HL Deb 11 March 1880 vol 251 cc782-8

Order of the Day for the Second Reading, read.

EARL STANHOPE,

in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, he thought he was expressing the feeling of all their Lordships in deploring the destruction of ancient monuments. Of late years the Castle of Banbury, and many other ancient monuments, had been entirely destroyed, together with many old castles in different parts of the country, and this, not for the purpose of removing obstructions, or for any important and useful purpose, but merely to obtain the stone to mend roads or repair cottages. He reminded the House that the ancient monuments were really the unwritten history of this country; and it was suggested that to prevent their further destruction and entire disappearance the owner of the land should, in the first place, before destroying them, offer them for sale, and that the Trustees of the British Museum, who were to be Commissioners for the purpose, should be empowered to buy them under certain conditions. The Bill, or similar Bills, had six times passed a second reading in the House of Commons, had been once examined in Committee, and had once been referred to a Select Committee of the other House, which had recommended certain modifications, which had been adopted in the present Bill. During the discussions on the measure in the House of Commons, the hon. Member for Maidstone (Sir John Lubbock) had given a number of examples of the destruction of interesting ancient monuments. Of course, if owners chose to retain and take charge of the ancient monuments on their estates, they could do so. His own opinion was that the Bill would cause all proprietors to preserve their historical monuments. Some objections had been urged against the proposal on the ground of expense; but he was at a loss to perceive how any great expenses could be incurred, because all that these ancient monuments required was to be let alone. On the receipt of a communication as to the wishes of the Government in that respect, the Trustees of the British Museum had, on the 27th July, 1878, resolved to become the Commissioners under the Bill. Annexed to the Bill was a Schedule containing a list of the monuments to which the Bill would apply, which had been carefully revised by the Societies of Antiquaries of London and Scotland, and by the Royal Society of Arts in Ireland. Under the 3rd clause the Commissioners would have power to apply the Bill to any monument which might appear to them to be of national interest, and which was not in a park, garden, or pleasure ground of a private owner; but this power was guarded by subsequent clauses in the Bill. He ventured, as the son of a former President of the Antiquarian Society, to impress upon the House the importance of adopting this measure.

Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a "—(The Earl Stanhope.)

THE DUKE OF SOMERSET

said, that the Trustees of the British Museum were not a proper body to have charge of these ancient monuments. They had not the means to protect these interesting relics of antiquity. In this Bill a monument had little reference to history. The Bill applied to cairns, dykes, and mounds, which were pre-historic, and of most of them nothing was known. Even Cæsar's Camp was doubtful. The Schedule of the Bill was imperfect in what it contained and in what it omitted, and the proposed machinery of the measure very unsatisfactory. He did not approve the appointment of the Trustees of the British Museum as the Commissioners. On these grounds, he suggested that the Bill ought to be referred to a Select Committee.

EARL DE LA WARR

quite agreed with the noble Duke that this Bill should be referred to a Select Committee. There was a Schedule of places in the Bill; but the provisions of the measure might be applied to any monument which, in the opinion of the Commissioners, ought to be taken care of. The owner of a small property which was not a park, garden, or pleasure garden, might have a monument in which he took much interest, and the Commissioners would be able to interfere with it against his will. He was quite at a loss to know why that should be so. A monument was as much a man's property as any other kind of property; and because it was ancient, was that a reason why he should be subjected to restrictions as to what he should do with it? In short, an owner would have to deal with his property as if he were a sort of trustee of it. He thought that an owner of an ancient monument was much in the same position as the owners of a picture by an old master.

EARL GRANVILLE

understood that this Bill had received the approval of the Trustees of the British Museum. However that might be, it was quite clear that the Government had been in communication with those Trustees, and no doubt they would make excellent arrangements for the purpose of carrying out the objects of the Bill.

THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)

said, that he thought the Bill should not be passed in its present shape. The rule was that when it was proposed that an owner's property was interfered with he was allowed to be heard upon the question before Parliament; but this Bill contained the strange proposition that a man's property might be interfered with whether he liked it or not. He hoped their Lordships would not adopt the course now proposed by this measure. Curiously enough, a county with which he was connected—Northumberland—was not included in the Bill; yet in that county there were the remains of the Roman Wall, of all things in this country the most interesting, and not yet included in the Schedule. There were many other omissions. They should not pass this Bill, merely because it must be passed, in a hurry, and he hoped it would go to a Select Committee.

THE EARL OF CARNARVON

wished to say a word or two in favour of the Bill, and upon the shape in which it had been brought before the House. He must point out that the interference allowed with any man's property had been pared down to the smallest possible quantity. As originally framed, Commissioners were named in the Bill who were not the Trustees of the British Museum. Her Majesty's Government suggested that those Trustees should be the Commissioners, in order that the latter might be responsible to the Executive. He accepted that proposition as it came from Her Majesty's Government, though he did not himself think that the Trustees of the British Museum were the best body to act as Commissioners under the Bill. He should have liked as Commissioners a body like the Inclosure Commissioners, with members named by the Antiquarian Societies of the Three Kingdoms. The Commissioners would not be able to expend monies without the sanction of Parliament. There was no doubt that most interesting monuments had been, and were being, destroyed through ignorance, the sordid love of money, and every conceivable folly. In many cases woful and wanton mischief had been done, which it was the duty of Parliament and of an enlightened Government to restrain. His noble Friend (Lord Houghton) was fully justified in what he said as to the necessity of an early interference. Many most curious monuments had already disappeared, and many more were disappearing. In a year or two there would be a loss to the country of most valuable remains. These cases of destruction or disappearance it was the duty of the Government to restrain. In this they had an example in the course followed by other Governments. In Holland, monuments which were almost unique had been preserved in this way. The Danish Government had also taken steps in the same direction, and for years and years past the French Government had taken similar measures; and if they had sometimes failed it was owing to the disturbed state of affairs in that country. We had, indeed, ourselves done something towards the same object, though he could not recall under what Government. There had been a great outcry that the rights of property were being interfered with; but he did not think there was force in that contention in the case of the Bill before their Lordships. A few years ago—about 10 years ago, he thought—when Sir Henry Layard was the First Commissioner of Public Works, he had been requested by the Society of Antiquaries to take up the question of preserving the ancient monuments of this country. He hoped that his noble Friend would not press his objections. The subject had been very carefully considered in "another place," though he would not on that ground claim that the Bill should escape scrutiny by their Lordships. He could not desire that it should not be examined there; but he thought that the measure could be passed with perfect safety. If the Bill was referred to a Select Committee it would inevitably be destroyed.

THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON

said, it was not his desire to send this Bill to inevitable destruction; but he submitted that it ought to be referred to a Select Committee. It was just one of those measures, dealing as it did with property in so summary a way, which ought to receive such consideration as would be given by a Select Committee. It was unlike other modes of dealing with property, in that there was no provision for giving notice to the persons affected, except in the Schedule to the Bill. There was no notice to anyone that any part of his property was to be interfered with. Until he read the Schedule of the Bill, he was unaware that part of his property was intended to be dealt with. It was, however, unreasonable to say that there was any intention of getting rid of the Bill, when it was said that it should be referred to a Select Committee. But he objected to the manner in which monuments were proposed to be dealt with. His noble Friend (the Earl of Carnarvon) had himself objected to the Trustees of the British Museum being the Commissioners, and had mentioned another body and representatives of learned Societies instead; and if the Bill should be referred to the Select Committee he would be able to recommend to them what he now suggested. He must say that he could not conceive how it would be possible for the Trustees of the British Museum to take possession of and preserve the fort on the hill of Roath. He thought it undesirable that such an extreme measure as that before their Lordships should be resorted to, and he hoped that his noble Friend would accede to the proposal of the noble Duke (the Duke of Somerset).

LORD O'HAGAN,

as one of the Trustees of the British Museum, believed that the duties which were cast on them by the Bill would be well and adequately fulfilled. They had consented to undertake those duties; and, upon their consent, it had been approved by the Treasury. It was a mistake to suppose that, under it, any man's property could be taken or meddled with against his will. Whatever was done must be done by voluntary agreement. He referred to several sections to establish this; and also to show that machinery and means were provided to carry out its object, which, in his (Lord O'Hagan's) opinion, was of high public importance. The monuments which it sought to preserve were not merely private property. In one aspect, the nation had a great interest in them which it was entitled to protect. He feared that the loss of this Bill would endanger very many of them in this country and in Ireland also; and the reference of it to a Select Committee, at this time and under existing circumstances, would effectually defeat it, and postpone, for an indefinite period, provisions which were at present a most urgent necessity.

Motion agreed to; Bill read 2a accordingly.

THE DUKE OF SOMERSET moved that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee.

EARL STANHOPE

said, that he was not able to accede to the Motion of the noble Duke, as he wished to point out that it was not meant that any person's property should be taken absolutely; but that if the owners of an ancient monument should be inclined to destroy it they should be required to offer it for sale to the Commissioners at a reasonable price.

THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON

said, that he objected to the power proposed to be given to the Trustees of the British Museum. They might come on to his property and interfere with his method of taking care of any ancient remains, and say that some other method should be followed.

THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)

supported the Motion, and he would observe that the Bill came up from the other House on the 26th of February, and it was not till the 6th or 7th instant when Notice was given of the second reading.

On Question, resolved in the affirmative; Bill referred to a Select Committee accordingly.