CLASS IV.—EDUCATION, SCIENCE, AND ART. (Hansard, 16 August 1881)

§ MR. D. GRANT
said, he wished to ask whether it would not be practicable to light the National Gallery so that it could be kept open every night until 10 o'clock for 12 months? The matter was one of considerable importance; still he should not have brought it on but for the fact that the Trustees would not meet again until next year, and because they had the pleasure of the presence of one of that body amongst them to-night. The Gentleman to whom he referred would be able to answer his question and give him the information he desired. What he wished to know was whether the Trustees were taking any steps towards lighting up the National Gallery? Last evening he (Mr. Grant) drew up a form of requisition to the Trustees, and within a few hours—that was to say, before he left the House—he obtained 190 signatures of Members of Parliament in favour of obtaining from the Trustees some expression of opinion as to the course they would be willing to adopt for the purpose of carrying out the suggestion for throwing the Gallery open to the artizan and labouring classes. Unless it was open at night these classes would never be able to avail themselves of it, as they were always at work during the day. It seemed to him that providing the pictures were capable of being protected from the injurious influence of the light, and, at the same time, were so placed that they could be seen, it would be a great benefit to the people of the country, and to the people of London in particular, if the Gallery were allowed to remain open until 10 o'clock. The hon. Member for East Cumberland (Mr. E. S. Howard), who was one of the Trustees, no doubt, would answer him.

§ MR. E. S. HOWARD
said, he very much wished that there was in the House some other Trustee who had had greater experience of the working of the National Gallery than he (Mr. E. S. Howard) had had; but as he was the only representative of the National Gallery in the House, he had great pleasure in replying to the hon. Member to 101 the best of his ability. However, he could give no kind of official answer, as he had had no opportunity of consulting the other Trustees of the National Gallery; but he was certain of this—that it would not require the signatures of 190 Members of Parliament to persuade the Trustees to take a proposal of this kind into their consideration. It was to their interest—and he was sure they felt it to be so—that they should, as far as possible, make the Gallery which they had the charge of valuable to the public. But, though he felt they would take this proposition into their consideration without the slightest prejudice, and with every desire to do all that was in their power to accommodate the public, he still must say that he saw many difficulties in the way. In the first place, there was the question as to the kind of lighting that should be used. Gas was quite out of the question. There was the electric light; but he did not know that its advantages had been so demonstrated that it could be safely used in the National Gallery. They could not talk of it in any sense with absolute certainty. Experiments with this kind of lighting had been tried at the South Kensington Museum, and, as far as they had gone, they had succeeded pretty well. It was only this morning that they had had the Report of the Science and Art Department, in which the result of the experiments was recorded; the result was not yet satisfactory, and they should be permitted to go a little further before the Trustees had sufficient data before them on which to act. At present, they did not know whether the electric light affected pictures chemically. For himself, he did not express an opinion on the matter; but the fact must be thoroughly well known before they introduced the electric light amongst their great National Collection of pictures. There other difficulties to be considered—for instance, the difficulty of expense. At present, the staff of the Gallery was completely occupied, and it would be impossible to keep the pictures on view for any additional hours a-day without a large increase to the staff. The proposal was to keep the Gallery open after dark; and, looking at the number and the class of persons that would be likely to come after dark, the staff would, necessarily, have to be very largely increased. The staff could not be increased without great 102 cost, and that cost would have to be carefully measured. Then there was the difficulty that would arise from the accumulated bad air in the crowded rooms. If anyone would go into the National Gallery at 6 o'clock—at the end of a public day—he would find the dust flying about in a manner which could hardly be described, and the air in a wretchedly bad state; and he would, without doubt, come to the conclusion that it would be necessary to very largely improve the ventilation of the Gallery before any prolonging of the hours was possible. This would be necessary, not only for the sake of the visitors, but also for the sake of the pictures. No doubt, any evil which existed in the matter of ventilation would be remedied by the Government. The Government had shown every willingness to meet the requests of the Trustees for the alteration of the system of ventilation; but it was not altered yet—and they knew very well that these things always took some time to do. Then, besides the question of ventilation, there was the question—really an important one, though it might seem trifling—of the cleaning of the pictures. He did not allude to that elaborate cleaning necessary sometimes with old pictures, but the ordinary dusting and cleaning with silk handkerchiefs and brushes. Until quite lately, the National Gallery was, practically, shut to the public on students' days—two days a-week—and also for a whole month in October; but now it was open every day of the week all the year round, and, therefore, there was no time for this ordinary cleaning, except that which took place after the Gallery was shut in the evening, or before it was open in the morning. This was a practical difficulty, and, although he did not say it was an insuperable one, it was one which would have to be considered. In considering this requisition, which had been so influentially signed, the Trustees would have to consider whether the proposed additional cost of staff and of lighting the Gallery would be best spent on keeping open the Gallery until 10 o'clock at night, or in giving increased accommodation, which was very much wanted at present; in fact, which was absolutely essential. He did not think it was necessary for him to say any more than this. He did not wish to enter into a long 103 justification of the course taken by the Trustees, because he was sure they would give this and every other question that came before them their fullest and most careful consideration.

§ MR. WARTON
said, that seeing a Trustee of the National Gallery in the House, he would venture to draw his attention to a certain point, although it was a point of some delicacy. There was no provision made there for the wants and conveniences of human nature, and the result was that the visitors were put to very great inconvenience. He should have put a Motion on the subject on the Paper if he could have done so.

§ MR. E. S. HOWARD
said, this was a matter for the President of the Board of Works, and not for the Trustees, who had no power to alter buildings.

§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR
said, he should like to know what necessity there was for continuing this Charge? Originally, £10,000 was voted for this service; but the money was not expended, a considerable portion of it being returned to the Treasury. Last year the complement of the money was voted; but again it was not expended. Now they had another Vote which brought up the total again to the original amount, and, under the circumstances, he would like to ask the noble Lord whether there was any reasonable ground for supposing that the money would be required, and, if so, how it was proposed to spend it? He (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) was afraid the fact was that the Vote was really unnecessary; and, if that were the case, they should require some explanation from the Secretary to the Treasury.

§ LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH
said, that £10,000 was promised to these 104 two Exhibitions. The Melbourne Exhibition only closed last year, and the grant in respect of it would come in course of payment during the present financial year. The money could not be paid before the present financial year.

§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR
Then, may we take it from the noble Lord that, although the whole of this money may not be expended during the present financial year, there will be nothing asked for in addition in a future year?

§ LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH
I think, in all probability, there will be nothing more asked for.

§ LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH
I believe it was understood that the Irish Votes would not be taken to-night. I am in the hands of the Committee, however; and if hon. Members wish to take these Votes, I shall be happy to go on with them.

§ MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR
It was arranged that they should be taken tomorrow; therefore, we cannot consider them now.