§ Lord Duncannon moved, that the House should resolve itself into a Committee, for the purpose of considering the propriety of appropriating a portion of the land revenue of the Crown, for the completion of the repairs and improvement of Buckingham Palace.
Mr. Humehoped, that some clear understanding would be come to, as to the amount which the public were to be called upon to expend for the building and repairs of Palaces. An estimate ought to have been presented, having this object in view, during the last Session, and he hoped it would be forthwith furnished.
§ Lord Duncannonsaid, he could not exactly say when such a return would be presented; it ought to be made by the Board of Works.
§ The House resolved itself into a Committee.
§ Lord Duncannon moved a Resolution, that in the opinion of the Committee, it was expedient that a sum not exceeding 78,750l., arising from the sale of part of the land revenue of the Crown, should be applied to defray the expense incurred by the repair and improvement of Buckingham Palace, and the charges of the architect employed in completing the works.
Mr. Humeinquired whether the amount named in the Resolution would complete the Palace, including the necessary furniture, &c., or whether it was probable, that another demand would be made hereafter for furniture?
§ Lord Duncannonsaid, the sum now proposed to be granted would complete the building and repairs of the Palace, and render it fit for the reception of his Majesty; but no part of this sum was intended to be expended in the purchase of furniture. There was a large quantity of furniture in store, which his Majesty had directed should be applied to furnishing Buckingham Palace, but it would not, he believed, be sufficient. It would be necessary to provide some furniture.
Mr. Humecertainly did not object to furnishing a Palace, the building of which had cost the country above 500,000l.; all he desired was, to know how much the country was to be called upon hereafter to pay for furniture. He also wished, to know, 145 whether it was intended to expend any more money on St. James's Palace, which had already cost the country a very large sum?
§ Lord Duncannonreplied, that after Buckingham Palace was completed, and fit for the occupation of his Majesty, the recommendation of the Committee had been, that no further outlay should take place on St. James's Palace.
§ Mr. John Woodhas been one of the members of the Select Committee, by which body it was recommended that Buckingham Palace should be finished, and that afterwards the Palace of St. James should be applied to some other public purpose. The House would be guilty of a dereliction of its duty, if it did not take care that that recommendation was carried into effect.
Mr. Goulburnhoped it would not be understood, that the Committee had unanimously decided, that no more money was to be expended on St. James's Palace. He was one of those who thought that the building must hereafter require some expenditure, if it were only to prevent it from falling into decay.
§ Mr. Crokerentirely concurred with his right hon. friend (Mr. Goulburn). The idea of abandoning St. James's Palace had never, as he understood, been decided on by the Committee. It was allowed, that St. James's was not suited for a royal domestic residence, and that, to make it applicable for such a purpose would create great expense. Upon these grounds it was resolved to finish Buckingham House, and keep St. James's for other purposes.
Mr. Humewished to know how far Ministers intended to follow the recommendation of the Committee? for after what they had just heard, it became necessary to understand whether the opinions of the right hon. Gentleman, or those of the Committee, were to be preferred.
§ Lord Duncannonbegged to explain. He thought his Majesty's Government would not be justified in suffering St. James's Palace to fall into decay. All he meant to state was, that when Buckingham Palace was completed, no addition would be made to St. James's; but there must be some expenditure to keep it from falling into decay.
§ Sir George Warrenderthought, it would be very bad economy to abandon St. James's Palace, on which a large sum had been expended, and which contained some of the finest apartments in England.
§ Mr. Huntcould see no sufficient reason for continuing to occupy St. James's Palace, 146 when Buckingham Palace was completed. It was not without precedent to pull palaces down that cost much in construction, and he mentioned Kew and Carlton Palaces as instances. He had heard it asserted, however, that his Majesty preferred the old Palace, and he wished to ascertain whether the King proposed to five in Buckingham Palace if it was completed.
§ Lord Duncannonsaid, he understood his Majesty intended to reside in Buckingham Palace when it was made habitable and fit for his residence.
Mr. Warburtonsaid, he had understood that the Committee had come to no decision respecting St. James's Palace; they had left the point to be determined by Parliament.
§ Mr. John Woodhoped, that the Report of the Committee would be soon printed, that the House might be in possession of sufficient information, before it decided upon these matters. He had understood that the state apartments in St. James's Palace were gradually falling into ruins, and if so, the sooner they were pulled down the better.
§ Lord Duncannonknew that it had been the wish of the Committee that much money should not be expended at St. James's Palace—no more, in fact, than was necessary to keep it in repair.
§ Mr. Huntsaid, that his hon. colleague appeared to have started a fresh hare. He was afraid, by what he could understand, that the plan of the Committee would not be attended with any decrease of expense, if they were to keep up the State apartments of St. James's Palace. 78,000l. was required for Buckingham House alone, and it would probably be better to have new state apartments built at the latter palace, rather than be at the expense of keeping up two palaces.
§ Lord Duncannonbegged to say in reply, to the hon. member for Preston, that all that was intended by the vote at present before the House, was to make Buckingham Palace a fit residence for the Sovereign, but no further expense would be incurred without a direct application to Parliament. There was no doubt, that very splendid state apartments already existed at St. James's Palace, but if their condition was so bad that they would soon fall down, it was evident some measures must be taken to supply their place. For the present, however, he would assure the Committee, that it was not intended to expend more money on them than was sufficient to keep them fit for use.
§ Resolution agreed to. The House resumed.