§ 2.36 p.m.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are yet in a position to make any statement with regard to the latest theft from the Imperial Maritime Museum at Greenwich; whether the number of the staff was strengthened after the theft of the Nelson Relics; and whether any further additions are contemplated as a result of the latest incident.]
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER (VISCOUNT SWINTON)My Lords, between 11.50 a.m. and 2.30 p.m. on July 15, a gold casket presented to Admiral Vernon by the City of London was stolen from a glass case in the medal room of the National Maritime Museum The box has been recovered by the police and I understand that charges are being preferred. After the previous thefts referred to by the noble Earl, which took place at night, measures were taken which included, as I informed the noble Earl on November 20, 1951, the grant of authority to the Trustees to increase the warding staff in order to relieve the night patrols of responsibility for manning the telephone switchboard.
Unfortunately, it proved to be impracticable to arrange for the Museum warding staff, who had been engaged for and employed on daytime duties only, to undertake night duty; and it was therefore 380 necessary to explore other possibilities with the Ministry of Works, by whom the night staff are employed. I am glad to say that arrangements have now been agreed among the parties concerned for strengthening the night patrols and training that staff in telephone work. Details of the latest proposals have not yet been before the Trustees, but I believe they will be found satisfactory. The night arrangements, however, have no immediate bearing on the most recent theft, which took place in the daytime. Inquiries into that matter are continuing. A number of factors affected the situation and it would be unwise, in the meantime, in any way to anticipate the outcome of the inquiries
§ EARL HOWEMy Lords, as this is the third important theft of valuable relics which has taken place from this Museum, may I ask the noble Viscount whether he can give an assurance that steps will definitely be taken which will preclude further losses in this direction, and that no further reduction of staff will be made—in fact that, if it should turn out that additional staff are required, such addition will be made in order to safeguard these valuable relics?
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONMy Lords, I am afraid I cannot give—indeed, I think nobody, not even an insurance company could give—an assurance that no theft will ever take place anywhere at any time. But I am sure that every possible step has been taken. There is no question at all of a reduction of staff. So far as I understand it, the presumption is rather in the other direction.
§ EARL JOWITTMy Lords, this is rather a disturbing matter. I very much hope that there will be some thorough and complete investigation, so that the noble Viscount may be able to assure the House that every step humanly possible is being taken to see that this deplorable state of affairs comes to an end.
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONMy Lords, I have already given an assurance to the House that the fullest inquiries are being made. I cannot possibly tell the House what the results of these inquiries are until they have taken place.
§ EARL STANHOPEMy Lords, is the noble Viscount aware that the trustees of the Maritime Museum wrote to the Treasury on January 28, informing them that the cuts then proposed were such 381 that they could not hold themselves responsible for the safety of exhibits in that Museum from then on?
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONNo, my Lords, I have not been instructed about this. I am sorry, but it is not my Department and therefore I do not know all the correspondence which has taken place. But I am informed that the question of cutting staff in museums had no effect upon the security arrangements.
§ LORD VANSITTARTMy Lords, does the noble Viscount remember that in the first act of The Importance of Being Earnest it is suggested that while the loss of one parent may be a misfortune, to lose two seems like carelessness?
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONMy Lords, there are other aphorisms from the same author which no doubt could be applied, but I am not quite sure that I see the relevance of this one.
LORD FARINGDONMy Lords, does the noble Viscount say that there is no ground for anxiety about this reduction of staffs and, if so, does he draw that opinion from the trustees and directors of the National Collections?
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONI did not say that there is no ground for anxiety about reduction of staff. The question about reduction of staff was generally directed to whether certain rooms in certain museums should be closed. The information which I am given here is that that was not relevant to the security arrangements in this particular museum.
LORD FARINGDONMy Lords, I do not know whether it is relevant to this particular Museum, but I suggest that the Government should inform themselves of the views of the directors and trustees of Our National Collections on this question of security. I fancy that it is not entirely a matter of merely closing rooms. I believe that this reduction of staff is causing anxiety.
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONMy Lords, I do not think it would be relevant for me, in replying to a specific inquiry about a specific theft at a particular Museum, to open the general question of closing rooms in museums. What I did say to the House—I cannot speak with first-hand knowledge of this—was that in this 382 particular case, so far as the investigations disclosed, the reduction of staff did not affect the security provisions.
LORD FARINGDONI beg the noble Viscount's pardon. I thought he made a general reference to all museums.
§ VISCOUNT SWINTONMy Lords, I never argue from the particular to the general, and seldom from the general to the particular.