The Sun.
London, England, 1863-07-03 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JULY 3, 1863

in Woolwich yard, and Ido not think it is ..ed;catieli of
safe guidance for the committee iTuottti etexpeiik, when
I say that that ingenir-
-0 ',loth': *a's tried three or four
times, and on.
Otte it required alteration, and cost the
count-
04'0, 'and it ended in its lying in the yard at
Toolwieh. (Oh, oh, and Question.) Ido not ask the cora-
znittee to take anything on my credit, but I
invite the hon.
member for Galway to move for the production of the whole
correspondence relating to these trials. (Oh, oh, and Ques-
tion.) Surely it is of importance to the committee that they
should know something about this gentleman. But I now
come to the direct statement that Mr. Mallett is the eminent
engineer who had been employed under Sir C. Barry in im-
portant functions in connection with the houses of Parlia-
ment, and during the speech of my hon. friend I made at-
tempts to find out the biography of this gentleman. I found
that the hon. member for Finsbury knew nothing about
him ; but the hon. member for Bach said he knew who he
was, and that he drew all the working plans for the Houses
of Parliament.

months ; £60,000 if in twelve months ; and between £60,000
and £70,000 if in eighteen months. I have now come to
the last portion of the subject, and will have to entreat the
time of the committee only for a short time further. It is
true, the executive Government, in dealing with the ques-
tion of the acquisition of a great mass of property, must
have regard not only to the private convictions of the House
of Commons, but also the prepossessions of the House ;
feeling confident that lapse of time will considerably modify
them. Now this is our position : we have got to provide
for three urgent public wants; the want of a national por-
trait gallery is urgent. (Laughter.) I admit it is not a
want upon which the existence of the State depends. (Re-
newed laughter.) But if you have a national portrait gal-
lery, it ought to be where people can go and see it. They
cannot do this at present, for in the house in Great George.
street ten persons could not be accommodated at one time
in any of the rooms, and not five if they were ladies. An-
other great want is the Patent Museum. The Commission-
ers of Patents have been pressing the Treasury for ac-
commodation, and if we are unable to find a place for
them at Kensington, we shall have to provide a sum of
£220,000 to enable them to build a museum for them-
selves, The third want was to provide a suitable place
for the natural history collection at the British Museum.
We desire to satisfy these three urgent wants, and we
have no means of sat sfying them within a definite time,
except by appropriating some portion of the site at Ken-
sington. We wi,h to satisfy these wants, and we also
wish to consult the inclinations and prepossessions, and,
I will go so far as to add, the prejudices entertained in the
House of Commons ; and before we pledge ourselves incon-
veniently to any public expenditure, in all probability
the matter will be settled. We have considered in what
way these urgent public wants could be satisfied, and I hold
in my hand ocular demonstration of the means—that is to
say, I have a plan which will explain distinctly and intel-
ligibly to the committee the mode by which we propose to
apply the vote we now ask them to give. This portion of
the plan shows that part of the building looking towards
the north. It has appeared to the Government that public
opinion is totally adverse to the destruction of the picture
galleries. (Cries of No, no, and Hear, hear.) This pro-
posal involves the maintenance of the picture galleries, but
I don't want the committee to come to any conclusion with
regard to the exterior. We propose that this branch of the
question should stand over
Ifroorfeuall cheers.)lerdiscusioTnhuepgornoutnhde
miscellaneous estimates. (Ironical
floor of the galleries will afford not superfluous, but ample
accommodation for patents; the other part of the plan or
drawing has relation to the northern part of the building, and
for which it will be necessary to make another proposal.
We propose a sum of £120,000 for seventeen acres of land,
which land includes the site of a building locking towards
the Horticultural Gardens, and forming a large portion of
the north front of the structure ; the cost price of which
may be taken at £30,000. It is so difficult for persons
who have no taste to approach a matter of this kind,
that I bow with entire humility. (A laugh.) This
fagade being considered convenient and unobjectionable,
and being connected with the Horticultural Gardens, we
propose to preserve; but we do not propose to deal with
the exterior of any part of the building ; only adapting
the galleries for the patents, and a space of about 2 acres
adjacent to the Horticultural Gardens—but not at all in-
terfering with the dome—(laughter)—in order to take pre-
liminary measures for preparing it for the reception of the
natural history collection at the British Museum. The
exterior of the building will remain as it is, pending the de-
claration of the pleasure of Parliament, and the public will
have time to consider what Government, or what a com-
mittee or a commission may recommend.
Lord R. CECIL—Does the right hon. gentleman begin
by buying the building ? (Hear, hear, and laughter.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—We take
the land and building as they stand ; but we do not pro-
pose to make any arrangement with regard to the land or
the building beyond the adaptation of the picture galleries
and about 21 acres for the purpose of the British Museum.
So that we give up the dome, and only ask authority to deal
with 41 acres, instead of 8 acres originally mentioned. Now,
with respect to the financial aspect of the question, I think
I shall be able to sate the finances with perfect precision.
We have got to pay £120,000 for the land, and for the build-
ing upon a portion of that land a further sum of £30,000.
We have also to pay the contractors 180,000 ; and I have
ascertained that the cost of adapting the building to the
purposes I have already described will cost another sum of
£90,000. The total sum I have to ask the committee to
pledge itself for is £290,000. According to one estimate the
cost of the picture galleries was put at £90,000, and in an-
other at £BO,OOO. Well, then, we have the land, which is
worth £250,000; commissioners' buildings, £30,000; the
picture galleries, £BO,OOO. Or, to put it in another point
of view, we will have 41 acreshoereisasc, wrese
willadap avtehdien
lth2;
manner I have stated, and, besides,
acres of a site and the removable value of the building.
We reccmmend you a plan that is not discreditable to the
times greater
national taste, while at the same time it will serve highly
useful and important national objects, and by adopting
ihe7igrht hon. gentle-
which we avoid long delays, infinite vexations, endless
disputes, public discredit, and even an exnendi-
tre... publicpublic nselty.
askew
two,<c, three.iee
rs)
Luau conducted by proposing a vote for £105,000. In an-
swer to Lord Eleho, the right hon. gentleman said that
Messrs. Kelk and Lucas had offered to keep the building in
proper repair for three years, for a payment of £2,000 do wn,
and £1,500 a year for the three years. In answer to Mr.
Coningham, he also stated that Professor Owen most em-
phatically and warmly approved of the interior of the build-
ing towards the north for the natural history collection of
the British Museum, that being the point where the Govern-
ment proposed to place it.
Lord ELCHO rose to move the rejection of the vote for
the purchase of the International building at Kensington
Gore. In doing so, he said he was not surprised that the
noble lord the member for Stamford had asked across the
floor whether the Government intended or not to purchase
the whole of this building, for there had been so many
changes on the part of the Government to this vote, that
he should like to know how the question stood. It now
appeared that the Government did intend to purchase the
whole of the building, and they asked for a sum of ;£BO,OOO
for that purpose. They now proposed to keep the picture
gallery and the part of the building in the rear towards the
Horticultural Gardens. The Government, to use a military
phrase, had changed their front. They had modified their
vote, and now asked the house to treat the question simply
as a matter of detail, and to sweep away from consideration
the report of Mr. Hunt on the state and condition of the
building. He objected to take the advice of his:right hon.
friend without the estimate of Mr. Hunt. He asked the
house to refuse the proposal on the ground that, whether
the whole or part of the building was taken, it was objec-
tionable on the score of sound sense, sound economy, and
good taste. He wished to guard himself from being sup-
posed to be opposed to the promotion of science and art. He
had voted for the purchase of the land, because he thought
it a good bargain; but the observations which had fallen
from the Chancellor of the Exchequer had given a totally
different colouring even to that vote. That land at £5,000
an acre might be dearer than at £50,000 per acre, if its title
obliged them to purchase this building, or to run the chance
of an action to get rid of it legally. He believed, however,
tbroat publicor
te clear opinion
away thed c an
followed, because they purchased the land, therefore they
were to purchase the building upon it, or that it would be
nion
building, law
and ow
thatu would
i t b force
by n to h
me con-
tractors
economical or wise to do so. On what grounds were they
recommended to purchase it. Was it on account of beauty ?
So far from that, it was only by a liberal use of the trowel
and cement that it could be made tolerably pleating to the
eye. As regarded its fitness, it was to be turned to a pur-
pose for which it was not originally designed ; and, as re-
garded its solidity, they had reports of surveyors by which
it appeared that the building required to be wholly renewed
from skylight to floors, and even beneath, for it was proposed
to lay beneath the floors 12 inches of concrete. He did not
think it could possibly be economy to maintain such a build.
ing as that. The hon. member quoted at some length from
the report of Mr. Hunt. to show the nature of the renewals
which would be required ; said that the report of Mr. M al-
lett, which had been referred to on a previous occasion by
the hon. member for Galway, was not so condemnatory of
the building as that of Mr. Hunt ; and then, referring to
the petition of the Institute of British Architects, vindi-
cated the claim of the opinion of that body to be considered
in connection with this matter. Quoting the opinion of a
committee of that body which had condemned this Exhibi-
tion as unfit to be rendered permanent, he proceeded to read
other portions condemning sepecifically the plan proposed
by the Government for rendering the picture galleries avail-
able. After the report of Mr. Hunt and the opinion of the
Institute of British Architects, he did not know whether the
house would be still of opinion that the building was so great
a bargain. Had ever a case been heard of a private individual
btwahehaes o had
sum
mti
intention
n itn,tvhbeeusottpf invested
proportion
spending
or O i
simply
t o nn a
to
omo
fnna
xkot
that
old
tto tumble-down
ahouse,tey waterproof
trnotohotfaita:
n hmdouul
habitablest
improveei
multiplying
withlyai
nnd
g,
the sums by one thousand, was what the right hon. gentle-
maniaa
pnhr
pdpoe romto truthrhvptteoano nt f. realth(was,Hat such
(Hear,
ai
a object
r the: design,
h was ware o.1)eo
He
athingrne dmwas
o he
v w
ea s
h
surethep
the Chancellor of the Exchequer now proposed. He
could not held thinking that there was something more be-
hind the proposal than the public had yet heard of. (Hear.)
T
"plant"—(laughter)
hdpael
ttaihnoent
public'
a' —1
Galleryw
house( aouu gwl would
h would
not
likewise refuse to sanction it. There was, however, another
it
" r s t question
authorities,W,himposition,i ch theyin
architecture,
hada to consider, and it was the [more
m
:involved a principle—he meant what
should guide them in the matter of decoration. He objected
to all sham decoration, and he was supported by one of the
fiea
vulgarity,Mr.
an Ruskin,
impertinence,w ho described
and a
sin. H
na nadd oeapplied imitater
an
,thteo thehear.)rp
heDsusemswpahi ofntieefha ct that, a( (Laughter.)
swell-known tuhgehGt
eor .
v lady
dr
snyhm,
eme covered
an pro-
posede to roughcoat Vac, walls of the building with falsehood,
tthe cheeks of dilapidated and questionable beauties with a
substance which was said to make them beautiful for ever.
The noble lord at the head of the Government and the
Chancellor of the Exchequer now stood before the country
as the Madame Roches of architecture—(laughter)—for
they proposed to cover the building with a composition
which was to have a similar effect. There was, however,
this difference between them. Madame Rachel's price was,
he believed, £l,OOO, lie had never been called upon to pay

it himself—(laughter)—but he hoped if there were anyhon.
member in the house who had paid it, he would tiae and
state to the house the eXact slim. (Laughter.) He believed,
however, that Madame Rachel's price wag as he bad stated,
but there was this difference between her system and that
of the noble lord and his right hon 4 friend : her composi-
tion cost £l,OOO, but lasted for ever; theirs would cost
£45,000, and would last, not for ever, but only for a *neon.
(Hear, hear.) The argument of the noble lord was that it
would be in company with other stucco buildings. (Laugh-
ter.) But would it ? On the contrary, he was aware that it
was the intention of the Marquis of 'Westminster, when
his leases fell in, to sweep away the whole of Grosvenor-
place, and to rebuild it with stone and marble. (Hear.)
Hon, members need not be alarmed at the intelligence.
The rents would not be much increased—(laughter)—for
he believed that the difference between the cost of brick and
more durable materials in such structures was not more
than 5 per cent. Every influence had been brought to bear
to thrust the vote down the throat of the house. Balls,
concerts, and bazaars had been held in the building to make
it popular. He did not object to the bazaar for the benefit
of Incurables, because it was germane to the place—(laugh-
ter)—but it was a remarkable fact that, in the case of the
old Exhibition building of 1851, the contractors were posi-
tively restrained by legal injunction f:om allowing anything
of the kind to take place within its walls. In conclusion,
the noble lord maintained that the rejection of the vote in
no way involved disrespect to the memory of the Prince
Consort, whose published speeches constituted a monument
more enduring and remarkable than any which could be
raised to his name by the country or the house, and called
on the committee to reject the proposition for the purchase
of a building which was condemned alike by private, by
public, and b) professional opinion. (Hear, hear,)
Mr TITE explained that Mr. Mallett had been employed
in connection with the iron work, and repudiated the idea
that there was any dirty jealousy in the minds of the gene-
ral body of architects against Capt. Fowke. The Council
of Architects bad, however, almost unanimously condemned
the building, and there was a unanimous feeling in the ar-
tistic world against its remaining.
Mr. BENTINCK said there was one peculiarity about
the House of Commons—they were very regular in their
meals. (About 200 members had just retired in a body to
dinner.) He condemned the building generally as a vast
monument of extravagance and ugliness, and supported Mr.
Mallett's opinion of it entirely. It had been thrown out
as a reproach against Mr. Mallett that he had had nothing
to do with the erection of the Houses of Parliament;
but if there was one thing more than another that ought
to commend Mr. Mallett's judgment as an architect, it
was that he had no connection with the greatest mass of
extravagance, bad taste, and inconvenience that ever was
put together. (Hear, hear.) If they once sanctioned the
purchase of the building, no one could say what would be
the expense they would ultimately be called upon to incur
to carry out the proposed scheme. It was one of the most
extravagant and ono of the most unjustifiable proposals that
was ever made to the house, and he hoped it would be re-
jected. What, he asked, would the operatives in the North
say to this expenditur, when such small assistance was
offered to them, but that it was a wasteful expenditure of
money, and that the sympathy that had been expressed for
their distress was simulated ?

Sir J. SHELLEY opposed the vote. He dreaded the
expense they would be put to if they purchased the build-
ing, by men of taste who would be called in to ornament
the structure. With the best wish to support the institu-
tion at South Kensington, he believed that he should best
be doing his duty to the public by giving his vote to raze
the building to the ground.
Mr. COWPER said that what the right hon. gentleman
the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said about the con-
tract did not appear to be thoroughly understood. The
commissioners of the Exhibition of 1851, who were the pro-
prietors of the land, had covenanted with the commissioners
of the Exhibition of 1862 that the land should be cleared
within six months after the conclusion of the Exhibition,
and they naturally assumed that some legal document had
been signed by the contractors in their engagements with
the committee of the Exhibition of 1862, to give force to
that covenant; and it was only recently that it was dis-
covered that the commissioners of 1862 had failed to
obtain any covenant to bind the contractors as to time. If
the Chancellor of the Exchequer had been aware of
that fact at the time of proposing the vote, he would have
mentioned it. The noble lord (Lord Elcho) had made an
able speech in moving the rejection of the vote ; but he had
failed to grapple with the question put before the committee
by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. That proposal only in-
volved an expenditure of £290,000, and the retention of those
portions of the building which were permanent, as distin-
guished from those which were of a temporary character,
for the purposes of the British and Patent Museums, leav-
ing for future consideration the question how the remaining
portion of the land should be disposed of. The estimate of
Mr. Hunt had only been put before the house to afford the
information of what would be the maximum expense if the
whole building were made permanent and substantial. Mr.
Hunt bad based his estimate on the cost of eovering the
front with stucco, but that would not preclude the use, if
the house should think fit, of bricks, terracotta tiles, or
earthenware. If the house should resolve to use Portland
stone, no one would be better pleased than he should; but
that was a question in no way involved in the present vote.
He denied there was any intention to transfer the pictures
from the National Gallery to the new building at Kensing-
ton-gore, and went into details to show that in point of eco-
nomy the proposition of the Government was the best which
could be proposed for giving the accommodation required
for the British and Patent Museums.
Mr. C. BENTINCK said that the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer and the right hon. gentleman who had just sat
down, had told the committee that Government wished to
treat this matter as one of business ; but of all unbusinesslike
proceedings this was the most so. They had just heard from
the First Commissioner of Works that the House of Commons
had bought a property with a bad title. (Mr. Cowper dis-
sented.) It was clear to him that there was a flaw in the title.
The purchase had been made by the house in ignorance of
that, or it certainly would not have bought the property,
That opened the question as to the impression on the minds of
the commissioners of 1862 with regard to the ultimate desti-
nation of the building. It was a matter of surprise to him
that this important question had been delayed to so late a
period of the session. There appeared to be an intention on
the part of the commissioners that the building should be-
come the property of the nation ; but he trusted that was
not the intention of the House of Commons. The. hon gen-
tleman then complained of the silence of the Treasury
bench, but he was not surprised at it, for, whenever they had
a bad case, they always declined to speak. It was only by
driblets that the house got any information at all on the
subject. He had no doubt that Captain Fowke at all events
knew that the building was to be permanent—(heer, hear)
-- and, if so, they were entitled to ask for what purpose
it was intended. To what use were they going to apply
the building ? for it was evident the Patent Museum
scheme was only put forward to hoodwink the public. The
British Museum only required five acrese—the miserable por-
trait gallery was now contained in three or four small rooms
and everyone knew that the national collection of pictures
could never be removed to Kensington. He gave his most
cordial support to the amendment of his noble friend.
Mr. F. DOULTON said it appeared to him that the owl-
duct of the Government in this matter had been, to say the
least, very disingenuous. (Hear.) It was a very significant
fact that they had not as yet been favoured with the opinions
of any, of the gentlemen on the front Opposition bench.
(Hear.) Outside the house, however, it was rumoured that
they were in complete accord with the Government. Well,
if that were so, it was not the first time, for whenever a
great abuse was to be perpetrated the front benches were
usually in agreement.

Lord H. LENNOX said he should vote for the proposi-
tion of the Government, because he believed if they did not
arrange the matter now they would continue, so far as re-
garded :heir art and scientific institutions, in a state of
chronic confusion and congestion. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. GREGORY opposed the vote, and in doing so com-
plained of the attack which the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had made on Mr. Mallett. It was true that Mr. Mallett
had ,vritten a work on earthquakes—(laughter)—but it was
as illiberal to decry his engineering ability on that ground
as it would be to object to the right hon. gentleman's finan-
cial ability because he had written a book on theology—
(laughtcr)—or published profound theories about Homer.
(Hear, and laughter.) He believed that the spirit of stucco
was ono of the characteristic credos of tho Kensington
School, and if they were to assent to the proposal of Govern-
ment they would be inaugurating a reign of stucco.

Sir S. NORTHCOTE said the discussion had gone
beyond the limits of a business-like debate, owing to the
Chancellor of the Exchequer having been the first to depart
from the question at issue. He charged the Government
with not having brought forward a clear, distinct, and defi-
nite proposition in reference to this matter ; and after re-
ferring to the defeat of the Government proposition last
year for the re-arrangement of the British Museum, he
condemned the course pursued by the Government this
session in dividing the vote, which prevented the subject
from being then properly sifted, or discussed in such a
manner as its importance demanded. Great fault was also
to be found with the Government for withholding from the
knowledge of the House the fact that, though they
had purchased the land, they were at the mercy
of the contractors when they would give it up to
the country ; and the want of information on what was to
be the future proceedings of the Government rendered it
impossible for hon. members to come to a satisfactory divi-
sion on the matter. He observed that the opposition to the
vote was based on different objections, and some of those
who did sl did it, not on the grounds of true economy, but
on the ground of beauty and ornamentation, which in
reality meant greater expense, rather than not being in ac-
cordance with national taste. (Hear, hear, and No, no.)
He cautioned true economists how they allied themselves
on this occasion with those who would lead them in future
years into great and extravagant expense. (Hear, hear.)
A great injustice had been done to Captain Fowke by the
noble lord (Elcho) in comparing the stuccoing of the
building to the painting by Mdme. Rachel, and
thereby impute to him what he disclaimed—viz.,
that he was an advocate for stucco. (Crites of Divide,
divide.) He would not weary the house much longer, but
his object was to move an amendment--(cries of Move,
move)—but it was necessary to give some explanation before
doing so. (Cries of Oh, oh, Divide, and Move.) The site

had been obtained on favourable and reasonable terms—
(loud cries of Divide from both sides of the house, and, as
the hon. member could not be heard, he moved that the
Chairman report progress, which announcement was re-
ceived with cheers,)
Mr. LOWE rose to give certain explanations to the hon.
member for Taunton, but he was received with such loud
cries of Order and Divide, that he was inaudible.
Mr. DISRAELI, who next attempted to speak, was
received in a similar manner by his own immediate sup-
porters, as well as the more impatient on the Ministerial
side of the house. There were also loud cries for Mr.
Bernal Osborne and " Divide," mingled with other mani-
festations of displeasure. The Chairman in vain called for
order, and Mr. Disraeli was obliged to resume his seat with-
out being heard.
The question for reporting progress was put and nega-
tived amidst the confusion that prevailed.
Lord R. CECIL succeeded in gaining a few moments of
attention, during which he implored the committee to con-
duct themselves in a more orderly manner and not interrupt
the discussion of what he characterised as an unpopular
vote.
The CHAIRMAN,—The question is that I report
progress.
Mr. DISRAELI said—Mr. Massey, I desired, with hu •
mility, to offer the house advice, because I thought they
were pursuing a course which they would afterwards
regret. I was not present on a previous occasion, and
therefore I was not responsible for the course which the
house then adopted, and for the precipitation with which it
may have acted. What I wish to point out to the committee
at this moment is the remarkable position in which they
may unwittingly place themselves, The Government have
brought forward a motion of considerable importance ; no
member on this bench has spoken, though we have been
challenged to do so ; the hon. member for Stamford was
explaining his views, and was about to offer an amendment
of considerable moment—he was about to propose that the
question should be sent before a select committee, before
which the question might be fully discussed. (Cries of
" No, no," and " Divide, divide.")
After a few words from Sir H. WILLOUGHBY, which
were wholly inaudible in the gallery,
Mr. DI -RAELI said he did not intend to give the
amendment of his right hon. friend accurately. It was,
however, in perfect unison with the forms of the house.
Sir R. CLIFTON said sufficient time had been devoted
to the discussion, and suggested that the committee should
at once come to a conclusion on the vote.
The motion to report progress was then negatived with-
out a division.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE raid the amendment he now wished
to propose was that the vote be reduced by the sum Of
£25,000. That would give an opportunity for a select com-
mittee to decide on the question of the site:

Mr. HENLEY objected to both the proposition of the
Government and the amendment, as both pledged the
house to an indefinite expenditure to which he could see
neither limit nor end. By rejecting both it would give
time to the Government to consider the whole question
maturely, and bring forward well-digested plans and esti-
mates for the employment of all the land. At present
it had been put before the house in so unsatisfactory a man-
ner, that they were not in a position to tonne to a fair judg-
ment. The hon. member complained, too, that the Govern-
ment had appeared to have practised some concealment on
tha house in regard to purchasing the land.
Sir S. M. PETO next, amid loud cries of "Divide," ad-
dressed a few words to the committee, which did not reach
the gallery.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then rose
to say a few words in reply. He first suggested, as a matter
of general convenience, that the amendment should be with-
drawn, and then proceeded to deny that any concealment
had been practised in regard to the purchase of the land.
He had himself stated that it was not likely that possession
of the land would be obtained in less than two years. What
he said was that, even with a contract, it would be very
difficult to get possession of the land in 1864. He never
meant to say that Messrs. Kelk and Lucas would make a
vexatious exercise of their power; what he said was that,
like men of business, those gentlemen would simply endea-
vour to obtain the best market for their materials. The
right hon. gentleman opposite said the Government had no
proposal of a clear and distinct character to offer. He main-
tained, however, that their proposal was perfectly plain and
distinct. They proposed to deal with four and a half acres
of this land, and to apply the money asked for to that
land, reserving all question as to the remaining 121
acres for future consideration. That would inv,,lve no pledge
whatever, and if it was determined that the building on the
121 acres should be removed, it could be removed, and a
considerable sum would be received for the value of the
land.

Sir S. NORTHCOTE then announced that he with-
drew his amendment, reserving to himself, however, power
to renew it at a future stage in case the vote were now
carried.

The committee then divided, and when, after the usual
interval, the tellers approached the table, and the assist-
ant clerk was seen to hand the paper on which the num-
bers were inscribed to Lord Riche, who, with Mr. Gre-
gory, acted as teller for the opponents of the vote, there
was a general burst of cheering, which was renewed with
redoubled vigour when the result was proclaimed as follows:
Ayes
Noes 287
Majority against the vote -166
The house then resumed.
ELECTION PETITIONS BILL.

On the order for going into committee on this bill,

Mr. HODGSON moved that the bill be committed that
day six months ; and after a long discussion the amend-
ment was accepted without a division, and so the bill was
lost.

The amendments to the Vaccination (Scotland) Bill
were considered and agreed to.
The Lords' Amendments to the Salmon Fisheries (Scot-
land) Act Continuance Bill were considered and agreed to.
The Public Works and Fisheries Acts Amendment Bill
was read a second time. _ _ _

The Poor Law Board Continuance Bill and the Loan
Societies Bill were read a third time and passed.
The Militia Ballots Suspension Bill passed through com-
mittee.
The Lords• amendments to the Security from Violence
Bill were considered and agreed to.
The Stipendiary Magistrates Bill, as amended, was con-
sidered
REFRESHMENT ROOMS (HOUSE OF COMMONS).
Colonel FRENCH called attention to the report of the
Kitchen and Refreshment Rooms committee, and moved
that the enlargement of the dining rooms should be carried
into effect.

Mr. AYRTON moved that the debate be adjourned.
The house divided. The numbers were—
Ayes
Noes
Majority„
The debate was then adjourned.
WESTMINSTER NEW PALACE APPROACHES.
On Mr. Tite's proceeding to nominate the select com-
mittee on this subject,
An HoN. MEMBER moved that the house be counted,
and there not being forty members present, the house ad
journed at ten minutes to two o'clock.