The Sun.
London, England, 1865-07-14 00:00:00

ceived with a scoff, or with contumelious silence, by the
free-trade party. But that violated their rrinciples. Now
you know how advantageous treaties of commerce are, and
you know that the increased trade consequent on the treaty
of commerce with France has materially supported Eng-
land in the crisis through which she has been called to pass
during the struggle which lasted for so long a time in the
United States of America. How can it be said that all this
benefit is due to the Liberal Government when they so put
themselves in opposition to the principles of a French
treaty ? The Liberals have been telling you that there is
to be a great treaty of commerce with Austria. It has been
announced, from week to week, that a treaty of commerce
with Austria was likely to be concluded from which we
were to derive benefits similar to those which have re-
sulted from the French treaty. I said there was no chance
of any such thing. We have heard of a right hon. gentle-
man (Mr. Hutt) who has dined with the Emperor of Aus-
tria, and who has made speeches in various languages, but
the simple reason we are likely to be unsuccessful in this
case is, that we have no concessions to grant to the Aus-
trian Governnient. When you adopted the principle of un-
restricted competition—whatever other benefits might re-
sult from it—yet, of course, viewing the question in its
particular bearing with respect to Austria, you allowed all
the products of Austrian industry to come into this coun-
try, and now what have you to induce Austria to lower
her duties on the articles of your production ? Why did
you succeed in completing a treaty of :commerce with
France ? Because, though you adopted generally the
principles of unrestricted competition, yet Sir Robert Peel
was obliged to keep the duty on some articles of French
produce, for instance, upon their wine and upon their
silk, because Sir Robert Peel thought that you could
not at that time part with them with due regard to
the revenue, and therefore when you entered into
negotiations you had a great deal to offer France ; you had
the offer of reducing the duties on wine and silk, and there-
fore you negotiated a successful, a most successful treaty,
which has been of inestimable advantage to this country,
because it has been effected in total violation of the princi-
ples of free trade. (Hear) I attribute the attention with
which you listen to me to the interest you naturally take in
this subject, which is one of the most important with which
Englishmen should acquaint themselves. (Hear.) I am told
there has been a large reduction of taxation by her Majesty's
Government. I admit it, but it has been of taxation which
they themselves levied on the country, and Chat fact is
omitted. (Laughter.) There is one subject on which I
confess that Mr. Gladstone and myself have differed. I
have agreed with him in reducing the duties on tea, and in
reducing the charge of the income tax. I was in favour
of the principle of a treaty of commerce with France,
though I differed in detail as to the manner in which it
was brought forward. There is one point, however, in
which we differ, and that is the malt tax. (Cheers.) My
excellent colleague in the representation of the county
has already expressed before you decided views upon
the subject of the malt tax; though in my address I have
omitted to touch upon that topic. I do not treat the
matter now for the first time. For eighteen years I have
enjoyed your trust and general approbation, and being
placed, more by accident than by any merit of my own, is
charge of the public revenue, I asked you to allow me to
be returned to Parliament' unpledged. But 1 did think
that if there was any subject on which it was unnecessary
for me to declare my sentiments it was the malt tax. I
remember that in 1852, when the general taxation of the
country was reviewed, and when the country had finally
adopted the principle of unrestricted competition, I re-
commended, on the part of the Government of Lord
Derby, that the malt tax should be reduced by one-half.
(Hear, hear.) What happened ? Many Liberal gentle-
men—l do not say that I received a fervent support even
from many members on my side—but the generality
of Liberal members professed a belief that a remission
of one-half of the malt tax would be of no use whatever. I
heard of many such gentlemen who have since stated,
either in the House of Commons or battling at the hust-
ings, that a reduction of one-third of the malt tax would be
of advantage ; but at that time they refused a proposition
for remitting it by one-half. Why did we deal with the
malt tax ? We did not believe that, though the country
had definitely accepted the principle of what is popularly
called free trade, but what is really unrestricted competi-
tion, there was any doubt that that policy must have an in-
jurious effect upon the wheat crops of the British farmer
in the long run, and events have shown that that opinion
was not incorrect. Therefore it was of great importance
that the crop next in value should be freed as much as pos-
sible from all unnecessary impost in its general use, and
that the farmer should be freed as far as possible from every
disadvantage. In the adoption of the proposition to take
off ono-half of the malt tax you would not have entirely
obtained that object ; but when you had to deal with a tax
which then produced £6,000,000, and now produces
£5,000,000 annually, it was necessary to have a beginning;
and if one-half were taken off first, and there was a recur-
ring surplus such as we have of late been accustomed to,
you might soon take off the other half. (Hear.) Therefore
I believe this is a sound policy. (Hoar.) I believe that
the real reason that there is so much feeling in the coun-
try respecting the malt tax is, that-experience has proved
that tho British fanner can no longer depend upon the
weight and profit of his wheat crop, but that he must look
to his barley. [A Voice : " Then wo should get jolly
drunk.") (Much laughter.) I should think that gentle-
man has had a glass before this. (Renewed laughter.)
When the question of the malt tax is brought forward
we must consider it with reference to the general state
of the country, and with regard to our finances, and, if
we possibly can, we should relieve the British farmer
from this tax, on principles of financial justice as well
as on the ground of general utility. (Cheers.) One
other observation with respect to finance. Almost all
that has been said in addresses at the hustings has referred
to expenditure, but there is another equally important in
finance; I mean economy. (Hear, hear.) We are told there
have been great benefits accruing from the placing of the
finances in the hands of a Liberal Government, but I will
place before you simple facts which cannot be controverted.
In 1858-59 the expenditure was £64,900,000, though really
it was only £63,000,000; but in 1865 the sum of £2,000,000
for the payment of the Terminable Annuities was no longer
required. The expenditure of last year was £66,000,000.
(A Voice—" The family has got bigger!" followed by much
laughter.) A gentleman says the expenditure has increased
because the family has got bigger; but that cannot be the
reason, for two years ago the expenditure was £70,000,000,
and now it is £66,000,000. (Laughter.) If we had had an-
nual Parliaments I could have given that gentleman fresher
information I say that there is, even as
compared with
which
I was responsible for the
(Loud laugihnt er.
finances of the country, an increase in the amount of taxa-
ith the year
taxa-
tion levied to the extent of at least £3,000,000, an increase
from £63,000,000 to £66,000,000. But how were those
£66,000,000 arrived at when two years before the sum was
larger by several millions? Tho reduction was produced
by repeated motions in the House of Commons, made by
myself or by my friends, for a diminution of expenditure. I
am perfectly willing to give the Government credit for all
that they have done in the way of decreasing taxation and
introducing greater economy in the public service, but I do
not believe that our financial prosperity is wholly the result
of their exertions. (Hear, hear.) I have shown that if you
had a Conservative Administration there would have been
a repealnf the paper duty as well as a reduction in the tea
duty, and a great reduction in the income tax. I believe
that there would also have been a treaty with France, al-
though not one, perhaps, framed with such admirable
ability as the treaty conducted by Mr. Cobden, and
not by the Government. And here I cannot help
remembering that it has been said, that while Lord
Derby, when he was Prime Minister, in 1852, was
engaged in negotiating a French treaty, another Prime
Minister was actually throwing impediments in the way
of such a measure. I have shown you that the course of
Lord Derby's government has nothing to dread upon this
subject of finance from a comparison with their successors ;
and I have been forced to take this course in vindication
of those with whom I act in public life. In fact, the
whole thing has been a genteel impDsture from beginning
to end (cheers and laughter); and if those gentlemen did
not occupy distinguished positions I am afraid they would
really be taken before the Lord Mayor for obtaining ap-
plause under false pretences. (Renewed laughter.) Tha
reminds me of a circumstance which occurred to me to

day. A gentleman stopped me on my way to these hust-
ings for the purpose of speaking to me about the malt tax.
He said that the farmers had been treated very badly in
that matter, and that they had always looked forward to
the falling in of the Terminable Annuities as the means by
which they were to get rid of that burden. I said to him,
as I was already later than I ought to have been, " My
dear sir, I am behind time ; if you hold me by the button
the election may be over before I can take any part in it,
and, perhaps, my
excellent friend, Dr. Les, will be re-
turned instead of me." (Great laughter.) I was thus
to
obliged abruptly get rid of the gentleman by whom I
was so importunely consulted. But it is very remarkable
that nobody appears to know what Mr. Gladstone did
with the Terminable Annuities. I will now tell you what
lie did with them. It has hitherto been kept a secret, but
Parliament having been dissolved I will let you know all
about the matter. One evening there was a very full
attendance in the House of Commons, as it was known
that Mr. Gladstone was going to make a great speech,
and to perform a wonderful feat in finance. He had
£22,00.000 at his disposal. These Terminable Annuities,
to which every class of Englishmen who thought that
they had to submit to any kind of fiscal grievance
had been for half a century looking forward as the best
chance of securing to them some redress, had at length
fallen in; and what did Mr. Gladstone do with them?
By a feat of legerdemain, that exceeded any of the con-
juring tricks of M. Robert, he took one million of the Ter-
minable Annuities and turned them into "ducks"—
(laughter)—and then he took another million and turned
them into "drakes"--(renewed laughter)—and in half an
hour all these " ducks" and "drakes" were cackling and
flying about the House of Commons, until we were all so
ashamed of one another that we ordered strangers to with-
draw, and determined to keep the whole affair a profound
secret until the dissolution of Parliament. (Continued
laughter.) Having communicated to you that information
I will next proceed to notice the case of the Union Charge-
ability Bill. I have here, in the first place, to state that I
have always been in favour of doing away entirely with
the law of settlement. With regard to Mr. Villiers's bill,

I will confess that, speaking generally, I was in favour of
that measure. In the House of Commons it met with but
little opposition ; but I think the change might have been
arranged in a manner by which less injustice would have
bean done to particular proprietors and yet the same ad-
vantage might have been conferred on the poor of the
country. I will only say in reference to this subject that I
gave my hearty support to the proposal for the total aboli-
tion of the law of settlement ; and I hope that a bill for
effecting such change will be carried in the next Parlia-
ment. There is another topic which Ido not wish to let
pass unnoticed. I find that the candidates on both sides
who have of late been addressing the constituencies through-
out the country are in favour of what is known as the policy
of non-intervention. Now, lam not in favour of non-in-
tervention, and for this reason, because there is no such
word in the English language. (A laugh.) But if you mean
by that barbarous expression that England should not under
any circumstances interfere in the affairs of foreign coun-
tries, I am equally opposed to such a view. I think there
are occasions when the honour and interests of England
may authorise such interference; but I also think that
there must be an unmistakable manifestation of feeling
on the part of the nation before you can decide that its
honour has been outraged, and that it requires on the part
of a ministry very great sagacity and the most careful con-
sideration before they can come to the conclusion that it is
their duty to engage in a quarrel with any other country.
I am myself in favour of a Conservative foreign policy, and
of a Conservative foreign policy that is founded on the be-
lief that the maintenance of the tranquillity of the world is
the interest of England—(hear)—that peace is the normal
state of man, and that in the tranquillity of other nations
the best objects of English ambition may be obtained—
(hear)—l therefore do not think it is the interest or the duty
of England to ally itself with the revolutionary party. I
believe that you will have a much greater choice of avoid-
ing war if you look on the power of England in the world
to be essentially a moderating and a mediating power.
During the 27 years I have been in Parliament there was
only one occasion on which, I think, war was justifiable on
the part of England, and that was the occasion of the Cri-
mean war ; and I therefore supported that war—(hear).—
I think it was a fair boast that was attempted to be made
on the part of the Government at a time of dissolution, and
when they were appealing to the country, to show that they
had maintained peace. I admit that, but lam bound to say
that I think the allegation on the part of the present Admi-
nistration cannot be sustained.. When Parliament met at
the commencement of 1864 there was a general opinion in
the country that we were on the point of war; that we were
going to war with Denmark against Germany. There was
great apprehension that that would be the course. The Go-
vernment was much pressed upon the question; the situation
was mysterious ; we wanted light; the fear of war haunted
the public mind; and it was peculiarly the duty of the Oppo-
sition, but it was also the duty of members on the Liberal side
of the house, to press the Government for information under
such circumstances of perplexity and anxiety. We could
get no information. No papers were presented, and it was
only after repeated inquiries, and it was only by an appeal
to a hostile motion that, at last, papers were presented,
and then only a portion of the papers, which did not give
the information required. The situation appeared alarm-
ing—we were about to ask the House of Commons, by a
vote, to relieve the mind of the country from the anxiety
universally felt, but instead of getting a clear account of
the state of things from her Majesty's Ministers they told
us that a oonference was about to be held. We could not
risk the peace of the country by attempts at interference
either in the House of Lords or in the House of Commons,
lest it should bring about the catastrophe we were wishing
to avoid. The conference at length rose, and papers were
placed upon the table which threw off the appeal to a later
time. But what did these papers prove ? They proved by
the published despatches of the Secretary of State for Fo-
reign Affairs—and I am sure that if I am in any way mis-
stating, there are many gentlemen present distinguished by
theirpolitical knowledge who can correct me—it was proved
that Lord Russell, the English minister acting under the
immediate advice of Lord Palmerston, the Prime Minister
—it was proved that these responsible ministers made re-
peated overtures to Russia and to France—and especially
to France—to enter into an alliance to declare war against
Germany on behalf of Denmark. These were the acts of a
Liberal Government. (Laughter.)
Dr. Lee—l agree with the right hon. gentleman in his
opinion of war in general, and of the Crimean war in par-
ticular. I agree that war is justifiable in self-defence,
though not in aggression.
Mr. Disraeli—This classic episode encourages me—
(laughter)—but I want to know what comes of the observa-
tions of the hon. gentleman, who shows that he is equally
hasty and uninformed, with, many others, on this question.
What becomes of the charges against the Conservative
Party, when indubitable evidence is brought. forward that
this Liberal Government, whose existence is pledged
on the basis of the maintenance of peace, tried to stir
up war in three quarters ? and if it had begun it would
probably be raging at the present moment. (Hear, hear.)
And if there had been war there could have been no reduc-
tion in the tea duties, no remission of the income tax, and
the manifold advantages of the French treaty might have
been lost. You were nearly precipitated into war, and the
united efforts of the two most influential members of the
Government, Lord Palmerston and Lord Russell, were
made to stir up the flames of war in Europe. (Cries of
" Oh, oh.") To whom do we owe the preservation of
peace ? To the firmness of the Sovereign, to the concilia-
tory character of our allies, and, allow mo to say, in some
degree to the united exertions of the Opposition. (Hear,
hear.) Gentlemen, 1 have now placed before you the
general state of our public affairs. I have vindicated the
party with whom I act from the unjust imputations
made against them, but it is matter almost 'of insignifi-
cance to draw your attention to the mere transient
character of the Ministry—the important question is as
to the existence of our institutions, and whether the
form of government under which we now live is to pre-
vail. (Hear.) I address you in the spirit which I think
becomes a public man who is not the slave of party, who
speaks to you because he wishes to impress upon you, as
his constituents who have unanimously returned him to
Parliament, as well as upon the country at large, the fact
that it is the duty of Englishmen in these great questions
of politics which will concern the future form of govern-
ment under which we and our successors are to
live, and which relate to some of the dearest interests
that can influence a human being—l would impress upon
all, whatever may be the minor differences of opinion
among them, the necessity of arriving at definite conclu-
sions. It is your duty as Englishmen to act in this
manner, and not to allow yourselves to be drawn from so
noble a duty, from so exalted a privilege, by the
superficial and interested hisinuations of persons who are
influenced' by very unworthy motives, that those questions
are not at issue, and that all you have to do is to applaud
the financial management which, under any Ministry,
would have been the same, and thet the upholding and
preservation of peace is especially due to the existing
government Gentlemen, assured .that I possess the con-
fidence of my constituents, I now thank you for the great
distinction you have conferred upon me on this occasion.
I thank the gentleman who proposed me, and who repre-
sents one of the greatest houses in this great and undivided

_ .
county, for the honour ho has done me. I thank the gen-
tleman who lives at the other end of the county, and who
so well represents its yeomanry, for the distinction he has
conferred upon me by seconding my nomination, and I
assure you that, supported by the conviction that the people
of Buckinghamshire will stand by me, I shall re-enter
public life in the new parliament with no less confidence
in the future than before, and with a courage which I hope
will not be lessened. And, gentlemen, whatever may
have been my deficiencies—and I acknowledge they have
been numerous—whatever may have been my errors—and
I have never denied them—so long as I possess the con-
fidence of the county of Buckingham, I hope that, whether
I servo in a more or less responsible public position, I may
be able to serve in some manner the country to which I
belong. (The right hon. gentleman sat down amid great
cheering.)

Mr. HARVEY then rose to thank the electors of Bucking-
hamshire for returning him a second time as their repre-
sentative. He had rejoiced in the opportunity of listening
to one whose abilities and eloquence had obtained for him
a deserved and world-wide renown. The ground upon
which he wished to stand was the good opinion of the
electors. His political opinions were so well known that
there was no occasion for him to repeat them there. He
had entered parliament a disciple of the pure Conservative
creed, from which, he hoped, he should never swerve, be-
cause he considered that the essence of that policy was
truth. He was opposed to any extravagant enlargement
of the franchise, which, he believed, was already placed
within the reach of every honest, industrious, and well-
conducted person in the country. (Hear.)
Dr: LEE here came forward and asked Mr. Harvey
whether he would be prepared to abolish the game laws,
and whether he would join the Anti-Tobacco Society.
(Much laughter.)
Mr. Harvey here produced a well-filled cigar case, and
said he believed that was a sufficient answer to Dr. Lee's

-- -
last question. With regard to the preservation of game, he
should say that he did not believe the farmers in that
country had much to complain of upon that subject ; and
it should be remembered that if there were no game the
country gentlemen would probably not reside so much as
they did on their estates.

Mr. Du Pre then proposed a vote of thanks to the High
Sheriff for the admirable manner in which he had that day
presided over their proceedings.
Sir H. Verney seconded the proposal.
The compliment was then acknowledged by the High
Sheriff, and the proceedings terminated.

[ADvErtnsEmsxr.]—Holloway's Pills.---Counsel and
Comfort.—A disordered stomach throws the whole system
out of gear, and renders us unfitted both for work and
amusement. A few doses of these strengthening and puri-
fying pills will, however, speedily restore order, if taken
according to their accompanying directions, and so enable
the stomach to digest its food without difficulty. These
excellent pills are suitable alike for the peer and the
peasant, the soldier_ and the sailor, and particularly for
home and foreign colonists. Holloway's pills are very use-
ful in checking feverish attack, bilious complaints, and in-
flammations. They have also made the most signal cures
in cases of dropsy and diseases of the kidneys, heart, and
lungs, when the sufferer seemed past the reach of
medicine.

Proposed Exhibition of National Portraits.

Yesterday a meeting for organising a national
portrait exhibition was held at the South Kensington
Museum ; the Right Hon. the Earl of Derby in the
chair. Amongst the other noblemen and gentlemen
present were Earl Granville, the Earl of Clarendon,
the Marquis of Lansdowne, the Duke of Buccleuch,
Lord Taunton, Lord Houghton, Viscount Sydney,
Mr. John P. Knight, R.A., Mr. F. Y. Hurlstone,
Mr. Edgar A. Bowring, the Dean of Windsor, Mr.
James Spedding, Mr. T. D. Harding, Mr. G. Scharf,
Mr. R. Redgrave, R.A., Rev. James Beck, Mr. R. J.
Sketchley, Rev. Dr. Brock; Mr. Cole, secretary, &c.
The Earl of DERBY opened the proceedings by an
address in which he said ho should apologise for
putting the meeting to some inconvenience in conse-
quence of calling them together at 3 o'clock, instead
of 12 o'clock, as originally proposed, but he was
compelled to attend a meeting at the latter hour at
Marlborough House, at which the Prince of Wales
was present. With regard to his occupying the
place of chairman on that occasion it arose from the
circumstance that he originally suggested to Mr.
Redgrave, who called upon him for a contribution
for another object, the desirability of holding an exhi-
bition of portraits of eminent historical persons, chro-
nologically arranged, as well as of persons distin-
guished in art and literature. Mr. Redgrave con-
curred with him in that suggestion, and he reported
the matter to the Art and Science Department of the
Committee of Council. He (the Earl of Derby) was
afterwards requested to put on paper the substance
of his proposition, and he heard nothing more on
the subject until he received a printed paper signi-
fying the approval of the Committee of Council,
with his name inserted as president. Having sug-
gested the proposal he did not feel.at liberty to de-
cline the honour, and that was the reason why he
appeared that day in the position of chairman. It
was not intended at the present meeting to propose
any resolution, but they met rather as a committee
of advice, and for the purpose of receiving any sug-
gestions that might bo thrown out by any one pre-
sent. The object of the exhibition was to collect
portraits of eminent persons, statesmen, warriors,
and men of literature and art, beginning, say, from
the middle of the 15th century, and bringing them
down to a recent period. They were to collect from
private sources as many of those portraits as they
could obtain and exhibit them in a chronological
series. Such an exhibition would trace the pro-
gress of British art, beginning, say, from Holbein,
to Vandycke, Lely, Kneller, Gainsborough, Rom-
ney, down to Lawrence. He might mention the
names of Hudson and others who had obtained dis-
tinction by painting the portraits of eminent per-
sons. He thought from an historical and artistic as
well as from a general point of view that such an
exhibition would be valuable and interesting. There
was a vast number of portraits scattered through-
out the country, and he believed that the owners of
them would not object to the loan of them for such
a purpose for a short period. It was advisable to
I consider in what manner they should address the
proprietors of those pictures and how they were to
obtain information respecting the pictures that might
be so obtained. It was proposed to hold the ex-
hibition in the refreshment rooms of the Interna-
tional Exhibition of 1862. The site, which was
south of the Royal Agricultural Gardens, afforded
a very favourable space for this exhibition.
It was true that the light was not from
above, but from the side windows. Within the
last half-hour he had visited the spot in com-
pany with Lord Granville and Mr. Cole, and he
contemplated the effect produced upon two pictures
that were hung up there as an experiment. There
were 1,420 feet run of space, and there was a height
of 13 feet. It was proposed to allow 24 square feet
for each picture, being the same space that was
allowed in the Manchester Exhibition, which would
afford accommodation to 800 pictures, and which
would be arranged in a series of bays. They would
allow the light to fall on two sides, and also in front.
There would be three entrances to the Exhibition--
one in Exhibition-road, one in the Prince Albert-
road, and a third a central entrance, leading from
the Horticultural Gardens. It was proposed to open
the Exhibition in April, 1866, and to keep it open
two or three years, according to the number of pic-
tures that might be offered to them. If there were
only to be two exhibitions it struck him that 1688
would be a convenient limit by which to separate
the two exhibitions. In the first they might have all
the authentic portraits that could be obtained from
the time of Richard 111. or Henry VIII, coming
down to Elizabeth and the Stuarts until they arrived
at the epoch of 1688 ; and in, the second exhibition
all those that belonged to a later period. If the
pictures within this period were too numerous then
they might continue the exhibition for a third
year. He had had communications upon the sub-
ject with several individuals both personally and
by letter, and they all intimated their readiness
to contribute those portraits which they possessed
themselves, and to ascertain how many could be
obtained from persons living in their respective
neighbourhoods. It would be also satisfactory
to the meeting to hear that he had received a letter
from General Grey, intimating the Queen's entire
approval of the project, and her Majesty's cordial
desire to assist as far as she was able the object
in view. Her Majesty further stated that she
would patronise the project by contributing pictures
from the Royal collections—that whilst there might
be some difficulty in denuding the walls of Windsor,
there would be no difficulty in contributing largely
from the collection at Buckingham Palace. The
Marquis of Exeter, the Duke of Wellington, and
other noblemen and gentlemen had expressed their
readiness to co-operate with the committee in car.
rying out this scheme ; and he anticipated tha
those present would use their best personal exer.
tions in furthering an object from which he antic:

pated permanent and lasting benefits.
Earl GRANVILLE thought that the thanks of the
Department of Art and Science were due to the
noble earl for his valuable suggestion, and for the
lucid manner in which he explained the mode of

carrying it out. Perhaps Mr. Scharf would be good
enough to state to the committee what the general
rules were in regard to the National Portrait Gal-
lery.

Mr. SCHARF regretted he had not a copy of the
rules before him. He might, however, say that the
trustees of the National Portrait Gallery had three

objects in view. The first was the historical im

portance of the person represented ; the next the
authenticity of the portrait ; and the third was its

importance as a work of art--three things which
were somewhat difficult to combine. If he might
be permitted to suggest a principle of management
in respect to the projected three exhibitions, he
thought that the collection would be made more
valuable if, instead of being made chronological in.
their arrangement, they were arranged by classes—
that was to say, for the first year say an exhibition
of the portraits of Royal personages and .of the
nobility ; for the second year an exhibition of great
naval and military commanders, statesmen, &c. ;
and for the third year the portraits of men eminent
in literature, arts, and architecture.
The Earl of DERBY considered that the chrono-
logical arrangement would be much more interesting
and instructive. (Hear.) He should like to know
how far public bodies would be justified in contri-
buting from their collections to the proposed exhibi-
tion. In the British Museum there were several

valuable historical portraits. In the official residence

of the Prime Minister there were many portraits o:

ornler ministers which perhaps the Prime Minister

of the day would consent to contribute.

The Dean

of Christ Church had expressed his willingness to

lend from the collection in the hall of Christ Church.
Earl GARNYILLE concurred in the opinion as to
the chronological arrangement being the best and

most interesting. With regard to the loan of pictures
from Downing-street he had no doubt, after what
his noble friend had said, that if he were Prime

Minister he would lend the collection.

The Earl of DERBY here made a brief observation
which was not heard at the reporters' table, but
which occasioned some laughter.

Mr. SCIIARF said, although he was not empowered
to speak for the trustees of the National Portrait
Gallery, he knew that both individually and collec-
tively they were desirous of doing all in their power
to promote the proposed exhibition.
_ _ _

The Earl of DERBY called attention to a rule of