HC Deb 06 April 1888 vol 324 cc611-43

(1.) £7,900, to complete the sum for Science and Art Department Buildings.

SIR HENRY ROSCOE (Manchester, S.)

said, he rose for the purpose, not of finding fault with what was in the Estimate, but of finding fault with what was not in it. The condition of the building of the Normal School of Science, to which he would like to draw the attention of the Committee, was really almost disgraceful. The accommodation which they had at present in this school, the only Government school in the country for training science teachers, would be a disgrace to a third-rate German town. He happened only that day to visit the school, and had judged for himself what the accommodation was. To take one department only—namely, that of the experimental science of physics under the able direction of Professor Thicker. It appeared that so large a number of students at the present moment attended that particular department, that the buildings on the east side of Exhibition Road were entirely insufficient for their accommodation, and that a temporary building on the west side, which was put up for the International Exhibition, had been rented from the Commissioners of 1851, and was used as a physical laboratory. Not only was that building totally inadequate, but even that was to be taken away from the Science School. He was informed that the authorities of the Imperial Institute had given notice that they would require the land upon which the building was erected in a very short time for a road which they purposed making, or were in the act of making, between Queen's Gate and Exhibition Road. The consequence of this would be that the whole of the students who now worked in this building would be thrown, as it were, out of employment, and that our only Government Normal School of Science would actually have to reject the very large number of students who were now going there. He would put it to the First Commissioner of Works whether this was a desirable condition of things, and whether the right hon. Gentleman's attention should not be directed to the very important question of providing accommodation of a really efficient character for this great national institution? Even from an economic point of view this matter required, he thought, the attention of Her Majesty's Government, for should these students be turned away from the doors of the Normal School, the fees which they paid, amounting now to no less than £3,500 a-year, would no longer be paid into the Exchequer, and the Government would suffer a corresponding loss. He trusted, therefore, that this first point to which he begged to direct the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the First Commissioner of Works would be carefully considered by him. But there was a still wider question to which he wished to refer, and that was the housing of the National Science Collections. The Committee were, perhaps, not aware that we possessed now in South Kensington one of the most complete collections of scientific instruments and apparatus in Europe, and that it was only housed in temporary buildings—in a portion of the building once occupied by the International Exhibition. For this housing the Government now paid £2,000 a-year. Some time ago, this matter having attracted the attention of the Government, a Departmental Committee was appointed considering, not so much whether this collection should continue or should be housed, but having the collection, and valuing it, how it should be housed. The Committee consisted of Sir Frederick Bramwell, Lord Lingen, Mr. Mitford, and Colonel Donnelly, and they went into the whole question most fully. Evidence was obtained from all the leading men of science in the country as to the necessity and importance of this collection, and the Report of the Committee was so nearly unanimous that three of these gentlemen—namely, Sir Frederick Bramwell, Lord Lingen, and Colonel Donnelly, reported most favourably of the necessity of having proper buildings erected for the housing of the collection. Mr. Mitford reported separately, not so much because he did not agree with the Report of his Colleagues, as because he failed to appreciate so much as they seemed to do the value of this scientific collection. About that matter, however, there could be no doubt at all. The question of the cost of the erection of suitable buildings was most carefully gone into, and it was shown that, inasmuch as a very large rent had to be paid towards the housing of the present collection, and considering the sale of other land and buildings belonging to Government which would no longer be needed, a sum of something like £32,000 would be sufficient to pay for what was required. Under these circumstances, he thought there ought to be no difficulty in inducing the Government to look into the matter, and to take steps to put the National Science Collection on a footing worthy of the nation. A great deal had been talked about our failing industries, and we had heard much about protecting those industries; but he would venture to say that the one mode which all were agreed would lead to the protection of our industries was the development of the scientific education of the people. As he had said before, the present con- dition of things was a disgrace to the nation. When they heard of a small country like Switzerland spending £70,000 or £80,000 in erecting a single building, he thought it was high time that we should turn round and put our house in order, so far as concerned the proper accommodation in the National Science Schools and the housing of this scientific collection. He trusted that the Board of Works and Her Majesty's Government would give their best attention to this matter, which was one of real national importance.

MR. BARTLEY (Islington, N.)

said he should like to say a word or two on this subject. He must candidly say that he agreed with the hon. Member opposite (Sir Henry Roscoe) that something ought to be done to complete the Museum at South Kensington. When they looked into the Estimate they found that on new works, alterations, and additions to the South Kensington Museum only £100 was to be spent, and those of them who believed in the importance of the National Science and Art Collection at South Kensington must say that they ought to look forward to the building in which the collection was exhibited being completed at once. Another part of the Estimate showed that they were paying at the present time no less than £4,500 for the rent of premises on the opposite side of the road to the Museum. Under the new state of affairs as to the future rate of Consols, that represented a sum of something like £200,000. Well, he (Mr. Bartley) thought the time had come when they should make the South Kensington Museum complete, and should finish the buildings which had been designed for so many years, and do away with the present old and perfectly unsuitable premises On the other side of the road which they were now renting. It was true he had taken an active part in the objection raised to the system of circulating objects of art throughout the country, and he thought the reason why money was not given freely to complete these Museum buildings was because many persons thought that South Kensington spent too much money in keeping Art treasures, duplicates, and reproductions to itself, and did not circulate them as much as they should amongst other parts of the country. But, be that as it might, he agreed that it was a disgrace to the country that they should not by this time have completed these Museum buildings. It was true that a good deal of money had been spent on them; but it was also true, as the hon. Member opposite had pointed out, that smaller countries than our own spent greater sums than we did on such purposes. He thought the time had arrived when they should complete the buildings in South Kensington and put its working upon a broader basis. If this were decided upon he thought the House would be very willing to spend the necessary amount. He must say he did not look with any great hope to the two Front Benches doing this. He knew that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sheffield (Mr. Mundella), if he got up to speak on this subject, would advocate increased expenditure for this purpose; but, as it was pointed out last night, when the right hon. Gentleman was on the Ministerial side of the House, he did not take any steps to bring about such a consummation. The only way in which a satisfactory result in regard to this matter could be arrived at, and the Museum buildings completed, was for both sides of the House to combine in forcing the Front Bench into action. If this magnificent Museum were complete he believed it would do more than any other measure which could be adopted to promote trade and industry. Nothing would do more good than to put this Exhibition in a better position, and extend its operations by loans of specimens through the small as well as the large provincial towns of the country.

MR. F. S. POWELL (Wigan)

said, he hoped the Committee would allow him to add a few words to what had fallen from hon. Gentlemen who had taken part in the debate so far, The hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir Henry Roscoe) occupied, as they knew, a position of authority in connection with Owen's College, Manchester, and he (Mr. P. S. Powell) had the honour of being a member of the Governing Body of the Yorkshire College at Leeds; and he must say that when they took into account the work that was being done by those two provincial institutions, the position of South Kensington in regard to the country generally was discreditable to the Government. He thought the time had come when those who had seats in the House, as the Representa- country, ought to entreat the Government, not indeed to be lavish, but to be just and generous in their dealings with this institution. They had had occasion in the course of last year to regret the contraction of the grant to the British Museum; and while they viewed that contraction with great regret, he was sure they did not regard with any more satisfaction the unfair and unjust economy with regard to the scientific department, so to say, of our popular institutions in London. They had pressed on the Government by deputations and by various means the necessity of giving wider and larger and more perfect technical instruction throughout the country; but when they dealt with that which was the centre, that which was the chief, that which was the origin, and at the same time the controlling power in London, they found a want of largeness of view, and had to lament a most deplorable and false economy on the part of the Executive. He (Mr. F. S. Powell) had had an opportunity of visiting the collection at South Kensington in the course of the last few weeks, and he believed that no one could visit that Museum without feeling great regret that such a building should be allowed to remain in an incomplete state. Some portions of the building, as they knew, had been carried out in accordance with the designs of those who laid out the general scheme; but other parts were entirely unbuilt, and the remainder was in a miserably decaying condition, which was a sarcasm and a satire upon the whole conception. It was the wish of some Members of the House of Commons at all times to press economy upon the Government. It fell to his lot some times to join in this cry; but he did hope that if they were economical when economy was called for, they would also be liberal when necessity demanded liberality. It seemed to him to be really a mockery that they should be on all occasions entreating the Government to aid Municipalities in the different districts in the giving of technical instruction; and that then, when they came to London itself and to the Central Government, they should find matters worked down to what was really a miserable starvation point. There was one point of detail to which he should like to call the attention of the Government, and to ask them to answer a question upon, and that was the item of insurance. He saw that the sum for insurance had been reduced from the sum of £400 to £100. He held there was no more false economy than restricting the amount of insurance, and he trusted they would have an assurance from the Government, in the course of this discussion, that the reduction of the amount from £400 to £100 had not arisen from any reduction in the total amount for which the Museum was insured. He held that no more false economy could be committed than to risk the loss without compensation of such valuable objects as those which were continued in the Museum for the mere sake of saving the shin of £300. He (Mr. F. S. Powell) was sorry for having trespassed so long on the time of the Committee; but he had felt bound to take part in the discussion, having, as he had, the subject so closely at heart.

THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (Mr. PLUNKET) (Dublin University)

I wish to say, in the first place, that so far as I am personally concerned, and I am surd I may speak for every Member of Her Majesty's Government, that we most entirely sympathize with the great interest which the hon. Member opposite (Sir Henry Roscoe) has expressed—and certainly no one has a greater right to speak on this subject than he has—in the welfare and prosperity and highest development of the Science and Art Department of South Kensington; and whatever part may be taken—whatever, comparatively speaking, humble part may be taken by the Office I have the honour to represent in this controversy, so I can assure the hon. Member and the Committee that it is in a spirit of most hearty goodwill to all the interests for which the hon. Member has so well pleaded this evening. But then the Committee must understand that this question is one of very considerable difficulty. It has been felt to be a question of difficulty not only by the present Government, but also by the late Government, and the various proposals that have been made from time to time have not been given effect to, because all the interests concerned in this question have unfortunately not bean able so far to come to a common understanding on the subject. Now, of course, it is quite true that it is better that a little time should be occupied in arriving at a thoroughly satisfactory plan than that, by a hasty decision, a wrong direction should be given to the ultimate development of this important institution; but, on the other hand, I must admit that there has been very great delay indeed on the part of successive Governments in dealing with this question—a delay which I myself deplore, and which I should be very glad to see terminated. But now let me explain to the Committee that it is net quite as plain sailing to settle this question as one might suppose if he had only heard one side of the matter. The authorities representing the Science and Art Department at South Kensington have very wide views as to how this subject should be dealt with. They naturally wished that in whatever buildings are undertaken the largest provision should be made, not only for the present needs, but also for the possible development of this great institution. On the other hand, the Treasury has to consider what they might fairly propose in the way of expense in the interests of this particular Department. I am afraid that it is a kind of triangular duel which has been going on for seine time. The Office of Works being appealed to by the Treasury are, of course, bound to advise them from the practical point of view of the builder as to what they really think can fairly be asked in the way of increased buildings, and as to what they thought unnecessary and visionary demands. I ought to say at once that I admit that there is a considerable and a pressing want of immediate relief—and when I say immediate relief, I mean as soon as it can possibly be afforded—for the congestion that at present exists at South Kensington as regards the operations of the Science and Art Department. I do not think it would be of any use now for me to go over the early history of this controversy. I have no intention of doing so. I wish rather to submit to the Committee the proposals which have been made by me since I have been at the Office of Works. What we proposed to the Government was that there was a very large question which would have sooner or later to be decided, and the sooner it was decided the better; but that that matter wait rather a question for the future, and one which, comparatively speaking, could afford to wait for its decision—namely, in what shape and form the Science and Art Department should find housing in South Kensington when the whole of the ground which is naturally the best for its accommodation—I mean that part which lies to the east of Exhibition Road—should come to be occupied by buildings. There have been various plans proposed. There were plans proposed by General Scott, and there have since been plans proposed by the Surveyor and Architect under the Office of Works. These plans, I believe, have each considerable merit; but I am not at all sure that when we put our hand to the plough and really undertake to make this building, it would not be, perhaps, advisable—I only throw it out as my own opinion—to invite the very best architectural skill to deal with this very important matter—important not only in the interests of the Department of Science and Art, but also important because it will permanently affect a very prominent site in a very beautiful part of London; and I think everybody will feel that, when that ground is covered, it should be covered by a building which should not only meet the wants of the Science and Art Department, but will be in itself an admirable architectural feature. That is all I want to say about the ultimate solution of this question; but it is agreed on all hands that any such plan, if it were undertaken, would require at least four years, and possibly a longer time to give effect to it. Well, but the want is pressing, and we have made suggestions which, I am afraid, have not been favourably considered by the Science and Art Department. I will tell the Committee what those suggestions were. There are at present abutting on the eastern side of the Exhibition Road four largo and handsome residences, which are occupied by officers connected with the Science and Art Department. Now, one of the suggestions was that two or three—at all events, two—of these residences should, at any rate for a time, be taken from those who inhabit them at present, accommodation being found for those officers elsewhere. There would be no difficulty whatever in finding accommodation for them in the immediate vicinity of the establishment at South Kensington, and in these days of rapid communication by telephone and otherwise we do not suppose that any inconvenience would accrue from, say, two of these officers being located in the immediate neighbourhood and having to go a short way before reaching the Exhibition. The space which would be in this way obtained could, we are satisfied, be easily adapted for meeting the immediate wants of the Science and Art Department. We made, also, a further proposal. There are at present in these buildings in South Kensington a number of naval specimens, and various objects exhibited there in connection with naval architecture; and we have proposed that that part of the collection at South Kensington should be removed, at all events for a time, say to Greenwich, where we believe that accommodation could be found fur it, the space so saved being given to the Science and Art Department. I may say that these proposals are the best we can think of to meet the want which we fully admit to exist, and which we are most anxious to see properly dealt with. I am afraid, however, that when the Treasury submitted these proposals to the Science and Art Department they were not favourably received; and so, unfortunately, the triangular duel appears still to be going on. I can only add that I regret this very much, and that whenever the Science and Art Department can propose terms which will be satisfactory to the Treasury—and, of course, the Treasury being the Department which has to find the money for anything which is done, it must first be satisfied on the subject before anything can be undertaken—then I assure the Committee that the Office of Works will be perfectly ready and most glad and prompt in giving whatever assistance they can to settle this question, which, as I explained when I commenced these few observations, is an object which I fool, as strongly as any Member of the Committee, is one deserving to be dealt with as soon as it conveniently can.

MR. MUNDELLA (Sheffield, Brightside)

The concluding words of the right hon. Gentleman who has just sat down appear to me to sum up the whole question. The right hon. Gentleman said that when the Science and Art Department could make proposals which would be satisfactory to the Board of Works and the Treasury, then it was to be hoped the question would be solved. Now, Sir, it does net rest with the Science and Art Department. They have done everything, I believe, that lies in the power of the Department to do to bring about an accommodation both with the Board of Works and the Treasury, and the whole matter has been investigated in the fullest, most careful, and most impartial manner, and by the most impartial investigators. The hon. Member for South Manchester (Sir Henry Roscoe) did not use too strong language when he said that the condition of the Science and Art Department at South Kensington was a disgrace to the country. It really is a public scandal, and I am quite sure that if the public had any idea of the condition of things, they would not tolerate it for a day longer. Now let me just state to the House how the matter stands. In the first place, the office accommodation and the examination rooms are altogether inadequate for the services which have to be performed. There are servants there who are working in passages, corridors, and cellars—I am sure the right hon. Gentleman the Vice President of the Council knows all about it—and are crowded up in unhealthy rooms in conditions under which no public or private servant ought to be asked to work. It is in the last degree disgraceful that this state of things should be continued. There are something like £80,000 worth of Art objects which have been examined, or are to be examined, in the old building known as one of the old "Brompton Boilers," and when we remember the way in which the work is done it can hardly be imagined that it can be allowed to continue. The improvement of the state of the Science School is a matter of immediate and pressing necessity. That school has completely overflowed its limits, and a part of the physical laboratory has gone to the French annexe of the Museum on the opposite side of the road. That annexe is required either next year or the present year—I believe during this year—for the Imperial Institute, and the Science and Art School will have to "clear out." There will be 60 students displaced, and there will be a loss of fees alone of over £3,000 a-year. But, more than that, the new students coming up from the country will have no accommodation, and this is, as has been pointed out, our training school for Science teachers. We talk about technical education in this House and on public platforms, we plead for it, and are all in favour of it—that is to say, we are in favour of talking about it—but no one seems to be in favour of spending money on it, and the result is that we are about to diminish our supply of Science teachers in consequence of lack of room in this Department. Then I go to the housing of the Science Collection. We have a Science Collection which is unexampled, which is unique, and which, taken with our Patent Museum, we can safely say contains examples which no Museum of the kind in the world contains. Our Patent Museum possesses Arkwright's great loom, Stephenson's first steam engine, and many other similar great inventions. In fact, from an historical as well as an industrial point of view, there is nothing to compare with the contents of this Museum anywhere else in the world. But these objects of interest cannot at present be seen or examined. Nothing could be more wretched than the position in which they are placed at the present moment. No one who has not seen the manner in which they are exhibited can believe how bad it is. They require, in order to be properly understood and appreciated, that proper accommodation should be given to them. It may be said, however, that these things will not suffer by delay; but that cannot be said in connection with the Science School. That is suffering by delay, and if when the right hon. Gentleman opposite passes the Technical Education Bill, as we sincerely hope he will, as technical education spreads in the Provinces, and as Local Authorities set up Technical Education Institutions, they will want teachers. Whore are those teachers to come from? The Science School at South Kensington has provided the best teachers in the country, and that institution has done more for technical education than all the others put together, except Owen's College, in Manchester. Something ought to be said about finishing the Art Museum and Art Collection. What does the right hon. Gentleman opposite say? He says—"Well, we have our ideas about it—take over two or three private residences, pending accommodation for those who now occupy them elsewhere." I would put it to the First Lord of the Treasury, as to the removal of the officers of the Exhibition from these residences, that you ought to have in connection with this Institution, as you have in connection with the British Museum, your officers resident on the spot. You have a collection at South Kensington the value of which amounts to millions of money. The Art specimens cannot be replaced if once lost. In case of a fire at the Museum the officers ought to be on the spot. To remove these men from the building is, I think, a great mistake; they certainly ought to be within a minute's call. My right hon. Friend (Mr. Plunket) said this is a problem which has engaged the attention of successive Governments, and that it is not so easily solved. Yes; but what is the reason that it has not been solved? It is because the Treasury, when driven into a corner, when it is short of money or wants to make a saving, says—"Oh, we will cut off Science and Art." In this country it is always a safe thing to cut down Science and Art. The noble Lord the Member for South Paddington (Lord Randolph Churchill) went down to Newcastle, and in his speech, which. I read with great care, he said—"If you only left Science to local effort, Science would now walk alone and do without Government subsidy." As a matter of fact, he was speaking in a school which, but for Government subsidies, would have been shut up next day. [Lord RANDOLPH CHURCHILL: Oh, oh!] I know the school a great deal better than the noble Lord, and I tell him that nobody could be more astonished at his remarks that Dr. Rutherford.

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL (Paddington, S.)

Why, he gave me the information.

MR. MUNDELLA

But Dr. Rutherford would close his school within a month but for Government assistance. It would be impossible to continue the schools of this country unless there was a Central College for the training of teachers. But that does not arise on this particular Vote, and therefore I am afraid I have somewhat transgressed. What I specially want to do is to confirm all that has been said by my hon. Friend (Sir Henry Roscoe), and by hon. Gentlemen who spoke on the other side of the House—that there is no country in Europe that has made such wretchedly small sacrifices for the training of scion- tific men, for the purpose of giving scientific instruction, as our own. The subsidy given in any small German State is far greater than the subsidy we give. The difference is as distinct as daylight is to darkness. The noble Lord the Member for South Paddington Will make that out if he turns to the Report of the Commissioners on Technical Education. It is time we should put our house in order, and put our scientific teaching upon a proper footing, if we mean to do anything in the way of technical education.

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

We spend over £500,000 sterling a-year.

MR. MUNDELLA

Yes; but what do we spend it in? We do not spend it upon scientific teaching. That amount includes the whole of the Science grants of the country; it includes the whole of the cost of the Art teaching of the country; it includes the whole cost of management at South Kensington and the cost of the whole of the Circulation Department in the bargain. It is something loss than what is spent upon a single Science teaching institution in Berlin alone. The right hon. Gentleman the First Commissioner of Works (Mr. Plunket) said we should come to an agreement about the method to be pursued. He is anxious we should take wise steps, and not be too hasty lost we should not perform our work thoroughly and satisfactorily. He pointed to the fact that a Departmental Committee was appointed to inquire into the housing of the Science and Art Collections. Lord Lingen, of the Treasury, Major General Donnelly, Sir Frederick Bramwell, and Mr. William Mitford, formed the Committee, and they all agreed, except the latter, to a Report, and that Report was signed on the 27th of July, 1885. Mr. Mitford doubted whether the public would spend the money recommended. If the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Plunket) would refresh his memory on the point, he would find that, so far as the Treasury of that day was concerned—and it never had a better Representative, or one who was more more careful of the expenditure than Lord Lingen—he would find that the Treasury assented through that Report to a principle which would settle the whole question.

THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, 625 Westminster)

At that time Lord Lingen was not Secretary to the Treasury.

MR. MUNDELLA

I beg the right hon. Gentleman's pardon. Lord Lingen was Secretary to the Treasury during the whole of the time the Committee was sitting. He resigned on the 27th of July, 1885, and the Committee was appointed fully a year before that date. The whole time he sat on that Committee he was the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury, and I know that since that time Lord Lingen has not changed his mind. He is of opinion that the Report ought to have been carried out. It would have been wise and economical on the part of the Government to have carried it out. However, I do not blame the Government for not having done so, but I do trust they will take some decisive action in respect of Science and Art teaching. It is a scandal if pupils who come up from the Provinces to attend Science Schools cannot be admitted to Science teaching. For the sake of the work on which we are about to enter—namely, the better technical education of our people, I trust that some better steps with respect to this teaching will be taken.

MR. PLUNKET

said, that he only desired to add a few words to the observations he had already addressed to the Committee. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Mundella) had criticized one of the proposals which was recently made by the Office of Works on the ground that if they excluded the officers who were at present resident in the building at South Kensington it would considerably increase the dangers besetting the Museum—especially in case of fire. He assured the right hon. Gentleman that the experience of the Office of Works was that the presence in buildings of such officers, so far from being of any advantage in the case of fire, or being any protection against fire breaking out, was to increase the danger from fire. What they found was that to protect buildings from fire by police and by night watchmen was by far the best and most practical way. In answer to his hon. Friend the Member for Wigan (Mr. F. S. Powell), the hon. Gentleman was quite right in saying that there had been a reduction in the insurance premium of South Kensington from £400 to £100. He was glad, however, to assure his hon. Friend that there had been no reduction at all in the amount for which they were insured. They were obliged to pay a higher fee at the time the Colonial and other Exhibitions were taking place there. The Insurance Companies insisted upon higher premiums in consequence of the increased danger from fire, because of the proximity of these Exhibitions.

MR. MUNDELLA

asked to be allowed to add one word by way of explanation. He did not mean to say that the officers should reside in the building, but he thought that they should reside in the grounds, some little distance from the building.

MR. PLUNKET

said, that under the wing of the building were four very large and handsome houses, and it was proposed that two of them should be vacated and used to meet the pressing wants of the Institution.

MR. MUNDELLA

said, there was another correction he should like to make. When he spoke of the expenditure of the Science School at Charlottenburg, the Secretary to the Treasury shook his head. He did not mean to say that that Institution cost £500,000 sterling a-year, but that the building cost £500,000, and that £140,000 more had been spent in furniture, appliances, &c.

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL (Paddington, S.)

said, he rose in consequence of the observations which fell from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Brightside Division of Sheffield (Mr. Mundella). He wished to remark that he was not in the least deterred by what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman from pursuing a very close scrutiny of the expenditure of the country at the present moment on Science and Art. This was not the moment at which such a scrutiny could be made. The most convenient time for criticizing the expenditure would be on the Vote for the general expenditure upon Science and Art. He would give the right hon. Gentleman fair notice, however, that he hoped to be in a position, when the expenditure on Science and Art came up for review, to give some startling particulars of extravagance on a marvellously largo scale. If those particulars were brought forward and proved to the satisfaction of the House, the hon. Member for Manchester (Sir Henry Roscoe), and others who agreed with him, would very probably have far more money to spend in the way they desired than they had at present. Constantly charges were brought by right hon. Gentlemen opposite against the Government of the country for penuriousness, short-sightedness, and other bad qualities, with respect to Science and Art, and grants for Science and Art buildings. He would like to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he would cause to be prepared a Return, showing the expenditure which had been incurred in this country merely on buildings for Science and Art purposes, so that they might know exactly what had been spent, and that they might be able to meet the charges of niggardliness which were constantly brought by right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite? If they could find out exactly what had been spent during the last few years upon Science and Art buildings, they would be able to compare the expenditure with that of other countries, and he thought it would be found that our expenditure on Science and Art exceeded that which had been incurred by other countries. At any rate, the Return he proposed would be very useful in view of the continued demands made on the Treasury. Those demands were very popular, and very easy to make, and it was very difficult for the Treasury to incur unpopularity by refusing them. He did not think the House had the remotest idea of the hundreds of thousands of pounds which had been sunk by the country in the payment of Professors' salaries, and in other forms of encouraging Science and Art.

SIR JOHN LUBBOCK (London University)

said, he did not propose to follow the noble Lord (Lord Randolph Churchill) in his remarks, which he had listened to with considerable surprise; but he hoped they would hear from some Representative of the Government something more definite upon the question. He listened to the right hon. Gentleman the First Commissioner of Works (Mr. Plunket) with some disappointment. No doubt, he spoke in a sympathetic spirit, but, at the same time, his remarks were not at all definite, and the suggestion he made seemed to be of the nature of a makeshift. With regard to the question of the residence of the officers of the Museum, it was argued that, so far as the prevention of fire was concerned, police were more effective than the officers connected with the Institution could be; but, surely, when a fire had once broken out it must be of great importance to have someone on the spot who knew where the more valuable articles were stored, and what were the best steps to be taken for their protection or removal. They had heard from the hon. Member for South Manchester (Sir Henry Roscoe) and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Sheffield (Mr. Mundella) of the crowded condition of the physical laboratory. He believed there was on the south side of the road a piece of land belonging to the Commissioners of 1851 which might be acquired. It was very desirable to secure that plot of land at once, because he understood that very probably ordinary houses would otherwise be built upon it, and the opportunity would be lost. It was quite clear that this was a matter which did not concern one Department of the Government merely; and, therefore, he hoped that before the discussion closed they would have the advantage of hearing the views of the right hon. Baronet the Vice President of the Council (Sir William Hart Dyke) and of the Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Jackson). The subject had been engaging attention for years, and it was now high time something definite was done.

MR. W. H. JAMES (Gateshead)

said, he sincerely hoped that in the course of the next year something would be done to improve the accommodation at South Kensington. He did not know whether the First Commissioner of Works (Mr. Plunket) was aware that an annual Exhibition of drawings and prizes in connection with the Science and Art Schools of the United Kingdom took place at South Kensington in the summer months; but he (Mr. W. H. James) had attended these Exhibitions, and had experienced great difficulty in finding them. When he had found the exhibits it was exceedingly difficult to inspect them. These exhibits were prizes which were brought in from the chief centres of the United Kingdom; and it was a pity so little should be known of them. Occasionally he had seen the classes at South Kensington at work. The accommodation was of the most wretched, unsatisfactory, and miserable kind. He was inclined to think that in respect to Science and Art education the feeling of the democracy in the constituencies generally was rather in favour of a lavish expenditure than otherwise. He sincerely hoped the Government would be able to see their way before another year came round to increase this Vote.

THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)

said, he had listened to the debate with great interest indeed, and especially to the remarks which fell from the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Mundella). He must draw the attention of the Committee to the fact that the great complaint made against the Government was that they were penurious. They had heard different stories at different times and in different parts of the country; but he was not ashamed of their penuriousness when it was necessary in the interests of the public purse. He thought it was the duty of the Government to examine the proposals by Departments of the Government with the greatest possible care, and to be perfectly and absolutely certain the expenditure proposed was absolutely necessary in the public interest. Very much had been said this evening which seemed to indicate that other provision was necessary at South Kensington. His noble Friend the Member for South Paddington (Lord Randolph Churchill) was amply justified in the remarks he made as to the cost of the buildings which had been erected at South Kensington within the past few years. Complaint had been made with regard to the course pursued by the Treasury. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Mundella) had the Treasury to deal with in his day; and he (Mr. W. H. Smith) had no doubt the right hon. Gentleman found that the Treasury exercised a very careful supervision over the demands which were made upon South Kensington; and he had frequently, no doubt, himself been the medium of making demands upon South Kensington which were not always satisfied. The Treasury were simply doing their duty in examining most carefully the demands made from time to time. He admitted they might at the Treasury occasionally prevent the execution of works quite as quickly as they might be demanded by the public; but he wished to take note most distinctly of the fact that the Government desired only to spend money when it was necessary in the public interest, and that they were hound to offer resistance to Departments which from time to time made demands upon them from the point of view of the Department alone, and not from the point of view of the interests of the country at large. He did not wish to make any observations with reference to the particular demand for further accommodation which had been urged by the hon. Gentleman the Member for South Manchester (Sir Henry Roscoe). It was a matter which demanded the consideration of the Government as a Government, and they must decide as between the Department which was wrong and that which was right, and determine which was the proper course to be taken. He undertook, on the part of the Government, that attention should be given to the question, and that a statement should be made in the House without any unreasonable delay. But he did trust that the House of Commons and the Committee of Supply would not urge the Government, night after night, to make large expenditure, and then expect them to conduct the finances of the country upon economical principles. The noble Lord the Member for South Paddington asked that a Return should be given of the money spent upon Science and Art buildings. He should be exceedingly glad to give such a Return; and to make it as full and complete as possible he would suggest that it should be a Return of the cost of South Kensington from its establishment, 20 years ago, down to the present date.

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL (Kirkcaldy, &c.)

said, he had great sympathy with Science, but very little with a great deal that was called Art; and he had also great sympathy with what the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury had said with regard to economy. Therefore, his feelings with respect to this Vote were a good deal mixed. As an outsider, however, he could not refrain from saying that it did seem to him a shame that South Kensington Museum should be allowed to remain in its present unfinished state. A foreigner must be shocked and astonished that the Establishment should be allowed to remain year after year in its present condition. While he hoped that the Treasury would exercise a wise check upon extravagance, he was bound to say we were not a nation of paupers, and that if we did keep up establishments in this country, these establishments ought to be made to present a docent front to the public. As long as he could remember South Kensington there had been a hideous spectacle of an unfinished front. He hoped the Government would either finish the Establishment or abandon it.

MR. MUNDELLA

said, that the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Treasury had premised the noble Lord the Member for South Paddington the Return he desired. To make that Return as complete as possible, he suggested that it should not only deal with the cost of buildings, but with the cost of examples from the foundation of the Museum, and with the value of the gifts made to the Museum since its establishment. He was sure that the country had no idea of the value of the Art treasures which the Museum possessed.

MR. W. H. SMITH

said, he would endeavour to prepare the Return so as to do full justice to the views of the right hon. Gentleman as well as to those of the noble Lord. He wished to allude to one observation which fell from the hon. Baronet the Member for the University of London (Sir John Lubbock). The cost of the proposed addition would be about £300,000. That was the cost arrived at by a very elaborate process of arithmetic. The first outlay was estimated to be £233,000. The experience he had had in dealing with figures was that the outlay was absolutely certain to be exceeded, and that it was very doubtful indeed whether economy could be effected in the Estimate.

LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL

begged the First Lord of the Treasury not to mix up the information he (Lord Randolph Churchill) required, which was valuable information, with the information the right lion. Gentleman (Mr. Mundella) asked for. How could the Government give an estimate of the value of the gifts to the South Kensington Museum? What he asked for was a Return of the capital outlay on bricks and mortar in connection with South Kensington, and he hoped the First Lord of the Treasury would limit the Return to that outlay. If the right hon. Gentleman opposite wished to have another Return he could move for it.

Vote agreed to.

(2.) £8,940, to complete the sum for British Museum Buildings.

COLONEL DUNCAN (Finsbury, Holborn)

said, he trusted that he would be in Order in referring to the question of the lighting of the British Museum at night. It was within the recollection of many hon. Members of the House that last year, in the course of a debate upon this question, the First Lord of the Treasury gave an assurance that the matter should have his full consideration. He (Colonel Duncan) could not find any mention in the Votes of the lighting of the Museum by night. It was possible that this might be owing to the uncertainty of everything in London in consequence of the introduction of the Local Government Bill; but he implored the First Lord of the Treasury and the Government not to forget this subject. There were many people in London who were only able to visit the British Museum at night. Representing, as he did, the district in which the Museum was situated, he asked the House to bear in mind the great success which had attended the opening of Museums at night elsewhere, and reminded the House that the Trustees of the British Museum had already twice recommended that action in the matter should be taken.

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL

said, his recollection of the debate of last year was that there was a general concurrence of opinion that the first step in reference to lighting should be taken at the Natural History Museum. That was a most popular Institution for the people of the Metropolis, and he believed that if it were lighted up at night it would be very largely visited.

MR. W. H. SMITH

said, the Government undertook last year to consider this question very carefully, and they obtained an estimate of the cost of the plant necessary for the lighting up of the Museum, and also of the cost of maintenance. Unfortunately, he had not got the Papers with him, as no Notice was given that this question would be raised. To the best of his recollection, however, it was estimated that the plant itself would involve an outlay of £30,000, and that the cost of maintenance would amount to £7,000 a-year. That, of course, referred to the two Museums. He believed that the cost of maintenance in the case of the Natural History Museum would be about £3,000 a-year. They had careful observations made as to the frequenters of, perhaps, the more attractive Museum at South Kensington, which was lighted up at night, and they came to the conclusion that they would hardly be justified in asking the House of Commons to incur so largo an original outlay, and the annual charge which would be involved. Of course, it was for the House of Commons to say whether the hands of the Government should be forced in a matter of this kind. In addition to a question of cost, there were the dangers incurred in connection with night exhibitions in London to be considered. These Collections were of very great value; indeed, they could not be measured simply by money value, or by their cost. In many cases it would be quite impossible to replace the exhibits if, by any accident, they should be lost, and accidents were more likely to occur at night than in the depilate, when supervision was more easily exercised. The Government took counsel with those who were, next to themselves, bound to care for these Collections, and the view the Trustees hold was that they would hardly be justified in asking the Government to incur the risk of lighting up the Museums at night. Under these circumstances, and having given the matter most serious consideration, with the fullest possible desire to open these Collections to the largest number of persons who, by any possibility, might visit them, the Government thought they would not be justified in putting an Estimate on the Vote for the plant required, and for the annual charge which would be involved.

SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL

said, he could only express extreme regret at the statement of the First Lord of the Treasury. He confessed that he was astounded to learn that the cost of plant was so enormous. He should have thought that with the advance of Science the plant would not have been so tremendously expensive. Certainly the lighting of the Natural History Museum at night was not open to as much objection as the lighting of the British Museum. The exhibits were not of a very inflammable character, and if they were destroyed they could be replaced. by new ones.

MR. BROADHURST (Nottingham, W.)

said it was unfortunate that the First Lord of the Treasury had not the figures of the estimate with him. It appeared to him that the estimate as to the cost of the plant was far in excess of what it ought to be; and he was at a loss to understand why the lighting of the British Museum at night should cost £7,000 a-year.

MR. W. H. SMITH

And the Natural History Museum.

MR. BROADHURST

said, that in that case there was not very much to complain of. It was an intolerable thing that a great Institution like the British Museum should be a closed building to the great mass of the people of London. The Museum was situated in the very heart of the Metropolis, within easy reach of hundreds of thousands of the working people of London; and it was now practically closed to them, except on holidays and times when they could not visit it. Most people did not cease work until 6 or 7 o'clock, and even later, and if Museums were kept open until a reasonable hour at night—say 10 o'clock—they would et once get rid of the very vexed question, on which there were strong opinions on both sides, the Sunday opening of these Institutions. He, as one strongly opposed to the opening of Museums on Sundays, felt that unless they were prepared to meet the people by throwing these Institutions open in the evening, the progress of the Sunday opening movement would be very great. As to the danger attending the lighting of the Museums at night, he could not help thinking that it was much exaggerated. The South Kensington Museum had been open at night for a number of years, and, so far as he remembered, there had never been a serious accident in consequence. He did not see why it should not be as easy to guard against accidents, or why accidents would be more likely to occur, at the British Museum and in the Natural History Museum than at South Kensington.

MR. ISAACS (Newington, Walworth)

said, that last year there was something almost amounting to a promise given by the Government that during the course of the financial year an effort would be made to see whether that which had been so long desired by the London public could not be granted. He could not help feeling that even if the cost were as large as represented by the First Lord of the Treasury, this country ought not to hesitate to defray it, seeing that thereby an opportunity would be afforded to the working and toiling masses of the Metropolis to visit these two great Museums. He was disposed to demur to the observations of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Kirkcaldy (Sir George Campbell) as to the desirability of first of all lighting up at night the Natural History Museum, because he took it that, for an Institution whose object was to educate the people, the British Museum had a far larger claim on their attention than the Natural History Museum, setting aside for the moment the more central position of the older Institution. He strongly urged the Government, if they wished to afford an opportunity to those who had but few opportunities of seeing these great National Educational Establishments, to turn their attention seriously to the subject.

Vote agreed to.

(3.) £4,000, to complete the sum for Edinburgh University Buildings.

(4.) £17,626, to complete the sum for Diplomatic and and Consular Buildings.

(5.) £14,145, to complete the sum for Harbours, &c. under the Board of Trade.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)

said, he desired to ask the Minister in charge of the Vote to state what was the condition of the works in connection with Dover Harbour?

THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. JACKSON) (Leeds, N.)

said, he had no doubt the hon. Gentleman was aware of the answer which was given yesterday by the First Lord of the Treasury to the Question put upon this subject. It would be within the recollection of the Committee that last year, when this question was raised, it was promised that the question as to further expenditure on Dover Harbour should be considered. The question hardly arose upon this Vote, because, as the hon. Member knew, Dover Harbour was rather connected with the building of the convict prison there. However, he had no hesitation in saying that the Government having given their most serious consideration to this question, leaving gone through the Report of the Committee which sat on the question, and even having regard to the very largo expenditure which had been already incurred upon the convict prison at Dover, had come to the conclusion that the cost of such a harbour as had been suggested would be so enormous, and that the advantage was so doubtful, that for the present, at any rate, they ought not to ask Parliament to vote any more money in respect of the Harbour at Dover.

Vote agreed to.

(6.) £9,530, to complete the sum for Lighthouses Abroad.

(7.) £29,180, to complete the sum for Peterhead Harbour.

(8.) £14 8,848, to complete the sum for Rates on Government Property.

(9.) £7,500, to complete the sum for the Metropolitan Fire Brigade.

(10.) Motion made, and Question proposed, That a sum, not exceeding £163,302, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1889, for the Erection, Repairs, and Maintenance of several Public Buildings in the Department of the Commissioners of Public Works, Ireland, for the Maintenance of certain Parks, Harbours, and Navigations, and for Repayments to Baronies under "The Tramways and Public Companies (Ireland) Act, 1883.'

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E.)

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, whether he would not agree to postpone the Vote until next Monday, when Members from Ireland could be in their places? He thought it unfair to take Votes of this kind in the absence of Members who were interested in them.

THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)

There is no Notice of any opposition whatever against this Vote, or the next. If there had been the slightest intimation of opposition, I should not have taken them to-night; but the hon. Gentleman may be satisfied that the Report will not be taken until the time he has named.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

said, he rather demurred to the statement of the right hon. Gentleman with regard to the Notice of opposition to the Vote, because many questions might arise upon them with regard to which Members did not feel themselves bound to give Notice on the Paper. However, he would not press that point. With regard to the National Education Buildings, he believed it was a fact that the Estimates of previous years had been very considerably exceeded by the National Education Commissioners in connection with buildings for ordinary schools. The position of the Treasury and the Board of Works (Ireland) and the National Education Commissioners had been recently considered; certain resolutions had been adopted; certain regulations drawn up and instructions issued to the National Education Commissioners. Those instructions would limit the powers of the Commissioners to advance money for building schools under the Statute now in force. But many managers of schools had undertaken liabilities under what they considered to be a Parliamentary guarantee, and the restrictions imposed would very materially embarrass a number of gentlemen who had no reason whatsoever to suppose that the powers of the National Education Commissioners would be curtailed or suspended. That was the first point that he had to bring before the attention of the Government. His next point was connected with the Ulster Canal. Last year the Canal figured for the sum of £705. The Canal was in the hands of the Government; it was a security which they had taken, and it had constituted a heavy charge on the Exchequer for many years. The Government had tried from time to time to get rid of it; but the terms offered by the parties were so onerous and unreasonable that the House had refused to entertain them. The sum now proposed in aid of the Ulster Canal was, that year, £1,500, and there was no explanation whatever of the increase. He should be glad to receive some information from the Secretary to the Treasury on this subject. Then, on page 83, there was the sum of £5,000 on account of repayment of the balance under the Tramways and Public Companies (Ireland) Act of 1883. He believed the Government were able to advance the sum of £40,000 a-year, at the rate of 2 per cent on the amount of capital invested, where the guarantee of the barony had been given and had been discharged by payment of a percentage of the guaranteed dividends. He asked what were the baronies which had made payment, and what were the Companies to whom payment had been made, and also the amounts paid?

THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. JACKSON) (Leeds, N.)

said, that the relation between the Treasury and the Board of Works and the National Education Commissioners in Dublin had been very correctly stated by the hon. Member as having recently undergone considerable revision. As he had explained to the House on a previous occasion, it had come to the knowledge of the Treasury that the grants approved by the National Education Commissioners had largely exceeded the provision made by Parliament, and it was necessary that some arrangement should be come to by which effective control should be exercised over those grants, and particularly with regard to the point of Supplementary Estimates. It had been his duty to put matters in such a form that there should be effective financial control, and that Supplementary Estimates should, if possible, be avoided, at the same time without disregarding what, at present at all events, he considered to be the obligation of the Government, as far as possible, to keep to the grants which had already been approved. Although he had not yet received figures which would enable him to give particular information to the Committee, yet he was having a statement prepared which would show in detail the amount of expenditure upon every school for which a grant had been sanctioned, and which was likely to come in course of payment during the current financial year and during subsequent years. He hoped that when he received those figures it would be found that the £40,000 in the Estimates for this year might be, if not entirely adequate to meet the actual requirements, at all events so nearly adequate that no Supplementary Estimates would be necessary, and no serious inconvenience would happen in the case of schools in process of building. The sum of £40,000 a-year for the next three years ought, in his opinion, to meet the full require. ments of the case. With regard to the Ulster Canal, the cost of its maintenance had been in recent years, upon the average, about £1,100. It often happened, of course, that the expenditure was more in one year than another, according to the amount of work undertaken, and repairs necessary in particular years. With regard to the payments by baronies under the Tramways and Public Companies (Ireland) Act, he need not remind the Committee that Parliament had, on former occasions, passed Acts which imposed upon the Exchequer certain charges with regard to tramways made under certain Statutes if they did not earn sufficient money to meet the interest guaranteed. He did not wish to take a gloomy view of the matter; but he was afraid that some of the tramways sanctioned, like railways similarly sanctioned, would not, for some time at least, earn sufficient to pay the guaranteed interest, and that a larger sum than was asked for this year might be found necessary to meet the deficiency which might arise. The sum in the present Estimate had been arrived at on careful inquiry in each case. He had a list of the amounts likely to be earned and expended, and of the amount of charge likely to come upon the Exchequer. He was not able to furnish the names of the baronies at that moment; but he could give the hon. Member the names of the Companies. The total amount of increase was £9,000, and, therefore, in taking £5,000, the Government had made provision for very little more than half.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

said, the Secretary to the Treasury had told the Committee little beyond the fact that, although £700 a-year had been taken for some years on account of the Canal, that amount had always been exceeded. This was one of the things which made proceedings in that House so unsatisfactory. The Estimates were really no check upon the expenditure of the Government, and had never been a check upon the Board of Works in Ireland. The Ulster Canal was a bad bargain, and, in his opinion, every sovereign spent upon it, so far as the public interest was concerned, had been practically thrown away. An Estimate was now brought forward exceeding by more than 100 per cent what had been asked for in former years.

MR. JACKSON

said, that what he had stated was that the average expenditure amounted to £1,100, although that amount was sometimes exceeded. He had explained to the Committee that last year £705 was taken, because it was not anticipated that this amount would be exceeded; but it was found that a larger expenditure would be necessary this year, and accordingly £1,500 had been taken. He did not mean to convoy that the expenditure in previous years had exceeded the Estimates, but only that the expenditure varied from year to year.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

, said, he had no wish to misrepresent the hon. Gentleman. The Canal did not pay even the wages of the lock-keepers, and there was no justification for spending upon it an annually increasing sum. The Government would, in his opinion, do well to wash their hands of it. It was a bad security, and he must certainly protest against the present increase by moving the reduction of the Vote by the sum of £400, which would bring down the amount to what had been found sufficient for several years.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £162,902, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Arthur O' Connor.)

MR. JACKSON

said, he could hardly state with what pleasure he had listened to the remarks of the hon. Gentleman. Every year, for the last five or six years, the Government had been endeavouring to carry a Bill for the purpose of effecting that which the hon. Member suggested—namely, to get rid of this annual charge. Such a Bill was introduced last year, but they had been unable to obtain opportunities for passing it. He was extremely anxious to get rid of the Canal, and agreed with every word which had fallen from the hon. Member with respect to the bad bargain which the Government had made, and which they were most desirous of parting with. He would not say why they had been unable to succeed. The hon. Member was probably aware that there was before Parliament at that time a Bill promoted by the Lagan Navigation Company seeking powers to take over the Canal. He hoped that Bill would become law during the present Session, and then the Government would have an opportunity of getting rid of this annual charge of about £1,100 a-year, and at the same time of accomplishing some good for several districts in Ireland, by opening up communication from Belfast to the other side of the country as a means of cheapening freights, carrying coals, and competing with as well as keeping the railways in order. He therefore hoped the hon. Member would not press his Motion, but that he would assist the Government in passing the Bill to which he had referred.

MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR

said, he was perfectly well acquainted with the provisions of the Bill brought in year after year to enable the Government to get rid of this Canal. He had always, however, looked upon the proposed arrangement as a job, and had therefore opposed the Bill. The Government Lad, year after year, submitted the proposal that the Canal should be handed over to the Lagan Navigation Company, with the condition that the Company should be paid £10,000 by way of a douceur. If the Canal was of any use to the Company, by all means let them have it, but why, he asked, should they receive £10,000 as well. The Company having at first asked £10,000, on finding that that was opposed, moderated their terms, but they still wanted a considerable sum. The amount which the Committee were now asked to vote was probably intended to put the Canal in as good a condition as was possible for the Logan Navigation Company. The Government could get rid of the Canal by a stroke of the pen, and he did not see why this further expenditure should be incurred. He could inform the hon. Gentleman that the idea of a canal between Belfast and the Shannon was simply moonshine. There was no water to float a boat in some parts, and the idea of communication described by the hon. Gentleman was altogether chimerical. As his contention was that the Government could get rid of the Canal and wipe this item off the Estimates, he felt it his duty to press his Motion to a Division.

Question put.

The Committee divided:—Ayes 46; Noes 93: Majority 47.—(Div. List, No. 58.)

Original Question again proposed.

MR. EDWARD HARRINGTON (Kerry, W.)

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, whether it was the practice to establish police barracks in the huts of evicted tenants, and whether a rent of three times the tenant's rent was paid for them? He pointed out that this practice led to an injustice in the case of tenants who were resisting the extortionate demands of landlords, because the Government paid the landlord a higher rent than he before obtained. He knew of one case in which three times the original rent of £15 had been paid to the landlord under the circumstances he had referred to. The Constabulary in Ireland were already sufficiently unpopular; but he looked upon this as the most odious use to which they could be put—namely, that of placing them in the hovels of evicted tenants.

THE CHAIRMAN

said, he must point out to the hon. Member that his remarks had no reference to the present Vote. The hon. Gentleman would have an opportunity of referring to this subject when the Votes of Class III. were reached.

MR. NOLAN (Louth, N.)

said, he joined in the protest of the hon. Member for East Donegal (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) against the Government taking this Vote in the absence of Irish Members, and if there was one circumstance more than another to which Irish Members would be likely to take exception, it was that the Vote provided for the maintenance of police in barracks. He found various sums charged for police barracks at Belfast, Roscommon, and Carlow, and he was bound to say that in his opinion all this money had been very badly expended. There were already too many barracks in Ireland. His attention had been directed the other day to the fact that in one town in Scotland, where there was a population of 35,000, the number of policemen did not exceed 18. Let the Committee compare that with a town in Ireland of 3,000 inhabitants, in which there were two police barracks, one at either end of the town, in each of which 15 or 20 policemen were stationed. He asked whether it was the intention of the Government to continue to spend the money of the taxpayers on the erection of police barracks in view of the time which he believed was fast approaching when all these police arrangements in Ireland would be done away with?

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR) (Manchester, E.)

I can assure the hon. Member that the amount of barrack accommodation is strictly regulated by the number of police necessarily stationed in the district.

MR. NOLAN

said, in view of the unsatisfactory answer of the right hon. Gentleman, he felt it his duty to move the reduction of the Vote by the sum of £3,000.

Motion made, and Question put, "That a sum, not exceeding £160,302, be granted for the said Service."—(Mr. Nolan.)

The Committee divided:—Ayes 38; Noes 99: Majority 61.—(Div. List, No. 59.)

Original Question put, and agreed to.

(11.) £35,500, to complete the sum for Science and Art Buildings, Dublin.

MR. BARTLEY (Islington, N.)

asked, whether the designs for these buildings were now satisfactory, and whether they had arrived at the end of this Vote?

THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. JACKSON) (Leeds, N.)

said, he should not like to promise that they had reached the end of this expenditure. He thought the Committee had had tonight an example of the pressure constantly put upon the Government in matters of the kind. He was afraid there would be some expenditure both on account of furniture and fittings, in order to make the building habitable. It was true that there had been an increase on the Estimate, but there had been also a considerable enlargement of the buildings originally contemplated. The Government had no reason to believe that the contract which had been taken for the work would show any unreasonable excess.

MR. MUNDELLA (Sheffield, Brightside)

said, he should like to hear the hon. Gentleman say that this Vote did complete the expenditure for the building. The building was exceedingly handsome, and, so far as he was able to judge, it was the best of its kind that had been produced during the last quarter of a century.