The Sun.
London, England, 1838-01-30 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 30, 1838.

THE NEW HOUSES OF PARLIA-

tore of money in national undertakings, however gigantic they
may be, if such be based on the solid foundation for goodsense,
and which are likely to promote the prosperity of England, or
are commensurate with the magnitude and dignity of the mo-
narchy, I am quite convinced in such cases, if the money is
fairly expended, the country would cheerfully and generously
open its purse strings. But to see an atrocious robbery of the
Treasury, to witness the millions frittered away in jobs and
given to parasites and sycophants, is truly disgusting and
heart-rending.
I do earnestly and strenuously recommend the parishioners
of St. James's, St. George's, Marylebone, Pancras, and Pad-
dington, to call a public general meeting for the purposes of
petitioning Parliament to take down that abominable mr.s3 o'
rubbish and bad taste, St. James's Palace, and rebuild the
Houses of Parliament on its site. Their property in such
case would be greatly enhanced in value. A beautiful national
building would embellish the Parks and Buckingtam Palace.
where the air is salubrious. The site is in contiguity with all
the !eaiing c'ub houses, and would prove an inconceivable con-
venience and advantage to Llmost every Member of Parliament
I am Sir, your obedient Servan%
*JOHN EDMOND DE BEAUVOIR.

ME NT.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

Sir—After a solemn decision of the House of Commons on
a long debated question, it might warrant the assumption of
hardihood in an individual even to dispute its judgment, or to
point out its errors on an important subject.
The disinterested anxiety I feel for the commonweal has
urged me, on more occasions than one, to record my opinions;
I did so, when the House of Commons had decided to found
the National Gallery, on the site of the old King's Mews. I
pointed out the folly of allotting a space so limited to form
the foundation of a building which should have been in con-
formity with the grandeur of the British empire; like the pro-
phecies of Cassandra, my predictions were unheeded, except
by some of the editors of the public journals, who did me the
honour to quote and coincide in my opinions. This National
Gallery now stands a monument to record the taste and judg-
ment of its founders. Seventy-five thousand pounds was the
original grant made by Parliament for this national under-
takinss, whereas the marble arch before Buckingham Palace,
in building it up, altering, and partly taking down, cost the
country infinitely more.
No blame can therefore be attached to the architect of
the National Gallery, he having done more, under the
circumstances and restrictions in which he was placed,
to embellish externally, and arrange the internal ac-
commodation, than I consider any individual could have
effected; but I am sure few Englishmen can point
out that building to foreigners, as the repository of the
arts, without sentiments of shame and feelings of reproach ;
and, moreover, heartily execrating the system of jobbing,
which has had such injurious effects on our national edifices.
In consequence of St. Stephen's chapel being destroyed by
fire, Parliament has voted that an enormous sum should be
expended in re-building, on the same site, adequate Houses
for the accommodation of the Peers and Gentlemen of the
Commons. I object to the proposed ate, the Gothic style of
architecture as agreed on, and also to the immense expense of
outlay in forming an embankment in the Thames, to the pos-
sible injury of the navigation of that river.
In respect to the proposed site, many, with the most lauda-
ble and patriotic sentiments, have, in commemoration of bye
gone times, and of our eloquent British orators, chosen the
ground of the old Houses to found the walls of the intended
new building. I believe that in the proposed plan neither the
Houses of Peers or Commons will exactly stand on the old sites.
Many admire such romantic feelings, when patriotically enter-
tained; while many others arc amused by the Legislature
thinking it would please the nation to commemorate the spot
where King Stephen had his soup kitchen, where a Star
Chamber tyranized over the people, where Cromwell swayed
when a Monarch fell by the axe, where a subservient majority
have supported Ministers, and where eight hundred millions
of the public money were voted away. Had Guy Fawkes
carried his iniquitous plot into execution, it is more than proba-
ble the Parliament subsequently called would not have com-
memorated the spot by re-building its Houses on the old site ;
and what could now prevent a maniac, or a party such as the
gang of the Cato-street conspirators, from filling a barge with
combustibles and gunpowder, dropping it down with the cur-
rent of the river, then mooring it by an anchor so as to let it
swing by the operation of the tide near the wall of the House
of Commons, at a time, too, when its Members are assembled
in full conclave—the destruction of hundreds might be the con-
sequence of building in the mud—the detection of the conspira-
tors
would be difficult, nay, almost impossible. I will not pre-
tend to say that some Members of Parliament who have pro-
perty in the vicinity voted in favour of the old site from in-
terested motives, but I have heard that some wags contended
for continuing the connection with and for tacking the
Houses of Parliament to the Westminster Courts of Law.
I must suppose, therefore, that such argument was only
made use of in the spirit of jocularity, ' CC cause it must
1.r....
be notorious to all that the present
,(courts of Law
in Westminster are most inconveniently site ted, they being
at a distance of two miles from the Court of Chancery,
die Inns of Count, the Temple, the Law Libraries, and
three miles from the City ; moreover, they are so defi-
cient in accommodation and limited in space, that the
Judges in term time have severely suffered from the dense un-
wholesome atmosphere and suffocating heat of summer. The
appearance of the Courts is mean and contemptible, inferior
almost to every County Court in England, and the site
where they stand renders it impossible now, or at any future
period, to increase their dimensions ; therefore, the argument
in favour of building the Houses of Commons on the proposed
site for the purposes of connecting them with the Courts of
Law in Westminster is most monstrous. It is the wisdom
which builds a palace for the benefit of, and connecting it with
a hovel. Entertaining, as I do, a great respect for the gen-
tlemen of the bar, yet I do not see the necessity of retaining
the hugging copartnership of Parliament and the Courts
of Law. Sooner or later Courts of Law must be
built more spacious and conveniently situated than the
present, which will embellish the metropolis, accord with
the enlarged state of the empire, and support the dig-
nity of the Bar. Had all London been ransacked for an
ineligible site, a more inappropt iate one than the present could
not be selected. The Penitentiary of Millbank (another job)
where many an incarcerated wretch has atoned for his errors
by death from the local miasma and pestilential damp—even
this building is more removed from the river than the selected
site of the New Houses; nor has it the disadvantage of having
two gasometers opposite to it which the other labours under.
How many Members have lost their lives front leaving an over-
heated House, (often the House breaks up at two and three
o'clock in the morning), on suddenly exposing themselves to
the damp air and running the gauntlet across Old Palace-
yard, the Devil's bellows of London, where the keen cast wind,
accompanied with rein, or the fog imbibed from the river, pe-
netrate through the armory of cloaks and great coats—the
horror Members of delicate constitutions entertain of under-
going this ordeal of heat and cold has often prevented them at-
tending to their Parliamentary duties; besides, this site is sub-
ject to inundations of the river, and more so since the removal
of old London Bridge. So damp is the neighbourhood that I
have frequently seen the internal walls of houses there dripping
with moisture; but one of the greatest objections to the spot
is its great distance from the domiciles of the Members, who
nearly all live in the west end of the town ; they must naturally
feel the great waste of time occupied attending St. Stephen's,
to say nothing of the danger and difficulty when the weather
is foggy. Some few, to avoid these inconveniences, are com-
pelled to take houses in the vicinity, in order to attend with
diligence their Parliameretary duties. The neighbourhood is '
obscure, and they are removed from their friends in the west
end, and this is a great annoyance and disadvantage, more es-
pecially to those Members who have families. The proposed
site is removed from all the leading Club Houses of London,
and hotels where Members usually take refreshment, receive
letters, and reply to communications—it has every possible dis-
advantage without one redeeming quality in its recommen-
dation. _ _ _

Many approve of the Gothic style of architecture as being
characteristic of the national taste. Sketches and plans in such
style may appear very beautiful on paper, and elaborately
wrought Gothic edifices when new and unsullied generally
call forth our admiration, where the atmosphere is untainted
by smoke or fog, such as the sites of Eaton Park or Fonthill,
the style is appropriate and beautiful ; but to withstand the
soot and smoke of foggy London, it is of all styles the most
unsuited; to arrive at a perfect knowledge of the effect pro-
duced on this kind of architecture, pray view Henry the
Seventh's chapel, one of the most highly wrought and beauti-
ful Gothic edifices in Eagland. This chapel was entirely re-
freshed some years ago, so as to appear new from the hands
of the builder—it is now one dingy mass of sooty livery,
palled in the dunny smoke" of London—the Gothic crevices
seem particularly adapted to catch the dirt. However beau-
tiful the new Houses of Parliament may appear on paper, if
the plans are carried into execution, in a few years they will
exhibit one undistinguishable mass of mourning, as charac-
terizes their sister order Henry the Seventh's chapel ; besides
external appearances the style internally is totally miscalcu-
lated for a House of Commons. The light afforded by Gothic
windows is generally defective and gloomy; the light given to
the new Gothic Grammar School in Birmingham appeared to
me very insufficient. There will be immense difficulty to
make the internal arrangements commodious and comfortable
for the Members, and at the same time to retain the correct
style of architecture. The highly talented architect grasped
at the crown of fame with its more solid advantages, and ob-
tained the prize from many rivals ; the magnitude of his bold
design evinced an enlarged mind; his genius also in embellish.
ment captivated, deluded, and perverted the understanding of
the jury—they forget that the fantastic Gothic style was at
variance to that association of ideas which should harmonize
with the grave deportment of a deliberating senatorial as-
sembly. A church fashioned after the pagoda style of the
Brighton Palace, with a Reverend Divine in the pulpit dressed
as a harlequin or mandarin, such habiliments might indeed be
in keeping with the building ; but such an exhibition by the
association of ideas would excite our laughter, and not our de-
votion. Making the style of the new Houses of Parliament
to harmonize in keeping with the localities of Westminster
Abbey and Henry the Seventh's chapel, is equally as absurd
and out of character to that pure order which should
symbo-
lize the dignity which ought to be found in a British Senate
House. There are many retired cockneys in Hampstead, who
revel in the romance of a Gothic villa. This style may be
English taste, but it is not classic elegance—is not calculated
for our sooty atmosphere of London—is ill calculated for com-
fort or convenience—its windows afford but an obscure light,
and at best is only fit for a sepulchre or a church. The
Gothic is no more pure classic than dog Latin. The new
Houses may commemorate any thing but a " Reform" ill
English taste. As a public national building it will
be designated we hope " the last of the Goths." The
sum allotted for forming an embankment in the mud is
equal in amount to that which was granted for building our
National Gallery. Can it be believed that Englishmen are so
lost to shame and national feeling as to waste enormous sums
on a gingerbread palace, unworthy of our great monarchy, and
yet to award a wretched sum of 75,000/. and a limited space
for a National Gallery, and besides granting an immense sum
to form only an embankment in the mud for a House of Com-
mons, which must contract and obstruct the navigation of the
River? I also contend that partial obstructions always in-
crease the alluvial deposit in ether places, which fact is esta-
blished by the removal of Old London Bridge, the deposit of
med. on the banks being now much reduced since the obstruc-
tions have been lessened. Job, with its wheel as ithin wheel, and
political partizanship, arc the curse of the country. A leader in
OP fitoillQsuac,
titmay b
whether Whigeclw so sure,orTory, who bring forward a mea-
absurd, mischievous, aristocra-
tical, or den-aacra.dCa% if his party be in power, that measure i'
earrif4—itll his friends, like a well trained pack of hounds,or a
string of ntopkeys on the rock of Gibraltar, hark to his cry. I'
is all Ministerial or Opposition—Heaven or Hell—there is no
Ipurgatory, or a neutral bench allowed. In the arrangements
of the New Houses there should be, howbver; a seat rest:mi
for Purptoriats. Where there is a necesiii for the espencTh