HC Deb 05 July 1822 vol 7 c1513
Lord Binning

moved, that the petition relative to the National Monument in Scotland be referred to the committee of Supply.

Mr. Hume

wished to know why the petition was to be referred to that committee?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

was of opinion, that it naturally belonged to the committee.

Sir R. Wilson

objected to the proposition, as the petition was founded on an erroneous statement of the funds applicable to that purpose.

Lord Binning

stated, that the sum of 100,000l. had been voted, though he acknowledged it was not raised or appropriated.

Mr. Bennet

objected to the principle of this proceeding. He had voted for the 100,000l., but it was with the view of building a church, and it was necessary to draw a distinction between churches and triumphal arches.

Mr. Hudson Gurney

thought, under the present circumstances of the country—acting on a system of severe, and, in many instances, of very unjust reductions of public expenditure, famine in Ireland, and distress in England—it was impossible to vote 100,000l. for the purpose of erecting on the Calton Hill at Edinburgh, a bald, meagre, and miserable imitation of the Parthenon at Athens. [Hear, hear!]

Lord Binning

said, that the question was not now what the style of the monument should be, but whether the petition should be referred to a committee.

Mr. Hume

said, that this was not a time for a hasty appropriation of the public money.

Lord Binning

expressed his astonishment at the novel course which had been taken on the present occasion. He would withdraw his motion for the present.