§ SIR R. H. INGLISreferred to certain questions of which he had given notice, relative to Westminster-bridge and the new Palace of Westminster. Seeing the Secretary for the Treasury in his place, and knowing that he must have much information on the subject, he was anxious to put to him the questions he had intended to ask the Chief Commissioner of the Woods and Forests. He could not expect the House to recollect, but he believed that the right hon. Gentleman well remembered, that on the 4th of August last he had put certain questions as to the state in which Westminster-bridge had been left. On that occasion the First Lord of the Treasury said, that he had received a communication some days before, and that as soon as the Session was closed, he, with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, would take the matter into consideration. He wished to be informed whether that report had since been considered—what was the decision upon it—what sums of money had been laid out upon the repair (if such a word were applicable) of Westminster-bridge, and whether Government were prepared to appoint a Committee on the subject? When the right hon. Gentleman had answered these questions respecting Westminster-bridge, he would follow them up by others regarding the new Palace of Westminster.
§ MR. CARDWELLhad to state, that after the close of the last Session, according to his promise, the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, in conjunction with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had taken into consideration the report of the Committee which sat upon the subject. The Commissioners for the repair of Westminster-bridge had no funds for the construction of a new bridge, and the course taken by the Treasury was this: Instructions had been given to the Commissioners to obtain weekly reports from the engineers of the state and security of the bridge, and whenever these reports contained a notice of the slightest alteration, they were to be communicated to the Treasury. Special 838 directions were given to the engineers, that if any circumstances occurred requiring particular notice, the attention of the Treasury should be called to them. It was thus evident that ample care had been taken of the safety of the public as regarded Westminster-bridge; and he hoped that the hon. Baronet would not feel it necessary to move for a Committee.
§ SIR R. INGLISobserved, that such an answer was most unsatisfactory, and he would revert to the subject hereafter. He now came to his other question—when was it likely that the House would be able to enter upon its new locality? [A laugh.] He understood the meaning of that laugh to be, that no man expected the right hon. Secretary to the Treasury to be able to answer that question. His question was, when Government anticipated that this House would be able to enter its new accommodations in the new Palace of Westminster. He referred not merely to the room in which the Members were to sit in their legislative capacity, but to the Committee rooms also. The expectation held out at the end of the last Session was, that they would be ready by the commencement of 1847, but that seemed not likely to be realized; and he wished also to know whether Ministers would consent to the appointment of a Committee to inquire why the expectation was to be postponed?
§ MR. CARDWELLhad some reason to apprehend that the hope entertained that the new Houses of Parliament would be ready by the commencement of the Session of 1847 might possibly not be realized. He was aware that some causes of delay had occurred, and he was afraid that they would partly account for the postponement. He could assure the hon. Baronet that these causes of delay had received the most anxious consideration, and every exertion had been made to accomplish the object. He could only conclude, as before, with expressing a hope that the hon. Baronet would not think it necessary or expedient that a Committee should be appointed.