The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-19 00:00:00

TEM SUN', LONDON', WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARO}t 19, 1.862.

take place, the noble lord ought to rest satisfied with having
called attention to the question, and not press the motion
to a division, The more the evidence es to the South Ken-
sington Museum was considered, the more would the public
agree with the committee, that it had done, was doing, and
would do a great deal towards accomplishing the object for
which it had been established. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI agreed with the hon. baronet that his
noble friend would do wisely not to press his resolution to a
division. The circumstances under which the house was
asked to agree to a resolution should always be considered.
At that particular hour the house might arrive at results
that would lead to an impression that they d:d not sympa-
thise with the general views expressed by the noble lord.
His noble friend had brought the subject forward in a speech
of great ability, and had really grappled with all the points
of his case. He had no fault to find with the resolution of
his noble friend, because, though it affirmed a general prin-
ciple which the house might ultimately adopt, it pledged
the Government in no way to its details. After the speech
and amendment of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, his
noble friend would act imprulently if he risked a division.
An independent member ought to feel satisfied when a
Minister moves the previous question as an amendment to
his motion, for the previous question was in reality an
admission of the general justice of his case. (Hear,
, hear.) Ho might state that in his own opinion the general
management of our institutions was not satisfactory,
though ho could not agree in the reasons offered by his noble
friend for coming to that conclusion. His noble friend had
said with respect to the National Portrait Gallery that it
was with difficulty he made his entrance ; that he found a
number of pictures hung in an obscure and dingy apart-
ment; and that he discovered that the public had only been
admitted within the last y ear to inspect them. These were
all circumstances incident to a young institution. The
apartment was a temporary one, and had not been selected
by the trustees, of whom he was one. The trustees would
have been perfectly ready to have placed their pictures in a
magnificent gallery if the public had furnished them with
one. His opinion of the value of the gallery differed from
that of his noble friend, His noble friend had formed a false
estimate of its value, and had expected to be received in a
magnificent saloon, instead of in a dingy apartment, and as
it was not in a dingy apartment that a refined dilettante,
like his noble friend, could form an accurate estimate of pic-
tures. The institution in question was a wise and proper
one, and had been established in consequence of an address
to the Crown by both Houses of Parliament. The portraits
were in his opinion a most valuable and interesting collet •
tion. With respect to the National Gallery, he should say
nothing about the building. In his opinion it would bo
advisable to devote the whole of the building to the Na-
tion Gallery. (Hear, hear.) He differed from the member
for Brighton with respect to the management of that gal-
lery. He recognised the right of the hon. member to speak
on the subject of art, and he could have wished that the
hon. member had confined his remarks to that subject.
(Hear, hear.) It was impossible for any man to occupy
the position of Sir C. Eastlake without being exposed to a
great deal of envious criticism. Ho looked upon Sir C.
Eastlake as a man of most accomplished mind, and fully
qualified in every way for the position which he held.
It was not Sir C. Eastlake who was deficient in the
knowledge of art, but it was the people of this country.
It was in vain to conceal from ourselves that art had
never flourished, had never been appreciated except in
small communities. In this country the people were much
too busy—much too occupied with great affairs of the world
to pay much attention to art. Wo lived in a country whose
great men were engineers, and that was the reason why we
could not concentrate our thoughts and feelings on those
beautiful productions which had rendered Athens and Flo-
rence immortal. (Hear, hear.) lie did not think, there •
fore, that any change in the administration of our galleries
would lead to results more satisfactory than those which
had been accomplished. He admitted, nevertheless, that
whatever expenditure was necessary ought to be placed
under a responsible Minister of the Crown. Ho came to
the more important part of the subject—the management
of the British Museum—and on that point his views were
not in accordance with those of his noble friend. Anomaly
in governing bodies was not the exception in England, but
rather the rule. Accident had produced the original con-
stitution under which the British Museum existed. That
constitution had become modified and respected. He could
not trace to the anomalous character of that constitution
and management the highly unsatisfactory state of the Bri-
tish Museum. It was to be accounted for by the origin of
that great collection. It was the collection of a virtuoso,
and as time had advanced circumstances had proved that a
collection founded on that general character must be imper-
fect and unsatisfactory. Art, science, literature, nature, were
jealous mistresses that refused to live under the same roof,
and when we presented their various achievementsunder one
roof we were attempting to accomplish that which, whilst
it was desirable, was necessarily imperfect. Her Ma-
jesty's Government had adopted as their principle of action
that which he had always contended for—the division of
these great departments. The very moment we divided the
collections of art and learning, which now met under the
same roof, we should do justice to the increasing and irre-
sistible demands of natural science, and enrich those collec-
tions of art and those great libraries which we were now
almost prevented from enriching. It was in the management
of the collection, and not in the alteration of the governing
body, that we should find those improvements which the
country demanded. But if we adopted that course of divi-
sion there was no reason why we should not also adopt the
principle laid down in the resolution of his noble friend.
There was no reason why the whole matter should not be
placed under the direction of a responsible minister of the
Crown. The Chancellor of the Exchequer having recog-
nised so amply the justness of the principle contained in the
resolution, and having announced that in any future ar-
rangements the Government were ;prepared to adopt the
only principle that would lead to a satisfactory solution of
the difficulties that existed, he thought it would be unwise
for his noble friend to ask tho house to come to any absolute
decision upon the resolution. (Cheers.)

Lord H. LENNOX then withdrew his resolution.
BRITISH MERCHANTS IN CHINA.

Mr. GRE GS ON called attention to the position of British
merchants in China, and moved a resolution, that due protec-
tion be afforded to them and their property in the treaty ports
of that empire. He read statements made by persons upon
whom he could, he said, depend of the character
of the Taepings, who, so far from being a na-
tional party, were represented to be a set of robbers and mur-
derers, land pirates, and marauders. All he asked was pro-
tection of the lives and property of our countrymen resident
in the cities named in treaty against the lawless violence of
these men.

Mr. J. TURNER, in seconding the motion, dwelt upon
the great value of the trade of Shanghai to Manchester.
Colonel SYKES concurred in the motion, denying, how-
ever, that a single proof had been furnished of a British
subject having been killed, or of British property having
been put in jeopardy, by the Taepings, to justify the panic
at Shanghai. He drew a favourable picture of the Tae-
pings, and protested against our interference.

Mr. LAYARD said the Government had endeavoured to
pursue a policy of strict forbearance and non-intervention
in China ; but in the present condition of the country this
policy was difficult. All the information the Government
had received tended to but one result,—that the party
called Taepings had no policy, and were totally unable to
establish a Government ; that they were a rabble rout of
marauders and plunderers. There had been a notion that
they wore about to introduce the Christian religion, and
that the object of the movement was to restore the Chinese
dynasty; but this illusion had disappeared from all except
Colonel Sykes, and the devastation created by these bands
nasal the descriptions given by writers of the horrors
perpetrated by the wild hordes that invaded Europe in the
early ages. Cultivation disappeared, cities, were deserted,
populations fearfully reduced, and in some places entirely
exterminated. Meanwhile a new Ministry had been or-
ganized at Pekin, and our Minister wrote that a great change
had taken place in the policy of the Imperial Court. A great
emporium of British trade was now threatened ; were we
to stand by and see it destroyed P It was not a question of
neutrality, but of humanity. The ITaepings. were deter-
mined to ruin Shanghai, and it would be criminal on our
part to allow it. Instructions had therefore been given for
its defence, and the Government had determined to protect
the other treaty porta.

Mr. J. WHITE approved the determination of the Go-
vernment, though their past policy did not meet his appro-
'bation. Ho thought that hereafter we might come to some
arrangement with the Taepings.
Mr. BUCHANAN said very serious apprehensions were
entertained in China from the progress of the Taepings, and
the determination of the Government would be highly. satis-
factory.

Mr. MARSH gave particulars of the ill-treatment of the
Chinese in Australia.
Mr. GREGSON withdrew his resolution.
EMBANKMENT OF THE THAMES.

Mr. COWP.ER rose to move for leave to bring in a bill
to provide for the embankment of the Thames. this was,
he said, ono of the most urgent wants of the metropolis.
Great inconvenience was caused by the want of a free pas.
sage along the great thoroughfare which united the east and
west of London. Along that important line of communica-
tion there was such a constant flux and reflux of traffic be-
tween the city and west-end that at certain hours it was
almost impassable. Ludgate.hill, Fleet••street, and the
Strand did not serve the purpose for which they were in-
tended. The great value of the property in those streets ren-
dered it impracticable to widen them. With the construc-
tion of another thoroughfare from east to west it was pro-
posed to combine the laying down of the low-level sewer, so
as to obviate the necessity of raising the pavement of Fleet-
street and the Strand and endangering the houses by loosen-
jog their foundations, the improvement of the navigation
the embellishment of its shores and the
formation
Thames,o
of
a
handsome and healthful promenade for the
citizens. One
might have expected that London would
have taken a pride in the river which formed one of its
noblest features, and to which it owed in a great measure its
contrary, it had been neglected and abused. Paris made
supremacy over other cities. But, on the
tPhreosmpeersittyofantdhe Seine, St. Petersburg, did not neglect the
Neva; Stockholm,
Florence, and other foreign cities had
greatly improved their rivers. Even the Liffey, which Was
not to be compared fo-
F a moment with the Thames, had
adorned with a beautiful line of quays. But the people of
pontloa geed their river to a mum sower for their drains?

and were content only to talk about doing something to im-
prove it. The discussion about the matter has lasted now
for about 230 s ears. (A laugh, and Hear, hear.) The first
step towards embanking the Thames was taken by one of
his most illustrious predecessors. After the Great Fire, Sir
C. Wren, in drawing up those plans for the rebuilding of
London which would have rendered it a really handsome
and symmetrical city, proposed a quay from London-bridge
to the Temple. An act was passed sanctioning the work,
but only a portion of it was completed. In 1767 the corpora-
tion of London obtained powers to make an embankment,
about half a mile of which was constructed, and it was then
stopped. There had been partial embankments, such as
that at the Adolph' ; but those had only aggravated the ir-
regularities of the river. What was wanted was a uniform
system. In 1824 Sir F. Trench agitated the question. He
assembled a number of the most eminent authorities in art
and science on a barge moored off Scotland-yard, with the
Duke of York in the chair, who adopted a scheme for an em-
bankment between London and Westminster bridges. In
1825 Sir F. Trench brought a bill for that purpose into Par-
liament. That bill was opposed by those who, taking a short
sighted view of their own interests, believed they would be
injured by it. Sir F. Trench injudiciously thought it would
be well to attempt to conciliate the opposition of the occu-
pants and owners of property on the banks of the river, and
for that purpose he consented to curtail his plan. At first,
instead of carrying it to Westminster-bridge, he made it
stop short at Whitehall-stairs. Being then met by new ob-
jections, he agreed to stop short at Scotland -yard. This
had the effect of calling forth fresh objections, in deference
to which he consented to stop at Craven-street. These con-
cessions only induced the inhabitants along the whole
length of the rest of the line to combine their resistance,
and they said, " If this work is not to be carried out in front
of the property of persons of great wealth and station, why
should it be carried out in front of ours p" and in conse-
quence of these and other reasons Sir F. Trench had to
abandon his bill. Nothing more was done till the year 1844,
when a Royal Commissic:-.. took up the subject. That com-
mission was presided over by the Duke of Newcastle, and
after hearing a great deal of valuable engineering evidence
they reported that it was desirable the river should be em-
banked between London-bridge and Vauxhall-bridge, and
recommended, as the most pressing part of the work, that
the section between Blackfriars and Westminster should be
first proceeded with, and a bill was introduced in 1845, but
did not become law. In 1860 the subject was again renewed
in that house, and a committee appointed to inquire into it.
They recommended, as the previous commission had done,
the embankment of the river letween Blackfriars-bridge
and Westminster- bridge, and suggested that the coal duties
would form the proper source from which to defray the ex-
pense. That committee, however, did not adopt any parti-
cular plan. Last year a Royal Commission again sat on the
subject, and went very fully into a large number of plans
submitted to them by the most eminent engineers. They
recommended not only an embankment generally, but the
specific plan to which the bill now about to be introduced
was intended to give effect. That plan, he thought, there
could be no doubt, was the best yet devised. This subject
had been so thoroughly investigated that almost every
engineer of distinction had had an opportunity of giving
his opinion and making suggestions upon it, and the
plan now proposed had the sanction of a com-
mission comprising not only very able scientific
men and eminent engineers, but also thorough men of
business. Its main advantage over most of those pre-
viously suggested was that it did not attempt to maintain
the wharfs. Almost all the former plans were only ingeni-
ous modes of combining access to a wharf with a roadway
—a difficulty which no engineering skill could entirely over-
come. The last commission, therefore, thought it better to
buy up the what fs and abolish them altogether, and then

_ .
make a solid embankment with an ordinary roadway, No
public inconvenience would arise from that arrangement,
because the former necessity for those wharfs in the neigh-

bourhood of Scotland-yard, which were principally coal
wharfs, had been superseded by the facilities that now ex-
isted, for at once transferring the cargoes from the colliers
into railway trucks and conveying them whither they were
wanted. In fact, any establishment of wharfs in the imme-
diate vicinity of Charing-cross, the Strand, and Whitehall,
was obviously a great inconvenience; and the general
utility of those thoroughfares would be increased by their
removal. In point of economy, too, it would be far better
to give the owners of the wharves the whole value of their
property at once, rather than compensate them first for the

injury done them during the progress of the works, and then

leave them the reversionary interest on their wharves after
the works were completed. Another feature of this plan was
the formation of a thoroughfare from Blackfriars hridge to
the Mansion-house, because a mere roadway along an em-
bankment would not supply that great desideratum, a com-
plete thoroughfare from the West-end, say Charing-cross, to
the Mansion-house, the traffic between which points now re-
quired to be relieved. It was originally proposed that the em-
bankment should proceed further east thanßlackfriars-bridge;
but the river was very narrow between London-bridge and
Southwark, and it was not desirable for its navigation that
any encroachment should be made upon it in that part,
And as to the space between Southwark-bridge and Black-
friars-bridge, the narrowness of the river and the great
value of the wharf property would render the advantages
of embankment quite incommensurate with the expense.
Therefore this plan consisted of a roadway, commencing
from Westminster-bridge, passing along the banks of the
river until it reached Blackfriars-bridge, then proceeding
with a street of great breadth across Thames-street and
Cannon-street, and at length reaching that great centre
surrounded on different sides by the Mansion-house, the
Bank, and the Royal Exchange. The funds from which
the work was to be executed were those which were
appropriated to this special purpose by an Act of
last Session. The London Coal and Wine Duties
Continuance Act provided that the coal duties should be
applied in the first place to the Thames embankment, and
afterwards to any other public improvements that might
appear desirable. He believed that the whole of the coal
duties during the period for which they were continued by
the Act of last year—viz., ten years, would be required for
this object. It was the opinion of the house last year that

these duties could hardly be better employed than in pro-
viding for this great thoroughfare and the embankment of
the Thames ; and, among the many great metropolitan im-
provements effected by means of the coal duties, none, he
thought, would be more appreciated than this. He pro-
posed that the execution of the Act should be confided to
the Metropolitan Board of Works—a body created by the
Legislature for the discharge of duties very much of that
nature. The main drainage of the metropolis was very
analogous to the formation of the proposed embankment
and the opening of the proposed street. It was said the
Metropolitan Board of Works was too much occupied by
the business it already had to do, and that it we's too large
a body to perform executive work of this importance. But,
to guard against that objection, the bill would provide that
the executive works thrown upon them by the measure
should not be carried out by the whole Board, consisting
of 40 members, but by a committee to be elected by the
Board itself for this special purpose. (Hear, hear.) The
committee would be composed of nine members, two
of whom would be selected from the gentlemen
who represented the city of London in the Board ; be-
cause, as a large portion of the work would pass through
the City, it would be only right that the interests of
the City should be represented in the committee, as they
now were in the Board itself. It had always been thought
desirable that the embankment should extend, not merely
between Blackfriars-bridge and Westminster-bridge, as
proposed by the present bill, but should extend as far as
Vauxhall-bridge or even Battersea-bridge. Now if this
bill were carried out there would remain unembanked only
that small space between Westminster-bridge and the end
of Millbank-street, near the Penitentiary. We might,
therefore, hope a few years hence to see that part of the
work also completed, in which case there would be seen
running from Blackfriars-bridge to Chelsea—a distance of
about four miles—as splendid a quay as could be found in
any city in the world. Hon, members might pioture the
effect which would be produced in the course of a walk
along the embankment by the splendid buildings within
sight—the Houses of Parliament, Somerset-house, and the
fine churches and steeples of Sir Christopher Wren. This
five miles' promenade and drive would, indeed, be a great
source of recreation and admiration. At present it was not
proposed to embank the southern side of the river. A com-
mittee was new sitting which had heard a great deal of
evidence, and until it had reported it would' be premature
to form any opinion on this subject. Among the advan-
tages which would be derived from the embankment now
proposed, some considerable spaces of grass and trees would
be thrown open by tho side of the river to the dense popu-
lation north of the Strand, and here they might breathe
fresh air—(a laugh)—for he hoped that the river would
then be freo from sewage, and that the people would obtain
enjoyment and healthy recreation from disporting them-
selves on the bank of a clear river. (Hear, hear.) At
some points it was intended to build, the land being let on
building leases, and he hoped that here some fine terraces
and streets would arise which would be an orna-
ment to the banks of the river. The powers contem•
plated by the bill would bo committed to the Metropolitan
Board, without any control or interference, except that
the coal dues were at present in the hands of the Trea-
sury. The bill would empower the Treasury to pay the
money to the Board, who, however, would be left free and
unfettered in executing the purposes of the Act. The right
hon. gentleman concluded by moving for leave to bring in
a bill for embanking the north side of the river Thames
from Westminster-bridge, and for making new streets in
and near thereto, and from Blackfriars-bridge to the Man-
sion-house.

Mr. AYRTON rose on a point of order. The bill which
it was now proposed to introduce was for the regulation or
appropriation of a public tax, and it was unusual to intro-
duce such a bill except in a committee of the whole house.
The right hon. gentleman seemed to have forgotten the pre-
cedent to which ho lately submitted when he proposed to
appropriate a tax for the purpose of making a road in Ken-
sington Gardens. He then made the usual motion that the
house should resolve itself into a committee for the purpose
of considering the Act, and it would be a dangerous prece-
dent if this course were departed from in the present in-
stance. The coal-tax was in point of fact a public tax, and
ought not to bo treated in a local bill. Again, it was extra-
ordinary that the right hon. gentleman should have given
no estimate, and not said a word about 'he sum he wanted
to complete the works. (Hear, hear.) ;
Mr. C02W1344 844 that vioy tbo bill imposed uo

charge upon the public. No doubt it appropriated rates and
duties already granted, but he never understood that it was
necessary to brine:in such a bill in a committee of the whole
house. A: to the Road Bill referred to, it; would eato im-
posed indirectly a charge upAt the public, but ho was wo,
awaro that the present bill would iropose any, for if it dia,
not pass the public would pay the sane as before.
Sir J. SHELLEY expressed an opinion that the usage
of Parliament required that the bill should be introduced
in committee.

Lord J. MANNERS said it was impossible to estimate the
effect of words which were introduced for the first time into
the motion as it was put into the Speaker's hands. As ho
caught them, they referred to the appropriation of public
money, and it might be that the hon. and learned member
fur the Tower Hamlets was right. He should have the
greatest possible pleasure in supporting the bill, because, as
he understood, the creation and management of this great
metropolitan improvement were handed over to the Metro-
politan Board of Works. At present he reserved his opinion
(4n the details; but, as ha had caught an allusion to some
suitable public buildings which were to recreato the eyes of
the Londoners, he might express a hope that neither the
noble lord nor the right hon. gentleman would have any-
thing to do with them. (Laughter.)
Tho SPEAKER decided that, as no new burden was
proposed to be laid on the public, and the amendment of the
London Coal and Wino Duties Act only referred to the plan
of keeping the accounts, there was nothing informal in the
mode in which the bill was introduced.

Hr. WILLIAMS thought that the embankment of the
south side was most important for the comfort of the in-
habitants in that district, as they were now constantly
inundated, and would suffer greater inconvenience if the
north side only was embanked.
Mr, LOCKE also hoped that the effect of the north em-
bankment upon the south side would be considered. As to
the embankment from Millbank-street to Westminster-
bridge, he wished to know whether it would be in frcnt of
the Houses of Parliament, and how access was proposed,
seeing that there was no space for a street between the end
of the clock-tower and the bridge. He approved a solid
embankment, because the openings for barges would lead to
a great accumulation of filth and mud, and he therefore
condemned the proposal to have openings in that part east
of the Temple-gardens, merely for the convenience of the
City Gas Company. Those works might have been re-
moved but for an act which passed two years ago, and even
now it would be worth considering whether some of the
money from the coal duties should not be applied to get rid
of them. He hoped that plans of the works would be ex-
hibited for the inspection of hon. members.
Dr. BRADY expressed his surprise at the tone in which
the metropolitan members had treated the question, for
without a grand opening of the sort along the river side
London never would be what it ought to be. The saving
which would be made by the improvement would soon pay
for the expense of it, and the commercial community ought
to be the chief supporters of it. (Hear.)
Mr. COX agreed that it would be desirable that the house
should have the plans of the embankment before it previous
to the second reading. He should like to have some further
explanation of the use of the new road from the embankment
by Earl. street to the Mansion-house. He was of opinion
that it would be utterly useless in removing the real press
of traffic. If the improvement were carried out as proposed,
it would be necessary to renew the coal tax for another 10
years beyond those proposed by the bill, and, as regarded
the southern side, he was afraid that it would be little better
than a nuisance—(no, no)—and would produce a constant
overflow on that side of the water. He should be glad to
hear from the right hon. gentleman what effect it was ex-
pected the embankment would have on the foundations of
London-bridge.
Mr, CONINGHAM thought this one of the most im-
portant metropolitan improvements which had ever been
proposed, and was surprised that the hon. member for the
Tower Hamlets should persevere in making war on all the
schemes suggested for the improvement of London. The
matter was one which regarded the whole country, in a
certain sense, for it was not only the inhabitants of London
who paid the coal tax, but everybody who came into London
and helped to burn coals there had a share in it. (Hear.)
As the representative of London-super-Mare—(a laugh)—
he should give his best assistance to pass the bill.

Mr. KINNAIRD thanked the President of the Board
of Works for the very excellent metropolitan improvement
which he had proposed.
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.