§ MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, he wished to ask the First Commissioner of Works, If it is intended to move the statue of Canning from its present site and to reinstate it in its former position?
§ LORD JOHN MANNERSSir, in answer to my hon. Friend, I have to say that the present position of the question affecting Mr. Canning's statue is as follows:—When the railway works were being made through Parliament Square they necessarily destroyed the trees and shrubs which heretofore had formed the background to the Canning statue; and it became necessary to re-consider the whole arrangement with regard to Parliament Square, and my right hon. predecessor at the Office of Works, in conjunction with Mr. Barry, gave his best attention to the subject, and arrived at the conclusion that it would be proper to remove the statue from the site it formerly occupied to the situation in which it is now placed. It appears to me that the conclusion at which they thus arrived was formed on very good grounds, and I have adhered to it; consequently the statue was removed to where it now is. But it appears that a very strong feeling exists in many quarters, more especially among those related to, or who were acquainted with, Mr. Canning, that the statue to his memory having once occupied a position in immediate contiguity to the Houses of Parliament ought not to have been removed from that site. I apprehend that if you view this question 959 merely on the ground of artistic considerations the removal of Mr. Canning's statue to the site it now occupies is perfectly justifiable. If artistic considerations are put out of the question, and the subject is looked at merely with reference to the feelings of private connections, I admit there may be a good deal in what was said on the subject in "another place." On that occasion there was a very strong expression of opinion in favour of restoring the statue to the site it formerly occupied, or one immediately contiguous to the Houses of Parliament. In this conflict of opinion I consulted some of my Colleagues, and in concert with Mr. Barry carefully reviewed the whole question. No final decision has been come to, but I think I may say that if it is thought advisable on the considerations to which I have referred to move Mr. Canning's statue again, we should think it right not to place it precisely on the site it originally occupied, which under the changed circumstances would be very objectionable, but in the centre of Parliament Square. I should think the decision must be arrived at on one or other of the grounds I have indicated. Those who have seen the statue from the rear will be of opinion that nothing could be more objectionable than that it should be approached by the public in that direction. Any one who did not know the effect produced by viewing a large statue at the rear, when it was never intended that the eye should see it in that way, had only to walk down Regent Street, and he would be satisfied of the truth of that opinion. Great objection, he was afraid, would be taken to the replacing of Mr. Canning's statue in its former position by those approaching the Houses of Parliament from Victoria Street. On the other hand, those approaching the Houses of Parliament by Whitehall or by Westminster Bridge would no doubt entertain a different opinion; but, whatever decision is come to, either those who regard the question from the artistic, or those who regard it from what he might venture to call the sentimental point of view, mnst necessarily be disappointed.