The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-09 00:00:00

IRISH PATRONAGE.

Mr. J. FITZGERALD moved for a return of the
names of the several persons who, since the Ist day of
January, 1843, have been appointed to fill judicial offices,
or the office of Attorney or Solicitor General, in any of
her Majesty's colonial possessions, or in any of her Ma-
jesty's possessions in India, not being natives of India;
with the title of the office, the salary and emoluments
annexed thereto, and also distinguishing to which bar,
whether English, Irish, Scotch, Colonial, or Indian,
each person so appointed had previously belonged.—
Agreed to.
SHERIFF COURTS IN SCOTLAND.

Mr. CRAUFURD rose to move for leave to bring in
a bill for the more speedy and effectual administration
of justice in the Sheriff Courts in Scotland, and stated
that if he obtained leave to introduce the bill, he should
propose after the second reading to refer the measure to
that committee which he presumed would be ap-
pointed to investigate the bill brought in by
his learned friend (the Lord Advocate), to which he
entertained serious objections. The main feature of the
bill which he (Mr. Craufurd) proposed was the abolition
of the double system of sheriff substitutes and sheriffs.
At present there was a cheap and expeditious process by
which all debts up to 81. 6s. Bd. were recovered in the
courts of the sheriff substitute, and he wished that the
powers of those courts should be extended, with a sum-
mary and easy jurisdiction, not merely up to 121., as
was proposed, but up to 351. or 50/„ while, in cases of
consent, he would allow the court to exercise a summary
jurisdiction even beyond that amount. (hear, hear.)
He proposed to take away the present powers of appeal
on matters of fact to a judge who had not heard the wit-
nesses, and knew nothing of the circumstances under
which their evidence had been given, but the bill pro-
vided that there should be an appeal on points of law in
all cases from 251., and then directly to the supreme
courts. His bill would give more extensive jurisdiction
to the sheriff substitute than he at present possessed.
and would allow the issue of interdicts and injunctions.
He proposed to raise the salaries of the judges, who
were now exceedingly underpaid. The sheriffs of Scot-
land were not merely County Court judges, but exercised
a large jurisdiction in general matters. They acted in
bankruptcy and insolvency cases, as police magistrates, as
criminal and civil judges, and their duties were very onerous
and important. The bill which he sought to introduce
took away the fees now payable in the registration courts,
and the additional salary to be given to the sheriffs would
be in lieu of those fees. He wished to return to the old
Scottish system, and to make the sheriff a resident local
judge. The last County Courts Act for England pre-
vented the County Court judges from acting profession-
ally, and why should an opposite system prevail in Scot-
land with regard to the sheriffs principal ? If they wished
to secure an effective administration of justice, they must
raise the status of the local judges. The position of the
sheriff-substitute had been improved, and the best result
had followed. He wished now to give a short summary
remedy for the recovery of debts under 501., and to con-
solidate the offices of sheriff-substitute and sheriff-prin-
cipal, so as, out of the two officers, to make one good
and effective judge. The bill brought forward by the
Lord-Advocate for the reform of the Sheriff Courts of
Scotland was, he admitted, a great improvement in many
respects upon the present system, but the mode of pro-
cedure which he proposed to substitute was by no means
equal to that of the English County Court system. He
held in his hand a resolution agreed to at Glasgow, at a
meeting of bankers, merchants, manufacturers, and
others. The bill of the Lord-Advocate was admitted by
those gentlemen to provide various useful alterations in
the present system, but they expressed a strong opinion
in favour of an abolition of the office of sheriff-principal.
He believed, if the house would grant him a select com-
mittee, he should be able to substantiate every word of
this resolution, and he trusted that the Government
would accede to his motion. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. JOHN MACGREGOR said that the subject of
a reform in the Sheriff Courts engaged the serious atten-
tion of all Scotland, excepting, perhaps, Edinburgh.
The present Sheriff Courts and their local jurisdiction
were a mere remnant of the ancient system which ex-
isted when judicial situations were heritable. The Lord-
Advocate's was a good bill, but the house would never
give satisfaction to Scotland until they did away with
the system of non-resident sheriffs. The people of
Scotland wanted local courts as nearly as possible upon
the same plan as the county courts in England.
The LORD-ADVOCATE, although he would not
oppose the motion, or throw any obstruction in the way
of the introduction of the bill, was of opinion that the
hon. member had not adopted the most convenient
mode of attaining the end which he professed so have in
view. He (the Lord-Advocate) introduced a bill on the
same subject early in the session, and fixed next Thurs-
day for its second reading, but, understanding that the
Scotch members wished for further time in order to
ascertain the feeling of the country with respect to the
measure, it was his intention to postpone it to a more
distant period. This would enable the Scotch members
to follow their usual practice—and a wise one it was—
of meeting together to discuss the various points of
measures affecting their country, and of communicating
to each other the opinions of their constituents. Having
no object in view but to obtain the best measure on the
subject for Scotland, he could not refuse to allow of
the introduction of the hon. member's bill, since he
declared that it contained provisions which, if adopted,
would prove beneficial in their operation ; but at the
same time—judging of the measure by the online which
the hon. member had given of it, and the principles
on which it was founded—he must avow it was not
likely, when introduced, to obtain his support. It
was incumbent on him to declare, plainly and unre-
servedly—and he would not do so if spoke merely his
own opinion—that, so far from thinking the hon. mem-
ber's bill a step in the direction of reform, he conceived
it to be a retrograde and mischievous movement. (Hear,
hear.) The system which tha hon gentleman wished to
abolish was that of one judge having a cause with the
right of appeal, by the parties, to another judge sitting
in Edinburgh. Now, it was his (the Lord-Advocate's)
opinion that this system had been of the greatest possi-
ble advantage to Scotland, and productive of extreme
benefit. (Hear.) So far from thinking that the system
of Scotch law merited the obloquy which some would
attach to it, it was, in his opinion, more scientific and
simple than that of England. The hon. member, while
objecting to his (the Lord-Advocate's) measure as stop-
ping short of what was required, himself proposed a
scheme which was obviously imperfect. The hon. mem-
ber would give summary jurisdiction in cases under 501.,
but in respect to cases above that value he made no pro-
vision. The hon. member's scheme was simply an inno-
vation, and not a reform, and he opposed it, first, be-
cause it would impair the judicial functions of the sheriff,
while it struck at the very root of his administrative
functions. (Hear, hear.) Never was anything more
erroneous than the opinion that the office of sheriff was
not usually held by good lawyers. Why, there had
scarcely been a lawyer of eminence in Scotland who had
not filled that office. (Hear.) Seven out of the thirteen
existing judges and sheriffs ; so had the present and the
late Solicitor-General, and most of their predecessors.
It was said that the office was a sinecure. It was true
that in some of the smaller counties there might not
be much to do, but in the larger counties the sheriff
underwent a considerable amount of onerous labour.
The office was an important link in the whole ad-
ministrative system ; take it away, and you impaired
I the strength of the whole chain of government. The
Sheriff Court was as cheap, easy, and smooth an
administrative machine as could be devised. (Hear,
hear.) It was said that his measure would not
satisfy the country. Now, he did not expect that a
measure which made considerable changes and dealt with'
many details would obtain universal concurrence ; but
he had reason to think that it had been received with
favour hitherto, and that it was likely to advance in the
good opinion of the people of Scotland. Favourable re-
ports had been received from Edinburgh, and at a meet-
ing held in Dumfries a resolution had been passed in
favour of the existing system of two judges. It was not
his intention to surrender the character of a law reformer
because he was not prepared to support the hon. mem-
ber's bill, and to sacrifice one of the most useful institu-
tions of the country. (Hear.)
Mr. HUME cared nothing for the praises which the
learned lord had lavished on the Sheriff Courts in Scot-
land. Head heard similar eulogiums passed on all
the worst abuses of the Courts of Chancery. (Hear.)
The Scotch lawyers were, he feared, behind those of the
rest of the empire. (A. laugh.) The learned lord would
have done well to imitate the late Solicitor-General for
Ireland, who, in one of the most important speeches_iL,oi
doll;
law reform ever delivered in that house—(hear)
declared his intention to place the people of Ireland, as

~~ x

7

[PRICE SD.

regarded the administration of justice, on the same foot-
iny as the people of England. The .most earnest law
reformers in Parliament were members connected with
the profession. As regarded the learned 'lord's bill, he
would find that the people of Scotland were opposed to
it in the proportion of three to one.
Mr. EWART was surprised at the resolution referred
to by the noble lord as having been adopted at Dumfries,
because he alwayS understood that the opinion of the
people in that part of Scotland was hostile to the preserii
-system. It was impossible not to•admire in many re-
.tpects the Scotch law, but that was not the question here.
What they had to consider was a special act of law re-
form, and the ciuestion was, why should they have
two judges when one might do, and one of those
non-resident ? (Loud cries of " Hear.") He did not
gather from the Lord-Advocate whether it was his in-
tention to allow the present bill to go before a select
committee, so that it might be considered concurrently
with his own ; nor whether it would be competent to
the committee to hear witnesses. With reference to the
remuneration of the sheriffs, he must say the sheriff-sub-
stitute was in many cases very inadequately paid. In
the district with which he was connected as a represen-
tative, great fatigue and labour were undergone by the
sheriff-substitute, and he was, nevertheless, greatly un-
derpaid. In Ireland local judges had been appointed
under the name of assistant-barristers ; in England
County Court judges had also been appointed ; and it
was desirable that the same principle should be carried
out in Scotland. He would say generally that it was of
importance to establish some degree of uniformity be-
tween the law of the three kingdoms ; and he was happy
to believe that towards this " consummation so devoutly
to be wished," facts as well as wishes were gradually
tending. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. F. MACKENZIE hoped the learned Lord-Ad-
vocate would not consent to the second reading of this
bill, when that stage arrived, nor to its being sent to a
select committee, there to be considered concurrently
with his own. If-the bill went before a committee in
that way, he would find the question involved in the
greatest difficulties. He denied the accuracy of the as-
sertion that the sheriffs depute were sinecurists in Scot-
land, and he was satisfied that, if the present system of
having two sheriffs was done away with, it would strike
a blow at the civil and criminal jurisprudence of Scot
land from which it would not soon recover. When hon.

gentlemen spoke of the County Courts in England, he
begged to remind them thet those courts were but a new
experiment, and that it would be unwise to transfer to
Scotland a principle which, for aught they knew, might
at some future time be abandoned in England. (Hear,
hear.)
Mr. FERGUS thought the law and practice of the
two countries should be assimilated in all cases where it
would be an improvement to do so ; but he could not
help saying that a great deal of what had been brought
forward by the hon. member for the kyr burghs was not
improvement, but rash innovation. (Hear, hear.) Ho
was not an Edinburgh lawyer, nor was he tainted with
the prejudices of the profession, but, from long residence
in Scotland, he was convinced that undoubted advantages
arose from the appeal from the local judge to the judge
in Edinburgh, and he should be sorry to see it abolished.
(Hear, hear.) Whatever was done, he hoped this ap-
peal would still be maintained.
Mr. WHITESIDE said the assistant-barristers in
Ireland were not residents in the counties where they
acted as judges. When they finished the civil and '
criminal business that came before them as judges, they
were accustomed to return to their practice in the supe-
rior courts. (Hear, hear.)
Lord DRUMLANRIG said that, with all due defer-
ence to the zeal of his hon. friend the member for Ayr,
he considered he had not acted very judiciously in ask-
ing leave to bring in his bill at the present moment.
The Lord Advocate, in his opinion, had outstepped the
bounds of courtesy in giving his sanction to the intro-
duction of any such bill. There was, no doubt, great
excitement in Scotland existing on this question. There
was a fixed determination come to that some law reform
must be adopted ; but surely it would establish a very
awkward precedent if, when the Lord Advocate had not
only brought in a bill, but had intimated his anxious de-
sire to meet the Scotch members in a body, to listen to
their suggestions, to accept all practical advice from
them, and from other interested parties in Scotland—it
would surely establish a bad precedent if an inexpe-
rienced and new member were encouraged to come for-
ward in so inopportune a manner, and press on the house
his own independent measure. (Hear, hear.) He was
sure that the Scotch members, if they had been ap-
pealed to in a body, would have supported the Lord
Advocate, had he been disposed to oppose the pre-
sent bill. (Hear.) The Lord Advocate had shown the
greatest courtesy to all Scotch members, and he re-
gretted the member for Ayr had net had more experience,
else he would have waited till the Scotch members had
met, and until the Lord-Advocate had read his bill a
second time. Alterations might be proposed in com-
mittee. As the member for Dumfriesshire he had seve-
ral suggestions to make. The convener and others in
the county of Dumfries had taken a very strong and able
lead in the call for law reform, and when the commis-
sioners of supply met in January last, at which meeting
the resolutions were proposed which he (Lord Drumlan-
rig) had given that night to the Lord-Advocate to read,
and which resolutions seemed so much to-surprise the
hon. member for Ayr, there was a unanimous desire ex-
pressed that all parties should wait till after the Lord-
Advocate had brought forward his hill ; they hoped that
bill might be referred to a select committee ; but, what-
ever might be the difference of opinion as to whether
two sheriffs or one should be maintained, or how far an
extension of the Small Debts Court should be carried, he
(Lord Druznlanrig) was certain no body of Scotchmen
would approve of the fact of law reform being so prema-
turely taken out of the Lord-Advocates's hand and the
case transferred to the mercies of an English lawyer.
(Hear, hear.) He willingly acquitted the hon. member
for Ayr of anything like want of courtesy to the Lord-
Advocate, but he did not think his present step a judi-
cious one, and he also considered the present act a bad
precedent.

Mr. FORBES thought the learned lord was not
entitled to find fault with the hon. member for Ayr for
bringing in this bill, seeing he had an undoubted
right to do so. He trusted the bill would be per-
mitted to go before a select committee. If the Go-'
vernment refused this they would be much less liberal
than their predecessors were in the case of the Irish
tenant right bills._

Mr. J. PHILLIMORE said the bill of the Lord-
Advocate involved this simple principle :—There was a
judge in the county who heard the case, having the
parties before him, and when an appeal took place he
sent up the papers to a judge in Edinburgh, who did
not hear the parties, but who decided upon the case.
Was such a thing not a monster in jurisprudence ?
(Hear, hear.)

Mr. DUNLOP said, in Scotland they might boast
that while, in England, no man could recover the
smallest debt without coming to Westminster, they had
for centuries enjoyed the privilege of recovering all debts
in a cheap, easy, and simple, way. The County Courts
in England were truly a borrowing from Scotland, ex-
tending in some degree the amount of jurisdiction ; and
now they turned round, saying they would confer upon
Scotland the boon of County Courts, as if nothing of the
kind had existed before in that country. (Hear, hear.)
The case was not exactly as it had been put by the hon.
member for Dumfries, that in Scotland two judges were
doing what one did in England. The sheriffs in Scot-
land were not only at the head of the police, but had to
hear actions for debt, and almost every other class of
action besides, so that there was an immense mass of
business, and it would be impossible to give to them
anything like the great extent that was consigned to the
County Courts in England. (Hear, hear.) He could
not agree with all that was laid down in the bill of the
hon. member for Ayr ; nor, on the other hand, did the
bill of the Lord-Advocate altogether meet his, views.
He limited too much the small debt jurisdiction. There
was, in his opinion, no reason why all sums above the
small debt jurisdiction should not be dealt with in the
same way. The present system was not what had been
stated by an hon. gentleman opposite—that one judge
heard the evidence and decided, ,and that his judgment
was reviewed by another judge who did not hear the
evidence—for at present neither judge heard the evi-
dence, and it was all taken by examiners and reduced to
writing and then brought before the sheriff. The Lord-
Advocate's bill, however, did away with these written
proofs, and in this respect effected a great improvement.
(Hear, hear.) He should have preferred greatly leaving
to the sheriff substitute the police and the summary
jurisdiction, and that the sheriff principal should have
all the other cases that came under his jurisdiction,
making circuits to the places in which these cases ought
to be tried. (Hear, hear.) It was a fact greatly in
favour of the care and accuracy with which the sheriffs
executed their functions, that out of 14,000 cases not
more than 110 had been appealed against to the Court
of Session. (Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL wished, before the discussion
closed, to say a few words on the general principles in-
volved in the consideration of the question. There Was
sno doubt that by local administration justice wa
ob-
tained speedily and cheaply, but, if the administration
of justice were entirely local, there was a danger that
the judge would become too much connected with the
p-
locality, and likewise that, not havinri the means of a
whi ch
plying to.those higher sources of jurisprudence,
were always supplied by the great central courts of a
country, he would be hardly able to give his decision in
conformity with the opinions of the most enlightened
judges. On the other hand, if the
stem
dispensed by the central courts, then were entirely
n arose the evil of
expense and delay. It was therefore desirable, if pos-
sible, to combine the advantages, and avoid the disad-
vantages, of both these methods. ITThear.)
different modes of effect' \--ear, There
ing
Solicitor-General for Irelandthis object, and the late
had mentioned the plan
adopted in Ireland,
where the gentlemen appointed asf.
assistant-barristers continued to practice in the chief
courts at Dublin, and were consequently alwaYl equal
to the tra •
nsaction of business in conformity vnth the
Another
principles of the highest tribunals of justice.
mode, and eod was
that as many thought a most happYaa
w'llere
adopted from ancient times in the nttion,
there was a local judge ver much connected
locality, and, to avoid the evil
belo
connected with a too exelusivelvayle°'e
al
of appeal to other
dnaamipointneidwstrai
reference might be made in the wwho practised in the
persons called sheriffs-dePut4

,0•'"

higher courts, and, whatever :nigh
as individuals, were generally allo
of competent ability, and men who '46411",
the highest positions. (Hear, hear,
it appeared, were combined in
advantages of a cheap and epee Y a
of justice and the dispensation ip ,
Then, if they were to judge of the syst4nsbiltitssillts_s
the statement made by the hon. gentleman w elksi
spoke, that out of 14,000 cases, no more than 110 had
gone by appeal to the Court of Session, ought to grati-
fying to those who belonged to Scotland, or who took
any interest in the Welfare of that part of the kingdom,
s te
(Hear, hear.) He was certainly surprised to find that
rtohoetreanwderberagnenchtl,emaandncwonhsotruwisctheadn teontciharelnygenetw
system.the system
It was said that these sheriff-deputes were sinecure of-
ficers. Was that the fact ! Could it be proved before
any committee that those sheriffs received salary with-
out having any.causes brought before them, without
giving legal opinions, and without performing any work ?
He conceived that to be an assumption inconsistent with
the facts of the case. It was certainly very desirable
that all proposed amendments of the law 'should be well
considered, and should the suggestions made by the last
speaker be deemed conducive to the good administra-
tion of justice, no one would be more ready, after due
consideration, to adept them than his learned friend.
But, until he heard more convincing reasons, he should
be loth to give his consent to make such a complete
change in the Scotch system, which appeared to work
beneficially, as that contemplated by the bill now pro-
posed to be brought in. (Hear, hear.) •
Mr. NAPIER should be. sorry that anything oc-
curred in that house tending to interfere with the local
jurisdiction in Scotland ; and he trusted that the course
would nob be taken of sending two bills irrecon-
cilable in principle to the same committee. Let
there be a full discussion in the house, and let the
house decide which principle should be adopted. He
believed that the Scotch bar, as a body, supported the
Lord-Advocate's bill, and, as at present advised, his
opinion was in favour of the view taken by that learned
lord.

Mr. COWAN was satisfied that the people of Scot-
land would be much disappointed if the Lord-. Advocate
did not consent to refer both bills to one select com-
mittee, and give the committee power to receive evi-
dence. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. C. BRUCE trusted that the learned lord would
not refer the bills to the same committee. He denied
that the sheriffs-depute held sinecure offices, but de-
clared, on the contrary, that they had great and serious
duties to discharge.
Mr. DUNCAN said that the whole mercantile body
in Scotland were almost unanimous in favour of doing
away with the sheriffs-depute. He supported the sug-
gestion that both bills should be sent to the same com-
mittee.
Mr. HASTIE (Glasgow) spoke in favour of the aboli-
tion of the functions of the sheriffs-depute and the sub-
stitution of local administration.
After a few words from Mr. CRAUPURD in reply, leave
was given to bring in the bill.
THE NATIONAL GALLERY AND THE FINE
ARTS.
Colonel MITRE, in rising to move for a select committee
to inquire into the management of the National Gallery,
also to consider in what mode the collective monuments of
antiquity and fine art possesssed by the nation might be
most securely preserved, judiciously augmented, and ad-
vantageously exhibited to the public, said it might be in
the recollection of many hon. members, that at an early
part of the session his hon. friend the member for East
Lothian had given notice of a motion similar to this, but
his hon. friend was afterwards appointed to an office in the
Administration, the duties of which precluded him from
devoting to the subject so much attention as he could de-
sire, and for which his qualifications so well fitted him.
Under these circumstances, his hon. friend had requested.
him (Colonel Mure) to undertake the task, which he him-
self had been obliged to forego. The house would recollect
that no longer ago than 1850 a committee of that house
was engaged in a very similar course of investigation, and
produced a report founded on a valuable body of evidence.
That committee had been suggested, he believed, by the
excitement that then prevailed in the public mind in con-
sequence of the injuries that were alleged to have been
committed on several fine works in the National Gallery
by a rash process of cleaning. His hon. friend's attention
had been directed to the subject from the reappearance in
the 'gallery of several other pictures after a like operation,
and, similar as might be the objects of the former and of
the committee he was now moving for, and short as might
be the interval between them, there were various circum -
stances which tended to justify or demand a renewal of
inquiry at the present season. In the first place there
could be no doubt that a very great advance had token
place both in the state of public opihion and in the spirit
of public discussion and speculation relative to the arts Ix -
stitutions in this country since 1850. That, he believed,.
was owing to the Great Exhibition, which had given a
stimulus to every branch of art in the country; but, in the
next place, although the committee of 1850 had gone care-
fully into the question of cleaning, they did not appear to
have altogether exhausted the subject ; and in that remark
he thought he was borne out by a passage in their report,
in which they said :
" With regard to the disputed question of cleaning and
varnishing, the committee do not wish to express any
opinion, but they refer to the evidence produced before
them."

It appeared to him to be very desirable, in the present in-
stance, that some distinct expression of opinion upon this
particular point should emanate from the House of Com-
mons, in order to tranquillise the public mind, and assure
them that the Legislature was not indifferent t• a sttlsjes
in which it rejoiced to see the public take so strong and
anxious an interest. (Hear, hear.) There were various
other topics of considerable interest embodied in the form
of the present motion, which it might be expected he
should advert to, were it the object to raise any discussion
upon the subject of the fine arts in general ; but that was
not his object. What he had in view was simply to obtain
a committee of the house on a subject of considerable
extent and interest which the present state of the national
and public opinion appeared to him to render at that
moment peculiarly ripe for Parliamentary inquiry. (Hear,
hear.)

Mr: EWART, in seconding the motion, rejoiced that
his hon. friend had not limited his motion to the techniCal
question of cleaning the pictures, but that he had extended
it to the general question of getting for us a real National
Gallery, which should comprise not pictures only, but
works of antiquity, casts, and a variety of other specimens
indispensable to the cultivation of the fine arts, and the
want of which was a disgrace to the country. The ma-
nagement of the National Gallery had fluctuated in the
most extraordinary manner between the trustees -and
the Tresury, and he thought some other system should
be adopted. He regretted that our collection was not
extensive enough. The architect of the National Gal-•
lery was asked, while he was building it, whether he had
made any arrangements for sculpture as well as pic-
tures ; but his answer was, " No ; ' because the Minister
of that day had not given him to understand that a gall er y
of sculpture was to be combined with the gallery o f
pictures. Where are the antiquities in the National Gal-
lery—where the specimens of mediaeval art ? Where
the specimens of the beautiful drawings of the great
masters? At the Louvre they had a collection of that
kind, and in his opinion it was necessary that artists
should have the means of tracing out the first conceptions
of the great masters by their drawings. In connection
with the Louvre, also, there was an establishment for
tracing the outlines of the works of the great Ina vters, and
such tracings, from the works of Correggio Raphael,
Michael Angelo, and others, might be purchased in Paris
for 3f. or 4f. a-piece. In 1836 Mr. Woodburn ha offered
to the country a collection of most indubitable drawings of
the great masters, which had belonged to Sir T. Lawrence,
and in the collection of which he had passed his life and
injured his fortune, but the offer was never accepted, and
the Consequence was that they were sold and dispersed.
Some of them were sent to Bavaria, some to Holland, and
some to Russia, while some remained in this country, and
were to be found at the Taylor Museum at Oxford, where
they were exhibited to the public in glass cases, so as not
to be 'liable to any injury. In his opinion the appoint-
ment of the committee now moved for would be bene-
ficial, and he therefore hoped it would be agreed to by the
house.

Mr. B. WALL anxiously hoped that if this committee
were appointed it would be the last ; for during 15 years
they had had committees and commissions upon this sub-
ject, and he believed he stated the opinions of a great many
out of doors, if not of a great many in that house, when he
said there was an anxious desire on the part of the public
that an early decision should be come to upon it. He hoped
also the Government would inform the house in what posi-
tion they stood in reference to this subject ; for there
had been so many committees and commissions upon it
that there was a great contradiction in their reports, and
the house was quite ignorant of what the wishes of the
Government were, or what they thought would be
the most satisfactory arrangement to the country.
mmuemelibrrigreeLiondon, when
For his own part, he thought that the committee of
that house was little calculated to form a preinperthopeinion.
sutepopntathk:nsubbyjetchte,
nanobdlehleorvdege
he appointed a commission to inquire into it •
upon that commission, -besides three most
distill putting
men, a professor of painting and the most * m 8 shed
of the day. eminent chemist
Mr. H. D. SEYMOUR said there w general ; sion out of doors that some of the piet aseab,..a----i..— anPrea.
in the process of cleaning, and he therefore
------. -..11 spoiled
subject to be inquired into. With wished that
meat of the National Gallery, he respect to the manage-
ought to be taken out of the h did not think that it
vested in the keeper of the ands of the trustees and
control of some member of tie"acstiellea Pictures under the
time might be regarded as Government. The present
this country, and he she , a crisis in the history of. art in
second report of the %A be glad to know whether the
to be included i,....
k, Mat Exhibition Commissioners was
frewahire? " man motion of the hon. member for Ren-
Sir G. STRICRLA.N more practieall D thought that it would have been
been limited Y AND
had the inquiries of the
to the N •committee
The rescue of the
divine
moo _ ational Gallery. •
e, ta, of art there from the destroying process
of what WAS caleacleaningw lone an object of vast in-
terest. as
could sa , for himself, sea lf, that pictures which
heretofore he had gazed at with delight were now trans-
formed by this process into objects of absolute disgust
his eyes.
• that the hon. gentle-
Lord J. RUSSELL was of oPin"n
was emi-
nently who had proposed this motion—and who •
qualified to develop°
its objects—had framed the
An•mAnit. (Hear, hear.) However de-
sirable the settlement of t
motion with great in-a-,-le vexed question as to the clean-
ing of the wore other subjects of inquiry in
pictures, thereless worthy of investigation. It
• with art
connection wi not
t* n in his opinion, whether
nt ques w
th .
was a very important t tog
er, with other monuments
the pictures to be brought
of art, might not ibe so e
them more coulP e
than the present
xtended and diversified as to entitle
tel to the character of a national col-
lection National Gallery might be consi-
-1 It had always struck him that the Na-
tiered. (Hea' w composed, was rather such a collec-
tions] GallerYp as now composed, .
s.err rich individual, selecting a number of fine
tion as s' :- for his own particular gratification, might
works of art
ether, than such a collection
gather tog
should have collected as a great nation
together for its instruction and de-
light. (Hear, hear.) There were vast
c numbers of drawings
and pi
• tures belonging to the first beginnings of art which
he should desire to have, as eminently valuable both to
artists and to the general spectator, as illustrating the his-
tory of the art. (Hear, hear.) Whether it would be pos-
sible, considering the various titles under which our
various collections of fine art monuments were held, at
the British Museum, for example, and elsewhere, to com-
bine them, if considered desirable, into one great collection,
he was not prepared then to say. Thi v„,, i
the .important subjects which the a - one
of
to investigate. Re had committee would
himself more than once

2

;)