HC Deb 01 August 1850 vol 113 cc642-3

House in Committee.

(1.) 11,000l., Inclosure at Buckingham Palace, and Removal of Marble Arch.

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER moved that a sum of 11,000l. be granted for putting up iron railings in front of Buckingham Palace, and for defraying the expense of taking down, removing, and rebuilding the marble arch. It was in this case intended not to incur any expense that could be at all avoided; that the present hoarding must be taken down was quite manifest, and that it must be replaced by some sort of fence was equally clear. More than that it was not now proposed to do, but, on the contrary, to postpone the formation of the intended gardens. The marble arch must be removed, and the Palace protected by a fence. It was not easy, just at that moment, to say where the arch would be moved to; but if it were not immediately rebuilt, then the expense estimated for that purpose would of course not be incurred. The sum of 11,000l. which he now asked, was a reduced estimate from 14,000l.

SIR D. NORREYS

suggested, that instead of forming the enclosure according to the plan proposed, it might be better to inclose a much wider space, to place the arch in front of it, as well as to form roads connecting both Constitution-hill and the Birdcage-walk with Pall Mall. It was evidently desirable that the Palace should be protected, in the event of crowds or any popular excitement, by a fence placed at a considerable distance from it, perhaps as much as 150 yards.

MR. STAFFORD

wished that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had given the different items of this vote separately. Would the construction of the railing, as proposed, be such as to involve further expense for the gardens?

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

had distinctly stated that nothing should be done that would involve the necessity for further expense. The question as to the removal of the marble arch was not yet settled; but supposing it to be possible that the arch could be removed in the manner he had said, it would be attended with a small expense. The vote he now proposed to take would cover the expense of taking it down and putting it up again. If the arch was not removed, that part of the vote of course would not be expended.

MR. HUME

suggested, that the marble arch should be taken to Charing Cross, and be placed at an entrance to be made there into the park. Unless they could make some use of it, it appeared to him the best way would be to sell it.

LORD SEYMOUR

said, he had made inquiries as to what would be the cost of purchasing the property at Charing Cross, if it were desirable to put the arch there, and he found that it would be about 85,000l.

MR. HUME

said, a great deal of that was Crown property, and he hoped the leases would not be renewed.

SIR H. WILLOUGHBY

expressed himself of opinion that these votes should all come under one head. 561,000l. had already been raised on land revenues for Buckingham Palace, and why should not this be raised in the same way?

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

said, he thought his hon. Friend would agree with him that all these expenses should be brought before the House of Commons, and agreed to by them.

MR. SPOONER

said, that the charge of 650l. for commission for designs, superintendence, &c, and 350l. for the salary of the clerk of the works, was very heavy for a work which was to cost only 10,000l.

The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER

replied, that he did not know whether the charge would amount to so much, but he had taken sufficient to cover it.

Vote agreed to.