Document information

Physical location:

W70/7987, unit 468, VPRS 3991/P inward registered correspondence, VA 475 Chief Secretary's Department, Public Record Office, Victoria. 70.07.18a

Preferred Citation:

Ferdinand von Mueller to James McCulloch, 1870-07-18 [70.07.18a]. R.W. Home, Thomas A. Darragh, A.M. Lucas, Sara Maroske, D.M. Sinkora, J.H. Voigt and Monika Wells (eds), Correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller, <https://vmcp.rbg.vic.gov.au/id//letters/1870-9/1870/70-07-18a-final.odt>, accessed June 13, 2026

1
MS written by Georg Luehmann and signed by M.
Melbourne Botanic Garden
18th July 1870
Sir
In reply to the alleged grievances of the discharged gardener J. Hinze
2
On 11 July 1870 John Hinze of 12 Martin Street, Emerald Hill, complained to McCulloch: 'Allow me to lay before you a grievance, I believe I am justified to compain of. I have been for more than six years employed as gardener in the Melbourne Botanical gardens and received last May my discharge. As I understand the discharge of the several employers [sic] has been made in consequence of your order, according to seniority. How is it then, that one young man Harry Moran who has been a shorter time employed at the gardens has not got discharge, and why find two other men, Cotterel and French, nearly constant work an [sic] live still in Cottages, belonging the garden? On the day of my leaving Dr. von Mueller promised me on his honor to employ me again in his Department [after] six weeks and settle with me my doing duty for about eighteen sundays. Neither of these promises Dr. von Mueller has fulfilled. If Dr. von Mueller pleads wa[nt] of funds, why then did he raise the Clark two shillings and the Messenger one shilling I am sure Dr von Mueller will have no just cause to complain of me and I have the promise of Mr. Fergusson to testify to my character as well as to my abilites. I therefore beg of you, you will kindly take my case into consideration and see justice done.' (V70/7735, unit 468, VPRS 3991/P, Public Record Office, Victoria). Hinze's letter was referred to M for comment on 13 July.
I have the honor to lay the following facts before you.
1, As regards gardener Moran, who is junior to Hinze by only 6 months, being employed in the Botanic Garden, I beg to submit as a reason, that this man's wages are only 5/ p diem, while Hinze was in receipt of 8/; moreover Moran was ill for several months at the beginning of the year, for which time he received no remuneration whatsoever, and has besides an aged mother and a sick sister in a great measure depending on his earnings. He has at present similar work to that which Hinze would do, to perform. He being temporarily retained will to some extent make up for his loss during illness.
2, The men French and Cottrell have been employed for some days in assisting to compile the return for Parliament required by the Government. Otherwise they are mainly engaged in painting and writing labels for plants under the vote for Public Works, for which skilled labor Hinze is not competent. Cottrell continues besides for an hour daily to attend to the feeding of the birds, which requires some experience. Both these men have young children,
3
families deleted.
born in the cottages which they occupied for years, whereas Hinze never lived on the premises, nor has he any small children to support.
3, The Sunday duties, which Hinze undertook without my authority by arrangement of the Inspector of Forests, were before and are now again performed by an other senior gardener without extra pay, but who receives cottage accommodation in lieu. It is not true that I refused to pay for these extra duties on Sunday, but I advised Hinze not to press a claim so unjust and exorbitant; if however the Honorable the Chief Secretary deems it desirable, this claim might be recognized, but 5/ for each Sunday would be ample remuneration.
I gave him no positive promise of reengagement, but promised to do so, if the resources of the Department would admit of it. The unexpected reemployment of William Smith, however, renders now the engagement of any additional employee an impossibility;
4
Smith was among those whom M had discharged in a restructuring of the Garden's workforce two months earlier. See M to J. McCulloch, 23 April 1870 (in this edition as 70-04-23c); W. Smith to J. McCulloch, 9 May 1870 (in this edition as M70-05-09); and M to J. McCulloch, 7 May 1870 (in this edition as 70-05-07b).
besides two other discharged gardeners have precedence to Hinze, in the event of seniority having to be strictly observed. Gardener Hinze was engaged by me on weekly terms, involving no claims of any kind afterwards, and is therefore in the same position as the discharged carter and carpenter, who were senior to him by many years.
4, The wages of the messenger and town agent were raised 1/ per diem — from 6/ to 7/ — as far back as 18 months ago, when through some changes in the office he had to undertake extra clerical duties. The increase of pay to the clerk, who holds also the custodianship of the botanic museum, took place already in October last, and he only receives now 9/ p
5
per.
day, for which extra duties in the evening as well as every Sunday have to be performed. I may still add that Hinze also had his income raised 1/ per day during 1869.
I have the honor to be
Sir
Your obedient servant
Ferd. von Mueller
Direct. botan. Garden
The Honorable
the Chief Secretary
6
McCulloch initialled this file. There is no indication of any further action being taken.