | per Quarter. | from Rough Bars.| |
+------------------+---------------+-----------------+---------+
| | Ounces. | Ounces. | Ounces. |
|March 31st, 1852 | 300260·201 | | 446·94 |
|June 30th, ” | 501032·558 | | 399·17 |
|Sept. 30th, ” | 615753·337 | | 500·50 |
|Dec. 31st, ” | 828159·837 | 50·51 | 639·37 |
|March 31st, 1853 | 1113414·454 | 47·28 | 691·60 |
|June 30th, ” | 1223454·550 | 49·40 | 472·34 |
|Sept. 30th, ” | 248434·554 | 39·34 | 1130·64 |
|Dec. 31st, ” | 484331·447 | 42·81 | 784·42 |
|March 31st, 1854 | 769791·029 | 54·21 | 730·61 |
|June 30th, ” | 101611·604 | 49·65 | 787·21 |
|Dec. 31st, ” | 194968·684 | 47·76 | 583·07 |
|March 31st, 1855 | 515639·229 | 47·42 | 447·05 |
|June 30th, ” | 501708·378 | 47·01 | 456·20 |
|Sept. 30th, ” | 283944·316 | 43·53 | 420·18 |
|Dec. 31st, ” | 1012329·518 | 44·57 | 509·08 |
|March 31st, 1856 | 360409·244 | 38·39 | 489·05 |
|June 30th, ” | 818465·116 | 40·36 | 509·57 |
|Dec. 31st, ” | 362599·792 | 41·74 | 406·28 |
|March 31st, 1857 | 73638·878 | 39·64 | 233·84 |
|June 30th, ” | 19872·998 | 40·52 | 57·86 |
|Dec. 31st, ” | 1154606·290 | 54·69 | 18·45 |
+------------------+---------------+-----------------+---------+

There will be occasion to refer to the next table for further information; but as the facts in this table are not strictly comparable with any others that will be given, it is better to explain this as it stands. Of the rate per centum of coin obtained from the bars there will be occasion to speak at a later period. These figures are placed here with a view to save repetition, which would be necessary when that subject is discussed.[50] Although the figures in the first column represent ounces, each item can at pleasure be converted into pounds sterling by multiplying it by £3·89375, which is the decimal expression for £3 17_s._ 10½_d._, the price per ounce of standard gold. In such case it will only be necessary to multiply the weight of the coinage by that value, and then to consider the loss of metal as pounds sterling—thus, 300,260·201 ozs. + £3·89375 = £1,171,318 5_s._ 3¼_d._, which sum lost weight by coining at the rate of £446 18_s._ 9½_d._ per million coined. If calculation be made by addition and division of the figures in the third column, it will be observed that the average loss per million between March, 1852, and December, 1856, is £577·96,[51] and this was believed to be absolutely wasted in coining; but this amount may be fairly reduced by the deduction of £72 10_s._, the average value of sweep recovered, when it will remain £505·85. It will also be seen that the rate per million missing—for that is the fact—varied a good deal according to circumstances.

[Footnote 50: See pages 107, 117.]

[Footnote 51: See page 89.]

It has been asserted that these losses were mere matters of account, and resulted from the removal of “fat or oil” in the various operations. These explanations shall be admitted to their fullest extent, but that they do not contain the cause for all the losses is to be gathered from the fact that gold has been returned to the Mint by the brickmaker, who found it in the ashes which he had bought. That there were cases of actual theft I am myself aware; for I, by the Master’s sanction, dismissed two men who were detected. Eleven others shared the same fate, but no prosecution was attempted or permitted, although strongly urged. As bearing on this point the following, in relation to “peculation,” is told and believed in the Mint:—In 1856, when the men had formed a strong opinion as to the honesty of one particular person, they took their own means to watch him, and to see how and when he abstracted the metal. A clear-headed man made it his business to do this duty. The suspected man was assisting the officer at the scales in the drag room, when the watcher saw him, after the bullion was weighed, take a piece stealthily and secrete it in the palm of his hand. The watcher, thinking to secure detection, requested the officer at the scales to re-weigh that draft; but this gentleman refused to comply. The watcher then told the officer what he had seen, and that if he would open the man’s hand the piece of gold was still in it, when the officer, addressing the suspected person, said, “Is it all right, John?” John replied “Yes,” and no more passed. On his road home “John” stumbled, and a piece of uncoined gold fell on the pavement.

That metal was actually removed from the premises is beyond doubt, for a late officer picked up a piece of gold in the courtyard wrapped in brown paper, and the police brought to the Master a “flat end”[52] of gold, which had been offered for sale. The police inspected all the men in the Mint employ; but the person who abstracted the gold did not personally offer it for sale, and thereby escaped detection.

On the 2nd of December, 1853, the cutting room book records a loss of 87·26 ounces of gold, for which no satisfactory explanation is given. This book also contains some significant remarks by the officer who had charge of that department.

The Mint books adopt the word “Wasteage” as explanatory of these losses, which were believed to be a necessary result of coining; so generally, indeed, was this firmly-implanted belief entertained, that at the bottom of each day’s account the word loss was printed, so that the officer had only to write the amount which was missing.

If indeed proof that unnecessary wasteage[53] took place be required, it will be but necessary to quote from the letter of the Master of the Mint to the Treasury, dated 7th June, 1860. This letter was placed in my hands on the 1st June, 1860, by the Master, who desired me to copy such parts as related to loss and were of service to me, and that I might confirm the accuracy of his figures. He said, “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 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 three years here referred to were contained in the period during which Mr. Graham entrusted me with the management of the coining department.

[Footnote 52: See page 27.]

[Footnote 53: See pages 99-106.]

That the actual amount of loss by coining may be got at, it will be necessary to view the matter in a different form, and in that way to show the amount of money recovered by the sale of sweep; that is, by the sale of the ignited rubbish accumulated during a coinage, and in the statement given on page 90 the money value of each item is specifically represented. It need not be insisted that the utmost care should be exercised in preserving the sweep, when it is stated that this yields, at the end of a coinage, from 15 to 20 ounces of material bullion called _scrap or supply_, when picked over before sale, for only such as will pass through a fine sieve is sold; yet this sweep used to stand about in open, unlocked boxes from month’s end to month’s end.

It would be wrong to state that there is no _apparent_ loss by coining gold. If, however, the whole circumstances be examined, it will be found that, after deducting every legitimate waste, an appreciable gain should be exhibited. In annealing sovereign blanks the loss is 54·12 ounces on each million. This then would appear to be an absolute waste; but starting on the undisputed fact that “_matter cannot be lost_,” let us see what becomes of these 54·12 ounces apparently lost. 54·12 ounces contain 25,977·60 grains troy. Now, since careful analysis extending over more than thirty millions of gold annealed has determined that each million lost 5,708 grains of copper, and this copper is washed away as sulphate of copper, it may be admitted that so much is lost, thus leaving 20,169·60 grains unaccounted for. These 20,169·60 grains are just 42·02 ounces, and if proper care were bestowed I could show how every particle should be recovered at the end of the coinage.

That there should be a gain is demonstrable from the fact that the gold as received into the coining department is quite clean; when wrought it becomes coated with oil, and this being returned on the scissel[54] to the melting-house is really charged as gold. In 1858 Mr. W. H. Barton, experimenting independently, arrived at the conclusion that there were 200 ounces of oil on 765,370 ounces of gold scissel, while on the same scissel I, by careful experiments, determined that there were 118·39 ounces of oil, the remainder being dust and other foreign matter. Further experiments, conducted by Mr. Barton for his own satisfaction, brought him to adopt my figures as accurate. This proportion would give 154·55 ounces to each million ounces of scissel; but since good work returns only 35·80 per cent. of scissel on the rough bars, it becomes manifest that this same proportion is but 101·22 ounces in each million coined.

[Footnote 54: See pages 35, 87.]

Now the MONEYERS[55] used to make an allowance of 347 ounces to each million ounces of scissel, and with such sharp business-like people it is barely possible that they allowed too much. We may therefore assume that the scissel of the present day is much less covered with oil than it used to be; and this is indeed the truth, for whereas the trucks were wont to be actually spotted with oil which dropped from gold scissel, they are now unstained; and it may be mentioned that, to test the minute amount on the scissel, the Master has upon occasions wiped it with a white cambric handkerchief, by way of settling a disputed point, without perceptibly soiling the handkerchief. Admitting then a loss of 42·02 by annealing and blanching, we get, by deducting this from the gain by oil, an absolute gain of 59·20 ounces on each million ounces coined. In a little while, when examining the table, we shall see how this theory worked out in practice; for, to be perfect, it should be capable of demonstration. The question will naturally arise, If the oil be now so small in proportion, why should there not be an increased loss by melting? And here indeed arises a very nice point, but one which is proved to demonstration—that whereas large amounts of oil _cause_ loss, small quantities of oil PREVENT loss by melting, and for the following reason. Standard gold consists of copper 2 parts, gold 22 parts. So soon as this gold approaches red heat it changes to a purple colour on its surface, owing to the oxidation of the copper. If, however, a trace of oil be present, the heat, while it warms the gold, volatilises the oil, and thus places the gold in an atmosphere free from oxygen, so that the standard gold remains metallic until it liquefies; hence the saving of loss, for any oxide of copper would be lost in the pot. This matter of the oil has been dwelt upon because it is a vexed question, and when the melter, by want of care, makes a large loss, he invariably, by a human weakness, attributes the loss to the oil on the scissel. It was on such an occasion that the assistant-melter produced the following amusing parody on the three witches of Shakespeare. The illustrative picture is clever, but unfitted for these pages.

[Footnote 55: The moneyers were those contractors who conducted the coinages previously to the Mint being formed into a governmental department in 1851.—_Vide_ Parliamentary Reports, 1837, 1849, 1852.]

_First Witch_. Round about the journeys go,
In the dirt and rubbish throw;
Extraneous matters, small and great,
Everything to make the weight.

_Second Witch_. Stone swept up and pounded small,
Pieces of the stuccoed wall,
A bit of saffron-coloured brick,
Odds and ends of broken stick;
Here’s the sweeping of the floor,
Weighing full an ounce or more.

_All_. Hubble bubble, toil and bubble,
Give the melter every trouble.

_Third Witch_. Copper by annealing got,
Send largely to the melting-pot;
A pennyweight of leather strap,
A piece of old brown paper cap,
Some cotton fluff, ten grains of coal,
Then OIL to saturate the whole.

_All_. Hubble bubble, toil and bubble,
Give the melter every trouble.

MACBETH (_as Justice_). How now, ye secret, black,
and cunning rollers!
What is’t ye do?

_All_. A deed without a name.

_24th November, 1862._ J. G.

Upon consulting the table—see p. 90—it will be found that, by deducting the value of the sweep recovered, from the value of the metal lost, between the periods November, 1851, and March, 1857, the actual loss was £19,930 18_s._ 0_d_., which sum, divided by the amount of gold coined in that period—viz., £40345185·450, gives £494 as a _bona fide_ loss on each million pounds coined, when the belief was to the effect that there must be a loss. The great fact, _that matter once existent cannot be lost_, was never applied to the operations of minting until, in 1856, I demonstrated to the Master that the floors not being paved to many inches thick with gold, the bullion which was stated to be “wasted” in coining must have been _absolutely volatilised_, the proposition exposing me to more than ridicule at the time, and to positive hatred and misrepresentation thereafter; but when once the determination was formed to arrest what I saw clearly was unnecessary loss, it was carried out firmly, and in November, 1856, I commenced my determinations of the _necessary_ amount of loss in each operation, as well as a series of experiments to elucidate other points requiring reform and explanation.

In furtherance of this firm resolve I assembled the men together, and informed them that I had now taken charge of the departments over which I had been placed, and that I should not permit any man to leave the Mint until the account was satisfied, and I had received from them the bullion to its uttermost part which I proposed to entrust to them. That I might effect this determination I weighed out to them, in their presence, a limited weight of gold, and then directed their foreman, on their behalf, to satisfy himself that the weight I charged was fair and honest; and then, with a firmness which surprised them, I followed this gold step by step, never for an instant permitting it to leave my sight, and at _each step in its passage from bullion to coined money_ I carefully weighed it, and made the foreman again check me, all the men being witnesses. At the end of the operations a FIXED GAIN exhibited itself. I was called upon for an explanation, which I gave, and each man was thus convinced that it was no use to attempt to cheat me, and was compelled to acknowledge that unless by abstraction there could be no loss. Many arguments followed for months, but LOSS became a matter of history so long as I was present,—not so in my absence, even at that time, as the books will show.

Great firmness was required, but I persevered, and received not only thanks, but very valuable assistance from many of the men. With a view to keep the Master supplied with information as I gained it, I adopted a plan of reporting to him daily in writing the various changes which took place in the bullion under my care as regards differences of weighing, loss or gain, the amount per cent. of coin obtained, and other such details, and at the end of each coinage I summarised the whole of such facts into a tabular form, and thus rendered to him a complete history of the operations conducted. This proved of immense service, for upon the occurrence of an unusual event, attention was at once drawn to it, and means adopted to discover the cause, while at the same time a constant study of these reports could not fail to induce for myself a more minute inquiry into the various branches of my subject. I feel it cannot be unfitting to give, before proceeding further, one of these statements or reports relating to gold, and when I come to the discussion of silver I will, in its proper position, place such another table, because these seem to convey much practical information which will be useful to those engaged in coining.

The report placed on page 92 is a copy of one I made to the Master, so I give it _in extenso_, and it will be found that by it bullion may be traced from its first admission to the coining department to its final issue as coined money, while each item of its history finds a place in the immediate department in which the bullion may be under operation.

STATEMENT OF LOSSES INCURRED AND OF SWEEP RECOVERED. THIS REFERS WHOLLY TO GOLD IN THE COINING DEPARTMENT.

+--------------------------+-----------+-------------------+--------
| | Weight of | | Weight
| Date—Financial Year. | Coinage. | Value of Coinage. | of
| | | | Lost
| | | | Metal.
+--------------------------+-----------+-------------------+--------
| | Ounces. | £ _s._ _d._| Ounces.
| Nov. 1851 to March 1852 | 351837·830| 1,369,968 11 0 | 134·206
|April 1852 to March 1853 |3058360·186|11,908,489 19 5½ |1851·888
| ” 1853 ” 1854 |2726011·580|10,614,408 11 9¾ |1804·559
| ” 1854 ” 1855 | 812219·517| 3,162,579 14 10½ | 424·092
| ” 1855 ” 1856 |2158391·456| 8,404,236 14 7½ |1039·798
| ” 1856 ” 1857 |1254703·786| 4,885,502 17 2 | 581·615
| ” 1857 ” 1858 |1256586·572| 4,892,833 19 4 | 17·784
| ” 1858 ” 1859 | 736150·582| 2,866,386 6 6¾ | 16·603
| ” 1859 ” 1860 | 980070·679| 3,816,150 4 2 | 74·857
| ” 1860 ” 1861 | 861205·000| 3,353,316 19 5 |
| ” 1861 ” 1862 |1872214·638| 7,289,935 14 11 | 263·568
| ” 1862 ” 1863 |2351444·336| 9,155,936 7 8 | 27·480
| ” 1863 ” 1864 |1807332·130| 7,037,299 9 8 | 47·054
| ” 1864 ” 1865 |1949438·200| 7,590,624 19 10 | 43·491
| ” 1865 ” 1866 |1256347·104| 4,891,901 10 9 | 57·612
| ” 1866 ” 1867 | 175838·208| 684,670 0 5 | 5·037
| ” 1867 ” 1868 | 109580·129| 426,677 12 1¾ | 3·357
|June 1868 to Sept. 1868 | 280993·740| 1,094,119 7 6 | ⁂19·87|
+--------------------------+-----------+-------------------+--------
+--------------------------+-----------------+--------------
| | Value of | Value of
| Date--Financial Year. | Lost Metal. | Sweep.
| | |
| | |
+--------------------------+-----------------+--------------
| | £ _s._ _d._ | £ _s._ _d._
| Nov. 1851 to March 1852 | 522 11 3 | 89 1 3
|April 1852 to March 1853 | 7,210 15 9¼ | 716 11 11½
| ” 1853 ” 1854 | 7,026 10 0¼ | 707 7 3½
| ” 1854 ” 1855 | 1,651 6 1¾ | 222 14 3
| ” 1855 ” 1856 | 4,148 14 3 | 635 4 1½
| ” 1856 ” 1857 | 2,264 13 3 | 422 13 10
| ” 1857 ” 1858 | 69 4 11 | 192 14 10
| ” 1858 ” 1859 | 64 12 11½ | 209 16 7
| ” 1859 ” 1860 | 291 9 6 | 254 4 9
| ” 1860 ” 1861 | |
| ” 1861 ” 1862 | 1,026 5 4 | 545 10 5½
| ” 1862 ” 1863 |+ 107 0 1 | 360 1 11
| ” 1863 ” 1864 |+ 183 4 4 | 459 0 1
| ” 1864 ” 1865 | 169 6 10 | 295 9 3½
| ” 1865 ” 1866 | 224 6 6 | 350 3 9
| ” 1866 ” 1867 | 19 12 3 | Nil.
| ” 1867 ” 1868 | 13 1 5 | Nil.
|June 1868 to Sept. 1868 | 77 7 7 | Nil.
+--------------------------+-----------------+--------------
+--------------------------+---------------+--------------
| | Value of Lost |Value of Sweep
| Date--Financial Year. | Metal per | per Million
| |Million Coined.| Coined.
| | |
+--------------------------+---------------+--------------+
| | £ _s._ _d._ | £ _s._ _d._
| Nov. 1851 to March 1852 | 381 8 10¼ | 65 0 2½
|April 1852 to March 1853 | 605 10 3¾ | 60 3 5¾
| ” 1853 ” 1854 | 661 19 6½ | 66 12 10
| ” 1854 ” 1855 | 522 2 1¾ | 70 8 5
| ” 1855 ” 1856 | 481 14 10¾ | 75 11 7½
| ” 1856 ” 1857 | 463 10 11¼ | 86 10 4¼
| ” 1857 ” 1858 |⁂ 14 3 0 | 39 7 10½
| ” 1858 ” 1859 |⁂ 22 11 0½ | 73 4 0½
| ” 1859 ” 1860 | 76 7 7 | 66 12 5
| ” 1860 ” 1861 | |
| ” 1861 ” 1862 | 96 8 6 | 51 5 1
| ” 1862 ” 1863 |+ 11 3 8 | 39 6 7
| ” 1863 ” 1864 |+ 26 0 8 | 65 4 5
| ” 1864 ” 1865 |⁂ 22 6 2 | 38 18 6
| ” 1865 ” 1866 |⁂ 45 17 1 | 71 11 8
| ” 1866 ” 1867 | 28 12 10 | Nil.
| ” 1867 ” 1868 | 30 12 8¼ | Nil.
|June 1868 to Sept. 1868 | 70 14 5¾ | Nil.
+--------------------------+---------------+--------------+

NOTES.—The sign + indicates that on those special coinages there was an actual gain by weight to the extent specified, which will be explained on page 98.

The ⁂ is intended to draw the attention of the reader to these figures when a little later they are explained at pages 89, 93, 94, 95, 98.

To obtain the true amount of loss, deduct the value of the sweep from the value of the gold lost.

RETURN TO AN ORDER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS DATED 17TH FEBRUARY, 1870. THE LORD ROSSIE. No. 1.

FROM THE COINING DEPARTMENT OF THE ROYAL MINT.

A STATEMENT of the Weight and Value of the Gold Moneys coined in each Financial Year from 1851 to 1869 inclusive, exhibiting the Weight and Value of the Loss or Waste sustained in each Year, as well as the Value of Sweep recovered, and the average Proportion of such Loss or Waste and Sweep recovered to each Million Pounds Sterling coined.

+----------------------------+-----------+----------------------+
| Date. | Weight of | Value of Coinage. |
| | Coinage. | |
+----------------------------+-----------+----------------------+
| | Ounces. | £ _s._ _d._ |
|Nov. 1851 to March 1852. | 351837·830| 1,369,968 11 0 |
|April 1852 to March 1853 |3058360·186|11,908,489 19 5 |
| ” 1853 ” 1854 |2726011·580|10,614,407 11 10 |
| ” 1854 ” 1855 | 812219·517| 3,162,579 14 10 |
| ” 1855 ” 1856 |2158391·456| 8,404,236 14 7 |
| ” 1856 ” 1857 |1254703·786| 4,885,502 17 4 |
| ” 1857 ” 1858 |1256586·572| 4,892,833 19 4 |
| ” 1858 ” 1859 | 736150·582| 2,866,386 6 7 |
| ” 1859 ” 1860 | 980070·679| 3,816,150 4 2 |
| ” 1860 ” 1861 | 861205·000| 3,353,316 19 5 } |
| ” 1861 ” 1862 |1872214·638| 7,289,935 14 11 } |
| ” 1862 ” 1863 |2351444·336| 9,155,936 7 8 |
| ” 1863 ” 1864 |1807332·130| 7,037,299 9 8 |
| ” 1864 ” 1865 |1949438·200| 7,590,624 19 10 |
| ” 1865 ” 1866 |1256347·104| 4,891,901 10 9 |
| ” 1866 ” 1867 | 175838·208| 684,670 0 5 |
| ” 1867 ” 1868 | 127485·816| 496,397 17 11 |
| ” 1868 ” 1869 |1270778·550| 4,948,093 19 7 |
+----------------------------+-----------+----------------------+
+----------------------------+---------+--------------+-------------
| Date. |Amount of| Value of | Value of
| | Waste. | Waste. | Sweep
| | | | recovered.
+----------------------------+---------+--------------+-------------
| | Ounces.| £ _s._ _d._| £ _s._ _d._
|Nov. 1851 to March 1852. | 134·206| 522 11 3 | 89 1 3
|April 1852 to March 1853 | 1851·888|7,210 15 9 |716 11 11½
| ” 1853 ” 1854 | 1804·559|7,026 10 0 |707 7 3½
| ” 1854 ” 1855 | 424·092|1,651 6 2 |222 14 3
| ” 1855 ” 1856 | 1039·798|4,148 14 3 |635 4 1½
| ” 1856 ” 1857 | 581·615|2,264 13 8 |422 13 10
| ” 1857 ” 1858 | 17·784| 69 4 11 |192 14 11
| ” 1858 ” 1859 | 16·603| 64 13 0 |209 16 7
| ” 1859 ” 1860 | 74·857| 291 9 6 |254 4 9
| ” 1860 ” 1861 | | |
| ” 1861 ” 1862 | 263·568|1,026 5 4 |545 10 5½
| ” 1862 ” 1863 |!+ 27·480| 107 0 1 |360 1 11
| ” 1863 ” 1864 | + 47·054| 183 4 4 |459 0 1
| ” 1864 ” 1865 | 43·491| 169 6 10 |295 9 3½
| ” 1865 ” 1866 | 57·612| 224 6 6 |350 3 9
| ” 1866 ” 1867 | 5·037| 19 12 3 | Nil.
| ” 1867 ” 1868 | 3·357| 13 1 5 | Nil.
| ” 1868 ” 1869 | 45·585| 177 9 11 |538 3 1
+----------------------------+---------+--------------+-------------

+----------------------------+-----------------+----------------+
| Date. | Value of Waste | Value of Sweep |
| | per £1,000,000. | per £1,000,000.|
+----------------------------+-----------------+----------------+
| | £ _s._ _d._ | £ _s._ _d._ |
|Nov. 1851 to March 1852. | 381 8 10 | 65 0 3 |
|April 1852 to March 1853 | 605 10 4 | 60 3 6 |
| ” 1853 ” 1854 | 661 19 7 | 66 12 10 |
| ” 1854 ” 1855 | 522 2 2 | 70 8 5 |
| ” 1855 ” 1856 | 493 12 11 | 75 11 8 |
| ” 1856 ” 1857 | 463 10 11 | 86 10 5 |
| ” 1857 ” 1858 | 14 3 0 | 39 7 10 |
| ” 1858 ” 1859 | 22 11 1 | 73 4 0 |
| ” 1859 ” 1860 | 76 7 7 | 66 12 5 |
| ” 1860 ” 1861 | | |
| ” 1861 ” 1862 | 96 8 6 | 51 5 1 |
| ” 1862 ” 1863 | 11 13 8 | 39 6 7 |
| ” 1863 ” 1864 | 26 0 8 | 65 4 5 |
| ” 1864 ” 1865 | 22 6 2 | 38 18 6 |
| ” 1865 ” 1866 | 45 17 1 | 71 11 8 |
| ” 1866 ” 1867 | 28 12 10 | Nil. |
| ” 1867 ” 1868 | 26 6 7 | Nil. |
| ” 1868 ” 1869 | 35 17 5 | 108 15 2 |
+----------------------------+-----------------+----------------+

! _Note._—The financial years 1862/1863 and 1863/1864 exhibit
a _gain_ in the Coining Department.
C. W. FREMANTLE, DEPUTY-MASTER OF THE MINT.

ROYAL MINT, _2nd March, 1870_.

STATEMENT OF WORK PERFORMED IN THE COINING DEPARTMENT FROM OCTOBER 2ND, 1857, TO DECEMBER 17TH, 1857, INCLUSIVE.

The Coinage was completed in 53 Days. The Value of the coined Gold was £4,495,748 4_s._ 10_d._

+----------------------------------------------------+
| IN ROLLING ROOM. |
+----------------------------------------------------+
| RECEIVED. |
+----------------------------------------------------+
|Weight of Gold Bars for Sovereigns |
| by Mint Office Beam 2110962·00 ozs.|
|Weight of the same Bars |
| by Rolling Room Beam 2110939·71 ” |
| ---------- |
|Showing a minus difference upon |
| the Mint Office weight of 22·29 ” |
| ========== |
+----------------------------------------------------+
| RETURNED. |
+-------------------+-----------------+--------------+
| | As by | As by |
| | Rolling | Mint |
| | Room | Office |
| | Beam. | Beam. |
+-------------------+-----------------+--------------+
| | Ounces. | Ounces. |
|Fillets | 2016337·80 | |
|Stopped Pots | 1256·15 | 1256·15 |
|Brittle Bars | 12142·36 | 12142·36 |
|Ends | 81207·18 | 81208·24 |
+-------------------+-----------------+--------------+
| | 2110943·49 | 94606·75 |
|Deduct “received” | 2110939·71 | ========= |
+-------------------+-----------------+ |
|Increase during | 3·78 | |
|work. | | |
+-------------------+-----------------+--------------+
| The Ends were 4·49 per cent. on Bars. |
+----------------------------------------------------+

+----------------------------------------------------+
| IN CUTTING ROOM. |
+----------------------------------------------------+
| RECEIVED. |
+----------------------------------------------------+
|Gauged Fillets for Sovereigns |
| by Rolling Room Beam 2016337·80 ozs.|
|Gauged Fillets for Sovereigns |
| by Cutting Room Beam 2016331·10 ” |
| ---------- |
|Showing a minus difference |
| upon the Rolling Room weight of 6·70 ” |
+----------------------------------------------------+
| RETURNED. |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| | As by | As by |
| | Cutting | Mint |
| | Room | Office |
| | Beam. | Beam. |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| | Ounces. | Ounces. |
|Cut Blanks | 1250996·04 | |
|Scissel | 755829·53 | 755830·74 |
|Dumb Fillets | 9540·00 | 9540·00 |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| | 2016365·57 | 765370·74 |
|Deduct “received” | 2016331·10 | |
+----------------------+------------+ |
|Increase during | 34·47 | |
|work. | | |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
|The Dumb Fillets were 0·45 p. c. on Bars. |
|The Scissel was 35·80 ” ” |
+----------------------------------------------------+

+----------------------------------------------------+
| IN WEIGHING ROOM. |
+----------------------------------------------------+
| RECEIVED. |
+----------------------------------------------------+
|Cut Blanks for Sovereigns |
| by Cutting Room Beam 1250996·04 ozs.|
|Cut Blanks for Sovereigns |
| by Weighing Room Beam 1250989·11 ” |
| ---------- |
|Showing a minus difference |
| upon the Cutting Room weight of 6·93 ” |
+----------------------------------------------------+
| RETURNED. |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| | As by | As by |
| | Weighing | Mint |
| | Room | Office |
| | Beam. | Beam. |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| | Ounces. | Ounces. |
|Good Blanks | 1163502·34 | |
|Rejected Blanks | 87488·31 | 87488·57 |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| | 1250990·65 | 87488·57 |
|Deduct “received” | 1250989·11 | ========= |
+----------------------+------------+ |
|Increase during | 1·54 | |
|work. | | |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
|The Rejected was 4·14 per cent. on Bars. |
| ” ” 6·99 ” Blanks. |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+

+----------------------------------------------------+
| IN ANNEALING AND PRESS ROOMS. |
+----------------------------------------------------+
| RECEIVED. |
+----------------------------------------------------+
|Good Blanks for Sovereigns |
| by Weighing Room Beam 1163502·34 ozs.|
|Good Blanks for Sovereigns |
| by Annealing Room Beam 1163487·44 ” |
| ---------- |
|Showing a minus difference upon |
| the Weighing Room weight of 14·90 ” |
+----------------------------------------------------+
| RETURNED. |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| | As by | As by |
| | Press Room | Mint |
| | Beam. | Office |
| | | Beam. |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| | Ounces. | Ounces. |
|Coined Sovereigns | 1154590·87 | 1154606·29 |
|Pyx Pieces | 1903·92 | 1909·21 |
|Brockages | 6926·03 | 6925·90 |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
|One Sovereign | | |
| missing. | ·25 | |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
|Loss of Weight | | |
| by Annealing | 57·05 | |
| and Blanching | | |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
| | 1163483·12 | 1163441·40 |
| | | ========== |
|Deduct “returned” | 1163487·44 | |
+----------------------+------------+ |
| | | |
|Loss during work | 4·32 | |
+----------------------+------------+----------------+
|The Brockages were 0·33 on Bars. |
|The Coined Money was 54·79 on Rough Bars. |
| ” ” 57·26 on Clean Bars. |
+----------------------------------------------------+

Paid for Wages of Men
and Boys.
------------------------------
Rolling Fillets, £252·402225
Cutting Blanks, £260·624165
Annealing Do. £145·437875
Coining Do. £120·269875 = £778 14_s._ 8_d._
for £4,495,748 4_s._ 10_d._ Coined Money.

Memorandum of
Coined Gold Moneys delivered
into Mint Office.
----------------------------
Ounces.
October 252030·274
November 594084·366
December 308491·650
------------
1154606·290
============