§ 8. Mr. KINGasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that a certificate of an Indian engineering college is required from persons seeking appointments as building experts under district boards; whether these engineering colleges or the architectural section of the Bombay School of Art provide theoretical or practical instruction in the traditional building craft of India, or have any teachers on their staffs who have studied the subject and are qualified to give instruction in it; and, if not, whether the Secretary of State or the Government of India will consider the desirability of ensuring greater efficiency in this respect?
§ The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Charles Roberts)My hon. Friend presumably refers to a rule in force in the Madras Presidency directing that, except with the express sanction of Government, no one shall be appointed as an assistant engineer to a district board unless he has a university degree of B.E. or an engineering college certificate in engineering. The duties of a district board engineer are largely concerned with roads and bridges, and a rule requiring evidence of training as a civil engineer is of obvious expediency. The curriculum and the qualifications of the teaching staffs of the engineering colleges are regulated in India. The Secretary of State is not informed as to the extent to which instruction in the traditional building craft of India is given, but he thinks it may be assumed that the matter has not been overlooked.
§ 9. Mr. KINGasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the attention of the Secretary of State has been drawn to the fact that a fine mosque, larger than 901 Shah Jahan's great mosque at Delhi, and considered by expert authority to be better in design than the latter, is now being built at Bhopal entirely by Indian master-builders using traditional Indian methods; whether it was stated, in an official reply to a petition presented to the Secretary of State urging the employment of Indian methods of building at the new Delhi, that such methods have long ceased to be applicable to works of any magnitude; and whether the Government of India consider it expedient that master-builders of such capacity should be barred from municipal employment of over 50 rupees per month for want of a certificate from a Government engineering college?
§ Mr. C. ROBERTSThe Secretary of State has seen an account of the mosque in the Government of India's Report on Modern India Architecture, but does not feel in a position to commit himself on its architectural merits. It has been in process of building by Indian craftsmen for more than twelve years and is still unfinished. The answer to the second part of the question is in the affirmative; and with regard to the last part, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply I have just given to his question on the subject.
§ Mr. KINGWith regard to this very remarkable building which is in progress, can we have a special report, or someone sent to examine it, with the view to the adaptation of those principles to the style and work for the buildings of the new Delhi?
§ Mr. C. ROBERTSThere is some information about this question included in the Report on Modern Indian Architecture to which I have referred.
§ Mr. C. ROBERTSI will see if that can be done.
§ Mr. WATTI understand from the last part of the hon. Gentleman's answer that the Indian Government encourages the system of employing no servants but college-bred men, no matter what their talents may be?
§ Mr. C. ROBERTSThat is the rule in the Madras Presidency, as I have said, with the exception of cases which may be expressly sanctioned by the Government.
§ 10. Mr. KINGasked whether the European architectural experts of the 902 Public Works Department appointed by the Secretary of State to advise the supreme and local governments are given sufficient opportunities for acquainting themselves practically with Indian building craft upon the sites of buildings, or whether they are chiefly occupied in the preparation of drawings to be used as patterns by Indian craftsmen; and, in the latter case, whether the Government will call upon their experts for suggestions for improving the system?
§ Mr. C. ROBERTSThe consulting architects to the Governments in India are employed to carry out the usual functions of architects, and the Secretary of State has no reason to doubt that they are given sufficient opportunities of the kind suggested. He does not propose to address the Government of India on the subject.
§ 11. Mr. KINGasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he has noted that the Report on Modern Architecture, published last year by the Government of India, revealed the fact that Indian master-builders working independently of the Public Works Department generally show much greater power for original work and a higher standard of technical skill than those employed by the Department; and whether the Government of India will investigate carefully the reasons for the deterioration of native craftsmanship and especially to what extent this is due to the conditions and methods of Departmental building in India?
§ Mr. C. ROBERTSThe Secretary of State is unable to associate himself with my hon. Friend in the inference he draws from the Report in question. This matter is mainly one of opinion. The encouragement of Indian craftsmen and their more extensive employment on public buildings are objects which the Government of India desire to further in any way they can.
§ Mr. KINGAs there is some difference of opinion between my point of view and that of the Secretary of State, can we have a report from the technical advisers of the Government of India, so as to decide the issue between us?