LORD STRATHEDEN AND CAMPBELL, who had given Notice of the following Question:—To ask Her Majesty's Government, Whether they can pledge themselves to take no further steps in carrying out the Public Offices Site Act until Parliament has re-assembled for the Autumn Session, said: I have put this Question on the Paper only with a view to urge the Government to delay still further the application of the Public Offices Site Act. Let me remind the House that the Act—which I have to-day looked over—is entirely permissive. The Government are empowered to appropriate a site by 594 valuation and by purchase; but are not bound to take any steps of demolition or construction. As to construction, they are engaged, by what passed in 1882, to take no steps until a plan has gained the sanction of the Legislature. No plan has gained the sanction of the Legislature; and it is doubtful whether any of those exhibited at 18 Spring Gardens can obtain it. As there is no legal obligation to do anything, as the whole question is sub judice, at least, of the Executive, who have discretionary power, it is useful to recall, in a few words, the consequences of the measure if persisted in. It would be most disturbing and injurious to the residents on the eastern part of Carlton House Terrace, who hold, their leases of the Crown, and are entitled to protection from it. It would invade the Admiralty, which has great associations. The plan favoured, which I have inspected in its drawing, would overshadow the Horse Guards, one of the few edifices in which architecture has been fortunate. Without the slightest reason, it would destroy Spring Gardens, a space available for new official residences, and really wanted for that purpose. The Act renounces the advantages of the site connected with Great George Street, which the noble Earl the Chairman of Committees (the Earl of Redesdale) has so frequently insisted on, and which the Protest signed among your Lordships thoroughly explained. It was resisted by the Institute of Architects. It is opposed both to inquiry and to evidence. On the other hand, it emanated from a Board to which we owe the anarchy of Hyde Park Corner—now so often likened to a railway junction—together with the mutilation and departure of the statue which belonged to it, against the recorded judgment of the House, and still more against the outraged feelings of society. Now, there is but one pretext for the measure. It is true the War Office are badly lodged at present. I readily admit their inconveniences. But if this scheme is carried out, they will be badly lodged for the next decade. Their wants admit of far more prompt and easy satisfaction than will be found in an extravagant and tawdry block of speculative architecture. My Lords, the conclusion is that the Treasury ought not to give their sanction to the measure. There is a special ground to justify such conduct, besides 595 the drain upon finance which foreign policy occasions at this moment. By accident the sense of this House was never taken on the Bill; and it is impossible to say that it would not otherwise have been defeated. Beyond the Government it had no clear support, and there is little reason to suppose that they were all united in its favour. What I ask to-day, in point of fact, is no more than the Government conceded, when they declared that the Act should not go on, until some one of the designs had gained the approbation of your Lordships.
§ LORD MONSONsaid, he had to inform their Lordships that the Government did not intend to take any further steps as to erection of the new War and Admiralty Offices until after the reassembling of Parliament.
§ House adjourned during pleasure; and resumed by The Lord MONSON.