Throughout the foregoing pages I have endeavoured to point out the
causes which lead to mismanagement in the Royal Mint, and I should
be glad if I could see a reason to hope that this state of things
was likely to terminate. However, there seems to exist an obstinate
determination to maintain the present arrangements. If proof of this
be required, it exists in the re-issue of Pistrucci’s device on the
sovereign of 1871, which meets with deserved condemnation from all
classes of opinion. It is a wrong to Pistrucci’s memory to append his
initials to a coin so mutilated. While, however, Mr. Fremantle thinks
it economy to continue—_vide_ “European Mints”—the present system of
the die department of the Royal Mint, the nation must bear the disgrace
inherent to such determination. There is, however, reason to believe
that this subject will be forced upon the Master of the Mint, for it
is now attracting considerable attention. That St. George, seated on
his horse, should be placed in a concavity, is perhaps intended to
symbolise the necessity for washing from him the dirt in which he has
of late been bathed; but that thus sinking the work on a coin is wise
may be questioned, for our coins should represent medals, not saucers
of tarnished copper. Instead, however, of altering the effigy of her
Majesty, they at the Mint have made an unwise alteration of the eye
alone, and which gives a very unpleasant expression. The necessity for
the issue of this new coin arose from the fact of the alteration from
base to standard coin (see pages 54-56), and its design is really a
Hall mark to point out to the Mint authorities the real value of the
coin. When purchased for melting, five hundred of these coins will be
worth £500, but an equal number of coins of the previous issue is worth
only £499; so that by the alteration the Bank of England now loses
£2,000 which it before enjoyed from this source, quite independently of
the profit demonstrated at pages 126-127.
I have insisted on the necessity for a different system as applied to
the chief engravership of the Royal Mint, and, consequently, for a new
effigy of her Majesty on the coins of the realm. I had hoped that when
the George and Dragon was issued, a new device would also appear, and
that this did not take place is a subject of universal regret. There
appears to be a want of knowledge as to the cause for retaining the
present obverse; I therefore mention it. The objection to change arose
with his late Royal Highness the Prince Consort, who resisted any
alteration of the design in the die of the face of her whom he loved
so well. This fact probably prevents the issue of a coin from the new
pattern die which is prepared in the Mint.
The want of knowledge exhibited in the Royal Mint is further
demonstrated by the recommendations of Mr. Napier, who has not been
at the pains to understand the cutting-out presses which he condemns.
I concur, however, in that condemnation; for these machines should
be small, powerful, and diaphanous, if I may so interpret that word;
not heavy and light-obstructing as at present. Such a machine can
readily replace the present machinery, which, with one coining press
and its complete accompaniments, will find a fitting home in the South
Kensington Museum. Had we in these days the inventive minds of past
generations, we might hope to see the principle of the screw press
of Mr. Boulton so modified and applied to the other presses in the
Mint, that they would require but little more space than that occupied
by themselves alone; indeed, such an instrument seems but a natural
result of the existence of Mr. Boulton’s press, and coins, intended to
represent medals, should be formed by a blow, not by gradual pressure.
That the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the time being should be
Master of the Mint is perhaps the strongest proof of the ignorance
on the subject of the Parliament which passed the Act that can be
produced. It keeps the Deputy-Master of the Mint, by his own admission,
continually journeying between the Mint and the Treasury Chambers to
instruct the Master, instead of, as he should be, attending to the
arrangements of the Mint. Parliament, I hope, will yet see that the
master of a working Department should be a practical, not merely a
financial or political man.
When the new Coinage Act was passing through Parliament, a clause was
introduced which has enabled any person to send gold to the Mint for
coinage free from expense, except loss of interest. Colonel Tomline,
M.P., has been the first to avail himself of this right, and I happened
to be with that gentleman on the 4th February, 1871, when he received
from the Mint £100 in coined gold, of which he gave me a specimen.
This is the first time that a private person has attempted such an
invasion of the prescriptive rights of the Bank of England, and by it
he has made a clear gain of 1¾_d._ (although in this instance he lost
profit by assay and trade practice), for he sent an ingot which weighed
25·681 ounces—seller’s weight at £3 17_s._ 9_d._ an ounce—and received
back from the Mint 25·684 ounces of sovereigns, or in excess weight
0·003 ounce. The time occupied was twenty days. The principle thus
established is a great one, and it is to be hoped that Colonel Tomline
will carry his point against the Master of the Mint as regards a free
coinage of silver; for while the Government claims the exclusive right
to coin silver, its workshop—the Mint—refuses to issue coined silver to
the public. That department sells threepenny pieces because the Bank of
England will not take the trouble; but all other silver coin goes to
that institution, to be issued by it to bankers alone in bulk.
Colonel Tomline will perhaps consider the wisdom of re-establishing
an Exchange where those who have an excess of bronze or silver can
exchange it for gold, and those who wish it can obtain the subservient
coinages.
There are strong reasons why the Royal Mint, instead of the Bank of
England, should purchase gold bullion and pay for it in Mint notes,
but, leaving the full consideration of this part of the subject for
a future opportunity, it seems that there can be little doubt of the
fairness of my proposition to charge one pound for the coining of
each thousand sovereigns, this sum being quite sufficient even under
the present system to protect the Mint from loss, while it is certain
that it would, under efficient management, yield a profit. If, then,
beyond this degree of protection against pecuniary loss by the gold
coinage the average amount of silver and bronze were coined, the
Royal Mint should be—and under proper control would be—not only a
self-supporting Department, but one of actual profit, just as the Post
Office has become, instead of, as at present, a vast abyss into which
a great amount of money is thrown, never again to appear. It must not
be conceived that my wish or intention is to do violence to those who
hold office; my desire has been to point out the irregularities which
prevail, and at the same time, from experience gained under exceptional
opportunities, and by perseverance under adverse circumstances,
to develope the actual facts, so that when these are known the
irregularities, to say the least of it, may be remedied.
I cannot assert that my descriptions explain the operations at the
Mint as now conducted; but this I do feel, that if such suggestions as
I have made for improvements in the operative department were alone
followed in their entirety, the result would be a clear saving of at
least £4,000 a year; while, if the other propositions which I have
endeavoured to demonstrate are carried into effect, it seems perfectly
clear that the Chancellor of the Exchequer need not apply year after
year to include in the estimates the large amount required to meet the
losses of the Mint.
It is due to myself to state that the manuscript for my late edition
was in the hands of the Publisher at the time of Mr. Graham’s death,
and on the occurrence of that event I, at great expense, altered many
passages which I had written, with an especial view to Mr. Graham’s
replying to them.
I wish to state that my object is to point out the system and its
results; and in case the feelings of any gentlemen should be hurt,
I must apologise to them, pleading the necessity, when a discussion
on the Mint is pending, that all who are acquainted with the subject
should exhibit facts relating to it, that when the whole matter is
fairly considered a true judgment should be arrived at; for, as
Archbishop Whateley has truly said, “The deadliest of all falsehoods is
the lie of suppression.”