The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-29 00:00:00

r- • -

-7<

a

l

\‘`
THE CRYSTAL PALACE
The report made to the Lords of the Tre asktfy i Tll
the Commissioners appointed to inquire into tbeCpaj,
,Lnd applicability of the Crystal Palace has a t eng
bees: printed, and will he read with interest... Only
seven
witnesses were examined, viz. :—Sir Charles
Fox, Mr.
Dilke, Mr. Fleming, the Duke of Suther-
land's
ger,lener at Trentham, Sir Joseph Paid ion, Mr.
John lilk
,)roprietor of some of the houses opposite
the of the building, Mr. Hawkins, bead of
south eside
the department of antiquities in the British Museum,
and Mr. Cole.
" Offic•e of Works, &c., 19th Feb. 1852.
"M Lords,—In ,lon.ipliance with your Lordships'
directions we have mktde inquiry into the several mat.
tern referred to us in the Treasury letter, dated the 13th
of December, 1851.
" It will be most convenieklt that we should in the
first place report upon those que,stioas which will admit
of distinct and definite replies; eiese are—
" 1. The price at which the Government could par-
chece the Exhibition building.
"It appears that since the 31st of December, 1851,
the building has been given up by the Commissioners
appo.'nted to superintend the Exhibition, and-has be.
Come the property of the contractors. In order, th ere-
fore, to obtain a reply to this question, we applie.3 to
Sir C. For, and he has stated on the part of the
contractors, that the pricy of the building as it now
stascia is 65,834/. :is. lld,, to which amount, how-
ever, must be added a sum for its maintenance
since the Ist of Decem:Jer. Sir C. Fox has stated that
he expects the Royal Commissioners to pay a sum of
20,912/. 4s. 4d. beyond what he has already received,
and if this expectation should be realised the purchase-
money would be reduced to that extent.
2. The cost at which it could be adapted for a m-
ammy structure.
"The works necessary for this purpose th, contractors
would undertake to execute for the sum of 216,0001., as-
suming that it were determined to retain the building on
its present site:-
Course depend
" 3. The cost of removing the building and refixing it
upon another site.
proposed to re'fix the building; bat
rqeumesotivaoni,
iumlusd
ttheonf
attire
of
the
soil
uponnT
wt hh
hee Bedistanceat
may be
fbi tehi es
assuming it to be within a dist,snce to which the materials
could be carted, and that the site chosen for its re-construe-
tion were attended with no unfavourable circa matances, Sir
C. Fox has stated the cost of its removal and room.
struction, including such improvements as I would adapt
it for a pennant building, to be 61,5001. In o th; er words,
adding the cost of removal and reconstructi on to the
price of the purchase, the Exhibition Building could Saw
removed and refixed for the sum of 127,3351., a me..
dition in which it could be permanently maintained.
"4. The probable cost which would be required for
the maintenance of the building.
" The contractnrs would undertake to maintain the
structure, including the cost of painting it externally an d
internally every fon: years, for the sum of 5,0001. a yea r.
" The other questions which your Lordships have sul s-
mitted to our consideration must be matter of opinic fa,
and will not allow of such easy solution. These are--
"5. The purposes to which the building could be
most advantageously applied.
of suggestions have been
" A large covered space affords, it is said,. socommo-
off`e'rUedp.on this point a variety
accommo-
dation for innumeiable objects, and facilities for public
amusement and instruction. These are a dvantagee
which, it is argued, should not be neglected, bi it should,
in some way or other, be rendered available; an d accord-
ingly the Exhibition Building might, it has b een sug-
gested, comprise within its ample area museums, sculp-
ture galleries, lecture-rooms, sheltered walks for inva-
lids, places of recreation for the idle, and of scientific re-
search for the studious.

" It is impossible fairly to examine those various sug-
gestions without at the same time considering another
question, namely,
"6. The site which it may be desirable to select
for this building.
" Whether or not the Government could, cons istently
with former engagements, retain the building u pon its
present site, is a question into which we do not ct minder
it our province to enter; but we have not deemed it t right,
in regard to this point, to exclude some evidence which
appears to deserve your Lordships' attention.
" Assuming that the present site were deemed unob-
jectionable, it appears to us that a portion of Hydu-park
should not be permanently appropriated, unless to an
object of very general interest and advantage.
" The British Museum affords undoubtedly insufficient
space for its daily increasing collections; but we believe
that the structure in Hyde-park could not be rendered
subservient to its relief without extensive alterations,
which, while they would impair the effect of the build-
ing, would ill satisfy persons who visited the collection.
" The sculptures of Egypt, of Lyeia, and of Nineveh
might, it has been said, be advantageously seen under a
roof which from its lightness and transpstrency resem-
bles the open air.—The contrast of light and shade is,
however, deemed advantageous to sculptetre, and the
colossal character of these antiquities may be by other
persons thought to accord best with massive architecture.
" Mr. Hawkins, the head of the department of mai-
-1 guides at the British Museum, thinks it objectionable to
divide the collection, while he observes that articles of
value could not be safely deposited in this building, un-
less the precautious resorted to during the time of the
Exhibition were aplin adopted.
" It is, moreover, obvious that rooms for the officers of
the department must be provided; and it is probable
that gradually the sab,iivisions and alterations cf the
interior would prove the- bad economy of appropriating
this much admired structure to a purpose for which it
was not originally designed.
"The force of these observations appear to have been
in some measure admitted, even by persons' who recom-
mend this appropriation of the building. It may be
seen, for instance, that Mr. Cole contemplates this only
as a temporary employment of the building until same
more suitable edifice shall have been eons tructed for
the various institutions which he thinks it dosirable to
establish.
" Amidst the various schemes that have been pro-
posed with a view of rendering the building perma-
nently attractive on its present site, the plan recom-
mended by Sir J. Paxton appears to be the most eligi-
ble. He submitted a very ingenious plan for convert-
ing the building into a garden, and having estimated
the coat of this conversion, be states that the entire
outlay necessary for the purchase of the building
and its subsequent adaptation would be 1.50,0001. He
also estimates the cost of its future maint enanoe at
12,0001. a year. Upon further consideration, however,
Sir Joseph Paxton has revised this estimate, at sd stated
the yearly charge for the maintenance of the fa brie and
the renewal of the interior decorations required ID render
it permanently attractive at 20,0001 a year.
"Even after making these extensive alterations in the
present building, Sir Joseph Paxton has admitted that
it will not be in all respects the best adapted to its pur-
pose, and that for the sum of 150,0001. he could put up
a much finer, a more magnificent, and more appropriate
structure than the Exhibition Building.
whichdi whinh will
would be wee
" We are not prepared to say that the sum of 150,000
would cover the cost of adapting the building to the 1.
pur-
poses of a garden. We should think it more prudent to
sesame
Considering 2 00, O
001.
theas thelar expenditurelarge
annual
ture ex expenditure
n
cessary for these works. ,
be required for the maintenance of the gardens when
recommend toimperfect. the
to
Parliament an annual grant for the maintenance of an
ornamental garden under gsluacshs within the precin eta of
t a structure should, we
ithforall the skill which science and
abreksd,estighenepdlawn
experience could direct to
think,h e P
this task; and it would be
unfortunate that the architect should be fettered by the
endeavour to employ old
materials and re-adapt former
arrangements.

"We believe that the remembrance of the late Ex-
hibition would be unfavourable to a new appropriation
of the building, as it would be impossible to reproduce
induces us to
the brilliant effect obtained from the rich collections
which were temporarily placed there.
believe "Thevite, s
eu
that even if the building were removed to another
Battersea-park, it could not
establishment, unless it
be rendered a self•suPPrting
were under the management of persons who might con-
che:fiocirenincestawnehei,cahs have
taken
duct it as a commercial speculation.
I 66 We
object, and therefore we have not in-
quiredchase it for such an
"ofthe
o such an appropriation
further into e do not suppose that the Government would pur-
the structure, could be f
ortion of
vve endeavoured to ascertain wether the Exhibition
Building, yp
new in connexion with the Botanical Gardens.
.house affords space for the exhibition of
ants, but a building for the growth of plants
tropical pl
helter and moderate heat is much desired.
requiring
b
In those grounds there exists already an establish-
ment which could be employed in the care of the plants,
and it must be admitted that the height and beauty of
e to, p lTcred
palm-house
the transept forming the most striking portion of the
building would be a great ornament to the gardens at
Hew.
" We inquired therefore of Sir C. Fox the cost of re-
moving the central portion of the extent of 33 bays,
erecting this central piece together with two new ends,
and completing this diminished building as a permanent
structure.
" From his reply it appears that the price of the pur-
chase and the charge for refixing it would amount to
about 80,0001. Some additional expense would have to
be incurred for warming and ventilating apparatue.
" Thesesults of the evidence hero collected appear to of
to show, that if it be proposed to retain the building on
its present site, the best purpose to which it Could be
applied would be the formation of an ornamental garden,
as suggested by Sir J. Elate': ; if it were decided not to
retain the building in Hyde-park, we do not know any
other site upon which a e can recommend its re-construe.
Lion at the public expense.
If the expenditure of 80,0001. were not deemed an in-
superable objection, the principal portion of the building
might be removed to Hew, where its future maintenance
as a conservatory, both useful and ornamental, might be
provided for with a comparatively
establishment of the botanic gardens.
"In the event, however, small increase to the
,0f such a scheme meeting with
the sanction of your lord:hips and the approval of Par-
liament, we believe that it would be the most economical
course of proceeding
to purchase the entire structure,
and again to dispose of those portions which might not
be required for the purposes of the botanical gardens.
" We have the honour to be, my Lords,
" Your Lordships' very humble somata,
" SETIouR.
" W. Ctrurrr.
" Jou); LXNDLZI.
"The Right Honourable the Lords Commissioners
of her Majesty's Treasury."