← Table of contents
The Royal Mint

CONCLUDING REMARKS.

Reading edition

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Explore with AITake your curiosity a little further.

Reading settings