SECOND READING (Hansard, 26 July 1905)

§ MR. CALDWELL (Lanarkshire, Mid.)

said that as no explanation of this Bill had been offered by the Government, it fell upon him to explain the nature of this measure The Osborne Estate belonged to the late Queen as private property apart altogether from Crown property, and she was particularly anxious that the Osborne Estate should remain the property of the Crown. She held the Osborne Estate as private property and paid taxes upon it, and she was very solicitous that Osborne should be retained as the personal property of the Crown. In consequence of the property being bequeathed in that way, on the Second Reading of the Bill last year he explained how solicitous Her Majesty had been in handing this property down as a personal appendage to the Crown. When the Osborne property was handed over to the nation it was stated that it was a valuable gift on the part of His Majesty. They were told that the free income of the estate was £1,000 a year. It was provided in the Osborne Estate Act that the portion of Osborne House which had been in the personal occupancy of the late Queen should be retained as a memorial of Her Majesty and be open to the general public, while the rest of the house should be devoted to the benefit of officers of His Majesty's naval and military forces, their wives, widows, and families. At the time of the passing of the Act it was said that the structural alterations required were 419 estimated at between £5,000 and £6,000. It was further stated that the upkeep of the house and gardens would be from £3,000 to £5,000 a year. It was not long since 1902 when the Act was passed, but they found from the current year's Estimates that the amount to be expended on Osborne was £14,900. Last year the amount for structural alterations was £20,550. The House would, therefore, see that this property, which was said to be a valuable gift to the nation, had turned out to be an enormous burden. It was now proposed by the Bill before the House to extend the benefits of the convalescent home at Osborne to other branches of the public service, having particularly those in view who were serving the Crown in the Colonies or foreign countries under unhealthy or dangerous conditions. Who was to have the patronage with regard to the persons who were to occupy Osborne? The place was to be under the management of the Commissioner of Works. The Department of the Commissioner of Works was represented in the House, and it was answerable to the House for the manner in which it exercised its patronage. But this Bill proposed that the patronage in regard to the admissions to Osborne should be handed over to the Privy Council.

And, it being half-past Seven of the clock, the debate stood abjourned till this Evening's Sitting.