32. Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the increased rentals obtained by the Crown through the recently completed extensions of the leases of five premises in Regent's Park, the Treasury will take steps to cancel the agreement by which the Toxophilite Society hold six and a half acres of the park on an annual tenancy of £200 a year and open this area to the public for much-needed playing fields; and whether it will decline to sanction, before 1st January, 1916, and extension of the leases of St. John's and St. Katherine's Lodges, which do not expire till July, 1916, and October, 1929, respectively, in order that means may be devised, if possible, for securing these large areas (eleven and six acres) for the use of the public?
§ The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Runciman)I am asked by my right hon. Friend to reply to this question and to say that he regrets that he does not feel justified in giving up without compensation the revenue that would be lost by determining the tenancy of the Toxophilite Society. There is 1863 under consideration at the present time a scheme involving no loss of revenue for adding to the open park a small area, part of the society's holding. In reply to the latter part of the question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave him on the 24th ultimo.
35. Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether Mr. Hanbury promised in 1900 that no lease of the South Villa enclosure in Regent's Park would be granted without the knowledge and sanction of Parliament; and, if so, whether effect has been given to this promise?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANNo such promise was given; but with regard to the houses and grounds in Regent's Park generally, Mr. Hanbury said that it was for the interest of the public that revenue should be derived from the lands, and, when they had the opportunity, it would be for the Commissioners to see how far, without detriment to the revenue of the Crown, the public could have more access to certain portions of the park. Mr. Hanbury's view has since been acted on, and, as the hon. Member is aware, several additional areas previously in private occupation have been thrown into the open park in recent years.
§ Mr. CHIOZZA MONEYCan the right hon. Gentleman give us a promise that no fresh leases will be entered into without the consent of Parliament?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANThe only leases which are under negotiation have already been notified to Parliament. As I stated, I suspended them for a few days in order that the local authorities might have time to reconsider their decision.
36. Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he will ascertain the total number of members of the Royal Toxophilite Society to which 6½ acres of valuable public land in Regent's Park have been let for £200 a year; and whether he will publish a list of the names of all the members of the society?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI am not in possession of information enabling me to supply the particulars desired, and have no better facilities for obtaining it than my hon. Friend or any other member of the public.
Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTWill the right hon. Gentleman not take advantage of those facilities and publish this list. Is it not desirable that we should have a list of the seventy individuals who are enjoying the use of this land at so much less than its real value?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANAll I could publish would be the names of the persons to whom the lease is made. I am afraid I cannot ask the names of the members of the society any more than my hon. Friend can.
37. Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the President of the Board of Agriculture, with reference to the deputation from the protest meeting in Regent's Park which waited upon Mr. Leveson-Gower, what were the special reasons referred to by Mr. Leveson-Gower for the granting to Bedford College of a lease at a rental of £950 a year of the South Villa enclosure, which had been valued by him at £4,000 a year and by Lord Eversley at £8,000 a year?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANNo such statement was made by Mr. Leveson-Gower, who merely referred to the fact that Bedford College occupied a somewhat special position as a very prominent educational institution. This consideration, however, had reference only to the question of allowing more building on the land than would have been permitted in the case of a private occupier and in no way affected the question of the rent charged. The South Villa enclosure was never valued by Mr. Leveson-Gower at £4,000 a year, and I have no knowledge of the valuation attributed to Lord Eversley, but I am convinced that the values referred to, if obtained at all, could only have been obtained by appropriating the whole site for building purposes, a course which was never contemplated by any one connected with the Office of Woods.
§ Sir H. CRAIKHas the right hon. Gentleman seen Lord Eversley's letter in to-day's "Times"? Is it part of the functions of the President of the Board of Agriculture to continue the functions of educational aid which he performed at the Board of Education?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI have read Lord Eversley's letter with a great deal of interest, but I do not propose to reply to it So far as the hon. Gentleman's second question is concerned, I am acting 1865 as one of the Commissioners of Woods, and I am replying to this question on behalf of my colleague the other Commissioner.
§ Sir H. CRAIKDoes this consideration of educational qualifications in any way concern the Board of Agriculture?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANIt certainly would not have concerned me, as the lease was made before I went to the Board of Agriculture.
38. Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the President of the Board of Agriculture if he will state what is the extent of the meadow enclosed to the Baptist College in Regent's Park, adjoining the boundary wall; for what purpose it was let to the college; what rent is received from the college for it; what rental does the college receive for the horses and cattle which graze upon it; and whether, in view of the present conditions in which this meadow is kept, he can see his way to throw it open to the public?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANThe original lease of the premises, now known as the Baptist College, comprised about five acres of land. About six and a half acres of meadow land had previously been held on a yearly tenancy by the lessee of the premises since 1841 (when the adjacent part of the park was thrown open to the public), and it was part of the arrangement of 1883 that on the giving up by the lessee of about two and a quarter acres., the remainder, about four acres, one rood, eight poles, should be added to the lease from 10th October, 1883, and the rent was raised by £30 3s. 9d. I have no knowledge of the revenue, if any, derived by the college from the meadow land, and I have no present power to deal with it. The question whether and, and, if any, what part of the land can be given up without loss of revenue will be considered when the renewal of the lease (which does not expire until April, 1932) is suggested.
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI am afraid that at this interval of time I could not say. When the lease comes up for consideration again the large amount of meadow land now in the lease will, of course, be reconsidered with a view to the public requirements.