§ MR. BERESFORD HOPESir, I rise, according to Notice, to call attention to the delay which has occurred in proceeding with the building of the new National Gallery. I do not desire to raise a party fight on the question, nor to make a personal attack on any Member of the Government, whether or not his conduct may have been such as to deserve approval or otherwise. My object simply is to obtain, if I can, from those in whose hands the matter lies, some valuable assurance that the important subject which has been before Parliament and the public for not less than 30 years—namely, the erection of a National Gallery such as shall be worthy of this great country, shall be executed within as short a period as may be reasonably possible. About a fortnight ago the Chancellor of the Exchequer held out a very bright hope to us on that subject, and informed us that a considerable portion of land had been purchased behind the present National Gallery, on which he said that sooner or later—and the right hon. Gentleman trusted it would be sooner rather than later—a new National Gallery shall be erected. Latetanguis in herbâ. I do not like the word "later" even in this conjunction. Now, I will not go back to the wearisome history of previous discussions in this House upon the site for the new National Gallery—sometimes at Kensington Gore, and sometimes at Kensington Palace. At last the House, sick of the delays that had been interposed in the matter, determined at any 1064 price that it would have a new National Gallery, and fixed on the large garden behind Burlington House, where now the Royal Academy and the London University are placed. The choice was excellent, and the Royal Academy would then have naturally inherited the whole building in Trafalgar Square. Unhappily, however, the House thought fit to reverse the scheme on the Motion of my noble Friend the Member for North Leicestershire (Lord John Manners) in 1864. I was not in that Parliament, but I tried to induce the next one in the following Session to reverse the decision. The House was, however, wearied out, and though I was supported by all who had the fullest knowledge of the subject, it stuck to the decision that the Gallery should be situated in Trafalgar Square. A limited competition had been held of eminent architects, and eight or nine gentlemen were named as judges of the designs that might be sent in. Among those judges were the noble Lord the Member for Haddingtonshire (Lord Elcho), the hon. Member for Bath (Sir William Tite), Mr. Boxall, Lord Hardinge, myself, and others. We reported, in effect, that none of the designs submitted to us exactly met the object in view, and that we could not recommend any of them for adoption. However, in our opinion, Mr. Edward Barry's design was the best, and we hinted that the Government would do well to appoint that eminent architect. In the following year, 1868, Mr. Barry was appointed by the noble Lord (Lord John Manners) then First Commissioner of Works. Though the Government have not yet actual and material possession of the ground required for the enlargement of the National Gallery, they have moral possession of it. It is absurd to put off submitting the plan to the House on the ground that the site is not yet obtained. The money is as good as granted, and the site is as good as got. Besides, although the correspondence which was granted to me more than a year since leaves off some months previously, it is currently believed that the architect has prepared, a plan and sections, and drawn up a careful Report. The Government ought, therefore, to take immediate steps to rid us of the disgrace of having a National Gallery not suited to the pictures we possess, quite inadequate to our future wants, and unworthy of the 1065 character of a civilized, enlightened, and artistic nation. So cramped is the National Gallery, that I believe there is not room in it for a single additional picture that may be given or bequeathed to us. Some little time since I saw in the Director's apartment a very curious and interesting Venetian picture, for which I believe there is no space in the Gallery itself. The papers of the last week inform us that a lady alike to be honoured for her own proficiency in art, and the genius of her husband—Lady Eastlake—has given the Gallery a very valuable painting by Bellini in memory of the late Director, while the large "Raising of Lazarus," by Haydon, a painter who, with all which may be said against him, marks a period in the history of British art, hangs hopelessly in a basement room. The public has also been informed that a large bequest of pictures has turned up in the will of a gentleman lately deceased. There are some things which may be tinkered; but you cannot tinker a National Gallery. The present Government has been criticized for their general economical behaviour. They will give the best possible; proof of judicious economy if they show a large balance in hand for great works which the dignity of the country requires to be carried out. The existing Gallery is so full that if additional pictures are to be hung in it, they must be "skied," as the artists term it, in which case the visitor must mount on a ladder to see them, or they must be hung so close to the floor that the student must break his neck in stooping to look at them. Some one has been wild enough to report that official brains have conceived the idea of hanging pictures in the entrance hall of the National Gallery, where they will be exposed to great detriment from soot and other dirt swept in by southerly winds. I hope the Chancellor of the Exchequer will express the indignation which he must feel at such a slanderous rumour. Another story, quite as absurd, attributes to some unknown person the notion of building a huge glass house, like an exaggerated photographer's studio, upon the roof of the Gallery. No man but he who would have thought of using the Hall for pictures, can, I venture to say, have dreamed of such a second absurdity. But I now come to what is perhaps the most serious reason for urging the construction of, at all events, a section of the new building. The public generally suppose that 1066 the National Gallery is fire-proof. This is an absolute mistake. The floors of the half of the existing building originally allotted to the National Gallery are what is called—though that is more than doubtful—fire-proof, but those of the portion that has until recently been occupied by the Royal Academy have not even this recommendation; while the wooden roof which ranges over the whole building is impartially dangerous and combustible in its first construction, and from having been baked in the sun for 40 years it is now mere touchwood. The consequence of this state of things is that the pictorial treasures of the nation may be entirely destroyed in a few minutes. The danger is enormously increased by the immediate proximity of the barracks, and of a number of mean houses contiguous to the building, while the baths and washhouses uplift their tall and ugly chimney—one drift of burning soot might do the work. The barracks ought at once to be removed to the river side or anywhere, and the new building commenced. The Treasury has plenty of money in hand to enable them to adopt such a course. The advantage of the plan proposed is that the work can be done in sections. Those to the north not being in view will be quite plain and unornamented and therefore cheap, while their construction and use would not involve the demolition of the actual structure until the season has arrived for the final completion of the whole permanent edifice. The time has come when the House of Commons is entitled to know what progress has been made in the negotiations for the erection of the new building, and how soon it is actually to be taken in hand, and I therefore beg to move for the production of Papers relating to the subject.
§ MR. W. H. GREGORYsaid, they were much indebted to the hon. Member for Cambridge University (Mr. B. Hope) for his Motion. For years past there had been a general admission that justice had not been, and could not be done to the national pictures which had been acquired at so large an outlay of public money and had been added to by so many noble gifts and bequests. So far back as 1847 the Committee then sitting recommended the employment of the ground at the back of the Gallery. Fourteen years ago his noble Friend the Member for Haddingtonshire (Lord 1067 Elcho) complained of the condition of the National Gallery. He said it had boon a ricketty child from its birth; and no sooner had it been erected than a great portion had been handed over to the Royal Academy. In the same debate the right hon. Member for Buckinghamshire (Mr. Disraeli) made the following statement:—
I am not indulging in anything like exaggeration when I say that the prevalent feeling of the House and of the country is that a new National Gallery which shall afford adequate accommodation to those treasures of art we possess, and which, I trust, we shall greatly increase, is necessary."—[3 Hansard, cxlii. 2136.]It was lamentable to think how many years had elapsed since that avowal was made. The Royal Academy had now departed to Burlington House, and some relief had consequently been experienced. This enabled the Trustees to bring up a certain number of selected pictures from Kensington, and to have one entire room of the British School of painting. But the relief was only temporary; even now the pictures were climbing up like ivy to the top of the wall and reaching the ceiling. In their despair the Trustees had been obliged to contemplate the desperate necessity of erecting screens; although these screens impeded circulation and interrupted a proper view of the pictures. The position of affairs was this—that only a faulty and imperfect exhibition could be given of the pictures already in Trafalgar Square. They were huddled together one on top of another—and every one conversant with pictures must know that certain pictures by contiguity to others are absolutely destroyed. Members of Parliament endured a good deal of huddling and squeezing together without falling out; but pictures were of a much more jealous and malignant disposition. In some cases, when brought close together, they actually killed one another; and yet, owing to exigencies of space, the Director was obliged to bring into actual contact these hostile, indeed internecine brothers. Those who visited the recent exhibition of Old Masters at the Royal Academy would remember with delight the extraordinary interest conferred on the pictures exhibited there by proper light, judicious hanging, and ample space. This exhibition of a private society was a credit to the country, whereas our National Gallery would continue to be a national discredit, until 1068 they emulated the example thus set to them by a body of artists. Then to sum up. The pictures at Trafalgar Square were huddled up together, reaching the ceiling and out of sight. Other ancient pictures were, till recently, in the rooms below. Some ancient pictures had been sent to Kensington in temporary exile, as it was impossible to house them. Some very fine specimens of English Art were also stowed away at Kensington—and, to add to their depression and oppression, the Trustees had recently received from Kensington a most unmistakable hint that the Lord President of the Council and Mr. Cole would infinitely prefer their room to their company. Now he (Mr. Gregory), as a Trustee, wished at once to say that he did not want the House to rush into any extravagance. He had no idea, for instance, of pressing at present for a new and costly facade, which was the chief item of the expenditure once contemplated. All he wanted was the erection of galleries on the ground already purchased, and purchased for the particular object of enabling the country to enjoy those works of Art now belonging to the National Gallery, and those others which it had always been expected and intimated should be attached to it. To show how little anxious the Trustees were to incur unnecessary expense, the words of their Report, to the then Commissioner of Works, were these—All the space required for the national collection of the Old Masters would not be wanted at once, part of it might be temporarily employed for other purposes.He had never known the House of Commons niggardly as regards any expense which was really for the credit of the country. No doubt they cavilled at Estimates for Art catalogues, Alderney breakwaters, and Portsmouth forts which could find no bottom; but the House, once satisfied that what it was voting would be properly spent and was for a really useful purpose, never made an objection. And now a word as to what was required at once. The Trustees had carefully considered the subject, and they were not without hope that in a new Gallery, if a proper Hall were provided for their accommodation, Her Majesty might graciously permit the Cartoons of Raphael to be installed there. In accordance with the unanimous recommendation of the Committee on the British 1069 Museum, in 1860, it had always been supposed—and public opinion had been unanimous on this point—that the drawings of the Old Masters now at the British Museum should be under the same roof as the national pictures. They illustrated these pictures, and in many instances determined the authorship of doubtful works. There was no departure from that principle in any of the great European galleries. In the Louvre at Paris, in the Uffizzi of Florence, the drawings formed an important and most attractive portion of the collections exhibited to the public. But who had over seen these drawings at the British Museum? Not one person in 1,000. Except that one lived in hope that in future they would be exhibited and made popular, they might as well, but for purposes of research, not have boon in existence. The Trustees had also considered it expedient that there should be one or two rooms for the exhibition of pictures lent to the National Gallery. England, it was notorious, had a large proportion of the finest works of Art in private houses. Many of these would come on loan for exhibition, and important acquisitions might be made in consequence. Then came another claimant for space, which, though not actually of the same flesh as the National Gallery, was still kith and kin to it—the National Portrait Gallery. He entirely agreed with the observations of his hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge University on this point. The condition of that unfortunate collection had been so intolerable in its dingy habitation in Great George Street that it had been temporarily removed to Kensington. But the Trustees of the Portrait Gallery, in their Report just submitted to the Lords of the Treasury, remind their Lordships that it has been distinctly given to them to understand that they were to be provided with space in the buildings about to be erected for the National Gallery—and he was sure that any attempt to retain them in the shed at Kensington would be strenuously resisted. Why, then, did Her Majesty's Government stand aloof all this year? Surely, it could not be on the ground of economy; for the nation had bought the ground, and there was nothing to prevent the architect from setting to work at once. There could be no economy in losing the interest upon the sum laid out upon this 1070 land. Was it economy year after year to accumulate the noblest works of Art at large prices and then so to exhibit them that, to use the words of the hon. Mover of this Notice, you must strain your neck to look at some pictures, they were so high, or lie down on the floor to look at others, they were so low? When they considered the exertions of every foreign nation to multiply galleries of Art and Science throughout the length and breadth of the land—when they saw the effects which daily conversance with Art had on the commercial progress and success of France and little Belgium—it did seem an inscrutable act to have the fountain head of Art in the metropolis of England in the unseemly condition in which it was at present; more especially when the state of the national resources enabled the Chancellor of the Exchequer to pour forth so many and various gifts from his well-filled cornucopia.
§
Amendment proposed,
To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "there be laid before this House, Copy of Correspondence between Her Majesty's Office of Works and the Architect of the New National Gallery, in continuation of the Return to the Order of the House of Commons (10th March 1869), and of the Report of the Architect to the First Commissioner of Works,"—(Mr. Beresford Hope,)
—instead thereof.
§ Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
§ MR. AYRTONsaid, there could be no objection whatever to the Motion with which the hon. Member (Mr. Beresford Hope) concluded his remarks. There was every disposition on the part of Her Majesty's Government to afford to the hon. Member and the House every information respecting the proceedings that had taken place since the last Papers were laid upon the Table. But the hon. Member had read them a very long lecture upon the supposed duties of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, of whose balances he seemed anxious to dispose at the earliest possible period in the construction of a National Gallery; the hon. Gentleman suggested that some one interposed to stay the bountiful hand of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in this direction; he did not know to whom the hon. Gentleman referred—certainly it could not be to him, as First 1071 Commissioner of Works, because the hon. Member would be aware that the First Commissioner had no authority to embark in any great undertaking of this kind, and that his duty was confined to carrying out the instructions he might receive from the chief officers of Her Majesty's Government, especially from those representing the Treasury, who determined the expenditure on public buildings. The Government could not disregard all considerations of economy, and in this matter it would be well to be instructed by what had been done in the past, for the hon. Member was not the first who had appeared in that House to enlighten them upon questions of Art, and reminding the Government of their duty to embark in great public buildings, assure them that the occasion was suitable and beautiful. That was the language held some years ago when it was proposed to build a National Gallery; but the Government then in Office, being economically disposed, suggested that a large building in Whitehall, designed for a banqueting hall, in which no dinners had been given, and once employed as a chapel for soldiers, but then altogether unused, would do very well for the purpose. But the Art patrons and the artists of the day complained of the side light and said it was a pity to spoil the beautiful roof, and that it would be very much better to build a Gallery large enough both for the national collection and the annual exhibition of the Royal Academy, because it would leave room for the growth of the national collection; and it was provided that the Royal Academy should remove elsewhere if the national collection increased beyond the accommodation. And what was the result? A considerable sum was proposed for the building; then a farther grant was made; the building cost a great deal of money, and it was thought to be admirably suited for the site on which it was built. Those who had advocated a handsome building 20 years ago said it would attract a handsome donation of valuable pictures, just as was said now. [Mr. W. H. GREGORY: And we have got them.] No doubt a great many pictures had been given to the national collection; experience, however, had shown that people had a great fancy for giving pictures to commemorate themselves, but did not offer to contribute pictures which would pro- 1072 mote the Art of the country. [Cries of "No!"] He had authority for that statement, and he believed no one would deny that a great many pictures had been offered and declined, because they were unfit for exhibition in a National Gallery. He merely mentioned this to show that hon. Members must not attach too much weight to the presumption that donations of valuable works would follow the creation of a handsome Gallery. When the collection, however, had in time extended beyond the limits of the building reserved for it, the Government considered the matter and came to Parliament with a scheme for meeting the difficulty. It was then stated that, with the assistance and advice of the Trustees of the National Gallery, an excellent adaptation of the building could be made, which would suffice for the exhibition of the national pictures for many years to come. Confiding in that assurance, the House of Commons voted a sum of £17,000, and, in furtherance of the same object, a donation was made to the Royal Academy; the very valuable ground on which the building was erected being worth, perhaps, from £40,000 to £50,000. No sooner was this done, no sooner had the Royal Academy vacated the rooms, than a cry arose that the National Gallery was in every respect unsuited to the exhibition of the national pictures, and that justice to Art required that it should be immediately pulled down. Upon that occasion he ventured to urge, on grounds of economy, that before they pulled down the National Gallery they ought at least to have the design of a better building to erect in its stead, otherwise it would be an idle waste of money to pull down that which already existed. Designs were accordingly invited, with an alterative aspect, one to build behind the National Gallery, leaving the building as it stood at present, and the other to pull down the building and erect an entirely new structure on its site. The result of the competition was that no design was fit to be executed—a result certainly not very flattering to the state of structural art in this country. Two designs were mentioned as having conspicuous merit, and they were bracketed together; but, in the end, upon considerations entirely independent of this particular question, in June, 1868, Mr. Barry was appointed 1073 by the late Government to be the architect for the construction of the new National Gallery. When Her Majesty's Government were now asked, without a moment's delay, to proceed with such a building, as rational men of business they were bound to ask themselves what other works were demanded at their hands, in order that they might make a choice, and postponing those which would contribute merely to the delight of the country and of the friends of Art, they might be free to deal with other designs which were of paramount importance in the administration of public affairs. At no period had Her Majesty's Government been called upon to undertake such a number of important public works, involving such vast employment of labour and expenditure, as were called for at the present moment. And let him remind the House that these were not works on which Her Majesty's Government embarked with the notion that they were going to do something-magnificent—something which would attract the attention and strike the mind of passers-by, if, indeed, there were persons capable of being influenced in this manner. The history of the world taught us that it was a bad thing for a Government to embark in great building operations, with the notion that it was thereby rendering itself popular in the eyes of the community. There had been conspicuous examples of those who were led away by such reasoning, and found themselves exposed to the most calamitous results. And Her Majesty's Government were too sagacious to follow in the footsteps of dynasties which had been almost destroyed by squandering public money upon magnificent public buildings. At no great distance from London they had recently seen the effects of a large expenditure upon the adornment and improvement of a great city. What Her Majesty's Government were called upon to consider was the bearing of this question upon the administration of public affairs. Look at the various projects which were forced upon their attention. There was first the construction of a new Palace of Justice; next, a building for the accommodation of the Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Secretary of State for the Colonies, with the subordinate departments subject to their supervision. Recently, the conclusion 1074 had been arrived at that it was necessary for the proper administration of the War Department that it should be carried on under one roof, and that, of course, would require a building of enormous magnitude. Attention had had likewise been directed, very forcibly, to the deplorable condition into which the Admiralty Department had fallen, from being scattered over different buildings; the remedy proposed, of course, was to have a building not less in extent than that which would be required for the War Department. Here were various immense structures pressed upon; the Government as requiring to be executed at the earliest moment with a view to promote the effective administration of public affairs. Then, again, the development of the postal system rendered it necessary that we should erect a new Post Office, almost as large and, as far as internal accommodation went, of not loss capacity than the existing Post Office; this, indeed, was a work imperatively required, for if not carried out at once it would be almost impossible for the Department to discharge the new duties it had undertaken. There were various minor works involving considerable expenditure, but with the details of these it was not necessary that he should trouble the House. He must point out at the same time, that as regarded the interest of Science and Art Her Majesty's Government were by no means indifferent. At Kensington a building of enormous proportions were being erected, which must be carried on to a stage that would render it fit for use; although a very large expenditure of public money would be required for that purpose, it was impossible to stop in that great undertaking till it had reached such a position that the appearance of the building could be described as comparatively decent. Once more, there was constantly pressed upon the Government the condition of the British Museum, to which the remarks of his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been intended to apply. His right hon. Friend might possibly have been infelicitous in the mode of expression which he adopted, but his remarks, undoubtedly, were intended to apply to that Department. Her Majesty's Government and successive Governments for several years past, had felt the absolute necessity of affording some 1075 measure of relief to the British. Museum in its present overcrowded condition. After the enormous expenditure made upon the maintenance and improvement of the beautiful collections which it contained, it was deplorable that there should not be sufficient means of exhibiting them, and that their vast and interesting stores should lie in drawers and presses, only to be resorted to by the few who came under very special conditions. When specimens in the Natural History Collection, for instance, were crowded into a case three or four deep it was impossible for the public to look at them with a sense of intelligent enjoyment. But to provide adequate space for the proper display of the collections in this building would require, within the strictest economy, over £100,000 or £200,000; and the last time that the project was under discussion the sum mentioned was much nearer to £500,000. Her Majesty's Government, of course, would not proceed hastily with the work until they had satisfied themselves that the arrangements which they had made would not be hereafter condemned as unnecessary, inconvevenient, or extravagant; but as soon as all the questions, necessarily very difficult and complex, connected with this building had been solved, he believed he might say that it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to submit the question to the consideration of the House. It was not, however, an easy one to deal with, and the Committee which sat last Session made certain recommendations, to which it was of course the duty of Her Majesty's Government to give the most careful, minute, and searching examination. This was certainly a more urgent affair than the work upon which the hon. Gentleman wished the Government at once to enter. Proceeding on ordinary principles of business to deal with the demands made upon them, the Government must have regard to whether the National Gallery was so overcrowded with pictures as to prevent the visitors from deriving adequate enjoyment. If it was said that the National Gallery was overcrowded, he must point out that it contained a very large number of the works of one artist, and it might become the duty of the Government to consider whether a national collection ought not to consist of the most perfect 1076 works of every school, and whether it would not be better for the enlightenment of the students of Art to have a more general collection, instead of having one of the finest rooms occupied by the works of a single artist. [An hon. MEMBER: You are obliged.] He denied that there was any obligation to occupy one Gallery to such an extent as was the case at present, while the removal of some of those pictures would give a great amount of space, and would prevent the necessity of hanging pictures, as had been proposed, in a hall where they would be destroyed with dust. The National Gallery was a building of two stories, only one of which was now used for the exhibition of works of Art, and he thought it ought to be known why the other could not be turned to account. The hon. Member opposite (Mr. Beresford Hope), who was so solicitous to preserve the National Gallery from fire, did not tell the House that a portion of that building was used as a private residence, in addition to which the Trustees wanted a library fitted up on the ground floor, because the Council of the Royal Academy, after having had ground given to them for a new building, chose to keep their books in the old one. The first thing which he thought ought to be done in reference to that building was to clear the basement or ground story of its present occupants, and then great facilities would be given to the public for enjoying the national collection, which would also be made more available than at present for those students who desired to take advantage of what the country possessed. That was what he proposed, but the Trustees, instead of thanking him for his efforts, came down to the House for the purpose of throwing discredit upon them, and taunted him with being a very economical person. He accepted the imputation, his view being that the public should have their own property and make the best use of it, and that he ought not to be driven to provide new buildings for persons who did not assist him to turn the existing ones to the best account. The Government ought not to be hurried to proceed with the construction of a new building, but, looking to the demands that were made upon the national Exchequer, they ought to have some regard to the necessities of each case, and give to one a preference. The Government would give 1077 the subject their best consideration, and when they felt that they could embark in the proposed undertaking they would be prepared to submit a proposal to the House.
§ LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, he did not intend to make any imputation of economy against the right hon. Gentleman who had just sat clown; on the contrary, he should charge extravagance against the proposals the right hon. Gentleman had shadowed forth, and he should oppose every grant which was asked for with the intention of tinkering the existing National Gallery, because the money would be thrown away in so doing. One would imagine from the observations of the right hon. Gentleman that all these schemes with regard to the National Gallery were merely whims of a few connoisseurs or Trustees of the National Gallery. The right hon. Gentleman had made one singular omission in his historical retrospect of those transactions—there was not one word said of the different Bills which, from time to time, had been brought in by a Liberal Government for the express purpose of purchasing land upon which to erect a new National Gallery. Year after year Parliament had readily and cheerfully voted the money which was asked for by the Executive of the day, for the purpose of enabling them to become possessors of land for the erection of a new Gallery; and a Liberal Government, of which the present Premier was Chancellor of the Exchequer, issued instructions for a limited competition in reference to designs. The right hon. Gentleman stated that two architects had been bracketed together. The facts were these—if the judges were to select the best design for a new building altogether, they would have selected that of Mr. Edward Barry; but if they were to select the best design for the adaptation of the present building to its purposes, they were prepared to select that of Mr. Murray. During the last few years Parliament had really been the dupes of the Government, if, after the passing of those Bills for the expenditure of large sums of money for the purchase of land on which to erect new buildings, it was found that there existed no serious intention, on the part of the Government, to erect a new National Gallery. The right hon. Gentleman's speech amounted to a confession that the Government had not made up their minds 1078 about the National Gallery, while he did not think much of the uses to which it was turned; for, he said, after all, it was only an exhibition of pictures, about which only a few people cared, the majority being far more concerned about rigid economy.
§ MR. AYRTONsaid, the noble Lord could not have attended to his remarks, or he would not have put such an interpretation upon them.
§ LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, he was glad to elicit from the right hon. Gentleman a disclaimer of such sentiments. The right hon. Gentleman had made an unfounded charge against the Royal Academy. He told them that the Academy maintained a library in the lower story of the National Gallery, although Parliament had voted them a sum of money for the erection of a new building on the Burlington House site. [Mr. AYRTON: Had granted land.] Yes; for the purpose of erecting a now building on it. But not only did Parliament grant the Royal Academy a piece of land, but they also granted them Burlington House, where, as soon as the building was handed over to them, they would place their library, and throw it open to the public. The delay was not occasioned by the Royal Academy, but arose from the non-completion of those buildings, between Burlington House and Piccadilly, that were to accommodate the Royal Society and other learned institutions. A portion of Burlington House was now occupied by the Royal Society, the Royal Academy could not take complete possession until the building was free. So far from their being open to the charge that had been brought against them for continuing to occupy the National Gallery, the fault, if any, rested with the First Commissioner of Works, from his not being in a position to give up Burlington House to the Royal Academy. The right hon. Gentleman's concluding remarks were, he thought, intended to divert the House from the real point at issue, which was simply whether, after long inquiries by Committees and Royal Commissions, after plans had been adopted by the Government of the day, after Acts had been passed to carry them into effect, after large sums had been annually voted by Parliament for the purpose of these buildings, and even the ground required had been purchased, they were now to 1079 be told that everything was at sea again, and that the right hon. Gentleman the First Commissioner of Works had not only in his head a scheme for the structural alterations of the National Gallery, but a scheme for the exhibition of pictures in that building which the Trustees, and the Director were not likely to accept on his ipse dixit. Fortunately, the schemes proposed by the right hon. Gentleman could not be carried out without money, and, before that could be voted, the matter would have to be decided by that House. The right hon. Gentleman intended to disregard all that had been done by the Government of Earl Russell and other Governments, and to have the pictures exhibited in what he could not help terming a more hugger-mugger manner than at present. It was a scheme that, no doubt, would cost money, but then it would be spent, they were told, by a really economical Minister. He could only regard the policy sketched out by the right hon. Gentleman as an attempt to escape the responsibility which had been thrown upon him by Parliament, and as evincing a determination to deal with these exhibitions in a manner which would be characterized by every man of taste and love for Art in this or any other country as a disgrace alike to the nation and the Government.
§ MR. COWPER-TEMPLEsaid, the First Commissioner of Works had not appreciated the recommendation of the hon. Member for the University of Cambridge (Mr. Beresford Hope). The hon. Gentleman did not ask the House to embark in an expensive scheme; but to adopt the plan of leaving the present building for future consideration, and at at once commencing Galleries that might be perfect internally, and economical in external decoration, as these Galleries would have little frontage to the street, they need not be more costly than the Royal Academy Galleries. He (Mr. Cowper-Temple) had not believed till that evening that any reasonable man doubted the necessity of enlarging the exhibiting powers of the National Gallery, and the present First Commissioner of Works was the only man in that House who thought the present building was adequate for its purpose. Its defects were warnings to avoid the parsimony which spoilt the design of Mr. Wilkins. The right hon. Gentleman's remarks about the Turner Collection surprised him; the 1080 pictures were bequeathed to the nation on the condition that they should be kept in a separate room; and, even if this condition could be overridden by a quibble, it would be discreditable to the Government and the nation to do so. Then it was proposed that the basement should be used for the exhibition of pictures. But it was not the intention of Mr. Wilkins that the basement should be used for that purpose, and consequently it was not fitted for it, and it would not be treating the pictures fairly to exhibit them in such a place. But the strongest reason why there should be some immediate dealing with the subject had been stated by his hon. Friend the Member for the University of Cambridge. That hon. Gentleman reminded the House that the pictures were not so safe as they ought to be, as the building had a wooden roof, and if unfortunately, a fire were to break out, we might lose some of the great masterpieces which were the pride of the country and so useful for the cultivation of Art. Then, bequests would not be so frequent for the future if we were to act in the way now proposed by the First Commissioner. There were still many persons, actuated by a generous and patriotic feeling, who would be glad that the pictures which they had collected with care and skill, and the expenditure of much money, should be of use to the nation and be exhibited to the whole world in a proper building. Would it not be the best plan, therefore, to build a really useful Gallery to receive such pictures as any public-spirited person might give to the nation? If therefore, the Government were prevented from dealing with the question immediately, it would be a great national misfortune, and, besides, it was not an economical proceeding to allow valuable land in the centre of the metropolis to remain without producing any return.
§ MR. BARINGsaid, he must express his astonishment at the speech of the right hon. Gentleman (the Chief Commissioner of Works). The right hon. Gentleman had asked, why should we do anything in a hurry? Now, what was the right hon. Gentleman's idea of a hurry? Had not this subject been agitated for 20 years, vote after vote been taken upon it, money after money granted, and a site purchased? The right hon. Gentleman had said that we could not do it now because there were 1081 other matters pressing; but all that ought to have been considered before we paid for the land. This was not the measure of one Government, but of many Governments; for it was considered a great matter to encourage Art, which would have re-acted for the benefit of the taxpayer, because the ability to manufacture and the power of production would have been increased. The right hon. Gentleman said he would give the Papers, but not a National Gallery. But the right hon. Gentleman further took care to say that he was not the person who had rejected the proposal; but that it was the deliberate opinion of Her Majesty's Government that there should be no National Gallery. ["No!"] The right hon. Gentleman had come into Office with fresh ideas; but they were ideas of parsimony. He said that it was the opinion of the Government that there should be no National Gallery. [Mr. GLADSTONE: Nothing of the land.] Were the Government to build a National Gallery after everything else was done? There was no intention, on the part of the Director or Trustees, to put the National Gallery in opposition to Kensington Museum. There was no such idea on the part of anyone who really regarded the advancement of art. The right hon. Gentleman had said that he spoke on excellent authority; but the right hon. Gentleman, differing from his predecessors, had not put himself In communication with the Director, and Trustees. Wherever his authority came from it did not come from those authorities. The right hon. Gentleman ought to know that the Trustees and the Director only existed under a Treasury Minute, and had no power—not even the power of appointing a housemaid without reference to the Treasury, and, consequently, they could not turn any of the rooms to other purposes without the authority of the Treasury. The right hon. Gentleman did not appear to know on what basis the institution stood. He would tell the right hon. Gentleman that the communications of the Trustees with the First Commissioners of Work had hitherto been satisfactory, because they had been with Ministers who felt with them that the object in view was a national one, and they had been always treated with courtesy. They had always received from every Minister the most courteous 1082 and kindly consideration. All he could say was this—that unless the Trustees were to continue upon that footing of free communication, frank consideration, and courteous reception, the office of Trustee would be untenable. If information with regard to changes were obtained, and the changes carried into effect without any communication with them, it would be totally impossible that they should hold their office with satisfaction to themselves or benefit to the country. Everything should be done as if the Government and the Trustees had but one purpose, one object, and one desire. When the right hon. Gentleman talked of the Trustees as wishing to force a thing upon him—wishing to make war upon him—he could tell him the Trustees had no feeling of the kind. All who visited the Gallery—foreigners as well as English, and who were judges of pictures—admitted that the collection, though not large, was very choice; but there was no one who did not say that there was no room to hang the pictures as they ought to be hung. One might hang a picture with its back to you, or in any other way, but to hang it well required room, space, and light. With regard to the library, the Trustees were authorized to purchase the library of Sir Charles Eastlake, which was a most valuable one for study and for reference, and no answer could be got from the right hon. Gentleman as to a room to put it in. If, as he gathered from the right hon. Gentleman, it was not the intention of the Government to have a new National Gallery until everything else was finished, then there might be reasons for making the changes which the right hon. Gentleman proposed; but if it was intended, within a reasonable time, to proceed with the construction of a National Gallery fit for national purposes, then, so far from there being economy, there was extravagance in the plan of spending money to-day on a building which must be pulled down tomorrow. The right hon. Gentleman had made observations on the conduct of the Trustees with regard to the room which contained the Turner pictures. But there was this to be considered, that the Turner Collection had been bequeathed to the National Gallery upon conditions which, according to high legal authority, if not complied with, the collection would revert to the heir-at-law. But, said the 1083 right hon. Gentleman—"The nation could do what it liked with its own." The right hon. Gentleman probably intended to introduce an Act of Parliament on the subject. But where would he get bequests for the future if the conditions upon which those that were already given were not complied with? With regard to the proposals which the right hon. Gentleman had made to the House, it was only right that it should be understood that he had kept himself aloof from the Director and Trustees, and there had been no communication whatever between them.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, that if indignation would remove the difficulty of dealing with public questions, and especially with those which unfortunately seemed most puzzling—namely, those connected with Art—he knew from experience that the noble Lord the Member for North Leicestershire (Lord John Manners) was the man to do it. That was not the first occasion on which he had seen the noble Lord transported almost beyond himself by an irrepressible excitement on subjects belonging to the Department with which he had so often been connected. But he confessed he had not expected that the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down would have exercised his imagination to the extent that he had done. He did not refer to the parts of the hon. Gentleman's speech which referred to the relations of the First Commissioner of Works with the Trustees, because upon those he was uninformed; but when the hon. Gentleman, under the influence of his excited imagination—because no man was less capable of wilful inaccuracy—ascribed to his right hon. Friend the First Commissioner of Works the statement of a deliberate intention on the part of the Government that they should not have a new National Gallery, he must say his right hon. Friend had used no words which, in the slightest degree, bore that signification. He entirely repudiated any such intention on the part of the Government. [Mr. BAKING said he was very glad to hear that.] Such hasty imputations might, perhaps, animate a debate; but they certainly tended to retard, perplex, and confuse a public question; and he knew of no justification which, the hon. Gentleman could have for imputing such an utterance to his right hon. Friend.
§ Mr. BARINGsaid, he was surprised that a charge of that description should be made against him by the First Minister of the Crown. He conceived the First Commissioner of Works to have said that nothing was to be done in regard to the National Gallery till many other works were finished, and that then that question would be taken into consideration.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, the hon. Gentleman now substituted a totally different charge from the one he had first made; but that charge he (Mr. Gladstone) would meet also. His right hon. Friend the First Commissioner of Works did not state that all those other questions were to be disposed of before the National Gallery was erected. The speech of his right hon. Friend set out the works of that description which were now in the hands of and before the Government. It might be fair to describe that as a dilatory plea. It was perfectly competent for anyone to argue that the whole of that work ought to be done at once, or that any particular portion ought to be preferred to the rest; but it was only right that those connected with the Government should point out to the House what was the amount of work of that kind they had in hand, that the House might be aware of the existence of competing claims. Although he did not find fault with those who said that all ought to be done at once, he could not share their sanguine anticipations. In the history of the Department of Public Works for the last 30 years he had seen little except a succession of procrastinations, reproaches, complaints, and partial failures. There was, however, in London one notable erection of the present generation which was a remarkable success—a success in utility, in happy and original conception, and in moderate cost. It was the reading-room of the British Museum; and it happened to be the one work with which the Government and Parliament had nothing, or next to nothing, to do. When they got into a discussion of this kind there seemed to be nothing but hard words; and he was sure he was very sorry if he had said anything which partook of rudeness to the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Baring); but, after all, the present discussion was only similar to those which they had witnessed before on similar subjects. Indeed, he recol- 1085 lected scenes, if he might say so, of much fiercer excitement than had prevailed that evening; because, although the area of the South Kensington Estate never had been actually stained by the gore of the contending hosts, yet the battles fought over the disposal of that ground in that House had been such that, if words could have drawn forth blood from the veins and arteries of men, unquestionably the whole floor would blush with it. But, in this case, it was right to bear in mind the mass of work that pressed on them. They had just disposed of the London University. A great work at the Post Office was rapidly proceeding. A great work at the Kensington Museum was in rapid progress. The erection of the Public Offices, including the Colonial and Home Departments, was also fast advancing. Structures of immense extent and importance must be undertaken for the War and other Departments, which were of great urgency in reference to the efficiency of those Departments. He need not refer to the case of the Law Courts, because all who heard him knew of the difficulties in which the Government had been involved on that subject. All those buildings, with the exception of those of the University of London and the Kensington Museum, were so connected with administrative necessities as to be entitled, he thought, to precedence in general terms, though he would not say to precedence in so absolute a sense as that they should necessarily be all completed before anything else was begun. He had not a word to say against the mode in which this Motion had been brought forward by his hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge University (Mr. Beresford Hope), and he would state frankly that he did not think the question of the National Gallery should be indefinitely postponed. But surely the buildings to which he had referred were of greater urgency. He did not understand his right hon. Friend in the same sense as he was understood by his hon. Friend behind him, that they should be working in the dark behind the present Gallery, and allowing the façade to stand over till some indefinite period.
§ MR. BERESFORD HOPEWhat I suggested was that the work might be done in sections, and that the portion in front might be left till the last.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he certainly did understand his hon. Friend to say that, to a certain extent, the plan of proceeding piecemeal behind the present Gallery would be obnoxious, his wishes going to the extent of complete reconstruction.
§ MR. BERESFORD HOPETo proceed gradually.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, according to the opinion of the Government, however, another question was more urgent than that of the National Gallery—namely, that of the Natural History Collection of the British Museum. The case of the British Museum had reached a point far beyond being curable by indignation; it was so extreme that nobody now endeavoured even to apply indignation as a remedy or palliative for it. It had attained the point of absolute absurdity; because, besides the hideous deformity which it had been necessary for many years to give externally to a building which, after all, had a noble façade, in its interior things were packed and stowed away in the dark which were absolutely valueless except when displayed in the light. Therefore, his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer fully intended and desired during this Session to propose a plan to the House respecting the British Museum. If the House should be of opinion the Government were wrong in doing that, and that they ought to make the completion of the National Gallery the first object of their efforts, they had no foregone conclusions and no fastidious pride on the subject that would prevent them from bowing to what might be deemed to be the general wish. He was surprised to hear from the hon. Gentleman who had spoken last that the pictures were so crowded together in the National Gallery. For himself, he had not visited it lately; but when he was last there he thought they were, on the whole, exceedingly well hung and very well seen, and that there was no such extreme urgency in regard to the pictures, although, undoubtedly, space for expansion was to be desired. He had said thus much to remove obvious misapprehension as to the declarations made by his right hon. Friend the Chief Commissioner of Works; and, while he was not himself very sanguine as to their being more successful than other Governments had been in the 1087 prompt, rapid, and effective disposal of all those difficult subjects, at least they ought not to be precluded from approaching them dispassionately, through erroneous interpretations being hastily put upon the statement of their intentions.
§ SIR WILLIAM TITEsaid, he wished to say that the Instructions to the Commission, of which he was a Member, were that they were to go into questions of alterations of the present building as well as the design for a new Gallery; and the conclusion they came to was that the design of Mr. Murray was the most suitable for the alteration of the present building, but that of Mr. E. Barry was the best if a new one were to be constructed. He was delighted to hear from the Prime Minister that this matter was not to be forgotten, though he was sorry to hear it was to be postponed. What he desired to warn the Chief Commissioner against was any attempt to tinker with the basement of the present building. He believed a fire-proof Gallery might be contructed at a very moderate cost on the site of the workhouse at the back of the present building, after the design of Mr. Barry. The Government ought not, he thought, to grudge the expenditure for the purpose, particularly as the new Law Courts were not to be paid for by the nation, but were to be constructed by means of the Suitors' Fee Fund. He trusted the Government would take the subject up in a large and generous spirit.
MR. BENTINCKsaid, that his hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Sir William Tite) was quite right as to the source from which the money for the new Law Courts was to be derived, and he (Mr. Bentinck) contended that they ought not to be placed in the same category with other public buildings. As to the buildings in connection with the British Museum, they had been long promised, and it would be something like a breach of contract, he maintained, to delay proceeding with them. He hoped the Government would yet rescind their decision as to the National Gallery, and begin at once. He would remind the House that the Turner pictures were a bequest to the nation; and, with respect to one of them especially, Mr. Turner had requested that it should be placed next one of the celebrated paintings of Claude. That was a stipulation by which 1088 the Government were, he thought, bound in honour and good faith to abide.
§ MR. A. SEYMOURsaid, he wished to call attention to the fact that there were large numbers of drawings of the Old Masters lying at present in rooms at the British Museum, which were perfectly useless, so far as the Art education of the country was concerned, as they were now stowed away. He would suggest the erection of some plain brick and mortar building, which might be even left to the First Commissioner of Works, in which they could be displayed. Such a building could be constructed at a comparatively small cost; and it would even be advisable to spend £50,000 rather than allow the drawings to be hidden away as they were; or an arrangement might be made to exhibit them in order at the National Gallery.
§ MR. BERESFORD HOPEsaid, he would withdraw his Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.