§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £30,800, be granted to His 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, 1913, 70 for Houses of Parliament Buildings." [Note.—£20,000 has been voted on account.]
§ Mr. NORMAN CRAIGThe subject upon which I wish to address the Committee will perhaps not be regarded as one of national importance. It is, however, one which indicates the care that is bestowed and the inspiration that is exhibited by the Lords Commissioners in relation to the internal architecture and arrangements of this House. I am addressing myself to what has been done in relation to the new larders. The method of treatment adopted in relation to those larders is a sort of tangled topsy-turveydom. The facts are that new larders have been put in. The larders to look at are excellent larders, with beautiful tiles and all the usual appurtenances, but the site is most unfortunate, because one wall of the new larders is also the side wall of the old boiler, and you have a hot wall on one side and a cold wall on the other side. It does not sound a promising place on which to expend public money from the National Exchequer in constructing new larders for this House. The position is not bettered when one knows, as I know, having visited the larders, that from the boiler room through the larders comes the pipe which conveys the heat from the boiler for the purpose of heating the House. Thus you have got your new larders on one wall of the boiler, and you have actually got hoc pipes carried along the ceiling of the larder. In commenting on this matter I should perhaps pay the Office of Works the compliment of saying, and quite frankly, that they resisted the temptation, which must have been considerable, of carrying the pipes from the boiler through the cold storage room which adjoins the larder. Every Member will recognise that a boiler is necessary to generate heat, that pipes are necessary to distribute heat, and that larders are necessary to cool meat; but even the Office of Works cannot warm our feet and cool our meat by one and the same operation. No doubt the Government are alive to the value of hot air, but the larder is not the place for it. The platform, or somewhere of that sort, is a far preferable spot. As far as the usefulness of the work is concerned, this larder is as bare as a cupboard famous in our national literature. It is perfectly certain that the money is absolutely wasted, as the place can never be used for the purposes of a larder. I have racked my brain to find out what useful purpose it can serve. It might 71 be useful as a sitting-out room if a staff ball were given below stairs, but for the primary purpose for which the work was done I cannot see that any good can result. I congratulate the Government on an effort in economy; it would have been useful if they could have done their cooling and heating by one single process; but I lament the fact that even efforts towards economy on the part of the Government result in extravagance. I should like to know who was consulted as regards the site of these larders; who was responsible for the design; who sanctioned it, and at what cost the work was carried out?
§ Mr. WHITEHOUSEThis Vote contained an item of £530 for building a base for a group of statuary to be erected in the New Victoria Embankment Gardens. I understood that these gardens would not be finished for two years, and that before any definite decision was taken as to laying them out, a plan—if not a model—would be exhibited in the House. I should be glad to know whether it is proposed to erect this group of statuary before the plan is exhibited, and Members have had an opportunity of submitting their criticisms to the Office of Works. I protest against the practice of promising that a plan shall be placed in the Tea Room and thinking that the mere observance of that ritual will satisfy Members of the House. It is not the ritual of the placing of the plan that we value. It is the opportunity of criticising the plan when exhibited, and, above all, of having our criticisms duly considered before the work is carried out. It appears that we are now pledging ourselves to erect in a certain spot a certain piece of statuary, before we have considered whether this is the best way in which partially to lay out the gardens. I am not criticising the very beautiful piece of statuary, "The Burghers of Calais," which it is proposed to erect in the Embankment Gardens. Judging from the photographs, the statuary is of a singularly beautiful nature; but to my mind it requires a historic and especially an architectural setting. I submit that this garden is not a suitable place on which to put this statuary, and I fear that it will be followed, as in so many other cases, by similar additions. Therefore, I await with considerable anxiety an assurance from the representative of the Government upon this point. There is an amount included in the Vote for internal repairs and altera- 72 tions to these Houses, including a certain sum for removing the varnish from the oak work throughout the buildings. No attempt has been yet made to remove the varnish from the very beautiful oak work which adorns this Chamber. I think I shall be expressing the general sense of the Committee in asking the hon. Member for St. George's whether his Department, will soon remove the varnish from this; woodwork, and thereby greatly improve the amenities of this Chamber.
§ Mr. JOHN O'CONNORI wish to ask a question concerning the frescoes in the Royal Gallery. Those frescoes are deserving of the consideration of this House for two reasons: first, because they represent two great historical subjects—the death of Nelson, and the meeting of Wellington and Blucher on the field at Waterloo; and, secondly, because they are the works of a great and distinguished artist, namely, Daniel Maclise. I feel a personal interest in these frescoes because I am a fellow-citizen of Daniel Maclise. I had not the honour of his acquaintance; he was before my time; but I knew very well some of his pupils in the City of Cork, who took a very great interest in these pictures, and always lamented the fact that they were rapidly fading from view. I have asked questions about these frescoes before, but I have never received a satisfactory reply. Perhaps no satisfactory answer can be given. Possibly it cannot be stated why they are fading away. The present Colonial Secretary, I know, asked for a report from Sir Arthur Church; but even he failed to explain why these historical works, in which the whole nation, and even the whole world, are interested, are fading away. It is sometimes said that it is feared that Daniel Maclise used pigments of a faulty character; but that has not been proved to the satisfaction of anybody who has considered the subject. It has also been stated that the frescoes suffer from the fumes proceeding from Doulton's and other factories up the river, and that those fumes are affecting, not only these pictures, but the very structure of this building itself. It is also stated, in order to account for the fading away of these pictures, that they are suffering from the damp which comes in through the walls. It may be that the representative of the Office of Works has not had these frescoes brought to his attention; but the Colonial Secretary, who is present, took a great interest in them, and had them repaired, if I may use the term. Can the 73 right hon. Gentleman say what has been the result of the application of the work of other artists to these pictures, to what extent they have been renovated, what has been the effect of the renovation, and whether there is any hope that the pictures will be reserved to the nation and to those who take a keen interest in them?
§ Mr. ALEXANDER WHYTEThere is a comparatively small sum set aside for urgent and unforseen works and alterations of a minor character. I wish to ask whether the hon. Gentleman is prepared to take into consideration the advisability of applying a small part of that sum to the removal of the grille in front of the Ladies' Gallery? If the hon. Gentleman has any doubt as to the nature of the demand for that work he might take an opportunity of discovering the general sense of the Committee on the point. Although he perhaps has no personal experience of that demand, I am certain that the majority of Members would concur in and welcome it. It cannot be doubted that the removal of the grille and the substitution of a brass bar, or some defence of that character, would greatly improve the Ladies' Gallery as a point of vantage for those who wish to listen to our Debates.
§ 7.0 P.M.
§ Sir J. D. REESI only desire to call attention to Item D (warming, ventilating, and lighting). I assume from the fact of the provision made that the Vote is practically a normal one, and that nothing will be done during the year in the way of changing the method of lighting this House. When the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Harcourt), who has just left the House, was in charge of the Office of Works, he gave the most kindly and courteous consideration to those Members of the House who are extremely interested in this problem, because they feel the pressure of light from above on their eyes. I believe that pressure possibly to be unavoidable. At any rate, it might be made very much worse than it is if electric light were substituted for gas. I would not venture to bring this forward if it were merely a matter of one individual Member's eyes, and those of my own; but I have made inquiries, and I believe there are many Members of the same opinion and who quite dread a change. If I am in order, I should like to deprecate very strongly any such action being taken without the matter being brought before the House, and without an experiment being made under somewhat similar conditions as to the relative 74 effects of gas and the electric light upon the eyes of the average man. If the hon. Gentleman would kindly give some assurance that no such change will be made without the opinion of the House being taken I, and perhaps other Members also, shall be grateful to him.
§ Sir W. BYLESThere is one improvement that would make for the convenience of Members of this House which I should very much like the Office of Works to take into their serious consideration. I have raised the question before by question in the House and also by private representations. I refer to the suggestion that there should be a lift provided in the well of the staircase which leads up from the bottom of the floor close to the large Smoke Room up to the Committee Room. The staircase is one which is in use all day long by the servants of the House, by Members of the House, and by the Press. There are certain Members who are getting well into years. I do not want to make any personal observations, but I know from my own experience that climbing that very long staircase is getting to be a laborious matter. It would be a benefit, I feel absolutely certain, to all of us, if such a suggestion as I put forward were carried out. It would be hailed with great satisfaction as soon as it was found to be in working order. I am very anxious that the Chief Commissioner should give his attention to this matter. I believe there are some slight engineering difficulties in the way. There is a small room that intervenes. But some arrangement might be made elsewhere for the accommodation that would be taken away, and I strongly urge upon the Office of Works that they should take this matter up.
§ Mr. WEDGWOOD BENNWith regard to the question put as to the group of statuary by M. Rodin known as "The Burghers of Calais," my hon. Friend the Member for Lanarkshire pointed out, quite rightly, that money has been taken for providing a base, and he asked whether the statuary was to be erected in the Victoria Tower Gardens. The facts are these: A copy of the original statue stands in a square in Calais itself, and a copy was very generously given to the First Commissioner by the National Art Collection Fund. It awaits some place on which to stand, and it is proposed to put it in some suitable place in the Victoria Tower Gardens. I do not know that I can give any particular historical reason why it should be placed there, except that Queen Philippa has 75 some association with the Abbey of Westminster, where she was crowned and buried. But the matter cannot be completed for some time, and until the London County Council have carried out its projected improvements. I am afraid that it will be well into next year before any definite steps can be taken. My hon. Friend opposite on the Irish Benches raised the question of the Royal Gallery pictures by Maclise. I think it is true that some experiment was made in the way of pigments with these frescoes—although I defer to his opinion in this matter—but the Office of Works has the advantage constantly of the advice of Sir Arthur Church, and my hon. Friend may rest assured that such steps are taken as are necessary to safeguard and restore these works of art.
§ Mr. JOHN O'CONNORCan the hon. Gentleman tell me what is the result of such restoration? What was the effect of the work that has been done, and which I saw being done myself last year? I also want to know is it going to be continued, because unless something is done these pictures will be lost? They are fast fading from view; they are on the eve of extinction.
§ Mr. W. BENNThe hon. Member, of course, understands that these are very difficult things to deal with. I think he will agree that the First Commissioner could do no better than take and follow the advice of such an acknowledged expert in these matters as Sir Arthur Church; and that is the course which he has pursued As to the removal of the grille in front of the Ladies' Gallery—a question raised once more—I do not think any person, with one or two exceptions, has ever expressed a view favourable to a removal of the grille. I cannot undertake to carry out the suggestion of the hon. Member unless he can show me that there is a majority of opinion amongst hon. Members of this House in favour of the removal, and also a similar balance of opinion amongst the ladies who occupy the Ladies' Gallery. As to the question of a lift mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Salford, no provision is made in this year's Estimates. But the First Commissioner has already promised to consider the matter, and, I believe, to bring it into the Estimates next year. The only other matter which it is necessary to refer to is the lighting of this Chamber, and if the House will 76 permit me I will refer to it at some length, because it is an important matter and one in which I take a good deal of interest. First of all, it is necessary that there should be a change of light. At present the House is lighted by groups of circular Argand burners—a very old-fashioned type. In order to maintain the proper amount of illumination on the floor of the House some alteration is necessary. Then the question arises what alterations should be made.
I think I shall be able to show the House that the substitution of clusters of electric lamps will produce exactly the same effect as regards the strength and tone of the light as that produced by gas, with other advantages in the way of economy, and improvement of the ventilation. The illuminating power at present of the gas is such that we cannot maintain a proper light on the floor of the House. Hon. Members complain that they cannot read their notes or see the Papers that they desire to see in the course of debate. I must apologise for troubling the House with these details, but the chimneys of the present burners sometimes melt and the falling glass has more than once alarmed hon. Members and may even cause some accidents. Now as to the alterations. I estimate the cost of this light at about £250 or thereabouts yearly. By the instalment of the electric light we shall save half of the cost of maintenance. The saving will be £140 a year, which is exactly half the cost of the installation of these lamps. What other advantages shall we obtain? We shall be able to revolve the plant which ventilates this House at a greater speed, and consequently we shall be able to get a better flow of air through the Chamber than at the present time. If we attempt anything like this at present and turn the apparatus beyond a certain speed, there is always the danger that we may blow the light out. The rest of the House is lighted by electricity. This ceiling above us remains lighted with gas. One portion of the ceiling has been installed with the electric light, and if the House sits tonight till the light is necessary—which I hope will not be the case—hon. Members will have the opportunity of seeing for themselves whether or not the colour and tone of this light is more or less than that given by gas. I am confident that hon. Members will be perfectly satisfied that the change is an improvement. If they are, we shall then proceed to the other bays to effect the economy I spoke of, and 77 the improved ventilation. If on the other hand the House does not approve of the change, then we shall remove the electric light which has been installed in one bay. In this matter the First Commissioner is undoubtedly in the hands of the House of Commons. He is anxious, as he always has been to meet hon. Members' wishes in every possible respect. I therefore ask hon. Members to reserve their judgment until they have seen the experiment to which I refer, and if it meets with their approval, we shall proceed with the alterations which I have outlined.
§ Lord BALCARRESI am afraid the experiment of 25 per cent. of the lighting of this House in one of the four bays will be insufficient to convince hon. Members that the Government are justified in extending the light to the other three bays. In fact, if only one of them is lighted by electric light it will not give us a fair test. I frankly tell the House that I regret the proposal of the First Commissioner. The hon. Gentleman has really not explained to us why the alteration is necessary. He said that an alteration is necessary; that an alteration has got to be made; and that therefore it is going to be made; but I fail to follow him as to why the alteration is necessary. He said there were complaints of the lighting. I have been in this House for eighteen years. I have only heard one complaint of the lighting as far as my recollection goes. That was quite recently made by an hon. Member who sits upon the Nationalist Benches, and who complained that the lighting was inadequate. The complaint that the present system is dangerous seems to me to be one which is not likely to attract much attention, and the statement that £40 per year is going to be saved is not, in my opinion, sufficient justification for changing the whole system. I have been reading the report of the expert who has been called in to give instructions. I notice the expert visited the House on a Friday at the end of April. It is obvious, therefore, that he did not spend four or five hours in the House while the artificial light was illuminating the Chamber. It is not for me or anybody else to cast aspersions upon the technical expert. I have no doubt that he was the best expert that could be found, but I venture to say that the best test is the test of Members themselves, who sit here year in and year out for hours and hours under the present system of artificial light. I state confidently, so far as my Friends are concerned—and, indeed, I have had an 78 opportunity of hearing hon. Members opposite also on the subject—that the present system of lighting is less fatiguing to the eyes than anything so strong, and, above all, so uniform, as a system of electric lighting. I notice that the expert suggested not only that electricity should be substituted for gas lighting, but that the light should be stronger. Is that recommendation going to be followed out?
§ Mr. W. BENNI did not say so.
§ Lord BALCARRESIf we are to have electric light, it is important it should not be stronger than the artificial gas system we have at present: the expert suggested an addition of 20 per cent. to the lighting capacity of the roof. One further small point—it is only a point of detail—it is suggested that the Gallery lights should come from behind Members. That is a very obvious suggestion from one who is not a Member of the House of Commons and who has not sat under the Galleries.
§ Mr. W. BENNThat is not to be done.
§ Lord BALCARRESI am glad to hear that. It. is suggested that uniformity of illumination in electric light is an advantage, and that the flame of the gas vacillates, and that the light therefore is not as uniform and as regular as it should be. Here, again, I put the practical experience of the layman against the technical knowledge and experience of the expert. I believe that when you are here for six, eight, and ten hours at a sitting—and all-night sittings in winter months run for ten hours—the variation of the light, and the lack of uniformity, is a source of unconscious change and of relief to the eyes of hon. Members. I cannot for the life of me find out, after all my inquiries in the House of Commons, that gas has a fatiguing effect as an illuminant, or that there is a demand for this alteration. If one reads in the Library or the Lobbies with electric light, the experience of being under that electric light for half an hour involves an astonishing amount of fatigue to the eyesight, compared with the lack of pressure from the gas light at the height of forty or fifty feet from the floor of the House. If the change is to improve ventilation, that at least would be a point in its favour. I may be an optimist upon these matters, but I consider that the lighting and ventilation of this House are infinitely superior to anything that can be found in any other chamber or place of assembly, 79 be it church, theatre, school, or public meeting place, where any service or performance goes on uninterruptedly hour after hour. I ask any Member of this House if he has not proved by experience, whether in a theatre, church or public meeting, or indeed in one of the Committee Rooms upstairs, which has been occupied by a meeting or filled with people for three or four hours, that you will not get a splitting headache in ten minutes after you have gone in there?
You can come into this House, after it has been sitting eight or ten hours, and whatever objection may be made to the system of ventilation through the floor, at all events you find the place is conveniently fresh and well ventilated when compared with the defects you have to face under any other system. How can the ventilation of a theatre, with its temperature and atmosphere, and its smell and everything else, which are most intolerable, be compared with the system we have got here, which is the only system consistent with the long hours the House of Commons sits? I myself would run the risk of having one out of sixty-four of our lights occasionally blown out rather than put in electric light to prevent that small difficulty. When a light is blown out there is one blank space out of sixty-four. One light may blow out once in ten days, or in three or four weeks, but that is not very serious. The loss of a light is not incalculable or immeasurable, and within a very few minutes afterwards the officials of the House, when a light goes out, get it repaired again. I frankly tell the Government I regret this change. The hon. Gentleman opposite has not convinced me that there is any effective demand in any quarter of the House in its favour. So far as my personal experience is concerned, I believe the gas light, with all the disadvantages attached to it, is none the less one which hon. Members who have to be here for long hours during the evening and night, believe to be the best system, and by far the most suitable for our requirements.
§ Mr. NOEL BUXTONI think the House will hear with pleasure my hon. Friend's statement that there is to be a speeding up of the rate at which varnish is to be taken off. It is well to consider that the general public frequent this House on Saturdays in very large numbers, and regard it as a museum of art to a very 80 remarkable degree. Hon. Members are no doubt too much engrossed with their arduous duties here to pay the attention they otherwise would to the artistic beauties of this building. The public recognise it is a palace of Gothic art of supreme importance, and visit it in immense numbers on Saturdays. It is really unworthy of the sense of proportion that so little should be spent upon removing what really spoils the distinctive characteristics of this House, the marvellous collection of old carvings; and it is really the varnish that makes all the difference in the world between extreme beauty and a certain degree of unsightliness. In time to come, when the rage for neo-classic building has had its day, there will be a reversion to Gothic, and this House will come to be regarded in a hundred years as far the greatest memorial of the Victorian age; and it is very unworthy that such a trivial sum required to make it as beautiful as it should be in regard to good carving should not be readily expended. I trust my hon. Friend will give this matter his most serious attention.
§ Sir J. D. REESDo I understand the hon. Gentleman (Mr. W. Benn) to give a pledge on behalf of the Government that they will not proceed with the substitution of electricity for gas without taking the opinion of the House upon the subject? I should be sorry to take any step now to force a Division or to delay the House, and I hope the hon. Gentleman opposite will give me that pledge.
§ Mr. KINGSo far as I can judge, this question of the substitution of electricity for gas is an urgent necessity. I cannot understand the remarks of the Noble Lord opposite when he says he does not see the necessity for the change. If he knew anything about the recent course of gas lighting generally, and of electricity also, he would know that there is a very real reason why some change must be made. The manufacture of gas everywhere is proceeding on the lines of giving less and less illuminating capacity per thousand cubic feet: That is desirable, both in the interests of cheap gas and also the incandescent mantle, and other new forms in the use of gas as an illuminant, and it is absolutely absurd that we should go on here using the old arc burners. Anyone who has given any direct attention to gas as an illuminant must know that to continue using the old arc burner is more costly and inefficient, and for anyone to advocate that 81 we should continue keeping the old system shows he knows nothing about the present course of illumination.
§ Lord BALCARRESI hope I did not pretend to any technical knowledge of gas or electricity. I have neither. I said I have practical knowledge by being in this House for eighteen years, and that my experience shows that the present light is excellent.
§ Mr. KINGI quite accept what the Noble Lord says; but he ought to be aware that every year the illuminating power of gas, as furnished by the gas companies, is going down, and, that being so, it is absolutely inevitable we must change the system which possibly was good enough twenty years ago; but which is an increasing infliction in these days. Every year electricity is becoming cheaper and cheaper as an illuminant, and more and more effective. Personally, having given some consideration to this question, I feel quite sure that the specialist advice is the right one, and that the change recommended will be a good one. If hon. Members will look up at the roof at the present moment they will see that one of the lights has gone out. That in itself proves that the lighting is ineffective. With regard to the question of increasing the illumination by 20 per cent. in this Chamber, I feel convinced that it is desirable. The increase of 20 per cent. in the illumination would not be dazzling to the eyes of hon. Members, especially if they would return to the good old practice of wearing their hats when sitting in this House. That would have a very good effect in screening the eyes from any glare from above; and it would be a real advantage for Members, as they would then be able to observe whether an hon. Member speaking was making any effect by his remarks upon the House. I hope the Government will remember that those who have some little claim to speak support them in the change which is about to be made.
Before sitting down I would like to make one suggestion in reference to the money spent upon this House. I shall never be content or happy in this House until there is better accommodation than we have got at present for reading newspapers. Really, the Newspaper Room in this House is the most miserably inadequate room in the whole building. It was built and furnished, I suppose, with newspapers at a time before many of us 82 were born, when there were not half the number of newspapers there are now in the country, and when they cost from 3d. to 6d. each. We cannot really keep ourselves well posted up in what is going on unless we have much greater facilities for reading newspapers, and especially the provincial newspapers. There ought to be some provision made for providing the most important provincial newspapers, which ought to be kept in receptacles available for hon. Members referring to their own special part of the country in order that we may keep in touch with what is going on. I hope consideration will be given to the very inadequate Newspaper Room accommodation with the object of giving us more newspapers and greater comfort, and generally more facilities for keeping up to date with what is going on in the Press. I observe in all these Estimates and in connection with the special Vote we are now considering, there is a very large sum put down on each occasion for urgent and unforeseen works. In the case of this Estimate there is the sum of £900, and taking the whole of Class 1 the Office of Works has put down for buildings no less than £56,000 for unforeseen and urgent works. It seems to me that this is bad estimating, or at any rate shows a certain laxity when we are asked, in connection with the whole of these Votes, to vote at least £56,000, of which we get no details whatever. I hope this is a matter which will come before the Estimates Committee, and I trust that in future estimates we shall see a less sum devoted to urgent and unforeseen works.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTI desire to dissociate myself from the words spoken by my Noble Friend in reference to ventilation. Of course, the conditions which he enjoys on the Front Bench may be somewhat different from those which we suffer from on the back benches. It is no great pleasure during an Autumn Session—and I sat continually during the last Autumn Session—to find my body in a fairly hot climate and my legs suffering from the blast of an East wind. In this matter I will take the Committee into my confidence sufficiently to tell them that I have had to alter my mode of clothing in certain respects since I came into this House. I may also tell the Committee that before I came into this House I was almost wholly unacquainted with anything in the nature of colds, but during the last Autumn Session I found myself subject to chronic colds entirely owing to the fact that there is cold air 83 circulating along these benches when one is sitting, in other respects, in a hot atmosphere. Therefore I say that what has been said cannot be the last word in ventilation, and the existing arrangements might have a tendency to urge some of us to endeavour to aspire to the Front Bench when we might otherwise be quite content with our present humble lot. I should like the Noble Lord the Member for Chorley to try one of these back benches for himself. This inconvenience does not exist in places of worship because often there is a door at the end of the pew which prevents a draught. I hope some obstruction will be placed at the end of these benches to prevent the cold air circulating round our legs.
§ Mr. RUPERT GWYNNEI wish to ask the First Commissioner of Works if he can see his way to improve the ventilation in the Ladies' Gallery. I think it is generally admitted that the ventilation there is exceedingly bad, and I have heard a great many complaints about it. Although some of us do not desire to see ladies occupying these benches, we do think that when they come to the Gallery of this House they should have a place to sit in which is better ventilated than the present Ladies' Gallery is.
§ Mr. W. BENNAs far as the lighting is concerned, I think hon. Members will be well advised to see what they think of the alteration that has been temporarily and experimentally made before they come to any final opinion. I doubt whether many hon. Members are able to say which days the House was illuminated by electricity and which by gas. As to the ventilation of the Ladies' Gallery, that is a matter which is at present occupying the attention of the First Commissioner. It is a very difficult question, but certainly experiments are being made which I hope will have the desired effect.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTWill the hon. Gentleman say something about the draught of which I have complained?
§ Mr. W. BENNWe have a very careful system of recording temperature in order to maintain an even temperature throughout the House. If the hon. Member will tell me of any variations which he finds unpleasant I will have an investigation made.
§ Mr. WALTER REAI hope when the First Commissioner is considering the 84 question of the ventilation of the Ladies' Gallery he will also consider the ventilation of the Committee Rooms upstairs, where there is often a far greater crowd than assemble in this House, where the sittings are continuous, and where the atmosphere becomes almost intolerable for those who go in for only a few moments, and the conditions must be insufferable for those who have to attend Committees continuously.
§ Mr. W. BENNIn so far as any improvements can be made without any additional service, I shall be glad to see what can be done to meet what has been complained of.
§ Question put, and agreed to.