CO885(3-4) — Page 203

6

Should their Lordships adhere to their decision not to re-open the case, am I taking too great a liberty in requesting that their Lordships may be asked to assign their reasons for refusal.

The Right Hon. the Earl of Carnarvon,

&c.

&c.

&c.

(Signed)

I have, &c.

w. w. WOODS,

7

missioners of the Treasury the accompanying copy of a letter, enclosing a memorandum which Mr. Woods has prepared on the subject of his claims.*

Lord Carnarvon cannot under all the circumstances refuse to forward this communi- cation, though he would have felt much satisfaction if their Lordships had been able to obviate any such inconvenient prolongation of this discussion by placing Mr. Woods in the status which he had expected to occupy, or by some other settlement of the case.

I have, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT.

The Secretary to the Treasury.

Sir Charles Trevelyan, Dec. 12, 1871 (at the time Secretary to the Trea- sury).

Earl of Kimberley, July 21, 1870 (late Secre- tary of State).

Earl of Kimberley, July 21, 1870.

Earl of Kimberley, July 21, 1870.

Treasury Nov. 13, 1856.

Minute,

Treasury Minute, Nov. 13, 1856.

Sir C. Treveleyan, Dec. 12, 1871.

Lord Blachford's draft

of Lord Kimberley's letter of the 21st July 1870.

In 1859, "from a regard to my merits and qualifications, "with the intention that I might obtain earlier and better promotion," I was transferred, with no increase of, salary, from the Treasury to the Colonial Office, as assistant libra- rian, "encouraged to look forward to the librarianship” as my promotion.

In 1860, and on subsequent occasions, I applied for an increase to my salary, "but the Secretary of State uniformly refused to bring my case under the notice of the Treasury, pointing out to me that the superior office of librarian re- "mained still open to me on the librarian's retirement.”

66

"In 1870 the librarian retired, but only to give occasion to the abolition of the office, to which I would in the natural course of things have succeeded, and to which I had been required to look as the recompense of my services.”

I have now served the public for nearly 42 years, in various offices, “zealously and usefully," and my services in Ireland, during and after the famine years of 1845 and 1846, had been considered sufficiently conspicuous to warrant the Lords of the Treasury in referring to my conduct of the Relief Department of the Board of Public Works, and subsequently of the Land Improvement Act, in testifying that "my exertions greatly contributed to the success of that measure.”

Having discharged the duties of librarian since the abolition of the office, to which, according to the promises made to me by successive Secretaries of State, viz. :-

Lord Lytton (as interpreted by Sir Charles Trevelyan); Duke of Newcastle (personally to myself);

Lord Cardwell, twice;

Lord Carnarvon; and

Duke of Buckingham (these as witnessed by Lord Blach-

ford),

I should have succeeded, I now claim the arrears of salary, 8007., which have accumulated since July 1870, and to be placed on a present salary of 680., to which I hold myself legally and equitably entitled.

W. W. WOODS.

Colonial Office, July 1874. NOTE. If any statement in this memorandum,can be successfully impugned, or even if it can be shown that I have overstated the case, I will at once renounce my claim.

W. W. W.

SIR,

No. 10.

COLONIAL OFFICE to TREASURY.

Downing Street, July 30, 1874.

WITH reference to your letter of the 6th inst. (No. 10,510), and previous correspondence regarding the case of Mr. W. W. Woods, of this Department, I am directed by the Earl of Carnarvon to request that you will lay before the Lords Com-

• No. 8.

{

MY LORD,

No. 11.

W. W. WOODS, Esq., to COLONIAL office.

Broomville, Staines, September 22, 1874.

I HAVE received a letter from Mr. Herbert in reply to mine addressed to your Lordship, complaining of being passed over in the recent promotions, in which this passage occurs :--

"Lord Carnarvon has noticed with much regret the tone of your letters to him."

I may have been in your Lordship's opinion unreasonably impatient for a reply; for this expression of impatience I very humbly apologise to your Lordship; it would be vain to attempt to justify the offence, as it would be quite impossible for your Lordship to realise the intensity of feeling under which I wrote. As a reply to my letter to your Lordship, Mr. Herbert's explanation is an aggravation of my grievance, it only confirms my worst apprehensions.

I feel that I should also apologise for having been so foolish as to raise the question at all your Lordship's right to select for promotion being unquestionable. Persecution has often forced men to the commission of acts ending in the lunatic asylum or the prison; I hope my greatest crime may be folly.

CC

Will your Lordship now bear with me while I review the treatment which I have received at the hands of the Government, justly designated by Mr. Disraeli as plun- derers," nearly 1,000l. of my money being in that historic balance of five millions, now in the possession of the Government of which your Lordship is a distinguished member,

In 1859, I, then a clerk in the Treasury, was asked by Sir Charles Trevelyan, then Secretary to the Treasury, if I would accept the under librarianship of the Colonial Office, on the terms proposed in Mr. Merivale's letter, which I enclose for Lord-

your ship's perusal, viz.

This probable, though not the only possible advancement, would be to the post of librarian, 6007. to 8001., rising by twenties.

"Such then is the post we have to offer.'

(And with reference to the recent promotions and Mr. Herbert's explanation, I pray your Lordship's special attention to the words " though not the only possible' advance- ment;" what is their meaning? that a higher office still than the librarianship was open

to me, or was it a trick to entrap me? Impossible.)

Who are We? The Colonial authorities.

Who are the Colonial Authorities ?

Lord Lytton, Secretary of State.

Earl of Carnarvon, Under Secretary. Mr. Merivale, Under Secretary.

"Qui facit per alium, facit per se," is a sound legal maxim. I do not, therefore, think that I am forcing the argument too far when I say that your Lordship, if not legally, is morally bound to require that your promise is fulfilled, and that the attractions held out to me by your Lordship, unsought for by me, are not to be turned into false lights, an ignis fatuus, leading me to ruin.

Why was I selected? Read Sir Charles Trevelyan's letter of December 12, 1871.

"

You were selected for the appointment at the Colonial Office from a regard to your merits and qualifications, with the intention that you might obtain earlier and better promotion in consequence of the transfer."

It here occurs to me to ask your Lordship what difference in a moral point of view is there between "obtaining money under false pretences," a criminal act in the eye of the law, and of obtaining services under false pretences ? My services are my money; and the pretences under which they were obtained have, so far, proved to be false.

• No. 9.

A 4

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

TC.O. 885

4 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO