§ LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, that in consequence of an answer which was re- 748 ported to have been given by the First Minister to a deputation, he wished, before they went into Committee, to call the attention of the House to the position in which the question respecting the erection of the new public offices now stood. He thought that it was not well for a Government succeeding to power to reverse without very good reasons the decision of their predecessors, and especially with respect to matters of art and the construction of public buildings. When the reproach was made that this country was behind other nations in great public improvements, the reason generally assigned was that no sooner had one Government agreed upon certain public improvements than they went out of office, and the incoming Government upset all that their predecessors had decided upon. When he acceded to the office he lately held he found that a public competition of architects had been invited by his predecessor in respect to the structure of the new Foreign Office. Nearly 200 gentlemen responded to that invitation, of whom several received prizes. Subsequently on his (Lord J. Manners) recommendation, the whole question was referred to a Select Committee, who examined a number of able and competent witnesses, and arrived at a Report which was admitted to be a very fair and accurate Report on the whole question. But neither his predecessor in office nor the Committee had decided on any one of the designs. Had they done so, he should have bowed to that decision and carried it out. Consequently the whole responsibility of selecting from the first three designs was thrown on the Executive. He, therefore, paid the best attention to the whole of the evidence; and, after coming to a decision, submitted it to his colleagues in the Government, who approved the advice he gave. Towards the end of November, therefore, the architect selected was instructed to prepare an amended design, according to the recommendation of the Select Committee. Shortly afterwards the then Secretry for India obtained a frontage for the India Office, extending from Downing Street to Charles Street, and being impressed with the advisability of having one general design for these public offices, the Secretary for India placed the erection of the building for the India Department in the hands of Mr. Scott, the architect chosen by the late Government, in conjunction with the professional architectural adviser of the 749 India Department. He understood now that the present Prime Minister, in answer to a deputation, stated that he had given instructions to Mr. Scott to prepare other designs in a different style of architecture from that already fixed upon. This alteration would, of course, occasion additional expense for the preparation of fresh designs, working drawings, and specifications, not only in respect to the Foreign Office, but also with respect to the India Office; for, if the style of architecture was changed in one case, it must likewise be changed in the other to ensure uniformity. He had no wish to throw any impediment in the way of the Vote which should be asked for by the Government, but the House ought to receive a promise that the design now being exhibited up stairs should not be interfered with during the recess. The promise of the noble Lord alone would not be sufficient, but it ought to be accompanied by that of the right hon. Baronet the Secretary for India. The noble Lord and Secretary for India should give a clear and positive assurance to the House that nothing should be done during the recess to prejudice the design up stairs, which had been prepared with so much care and expense, and which he belived, if carried out, would be one of the greatest embellishments that the metropolis could have. His great object was to guard the House against being involved in a large expenditure, and which might be totally unnecessary.