COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. (Hansard, 29 March 1830)

§ Mr. Hume
declared that he would oppose that and every other motion of a similar nature, until it should be explained why a passage had not been opened for 995 the public from the bottom of Waterloo-place into St. James's Park. He wished to know why the promise that had been made by the right hon. Gentleman opposite, when he was at the head of the Woods and Forests, had not been fulfilled?

Mr. Arbuthnot
said, that the hon. Gentleman was in error in supposing that he had made any such promise as that alluded to. When he had been asked if any such opening would be made, his answer was, that he could not state until he saw the plans. When the plans were presented at his office they contained no such opening.

§ Mr. Hume
maintained, that an opening was promised by his Majesty's Government; but whether by the right hon. Gentleman or some other member of it, he did not recollect.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer
put it to the hon. member for Montrose, whether the present was the fittest occasion for the discussion of this question?

Mr. Lennard
observed, that the opening for which his hon. friend wished, would add greatly to the beauty of the street, than which nothing could be more unsightly than its present appearance. The wall which had been erected completely obstructed the view of the park. While he was upon his legs, he wished to say a few words on another subject. A few years ago the right hon. Gentleman promised that at the expiration of a certain period the interior of the Regent's Park should be opened to the public The time he conceived had now fully expired, and the public had a right to demand that the expectation should be realized. It was well known that there was a very dense population in the neighbourhood of the Regent's Park, to whom the liberty of walking over the whole of it, instead of being confined to the narrow roads by which it was bounded, would be a great convenience and advantage. The plantations had now grown up. If, however, any mischief to them were still apprehended, it would surely be very easy to give directions that some of the policemen should be on the spot, for the purpose of preventing it.

Mr. Maberly
referred to the leases granted to those who had built villas in the Regent's Park, in order to show that Government had no power to open the interior of the park to the public, unless 996 the rights of those who held the leases in question were first purchased by the public, a proceeding to which he presumed Parliament would not be inclined.

Mr. Arbuthnot
agreed with the hon. member for Abingdon, that it would not be in the power of the Government to throw open the whole area of the park to the public, but there was a portion of it— the hon. Member knew the part to which he alluded—which he (Mr. Arbuthnot) had intended to open to the public had he remained at the head of the department over which he formerly presided. What would be done now with reference to that part of the park he could not say; but he would say, if he had remained at the head of that department, he intended to open it to the public, [hear]

§ Mr. Protheroe
said, that every hon. Member who passed down to the House by Charing cross must have had his feelings and nerves annoyed in coming along that exceedingly dirty passage. There could, therefore, be no greater convenience, not only to members of Parliament, but to the public, than the making of an opening from Waterloo-place into St. James's park. He did not believe that a pledge had been given to that effect by Government, but he thought, upon the high ground of public convenience, that opening should be called for. He trusted that this passage would be made, and that also the area of the Regent's-park would be opened to the public. He trusted too that the noble lord now at the head of the Woods and Forests, and who, he was sure, was desirous to do every thing for the public convenience, would finally have the Regent's park thrown open to the public like Hyde park, and that also a passage would be opened, and a flight of steps made, from Waterloo-place into St. James's park.

§ Mr. Hume
said, whether or not a pledge had been given that this opening should be made, he trusted it would be for the public convenience. He concurred with the right hon. gentleman opposite that this subject could be mooted on a fitter occasion. Several votes connected with the parks must come under their notice, and the House would then have an opportunity for discussing this subject.

Mr. Lennard
said, he differed from the hon. member for Abingdon as to the construction of acts of Parliament regarding the Regent's-park, and as to the terms of the leases upon which the villas in that park had been let. It was quite true that there were provisions in the leases to prevent the building- of any more villas there: but he could see nothing in the terms of those leases to prevent the Government from opening the area of the park to the public. He himself possessed a villa in the park; but he did not think that the convenience of the public at large should be postponed to that of the few individuals who had villas there.

Mr. Maberly
said, when a part of the park was opened to the Zoological Society, he took counsel's opinion on the subject; and that opinion was, that the Government had no right to make that grant; and he could assure his hon. friend that if he would consult counsel on the point, be would find that, according to the terms of the leases of the buildings in the Park, the Government had no right or power to throw it open to the public.

Mr. Warburton
condemned the mode in which some of the new buildings erected on the site of Carlton-palace had been leased to Mr. Nash. His interest was of course opposed to the public in favor of his own, and in that way the public convenience was neglected.

Mr. Arbuthnot
said, in reference to Mr. Nash becoming the lessee of some of these premises, the facts were simply these:— Mr. Nash made an offer for a lot of ground for the erection of five houses, at the end of the area in Waterloo-place, which could not be let. He took it on the condition of building those houses upon it, afterwards to be let to such tenants as the heads of the Woods and Forests might approve of. and Mr. Nash undertook to give, them at the prime cost. He (Mr. Arbuthnot) knew that Mr. Nash had subsequently let them at the prime cost.

§ Mr. Beaumont
wished to know whether there had been any public competition allowed for this ground—whether it had been set up to public auction, or whether, on the contrary, Mr. Nash had not been suffered to take it by a private bargain, and very likely at his own price?

Mr. Arbuthnot
said, the public was fully aware at the time that this lot of ground was to be let. It had not been put up to public auction, because in the 998 opinion of the greatest landed proprietors in London that was not the best way of letting it. It might, if let by auction, go off at a price below its value, and the buildings erected there might thus be let to unfit and irresponsible persons.

§ Mr. Beaumont
saw no reason why St. James's-park should be looked upon in the light of private grounds. He was sure it would be a source of satisfaction and pleasure to the Sovereign to see his subjects enjoying the comfort and recreation which that park would afford them. He sincerely believed, if the noble Lord opposite would make a representation on the subject in a proper quarter, that the convenience of the public would be fully attended to in that respect. He was sure the royal heart would be gladdened to see the inhabitants of this metropolis enjoying the recreations afforded by that park, and its rural scenery.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that St. James's-park was an unfortunate instance to select for complaint, for within a very short period means had been taken to afford the greatest advantages to all classes of the public, by the improvements in that park. There was at this moment a road in progress on the south side of the park, which, when completed, would be of great advantage to the higher orders, and the opening of the interior of the park had been productive of the greatest advantages to all classes of society.

§ Mr. Beaumont
wished for nothing more than that every thing possible should be done for the accommodation of the public. —Agreed to, and the House went into a Committee of Supply.

§ Mr. G. Dawson
said, he proposed to take the vote for the Civil Contingencies upon account, as the amount was required for the carrying on the public service, and the House would hereafter have an opportunity of discussing the votes separately. He accordingly moved—"That a sum not exceeding 100,000l. be granted to his Majesty for defraying the charges of the civil contingencies for 1830."

§ Mr. Hume
would not object to taking this vote upon account now; but when the separate votes should come to be discussed, he would move a resolution, that it is expedient to effect a reduction in the diplomatic expenses of the country. He should object to voting 60,000l. or 70,000l. for extraordinary diplomatic expenses. A pledge had been given by Mr. 999 Canning, that every reduction would be made in the diplomatic expenditure of the country; but instead of that, it had gone on increasing ever since. He thought 400,000l. too large a sum for that single department of the Government.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, it would be found that considerable reductions had been effected in this part of the public expenditure this year.