Fri, May 25, 2012, 03:05 BST - UK Markets open in 4 hrs 55 mins

Discover Yahoo! With Your Friends

Explore news, videos, and much more based on what your friends are reading and watching. Publish your own activity and retain full control.

To get started, first

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    The Trial of the Pyx – keeping the Government honest since 1282

    For the last 730 years there has been a group working to keep the Government and its agents honest. This week the process began again.



    Every single year since 1282 the Trial of the Pyx has taken place – during which a legally recognised jury, in the presence of the Queen’s Remembrancer, is sworn in to run the rule over the coins the Royal Mint produces to make absolutely sure no one is scrimping, stealing or cheating the public when it comes to the pounds and pence used in the UK.

    Smelting, weighing and measuring the year’s coins, the Goldsmiths Company of the City of London has evaluated our coins since Queen Elizabeth I gave it that power more than 500 years ago. The trial originally took place in Westminster Hall, then at the Exchequer, but common sense finally prevailed in 1870 and the venue was moved to Goldsmith’s Hall – next to the Assay Office that has been responsible for testing the quality of British gold and silver since 1327.

    It takes them two months to deliver their verdict – as more than 50,000 coins taken from every batch of every denomination struck that year are looked into – but when it is finally read aloud, it’s oddly poetic for such a prosaic act of metallurgy:

    “We took out one coin from each of the single packets of gold coins. We weighed in bulk the coins taken out,” reads a section of the most recent verdict.

    “Then we melted the other weighed coins into an ingot and assayed it, comparing it with the standard trial plate of gold.

    “We weighed in bulk the residue of the coins remaining in the packets of gold coins. We then took out of the residue three coins of each type and weighed and assayed them separately.”

    And as that weighing and sorting and measuring begins again, we can take comfort that while the Bank of England might print more money, and the pound sink or soar against the euro, the coins in our pocket at least are exactly what they claim to be.

    [Related featue: How to spot a fake £1 coin]

    Key facts about the Trial of the Pyx:

    What’s a Pyx?
    “Pyx” is the name given to the chests that the coins are transported in and is a reference to the Pyx chamber in Westminster Abbey – where the chests were historically kept along with other important items of state and church.

    Who is the Queen’s Remembrancer?
    The Queen’s Remembrancer is the oldest judicial position still existing in the UK – first created in 1164 by Henry II. They are the senior judge in the Courts of Justice, and pleasingly still seem to act up their ancient role during the Trial of the Pyx: Bedecked in a tricorn hat, wig and “rambling on in an affected Scottish brogue” according to one recent witness. Steven Whitaker currently holds the role.

    What coins are tested?
    According to the 1998 Trial of the Pyx Order - amended slightly in 2005 - of those minted you have to test one in every 2,000 gold coins (such as the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee coin this year); one in every 150 platinum coins; one in every 150 silver Maundy coins; one in every 3,000 of every other type of silver coin (such as the silver pennies still minted); one in every 3,000 gold-plated silver coins; one in every 5,000 cupro-nickel coins of more than ten pence (so 20 and 50 pence pieces); one in every 20,000 cupro-nickel coins of a denomination less than ten pence (so 10 pence and 5 pence pieces); one in every 5,000 nickel-brass coins (one and two pence pieces); one in every 5,000 bimetallic coins (£2 coins).

    What do they check for?
    By law, the jury is required to test the size, weight and metallic composition of the above coins. Coins are checked individually by size and together by weight.

    Who is in the jury?
    The jury is made up of “Freemen of the Goldsmiths Company” – to be precise prime warden of the Goldsmiths’ Company (currently silversmith Hector Miller) with the three supporting wardens, the head of the Assay Office and a selection of the Company’s liverymen. Depending on the number of coins to be checked, the total number changes, but it’s generally about 20-strong.

    What is the Goldsmith’s Company then?
    The Worshipful Company of Goldsmiths – to use its full title – has been responsible for checking the quality of gold and silver in Britain since 1300 (and platinum since 1975). They’re the people responsible for hallmarks on gold and silver (in fact, the word “hallmark” itself is related to the Goldsmith’s Hall where items were brought for marking).

    How often do the coins fail the test?
    Although there have been cases of small discrepancies in the past few decades, these have mostly been miscalculations. Complete failure is unprecedented.

    What if the coins fail this time?
    As a legally convened court – complete with jury and judge – a verdict would have to be passed. The Queen’s Remembrancer would direct the verdict – which would then be delivered to the Department of Trade and Industry, the Mint and published “as the Treasury sees fit” according to the latest legislation. What they could actually do about it is rather unclear.

     

    36 comments

    • William  •  3 months ago
      No point in me checking mine, cos I don't have any!
    • Jonathan  •  London, England  •  3 months ago
      'FAKE MONEY' Read and think! The Bank of England has the right to loan out at interest 10 times the money it has in holding. Meaning if they have £1 on the books they can create £10 out of nothing! Give that to a subsidiary bank (that they own) which creates another 10 fold increase and so on. This is called the FRACTIONAL RESERVE SYSTEM and is the engine for the wealth of the elites of the world. CASH FROM NOTHING aka THE PERFECT SCAM! You spend your life paying back a mortgage that the bank pulled out of the air!
      • robert 3 months ago
        exactly put!!..this makes the very concept of money a very large con from the very people that invented it?...i hate the fact that we are either wealthy or poor by how much money we have instead of wealthy by means of skill and effort..the monetary system is such a crock of #$%$ considering?...the mind boggles when at times the whole world is poor in recession??,,at that point shouldn't every country just agree to start again at zero??...money money money? lets loose it and be go back to swapping stuff or being paid by goods or by kind
      • Andy 3 months ago
        Read and think! read it, think your stupid. Everybody uses the process whereby money doesn't actually pass hands for material items or services..No-one physically deposits 150,000 pounds into the hands of someone else when a house is bought for instance.
    • Sai  •  Milton Keynes, England  •  3 months ago
      It must cost a fortune to make coins i wish they would go back to having more notes like the long lasting plastic type they have in Australia i am fed with up with having a pocket full of scrap metal please some one take notice
    • TSK  •  Manchester, England  •  3 months ago
      Who was the daft person who designed the last lot of coins with ONLY words rather than numbers on them?
      • Lorna 3 months ago
        The pre-decimal coins only had their worth in words, not numbers and we all managed then!
    • coupt  •  Nottingham, England  •  3 months ago
      Prior to decimilisation, we had a coin system where all Copper & Silver coins value was proportional to it's weight. We now have the biggest mish mash of coins, it's time for a rethink. !!!
    • lisa  •  Birmingham, England  •  3 months ago
      what a waste of time with the amount of fake coins out there, the banks don't even bother checking the pound coins anymore as theres that many fakes!!!!
      • Arlene 3 months ago
        Oh, yes the banks do check them. I lost a £1 coin a few months ago from my Avon earnings. It was shiny as the other article mentioned. Ever since, I don't accept shiny £1 coins.
      • Simon P 3 months ago
        Ignoring the initial crime of introducing fake coins into circulation for which the perps should be persued and, if caught, prosecuted by the police, what actual harm is done by their subsequent circulation? If buyers innocently pass fake coins and sellers accept them in good faith they (the fake coins) are changing hands as acceptable tokens of value in just the same way as genuine coins issued into circulation by the Bank of England.
    • P  •  Birmingham, England  •  3 months ago
      Thank you very much for this piece of history that many people do not understand or know about . You have one part of coin history that have always be a puzzle "Weight and Measure" in coins .
    • who  •  3 months ago
      and how much are this pile of #$%$ dwellers getting payed for such a great service to the country
      • Micky 3 months ago
        payed ????
        Go back to school!! Then you might get "payed" a bit more!!
    • shaun g  •  Manchester, England  •  3 months ago
      Give me a million £1 coins and I'll check to see if they spend ok!
      • big brother 3 months ago
        im a antiques dealer and collector do they want a valuation
      • Trig 3 months ago
        I'm a con man, I'll double check them first. Trust me
      • georgesboy 3 months ago
        Is it possible that any rejects could be used to pay the bankers.
    • Steve  •  London, England  •  3 months ago
      Every single year since 1282 the Trial of the Pyx has taken place – during which a legally recognised jury, in the presence of the Queen’s Remembrancer, is sworn in to run the rule over the coins the Royal Mint produces to make absolutely sure no one is scrimping, stealing or cheating the public when it comes to the pounds and pence used in the UK.

      LMAO..........since when did they NOT steal & cheat from the public??????
    • Rob  •  Ilford, England  •  3 months ago
      I bet there was a jolly good Lunch & Dinner + a Luxury Hotel involved
    • robert  •  London, England  •  3 months ago
      keeping the government honest??..that statement in itself is the biggest lie ever!!..how sickeningly ironic.....example...the government voting system(party political)..is an annual event by the gov, to fool the public into thinking that they have some say in how the country is run. but in truth it matters not who you vote in as all parties are in this act/farce together...the gov will do what it pleases at the end of the day and cares not what the public think..and is only interested in being seen as directing this country/world correctly"...in reality it has no idea and is just a group of lucky individuals in charge of the rest of us that apparently need help?..lol lol..i hate the gov and all it stands for....they can keep there shekels!!.rob clark essex england
    • Bill  •  London, England  •  3 months ago
      Yet more featherbedding.
    • MIKE  •  London, England  •  3 months ago
      The forgers must love to hear that their work cannot be detected and it is a waste of time checking even checking them (coins) so they just keep (minting) away A Ho A Ho
    • slopjockey  •  3 months ago
      They dont take their work home with them then do they??
    • LeonE  •  London, England  •  3 months ago
      They look like a barrel of laughs.
    • Trig  •  Barrow-in-Furness, England  •  3 months ago
      I've found a foolproof way to fool vending machines. As they judge them by size and composition weight, I just file down 50p pieces to make 10p ones. Simples.
    • T P  •  Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia  •  3 months ago
      And who checks the paper money?
    • J  •  London, England  •  3 months ago
      Surely in this day and age, an electronic measure can be built into the manufacturing process and thus negate this outdated and no doubt exceedingly expensive system which appears to be more of a tradition using archaic reporting language than of any practical use. If the Judge directs the jury as to their findings ultimately the jury is of no use and the judge might as well declare his own verdict. That said with no precedent there is no stated sanction and therefore any decision as to the prosecution of the Chancellor for discrepancies - yes he/she is ultimately responsible, would be based on unwritten law which would then have to become case law without precedent the findings of which would no doubt be challenged and followed by an appeal All of which would cost a fortune for no positive outcome. Bin this outdated practise and move with the times, spend a few quid on electronic monitoring.
    • Badger  •  3 months ago
      Job for the boys, how much is the pound in my pocket worth sweet FA, and I don't need some pratt from Oxford/Cambridge to tell me that.