COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 27 July 1861)

§ MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH
suggested 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. COWPER
intimated that the Bill could not be postponed.

§ MR. AUGUSTUS SMITH
said, 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. AYRTON
inquired 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 WILLOUGHBY
said, he hoped that the smallest possible portion of St. James's Park would be taken for these improvements.

MR. COWPER
said, 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 WILLOUGHBY
asked, whether there was any reason to suppose that the part of the Park to be built upon was a quicksand?

MR. COWPER
said, 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 FITZGERALD
asked how much of the open space would be encroached upon?

MR. COWPER
said, 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.