SECOND READING. (Hansard, 18 July 1889)

§ LORD HENNIKER
As the result of representations with regard to the unsatisfactory accommodation given to our national portraits at Bethnal Green, the Office of Works submitted to the Treasury on the 30th April last a proposal to build a new Museum either on a site to the north-east of the National Gallery, or on a site to be acquired at South Kensington from the Exhibition Commissioners. Immediately after this proposal had been made an offer was 666 made by a gentleman to build a National Portrait Gallery at his own expense, if the Government would procure a site within one mile and a half of St. James's. The site provided by the Bill which I now bring before your Lordships is on the north and east of the National Gallery. It has been approved by the donor, and it has been approved by the trustees of the National Portrait Gallery, and the trustees of the National Gallery have concurred in agreeing to the site being taken, on the understanding that a space should be taken from the St. George's Barracks at some future time for any extension that may be necessary. The greater portion of the land given as a site is vested in the Commissioners of Works, under the National Gallery Enlargement Acts of 1866 and 1867, which were passed for the purpose of extending the National Gallery. But further statutory authority is required to appropriate this land for the present purposes, and therefore this Bill is brought in. The Bill provides for the re-transfer to the Commissioners of Works of a piece of land on the west of the site, of which I have spoken, which was conveyed to the Crown in 1885, or rather to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests on the part of the Crown, in exchange for a small piece of land taken from the Barrack yard of St. George's, which has been used for the late extension of the National Gallery. The proposed site, I may tell your Lordships, has been pronounced by the eminent architect who has prepared the sketch plans for the donor, Mr. Euan Christian, as quite sufficient for any National Portrait Gallery, but Mr. Christian thinks that it would be a very great advantage that a plot of ground on the north of Hemmings Row which is now vacant should be kept an open space. Not only does he think that it would secure a better light for the rooms, but he also thinks that if you had that open space it would secure better protection against fire. This plot of ground belongs to the London County Council. The Office of Works are in correspondence with the Council, and in correspondence with the Treasury, with a view to keeping this land as an open space. I think I need say nothing more in commending this Bill to your Lordships.

§ VISCOUNT HARDINGE
My Lords, I think it would be difficult to say too 667 much in appreciation of the munificence of the gentleman whoever he be who has come forward and offered to build a National Portrait Gallery at his own expense, and thereby has extricated the trustees of the National Portrait Gallery from a somewhat difficult if not a hopeless position. My noble Friend says that the trustees have approved of the site, but on the distinct understanding that, whenever at some future day the trustees require more accommodation for their pictures, both the National Gallery trustees and the National Portrait Gallery trustees should be able to appropriate part of the barrack yard for any extensions that may be required, and that if necessary the barracks should be given up. I hope that under no circumstances it will be necessary to take such a course. I believe that the parade ground if built upon will be amply sufficient for the extension of both Galleries, and the barracks will always be a useful place in which to put a company or two of Guards in case of any serious disturbance. I wish to draw your Lordships' attention to another point which my noble Friend has lightly touched upon, and that is the question of this vacant space north of Hemmings Row. I do not know whether people generally are aware of the great importance of this ground north of Hemmings Row being kept as an open space. It is obvious that if the County Council sell this land (for which they hope to get £7,000) at auction, as it appears they intend to do, there will be no security whatever against the erection of enormously high buildings, which will mar the effect of the present and any future National Gallery, and may be such unsightly buildings as your Lordships may see from Rotten Row by Albert Gate. I understand that it is the intention of the London County Council to recoup themselves by this £7,000 for the expenses of carrying out the Charing Cross improvement. I see that my noble Friend, the Chairman of the London County Council (Lord Rosebery) is in his place, and perhaps he will state, from the point of view of the London County Council, how the matter now stands. I would like to read to your Lordships the architect's opinion as to the importance of this open space being preserved. Mr. Euan Christian says:— 668 One point, in my judgment, of primary importance, and indeed of real necessity, if the gallery is to be built on this site, is the maintenance of the open space northwards which its occupation by buildings would effectually destroy. The security of this open space is vital to the scheme. That being so, it is quite possible that this anonymous donor might cry off and say, "If you are going to have high buildings there, I will not build the Gallery." Under these circumstances, it is very desirable that without delay some sort of arrangement should be come to between the County Council and Her Majesty's Government. I understand that what the County Council say is that they will have nothing to do with this question, which is an Imperial question. I do not know what line the Government have taken or intend to take, but whether it is a Municipal or whether it is an Imperial question, it is highly necessary that something should be done. If the London County Council, as representing the ratepayers, choose to say, "We will not give a sou towards the buying of this ground," it will then be for the Government to consider, and it will be a very serious question, whether, after all, they should hesitate to spend this dreadful sum of £7,000 in buying this open space. Considering they have not given a sou towards this undertaking, considering that at no expense they will have a National Portrait Gallery built, it would be monstrous, I think, if either the Government or the London County Council allowed these high buildings to be built and the light shut out from the National Portrait Gallery. I do rot know whether my noble Friend the Chairman of the London County Council will enlighten us at all upon the position which the London County Council take up. Perhaps it would be possible for the London County Council and the Government to divide the purchase money for this open space between them; but, at any rate, matters cannot remain as they are, because, in face of the strong opinion which I have quoted of the architect, it is quite on the cards that, unless this comparatively small matter is properly dealt with, the anonymous donor might cry off altogether and withdraw his munificent offer.

§ LORD LAMINGTON
I quite concur in the view of the noble Lord who has just sat down. This generous and 669 patriotic offer having been made, it seems to me inconceivable that for the small sum of £7,000 this plot of ground which is clearly necessary should not be acquired. Athough it is not more than a fourth of an acre, it is a long piece of land, and any buildings erected upon it will block the whole light of the Gallery. I hardly agree with my noble Friend that this is at all a matter for the County Council. It is for the Imperial Government, and I think it will be very little short of a scandal if the Government, having had given them a magnificent building of this kind, should for the sake of a few thousand pounds see the whole undertaking spoiled by the erection of high buildings in immediate proximity to the Gallery.

THE EARL OF ROSEBERY
It may perhaps be convenient, as the London County Council has been referred to by the noble Lords who have spoken, that I should state exactly the way in which this matter stands. The piece of land in question is valued at, I think, about £7,000, and it is part of the assets of the London County Council, for which they are responsible to the ratepayers of London. The London County Council, whatever their deficiencies may be, are certainly not averse to the acquisition or the maintenance of open spaces wherever it can be proved that that is to the interest of London and of the rate payers. But they are not entitled to look to any interests beyond those, and, indeed, in my opinion, they would be culpable if they did. It is perfectly clear, as I believe, that it is necessary for this building, both outwardly and inwardly, that this piece of land should not be built upon; but that is not a matter which concerns the London County Council. It is an Imperial matter. If there is an Imperial building in this country, it is that building in which you propose to keep the portraits of all those, whether in the United Kingdom or in the Colonies, who have rendered service to the Empire. What business it is to the ratepayers of London to maintain or to bring light into a building of that description I, for one, cannot possibly conceive. Some time ago the Council passed a resolution that this land should be dealt with as the other assets are dealt with—namely, it should be put up for sale. Shortly afterwards we received a letter from the right hon. 670 Gentleman the First Commissioner of Works, asking what our intentions were—a very courteous letter—and intimating, with the habitual politeness of the right hon. Gentleman, that it was possible that we might wish to contribute this open space, in consideration of the national character of the work, without payment. I do not think that that was actually put in black and white, but the insinuation was a delicate one, and one which we were not so blind as not to appreciate. Upon that we took the only course which was open to us. We sent back to the First Commissioner the resolution which had been passed by the Council, and said that, as far as we could, we should be willing to meet the wishes of Her Majesty's Government in not putting up the land to public auction, but dealing with it as a matter of private negotiation. Since then a conversation has taken place with those members of the Council who are most directly interested in the matter, and I have some hope that a favourable result may be arrived at. But I would point out most clearly to the House—and I think the House is, on the whole, with me in this contention—that if that land is built over it will be due to the laches, not of the London County Council, but of Her Majesty's Government. And I must further add, not as a member of the London County Council, but as an individual who has filled the position of First Commissioner of Works, and who has always had the building of this gallery very nearly at heart, that I do think that Her Majesty's Government will not be making an undue, an unlicensed, or an extravagant contribution if, to the £100,000 which have been contributed by a private individual, they string up their courage to find these £7,000 to purchase this piece of land.