PUBLIC MUSEUMS. (Hansard, 2 April 1845)

§ Sir J. Graham

said, he wished to go into Committee pro formâ merely. He did not think it right that the operation of the Bill should be confined to works of art in any particular locality; and he had therefore considered that it would be desirable to extend the provisions of the Bill as it stood at present, and he was about to move an instruction to the Committee to effect that object. There were many valuable works of art to which the Bill as at present limited would give no protection. For instance, the statue of the Duke of Wellington, near the Mansion-house, ought to be brought within the protection of the law. His noble Friend (Lord F. Egerton) had most liberally thrown open to the public his valuable and extensive collection of paintings and works of art, and it would be monstrous that any mischief should be done by means of a breach of his noble Friend's hospitality without the possibility of due punishment reaching the offender. The painted window of St. Margaret's Church might be broken by a stone thrown at it, and as the words of the Bill stood they would not reach such an offence. He therefore wished to give the measure a more extensive operation, and he begged to move that it be an instruction to the Committee that they have power to extend the provisions of the Bill to all works of art, and scientific and literary institutions; and, if the House agreed to that instruction, he proposed to go into Committee pro formâ, so that the provisions of the Bill might be made co-extensive with the mischief.