The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1885-08-15 00:00:00

THE STATUE TO GENERAL GORDON.

From information elicited in the House of Corn-
mons, it appears that the national admiration of the
character of the late General Gordon is to find expres-
sion iu the shape of a statue to be placed at Charing-
cross to his memory. Upon the House voting a
peeliminary sum of £5OO towards the expenses of
this undertaking, it was officially stated that Sir
Frederick Leighton, Sir J. E. Millais, and Mr. Watts
had been consulted as to the best form the memorial
could take, when those artists expressed the unani-
mous opinion that an allegorical group of sculpture
would be most suitable as a memorial to the deceased
hero. To this view, however, the Commissioner of
Works said he was unable to accede, and it seems
that the tribute to the deceased General's memory
is to take the form of a statue. If that must be the
result, by all means let us have a statue rather
than that there should be no enduring artistic
record of the gallant officer and noble-
hearted man who willingly sacrificed his life
for his country's good. But let us make an
effort, says the Daily Chronicle, on this occasion
not to disgrace the metropolis with another of those
grotesquely inartistic statues, which at the present
time serve but as landmarks to indicate a nation's
lack of taste and want of art knowledge. There is a
very genet-1,1 feeling in artis;ie circles that there will
be some hole-and corner business as regards the selec-
tion of the sculptor who is to execute the commission,
and this will possibly be the case if that selection is
to be left to one or two persons to determine. It
appears obvious that in a work of such national
interest as the proposed memorial that the surest
way to arrive at the best artist to execute would be
by public competition. We must remember that we
have now some noble sculptors in every way masters
of their art in Messrs. H. H. Armstead, Woolner, C.
B. Birch, E. J. Boehm, Hama Thornycroft, and others.
Mentioning the name of Mr. Boehm reminds us that
there is in some quarters a feeling of ill-concealed
jeouey as to the large number of public commissions
falling to the share of that distinguished sculptor.
We have no sympathy with any such feeling, believ-
ing that there should be the widest possible field and
Opportunity for an artist's success, provided only that
it is clearly apparent he is the best man to execute the
proposed work. But, on the other hand, it is deplor-
able when flunkeyisra or ignorance on the part of
those empowered to select an artist for a certain
work results in such pitiable failures as the Peabody
statue and other equally feeble metropolitan sculp-
tures we might mention. We can but repeat the
hope, which is doubtless largely shared by the public,
that the statue of one who, like General Gordon, is
enrolled among the brightest names this country can
boast, may be the result of a national competition, by
which means alone the fittest artist to execute the
work can be secured.

-
"I wouldn't worry about the cholera, dear," said a
wife to her husband ; " it isn't at all likely it will
reach this country?' "I don't know about that," he
replied, nervously; "it might break out at any
m?ment, o.nd we might have a frightful time. II
thmk I htd better pay the back pew rent, any WaV2.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

THE THA?,IES BILL.

In the FToc;3n or Lortn.-3, Auc. 10, on the question
that the River Thames (No. 2) Bill do pass,
Lord Abingdon, to meet the views ot the riparian
proprietors who objected to the bill as it stood, moved
an amendment providing that nothing in the measure
should be construed as taking away from riparian pro-
prietors any rights which they at present possessed.
Lord Bramwell said that if the amendment were
agreed to he should not oppose ,the passing of the
bill.

The amendment was agreed to, and the bill was then
passed.

MISCELLANEOUS.

The order for the third reading of the Burgh Police
and Health (Scotland) Bill was discharged. The Sum-
mary Jurisdiction (Term of Imprisonment) Bill was
read a second time.

Lord Dunraven, answering a series of questions by
Lord Wemyss, stated that the subject of certain pro-
posed improvements in the Martini Henry rifle was
under the consideration of a committee at the War
Office.

Lord Salisbury, in reply to an appeal from Lord Mill-
town, stated that he did not think the title "the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland" would be a
desirable substitute for that of "Great Britain "in State
papers.

THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON TRADE.

Lord Iddesleigh, in making a statement with regard
t 3 the proposed Royal Commission on the depression
in various branches of industry, explained that the task
of the Commission would be to obtain information for
the guidance of whatever Government might be in
power when it made its report rather than to recom-
mend a policy. He had applied to Mr. Goschen to
serve on it, but that right hon. gentleman replied that
for many reasons, which he felt it unnecessary to give,
he must decline the invitation. Mr. Shaw-Lefevre and
Mr. Cross, both of whom had been members of the late
Government, were subsequently asked to serve on the
Commission, but they also declined to do so. The
noble lord, having stated to their lordships the names
of the gentlemen who had consented to serve, ex-
pressed his opinion that the sound doctrines of free
trade would come well out of the inquiry, and his
regret that any statesmen should have refused to be
named on the Commission through an apprehension
that they might not be able to maintain in the inquiry
a policy which they had always upheld.
Lord Granville thought the inquiry was not desirable,
because it could not be attended with any practical
result. Having referred to the fact that Lord Beacons-
field had expressed the same opinion, he expressed his
surprise that Lord Salisbury should have thought the
inquiry to be at all necessary, inasmuch as on a recent
occasion that noble lord intimated that, owing to the
present Government, there would be an improvement
in trade within two or three months. Mr. Shaw-Lefevre
aod Mr. Cross objected to the constitution of the Com-
mission, which would have on it a great preponderance
of Conservatives and Fair-traders, or, in other words,
Protectionists. It could not be supposed that either
they or Mr. Gosclwn had declined to serve from any
apprehension of not being able to maintain the princi-
ples of free trrtle.
Lord Salisbury did not remember the exact words
used by him in the utterance to which Lord Granville
had referred; but, he asked, what had his sayings to do
with a Commission of which he was not to be a mem-
ber? He presumed that the utterance referred to was
one in which he pointed out that a feeling of coofidence
as to the policy of the Government abroad and at home
was calculated to have a beneficial effect on trade. He
pointed out that the Liberal authorities referred to
could not have known the constitution of the Commis-
sion when they were asked to join it, because it had not
then been constituted; and he thought that such petty
considerations as that of the Commission having been
proposed by a Government to which they were opposed
ought not to have influenced statesmen when great in-
terests were to be investigated. Members of the Liberal
party, having declined to serve on the Commission,now
found fault with it on the ground that it did not con-
tain a large element of that party.
Lord Granville explained that, when applied to, Mr.
Shaw-Lefevre and Mr. Cross asked to see how the Com-
mission was to be constituted, and Lord Iddesleigh sent
them a number of names, which were in the main those
read to their lordships that evening.
Lord Iddesleigh observed that no person had been
appointed at the time. As to several of the gentlemen
since named, he did not know whether they were Fair-
traders or Free-traders. •
On the motion that the report of amendments in the
Labourers (Ireland) Act be received, their lordships
divided and the motion was agreed to by 43 to 5.