§ (2.) 9,400l. Alterations in the New House of Commons.
SIR D. NORREYSsaid, he had given notice of his intention to ask whether it was intended that the House which they now occupied should stand after the completion of the new one until they had bad an opportunity of trying the effect of the alterations. They should take care that in allowing Mr. Barry to put a new ceiling as an experiment, which might after the vacation be found not to be successful, that they should find the present Houses still remaining, in which they might transact business, instead of finding themselves confined to one which was not so available. He hoped they would not be deprived of the present House till it was known the new one was available.
§ The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERassured the hon. Baronet that it was not intended to pull down the present House of Commons, for the New House would not be fit for occupation by Members until next Easter, and therefore until that time they would continue to sit in the present House. A plan of alterations had been submitted to the Committee by Mr. Barry, which would be distributed to Members. The Committee were of opinion that, under this revised plan, the New House would afford more accommodation than was at present afforded. The only matter about which there was any doubt was as to the hearing in the New House. The Committee had examined several witnesses on that point, but they certainly had not been much enlightened by their evidence. It was, however, intended to try certain experiments with a view to improve the hearing in the New House.
§ COLONEL SIBTHORPsaid, there were parties in the House—a very important and useful body, deserving every consideration—who ought to have opportunities of hearing and stating correctly what took 727 place during the debates; but he believed that in the New House they would be placed under some disadvantages. He would not say anything about the harmony of the building, because he never thought much about it. Members were in danger of breaking their necks even before dinner, and what might be the case afterwards he could not say. There was step after step, and he had the other day noticed an hon. Member in the New House nearly tumble into the lap of a right hon. Gentleman in an attempt to approach the Speaker's chair. He could only say that he would be sorry to employ any Member of the Committee in building a pigstye. The New Palace at Westminster was not a house built for business. As he had said before, he thought the building was much more fitted for a harem than for the purpose for which it was intended. What business did hon. Gentlemen do when they were in the New House? Why, they stared about at each other like so many scarecrows. They did not know at what door to go in, or at what door to go out. He declared he didn't. Nobody knew whether the building was to cost three millions, three millions and a half, or four millions; and he thought a most unwarrantable and unjustifiable expenditure had been already incurred, and that the whole affair was a gross job. He wished the Chancellor of the Exchequer would state whether this vote of 9,400l. was all that would be required for alterations.
§ MR. HUMEthought this was a vote at which they had great reason to be ashamed. They had already spent a million and a half, a considerable portion of that sum having been expended upon a chamber for the Members of the other House which turned out to be altogether unfit for its purpose. Then, with regard to the New House of Commons, if there had not been data upon which to proceed, if there had not been opportunities of ascertaining the number of persons to be accommodated, and the space which could be appropriated, there might have been an excuse for the result. And yet the House was still called upon to waste the public money upon a man who had shown himself utterly incapable of adapting the building to the purpose for which it was intended. He did not deny that Mr. Barry had acquired a character for high taste in architecture; but the question was, were his acquirements practically useful? On their way to the New House of Commons they had 728 to pass through two or three immense rooms, but for what purpose they were intended nobody knew. They then entered the room where the Commons of England ought to have been accommodated. The money they had expended upon that building was enough to have provided golden seats for the Members; but yet it was utterly unfit for it purpose. This vote was intended to destroy the appearance of the chamber, by putting up an artificial roof which blocked up half the windows. Why, any schoolboy would be flogged for designing such a place. He was satisfied they might build another palace for much less money than they would have to expend in completing and altering the New Houses. It appeared to him, when he looked at the distance Members had to go from one place to another within the New Houses, as if great trouble had been taken to make the building, not only as expensive, but as inconvenient, and as little suited as possible to the purposes for which it was required. He would propose that some architect should be employed who was capable of adapting the building to those purposes. There were architects who had constructed buildings within their estimates. He believed that in the case of the Archbishop of Canterbury's Palace and Buckingham Palace the estimates had not been exceeded. He would vote against the grant.
§ MR. STAFFORDregretted that the hon. Member for Montrose had not made some distinct proposition, because, upon his showing, the New House of Commons was altogether unfit for the accommodation of Members. The hon. Gentleman had said this was a vote of which the House ought to be ashamed; and that appeared to be the opinion not only of hon. Members generally, but also of the community. But wherever they attempted to place the blame, it was shifted to some one else. If the blame was charged on Mr. Barry, he charged it upon a Committee, the Committee charged it upon another Committee, both the Committees put it upon the Woods and Forests, the Woods and Forests charged it on the Government, and the Government upon that House. There was no one who would not acknowledge that the proceedings with regard to this building had been most unfortunate. They had spent upon it nearly 2,000,000l., and the principal room was a complete, decided, and undeniable failure. He must take that opportunity of observing that whoever built the House in which they were then assembled, 729 deserved the acknowledgment of their gratitude. He did not know the name of the builder, bat having, under circumstances of great difficulty and urgency, and without the assistance of a Committee, built them a room which, though it had always been considered temporary, afforded them, as compared with the elaborate and gorgeous edifice they were now and then obliged to enter, the greatest convenience and accommodation, he was entitled to great credit. He (Mr. Stafford) would not take upon himself the responsibility of refusing this vote, because he felt, with other hon. Gentlemen, that the New House of Commons was at present wholly unfitted for the purpose to which it was to be devoted. He had understood, however, that the expense of the experimental roof in that House was to be only 100l., and be wished to know how it was that there was an additional charge of 700l. for that purpose in the vote?
§ MR. SPOONERsaid, that 800l. appeared to him an extravagant charge for the deal roof which had been erected in the New House.
§ The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERcould not avoid expressing his regret that the New Houses had cost so large a sum of money, and that the chamber designed for the House of Commons appeared unfitted for its purpose, both in point of accommodation and of hearing; but he did not think the discussion that had taken place was likely to lead to any practical conclusion. Now, with regard to the accommodation, a Committee of twenty-one Members had been appointed a short time ago, who had made most diligent inquiries on that subject. The plan to which he had before referred was the result of their inquiries, and he believed the sum asked for would be the utmost amount it would be necessary to expend to provide adequate accommodation for the Members. Under that plan more accommodation would be given to Members, both on the floor and in the galleries, than was afforded in the present House, and amply sufficient, he thought, for as many Members as were likely generally to attend. He agreed with the hon. Member for North Northamptonshire as to the great convenience and accommodation of the House in which they were then assembled, and be thought if they had as much, or rather more accommodation in the new House, they would have no reason to complain. He wished he could speak with equal confidence on the subject of hearing; but he must fairly 730 say that he felt himself quite unable to give any positive assurance on that point. Three or four gentlemen most learned on the subject of acoustics, Dr. Reid, Mr. Scott Russell, Professor Wheatstone, and Professor Faraday, were examined before the Committee; but he did not think the Committee gained much knowledge from their evidence. Professor Faraday admitted that he could not give a confident opinion on the point. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had made inquiries from many parties concerned in the erection of; buildings, and he found in the case of churches, for instance, that one church might be admirably adapted for hearing, while in another, built upon precisely the same plan, it was scarcely possible to hear at all. It was, he understood, easy to build an apartment in which a person speaking from a given point, as from a tribune, would be heard in all parts of the room; and he believed that in the New House, a person speaking from a particular point would be as well heard as he understood counsel were when speaking from the bar of the House of Lords; but he had been informed that it was impossible to build a room in which it could be certainly predicted that the hearing would be equally good in all parts. The Committee had felt that they were unable to come to any conclusion without trying experiments upon this subject; and they determined to try the experiment of a boarded roof in the New House of Commons, which hon. Gentlemen had seen on Wednesday, and which cost little more than 100l. During the sitting on that clay several Members of the Committee endeavoured to ascertain the opinions of Members as to whether the hearing was improved or not. He believed that of some twenty or twenty-two Gentlemen he bad asked, ten were of one opinion, and twelve of the other. He thought the majority were of opinion that the alteration had been beneficial; but he must admit that many Members said they considered they did not hear one whit better than before. He believed the sum of 800l., which was proposed to be taken in this vote, would be more than sufficient to defray the cost of the experiments which it might be found necessary to try.
§ MR. ALDERMAN HUMPHERYinquired what was to be done for the 8,600l. He asked the question, because he would guarantee that another House and a far better one, could be built for 10,000l.
§ The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERstated that it was proposed, in the first place, to remove the wood screen at each end two feet backwards. [Mr. BRIGHT: And the reporters' seats.] He believed they also would be removed two feet back. [The right hon. Gentleman then proceeded to point out upon a plan on the table various alterations proposed to be made for the convenience of Members in the means of access to different parts of the House, and in some other respects.] No Members would sit in the south gallery, but it would be appropriated to distinguished visitors and strangers. The side galleries would be widened, to allow two rows of seats.
§ MR. ALDERMAN HUMPHERYwould like to know whether the Government had got estimates for all these alterations, and whether they amounted to 8,600l.
§ The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that a Committee of the House, consisting of most experienced Members, had investigated the subject, and they had come to the conclusion that this was the best mode of affording the requisite accommodation.
§ MR. LACYthought it would be well to try the effect of hanging up a number of banners in the House, and placing drapery to the windows.
§ MR. PACKEknew that in Whitehall Chapel, where formerly not a syllable could be heard, the congregation now, since drapery had been hung about it, heard perfectly; the echo was destroyed.
§ SIR B. HALLbelieved the New House would afford ample accommodation for the number of Members likely to attend. Out of the 656, there were not, perhaps, 300 who attended constantly, and if there was ascommodation for a great portion of the Members outside the body of the House, the business would go on quite as well. If there was accommodation on the floor for 320, and for 150 more elsewhere, it would be sufficient. The Committee desired Mr. Barry the other day to give them an estimate of what would be the fullest and amplest cost of the alterations; they requested to have an outside sum mentioned, so that they might not be called upon to provide anything more; and this estimate had been handed in under those directions. He (Sir B. Hall) would suggest that the whole matter should be placed under the control of the Chief Commissioner of Woods and Forests—no man was more fit for it; and that he should 732 be the responsible person in the House to answer questions and give information. He meant no disrespect to the hon. Member for Lancaster, who, he believed, would be glad to have the business under the control of some officer of the Crown.
§ MR. B. OSBORNEretained the opinion which he had always held, namely, that the New House would be unable to contain the Members, and that they would not be able to hear in it. The only thing the House was fit for was to hold the Exhibition of 1851, and he thought it should be devoted to that purpose. They all knew that Committees were of no use, and nothing would come of appointing one to inquire into the circumstances of the case. He wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer a financial question, whether he had come to any determination as to the payment of the architect? That question had been going on for many years, and appeared to be still an undecided one. The original contract with Mr. Barry was broken. The original contract with that gentleman was for 25,000l. and he now demanded to be paid 75,000l. Was the Chancellor of the Exchequer going to pay the 75,000l., or to enter into a lawsuit on the point? He (Mr. Osborne) believed that Mr. Barry had a just claim; but he wished to see the matter decided one way or the other, and that some statement should be made respecting the sum the architect was to get. He did not wish to make any attack on Mr. Barry, because he thought that gentleman had acted quite right, since the Government and the House were so undecided, to indulge his own taste, and to make them pay for it. He (Mr. Osborne) would be glad to give Mr. Barry 150,000l., and be quits with him. With reference to the suggestion of the hon. Baronet the Member for Marylebone, he (Mr. Osborne) thought it was a very bad plan. It would be a better as well as a cheaper way to have a paid officer; but it was totally impossible that one who had so much on his hands as the Chief Commissioner of Woods and Forests should be able to attend to the completion of the New Houses of Parliament.
§ MR. FORSTERhoped that the plan of the hon. Baronet the Member for Marylebone would not be acted upon, but that the question should be left to Mr. Barry himself.
§ MR. B. OSBORNEIt is a question for this House and the country to decide upon.
§ MR. NAPIER, as one who was well qualified to speak as to the capacities of the New House for hearing in, could say, that in consequence of the alterations, he had found great facilities in hearing when the House met in the new chamber on last Wednesday.
§ LORD R. GROSVENORsaid, that whatever might be thought of the accommodation provided for Members in the New House, he could not say much in favour of the accommodation which was likely to be afforded to strangers, which he thought would be found wholly insufficient. It was a matter for regret that those who came to hear the debates should find in the new less accommodation than in the old House. There were sittings for sixty-four visitors in the New House, but in that House he believed the number was greater. There were at that moment sixty-four persons in the gallery.
§ SIR B. HALLbegged to inform the noble Lord that there was accommodation for only fifty-three visitors in the gallery of that House.
§ MR. PACKEthought the accommodation for Members in the New House was inadequate. During the debate on Irish legislation, in 1841, there were more than 600 Members assembled in that House, and if so large a number were collected in the New House, no place would be found for them.
§ MR. T. GREENEsaid, his hon. Friend had to go back a long time, as far as 1841, for an instance in which above 600 Members had assembled in that House; but none could say that on ordinary occasions that House was too small for the Members who met in it. Allowing twenty inches for each seat, there was accommodation in that House for 446 Members, and on the same calculation there would be room for 468 Members in the new House. If they made it large enough to hold all the Members, it would be found utterly unfit for the transaction of business.
§ MR. ALDERMAN HUMPHERYsaid, the present House was so small, that it held out an encouragement to vice; because Members who could not find room in the House went into the smoking-room, where they would not go if they could find room in the House, and some went into the library. They might see numbers in the library, where they sat and slept. That House was not sufficient for the Members, and the New House would only hold half the number. The hon. Baronet the Mem- 734 ber for Marylebone said one-half of the Members might be in the House, and the other half waiting outside, probably in Palace-yard. Now, could anything be so preposterous as that they should have spent three millions of money on the new building, and that the House of Commons should not be able to contain more than half the Members after all?
§ SIR B. HALLsaid, that when Mr. Abercromby was chosen Speaker, 626 Members voted, 310 on the one side and 316 on the other; and the division was not then taken in the lobbies, but every Members was told in that House.
§ MR. B. OSBORNEwas inclined to think that the acoustic properties of the present House could not be particularly good; for he had put a question some minutes since to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, which did not seem to have been heard.
§ The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERbegged pardon of his hon. and gallant Friend, but he thought it better to wait, and give one answer to the numerous questions that were put to him. He agreed that Mr. Barry was entitled to a much larger remuneration than the 25,000l. which he was to have been paid under the original estimate; but what the precise sum might be had not yet been settled. [Mr. OSBORNE: Has he received anything already?] He believed Mr. Barry had received 25,000l. He must observe that Members would be very much indebted to the hon. Baronet the Member for Marylebone for the attention and the skill which he had bestowed upon the arrangements of the New House. As to the subject of hearing, the hon. and learned Member for the University of Dublin was a peculiarly valuable witness.
§ MR. BRIGHTsaid, he thought the House did not properly treat those whom they chose to call "strangers." He thought that the turning of them out whenever there was a division, was an useless and almost barbarous custom, and there ought to be accommodation for a greater number than there was at present. Apart from feelings of private curiosity, he believed there was a great public advantage in allowing to be present as many as they could find accommodation for. They came and understood the forms in which the business of the House was conducted, many of them most admirable forms; they had created in them a strong interest in public affairs, which was communicated to 735 their families, and to the circles in which they moved; and he thought the more they could bring the actions and the opinions of that House into harmony with the intelligent portion of the public out of doors, the better. He was extremely anxious, therefore, on public grounds, that the Committee, in making the alterations which they were about to make, should consider that the accommodation of the public was a really important matter, and that they should accommodate as many as circumstances would permit.
§ MR. HUMEsaid, if the contract had been broken, it had been broken by the alterations made by Mr. Barry himself, and on that account he ought not to be paid. The late Sir Robert Peel penned the resolution of the Committee, and it was sent to the four architects before it was determined that Mr. Barry should build the House; and they were informed that that was the sum the architect would be paid. The Committee gave to Mr. Barry the number that was to be provided for, and the number of visitors, three times the number accommodated in the present House; and it was quite discreditable to find that an architect who received those instructions, both as regarded the number of visitors and of Members, should so completely have failed in every respect as he had done. They had heard of Committees. Who had appeared before the Committees and advocated alterations? Mr. Barry. Mr. Barry had found it convenient to get Committees appointed, to recommend alterations, and to be answerable for them, he receiving a percentage on the cost. It might be the fault of Mr. Barry with regard to ventilation; but the dispute between Mr. Barry and Dr. Reid was most discreditable. He agreed in the opinion that had been expressed, that the Chief Commissioner of Woods and Forests had already too much to do to undertake this matter, and he thought it ought to be committed to one individual, who would give his undivided attention to it.
§ LORD D. STUARTagreed with his hon. Friend the Member for Manchester that there should be more accommodation for strangers, and said, he could see no good, but great inconvenience, in the practice of making them withdraw during divisions. Last night, a division was called, and strangers had withdrawn, a Minister got up to make a speech, Members observed that the reporters had withdrawn, and, of course, began to cry out, "Gal- 736 lery!" The withdrawal of strangers always contributed to confusion; and if it were necessary that strangers should withdraw, he suggested that the reporters for the press should not withdraw. They could not by any means run any danger of communicating with the House, or getting into the lobby. By not withdrawing they would not be themselves inconvenienced, and they could hear observations which it might be of consequence that they should hear. With regard to practical convenience, he believed that they would have a better and more convenient House than that which they were now met in. The hon. Member for North Northamptonshire said he did not know who built the present House. He (Lord D. Stuart) did not know either; but he knew who ventilated it, and he never knew any room which was more perfect in that respect. They were never too hot or too cold, and he thought very great credit was due to Dr. Reid.
§ SIR W. JOLLIFFEagreed that it was impossible to expect the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests to undertake the duty suggested for him, and thought the Government ought to take upon themselves the control of the expenditure. Surely the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who came down to propose votes of the public money, might see that it was expended for the benefit of the public. He ought to call to his aid some scientific man to guide him in the future expenditure of money. He wished to put a question with regard to the ventilation of the New House and the Committee-rooms. He had now taken a share in the business of Committees for four Sessions, yet the ventilation of the Committee-rooms remained in the same defective state of which so many complaints had been made. The other day he saw five enormous boilers on one side of the court-yard, and he was told there were six others on the opposite side. He believed they were intended for the ventilation of one part of the new building. The expense would be enormous, and he did hope that before it was incurred the Government would take care that the money was well laid out.
§ MR. SPOONERwished to know whether the ventilation of the New House was to be under the control of one person, or whether two were engaged in it?
§ MR. T. GREENEsaid, that the ventilation of the chamber of the New House and the rooms immediately adjoining was to be under the control of Dr. Reid. The 737 ventilation of all the rest of the House was placed under the control of Mr. Barry. The hon. Member's complaint of the defective ventilation of the Committee-rooms was a reasonable one, and he trusted that before next Session all the Committee-rooms would be properly warmed and ventilated. Having necessarily seen a great deal of Mr. Barry, and having observed the pains taken by him to make the New Houses complete, he thought that the terms used by the hon. Member for Montrose were altogether uncalled for. The hon. Member alleged that the whole of the expense incurred beyond the estimates was attributable to Mr. Barry. This subject had been fully discussed by a Committee appointed in the year 1844, who imputed no blame to Mr. Barry on the score of unauthorised alterations. On the contrary, all the alterations made were for the convenience of the House; and the Committee reported that Mr. Barry had not been the cause of the increased expenditure that had taken place. The labour Mr. Barry had undergone was infinitely greater than that of any architect of any other public building, and it did seem hard that he should be the subject of such remarks as had fallen from the hon. Member for Montrose.
§ SIR H. WILLOUGHBYcomplained that no one was responsible for the money now being expended. The responsibility of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was limited to the proper appropriation of the money voted. There was also no responsibility with the Commission of which Earl de Grey was at the head, because they had no power.
SIR D. NORREYSagreed with the hon. Member who had last spoken that some responsibility was required. Mr. Barry had had the uncontrolled expenditure of the largest sum of money that any one architect had ever had before. Well, were not the Committee ashamed of the result? ["No!"] Why, there had been an universal acknowledgment that the New House was a failure. He blamed Mr. Barry for not having placed himself in the position of adviser to the House, and presented such a report as would have shown the House what they were doing when they were incurring useless expenditure. The architect ought to consider himself like a physician, morally responsible to his patient for the result of his practice. He did not blame Mr. Barry for the deficient accommodation of strangers; because 738 he was told that, long ago, Mr. Barry had suggested the construction of a second gallery, to be solely applied to the accommodation of strangers, and which would have held three times the present number. Was it not shameful, and a scandal, for a constitutional assembly to exclude the public, as the House of Commons did? They gave places to sixty strangers; being about one-tenth of the number of those who might obtain orders from Members. In Belgium and France ample and abundant room was provided for strangers; but here the House excluded those whom it professed to represent. From the plans in the hands of Members, he believed that hon. Members would find themselves, after the recess, in a more inconvenient House even than the New House was at present. For example, if a Member were in the gallery of the New House, and wished to vote with the Ayes, the door being locked according to custom, when the question was put the Member would find himself in the lobby with the Noes. He should have no objection to vote the money as a vote of confidence to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, leaving him to spend it at his discretion.
§ The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERshould be very glad to take the money in any way most agreeable to the hon. Member, fie regarded himself as responsible that the money voted by the House should be applied in the manner detailed in the estimate; and he considered the hon. Member for Lancaster and his colleagues in the Commission responsible that no deviation took place from the plans as they were approved by the Treasury.
§ MR. DISRAELIfelt a little inclined to object to the hon. Member's proposed "vote of confidence" at this late period of the Session, and to its being introduced without notice. He wished to remind the Committee that it was now the 2nd of August, and yet they had been debating for two hours a Motion upon which no Amendment had been moved. Considering the present state of public business, he thought it highly desirable that this conversation—for it was nothing else—should cease. If, however, there was any such mysterious machinery about the New House as that to which the hon. Baronet the Member for Mallow had alluded, and by which an "Aye" would become a "No," the Government ought certainly to take the subject into their consideration. Such a machinery certainly should not be intro- 739 duced into a chamber where great constitutional disturbance might ensue. The House ought now, however, to close a discussion which had taken place towards the termination of every Session for the last three years, and which made them a scandal to Europe. There had been much talk of responsibility, but no one had defined what the term meant. Was the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if responsible, to pay for the building himself if the House did not approve of it? He would recommend the Government to reflect seriously on the fact, that no profession had ever yet succeeded in this country till it had furnished what was called "an example." For instance, you hanged Admiral Byng, and the Navy increased in efficiency till we won Trafalgar. The disgrace of Whitelock was followed by the victory of Waterloo. We had decapitated Archbishop Laud, and had thenceforward secured the responsibility of the bishops. That principle we had never yet applied to architects; and when a member of that profession was called on to execute a very simple task, and utterly failed after a large expenditure of public money, it really became the Government to consider the case, and they might rest assured that if once they contemplated the possibility of hanging an architect, they would put a stop to such blunders in future.
§ MR. ALDERMAN HUMPHERYsuggested they should draw up plans and estimates of the proposed alterations, and obtain the opinion of some four builders upon the likelihood of their being executed for the proposed sum.
§ MR. WAKLEYthought the temporary roof had caused a great improvement in the hearing. The New House had not had the trial to which it was fairly entitled, and every one knew it was more difficult in a new building than in one accustomed to sound. No experiments had been made on the capacity of hearing in the House; and if the House was hung round with flags, as had been suggested, he thought a change for the better would take place. Where there was so much carved surface as the New House presented, the sound would always be more or less broken; and the reason why they heard so well in the present House was, because it offered plane surfaces on all sides, which reflected the sound directly. He proposed that they should sit in the New House until the end of the Session, in order to give it a fair trial.
§ Vote agreed to.