SUPPLY-CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES. (Hansard, 6 April 1877)

§ MR. DILLWYN
said, that there was a very large increase in this Vote. It began very moderately with a sum of £2,000, and it had gone on growing, growing, growing ever since.

§ MR. EDWARD JENKINS
remarked that these Votes were taken under a Treasury Letter, dated May 24, 1866, which, in addition to a previous expenditure of £119,000, authorized a further expenditure of £195,000. The House ought to be informed how much of that sum had been already taken. One of the items in the present Vote was £3,000 for the enlargement of a sketch by Mr. Leighton, and he thought some explanation on that subject was duo to the House. He complained of the manner in which the accounts of the Science and Art Department were presented to Parliament. They were not submitted to Parliament, as was the case with the British Museum. It was a Chinese puzzle to him to know how this money had been spent.

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
gave some explanations as to the purposes for which the different items were intended. £1,390 was required to decorate the Refreshment Room, the South Court, and the Lecture Theatre, the other item of £1,320 was to discharge outstanding claims in respect of decorative works on the Lecture staircase.

§ MR. BARING
objected to Votes which seemed only proposed for the purpose of gratifying the extravagant whims of the original designer.

§ MR. MELLOR
wished to know whether the contracts for the various buildings were submitted to public tender?

SIR TREVOR LAWRENCE
was of opinion that the expenditure on the South Kensington Museum had given the greatest satisfaction to the general public.

§ MR W. H. SMITH
said, that all the buildings at South Kensington were the subject of tender and contract, and the greatest care was taken that the work should be executed by responsible builders, and at the lowest possible cost. The enlargement of a sketch by an artist could not, however, be made the subject of tender. The whole amount of the sum mentioned by the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Jenkins) had been spent on the buildings which were completed. The expenditure now required for the construction of an Art library had been rendered necessary by the removal of the old building, which had become unsafe.

§ MR. DILLWYN
said, this was the commencement of an expenditure which, they were informed, would amount to £80,000, and possibly would come to as much more. They had already spent only £735 on this Art library, and they ought to pause before they committed themselves finally to the enormous expenditure which was contemplated—namely, 271,607—and which he looked upon as unnecessary. He moved that the Vo to be reduced by the sum of £5,000 in respect of the Art library.
Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £7,664, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, for erecting and maintaining new Buildings, including Rents, &c., for the Department of Science and Art."—(Mr. Dillwyn.)

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
said, this country possessed the most magnificent Art collection in the world, but it was crowded into insufficient rooms, and a new building was absolutely necessary. While the Government were not prepared at present to proceed rapidly with the work in question, on account of want of funds, they thought it desirable to incur some expenditure, so as not to disband a number of skilled artificers who were at present employed.

§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL
considered the explanation of the right hon. Member (Mr. Noel) unsatisfactory. He thought this Vote was neither one thing nor another. The Government ought to determine to go on and finish the 741 work out of hand, or they ought not to touch it at all.

§ MR. ANDERSON
also supported the reduction of the Vote, and wished to know under what circumstances this large expenditure commenced, and what it was to lead to.

§ MR. MACDONALD
said, that considering the state of the revenue, and the diminished confidence of the people in the South Kensington establishment, the House would do well to endeavour to stop this increasing expenditure.

§ VISCOUNT SANDON
said, that the question of enlarging the Art library had been pressed on the Government last Session by several hon. Members. An hon. Gentleman opposite had asked him whether it was not the fact that the health of the students suffered in consequence of the confined room in which they had to study. [Cries of "Name!"] He did not remember the name at that moment; but he recollected the question having been asked, and that it caused him to pay a special visit to the library, where he found that the allegation was correct, and that many of the students had suffered materially from overcrowding. This building was required for Art education, and was constantly being used by artizans, students, and others; and it was necessary that it should be put into a good condition. Part of the building was at present dangerous for the safety of the collection of engravings, and that danger ought to be removed.

§ MR. WHITWELL
thought the Committee ought not to interpose its vote, and prevent a place being built for the study of high Art; but was this building really required?

§ VISCOUNT SANDON
said, the present building must be replaced, and it would be foolish to do that in an unworthy manner. The plan had been adopted by the Government, and this was part of a larger scheme.

§ SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL
thought the library might be a very sensible thing; but he objected to money being spent for the purpose in driblets, and recommended the withdrawal of the Vote till the Government decided whether the work was really to be carried on.

§ VISCOUNT SANDON
pointed out that the Government were proceeding on the lines which hon. Members opposite wished, and had specially urged upon him last year. It was part of a great 742 scheme, and this was not a Vote taken for something which had not been well considered.

§ MR. W. E. FORSTER
hoped that the Committee would not be put to a division. He understood that this library was necessary for the use of artists and artizans, and they could hardly say that the work should be done in an incomplete manner.

§ MR. DILLWYN
understood that the Works Department had had to put pressure upon the Treasury, and that the Treasury had acceded with a bad grace. He hoped that the Committee would now put their foot upon this Vote, and not yield as the Treasury had done. It seemed to him that they were having an extravagant building.

§ LORD JOHN MANNERS
said, he had referred to the authentic record of their proceedings, and he found that the junior Member for Sheffield (Mr. Mundella) last year spoke of the absolute necessity of providing library accommodation at South Kensington. The then First Commissioner of Works (Lord Henry Lennox) responded in a manner to meet the very reasonable view of the hon. Member for Sheffield, and, doubtless, of other hon. Members opposite; and the Vote was in fulfilment of that promise.

§ MR. EDWARD JENKINS
said, that what he objected to was not that the expenditure asked for should be demanded, but that it should be asked for by a sort of side-wind, instead of being honestly set forth to the Committee under its proper designation in the first instance. There was great expenditure at the South Kensington Museum for engravings, whilst there was at the British Museum a fine collection of engravings, which it was very difficult to got to see. If they were to spend £80,000, according to the original estimate, for the Art library and facade, a full statement ought to be made to the House.

§ MR. SWANSTON
asked whether the new building would cover the whole of the ground on the south side of the quadrangle? If so, it was a moderate sum for such a purpose.

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
said, it would not cover the whole of the ground. The plans could be seen.

§ MR. RYLANDS
asked whether the new building was really wanted? Many of the sums expended on South Kensington had been the cause of grave 743 public scandal, and it was right that the present proposal should be properly investigated.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
said, that last year's Supplementary Estimates included a Vote for £3,500 on account of the Science and Art Library and façade, and there was distinct notice given that it was proposed to spend £80,000. [Mr. DILLWYN: When was that?] That was in July.

§ MR. DILLWYN
I hope it will be a warning to the House not to take Supplementary Estimates in July again.

MR. WHIT WELL
said, he would not object to the Vote, if the Committee could see the plans, and know exactly what was proposed to be done by the Government.

§ MR. W. E. FORSTER
asked, whether the voting of the £5,000 would pledge the House to the expenditure of £80,000?

§ SIR ANDREW LUSK
wished the Vote postponed, as they did not know what had been done.

§ MR. GREGORY
thought it would be satisfactory to know what the country was getting for the £80,000.

§ MR. ANDERSON
also desired information as to what the £80,000 comprised.

§ VISCOUNT SANDON
trusted that the Committee would come to a decision on the matter, which he must again say had been well considered. The sum asked for now was only a portion of the amount that would be required, though no doubt the voting of a part did commit the House to the whole. What was intended was to provide an Art library and a reading-room for students to go to. He understood last year that the House had agreed to the expenditure of £80,000; but he could not pledge himself that that sum would cover the whole cost of the building. The Art library was, he believed, an institution quite unique in England. It was perfectly free, and advantage was taken of it not only by artists and those connected with Art in higher positions in life, but also, he was informed, largely by working men. It would not be worthy of the country to have a building of a shabby character, and it was proposed that it should be constructed with good terra-cotta ornament, after the manner of the quadrangle, with which hon. Members were familiar. The whole sum would be expended on the Art library and the 744 reading room, and in making more safe their depositories of articles in the Museum. The House having voted the sum taken for commencing the work, it would hardly now refuse what was required for continuing it. Any hon. Member who wished to see the plans could see them at South Kensington.
Question put.
The Committee divided:—Ayes 30; Noes 88: Majority 58.—(Div. List, No. 59.)
Original Question put, and agreed to.
(10.) £133,500, Surveys of United Kingdom.

§ MR. MORGAN LLOYD
asked, whether any steps had been taken, or wore about to be taken to complete the survey of North Wales?

§ MR. RAMSAY
asked, when it was probable that the survey of Scotland would be completed? It was begun 40 years ago, and he thought there was no more extravagant method of spending money than spreading it in this way over a long series of years. He should be glad to learn from the Chief Commissioner of Works when the survey would be completed, and how soon the country would have the advantage of getting any return for the money which had been expended during so long a period. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to give an assurance to the country that the survey of Scotland might be expected to be completed at an early date.

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
said, that the survey of many of the counties of North Wales had been discontinued. Precedence had been given to the mineral districts; but as they had been surveyed, the staff had been withdrawn to be employed elsewhere. The whole of the main land of Scotland had been surveyed. The survey of the Shetland and Orkney Islands, which would complete the general survey, was now in progress.
Vote agreed to.

(11.) £9, 490, Harbours, &c. under the Board of Trade.

(12.) £10,000, Metropolitan Fire Brigade.

(13.) £203,991, Rates on Government Property.

§ MR. HAYTER
asked why there had been a diminution of £30,000 in the Vote?

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
said, that the estimate of expenditure had been heretofore taken at an approximate amount. It was only recently that the Government had been able to get at anything like a correct amount, which accounted for the apparent decrease.
Vote agreed to.
(14.) £1,000, Wellington Monument.

MR. GOLDSMID
asked when this monument would be completed? He asked the same question when he entered the House in 1866, 15 years after Wellington's death, and he was then informed by the First Commissioner of Works that the monument would be completed in the course of a year or two; and the same answer had always been given in subsequent years to the same question. From what he could see, however, when he visited St. Paul's last week and looked through the cracks of the scaffolding surrounding the monument, it would be some time yet before the work would be completed. He must again say he should much like to know when it was likely to be finished.

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
replied, that he went to St. Paul's about a month ago, and on inquiry he was informed that the monument, which had been 25 years in hand, would be completed in six weeks or two months from that time.

MR. GOLDSMID
inquired whether the original ridiculous design by which an equestrian figure of the Duke surmounted the canopy over his recumbent figure, was to be carried out. He would advise that the pedestal which had been placed over the baldachino should be removed, as the monument would be quite complete without it.

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
stated that the equestrian statue would not be erected. He was diffident about expressing any opinion upon it in that critical Assembly; but he thought when the monument was completed and was thrown open to the public that it would be found to be a noble one, and well worthy of the illustrious man whose memory it was intended to perpetuate. Did the hon. Gentleman wish the pedestal to be left or removed?

MR. GOLDSMID
hoped that the pedestal would be removed.

§ MR. RYLANDS
said, that the object of the hon. Member for Rochester, whose presence the House always enjoyed, was 746 to inquire when the pedestal was to have a figure on the top of it, and he trusted the hon. Gentleman would long continue to be a Member of the House to ask the same question.

MR. GOLDSMID
remarked that if the hon. Gentleman would prefer that he should put his observations in the form of a question to the House he would oblige him.

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
said, he would not pledge himself to remove the pedestal without grave consideration.
Vote agreed to.
(15.) £70,000, Natural History Museum.
In re ply to Mr. DILLWYN, Mr. EDWARD JENKINS, and Sir HENRY HAVELOCK,

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
explained that although the architect's estimate had been £350,000, yet when the contract came to be given out, it was found it would have to be increased to £395,000. Of the £80,000 voted last year, only £70,000 had been expended, and hence only £70,000 was asked for in the present Vote, which was a decrease of £10,000. The sum which remained to be voted would be sufficient to complete the building.
Vote agreed to.
Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £10,825, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, for the Metropolitan Police Courts.

§ MR. RYLANDS
asked if that was the sum of money to be contributed towards the purposes of the police courts themselves, as regarded maintenance, or was any part of it a grant in aid of the erection of those buildings in London.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
said, that the amount was not a contribution towards the maintenance of the courts, but that £5,000 of it was towards the erection of Bow Street police court, the entire cost of the work being a charge on Votes of Parliament.

§ MR. RYLANDS
hoped the Committee would refuse to pass the estimate. They had £5,000 now asked for without the slightest information as to the total amount required. This coming down to the House for grants from the Consoli- 747 dated Fund to aid the metropolis in the matter of police courts was open to grave objection. He would like to know why Liverpool and other large towns should not come down for grants. He thought the policy was one that could not be maintained. He would like to know, whether the Government could inform the Committee what the total cost would be? He begged to move that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £5,000.
Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £5,825, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, fox the Metropolitan Police Courts."—(Mr. Rylands.)

MR. ASSHETON CROSS
said, he could not give the information. The present police court was not adequate, and a new one was required.

§ MR. ANDERSON
thought that means should be adopted in cases like the present for showing what the entire cost would be, and that might be done by a separate column. By voting the sum of £5,000, the Committee could not know to how large an expenditure they might be committed. He objected to the Committee being asked to vote £5,000 when they had no information given to them as to the total cost of the new court. It might turn out that it would be £40,000 or £50,000, and it was in this sort of way that the House got committed to large expenditure. A vote of this sort was taken to begin with, and next year the Committee would be told they had sanctioned the first Vote and were bound to go on.

§ MR. MELLOR
agreed with the hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands), that the metropolis should be subjected to the same rules as other places.

MR. ASSHETON CROSS
reminded the Committee that the metropolitan police courts had a claim on the Exchequer which provincial courts had not, as as a great deal of business was done in the metropolitan courts affecting the whole country as well as London, and the fees received there were paid into the Exchequer, whereas the fees in the borough courts belonged to the municipalities.

§ MR. WHITWELL
said, that as well as the entire amount, they ought to 748 know the object of this expenditure; whether it was for the site of a court, or for the building.

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
said, the £5,000 was for pulling down the old building and commencing the new one. At present, no definite estimate could be arrived at, and from what was said on the subject last, year it was thought advisable that no time should be lost.

§ SIR WILLIAM FRASER
thought it was quite time a new police court should be built at Bow Street. The state of the police cells in which the prisoners were placed in the morning while waiting to be brought before the magistrate was disgraceful. The late Sir Thomas Henry had frequently spoken to him on the subject. He had examined them, and could say that they were not fit for a man to be kept in for five minutes. He should like to know whether any improvement of them was contemplated.

§ MR. MUNTZ
said, that these buildings should be erected; but Parliament ought to have some estimate of the cost before this Vote was taken.

§ MR. RAMSAY
said, the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman placed the Committee in a worse position than before, leaving it quite uncertain what was to be paid, as no estimate had yet been made.

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
admitted that an estimate ought to be given, and he was prepared to withdraw the Vote.

MR. ASSHETON CROSS
quite agreed with his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir William Fraser) that the cells in the metropolitan police courts were not such as they ought to be; but a great improvement had been made within the last two years, and it was the anxious desire of the Commissioners to continue their improvement. The cells under the jurisdiction of the First Commissioner of Police, in which night prisoners were confined, were generally in a satisfactory state.

§ SIR ANDREW LUSK
could not help thinking, when he heard so much about the state of the police cells, that some people talked too much of what they did not understand. They were not quite such barbarians in London as people tried to make them out, and the police cells, like the police courts, belonged to a former day, and were not, perhaps, so good as they might be, but they had been improved and would by-and-by be made 749 better. Certain persons had almost lived in them for years and years, and he objected to their being held up to execration in this way by the hon. and gallant Baronet opposite (Sir William Fraser).

§ SIR WILLIAM FRASER
explained that he had not spoken of police cells generally, but of those attached to the police courts.
Amendment, and Motion, by leave withdrawn.
(16.) £120,325, New Courts of Justice and Offices.

§ SIR HENRY JAMES
complained of the delay in the erection of these buildings. Enough money had not been spent in accordance with previous Votes. £1,181,000 had been expended, principally for the site, £218,000 of which had been expended on the erection of the buildings, leaving a sum of £547,000 to be expended. They were, therefore, paying interest on the £1,181,000 without any result. By the original contract the buildings were to be finished in 1880; but it was quite evident from the little progress that had been made that the contract could not be fulfilled within the time. At the present moment not only had no return been received for a very large expenditure, but the administration of justice was inadequate for the want of proper buildings for its administration, and the evil every year would become more aggravated. He did not blame the Government, the contract having been entered into with their Predecessors; but an expression of opinion on the part of the Committee might be of service. It was evident that the contractors could not fulfil their contract. He hoped that warning would be given to the contractors that they must fulfil their contract, or the penalties would be exacted as sonic return to the public for the expense and inconvenience which would be caused by the non-completion of the work by the specified time.

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
said, the hon. and learned Member was justified in expressing dissatisfaction at the slow progress made with the building but lately the progress made had been more satisfactory, and the evidence of this was the fact that there had been a Supplementary Estimate for £40,000 to provide the money required for work that had been 750 done. The administrative offices would be completed by the spring of next year. It would be a strong measure to enforce the penalties, but the expediency of doing so would be taken into consideration, and every endeavour would be made to force on the building as rapidly as possible.

§ MR. GREGORY
considered it was most desirable on all accounts that the building should be completed with as much despatch as possible. The Government were losing something like £40,000 or £50,000 a-year in the shape of interest upon the money laid out upon the site, and they were also compelled to pay a composition to the rates in respect of the buildings pulled down. There was a much more serious consideration, however, than any mentioned by his hon. and learned Friend—namely, the impossibility of bringing the new Judicature system into harmonious operation until these buildings were completed.
Vote agreed to.
(17.) £1,082, New Palace at Westminster—Acquisition of Lands and Embankments.
In reply to Sir WILLIAM FRASER,

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
said, that no conclusion had been arrived at as to the disposal of the vacant land to the west of the Houses of Parliament.
Vote agreed to.
(18.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £177,637, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, for the Erection, Repairs, and Maintenance of the several Public Buildings in the Department of the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland.

§ MR. WHITWELL
said, he wished to make an inquiry of the hon. Gentleman on the Treasury Bench. In the Vote under the head of Board of Works no less a sum than £29,000 was put down for the labour of the servants of the Board. He asked whether the work might not be more economically done by contract?

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
said, though the sum was £29,000, yet if the hon. Gentleman turned to the Schedule he would find that it referred to a large number 751 of buildings, and the amounts themselves were very small. The work was executed by contract, as far as possible.

§ MR. BUTT
said, in the Vote there were items which ought not to be included at all. For instance, considerable grants for Queen's Colleges were included, and they would more properly come under the head of education.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
said, the Vote was set forth in the usual manner.

§ MR. MELDON,
referring to the Vote of £431 for the Botanic Gardens, Glasnevin, said there were other places like the Botanic Gardens which afforded an immense amount of amusement to the public, and also encouraged a taste for flowers, and tended very much to elevate the masses. The Botanic Gardens was a very useful place, and drew an immense population out of Dublin away from the public-houses, and tended very much to the public advantage. But there was another place which was probably of very much more use, and which stood very much in need of some assistance from the Government. He referred to the Zoological Gardens, which were not only celebrated in Ireland, but had acquired a European fame. The breeding of wild animals had been conducted there with very great success, and they had acquired a wide reputation for efficient management. He regretted to say that the amount of support they received from the public was not at all adequate to their deserts and necessities. The Zoological Gardens were very badly in want of houses for keeping the wild beasts, and he hoped the Government would take into consideration between now and next Session the propriety of giving a grant to the Gardens. At a time when they were endeavouring to legislate with the view of keeping people out of the drinking shops, he thought that one of the first things they ought to do was to afford them greater facilities for spending their time in places of harmless recreation. He hoped, therefore, that the Chief Secretary for Ireland would see his way next year to recommending a grant that would enable the parties to provide permanent houses for the animals in the Zoological Gardens. Another point to which he wished to call attention was the frightful state in which the Board of Works allowed the Four Courts of Dublin to remain. The Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer had only 752 lately been incapacitated from discharging his duties by reason of an illness resulting from the filthy, dirty state of the Court in which he sat. When he spoke of the Court of Exchequer, he might apply the same remark to all the other Courts. The state in which they were kept was monstrous, but no order could be obtained from the Board of Works to put the Courts in a proper state either as regarded the condition of the sewage or the ventilation. It was only very recently that it was found impossible for the Judge, jury, or counsel to remain in one of the Courts, it was in so bad a state, arising from the miasma which obtruded into the atmosphere; but although this had been going on for a length of time, the Board of Works could not be induced to make arrangements such as would render the buildings properly habitable. He hoped the Chief Secretary would see that the Board of Works did their duty in this matter.

§ MR. BUTT
objected to the way in which these Estimates were set out, as compared with the way in which similar Estimates were brought forward for England. He should have been inclined to object to the Estimates with regard to the Queen's Colleges and other matters, but owing to the way in which the Votes were furnished, he could not go through them without great inconvenience and an unnecessary tax on the time of the House. He would suggest, however, that the Irish Votes should be furnished in the same way as the English Votes.

§ MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY
moved the reduction of the Vote by a sum of £100. He complained that no detailed statement was given of Estimates for expenditure on post offices in Ireland. On a recent occasion, in the city of Limerick, a new post office was built; but the old one was still kept open for the accommodation of the public in that portion of the town in which it was situated. Suddenly that post office was closed, and the business was transferred to a shop in the neighbourhood so small and inconvenient that merchants and professional men had informed him they were afraid to trust important letters to it, and were thereby subjected to considerable inconvenience. The closing-up of the old post office had all the appearance of a job, and had caused much dissatisfaction. He as- 753 sumed the cost of fitting-up the shop as a post office was about £100, and therefore he moved the reduction of the Vote by that amount. He considered it a violation of all laws of economy to make such a removal, and complained that the fact was not set out in the Estimate.
Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £177,337, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, for the Erection, Repairs, and Maintenance of the several Public Buildings in the Department of the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland."—(Mr. O'Shaughnessy.)

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
said, that the recommendation of the hon. Member for Kildare (Mr. Meldon), as to the Zoological Society of Dublin had been anticipated, and a sum of £500 was annually granted to that Society. With regard to the Four Courts, he would undertake that the attention of the Office of Works in Ireland should be called to the observations of the hon. Member. If he was rightly informed, however, it was not altogether in the power of the Office of Works to prevent the state of things complained of. If the Liffey was in a better condition it would be much more easy for the Office of Works to undertake to place the Four Courts in a better condition; still, so far as it was in their power to remedy the evils, he would undertake that every effort should be made by them for that purpose. The remarks of the hon. Member as to the closing of the post office in Limerick had taken him and his noble Friend the Postmaster General completely by suprise. His noble Friend was not aware that anything had been done to inconvenience the inhabitants of Limerick, and an inquiry would be made into the particular case mentioned. With regard to the complaint of the hon. and learned Member (Mr. Butt), he would do all in his power to make the Estimates generally more intelligible when they were next laid before the House.

§ MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY
withdrew his Amendment.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

§ MR. RAMSAY
objected to an item of £13,000 for the erection of public elementary schools in Ireland being included in this Vote. They should be 754 placed before the House in the Vote for educational purposes.

§ MR. MELDON
thought that the item of £13,000 referred to by the hon. Member for Falkirk was an illustration of the inconvenience alluded to by the hon. and learned Member for Limerick of mixing up Votes which should be kept distinct. The year before last this sum came under discussion with the Education grant, while last year and this year it was placed among the Public Buildings works, with which it really had nothing to do. He also wished to ask the right hon. Baronet, whether the Government were prepared to put the vested schools on the same footing with non-vested schools as regarded Government grants? The non-vested schools managers were empowered to erect residences for teachers, paying half of the purchase money by instalments, Government finding the other half. But the other class of managers did not enjoy the same privilege. He would also like to know, if the Government would make it compulsory on the part of managers to erect residences for teachers?

§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS - BEACH
said, that the reason why the item for schools in Ireland appeared in this Vote was, that the money was expended by the Board of Works in Ireland, and not by the National Education Board as the latter Board had nothing to do with the purchase of land, and the erection of buildings thereon. With regard to the remarks of the hon. Member for Kildare, he did not think it desirable to compel the managers of schools to provide residences for the teachers, but the question whether a system of loans should not be substituted entirely for the present grants in aid of building was one well worthy of consideration. He was expecting a full report on the subject from the proper Department, and that was the reason he had made no proposition with regard to it.

§ MR. RAMSAY
thought that the explanation was not satisfactory, and that this system of expending public money prevented any comparison being drawn between the grants for the three countries.

§ MR. MELDON
wished to state that the observations that he made with reference to the compulsory provision of having school residences were made 755 without consultation or communication with anyone, and they represented his own views only. Ho thought that it was just as requisite to provide a residence for the teacher as to find the children with suitable appliances. A grant of money would not be made unless all the arrangements of the school were approved of, and he asked why a grant should be made where a residence was not provided? These were his own views, and he hoped the Chief Secretary for Ireland would not lose sight of this point. Then, with reference to the Zoological Gardens, he was perfectly well aware that the charge for maintenance was included; but the drift of his observations was that some money should be spent beyond the mere maintenance—some small sum of £200 or £300—to do what was necessary for the protection of the animals which they had there for the purpose of amusing and interesting the visitors.

§ CAPTAIN NOLAN
observed that if they were compelled to find residences for the teachers, one-half of the schools in Ireland would be closed, and the teachers would thus be deprived of their salaries. In the interests of the teachers of Ireland he hoped that the Chief Secretary for Ireland would not make this compulsory provision. He was anxious to see residences for the teachers, but he thought that it would be very wrong to shut up all the schools where a residence was not provided for the teacher. It certainly would be a very great advantage to have them if the Government would provide them.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
Original Question put, and agreed to.
(19.) £11,660, Lighthouses Abroad.
Resolutions to be reported.
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £46,907, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1878, for the British Embassy Houses and Legation and Consular Buildings, including Rents and Furniture.

§ SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF
complained that the Government had not, pursuant to a recommendation of the House in 1870, purchased Embassy 756 houses in place of renting them. As matters stood they were constantly exposed to increased rentals, and from the present Estimates it appeared that the rental at Berlin had been increased from £1,500 to £3,000 a-year, which was an extravagant sum, as at St. Petersburg, which was quite as expensive as Berlin, only £1,440 was paid for a better house.

§ MR. GERARD NOEL
pointed out that there was sometimes an objection to purchase in the event of the price being too high.

§ MR. MACDONALD
said, there were many items in this Vote which required explanation, and he would therefore move that Progress be reported.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."— (Mr. Macdonald.)

MR. GOLDSMID
wished to draw attention to the case of the Embassy house at Rome—["Progress"]—

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
would have been glad, as this was the last Vote, if the Committee would have consented to have completed its discussion; but as there really appeared to be a desire to debate some of the items, he would not oppose the Motion.
Question put, and agreed to.
House resumed.
Resolutions to be reported upon Monday next.
Committee also report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.