§ MR. BENTINCK, in rising to ask a Question with reference to New Courts of Justice, remarked upon the fact that in deference to the opinion of the House the number of architects who would be appointed to compete had been raised from six to twelve, and asserted that one of them was an architect who could under no circumstances be chosen, and that six of the remaining eleven men were pledged to Gothic architecture. He also thought that those architects who had distinguished themselves by designing the handsome buildings erected in the city had a right to complain that they had not been placed upon the list. He urged the still further increase of the number of competing architects to at least twenty-four; but he would much prefer unlimited competition. As the First Commissioner of Works had on a former occasion been understood to agree to the nomination of two architects to act as judges of the competing designs, he (Mr. Bentinck) desired to know their names, and whether they were to have equal voices with their colleagues; in the event of the Government returning an unsatisfactory reply, he should, immediately after the recess, move that three gentlemen of undoubted architectural knowledge and experience be added to the Committee appointed to select the design for the buildings in question. The hon. Member inquired, in conclusion, Whether the conditions of the competition were finally settled, and whether the First Commissioner of Works will present papers to the House describing those conditions, in company with a record of the names of the judges, the names of the competitors, and the time fixed for sending in the designs?
§ SIR GEORGE BOWYERalso thought twelve architects too few to admit to competition, when it was remembered how many able architects England possessed; and he thought there would be great advantage in admitting unlimited competition, for it might be that the best man of all was one as yet unknown to fame, and that if the opportunity were afforded him his talent would be made known, so that the country might have the benefit of it. If the Government did not choose to adopt the plan of unlimited competition, he 1179 hoped they would at least take care that there was a sufficient number of competitors to give a fair chance of obtaining something superior in design. He did not see any principle in selecting twelve men; and among those who had been passed by in the selection, but who had a claim to be considered, he would mention Mr. Coe, an architect of eminence, who had gained a prize in a former competition. He (Sir George Bowyer) did not know what course had been pursued with reference to the proportions of Gothic and Italian architects who had been selected; but he hoped that this point would be fairly dealt with. With regard to those who would have to decide upon the plans, he thought it very important that some of the Judges and the Attorney General should be on the Committee who had to decide with regard to the fitness and convenience of the building for the administration of justice. That was the first consideration; but it was quite as easy to erect a beautiful building that should be fit for its purpose as an ugly building. It might be very well that the Judges and the Attorney General should decide on the convenience of the building; but they would themselves allow there were many others who were capable of deciding on the beauty of the building; and he advisedly distinguished between beauty and ornament, simplicity being the great beauty in architecture. The Committee who had to decide on the question were not, in his opinion, so well qualified as they might be. The Chief Justice and the great legal authorities were not the best judges of architecture. He therefore hoped his right hon. Friend would take care to have persons on the Committee who were qualified to judge of beauty of design, so that the building when erected should not provoke the too frequent exclamation, "What an ugly building; it is a disgrace to the town."
§ MR. BERESFORD HOPEwished, before the question was answered, to throw out a suggestion, which, if adopted, would go far to remove the difficulty which was felt on this matter. He was sorry to say that the present condition of art politics made it excessively difficult to adopt the plan of unlimited competition, which, no doubt, was in itself the best. Besides, the Government must keep their contract with the competing architects; but why not have an extra unlimited competition of unpaid volunteers, not calling on them 1180 to send in so many designs as the dii majorum gentium, but only by comparison a few, and these less carefully finished; and, if any one or two came out of striking merit, thus inviting their authors, up to five or six or perhaps more, who really had done exceedingly well, to complete the whole set of designs like the twelve selected competitors, and be matched with them upon like terms. They might then have another set of judges competent to adjudicate between the twelve original designs and the five or six additional ones which would thus be pushed up to the general level of the original competitors. He would not have the Government break faith with the twelve, but a few hundred pounds additional would be a very cheap price to pay for the success of such a building which was to cost hundreds of thousands, and a few months' later delay, a very little time to transpire for the success of a pile which was to last for many generations. He hoped this suggestion would be taken up. Twelve was not a sufficient number; at the same time he must say, out of respect to the names selected, that if the list must be restricted to twelve, the number had been very well chosen. They were eminent men, and care had been taken in their choice. There were at the same time other architects, of whom he had a high opinion, that he should have been glad to see on the list; but he could not predicate unfairness of the selection. He hoped his right hon. Friend would avail himself of the suggestion which he had thrown out.
§ MR. COWPERhad no objection to lay on the table the instructions issued to the architects, which he believed would give all the information which the hon. and learned Gentleman desired. The hon. and learned Gentleman had again raised the question as to the comparative advantages of unlimited and limited competition; but he must say the opinion generally of those most competent to decide a question of this sort, and entitled to speak with authority, was in favour of the course adopted by the Government—of limited rather than unlimited competition. No doubt there were advantages in each course. The advantage of unlimited competition was that it gave an opportunity to young men of genius or remarkable fertility of talent who were as yet unknown to show what they were able to do. But in a limited competition they had the advantage of securing the works 1181 of the highest talent and standing in the profession. Thus in the unlimited competition for the Natural History Museum at Kensington Gore thirty-two designs were sent in, which were very well in their way—some very good; but none of the competitors were in the first rank of their profession. In unlimited competition they got men of leisure, not men of great practice. On the other hand, in limited competition they got the designs of men who by their practice had attained that position in public estimation which, on the whole, was the best guarantee of a man's qualifications to execute the work. In unlimited competition they were not bound to employ the architect who furnished the best design, while in limited competition they engaged to employ him. The case alluded to of Mr. Coe was a case in point. Mr. Coe sent in the best design for the Foreign Office, but the Government of Lord Derby thought him so unfit to execute the work that they would not allow him to construct the building. The fact was that that gentleman was passed over because he was not thought competent to erect the building, and the Select Committee took the same view. That was the ground why Mr. Coe was not selected for the present competition. By means of this limited competition the Government had got the men most eminent in their profession, ["No!"] He defied the hon. and learned Member for Whitehaven to name other men more eminent. With regard to the number selected for competition, he did not think that was a matter of any importance. He had at first thought that six would be sufficient, but he had enlarged the number to twelve. He must remind the House that, if the number were further increased, an increased expenditure must result; but he did not believe that by increasing the number they increased the chance of getting superior designs. In respect to the mode of adjudication, the course had been followed which was usually pursued by railway companies or other corporations when they proposed to erect large buildings. They generally adopted the principle of limited competition, and appointed some professional architect to make a report, which assisted the judges in deciding upon the designs. That was the course the committee of judges intended to pursue on this occasion. They proposed to select two professional men, with a practical knowledge of architecture, to make 1182 a report for the guidance of the committee on those points with respect to which special professional training gave full understanding and insight. He proposed to follow the course adopted in the competition for the Foreign Office and the War Office—and to appoint two assessors. That having been the course previously followed in regard to the erection of Government Offices, he thought it most likely to lead to a satisfactory conclusion.
§ MR. AYRTONobserved, that the right hon. Gentleman had not made any reply to the proposition of the hon. Member who had last spoken, which he thought deserved consideration; but he wished to call the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the position into which the House seemed to be drifting in this matter. They were about to spend an enormous sum of money, which was not to be voted in Supply in the first instance, but was to come out of funds otherwise specially appropriated, and any deficiency would have to be paid out of the National Exchequer. By way of an economical starting they were to pay each of the twelve architects invited to compote £800, or a sum of £9,600 in the whole. Thus £800 would be spent for the best design, and £8,800 for eleven other unsatisfactory and insufficient designs. That was not an economical mode of proceeding. He thought that that expenditure might have been avoided, if the Government had proceeded with a little more consideration in the matter. He believed the Government had now placed the matter in the hands of an irresponsible committee—namely, of gentlemen who did not hold any specific office in relation to the subject-matter. The right hon. Gentleman the First Commissioner of Works, who was the only responsible person, must be in a minority of one, so that practically this was an irresponsible proceeding, and, like all irresponsible proceedings, it did not seem to be carried out with any great forethought. One would have thought when persons were going to embark in a great undertaking like this, they would have asked in the first instance for general designs, giving an idea of the views and objects of the architects; but the committee had required in the first instance the most elaborate designs, for which, of course, the committee were obliged to offer payment. Having committed themselves to that point the committee then found it impracticable to meet the views of those hon. Gentlemen 1183 who desired unlimited competition; but in this dilemma the hon. Member for Stoke made a fair suggestion and had asked, in addition to the twelve, that an opportunity might be given for a freer competition. Why should they shut the door against the latent genius of the country in favour of those who were sufficiently paid for what they did? That proposition had been disregarded by the First Commissioner of Works, though he should have thought that the right hon. Gentleman would have been delighted at the opportunity of thus getting out of the difficulty. Now, he should like to know what objection there was to the course suggested by that hon. Member. The House would recollect that in the competition which took place for the erection of the Houses of Parliament the gentleman who succeeded was not at the time of such standing in his profession that he would have been selected as one of a chosen few to compete, though perhaps he was not spoken of as Mr. Coe, who it was said could make a design, but could not carry it out. Yet he asked any one who recollected the exhibition of the designs for the Houses of Parliament, whether Mr. Barry's was not so far superior to every other design, that there never existed two opinions on the point that he was entitled to the palm of honour. If that was the result of one of the greatest competitions in this country, were they justified in saying that free and open competition was a thing to be laughed at and treated as unworthy of consideration? He hoped that the House would receive from the Chancellor of the Exchequer some clear expression of his views and opinions more worthy of this great occasion. Next to the Houses of Parliament or the Palace of the Sovereign, the erection of a block of buildings for the whole administration of justice afforded the greatest opportunity for illustrating the state of art in the present time, and for drawing forth all the genius in the country which could be brought to bear upon the work. He held that the successful architects in the competition should be liberally remunerated, and that the number of minute drawings now required of competitors—he believed it was fifty—was too great a demand, entailing not only an immense amount of labour, but considerable expense. He did not think so many drawings were requisite to show the skill of the architect. He did not speak with technical knowledge; but having seen some of the designs sent in, 1184 his opinion was that half-a-dozen would be amply sufficient. He threw out the suggestion for the consideration of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and trusted he would be able to give the House some words of consolation in respect to art, which appeared to be in a deplorable condition.
§ MR. TITEdid not think the number of drawings required of the architect was so great as to interfere with competition. The House and the country were placed in a difficulty, out of which he did not see the way. He believed it would have been better if the competition had been open to the country generally, and he would have been inclined to recommend that course, being fully persuaded that it would have been eminently successful. The expenditure of £800 to be given to each of the architects, he held, was totally unnecessary; any man in a position qualifying him to be one of the twelve would have been delighted to compete, receiving as his recompense the adoption of his designs. It would not now be wise to open up the competition to the whole country; in that event the twelve architects now decided upon would, in all probability, resign. To do so would not be just to those gentlemen who had been urged to join in the competition. With regard to the selection, he would not give any opinion; he would, however, observe that the gothic element seemed largely to prevail among them. There would be considerable competition among twelve, and he believed they had been honourably and honestly selected. As to the judges, the five appointed were men of the greatest eminence.
SIR JOHN HAYapologized for interrupting the course of the debate; but as the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer could only speak once, he thought it right to put a question to him about the dockyard voters. There had been a question of a similar character on the paper, but somehow it had dropped out. He wished to know, whether it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to continue to press forward the clause in the Representation of the People Bill, which proposed to disfranchise the intelligent artizans employed in Her Majesty's dockyards?
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that the question of the hon. Baronet had been put to him on a previous occasion, when he replied that, on gene- 1185 ral grounds, it was quite impossible to deal with the subject until it came before the House in the ordinary course. The Government up to the present time had had no opportunity of explaining to the House the clause, or the grounds on which it had been proposed, and he did not think it would be respectful to the House, or just to those who proposed the clause, to enter upon its consideration, until it was brought fairly and fully before them. If clauses of any particular Bill were to be made the subject of discussion before the second reading, or the time appointed for such a purpose, there would be a deviation from the established order, and the result would be considerable inconvenience. When the House went into Committee this clause would be dealt with on its merits, and he hoped that this and every other detail might be allowed to stand over till that time. With regard to the discussion on the choice of architects for the Courts of Justice, his hon. Friend had not been very accurate in his statements. It had been the desire of the Government to secure to the House full control over every shilling of the expenditure; in that endeavour they had been successful, and whether it respected economy or extravagance in the arrangements, the House was perfectly free to act as it pleased. With reference to the suggestion that the residue of any expenditure beyond the contribution of the House must fall upon the public, he had to say that in the preliminary arrangement it was not the intention that the House should be called upon to contribute the residue. It had been arranged between that great officer of the Government who represented the legal profession, and the suitors, he might say in this case, and the other Departments of the Government, that if the plans included designs tending not only to convenience and expedition, but also to economy on the part of the suitors, the excess of expenditure over the estimates should be provided for in some measure by taxation in the form of stamps laid upon the suitors in those courts. This proposal was contained in documents in the hands of hon. Members, and it was thought to be a perfectly just one. His hon. Friend had suggested that the designs of volunteers should be accepted. He felt satisfied that all those volunteers would have to be paid exactly like the twelve. [An hon. MEMBER: No, no! That's a prophecy.] That was a matter 1186 of opinion, and having some experience of money matters and public expenditure, it was as much within his province to prophesy as in that of any other Member. He knew the soft-heartedness of the House when what he might call posthumous claims of this kind were brought forward. It would be said that this was an attempt on the part of the Government to economize pence after spending thousands of pounds; they would be accused of acting in a niggardly spirit, and eventually a Motion for giving precisely the same amount of remuneration to these volunteers would be carried, with great cheering, by a majority comprising all the really warm-hearted men of the House. It. would be most invidious to resist giving £800 to these men for their designs, when their competitors were receiving it. But the great difficulty still remained—instead of adopting either one course or the other and adhering to it, there seemed to be a tendency on the part of the House to take two courses which were incompatible and irreconcilable with each other. An independent body had been chosen for the consideration and settlement of the questions they were now discussing, and for the efficient and economical control of the work. But if the House intended to reserve to itself the power of interfering at every stage of the proceedings it had made a fundamental mistake in appointing that Commission. Either the building should have been allowed to go forward, like all other public buildings, under the control of the executive Government, subject to the revision of Parliament, or else, with all deference to the House he said it, hon. Members should abstain from interfering with the body to whose care the House itself had committed the charge. Questions were asked in the House why there were to be six or twelve architects, but neither the Chancellor of the Exchecellor nor the President of the Board of Trade had authority to represent the Commission in that House. He must confess that he looked with fear and apprehension to the perpetual alternation of conversations in the Committee-rooms and debates in the House, fearing that through the interference of the House the members of the Commission might feel themselves relieved from that responsibility which undoubtedly attached to them, assuming that the entire control was vested in their hands. The inconsistency of the present proceeding was 1187 further shown by the fact that upon the Notice paper for that evening was a Motion praying that a Commission might be issued with the object of making the management of public works more independent of that House.
§ Motion agreed to.
§ House at rising to adjourn till Thursday next.