Sitting of 30 July 1868

THE NEW PALACE OF JUSTICE.

  QUESTION.
  LORD DENMAN,in pursuance of Notice, asked of Her Majesty's Government, If the Commissioners under the Courts of Justice Building Act had recommended any definite plan in regard to the New Palace of Justice? The noble Lord said, no task could be more ungracious than seeming to under-rate the exertions of a Royal Commission, especially of the noble Lord (Lord Cranworth), and to oppose the opinion of eminent jurists who anticipate the greatest advantage from the concentration of the Courts of Justice; but having since 1864 differed from them all, and observing that but £36,000 was left for the building of a palace, whilst their Lordships' House had carried a clause that all plans and estimates should be laid before Parliament before the beginning of the work (which was given up on condition of a certificate as to the expense of the site not exceeding £750,000, and the expense of the building not exceeding another £750,000), he could not but remark that if the present plan were carried out more than seven acres would be required; whilst to accommodate jurors, suitors, witnesses, and the public as they could now be accommodated at Westminster Hall and Guildhall, no single building could be sufficient. The approaches also to Westminster had been improved, and in a very short time a railway station would be opened at the very place at which Mr. Canning's statue formerly stood. Shortly, instead of merely thinking they were represented, he hoped that the people would feel that they were so, and he trusted that no contract would be entered into without its previously being submitted to the new Parliament. He wished that the present unsightly buildings could be dispensed with; they had been condemned by his noble Relative as soon as they were built; but it had been settled that on £200,000 being paid for them they should be given up to the Commissioners, and it had been suggested that they might become Committee-rooms of the House of Commons. As to the increase of fees for fifty years, his noble Relative (who had done everything in his power to diminish the cost of litigation,

  1935
  counting the loss to his family and himself beforehand), could not have approved of such a method of paying for buildings, though it had the authority of an Act of Parliament passed last year. He must conclude joining in opinion with two of Her Majesty's counsel on the Home Circuit that an abandonment of Westminster Hall and Guildhall was unnecessary, and that the evils attending concentration had not been duly considered. He knew that his noble Relative did not approve of the Courts sitting at Westminster Hall and Guildhall at the same time, but that could be avoided. He really believed, in the present state of the labour market, that if these Courts were begun they might remain unfinished for years, like the tower of Cologne Cathedral, and he hoped that the Government would wait until the next Session and not adopt any plan with undue haste.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, he would endeavour to answer the Question of the noble Lord without attempting to enter into the wide subject introduced by him. The Commissioners under the Courts of Justice Building Act had not as yet actually recommended any definite plan, and therefore of course the Lords of the Treasury could not have adopted any recommendation. At the same time he was bound to add that the members of the Commission—of which he was one—held a meeting a few days ago, at which they agreed to a draft letter to be accompanied by sketches of certain floor plans, to be approved of. That letter and those plans had not, however, as yet been dispatched, but they were about being so. That was the state of the matter between the Government and the Commissioners.
  LORD DENMANsaid, that it was made clear that Parliament would have to exceed greatly the original estimates.
  House adjourned at half past Five o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter before Two o'clock.