HC Deb 02 March 1860 vol 156 cc2177-9
MR. DANBY SEYMOUR

wished to revert for a few moments to a subject respecting which the hon. Member for Honiton (Mr. Locke) had already asked a question. It appeared that the decision of the Trustees of the British Museum in favour of the removal of the Natural History collection had been carried by the casting vote of the noble Lord at the head of the Government. The House would recollect that a Select Committee of that House had reported against building a National Gallery at Kensington, on the ground that that locality was too far removed from the great mass of the inhabitants of the metropolis, and that to place it there would be to consult the interests of the rich alone. The same argument applied with increased force to the removal of the collection of Natural History from the British Museum. The noble Lord had not given a full and satisfactory answer to the hon. Member for Honiton. The noble Lord said the Trustees had determined to remove the collection, but that they had not determined to what place. He (Mr. Danby Seymour) found that at the meeting at which that decision was come to, and which was called in a very extraordinary manner, two questions were raised—first, whether the collection should be removed, and next, whether it should go to Kensington; and a committee of Trustees was appointed to ascertain what would be the difference in the cost of buying five acres of land at Kensington and five acres near the British Museum. It therefore appeared that the removal to Kensington was nearly determined upon. But he really thought that before it was, contrary as it virtually would be to the decision of the Select Committee, the whole subject should be brought before another committee. It was said that the Commissioners of the Great Exhibition would sell the land required at a low rate, and that the gain which would result from fixing the site at Kensington instead of in the neighbourhood of the Museum would be £212,000. But it must be remembered that if the collection were taken to Kensington, a most expensive museum would be required. But even supposing there was a gain of £100,000 by the transaction, that would not counterbalance the objection to removing the collection to a portion of the town entirely inhabited by the rich and luxurious. To take away the Natural History collection was to destroy one of the most attractive portions of the British Museum, which was largely resorted to by the working classes. Surely before a determination was taken, which virtually ignored the decision of a Committee of that House, the subject should be brought under the notice of Parliament. He believed that some underhand means were used by certain influential persons in this country to remove the National Col- lections to the west-end of London, in spite of the popular branch of the Legislature. He said "underhand means," because, while no attempt was made to popularize the other national collections, large sums were being spent at Kensington in giving lectures, in lighting with gas the buildings erected there, in registering day by day the number of visitors, in establishing schools, opening the galleries at night, giving conversaziones, and sending out cards of invitation to all whose support might be valuable hereafter. Everything, in fact, was done to popularize the Exhibition at Kensington, with the ultimate view, he believed, of removing the natural collection to that end of the town. The British Museum was now accessible to the mass of the population, and for all purposes was far better in its present position. With regard to the new building which would become necessary, it was certain that if the present system of nepotism continued, and the Smirke family was employed from father to son to make the estimates, the public money would be wasted in the future as it had been in the past. Mr. Smirke was not a proper person to call in for the purpose of making these estimates. For nearly a century the Smirke family, from father to son, had received pay from the nation; it was time that talent should be called forth from some other source. The trustees of the British Museum, on which large sums of public money were yearly spent, ought not to be allowed to take so important a step by such a bare majority as the vote of the noble Lord the head of the Government.