APPENDIX.

To the Right Honourable Lord Kinnaird, K.T.

27, Bernard Street, Russell Square, W. C. February 8th, 1871.

My Lord,

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Royal Mint, November 6th, 1856.

“My dear Sir,—

“I am happy to inform you that your nomination to office in the Mint has been approved by the Treasury.

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

“Ever truly yours,

“George Frederick Ansell, Esq.”

“Thomas Graham.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Extracts from Letter of Master of the Mint to the Lords of the Treasury.

Royal Mint, August 6, 1857.

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

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

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

(The master then goes on to request my Lords to do this for Mr. Ansell.)

“Tho. Graham.

“August 6, 1857 (No. 1114).”

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

“Royal Mint, 10th July, 1857.

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

(Signed)“Tho. Graham.”

(Extract.) Letter from the Treasury to the Master of the Mint.

“25th August, 1857.

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

(Signed)“W. H. Stephenson.

“Mint (No. 1163), 27th August, 1857.”

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

(Extract.) Letter from the Lords of the Treasury to the Master of the Mint.

“Treasury Chambers, 3rd September, 1858.

“Sir,

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

(Signed)“C. E. Trevelyan.

“Treasury (No. 14409), 3rd September.

“The Master of the Mint.”

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

To the Master of the Mint from George F. Ansell, Esq.

“Royal Mint, January 6th, 1860.

“Sir,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“With unmeasured hope and confidence,

“I am, Sir, “Your most faithful servant, “George F. Ansell.

“To the Master of the Mint.”

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

(Extract.) Letter from the Master of the Mint to the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury.

Royal Mint, 7th June, 1860.

“Sir,

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

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

Waste in the Melting Department—Gold Coinage.

Date. Weight of Gold Coinage. Value of Gold Coinage. Amount of Waste. Value of Waste.

April 1, 1858, to Ounces. £ s. d. Ounces. £ s. d.

March 31, 1859 736150·582 2,866,386 6 6¾ 248·804 968 15 7¼

Date. Value of Sweep recovered. Value of Waste per Million. Value of Sweep per Million.

April 1, 1858, to £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d.

March 31, 1859 231 2 1¼ 337 19 7 80 12 6¼

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

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

Waste in Coining Department—Gold Coinage.

Date. Weight of Coinage. Value of Coinage. Amount of Waste. Value of Waste.

April 1, 1858, to Ounces. £ s. d. Ounces. £ s. d.

March 31, 1859 736150·582 2,866,386 6 6¾ 16·603 64 12 11¼

Date. Value of Sweep recovered. Value of Waste per Million. Value of Sweep per Million.

April 1, 1858, to £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d.

March 31, 1859 209 16 7 22 11 0¾ 73 4 0¾

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

“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 13s. 0d. 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 14s. 0¾d.

“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 partly by estimate.

” 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

“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 0s. 0¾d.; and on the gold coinage of the last three years, £172 8s. 11½d. per million coined; showing an improvement of £611 11s. 1¼d. 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 7s. 11¾d., 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 8s. 4d. 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.

Date. Money coined. Absolute loss by peculations. Averages per £1,000,000 coined. Absolute saving effected by stopping peculation.

Loss. Gain.

£ £ £ £ £

1851-57 40,345,185 20,030 491 — —

1857-66 50,894,385 Nil. Nil. 26 27,736

Melting Department.

Date. Average loss by melting per £1,000,000 coined. Absolute average saving effected by the disuse of 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 8s. 4d. 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.

“I considered the case so hard that a gentleman who had served the country for about twelve years, ably and efficiently, as shown by letters from the Treasury and from yourself, should be dismissed on three months’ notice, that I resolved to bring this case before Parliament, but before doing so I thought it best that Mr. Ansell should memorialise the Treasury, stating his case and past services.

“Since the Memorial was sent in, I have heard of the loss you have sustained, and consequently have applied for the appointment for Mr. Ansell to the office lately filled by your brother.

“I think it right you should know this, and I am not without hopes that my recommendation may meet with your concurrence, as though I am aware that you had at one time some difference with Mr. Ansell, yet he has at the same time told me of many kindnesses he has received from you—shown also on a late occasion, when you gave him a very good testimonial on his being a candidate for a Gas Inspectorship, which proves the high opinion you have of Mr. Ansell’s qualifications.

“He has assured me that, should he get the appointment, he will act most cordially with you, and be most anxious to forget all that is past.

“I am prepared, on hearing from you that you concur in Mr. Ansell’s appointment, to write to Mr. R. Lowe to tell him that I wish the Memorial withdrawn.

“Your obedient servant, (Signed) “Kinnaird.

“T. Graham, Esq., F.R.S., D.C.L., “Master of the Royal Mint, London.”

Envelope marked “Private,”

From T. Graham, Esq., F.R.S., D.C.L., to the Rt. Hon. Lord Kinnaird, K.T.

“4, Gordon Square, 3rd March, 1869.

“My Lord,

“On returning from Scotland I find your letter of the 1st instant, the receipt of which I beg to acknowledge.

“I beg to remain, my Lord, “Your Lordship’s most obedient servant, (Signed)“Tho. Graham.

“The Right Hon. Lord Kinnaird.”

On the 6th March, 1869, your Lordship wrote me to the effect that Mr. Lowe had stated that he “still entertained a belief that Mr. Ansell was never on the staff of the Mint, and he cannot force a supernumerary on Mr. Graham, but he has sent the Memorial to Mr. Graham to answer.” I feel that the Right Hon. Robert Lowe thus committed a singular act of injustice to me. Those who will read the Memorial cannot but be struck with the fact that my sole complaint is against Mr. Thomas Graham, yet Mr. Lowe remits the case to the accused for his decision. Such an act is a remarkable comment on the promise of the Government that those who would faithfully do their duty, irrespective of their nominal position, should be rewarded.

This injustice induced your Lordship to take further steps, and you sent me the following letter:—

From the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone to Hon. A. Kinnaird, M.P.

“March 5th, 1869.

“My dear Kinnaird,

“I am not sure whether the arrangements to be made at the Mint will place any vacancy at my disposal, but if they do I will carefully consider the subject of your letter respecting Mr. Ansell.

“Ever yours sincerely, (Signed)“W. E. Gladstone.

“The Hon. A. Kinnaird.”

On the receipt of this letter your Lordship directed me to send a copy of my “Treatise on Coining” to Mr. A. West for Mr. Gladstone. Up to this date the case had been urged upon Mr. Gladstone, not only by your Lordship, but in addition by five Cabinet Ministers and five members of the House of Commons; yet there was, as in the case of Mr. Disraeli, some mysterious cause why I was defeated, and on the 27th of March, 1869, I received the following:—

From the Lords of the Treasury to G. F. Ansell, Esq.

(No. 3727, 24th March). “Treasury Chambers, 27th March, 1869.

“Sir,

“In reply to your Memorial of the 10th of February last, I am directed by the Lords Commissioners of her Majesty’s Treasury to acquaint you that my Lords have made inquiry into the circumstances which led to the cessation of your employment as a temporary clerk at the Royal Mint, and they do not find that they are such as in their opinion would justify them in awarding you any compensation in consequence thereof.

“I am further desired to state that your removal from the service was entirely within the discretion of the Master of the Mint, who distinctly denies ever having held out to you any expectation of promotion or of permanent employment; and that your statements as to the value of your services at the Mint are not corroborated by Mr. Graham.

“In conclusion, I am desired to add, with regard to your application that your services may be continued in some other department, that my Lords have no appointment at their disposal to which they can nominate you.

“I am, Sir, “Your obedient servant, (Signed)“William Law,”

George F. Ansell, Esq., “27, Bernard Street, Russell Square, W.C.” “Exᵃᵈ.

Whereupon your Lordship took steps, which I will explain presently; but I beg first to append a few extracts from my diary, written day by day at a time when, had my confidence in Mr. Graham been shaken, I could have induced him to make a written agreement. I instead placed in him so profound a confidence that I placed my future, as he knew, entirely in his keeping.

“9th March, 1858.

“I expressed an opinion that in the event of the Master being ill, or seeing fit to resign, I should be summarily dismissed the Mint, and that the —— and —— would come into power. I also related the grounds for my opinion, and the Master said that ‘the Treasury were too much awake to all affairs to admit of my dismissal or removal, or of such a change at any time under any circumstances; and that, beside, Mr. Sterry was now just preparing his last Report of the waste per quarter, and which would effectually close —— and ——’s chance.’”

“9th July, 1858.

“I showed the Master, and he read Mr. Halder Wood’s letter. I sought his advice, and he advised me to remain at the Mint, promising that, so soon as Mr. Brande or Mr. Buckle died, I should be placed in their position, for the Treasury would not make a place for me. I wrote this to Mr. Wood, who soon replied, offering me a place which was next to himself, and advising me ‘not to trust Graham’s promises.’”

“September 2nd, 1857.

“A note from Mr. F. Versmann, declining a position which I had placed at his disposal under these circumstances. Mr. Corcoran offered to introduce me to Mr. Payne, who subsequently offered to engage me on the following terms: I was to attend three days a week at Farnham, where I was to have a residence and £250 a year. The other three days I was at perfect liberty to use and to spend in London, in no way tied to Mr. Payne. I consulted Mr. Graham. He promised most faithfully that I should be ‘above all,’ and advised me to decline Mr. Payne’s offer. I did decline it, and to prove to Mr. Graham that the offer was bona fide, I handed to him Mr. Payne’s letter, with a request that he would recommend a fit person, and I would introduce him. Mr. Graham gave the letter to Mr. Versmann, who in his note says he declines because ‘I am sorry indeed that Mr. Payne finds it necessary for the chemist to reside on the spot; but, after all, I am sure I am right in not giving up my chances in London.’ Mr. Corcoran has at this day a perfect recollection of the whole matter, and writes me ‘I believe you would have accepted, but you had a prospect of a certain position in the Royal Mint.’”

“October 5th, 1859.

“In a conversation about my position, which had arisen from the opposition offered to me, the Master said, ‘Yes, that is the difficulty, you see the Treasury will not give you a position while we have so much old lumber in the way of officers who do nothing.... And in truth I will tell you I had hoped that the Act of last session would have rendered retirement at sixty-five compulsory, and then I would have placed you in a far higher position in the coining department; but that clause was unwisely withdrawn, and here I am, still encumbered by people utterly useless.’ I said, ‘Is it probable that I shall have to wait for my promotion till the death or retirement of one of my so-called ‘superior officers,’ or shall I now stand a chance of a more immediate position of safety?’ He replied with great earnestness, ‘It is a year since anything was done for you, so I will do something for you before the end of early winter, and you stand a far better chance now that Sir Charles Trevelyan is gone from the Treasury, for he always stood in your way, because his own nominations had turned out so very disastrously to this place; but I will promise you I will set you firmly directly the men return to London—directly the Ministers are in town.’”

22nd April, 1869.

Being determined to find the reason why I failed to be appointed, you, as stated in your Lordship’s letter, called on Mr. Graham, at the Mint. Mr. Graham spoke of his desire to serve Mr. Ansell, and offered “to appoint him to the position from which Mr. C. W. Goodwin was to be retired with an increased salary.”

I had in writing begged your Lordship to allow me to decline this offer, because I saw through the malevolent malice which induced it, and enclosed a statement with extracts from my diary.

Four days later, it appears that your Lordship called again on Mr. Thomas Graham, in the Mint, where he was in consultation with Dr. Lyon Playfair, M.P., and Mr. C. W. Fremantle, when you, as stated in your letter, read and heard read Mr. Graham’s letter to the Treasury, and your Lordship wrote to Mr. Lowe in relation to this interview with Mr. Graham, and sent me Mr. Lowe’s reply.

“Downing Street, Whitehall, April 29th, 1869.

“Dear Lord Kinnaird,

“Had Mr. Graham consulted me, I should have advised him not to produce any documents to you and Dr. Lyon Playfair, for the simple reason that I have already decided the case, and that it ought not to be opened without my consent. That consent I feel myself bound to withhold. I cannot permit any one in this office to act as a Court of Appeal on what I have decided. I have already given to your Lordship such explanations as the case seemed to require, and I have nothing to add to it.

“I am, my lord, “Faithfully yours, (Signed)“Robert Lowe.

“The Right Hon. Lord Kinnaird.”

The Right Hon. Lord Kinnaird, K.T., to the Right Hon. Robert Lowe.

“Rossie Priory, Inchture, N.B., May 4th, 1869.

“Dear Mr. Lowe,

“The only explanation in re Ansell which I received from you, was that Mr. Ansell’s Memorial, which complained of Mr. Graham’s conduct, had been remitted to that gentleman for an answer, and that, after receiving it, you considered further inquiry was unnecessary.

“I then asked to see the answer, and was refused, though, at the same time you assured me that it did not reflect in the least on Mr. Ansell’s character. When I did see Mr. Graham’s answer, I was struck with the animus which pervaded its tone, and can hardly understand how such a difference ‘between us’ can exist as to what does and does not reflect on a man’s character. That the impression conveyed to my mind by the document is the natural one, is corroborated by the declaration of Dr. Lyon Playfair on reading it; for he declared, ‘most strongly, that if published, it would prevent Mr. Ansell obtaining, not only any official, but any other employment.’ And certainly, if the statements therein be true, such a result would be deserved; however, the document bears on the face of it so manifest a perversion of facts, and exhibits such a malevolent feeling towards Mr. Ansell on the part of Mr. Graham, on whose word alone you have ‘decided the case,’ that I am satisfied that the publication of this document would rather tell in Mr. Ansell’s favour than otherwise. I pointed out to you that the appointment by Mr. Graham of his brother, whose unfortunate habits were well known, to a position of great responsibility in the Mint, and the peculations and losses which, by Mr. Graham’s own admission, had taken place, demanded a special inquiry into the management, and however much I might wish to screen a man of Mr. Graham’s scientific acquirements, I do not feel inclined to follow your advice and ‘ask Mr. Gladstone to give Mr. Ansell another appointment,’ instead of exposing the mismanagement of the Mint, and I cannot understand how, if you believe Mr. Graham’s answer to be reliable, you could recommend me to take such a course.

“Yours faithfully, (Signed)“Kinnaird.

“The Right Hon. Robert Lowe, Downing Street.”

The Right Hon. Lord Kinnaird, K.T., to the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone.

“Rossie Priory, Inchture, N.B., May 4th, 1869.

“Dear Mr. Gladstone,

“Since I saw you on the subject of Mr. Ansell’s appointment to the vacant office at the Mint, I have seen Mr. Graham’s answer to Mr. Ansell’s Memorial, and I earnestly hope that you will not think of filling up the vacant office without a full inquiry into the management of that Department, which I consider is imperatively called for, and I do not think that in making that appointment you would be justified in being guided by the advice of the Master of the Mint, who formerly appointed to that office his brother, whose drunken habits were so notorious as to render him quite unfit to be continued in such a charge.

“I see no reason to doubt Mr. Ansell’s statements that great peculations did take place at the Mint, as well as waste in coining. This is admitted by the Master himself, and clearly brought out in the Memorial of Mr. Ansell, who was employed for twelve years as supernumerary, and received an acknowledgment more than once from the Treasury in consequence of the saving he had effected. Mr. Graham, it is true, denies the facts, and endeavours to blast Mr. Ansell’s character, and thus to throw discredit on the evidence Mr. Ansell could give.

“Mr. Graham further states in his answer that Mr. Ansell was dismissed on the complaint of his brother, while the letter of dismissal following immediately on Mr. Ansell’s application to Mr. Disraeli to be put on the permanent staff bears, that it was in consequence of the ‘coining department being so partially occupied,’ though at the same time a new coinage had been ordered.

“Mr. Graham’s answer bears on the face of it such a perversion of facts that it appears to me an inquiry is absolutely necessary, and I hope you will not oppose a Motion for a Committee of Inquiry into the management of the Mint, unless some other mode of inquiry is adopted.

“Believe me, “Yours faithfully, (Signed)“Kinnaird.

“The Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone.”

Your Lordship will perhaps allow me to bring to your remembrance that Mr. Thomas Graham died on the 16th of September, 1869, many months after you had made great exertions in my favour. This is the more necessary because some have thought that Mr. Graham was not aware of my charges against him, whereas he had a full knowledge of all that was passing, and his removal made it more difficult for me to prove my statements or to obtain justice. It had been, I believe, your Lordship’s intention to allow “my case,” as it has been called, to go into abeyance till, on the occasion of your motion in the House of Lords for a Committee to inquire into the management of the Mint, others gratuitously attacked me, instead of replying to your Lordship exact statements made on the 18th July, 1870, when you once more brought the subject of the Mint before the House of Lords. As that debate became of personal interest to myself, I beg to quote your Lordship’s concluding speech.