Commons Sitting of 27 July 1861

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1°Consolidated Fund (Appropriation); Militia Ballots Suspension; Parochial Offices; Local Government Supplemental (No. 2); Militia Pay.
2° Metropolitan Police District Receiver.
3° Windsor Suspended Canonries; Gunpowder, &c., Act Amendment; Episcopal and Capitular Estates Act Continuance, &c., Edinburgh University; Revenue Departments Accounts.

SUPPLY—REPORT.
Resolutions reported.
LORD HENRY LENNOXsaid, he should not put the Motion of which he had given notice relative to the National Gallery. He wished, however, to ask the right lion. Gentleman the Chief Commissioner of Works whether it was true that plans had been prepared by Mr. Pennethorne to throw out a wing for the reception of Turner's pictures bequeathed to the nation, and whether an estimate had not been prepared for the whole plan by Mr. Pennethorne? He should also be glad to know whether the matter was not in such a mature state as that an application had been made to the war authorities for permission to take a portion of the exercise ground of the barracks. If that were so he would ask that no steps should be taken during the recess without the sanction of Parliament. Such expenditure he considered as wholly unnecessary, because the time fixed under the will of Mr. Turner for placing the pictures

1697
in the National Gallery would not expire until the 16th of December, and Sir Charles Eastlake, the President of the Royal Academy, and director of the National Gallery, had stated that there was plenty of room in the present gallery where the pictures could be placed without incurring one shilling of expense to the public. There being, therefore, no necessity for any expenditure of this kind, he was anxious to obtain a pledge from the right hon. Gentleman, the First Commissioner of Works, that under no circumstances would any plan of the sort be carried out until the sanction of the House of Commons had been obtained for such a step.
MR. BAILLIE COCHRANEsaid, he desired to impress upon the Government the propriety of not commencing any works of that description until the whole subject had been fairly discussed in the next Session. There could be no doubt that the whole of our national buildings were in a disgraceful state, owing to the want of harmony and unity, and it was of great importance, not only on account of the interests of art, but of economy, that opportunity should be afforded of considering some comprehensive system.
MR. COWPERsaid, he thought it rather hard that the hon. Gentleman should imply that there was any desire for incongruity of design in the public buildings on the part of the Government. The argument chiefly relied upon by the Government for building the new Foreign Office in the Palladian style was that that style would be most in harmony with the buildings in its vicinity, whereas the hon. Member was in favour of a Gothic design, which would be in contrast with them. He had to state in reply to the noble Lord that there was no plan of Mr. Pennethorne's for a National Gallery in such a state of maturity as that it could be produced. The question as to where the national pictures should be placed had been under consideration by the Government for two or three years, and had been before the public for fifteen years. The difficulty had arisen out of the possession of two good sites—Trafalgar Square and Burlington House. If they had only one site, the appropriation of a plan to it would be comparatively easy; there would be no difficulty in building a gallery over the back of the barrack-yard at a trifling expense, as it would not require much architectural ornament. ["Oh! oh!"] He meant that, not being seen from any thoroughfare, being seen only from
1698
the waterworks in Orange Street, it was not of consequence that the gallery should be of a very ornamental character. The cost would probably be about £25,000. He must say, however, that no plan had been prepared on which the Government had been able to come to any decision; but he trusted that plans would be ready before the House was asked to agree to any Estimate next year. The noble Lord wished him to give a pledge that during the recess under no possible contingency would any money be spent on a National Gallery that had not received the sanction of Parliament. At first, he thought the request rather absurd, because he was not contemplating any expenditure that had not received the sanction of Parliament, but, on reflection, he perceived the question of the noble Lord to be not so very unreasonable, as the Government of which the noble Lord was a Member actually did the very thing that he now wished not to be done. [Lord HENRY LENNOX: A burnt child dreads the fire.] Then the noble Lord, with a guilty conscience and stung with remorse, was haunted by the apprehension that he (Mr. Cowper) would follow the bad example of the Government of which he was a Member. He could hardly tell what the noble Lord was driving at—whether he wanted to throw blame on the Royal Academy—[Lord HENRY LENNOX: No!]—or whether he wished to protect the public mind from pollution from Turner's pictures; for the noble Lord informed the House the other day, to the great astonishment and indignation of the admirers of Turner's pictures, that that great artist was guilty of pruriency. No man had a higher love of pure nature, or could better represent its noblest aspects than Turner; and the study of his works was calculated to improve, refine, and elevate all who were capable of appreciating them. The noble Lord must, therefore, be under a misapprehension when he attributed evil to Turner's paintings. The question put to him was whether he, as First Commissioner of Works, was ready to pledge himself that he would never do what had been done by the Government of the Earl of Derby in 1858. When Parliament was asked to Vote £10,000 which had been spent by that Government in building a gallery, they considered that the Government had acted for the public benefit in the emergency that had arisen, and voted the money. It might possibly happen that during the recess the National Gallery

1699
might take fire, or that some valuable bequest of pictures might be made on condition that within a stipulated time, which would expire before the opening of Parliament, they should be placed within the National Gallery. In the case of the fire it would be a very foolish thing not to repair the building; and in the case of a bequest of pictures of great value, every hon. Member would wish that a small sum should be expended in erecting a gallery instead of waiting for the Vote of the House. To resolve that it was inexpedient to take any steps for committing the House to spend money without the sanction of Parliament was to affirm a truism, yet there might be cases in which it was the least of two evils. So far as he was concerned, nothing but necessity should induce him to take upon himself the serious responsibility of spending the public money without the leave of the House, and he knew of nothing likely to render so improper a course necessary. With regard to the Turner pictures, if upon legal investigation it was found that they must be placed within the building by a certain date, there was no such immediate necessity as the noble Lord supposed to erect a building for them, as they might either be hung in the place of existing pictures, or they might be put in the National Gallery without being exhibited.
MR. AYRTONsaid, he must apologize to the right hon. Gentleman for having exclaimed "Oh, oh!" but he confessed he never heard such a flow of observations upon so small a matter. There was no necessity for them, especially when they considered it was a Saturday meeting of the House. The only thing necessary was for the right hon. Gentleman to say that the Government had no intention to enlarge the National Gallery without the House first seeing the plans for the purpose. The right hon. Gentleman had opened up such a field of discussion, that if he (Mr. Ayrton) were to take it up there would be no end to the sitting.
LORD HENRY LENNOXsaid, that if a Member fell into error he owed it to himself and the House to correct it. He had received several letters complaining that he had asserted that some of Turner's pictures were of a prurient character. [An hon. MEMBER: You said "drawings."] He had also received a letter from the executor of Mr. Turner, explaining that there were two or three sketch-books of that distinguished artist which were not
1700
allowed to be exhibited. They were not, however, finished drawings, and they did not, therefore, come within the terms of the will.
SIR JOHN SHELLEYsaid, that the exercise-ground of the barracks at the back of the National Gallery was quite as small as it ought to be, and if any portion were taken for the enlargement of the National Gallery it would be necessary to remove the barracks to some more convenient situation.
COLONEL FRENCHsaid, he considered the answer of the right hon. Gentleman very satisfactory in reference to the National Gallery, but some departure from the principle laid down would be absolutely necessary in the case of the accommodation in the kitchens of the House of Commons.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
MR. SELWYNsaid, that in a recent debate there had been a general expression of opinion on the part of the House that a liberal grant ought to be made on behalf of the Volunteer force. The two points upon which it was agreed Government aid ought to be given were—in furnishing drill instructors, and in assisting Volunteers in the acquisition of rifle ranges. Colonel M'Murdo stated the other day that the present number of the Volunteers might be estimated at 170,000, and the Government grant for instructors might be taken at about 2s. 4d. a head. It must be remembered that in extending the drill instruction of the Volunteer corps the Government were retaining in the army a very valuable body of men, and at the same time rewarding them for long and distinguished service. In regard to rifle ranges, the Volunteers had never asked the Government to supply them, but only wished to be allowed to acquire them for themselves without unnecessary expense. He had taken up the matter quite at the end of a Session, and the Bill he had proposed had not, therefore, passed in its integrity. The Volunteers now asked that the Act of Parliament should really be carried into effect by all the public departments, and that, if necessary, it should be amended. An excellent rifle corps at Kingston-upon-Thames, being unable to obtain a rifle range, made application for a rifle range in a retired part of Hampton Court Park, which they offered to prepare and make perfectly safe at their own expense. Their application was refused, on the ground that the firing would frighten the colts in the

1701
park. Whether these colts, being thorough-bred, were more likely to be frightened than others he could not say. [Sir JOHN SHELLEY: They would be less so!] But other horses became so accustomed to the firing that they soon ceased to notice it, and could scarcely be prevented from straying into the line of fire. The Surrey Militia when called out had not been able to fire a shot for want of range until they had been offered the rifle range of the Inns of Court Volunteers. He trusted that the new Secretary at War would see that the Volunteer corps were not hindered by any of the public departments in obtaining ranges which were absolutely indispensable to their efficiency. He trusted that next Session the niggardly Vote for drill instructors would be increased.
SIR JOHN SHELLEYsaid, that the greatest difficulty the metropolitan Volunteer corps suffered under was the want of rifle ranges, for the ground in the neighbourhood of the Metropolis was so expensive that none but the richer corps had any chance of acquiring a rifle range, even upon lease. He trusted that the right hon. Baronet (Sir George Lewis) would turn his attention to this subject, and see whether he could assist the Volunteer corps in obtaining ranges under proper regulations.
MR. T. G. BARINGexplained that there would be an expenditure on the Volunteers this year of £160,000, and as the Vote of £30,000 was for only a portion of the year the total Vote for Volunteers in the next year would exceed £200,000. That such afforded no evidence of a niggardly spirit on the part of the Government. With respect to the details of the payment of the drill instructors, that was a matter which might be safely left in the hands of Earl De Grey and Ripon, who would succeed him in the office of Under Secretary for War, the noble Lord having devoted a great deal of time and attention to the interests of the Volunteers. He had not heard of any complaints with respect to the carrying out of the Act for rifle ranges referred to by the hon. and learned Member, and he did not see in what respect the Government were to blame. He thought the corps to which the hon. and learned Gentleman belonged (the Inns of Court Volunteers) had not shown that cleverness or astuteness which they individually displayed, because, if they had provided themselves with a range, they would have obtained a grant from the Government.
MR. SELWYNsaid, the corps objected to receive the public money. They merely desired to obtain a range without being put to a large and unnecessary expense by the authorities at the War Office.
Resolutions agreed to.

WAYS AND MEAN.—REPORT.
Mr. MASSEY brought up the Report of the Committee of Ways and Means.
Resolutions reported.
SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, that after the number of Supplementary Estimates which had been presented and voted, he wished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he felt satisfied that the Ways and Means provived for the year would be sufficient to meet all the expenditure of the year. The right hon. Gentleman, in March last, had assumed that he would have a surplus of above £400,000, estimating the expenditure at a certain amount; but the expenditure had since considerably exceeded the Estimate, and he wished, therefore, to know whether sufficient Ways and Means were provided to meet the increase, and particularly the Vote for iron ships?
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he felt obliged to the hon. Baronet for giving him the opportunity of stating a few details in reference to the subject brought under the notice of the House, and at the same time he must say that he entirely concurred in an opinion which had been expressed, that nothing was more inconvenient on all general grounds than the introduction of Supplementary Estimates. Supplementary Estimates ought never to be introduced, except for strong and special reasons, and he trusted the House of Commons would always require strong and special reasons to be stated why the charges included in Supplementary Estimates were not presented at the regular period, when the other Estimates were laid upon the table. The Votes now alluded to by the hon. Baronet might be accounted for on special grounds. The principal Vote relating to iron ships was one connected with a great exceptional operation, which he would not call the reconstruction of the Navy, but a great transition in the mode of building ships of war; and the other Votes partook of the same special character. The effect of the changes made in the Votes was that the Estimate for the Army, including the Vote for the Volunteers, had, upon

1703
the whole, been increased by a sum of about £17,000. The Vote for the Navy had been increased by a sum of about £247,000, which very nearly corresponded with the amount voted for the iron ships. A Vote of £30,000 taken for the dowry of a Member of the Royal Family belonged to the head of Civil Services, and required no explanation. The charge for the Civil Services had been increased by about £133,000, the reason of that being that, while a Vote of £155,000 was asked for in order to pay the amount agreed on in respect to the Stade Dues, there had been some small set-off on the other side, which reduced the increase to £133,000. The presentation of a Supplementary Vote on account of the Stade Dues, which, in conjunction with the Vote for the iron ships, might be said to constitute substantially the whole of the changes which had been effected in the Estimates, required no apology from him. That charge being dependent entirely on the conclusion of diplomatic arrangements in concurrence with other countries, it was impossible, and if possible, it would have been unconstitutional to ask the House of Commons to make, either in form or substance, provision for its payment until the instrument was concluded which made the desired concurrence a matter of certainty. Therefore, it was impossible to present that charge to the House with the ordinary Estimates of the year; but, when once the instrument was concluded, it would have been highly expedient to postpone the completion of the arrangement until another year, and thereby cause the trade of the country to continue to be subject to the inconvenience of the Stade Dues, while the trade of other countries would be liberated from it. Therefore, as to the amount of £400,000, without going into minor items, there were very special grounds to justify on the present occasion a practice which he nevertheless asserted to be highly inconvenient. In the Packet Service Estimates there was a change consequent on the termination of the Galway contract, and after making allowance for some trifling changes in the revenue department, the general result was that, whereas the Budget Estimate exhibited a surplus for the year of about £408,000, and the present excess in the Votes over the estimated expenditure amounted to £361,000, that surplus had very nearly disappeared, there remaining only the almost nominal amount of about £47,000. He was asked
1704
the question, whether he now felt reasonable confidence in the Ways and Means for the year, and he had to say in reply that, in the absence of any extraordinary circumstances such as could not be foreseen or counted on, he felt the utmost confidence in their sufficiency. The operation of one very important measure of last year, which appeared more or less in doubt when he made the financial statement, had since the commencement of the financial year been satisfactory—he meant the measure imposing an additional duty on spirits. The revenue was, upon the whole, in a satisfactory state, and more than equalled the expectations he had expressed about three months ago.
MR. WHITEwished to know, whether it was true that the hon. Member for Southwark (Mr. Layard) had accepted office as Under Secretary of State. If it were true, it was not, in his opinion, so bad or questionable an appointment as that made in reference to the Chief Secretaryship for Ireland, an appointment which he hesitated not to say had carried the utmost dismay into the ranks to which he belonged in that House, as being evidence of a reactionary policy on the part of the Government. He had asked the other night whether the hon. Baronet was a member of the Carlton Club; and since he came into the House to-day he had received an assurance that the hon. Baronet was a member of that club, and that he was at the moment he was asking the question dining at the club. ["Oh, oh!"] The hon. Member for Windsor (Mr. Hope) said "Oh, oh!" These appointments might be satisfactory to him, but they were not so to Members below the gangway on the Ministerial side of the House, and he could only say if that appointment had been made a month ago the Government would at this moment have been on the other side of the House. If the appointment of the hon. Member for Southwark was a fact he thought some apology was due to him (Mr. White) from the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets, for when he (Mr. White), having watched the career of the hon. Member for Southwark, knowing his Ministerial proclivities, ventured to dissent from accepting that hon. Gentleman as a representative of hon. Members below the gangway, the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets assailed him in his own vigorous style, and brought down the cheers of hon. Members.
MR. SPEAKERsaid, the hon. Member could not refer to past debates.
MR. WHITEsaid, he merely wished to express his dissatisfaction and that of hon. Members below the gangway at the recent appointments, as an evidence of a reactionary policy on the part of the Government which would lead to their ruin. He would recommend them to put their House in order, for if those changes had taken place a month earlier they would now be occupying that (the Opposition) side of the House—not their present places.
SIR JOHN SHELLEYsaid, he would put it to his hon. Friend whether it was a right course to attack an absent man. He should be sorry to have it supposed that the Liberal Members below the gangway deemed it their duty to dictate to the Government in reference to the appointment of individuals to public office. The responsibility for the appointments rested with the Ministry; and with regard to the hon. Member for Tamworth, no one could deny that the hon. Baronet had shown great talent. He was surprised that any observation should have been made on the appointment of the hon. Member for Southwark, because he had on every occasion taken an independent course with respect to the Government.
MR. G. W. HOPEsaid, he had uttered the exclamation referred to by the hon. Member for Brighton (Mr. White) not because he objected to his remarks, so far as they were political, for if the noble Lord thought the hon. Baronet could assist his Government, he was glad he had availed himself of his services. But he did complain that such private matters should be brought befere the House as where an hon. Member dined, and descriptions of the club to which he happened to belong. Such a course was not calculated to increase the efficiency of the House of Commons, or to further the public interest.
Resolutions agreed to.
"Bill to apply a sum out of the Consolidated Fund and the Surplus of Ways and Means to the service of the year one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, and to appropriate the Supplies granted in this Session of Parliament, ordered to be brought in by Mr. MASSEY, Mr. CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, and Mr. PEEL."
Bill presented, and read 1°, to be read 2° on Monday.

PUBLIC OFFICES' SITE BILL.

  COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
  MR. AUGUSTUS SMITHsuggested to the right hon. Gentleman that it would be advisable to postpone the further proceedings of this Bill until the next Session. It contained a very important principle, and one which could not be fairly discussed in a House when the attendance was so small as only nineteen Members.
  MR. COWPERintimated that the Bill could not be postponed.
  MR. AUGUSTUS SMITHsaid, that as the right hon. Gentleman did not appear inclined to accede, he must say the Bill was very objectionable. It proposed to vest in the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Works and Buildings a portion of St. James's Park for the new public offices, and one of the provisions of the Bill proposed to give compensation to the Crown for the portion of the Park so to be taken. He contended that the Crown estates were already the property of the public, and were vested in the Commissioners of Woods and Forests and Public Works for the benefit of the public, and the principle of giving compensation to the Crown ought not to be admitted by the House of Commons. It was quite clear that nothing could be done in the erection of the new offices until the next Session, and, therefore, he should move that the House go into Committee on the Bill that day three months.
  Amendment proposed,
  "To leave out from the word 'That' to the end of the Question, in order to add the words 'this House will, upon this day month, resolve itself into the said Committee.'" —instead thereof.
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
  MR. AYRTONinquired whether in the erection of the new public offices it was intended to pull down the building recently erected at great cost as the State Pape Office?
  SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, he hoped that the smallest possible portion of St. James's Park would be taken for these improvements.
  MR. COWPERsaid, the Bill was merely a formal Bill, consequent on an Act passed in 1859, giving the Commissioner of Works power to acquire a site, and the way in which the piece of ground would be paid for was merely matter of account between the Land Revenue Department and the Consolidated Fund. The legal title to this

  1707
  Park was not vested in the Commissioners of Works; they had only the management on the part of the public, and the object of the Bill was to give a legal title to the Commissioners of Public Works. The principle contained in the Bill was the same as that adopted in the Lighthouses Act, and it was practically only a matter of account. The piece of ground which would be taken St. James's Park was part of the inclosure close to Fludyer Street and Downing Street, to which the public had no admission. There was also a road near this enclosure which was used by the residents of the houses close to it, but when those houses were removed the road would be of no use. It was a little piece of useless ground, and would be taken as a part of the new Foreign Office. If the present Bill were to be postponed it would cause an additional charge upon the public Exchequer, and an unnecessary impediment would be placed in the way of commencing the preparations for the building. In answer to the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets, he had to say that the State Paper Office was to come down, but not in consequence of the present plan.
  SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYasked, whether there was any reason to suppose that the part of the Park to be built upon was a quicksand?
  MR. COWPERsaid, there was not; but even if there were, in the present state of scientific knowledge, and with the use of concrete, builders could make a firm foundation in a quicksand.
  MR. SEYMOUR FITZGERALDasked how much of the open space would be encroached upon?
  MR. COWPERsaid, that part of the triangular enclosure would be taken which was included within a line drawn from the eastern side of Duke Street and another line drawn from the southern side of Downing Street. It was intended to make an entrance into the Park from Downing Street, which would be a great convenience. The small portion of land would just enable the two fronts of the building to meet in a corner, and it was essentially necessary to the carrying out of the design adopted by that House.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Main Question put, and agreed to.
  Bill considered in Committee.
  House resumed.
  Bill reported, without Amendment; to be read 3° on Monday.

THE FRESCOES—HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.—EXPLANATION.
MR. BERNAL OSBORNEbegged the indulgence of the House while he made a personal explanation as to what he had said the other evening on the subject of the frescoes in the new Houses of Parliament. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Cowper) had, in his absence, stated that he was wrong in saying that the face of Cordelia, in the fresco of "King Lear," was in a state of decay. He had since taken an opportunity of examining the frescoes, and he found that he had committed a mistake in saying that the face of Cordelia was decaying. It was the next picture that was injured—Mr. Watts's fresco of "The Red Cross Knight," where the head of the Dragon was completely gone, the leg of the knight was peeling off, and the arm of the lady he was defending was on the point of altogether vanishing from public view. It was true that the face of Cordelia was uninjured, but the nose of Regan was in a very dilapidated state, and would probably fall off before the recess was over. The right hon. Gentleman said that any man who could use his eyes would see on going through the gallery in what condition the frescoes were. He (Mr. Osborne) had used his eyes and had carefully looked at the frescoes, and he could state that in that ridiculous fresco, representing the English rivers, "Old Father Thames" was in a state of considerable decomposition, and that all the frescoes were in a state that was not creditable to the country. He thanked the House for having allowed him to make this explanation; he withdrew his observations about Cordelia, but he maintained what he had stated with respect to all the other frescoes, and that even the fresco of Lear was in anything but a sound state.
MR. COWPERsaid, he wished also to make a personal explanation. His hon. Friend appeared in the first instance to have mistaken the face of Cordelia for the face of the dragon. But now that he had made a more minute inspection of the faces of the ladies he found blemishes on that of Regan.
MR. SPEAKER: I must remind the right hon. Gentleman that there is no question before the House.
MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman a question, and he would make a single observation or two to bring the vexed ques-

1709
tion of the frescoes to a definitive issue. There could be no doubt that Mr. Watts's fresco was in a state of considerable decay. So was Mr. Herbert's. The faces of Regan and Goneril were disfigured. As for the picture in the other angle, the figure of Adam was almost obliterated. As for the frescoes of Mr. Cope—
MR. SPEAKERsaid, he must again remind hon. Members that there was no question before the House.
MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, he made these observations with a view to the question he was about to put. There could be no doubt that the frescoes were in a decaying state, and he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he would institute an inquiry during the recess into the causes of the decay, as otherwise injustice would be done to the artist as well as to the country?
MR. COWPERsaid, it seemed as if an inquiry must be instituted into the facts as well as into their causes, as the accounts were so conflicting. His own impression was that Mr. Herbert's fresco was not suffering from decay. Undoubtedly "Father Thames" was in a bad state as well as Mr. Watts's fresco, but he thought the damages to the others were exceedingly slight. He would be very glad, however, to examine into the matter.
House adjourned at Two o'clock.