The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1874-04-18 00:00:00

OCR NATIONAL MoNUMENTS.

In the Rouse of C0111113./ns. April 15, Sir A Lubboc k roe to
move the second reading of the Ancient 31,0 11111 l ients tin, and
in doing no he said our national monuments wea, in a den,
but state In many instances, and in others were being rapilly
destroyed. Re adduced several canes to show the narrow

wipes of many of our most valued ;elks of the put, and
stated, on the authority of Lord Stanhope, that instances
of this kind were continually coming before the Society
of Antiquaries To watch over the ancient monuments
of the country he proposed as Commissioners the Master of
the Rolls, the President of the Society of Antiquaries, the
Proudest of the Antiquarian Society, the President of the
Royal Irish Academy, the Keeper of the British Museum,
and seven other commissioners. These commissioners would
have power to purchase monuments which they had reason
to believe were in danger of being destroyed, and to pay the
expense out of the Consolidated Fund. This would not
interfere with the rights of owners of property any.
more than did the railway bills passed by their Rouse
for the compulsory purchase of land when necessary. A
list of the ancient monuments of the kingdom would be
placed it) a schedule to the bill. He hoped the House would
affirm the general principle that it was desirable to preserve
our ancient monuments, by allowing the bill to be read a
second time. (Hear, hear.)
_

- -
Mr. G. Bentinck opposed the bill as one of spoliation, and !
expressed his surprise that the name of the hon. member for
the University of Cambridge (Mr. 11. Hope) was on the hack
of it. He protested against the clause which allowed the
cominimioners to pima into people's property to examine thes •
monuments at any time. It was legalising burglary only
in the day instead of between sunrise and sunset. (A
laugh). But not only did the Commissionershave the power of
isthig over property themselves, but of appointing other
people to. do so. A more determined invasion of the tights
of property could not have been devised, and he could not
think the House of commons would pass the bill, and he
1110VCd that it be read a second time this day six months.
Mr. lieresford Hope said this was a bill for the protection
of valuable property against the ignorance, it might be of the
owner, but more often of the tenant or servant, for they had
beard of the case of a gentleman in Ireland wtlt gave
orders that an old castle on his estate should be pre-
served, and found that some of the stones had been used for
tile construction of a fence. The hill would not be nearly
so stringent in its operation as had been suggested, and
there surely could be no objection to commissioners visiting
the property they had purchased. Ile asked the House
seriously not to be led away by the cry that the bill would
ruin property. It might be amended in committee if the
genoral principle were approved by the House to-day.
Aft:r remarks from several other hon. members,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer mid it was a principle of
this House that the voting of the public money could only
to. proposed by Ministers of the Crown. Ile had seen the con-
trary principle productive of great inconvenience in America,
and ally proposal from hon. members to deal with public
Maley should be viewed with great jealousy. It was the duty
of the Ministers of the Crown to consider all loins which pro-
posed to appropriate public money; and if there were any
commissioners to be appointed, it was proper that the
Government should introduce a bill for the purpose. The
only way of making the bill acceptable was by including
in it a proposal fur a liberal subsidy from the Govern-
went, and he trusted the !louse would not agree to this.
There was no limit to the applications that might be
inaile in this way, and it had been pointed out that it
protection wore
given to British, mama, and Roman re.
mains it would be sought to extend that protection to
ii7onuments of a later era. By far the most efficacious way
id protecting ancient monuments would be to leave them to
voluntary effort and public opinion. There might be excep-
tional cases in which the Government might be asked to in-
terfere. but he should oppose this bill, which proposed to
take care of all of them with the funds of the nation.

Mr. IMllivyn supported the general principle of the bill.
Mr. Hooky thought the bill would be an ungrateful return
to those who Ilasi taken care of these monuments for so
many years. Such a measure as this should be in the hands
of the Government.

Sir .1. Lubbock briefly replied, and the House divided,
hen there appeared --For the second reading, 14 against,
147 majority against the bill, 51