CO885(3-4) — Page 204

}

8

Now let me refer your Lordship to Lord Kimberley's letter of the 21st July 1870,* drafted by Lord Blachford, who was thoroughly acquainted with all the circumstances of

the case.

Hear their Lordships :-

The Secretary of State uniformly refused to bring his case under the notice of "the Treasury, pointing out to him that the superior office, rising from 600%. to 800%., "remained still open to him on Mr. Halksworth's retirement. Mr. Halksworth has now "retired, but it is only to give occasion to the abolition of the office to which Mr. Woods "has been required to look as the recompense of his services."

In this letter to the Treasury Lord Kimberley proposed a mode of compensation which was refused in such contemptuous terms as elicited Sir Charles Trevelyan's spontaneous testimony, as quoted on the preceding page.

The reasons for refusal being considered unsatisfactory, Lord Kimberley addressed a second letter, drafted by Mr. Herbert, in which he expresses a doubt of their under- standing the case, and repeating the terms of compensation formerly proposed; this also met with a refusal, without assigning other reasons.

Reluctant to allow a question affecting so large a sum, nearly 1,000%., the only savings of an official life of 43 years, to be disposed of by the "sic volo, sic jubeo" of the Treasury, I requested your Lordship on the 8th of July last,† nearly three months ago, to ask the Treasury on what grounds they so persistently refused to sanction the recom- mendations repeatedly made by the Secretary of State. The Treasury is not infallible; the reasons which have prevailed with their Lordships may not be valid; if they are they will carry conviction with them, and I will bow to their decision; if otherwise, their silence deprives me of the opportunity of criticising them, a right which I consider that I am entitled to claim, and which I trust your Lordship will continue to urge.

For 11 years, my Lord, I toiled on as under librarian, without any increase of pay; this dreary time occasionally brightened by the cheering promises of successive Secretaries of State, Cabinet Ministers, Peers of Parliament, which have now proved to be nothing better than "a mockery, a delusion, and a snare."

In conclusion, I take the liberty of suggesting to your Lordship the restoration of the librarianship to its former position and pay; its connexion with the General Department has all but strangled its vigour and utility; my time, except so much of it as may be occupied in answering the requirements of the several Departments, and the questions of the very numerous applicants for information on all colonial subjects, is entirely engrossed by the work of the General Department, and except for the industry and intelligence of the library messenger in arranging the books and papers, the business proper of the library would long ago have come to a dead lock. subject will satisfy your Lordship that the present system does not work satisfactorily; An inquiry into the such a change as I suggest would be effected at an ultimate cost of 2007. a year, and it would give your Lordship an opportunity, of which I am sure you would gladly avail yourself, of keeping faith with me, and so disposing at once of my claim for compensation.

I have, &c. (Signed) W. W. WOODS. P.S.-May I request the return of Mr. Merivale's letter when your Lordship has read it.

W. W. W.

9

this objection should be answered. Tis true that Lord Kimberley, in his letter of the 10th July 1871, mildly insinuates that they did not comprehend the question, but his Lordship does not directly grapple with the objection. "Tis also true that his Lordship had already informed the Treasury, in his letter of July 21, 1870,† that "the old librarian- ship, the post to which Mr. Woods would in the natural course of things have succeeded, "and to the duties of which he does in the main succeed."

It is to this "reason "of the Treasury to which I now respectfully direct your Lordship's attention, and which I earnestly entreat your Lordship to answer.

My answer to the Treasury objection is, 1st, that of the nature of my duties the Treasury must be, as a matter of course, wholly ignorant; they are of such a miscel- laneous character that it is impossible to describe them, but they are, to say the least of them, the identical duties discharged single handed as those discharged by my prede- cessors with the aid of an assistant, at salaries respectively of 9001, and 8007.

2nd. That Lord Kimberley's recommendation was as compensation, not as an increase of salary. His Lordship writes, "under these very peculiar circumstances Mr. Woods might PROPERLY be allowed to receive at once the salary of 6001., to which but for the " recent alteration he would have risen.' "

I would here call your Lordship's attention to the fact that compensation was granted to the clerks who were affected by the abolition of the salaries of the private secretaries present and prospective, although denied to me; on what principle I cannot understand, certainly not of even-handed justice.

3. I deny the competency of the Treasury to raise any objection, on the ground either of duties or salary. They sent me to this office on certain fixed conditions as to both, and both should, during my incumbency, be beyond the reach of their criticism.

In full reliance on your Lordship's sense of justice, and in the belief that your Lord- ship is sincerely anxious to promote my interest so far as this unfortunate case is con- cerned, I hope you will take such steps as to your Lordship may appear advisable to answer this objection of the Treasury.

SIE,

The Right Hon. the Earl of Carnarvon,

&c.

&c.

&c.

No. 13.

I have, &c.

(Signed)

W. W. WOODS.

COLONIAL OFFICE to W. W. WOODS, Esq.

Downing Street, October 15, 1874.

In reply to your letter of the 8th instant, I am directed by the Earl of Carnarvon to inform you that, as the arguments which would appear to have most weight in support of the proposal for an improvement of your position have been clearly and repeatedly stated to the Treasury, and as that Department has on several occasions considered your case, his Lordship does not think he can with any propriety press his opinion further.

W. W. Woods, Esq.

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

}

No. 12.

MY LORD,

W. W. WOODS, Esq., to COLONIAL OFFICE,

Colonial Office, October 8, 1874. In obedience to your Lordship's desire, I should not again intrude my case on your Lordship's attention were it not that the subject on which I now address you appears to me to be all important; and as it is my intention to prosecute my claim to the utmost, even to the peril of my situation, any reason given by the Treasury for their pertinacious refusals, founded, I fear, on prejudice rather than principle, of the repeated recommendations of the Secretary of State left unanswered, must weaken my position.

In the Treasury letter of August 30, 1870,† you will read this passage, "Their "Lordships do not see sufficient reason for raising Mr. Woods' salary, which appears "to them to be adequate to the duties which he discharges.”

This, my Lord, is the only reason which has been assigned, and as my letter of the 8th of July last asking for their Lordships' reasons for refusal remains unanswered, I may assume, which can be assigned, it becomes of the first importance to me that ↑ No. 9.

+ No. 2.

• No. 1.

• No. 8.

† No. 1.

+ No. 12.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

TREPLIC.O. 885

4

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO