SUPPLY—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES. (Hansard, 1 July 1872)

§ MR. STACPOOLE
said, he hoped that was not an inopportune moment to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, whether any steps had been taken with the view to the establishment of a Royal residence in Ireland?

MR. GLADSTONE
said, he could not see the connection between the question of a greater intercourse between the Royal Family and Ireland and the establishment of a Royal Palace in that country and the repairs of the Royal Palaces in this country.

§ MR. BOWRING
asked the Chief Commissioner of Works for an explanation of the large increase in the items for St. James's, the Green, and Hyde Parks—an increase of more than £2,000 over last year, apart from the fact that in last year's Vote the sum of £2,123 was granted for "extraordinary works," whereas this year that item only came to £450. He also asked, in the interests of the poorer classes, who lived in large numbers in such districts as Kensal New Town, to which Kensington Gardens were the nearest public park, whether his frequent complaint as to the entirely neglected state of the north side of those Gardens would be attended to, and whether any flowers, for instance, would be planted there, the expense of which would be quite trifling? At present those persons, if they wanted to enjoy the gardens, must walk three-quar- 433 ters of a mile across them, in addition to a long walk there, and do, moreover, what they disliked—namely, mix with the upper classes.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, that he had not the details of the increase in the items referred to by the hon. Gentleman, and was therefore unable to explain the matter. In regard to the north side of Kensington Gardens, it was not intended that it should be neglected; but it was not desirable that there should be the same quantity of flowers and plants that was to be seen on the south side. Variety was desirable; the north side was used for walking, and persons found the trees and shrubbery very agreeable.

§ MR. BOWRING
asked what the right hon. Gentleman meant to do with respect to the drinking fountains which, on a former occasion, he undertook to provide for the different Parks?

§ MR. AYRTON
said, the proposal was to have a simple fountain, and that would be carried out.

§ MR. BERESFORD HOPE
pointed out to the hon. Member for Exeter that the south side of Hyde Park was very bare of trees, while upon the north side there were some very fine trees. In that fact was to be found a reason for the larger outlay on the south side.

§ MR. MITCHELL HENRY
hoped the right hon. Gentleman would place a few more seats in St. James's Park. He knew there were objections to an increase of seats, but the presence of a few extra policemen would remove the objections. When going through the Park, he felt exceedingly sorry to see the poorer people turned away from the chairs because they were unable to pay the penny which the upper classes could afford to pay.

§ SIR JOHN TRELAWNY
asked whether the Chief Commissioner of Works would not think it desirable to plant Hyde Park with more evergreens, to take the place of deciduous plants, so as to make the grounds more ornamental during the winter months? It also occurred to him that there should be bathing-places in the middle of the Serpentine, formed by something made to represent islands resting on piles, with a passage to the land. Railings should be placed round the islands, and the railings being covered with evergreens, the bathing-places would in the distance appear mere islands. There 434 should be bathing-places for both men and women. He was told that there were a number of persons, about 30, calling themselves "All - the - Year - Bounders," who did actually bathe in the Serpentine all the year round, and they certainly ought to be considered.

§ MR. DENISON
asked what was being done towards the erection of a fountain at the north end of Hamilton Place, the cost of which was to be defrayed out of money left by a deceased lady?

§ MR. STAPLETON
inquired when the Chief Commissioner of Works expected to have a better supply of water in Victoria Park?

§ MR. BERESFORD HOPE
objected to money being wasted in the planting of evergreens in the Park, they being trees the inevitable fate of which was to become the colour of rusty iron and then die. Why not try acacias, laburnums, and other spring-flowering trees, and give up the eternal repetition of lime and plane trees? A good selection of deciduous trees would very much improve the effect.

VISCOUNT BURY
said, it was generally allowed that great improvements had been effected in the public gardens since they came under the charge of the right hon. Gentleman, and, contrasted with their former condition, they were now such an ornament to the metropolis as to elicit the admiration of foreigners. He congratulated the Chief Commissioner on his success in that particular.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
trusted the Chief Commissioner of Works would give an assurance to the Committee that more free seats would be provided in Hyde Park and St. James's Park.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, the whole of the grounds were under the charge of one of the most accomplished gardeners in England, and he exercised his judgment in the cultivation of the Park, guided by an experience of many years. All classes of trees had been recommended in turn, and the proper selection to make had been discussed for generations; and he trusted hon. Gentlemen would excuse his saying that it was one of those questions which could not well be settled in Committee. With regard to the fountain in Hamilton Place, the lady referred to died when in the midst of prosecuting her enterprize for providing public baths in the Parks for London, and he had £50,000 in his possession which she 435 had intended to appropriate for that purpose; but that and all other cognate matters must remain in abeyance till her estate was finally wound up. The fountain, however, was in the hands of a sculptor, under a contract, and the work was being carried on. [Mr. DENISON: Who is the sculptor?] Mr. Thornycroft. With reference to Victoria Park, an additional supply of water had been provided, and they were now considering how it could be further increased. Seats had been added from time to time in Hyde and St. James's Parks, and there would be no objection to furnishing more if they were required by the public. The seats, however, did not interfere with the chairs, as the persons who used the one would not use the other.

MR. OTWAY
said, he never rode in Hyde Park, because he could not find room there; and he wished to know whether the Chief Commissioner would take into consideration the expediency of making a ride for equestrians in Regent's Park?

§ MR. AYRTON
said, he thought there was not such a desire on the part of the public for a horse-ride in Regent's Park as to justify the expenditure necessary for the formation of a horse-ride there. It was true that at certain periods of the day Rotten Row in Hyde Park was crowded; but the horse-ride on the northern side of the Park was comparatively deserted at most periods. Another way of avoiding the inconvenience of overcrowding, and one which he adopted, was to get up at 8 o'clock, and ride in the Park, or else in the evening.

§ MR. RYLANDS
said, that the Royal Parks and Gardens Bill having received the Royal Assent, he should like to know when the rules for the Parks might be expected to be laid on the Table?

§ MR. AYRTON
In the course of a week.

§ MR. MELLOR
said, he wished to call attention to the fact that on every £4 charged for furniture the official expenditure was 12s.

§ MR. AYRTON
, in reply, said, the establishment was a kind of furniture police for the protection of the public 436 Revenue; its efficiency being tested not so much by what was spent as by what was prevented being spent. The duty of the office was to see that nothing was supplied which the public service did not imperatively require.

§ MR. BOWRING
said, he wished to call attention to sub-section 3 of this Vote, relating to warming, ventilating, and lighting. On gas and fuel, of the great expense of which he had on former occasions complained, he was glad to observe his right hon. Friend had within the last two years effected a saving of £1,300; but he thought economy might, with great advantage, be carried still further. The heat and glare of gas, arising from the enormous quantity consumed—say, 30,000,000 cubic feet for three months in winter and three months in summer—were, in some parts of the House, perfectly intolerable, and the books in the Library, especially, suffered in consequence. In the short conversation which occurred on Friday evening the right hon. Gentleman stated that the fire in the Clock Tower had been occasioned by the wooden frame at the back of the gas jet unexpectedly taking fire from a change of wind. Now, it seemed to him that if the light had been placed in an iron tank the fire would not have occurred, and he wished to know whether the accident had arisen owing to the desire to save a few pounds in the erection of proper machinery, or whether, which was more likely, it was the result of carelessness?

MR. GOLDSMID
said, he should be glad to know what the right hon. Gentleman intended to do to preserve the works of art in the lobby? Some of the frescoes had suffered considerably, and the public would be glad to know that there was some probability of preserving them. He thought there was nothing to find fault with in the warming of the House, compared with what it was some years ago.

§ MR. BERESFORD HOPE
said, he should like some information as to the 437 artist and subject of the fresco for which they were called upon to vote £500 under this head, so that hon. Members might really know whether they were voting money to advance or retard the progress of high art in this country. He hoped the old oil-lamps would be restored in the division lobbies, instead of the present flaring gaseliers, which rendered what used to be the coolest place in the House the most oppressive.

§ MR. MACFIE
suggested that seats should be provided in the outer hall for strangers waiting to see Members, and for the accommodation of aged and infirm visitors. He also thought the accommodation in the Ladies' Gallery might be greatly extended if his right hon. Friend would only exercise a little of his characteristic ingenuity and gallantry, and go a little step farther and slope the seats from the back to the front. As at present arranged, only the occupants of the front seat had the advantage of seeing and hearing. There was always a rush to the front, and the two back benches were generally unoccupied.

VISCOUNT BURY
observed that the complaints which used to be made as to the want of accommodation within the House appeared to have sunk into silence, he presumed from a feeling of despair, for the evil was as great as ever, if not even greater. The average attendance of Members was greater than it used to be, and steadily went on increasing. Times out of number he had seen hon. Members come down, and try in vain to find a place from which they could address the Chair. He asked whether the question of extra accommodation within the House itself had been shelved, and whether the silence observed on the subject had been construed by the right hon. Gentleman into an acquiescence in the present state of things?

§ MR. R. N. FOWLER
said, that, in former debates on the size of the House, when the present Parliament was younger, the Prime Minister had said—"Wait, and see whether the large attendance of Members is maintained;" and experience had justified the prescience of the right hon. Gentleman in that respect. True, during the debates on the Irish Church Bill it was difficult for some Members to find seats; but there was no longer any pressure, except very occasionally, when a large division was impending, and then it 438 only lasted for a few minutes. The House at that moment could not be called a thin House, and yet there was abundance of room to spare. The evils consequent upon enlargement, he was afraid, would be greater than those that were suffered now, for any additional seats would not be so good for hearing as those which now existed. It seemed better, therefore, to limit the accommodation to the number of Members in the habit of attending than to put them to inconvenience by providing for a larger number, including those who were not in the habit of attending, except when whipped up for a great division. The Government ought to consider most those who were in the habit of attending night after night, in order to make a House and carry on the Business of the country.

MR. ALDERMAN W. LAWRENCE
complained that the heat of the Library had been greatly increased by the lowering of the chandeliers by two feet, and the disuse of candles, which could be extinguished when not required. He believed that when the lighting was by means of candles the atmosphere was much better than it was at present, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would return to the former mode of lighting. He also thought the books were suffering material damage from the great heat.

§ MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK
said, he should be glad to hear if there was any probability of the "Judgment of Daniel," by Herbert, being soon placed in the public position for which it was destined. The item, for frescoes took him by surprise, because it had been understood that, on account of their fugitive character, they were to be superseded by mosaics; and therefore he should be glad of an explanation of the adherence to fresco-painting, unless, indeed, the use of the word were an error of the Press. No hon. Member could go round the building without observing the ravages that time was making with the soft stone; all kinds of projects to arrest decay had been mooted, but nothing effective had been discovered; and it was, therefore, desirable that the Committee should receive some information as to whether anything effectual could be done. The late Chief Commissioner removed paint which had been uselessly put upon beautiful stone inside the building, and he (Mr. C. Bentinck) 439 considered it a great improvement; he therefore regretted to observe that the bases of statues in St. Stephen's Hall had been covered with about the most ugly and unsuitable paint that could be used. He quite agreed with what had been said about the gas in the Library, and would suggest that the heat could be reduced by instructing the attendants to lower the lights that were not being used. He did not see the use of the lantern in the pinnacle of the Clock Tower, which caused the alarm of fire on Friday night, and he hoped that the signal would be discontinued.

§ MR. RYLANDS
said, he wished to call attention to the fact that a number of rooms over the Committee-rooms were not in use, for it would be desirable, if it were possible, to facilitate the access to the House of hon. Members sitting on Committees when the Division bell rang. He believed the House itself was large enough for the ordinary attendance, and that to enlarge it would increase the difficulty many hon. Members had in making themselves heard. The Members' light was a very useful beacon, often looked for by Members who were three or four miles away from the House, who were saved a useless journey when the absence of the light indicated that the House had risen. The light, he believed, had involved only a very slight expense, while it must have saved many hon. Members a good deal of trouble.

§ MR. J. S. HARDY
suggested that a simpler plan would be to exhibit the light during those hours of the night when the House was not sitting.

§ MR. DILLWYN
said, he thought it was a discredit to the country that hon. Members were obliged, when a division was called, to crowd into the passages leading to the House, and to ask some hon. Friend what was going on. Greater facilities of access to the House ought certainly to be provided, and he thoroughly concurred with the remarks of the noble Lord (Viscount Bury) in reference to the subject.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, he would, in the first place, reply to what his hon. Friend the Member for Warrington (Mr. Rylands) had said respecting the number of rooms in the building. Perhaps hon. Members generally were not aware that there was in the upper story of the House a beautiful suite of some 10 rooms, which he believed had not been 440 used for the last 20 years. No doubt that was a great waste of public accommodation, but there was considerable difficulty in utilizing the rooms. They had been given to the House of Commons for its own use; and therefore it had not allowed anyone to intrude into that part of the Palace of Westminster. No one could get to these rooms without ascending the staircase which the House claimed as its own, and he was afraid, therefore, that they must still remain unused and unoccupied; whereas if a staircase were made for Members to come down from the Committee-rooms by a short cut, instead of having to find their way to the House by a public staircase, they would perhaps be less tenacious of the occupation of this suite of rooms. With a view to effect the desired end, some years ago he proposed that the staircase leading to the smoking room, should be extended upwards to the corridor of the Committee-rooms, and be reserved exclusively for the use of hon. Members. The estimate made for the cost of the alteration was, however, very considerable, and the suggestion was not carried out. Since then, the subject had been reconsidered, and if the extension could be made consistently with certain difficulties connected with the ventilation of the House, he should be glad again to propose the plan. In the event of its adoption, it might be possible to utilize the rooms above, for other persons than Members might then be allowed to use the public staircase, in order to reach the suite of rooms to which he had just alluded. With regard to the light in the Clock Tower, it was a mistake to suppose the slightest risk had been incurred by reason of the use of a piece of wood, for the upper part of the tower being wholly constructed of iron there was no chance of its taking fire. In fact, there was no alarm experienced on the occasion, except that caused by the arrival of the fire-engines. The experiment was only a temporary one, and the wood was used because it could be easily adapted from time to time to any alteration. As to substituting the light behind the face of the clock for the light used in the tower, great inconvenience would arise from extinguishing the light behind the clock face at uncertain times. It was far better to have an independent light for the purpose of indicating when the House was 441 sitting, and as far as he could gather it had already been found to be a considerable convenience to hon. Members. If, however, the reverse was the case, and hon. Members did not appreciate the light, it could be removed, for it was no particular pleasure for him to keep it burning. The suggestion, however, that it should only be lighted when the House was not sitting, could not, he thought, be adopted. As regards the library, he had to state that there was no additional gas there at all. Until recently all the gas burners in the library were so placed that they could not give sufficient light. No one, in fact, could see to read a book without lighting a wax candle, and under these circumstances he thought the best thing to do was to utilize the gas-burners. The complaint now was that the light was too strong; but that inconvenience could be easily modified by slightly turning down the gas, according to the reader's experience. The same remark was applicable to the gas in the lobbies, which he might remark had been made much cooler than they used to be by additional openings for ventilating purposes. It was determined by the Royal Commission that the compartments in the Central Hall should be illustrated with pictures of the four patron Saints. One of these—St. George—had been executed in the Venetian or glass mosaic. Undoubtedly, the opinion generally entertained was that the glass mosaic was not very satisfactory as a work of art, or fitted for the decoration of the walls of the Palace of Westminster. It appeared to him, therefore, that he ought not to proceed further with that species of decoration without consulting gentlemen who were professionally conversant with art. In the first place, he asked all the artists who had been practically concerned in fresco painting, whether it ought to be abandoned as an impracticable mode of decoration; and here he might remark that he himself had no particular preference for fresco painting or for any other mode of decoration. Well, they thought it would be quite premature to abandon fresco painting, because the eminent chemist who was associated with them in their inquiry, was of opinion that the failure of the frescoes could be traced to definite causes, and that with a knowledge of those causes we might bring the art to perfection. That being their opinion, the 442 gentleman who drew the design for St. George, and who had also been engaged to make the designs for the other three panels, said he should be prepared to undertake fresco painting if he were desired to do so; and he might add that this gentleman had himself been associated with the Committee, because it was thought he would examine the subject in an eminently practical light. No definite arrangement had, however, been come to with regard to the matter. The artist's original engagement was to make four designs for the glass mosaics; but that gentleman had since declined to continue to furnish them at the particular price then stated, and had himself withdrawn from the engagement. One grave objection to the glass mosaic was, that a comparatively small sum was paid for the work of art, while three or four times as much money was paid for putting the pieces of glass together to represent the original painting. That did not at first sight appear to be a good mode of advancing the highest class of art. Under these circumstances, it was open to the Committee to sanction the payment of the £500 proposed, in order that we might, with all the experience which had been obtained, make another effort to obtain a fresco panel. On the other hand, there were other modes of painting. For example, there was the method applied by Mr. Maclise, which it had been hoped would be better than the ordinary fresco; but, unfortunately, that gentleman's work had now begun absolutely to decay and peel off; consequently, the mode he adopted could not be repeated. The subject had been carefully considered by the chemist who had devoted much time to the question; but he had not yet made his final Report as to the steps to be taken for arresting the decay of the large cartoons. As to the "Judgment of Daniel," which was ordered several years ago to be painted by Mr. Herbert, while it was in an unfinished state the canvas unfortunately showed certain symptoms of swelling. Steps would be taken to remedy those defects, and a Vote would be proposed to enable him to finish that work. As to the Ladies' Gallery, the back seats were, no doubt, rather low, and he saw no reason why they should not be raised. As to the proposal to enlarge the House, which was recommended by a Committee up- 443 stairs, no hon. Member had asked the House to affirm the Resolution of the Committee. He thought the Chief Commissioner of Works should not propose to pull down that House for the purpose of building another, unless the House of Commons itself first resolved that that course was absolutely necessary for the carrying on of Public Business. His personal conviction was, that no such necessity existed. However inconvenient the present room might be, he believed a larger room would be found on the whole to be infinitely more inconvenient. Therefore he recommended the Committee not to adopt any change on that point. At all events, he would not initiate any change. It would be necessary to raise all the pinnacles on the building, and to re-fasten them so that they should not fall down. No doubt too many stones had been used in the construction of that building which exhibited signs of decay. Any stones, therefore, that might be found so defective that they ought to be removed would be removed, and the only thing that could be done to preserve stones from further decay was to coat them with a composition.

§ LORD ELCHO
said, it was somewhat strange that fresco painting had failed in that House, wherever it had been applied; and he wished to know whether it was intended to take out the panel which had been filled in with glass mosaic, and to substitute for it a fresco?

§ SIR WILLIAM TITE
said, a Committee sat upon the subject of the stone employed in the construction of the Houses of Parliament some three or four years ago. They examined some very eminent chemists, and various remedies were suggested for arresting the decay, but it was found that no good could be done by washing the stones with any solution or composition. The only thing available was to cut out the stone wherever it was found to be decaying.

§ MR. OSBORNE
said, he was of opinion that the time had arrived when the advocates of economy and the lovers of art might join together in putting an end to this diabolical system of voting money for these frescoes. He was surprised that his right hon. Friend, who was really one of the most careful guardians of the public purse, was not satisfied with the experience we had had of these frescoes. We had spent between 444 £40,000 and £50,000 in defacing these walls with the most expensive paintings, which were completely out of character with the building, quite forgetting the example of Venice, and the way in which her frescoes were destroyed by capillary attraction, as our frescoes would be destroyed in another 20 years. The frescoes painted by Maclise had cost £7,500 each, and they were painted by the water-glass process, which was supposed at the time to last for ever; but what was the result now? Why, in the painting of the meeting at La Belle Alliance, Blucher had become very nearly obliterated, and the famous nose of the Duke of Wellington was dropping from his face. The Commission of Fine Arts which sat for the decoration of the Houses of Parliament found rather an expensive plaything. Noble Lords and most noble Dukes went on holding meetings on the subject, although they were warned that the walls of this building were not adapted for fresco painting. And what was the consequence? Every fresco was now rotting off the walls. He believed his noble Friend opposite intended to ask the Committee to put a veto on this Vote of £500, and that was the only way to stop this fresco business. Moreover, with respect to the representation of our patron saints, we were in what the Americans would call "a tarnation tight fix." In the Central Hall we had got St. George and the Dragon in mosaics up near the roof, and he believed it would be found more expensive in the end to take down that patron saint, than to put up the other three patron saints under this Mosaic Dispensation. With regard to the advice given by the hon. Member for Bath (Sir William Tite) not to paint the stone outside the building, did hon. Members remember what happened when this building was about to be erected? There was actually a Geological Committee which sat before the stone was selected, and if anyone wanted to know what had come of their deliberations, he had only to walk out and look at the stone, and he would see that it was in much the same condition as the frescoes inside. He should like to know after that how it was possible to put any faith in professors? He was sure that some subsequent House of Commons would be called upon to cover the whole of the Houses of Parliament with a coat of 445 Roman cement? To return to the Central Hall, he hoped his noble Friend (Lord Elcho) would insist upon having a distinct answer to the question whether St. George and the Dragon was to remain there or not? Mr. Poynter was no doubt a very great artist and a man of taste; but he (Mr. Osborne) objected to pay him. The original contract was to put up three more patron saints in glass, but certain people objected to it that it was not possible; so it was not done, and it seemed to him that they were to utilize the artist in another way and get him to paint a fresco which no doubt would quickly drop off the walls, with the rest of these monuments of decayed art. The money might, in his opinion, be just as well thrown into the Thames. He moved that £500, the Vote for these frescoes, be disallowed.

§ LORD JOHN MANNERS
said, he was not certain that the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had given a correct version of what had been done about the selection of the stone. The Commission that had been appointed did not recommend the stone which was ultimately selected. The particular stone which they recommended was to be taken from the Roche Abbey Quarries in Yorkshire; but the stone actually used came from some quarries in the neighbourhood. With respect to the Central Hall, after the repeated failures that had occurred, it would be an extremely hazardous thing to set about painting frescoes again. And more than that, there would be a certain incongruity in having one panel filled with a mosaic and the other three with frescoes. At any rate, the panel opposite to St. George ought to be filled with a mosaic. As a matter of congruity and harmony, it would be better to have all the panels filled with mosaic, of the enduring qualities of which there could be no doubt.

§ LORD ELCHO
said, that his hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Osborne) had anticipated him in moving the Amendment. If the Committee, after having seen the signal failure of these frescoes, were to vote £500 for another, it would be a most mischievous proceeding. Under all 446 the circumstances, the best course to take would be to complete the whole of the panels in the Central Hall in the same style of decoration as had been already begun.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, the explanation of the matter was this—A number of eminent artists, Royal Academicians, having been asked for their opinion as to the decoration of the walls, made a Report which had been laid on the Table. In that Report they condemned certain modes of decoration, of which glass mosaic was one, on the ground that none of these modes really represented the work of the artist. ["Name, name!"] Among these gentlemen were Mr. Cope, Mr. Watts, Mr. Armitage, Mr. Ward, and Mr. Herbert, the very gentlemen who painted the frescoes, who were very conscious of their own failure, and therefore understood the matter better than anyone else. Those gentlemen having recorded their opinion, it was his duty to present their views to the consideration of the Committee. He himself would give no opinion on the subject. If the Committee was of opinion that Mr. Poynter would fail, he (Mr. Ayrton) was not one of those to urge upon the Committee to proceed with the proposed work, as he thought he had sufficiently discharged his duty by bringing the subject before the Committee.

§ MR. A. SEYMOUR
said, it would be a thousand pities to destroy almost the only indestructible work of art in the House, and nothing could be more foolish than to put up three other frescoes when those which they already had were tumbling to pieces. He should most decidedly vote with the noble Lord opposite upon the question, and trusted that before his right hon. Friend embarked in any more fresco painting, he would allow the Committee to see the paper from which he had been reading, and would take the opinion of other people besides artists?

§ MR. LOCKE
said, he could not approve of the condemnation passed both on the mosaic and the fresco by the hon. Member for Waterford. He was surprised, however, at the observation of the hon. Member who spoke last (Mr. A. Seymour), because some time ago he had approved of fresco on each side of the stained glass window at the west end of the Inner Temple Hall. Now, the Benchers of the Inner Temple had accu- 447 mulated much evidence as to the decoration of their Hall, and Mr. Poynter had told him that the mosaic in the Central Hall was a failure, that it was not properly executed, and that he would not recommend any more. Mr. Poynter suggested frescoes, and it seemed to be thought that, with new ingredients, frescoes could be made to last for ever. Glass had been put over the frescoes, which would undoubtedly preserve them, and it had been stated that it would be great extravagance to do away with the present decoration altogether, until they found whether or not some improvement could be made. He thought they ought to trust the right hon. Gentleman in this matter.

§ MR. COWPER - TEMPLE
said, he was quite ready to trust the Chief Commissioner, if the right hon. Gentleman had an opinion upon the subject; but, if he had not, it would be better to rely upon common sense. The report on the decay of the frescoes was very valuable. The decay had been only partial, and, in a great degree, arose from the impurity of colours; and the gentlemen who made the Report suggested various methods in which mistakes might be avoided in future: it would be safe and right to entrust able painters with the task of continuing the fresco painting where it had been commenced. It was important, however, to avoid any retrograde movement, and as they had begun with mosaics in the Central Hall, it was advisable to go on with the work. The mosaic decoration being in its infancy was capable of much improvement, and was admirably suited to large buildings; and, therefore, he hoped the decoration for the Central Hall would be finished in the style which had already been adopted.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, the Report of the Committee of eminent artists was laid on the Table and printed on February 12. He had asked their opinion upon the subject, because dissatisfaction had been expressed with the mosaic painting. Mr. Poynter had desired that some portions of it might be taken out, and other pieces substituted for it; but he thought such an attempt might not be successful. He did not wish to pledge himself to proceed exactly in the manner pursued with regard to this mosaic; but he thought it possible that they might complete the decoration of the 448 Central Hall in an improved style. If it was the wish of the Committee that that should be done, they had better strike out the item under discussion.

§ MR. BERESFORD HOPE
said, he must protest against the idea that by striking out this item, they would be substituting mere decoration for fine art; they were simply preferring one process of fine art to another. If it was supposed that the mistakes made in the frescoes might be avoided, was there not ground for expecting that the mosaics might also be improved?

§ MR. ALDERMAN LUSK
said, it was interesting to hear the authorities on art differing from each other. He had begun to find out that the art critics in that House were not such very distinguished authorities as he used to think they were, and he should like to see them, while they pretended to teach others, agreeing among themselves. He regretted that the Chief Commissioner did not persist in his intention of following the advice of the artists whose Report he had received.

§ MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK
said, he understood that Dr. Salviati was not satisfied with the execution of the work, therefore the most reasonable thing seemed to him to be that before they discontinued it, they should try if it would not succeed when the work was better executed. Let them see whether on the Continent, and more especially at Rome, improved methods could not be found of dealing with the subject.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, that there was great difficulty in going on with the glass mosaic, because Mr. Poynter declined to proceed with the designs; so that the whole matter must be carefully considered, even assuming that they went on with the decoration of the Central Hall.

§ LORD ELCHO
said, that a Committee had been named to decide on the best mode of copying a portion of the cartoons, with a view of their being made more generally known, and he thought some very useful suggestions bearing on the question with which the Committee was dealing might come out of that inquiry.

§ MR. BAILLIE COCHRANE
said, he wished to point out the great disadvantage there was in not having a comprehensive plan in dealing with those buildings. There was a sum of £37,000 on the Estimates for the annual hire of offices, which represented a capital of about £1,600,000, and if buildings had been erected for that sum most admirable offices might be secured for the money which was now expended in the shape of rent. He wished to know when the houses in Parliament Street in front of the new offices would be taken down, and whether they had been purchased?

§ MR. AYRTON
, in reply, said, that the £37,000 referred to by the hon. Member was laid out on the hire of offices not only in other parts of the metropolis, but in the country, which offices could not possibly be concentrated in Parliament Street. This Vote was for the completion of buildings now in course of erection on land acquired under several Acts of Parliament, and, therefore, they were only proceeding within the limits of the authority already given by Parliament in reference to the space between Whitehall Place and Charles Street. All the houses between Charles Street and Whitehall Place would be pulled down as soon as the new Home and Colonial Offices were complete. At present, they screened the works in progress, and were useful as offices for persons who must be in the neighbourhood. When those houses had been pulled down, the space they now occupied would belong to the Crown, and it would be competent to Parliament to deal with it as might be thought proper. But it did not follow that the ground would be given to the public of of the metropolis as a street, because that would bring all the noise and turmoil of the street close under the windows of the public offices. ["Oh, oh!"] Probably the space would be reserved. There was, however, a moral claim on the part of the parish to have as much space added to Parliament Street as the parish formerly occupied with King Street, and the claim would have to be aken into consideration. Still, he had no authority to give the space to anybody, for it belonged really to the House of Commons or the Crown.

§ MR. BAILLIE COCHRANE
said, that what he had complained of was that there was no comprehensive plan in 450 dealing with those improvements, and that the right hon. Gentleman did not know, even now, what he intended to do with the space. The noise of carriages passing would be heard as much in the offices if the space was planted with trees as if it was thrown into the street.

§ MR. AYRTON
replied, that all he proposed to do was to carry out the provisions of the Acts of Parliament on the subject. This property had been acquired under Acts of Parliament, and if anything more was required new Acts of Parliament would have to be passed for the purpose.

§ MR. LOCKE
said, he should like to know whether the Department of Works would inform the House, when the buildings in Parliament Street were pulled down, what they proposed to do with the vacant space? He was all the more anxious to have information on this point, because of the course which had been taken with respect to the reclaimed land on the Thames Embankment. The Government had misbehaved themselves in that matter, and would not make any alteration although a Committee of the House had decided what should be done. They had appointed another Committee on the subject, and the result would presently be seen. Was a large brick wall to be built in front of the new offices, or was the open space to be made use of for the purpose of widening the street?

§ LORD JOHN MANNERS
said, the complaint of the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight (Mr. B. Cochrane) was founded on strict justice. It was impossible for great public works to be commenced in a particular method by one Government and carried on in a totally different way by their successors without the greatest possible public inconvenience. But in this instance, the position was even worse, because the change of policy had taken place during the existence of the present Ministry. A scheme was prepared by a Commission appointed by Lord Russell's Government for laying out the whole of this land, and concentrating all the public offices on the long line extending from the Admiralty down to George Street, and that plan was adopted, and the necessary notices given by the late Government. When Mr. Disraeli's Government went out of office a Bill 451 was brought in, which was backed by the names of the present Chancellor of the Exchequer and Mr. Layard, for carrying out the major part of that plan, the execution of which would have obviated the complaints now made by the hon. Member for the Isle of Wight. That Bill, however, was entirely shelved, and now the Chief Commissioner declined to state what was to be done with the line of houses immediately in front of the new buildings. When the Chief Commissioner stated that what was being done was carried out under Acts of Parliament and Votes, agreed to by that House, he must remind the right hon. Gentleman that those Acts were passed and those Votes obtained by the Ministers of the Crown in accordance with certain maps and plans produced for the satisfaction of Parliament, and Parliament was induced to sanction the Bill of 1865 on the distinct understanding that Parliament Street was to be widened by the whole breadth of the land purchased under the various Acts, and not required for the buildings. It was to be regretted that when the whole of the block of houses in question might at one time have been purchased at what would at the present moment be considered a moderate price, this piecemeal policy should have been entered upon, and that a miserable set of houses should be left standing in what might otherwise be one of the finest approaches to the Houses of Parliament, and the Abbey at Westminster.

VISCOUNT BURY
remarked that the question was whether the right hon. Gentleman had any comprehensive plan at all, and, if so, when would it be laid on the Table of the House, for they were now within one year of the actual completion of the works. They ought, therefore, to take care how they parted with the control of public expenditure in the matter, and to know whether one of the greatest alterations made in recent years was to be an improvement or not. He was surprised to hear the right hon. Gentleman say either that he had no plan, or that he declined to produce one; and in order to persuade the right hon. Gentleman to give the Committee all the information possible, he should be prepared to move a very material reduction of the Vote.

§ DR. BREWER
said, it was for the House to determine what should be done 452 with the acquired land, and he asked whether it would not be possible to throw the whole of it into Parliament Street? They could not hesitate to vote what was necessary for the widening of the street, as the object was of an Imperial rather than of a local character.

MR. GOLDSMID
said, that the question was whether the understanding that all the space not required for the public offices should be thrown into Parliament Street ought not to be carried out. The original plan should be carried out for the sake both of the public and of the Government offices themselves.

§ MR. COWPER-TEMPLE
said, he was rather alarmed at the suggestion thrown out by the Chief Commissioner of Works, that Crown property might not, like other property, be used for the public advantage. The extent of public thoroughfare that had been lost by stopping up part of King Street had to be replaced in Parliament Street; and although the whole of the street could not be widened by the present plan, the widening of half its length would be an important gain in beauty and convenience. He hoped to hear some satisfactory explanation of the right hon. Gentleman's remarks, for he was curious to know at what they could be pointed. The great thoroughfare between Trafalgar Square and the Houses of Parliament ought to be widened, whether from local or from Imperial funds. He hoped the Government would have no difficulty in stating their views upon the subject.

§ MR. ALDERMAN LUSK
thought the Committee had been a little hard on the Chief Commissioner of Works, for it was not so much his business to say what he was going to do as for the Committee to say what ought to be done. It would be imprudent in the Chief Commissioner to assume the functions of the House of Commons, and decide important points like this, and the Committee ought not to press the matter.

§ MR. M. CHAMBERS
said, the Committee had been asked to vote £100,000, and for what? This was an estimate of the amount required during the current year for the erection of new offices in Fludyer Street. The hon. Member for the Isle of Wight (Mr. B. Cochrane) had argued that Parliament had been extravagant and incautious with regard to purchases of property for the public offices, yet what were the facts? Forty 453 years ago the Government purchased Downing Street, which was for many years in a dilapidated and uninhabited condition; when suddenly there was a resolve that something should be done; a magnificent scheme for building public offices was drawn up, and afterwards the House of Commons was called upon to vote the money to carry out the plan. If, however, sufficient property for any public improvement was not taken at first, when more was required it could only be obtained at a price beyond that which it would have fetched originally. No doubt this money would have to be voted; but the demand afforded a fair opportunity for commenting on the folly of a Department planning a grand scheme, and then running away from it on account of the great expense, which had been the evil in this case. The Chief Commissioner ought to have been prepared to tell the Committee what he was going to do with the land in question, and his statement that the land was not to be thrown into the open street was not and ought not to be satisfactory to hon. Members, whose duty it was to see how the public money was expended. He did not wish to cause embarrassment to his right hon. Friend; but the House ought to have the power of saying—"You shall not have the money unless you tell us what is to become of the land."

§ MR. AYRTON
said, the discussion had travelled very wide of the real question before the Committee, which had reference simply to the voting of money for the new Home and Colonial Office, for the erection of which, on the faith of former Votes of the House, contracts had been entered into, the works had been commenced, and the money now asked for was for the purpose of paying the contractors. The complaints made as to the non-dedication of lands to the public should be addressed to his predecessors, who had not thought proper to insert the necessary clauses for securing their object in the Acts under which the site was acquired. Not long ago the parochial authorities called on him to ask whether he was not going to widen Parliament Street. He asked them to point out the sections in the Acts requiring that to be done; they, of course, were unable to point to any such directions, but they thought that perhaps he might do it. He, however, had no power to give away 454 the lands which Parliament had bought. The houses were still standing on those lands, and were occupied as offices. When the lands were cleared, then would be the time for whatever Government was in office to decide what should be done with the site. For his own part, he felt no embarrassment and no responsibility in the matter; the time for dealing with it had not yet arrived. He had not prejudiced or predetermined the matter in any way; he left it a perfectly open question. The local authorities seemed to consider that they had an equitable claim to have the breadth of King Street added to Parliament Street. When the proper time arrived, whoever then held the office entrusted to him, would deal with that question according to every principle of justice which could be quoted. The noble Lord opposite (Lord John Manners) was quite wrong in supposing that he had departed from any plans proposed by his predecessors; the plan on which the new buildings were proceeding had indeed been reconsidered by the architect, but the ground plan was precisely the same as that settled by his predecessor in office. As regarded metropolitan improvements, he would remind hon. Members that there was a far greater power than the Chief Commissioner of Works, and that was the Metropolitan Board.

§ LORD ELCHO
admitted that the question as to the land did not arise immediately out of the Vote for the new Home and Colonial Office, but thought it was closely connected with it. His right hon. Friend, in fact, admitted this, when he said that the future occupant of the office which he now held would have to decide the question whenever the land was cleared. This course was too characteristic of all our legislation, which proceeded in a happy-go-lucky, hap-hazard spirit, upon the assumption that sufficient for the day is the good or evil thereof. Had the scheme of that great ædile, Sir Benjamin Hall, been carried out at the time it was proposed, the land would have been acquired at a price which, in these days, would be considered moderate, whereas matters had been deferred from year to year, till at last no one exactly knew what was being done. With a view of rendering matters more intelligible, Mr. Layard, now our Minister at Madrid, caused a great model to be prepared for exhibition to Members in the conference 455 —now the dining—room of the House of Commons; and if by this or similar means Parliament were enabled to judge of the schemes for public works in progress or in contemplation, the present difficulty would never have arisen. That difficulty arose from this—that a space of land was to be cleared, and the Chief Commissioner of Works told them that his successor would be able to judge how to deal with the land, and that the Government then existing would deal with it on principles of justice. But this was not what was now wanted. What was wanted was that some clear and intelligible system of action should be laid down—not that land should wait until it became vacant, and then be dealt with, in the words of his right hon. Friend, "according to every principle of justice."

§ MR. M'LAREN
said, that all hon. Members who had spoken seemed to him to have missed the real question. The point whether this space should be thrown into a street had been discussed, and there seemed to be great unanimity of opinion that it ought to be, but the question who should pay for it had never been broached. He held that street improvements ought to be paid for by the Metropolitan Board of Works, and that the people of Ireland and Scotland ought not to be taxed for them. He would put an analogous case. The right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government had, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, agreed to have Industrial Museums in the three capitals of the kingdom—London, Dublin, and Edinburgh. When the time arrived for carrying out the improvement the Government opposed the erection of the Museum in Edinburgh unless the people agreed to pay the expense of widening the street from 25 to 70 feet. He was one of a deputation who urged him not only to erect the building but to widen the approach to it; the right hon. Gentleman, however, declined to do so, and the result was that the City of Edinburgh had to widen the street from 25 to 70 feet, at an expense of £30,000 or £40,000. If that was the right principle applicable to the North, why was it not applicable to the South—to the City of Westminster as well as the City of Edinburgh? And why should not the Board of Works in the metropolis do what was done by the people of Edinburgh—make the road at their own expense? He said that the rather be- 456 cause so much pressure was occasionally brought to bear upon the Government in relation to the Embankment and other improvements in the metropolis, which ought not to be paid for out of the general taxation.

§ MR. BERESFORD HOPE
said, he was satisfied that a very large sum of money now voted for the rent of public offices might have been saved if a proper systematic plan for rebuilding them had been adopted at first. The present complication would have been avoided if Parliament had been called upon for a certain sum of money to carry out a fixed mass of buildings capable of decently housing the public offices of the country—say, a new Home and Colonial Office, as well as a National Gallery and a Royal Academy.

§ MR. RYLANDS
said, a question had been raised—what was to be done with a certain amount of land which had been purchased by the nation when the houses which at present stood on it had been removed? But what was the object of discussing that question now? When the time came for the buildings to be cleared away, then it would be for Parliament to decide what was to be done with the vacant space. His right hon. Friend, if he should remain in office—as he hoped he would for many years to come—could not take any further step in the matter without the express sanction of Parliament. The metropolis must be looked at as a sort of Imperial concern, and he thought the question should not now be pressed.

§ LORD ELCHO
still maintained the opinion he had expressed that it would have been better for the public if the whole plan of these buildings had been laid before Parliament and nothing left to hap-hazard.

§ MR. CANDLISH
said, he objected to hon. Members in Committee of Supply airing any mortal crotchet they wished. He wished to ask the Chief Commissioner of Works, whether the building for the Home and Colonial Office would be completed for the sum originally estimated—namely, £285,000?

§ LORD ELCHO
expressed his regret that the hon. Member for Sunderland should have thought it right to make remarks which amounted to a censure upon the conduct of the Chairman of Committees.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, that the contract made was such as to fully justify the conclusion that the work would be carried out for the estimated cost; but, owing to the recent strikes, the progress of the building was now stopped, and any observations he made now must be accepted subject to what might happen in the future.

§ MR. COWPER - TEMPLE
asked, whether the area of the new building was such that there would be space enough to admit of the concentration of all the national pictures, including those that were at South Kensington or elsewhere?

§ MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCK
said, that was another instance of the disappearance of a comprehensive scheme. Some years ago, when the idea was that the National Gallery was to be permanently enlarged, schemes and designs were placed before a Committee, and Mr. Barry was appointed architect; but he was informed that nothing was being contracted for now but certain ugly plain brick galleries. Was it intended to stop there, or was a building to be produced which would be worthy of the nation? If not, we should have another example of the works of one Government abandoned by the next, and of an ulterior expenditure greater than it need have been.

§ MR. M. CHAMBERS
said, he should like to know whether space would be provided for pictures over and above those already possessed by the nation, because he believed there were many pictures in the hands of private owners who would present them to the nation if due provision were made for exhibiting them. For instance, he had one by Sir Joshua Reynolds which he would gladly give to the nation if it could be hung in a proper place in the National Gallery; and he had reason to believe there were others who would also enrich the national collection if it were likely that their pictures would be properly exhibited.

§ MR. BERESFORD HOPE
said, he should be glad to understand whether the money now asked for would be spent in such additions to the National Gallery as could afterwards be incorporated into any new building which it might be decided to erect, or whether they would be mere temporary erections for the passing necessities of the day?

§ MR. AYRTON
said, that the additions to the National Gallery had been expressly designed in such a manner that, while they were intended to be permanent in themselves, they would also be capable of being incorporated into any structure that might hereafter take the place of the present National Gallery. They were planned on a scale that was considered sufficiently large for the immediate wants of the Gallery, and for any that were likely to arise for some time to come; and he could therefore assure his hon. and learned Friend (Mr. M. Chambers) that no difficulty would be interposed to the acceptance of the picture which he had been good enough to offer to the nation. There would also be ample room for any other treasures of art that the friends of his hon. and learned Friend might be disposed to present to the collection.

§ MR. RYLANDS
wished to know whether the new buildings would be fire proof?

§ MR. AYRTON
said, that the new buildings would be fire proof, and that great precautions had been taken to prevent the pictures in the present building from being destroyed or injured by fire.

§ MR. BERESFORD HOPE
said, he did not wish to oppose the Vote, but would merely remark to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh (Mr. M'Laren) that it showed that expenditure of large sums for public buildings was not confined to London.

§ MR. M'LAREN
said, that in the absence of the hon. Members for Glasgow, he wished to explain that this Vote was the result of a bargain entered into between the inhabitants of Glasgow and the Treasury. The inhabitants undertook to raise £120,000 if the Treasury 459 contributed an equal sum. The amount raised in Glasgow considerably exceeded the sum originally fixed, and if the hon. Gentleman would look at a Return which he (Mr. M'Laren) obtained a few years ago, he would find that the proportion of the taxation paid by Scotland was more than any return which she got in this or in any other way out of the national Exchequer.

§ MR. BERESFORD HOPE
said, that this was another proof of the assistance given out of the Imperial funds to the public buildings of Scotland. He should like to know how much Edinburgh had subscribed as a rate in aid?

§ MR. M'LAREN
said, the Treasury laid it down as a condition that the street 25 feet wide, opposite the Museum, should be made 70 feet wide. That the local authorities had done at a cost of £40,000.

§ LORD ELCHO
remarked that on a former occasion the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Hampshire proposed that the National Gallery should be removed to Burlington House, and that the Royal Academy should be left in possession of the present National Gallery, on the understanding that they were to put a new front to it, and make it an ornament to the metropolis. His hon. Friend opposite was aware that this plan was defeated by a party vote.

§ MR. CANDLISH
believed the statement of the noble Lord was substantially true, but remarked that, generally speaking, matters of art or science were not made party questions.

§ MR. BERESFORD HOPE
expressed a hope that the right hon. Gentleman would give some explanation of the delay which had occurred in completing the new Post Office buildings at St. Martin's-le-Grand?

§ MR. MACFIE
complained of the want of sufficient postal and telegraphic accommodation at Leith.

§ MR. WHITWELL
wished to know whether the Post Office proceeded on any definite rules in determining what towns should have new buildings? The accommodation at Kendal was very insufficient for the amount of business transacted.

§ MR. RYLANDS
said, there was not suitable post office accommodation at Warrington. Care ought to be taken that proper post office buildings were erected in all large boroughs.

§ MR. AYRTON
replied, that it could hardly be said that any definite rule existed in regard to the erection of new post office buildings. There was however, no favouritism, and the urgency of each individual case was taken into consideration. Generally speaking, it might be said that the Post Office authorities and the Board of Works did not build if they could possibly avoid doing so; and that they did not purchase premises if they could hire them at a reasonable rent. The contract for the great work of the new Post Office in St. Martin's-le-Grand was to have been completed on the 31st of December last; but great difficulty was experienced at the commencement of the work in procuring the granite required for the foundation of the building. There was, consequently, some delay in beginning the work, and this circumstance had prevented its being completed in the specified period. The building, he regretted to say, was not likely to be ready for occupation for some little time to come. He believed the delay could not have been avoided by the contractor, and therefore it was not deemed necessary to take any severe steps against him.

§ LORD ELCHO
remarked that the requirements of Sunderland had been carefully considered in the present Estimate.

§ MR. CANDLISH
said, the expenditure at Sunderland arose from the Post Office having been ill-advised enough to buy an old shop, as also from the increase of population and the addition of telegraphic business.

VISCOUNT BURY
hoped the Berwick Post Office would be remembered next year.

§ MR. M. CHAMBERS
said, he thought a great deal too much money was spent upon post office buildings in different 461 parts of the country. He noticed that they were asked to vote £5,000 for Colchester, £9,500 for Newcastle-on-Tyne, and £3,000 for Rochdale; and he wanted to know what course the Government adopted when it was proposed to build or enlarge a country post office? His impression was that, in most cases, the buildings might be erected for one-half the cost charged in the Estimates.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, that the hon. and learned Gentleman had certainly been speaking from imagination, and assured him that every case of the kind was as carefully investigated as any case which he was called upon to plead. It must not be supposed that the expenditure originated with the inhabitants, for though requests were sometimes made to the Department, the reply always given was that they would be considered, meaning that they would not be considered as regarded local wishes, but would be considered in connection with the postal service. The surveyor of the Post Office reported on the requirements of each case, his report being considered by the Office of Works as well as by the Postmaster General, the surveyor of the former considering the matter in the light of economy of construction, and preparing the plans. Great care was taken that the exigencies of the Department were not exceeded, and these did not depend merely on the population, for a place might be an important centre of transmission and distribution, and yet have little local business. In cases where the largest expenditure was proposed, the building was for Inland Revenue as well as postal purposes, the two being combined when this could be done advantageously. The Surveyor of Works took care that the cost of these buildings was not excessive.

§ MR. RYLANDS
inquired whether this Vote would complete the expenditure at present authorized upon the buildings at South Kensington?

§ MR. AYRTON
stated that the cost of the buildings at South Kensington would 462 be kept strictly within the original estimate of £195,000. He must, however, express his fear that when those buildings were completed, a further large expenditure would be required to render them sightly, they being very unsightly at present.

VISCOUNT BURY
said, he had a Motion on the Paper that night to call attention to the present state of the Ordnance Survey; but with the House so thinly attended as it then was, he would not take the course he otherwise would have done, and he would therefore confine himself to asking for information. The course of the survey hitherto had not run very smoothly, it having been declared "no child of mine" by various Departments, and he must therefore congratulate the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Commissioner of Works on the prosperous state which the survey had attained now that it had been taken up by his Department, where it bade fair to have a less stormy career than had previously attended it. The old 1-inch map of Great Britain begun in 1801, and which was the only one which had been completed, was found on examination to be so utterly inaccurate that it was impossible to improve it. In 1861 a Select Committee was appointed on that subject, which sat for two long Sessions and to which 14 thick Blue Books, besides other documents, were referred. The Committee digested the information thus placed before them, and recommended that Great Britain and Ireland should be surveyed on a scale of 25 inches to the mile. Since then that survey on the 25-inch scale had been continued, and there were also a 6-inch plan and a 1-inch map to be prepared pari passu with it. He should now confine himself merely to asking two questions. First, whether, as the 25-inch survey descended from the North down into a part of Yorkshire, and as it also ascended from the South up as far as the Thames, it was proposed to continue it pari passu along with the 6-inch plan and the 1-inch map? It had been thought it would be better to tinker up the old 1-inch map: but that map, having been constructed 463 with reference not to any one meridian but to three different meridians was, as he had intimated, stupendously inaccurate, and even if they were out hunting and wanted to find their way home it was very seldom they would find the road they wished to travel laid down on it as the right place. He therefore urged on the Government the absolute necessity—if they had not already decided on doing so—of proceeding with the 6-inch plan and the 1-inch map pari passu with the execution of the 25-inch survey. The Committee of 1861 recommended that a uniform sum yearly should be devoted to that work, and that it should be £90,000. They added, however, that the work would be much more rapidly done if £120,000 were voted. The Vote this year was over £125,000, and he was informed that at the present rate of progress the survey would be completed in nine or ten years on the three scales. He thought his right hon. Friend had exercised a wise discretion in bringing up the Vote to its present amount, and congratulated him upon the progress made in the survey. Great credit was also due to Sir Henry James for the admirable way in which the survey had been made; it was regarded throughout Europe as a model of scientific work. He should like to hear some account of the circumstances under which the survey was transferred from one Department of the State to another.

§ MR. HERMON
said, it was of no use to have the survey unless some use could be made of it. Great difficulty was experienced in obtaining these maps in the country, and he would suggest that through the Post Office sets of the maps should be placed on sale in the various localities.

§ MR. WREN-HOSKYNS
said, he very much regretted that when he recently brought this subject before the House, he had not carried his Motion to a division, for he had found throughout the country a great desire that the survey should proceed at a more rapid rate. Ireland had, perhaps, the most beautiful map in the world. It was so received at the Congress at Brussels, but while Ireland was done part on the 1-inch and part on the 6-inch scale, and Scotland had been done on the 25-inch scale, the survey in England was, as the noble Lord had said, to a large extent "stu- 464 pendously inaccurate," and as to many of our counties we were in a state of Cimmerian darkness. It was time to claim justice to England. Ours was the only country in Europe, except Greece, which had not a cadastral map, by means of which its land transfer could be accomplished. By a small increase in the staff he believed the survey could be completed in five or six years; but as matters stood he doubted whether the noble Lord was justified in assuming that it would be completed in nine years. He had been told in this House that the work would still occupy 13 years.

§ MR. STEVENSON
said, he concurred with the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Hermon), that it was difficult to find an Ordnance map in any country district, and thought that if the Government engaged in the manufacture of maps, they should make the same arrangements which other map producers did to get rid of them, by allowing local stationers and others an adequate commission upon the sale.

§ MR. WHALLEY
supported the appeal which had been made for the utmost possible despatch in completing this work, which had up to the present time been executed in an admirable manner. It was impossible to proceed with sanitary works and numerous social reforms for the want of good reliable maps, and, therefore, no consideration could be urged superior to that of a speedy and economical completion of these maps.

§ MR. WHITWELL
said, he had found that even in the metropolis it was difficult to procure the Ordnance maps. The Local Government Board ought to press for the completion of this work, since without the maps it would be impossible for Local Boards to execute the sewerage and other works which the Public Health Bill would require them to carry out.

§ LORD ELCHO
said, he regarded the delay in this matter as owing to the faulty action of the House of Commons. Those who were conversant with it would recollect that after the Government which had charge of it had collected the opinions of those who were most competent to advise, an appeal was made to the House on the absurd argument that the sheets, if joined together, would cover so many acres, and the House carried away by that speech de- 465 cided to give up the cadastral survey. A Royal Commission was, however, moved for in the House of Lords, and that Commission decided in its favour. So that this House owed to the action of the other that which hon. Members were now anxious to have completed with all speed. A complaint had been made that England was behindhand in this matter, but the reason was, that she was beforehand when it was commenced. As regarded Scotland, there were now only three counties remaining to be finished on the largest scale, and as one of them was the county in which the capital was situate, a very strong feeling prevailed that the survey should be completed, and that desire was only reasonable.

§ MR. F. S. POWELL
said, he wished to join his entreaties with those of hon. Members opposite in urging upon the Government the necessity of active and vigorous energy in this matter. It was a disgrace to them to be so far behind other countries in the completion of their surveys. There was no person, however, but must admit that as far as they had gone they had the most beautiful map in the world, and that a survey so well mapped out as that was, was really an addition to our national resources. It was well calculated to make our people well acquainted with the great power of this country and its wonderful facilities for mining and other enterprising operations. It appeared to him, however, to be highly necessary that our Local Board districts, our Poor Law Unions, and our numerous railways should be distinctly marked or laid down upon the maps. He concurred with the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Wren-Hoskyns) as to the importance of this subject in connection with the transfer of land. He knew the value of these maps in Yorkshire, where the 6-inch survey was completed, and he was anxious that other counties should possess the same advantage.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, in reply to his noble Friend (Viscount Bury), who asked how he had got charge of that particular business, he would say that he had undertaken it in conformity with the wish of the Government, and under the authority of an Act of Parliament which, he had himself introduced. With respect to the other questions put to him, he should be sorry to re-open the question of the scale, which had been 466 settled years ago. He thought that the best thing they could now do was to adhere to the survey upon the basis which had up to this time been followed. With regard to the time necessary to complete this great work—proceeding upon the fact that £1,400,000 was to be the whole cost—it would take 14 years from April, 1870, at the rate of £100,000 a-year that had hitherto been voted for the purpose, to have the entire work completed—or 12 years from the present time. The Estimate for the present year, however, was £127,000, but only £100,000 of this was for the actual survey, the balance representing special services undertaken for various other Departments. As to the scale—the wild, and uncultivated, and mountainous parts of the country would be on the 6-inch scale; and all the cultivated and better inhabited parts on the 25-inch scale of map. As to accelerating the survey, that no doubt might be done by adding a large number of men to the present staff of operators, which, of course, would demand a much larger grant every year. That was a question simply of finance. In reference to the sale of maps when published, that was a question of much difficulty. No one trader would undertake to supply the Ordnance maps on the condition of having in hand such a one as every purchaser required. At one time it was gravely considered whether the Post Office might not be made the means of selling and distributing those maps. But when it was recollected that the performance of the duty properly would entail a considerable amount of knowledge, it was felt that such a duty would be quite inconsistent with the system under which the Post Office clerks were appointed. The Government since then fell back upon another proposal—namely, that of having special agents for the purpose throughout the country. That, however, was a subject which required further consideration. If it could be adopted, it seemed to him to be the best mode of facilitating the sale and distribution of the maps throughout the country. There should, of course, be a central depât established in order to carry out this proposal. When the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. F. S. Powell) spoke of having all the railways and the recent changes in the country corrected by these maps, he seemed not to be aware of the 467 difficulties of making those corrections and the magnitude of the task which they would impose. It appeared to him (Mr. Ayrton) to be much better for them to bring the present enterprize to a conclusion before they embarked in any other. His noble Friend (Viscount Bury) asked whether they were going to reproduce a 1-inch map for the supersession of the existing map. In reply, he (Mr. Ayrton) would tell him that that was a serious undertaking, but it was under the attention of the Government. He had every wish to proceed with the survey as rapidly as possible, but it could only be accelerated in proportion to the amount of money voted towards the work from year to year.

§ LORD ELCHO
said, he must still ask what course it was intended to take with regard to those counties in Scotland—Fifeshire, Mid Lothian, and East Lothian—which had been referred to, the survey of which, on the cadastral scale, had not yet been completed?

§ MR. AYRTON
said, that all the counties which came within the description given would come within the survey on that scale, but he could not say when the work would be done. That must be left very much to the discretion of the director of the survey, who was the best judge of the matter. Those counties, however, which were mineral or commercial, would have a preference over purely agricultural ones.

§ LORD ELCHO
said, he wished to have a more distinct answer. What the counties of Scotland wished to know was, when the proper time for surveying them would come? Were their surveys to be stopped until the whole of England had been surveyed?

VISCOUNT BURY
said, he did not think his noble Friend had a right to raise a cry of injustice to Scotland, when the whole of the agricultural parts of Scotland had been surveyed on a 25 and 6-inch scale, but some of the counties of England had not been surveyed on any scale. It was a necessity for England to have at least a 1-inch map. The Committee over which he presided recommended a 25-inch scale, but their only reason for doing so was that it could be published on any scale that might be desired. If his right hon. Friend would not give England a 1-inch map, then the Vote of £100,000 for a survey this year, as well as the like 468 expenditure for the last 10 or 15 years, would be perfectly useless.

§ MR. STEPHEN CAVE
said, that all the parts of the new map should be published together as nearly at the same time as possible, or people would hesitate before buying it from not knowing which were the recent, and which the new portions. He suggested that it would be advantageous and economical to reinforce the sappers and miners now engaged in the survey by the necessary number of civilians competent to perform it.

§ COLONEL BARTTELOT
urged the importance of expediting the publication of the survey. It was essential not only for private but for strategic purposes, scarcely a road being laid down correctly in the old survey.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, he should be happy to answer any specific question which the noble Lord (Lord Elcho) would put to him, but he could not tell him the exact time when the survey of the Scottish counties he referred to would be taken in hand. To his noble Friend (Viscount Bury) he would say that until the Treasury had come to a decision as to reducing the 25-inch map to a 1-inch map, he could not say anything further on that point. As to employing civilians, upwards of 1,000 were already employed, the military force being comparatively small.

§ MR. WHITWELL
asked for an explanation of the charge for Dover Har- 469 bour. The Vote required was £4,000, and the charges were stated at £2,200.

§ MR. BAXTER
said, he was happy to be able to inform the Committee that the works at Holyhead were so far complete that the charge would disappear from the Estimates in a year or two. In fact, he expected that by that time the whole Vote would disappear. The charge for harbours, in fact, had been reduced from £67,000 to £35,000 by the abandonment of the Alderney works, a decision that had received the general approval of Parliament. With regard to Dover, a very large portion of the cost of maintenance and salaries was paid for by the railway companies. In the course of the year that expenditure would also be got rid of. The receipts at Dover were estimated at £1,000 per annum, and at Holyhead £1,500 per annum, and he believed those amounts would be found adequate for the maintenance of the two harbours.

§ MR. MUNTZ
congratulated the Committee on the probability that these Votes would so soon disappear from the Estimates. The hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Treasury had omitted to answer the question put to him relative to the consulting engineer at Holyhead, and unless the Committee divided upon the question, he was afraid they would find the charge in next year's Estimates.

§ MR. BAXTER
reminded the Committee that the works at Holyhead were very important, and that they would be finished this year, so that the consulting engineer would disappear.

§ MR. CANDLISH
recommended the withdrawal of the Amendment, after the satisfying statement of the Secretary to the Treasury. He was glad to observe in the Vote an item of £360 for maintaining a light on the Island of Alderney, and would congratulate the shipping interest on the fact of this Vote being the precursor of the intention of the nation to relieve the shipping interest of about one-third of a million they had annually to pay for the maintenance of lights around our coast.

§ MR. GOLDNEY
wished to know whether the consulting engineer at Holyhead would be continued after the completion of the works? Dover harbour had been constructed in an efficient manner without the aid of a consulting engineer.

§ MR. BAXTER
said, he would undertake that before next year the whole Vote should be revised, and he hoped it would not appear again, at all events, not in this form and to this extent.

§ LORD ELCHO
said, it should not be forgotten that the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Candlish), who had hailed with so much pleasure the Vote of £360 in the Estimates for the maintenance of a light at Alderney, and who looked upon it as the precursor of a charge of £360,000 being placed on the nation, was a great economist and a Member for a seaport town. It was, therefore, necessary that the Committee should be informed whether it was a permanent or a temporary charge.

§ COLONEL BARTTELOT
asked for an explanation of the charge of £100 for St. Catherine, Jersey.

§ MR. BAXTER
said, it was a charge for the maintenance of a light about which there was some dispute between the Treasury and the Board of Trade as to what fund it should be charged on. The light at Alderney had been left on the Estimate in consequence of the hurried manner in which the works there were closed.

§ MR. STEPHEN CAVE
said, it would be as well that the Committee should be informed in what state Alderney harbour had been left, because he had been informed it was in a dangerous state, and that the danger was likely to be increased every year. Was the light wanted to warn shipping of danger, or was it placed there as an ordinary light to guide ships safely into the harbour?

§ MR. BAXTER
said, the House had unanimously declined to vote the money which had been reported to be requisite, and the Government, therefore, did not press the Vote. The harbour was now, he believed, in a dangerous state; but it had never been otherwise, and in his opinion no money which could in reason be spent upon it would make it safe. He hoped no attempt would be made to reverse the decision of last year.

§ MR. DAVIES
said, that under the circumstances he would not divide the Committee upon his Amendment.

§ MR. MUNTZ
said, he felt convinced that unless the Committee divided the whole thing would be forgotten, and the sum would appear next year in the Estimates as usual.

MR. PEEL
said, there was every reason to believe that before the close of the financial year these works would be completed, and that no further charge would have to be made on the Estimates for construction.

§ MR. GOLDNEY
asked whether, when the works were completed, the consulting engineers would be retained?

§ MR. BAXTER
Certainly not.

§ MR. GOLDNEY
wished to know to what Department it belonged? He always understood it belonged to the Army.

§ MR. BAXTER
said, it had been entirely handed over to the Navy.

§ MR. J. GOLDSMID
wanted to be informed when this memorial would be completed? He had been told that the certificates of Mr. Hunt and Captain Galton as to the progress of the work were not altogether satisfactory.

§ MR. BAXTER
thought it would be finished within a reasonable times.

§ MR. HERMON
suggested the postponement of the Vote till inquiries were made upon this point.

§ MR. J. GOLDSMID
said, that seeing the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his place, he now hoped the right hon. Gentleman could give the House and the country some information on the subject.

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
replied that he could give no information beyond that which he had supplied to the House on a recent occasion.