The Sun.
London, England, 1848-02-15 00:00:00

T EIE SUN, LONDON,

nut the tawdry ornaments which disfigured the House
of Lords, and which, though they might be fit for the
time of Louis XIV., were certainly not so for the pre.

sent age.
Sir H. PEEL—W hen the subject was last under the
consideration of the House I offered a humble sugges-
tion, that the House should appoint a Committee to in-
quire into all the circumstances; for I felt that the in-
vestigations of such a Committee would, either as regards
the original estimate of the construction of the Houses
of Parliament, or as regards the deviations, throw light
upon the whole matter much more effectually than any-
thing which could be said in the course of a debate. I
was anxious that a Committee should be appointed to
inquire as to the original estimate, and all the works
which it covered, that we might see to what extent the
original estimate had been exceeded, and ascertain whe-
ther there were any other items besides the expense of
embanking the Thames not included in it—what was
the excess of expenditure, and what were the causes
that had led to that excess. This is my opinion still.
If a Select Committee was appointed, all those things
could be ascertained more satisfactorily before it than
before the House, reserving, of course, to the House
the full right of judging for itself when the report of
the Committee should be laid on the table. The Hon.
Gentleman recollects much more fully than I do what
passed in the Committee, of which I also had the
honour to be a Member. With regard to the
remuneration of the architect, I perfectly recollect that
subject being under consideration. I agreed with those
who thought it better to determine what should be the
total amount of his remuneration than to adopt the
general rule of the profession and give him five per
cent., or any other per-tentage. And I must say it is
very unfortunate that the Treasury allowed a single
stone to be laid before laying down that condition, re-
ceiving the protest of Mr. Barry. They should have
said, " We have a sum to be paid to you, be it 25,0001.,
or 30,0001., or any other sum. We discourage entirely
all expectation on your part of payments to a higher
amount, or on another principle. At all events, we give
you notice that it is a matter which will be settled before
the commencement of the building." I don't think the
blame falls on the Government, on the Woods and
Forests, or the Treasury. I think the House of Com-
mons must rather bear the blame. The House of
Commons has_ hot and cold fits—(Cheers)—in regard to
public buildings; and if the results of the deliberations
of the Committee of 1835 had been to present us with a
building according to the beau ideal of excellence which
was suggested, namely, a building corresponding with
Somerset House, I believe there would have been a feel-
ing of universal disgust.
Mr. HUME made a remark which was inaudible.

Sir 11. PEEL—It was said by the Hon. Gentleman
that a building might be reared which would equal
Somerset House at a cost of 400,000/. There aro re-
peated instances which I recollect when the House was
in a very economical humour, and specified a sum which
was not to be exceeded. First, there was Buckingham
Palace. The Hon. Gentleman got an assurance that
300,0001. should be the extent of the expenditure. Irhe
walk through St. James's Park, he will now see a very
significant proof of the conseqUences.
Mr. HUME—These are additionarbuildings.
Sir R. PEEL—But, even without the additions, I
don't think there was very much satisfaction felt with
Buckingham Palace. Then there is the Treasury.
After some lapse of time, it had been resolved to alter
its appearance; and to whose aid are you indebted for
the great improvement which has been effected? To
that of the very Mr. Barry whose qualitica are so mush
called in questikn. I think it is a proof of his consum-
mate skill that Mr. Barry has been able to'thake out of
the Treasury, as it was left twenty or thirty years ago,
se beautiful an ornament to the metropolis.—(Cheers.)
There are other instances of the consequence of your
economy in regard to public buildings. First you limit
the architect to such an amount that his skill is fet-
tered, and then you become so dissatisfied with the
effects of your limitation of expense that you pull down
the whole front of a building and employ another archi-
tect to supply a better one.
Lord MORPETH—The National Gallery.
Sir R. PEEL—I was just going to mention it. We
are all anxious that Mr. Barry should be sent to improve
that. A sum perfectly inadequate was awarded to
erect a building on that magnificent site, and the result
is a structure on which we cannot congratulate our-

selves.
Mr. HUME—It would have been a brick building but
for me. It was at my recommendation that it was faced
with stone.—(Laughter.)
Sir R. PEEL—It was originally proposed that the
arcade should be 11 feet high. I recollect the observa-
tion made by the Hon. Gentleman that a man was not 11
feet high—(Laughter)—and therefore the arcade ought
not to be more than seven feet high.
Mr. HUME intimated dissent.
Sir R. PEEL—Does not the Hon. Gentleman recol-
lect my suggestion that the higher we had the arcade
the more you would save in brick and mortar ?
(Laughter.) In the case of the National Gallery you
stinted the architect to a certain sum. The result was
a building which was quite unsuited to the character of
the country. lam quite sorry to think that any blame
should be cast on the conduct of the Government
in appointing the Fine Arts Commission. It was the
universal opinion of Parliament that they should
not build a house for themselves without seeking how
far they could make the circamstanco instrumental to
the promotion of the fine arts. A Commission was ap-
pointed without any power to order the execution of
works. They can have no such authority without the
permission of the Treasury. Such were the origin and
objects of the Fine Arts Commission, over which, with
the utmost benefit for the promotion of art, and with the
most assiduous attention to his duties, Prince Albert has
presides. Mr. Eastlake, whom I cannot mention with-
-6tli, paying him that tribute of respect which is justly his
due as one of the most able and efficient members of his
profession, has acted as secretary of that Commission,
for a most inadequate remunereiton, at a great sacrifice
of time. Has that Commission not been successful? I
hear it is said that English taste is not accustomed to

those produCtious which have appeared under its
auspices: There are gentlemen who contemplated oil
'paintings as fit titeOrations for the Houses of Parliament;
hitt you are to consider that the works which have been
selected are novel in this country; and you find that those
who are acquainted with fresco are surprised at the suc-
cess which has attended the efforts of our artists. At any
rate, every exertion has been made by tha; Commission to
call out the latent talent of the country; and no man can
see the exhibitions of successive years in Westminster-hall
without rejoicing in the opportunities which have been
afforded for its development. Many, whose powers
were previously unknown, and who had not had the
advantage of any connexion with the Royal Academy,
have shown a knowledge of art for which the country
was quite unprepared. In that respect the Fine Arts
Commission has accomplished' one of, the objects origi-
nally contemplated, it having been a matter for consi-
deration whether the erection of the new Houses of
Parliament could not be rendered conducive to the pro
motion of art. If a Select Committee should be ap-
pointed
there is every disposition to give information ;
and I think the Hon. Gentleman will find that the Com-
mission is not responsible for any expenditure. But if
such a Committee be appointed as that proposed by my
Hon. Friend .the Member for the University of Oxford
(Sir R. H. Inglis) an inquiry will be instituted into all
the circumstances, and you will then see whether any
blame can attach to any party, and on whom that blame
is to fall. It may be that the House will find that this
building was undertaken under circumstances which
relieve those who have been chiefly inculpated from
responsibility with regard to the site. That subject was
brought before Parliament. The Hon. Gentleman
thought the best site lay opposite Marlborough House,
and all his reasons were given for such preference. But
there was a strong unwillingness on the part of the
House of Commons to have the new Houses of Parlia-

ment removed from this spot, and there was a great de-
sire to restore the old Palace of Westminster as nearly
as possible on its original site. It ought to have been
foreseen at the time, from the nature of the foundations,
that it was difficult to make any estimate of the entire
expense. But what I desire is that the subject should
be fully inquired into, so that we may ascertain what
may be the ultimate expense, as well as the excess of
expense over the estimate, and the causes of that excess.
With regard to Mr. Barry himself, I must do that gen-
gentleman the justice to say, that in all my opportuni-
ties of intercourse I have found him fulfilling his duties
—fulfilling every duty which could possibly be expected
from one placed in that situation,—most solicitous that
the work on which ha is engaged should be worthy of
his own name and of the purpose to which it will be de-
votod, but with no disposition to incur unnecessary ex-
pense, or assume any authority for himself, or depart
from the plans originally approved of. Whatever we
may think now, when we are smarting under the ex-
pense which has attended the building, I may state
that so far as I have had intercourse with
foreigners, I have always heard it extolled in
the highest terms. I have visited it with
foreigners, architects and others, who have had
the best means of comparing the merits of public
buildings in Europe, and as regards the interior, and
also as regards the exterior and the façade, I have heard
scarcely any other opinion expressed than that the struc-
ture is most honourable to the country that has under-
taken it,•and to the person by whom it has been plannel
I believe that Mr. Barry, and I may say all the artists
with whom .1 Mite come into communication, are inspired
with as high & feeling of honour and principle as those
which animate any other class of her Majesty's subjects,
and that, in general, they prefer honour and distinction
to pecuniary..profit.—(hear, hear.) I believe that by
this motive exclusively Mr. Barry has been animated ;
and I believe-that the result of the inquiry will show that
Mr. Barry is not responsible for any excess in the
expenditurev and that it will be seen to have arisen from
the nature of the works, from the number of persons for
whom accommodation had to be provided, from the con-
flicting Opinions of the Lords and Commons, from the
varying views of separate and joint Committees, from
the immense extent of accommodation required for
Committets, which was hardly contemplated when the
building wax designed. I believe that, by a full in-
quiry, it will bo st.ex that there are modes of account-
ing for a.great part of the excess of expenditure, which
will leave no blame on any individual or party ; but,
whether this be the case or not, let us go into the in-
quiry, and whatever censure may be duo for the past,
let us see whether any precautions can be taken to
avoid it for the future.—(Hear, hear.) I have one
concluding point to notice, and that is, that I concur
with the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hume) in thinking, that
if we are satisfied that the building—l will not say ac:-
cording to the original design, but accqrding to the pre-
sent design— can be completed is a short time, it would
be better, for the sake of economy, to avoid spreading
the cost over a certain number of years; that we should
be guided by economy alone, that we should be influenced
by no desire for increased convenience, by no desire to
exchange the old building for tlio new, by, no jealousy
of the House of Lords on atc.enrat of their having pew•
aeagoa of their apartment 50 11001 by to conliderstens

of architecture even—l am content to rest the case upon
economy alone, upon a saving of moneyand if the
result of the inquiry should show that, by the employ-
ment of a great number of men simultaneously, and a
great number of expensive machines, we can complete
the work in two years at less cost than if it were spread
over seven years, do not let us incur the additional
expense from an unwillingness to meet the cost at once.
—(Hear, hear.) In the case of individuals it may
sometimes be necessary to pay by instalments; but, in
the case of the public, if the public interest and a regard
to economy should require the immediate completion of
the work, lam sure it will be much better to pay at
once for its immediate completion than to have it spread
over a certain number of years. But, we cannot discuss
those matters satisfactorily until the proposed Committee
shall have presented the result of its deliberations.
Mr. M. MILNES confessed he had been annoyed at
finding that the new House of Lords bad not been so
generally appreciated as a work of art as he had ex-
pected, even by persons who were well able to appreciate
it ; nor could he find any consolation in attributing this
effect to a fundamental error, which he was sorry to trace
to the Commission itself rather than to the operation of
individual artists. He believed it had been represented
as strongly as possible to the Commission that if they
attempted to make any single apartment the receptacle
of so many fresco paintings as they intended, the result
would be to overpower the architectural details, and
detract from their effect. The Commissioners, how-
ever, had, unfortunately, deviated from this principle,
and disappointment had been the consequence. He
believed that the Commissioners bad been actuated by
the amiable motive of encouraging as many artists as
possible ; but he hoped they would take warning by the
result, and avoid the repetition of the error in the deco-
ration of the other parts of the building. With respect
to the cost of the building, he begged to express a hope
that the House would not unnecessarily limit Mr. Barry
either in this respect or in regard to time.
The Earl of LINCOLN said that the Hon. Member
for Montrose had accused Mr. Barry of exceeding his
estimate.
Mr. HUME—The Lords' report says so.
The Earl of LINCOLN—The Hon. Member quoted
the Lords' report. He (the Earl of Lincoln) had not
seen the report, but this he knew, that concurrently with
the Lords' Committee, a Committee of that House had
sat, of which he had been chairman; they went care-
fully through the accounts, and the result was that Mr.
Barry was entirely exonerated, it being hilly proved that
all extra expenses had been incurred under the sanction
of Committees of that House. Ile (the Earl of Lincoln)
was prepared to say that if a Committee were now ap-
pointed the result would be, no blame to the Architect
or to the successive boards, but to that House and its
Committees. He could speak for four years, during
which all proposed alterations were invariably sub-
mitted to the House or a Committee, and the result
was generally an increase rather than a diminution of
the expenditure. He would not go into the details of
expenditure, as that was more properly matter for the
Committee; but with respect to another subject to
which allusion had been made, namely, the conduct
of Lord Bessborough when in office, he denied that
Lord Bessborough had exercised any more control than
other commissioners. During his (Lord Lincoln's) term
of office every proper control had been exercised, but
Commissioners of Woods and Forests were not to go
beyond their constitutional bounds. The warming and
ventilation (so heavy an item) were first proposed under
Lord Bessborough's auspices; and the first thing done
by the new Government, in 1841, was on his (Lord
Bessborough's) recommendation, to appoint a committee
to inquire into both subjects. That Committee recom-
mended an addition but no curtailment of expenditure.
—(Hear, hear.) It had been said that, on an original
estimate of 700,0001., an expense of 1,400,0001. bad been
incurred. He was prepared to say that that statement
was entirely erroneous. An estimate was before the
House for 1,401,0001., but that was not the amount
already expended. All the expenditure together, sup-
plementary works and all, amounted to only 833,0001 ;
but of this 378,000/. was for works which had never
been mentioned in the original estimate.—(Bear, hear.) .
The Noble Lord opposite (Morpetb) stated the whole
sum already expended at 808,0001., and, assuming that
to be correct, it would leave the whole amount expended
on works mentioned in the estimate 430,0001. He was
anxious that, on this point no misrepresentations
should go forth to the public.-(LoudL cries of Hear,
hear.") According to his account, Mr. Barry had, of
his original estimate, 276,000/. still remaining. The
fact was, that all the increased expenses for warming,
ventilating, &c., had originated with the House, and had
led to expensive alterations in the architect's estimates.
He hoped that, for the future, care would be taken to
keep the architect and ventilators distinct, as he believed
that hitherto much delay had occurred from their func-
tions not being properly defined. The amount of remu-
neration to Mr. Barry of 25,0001. was consented to by
him under protest, and was only 3 per cent. on the ori-
ginal estimate, instead of 6 per cent, which architects
usually received ; and by a Treasury minute,
.he was
excluded from receiving any greater amount of remune-
ration, should the expenditure exceed the original esti-
mate. Considering, also, that Mr. Barry. was unable to
undertake, no doubt, smaller and less important, but
more profitable works for private individuals, it was
evident that the Government had not been deceived and
plundered by Mr. Barry, as some Honourable Gentlemen
seemed to think. Whoever was to blame for delay or
increased expenditure, they should at least do justice to
his motives, to his zeal, and to his abilities, which no one
denied. Indeed, one of the elements of Mr. Barry's
satisfaction was the applause he received, not only of his
own countrymen, but of foreigners. who, without ex-
ception had expressed their admiration of the building.
Ile hoped the Noble Lord would grant a Committee
which would thoroughly investigate the question, and
prove that neither the architect, nor the Noble Lord,
nor he (Lord Lincoln) had been wanting in their duty
to the House of Commons, but rather that the House
of Commons was wanting in duty to itself and the
country.
Mr. G. THOMPSON conceived that no satisfactory
answer had been given to the question put to the Go-
vernment, either respecting the cause of delay, or the
excess of expenditure over the original estimate. As
for Mr. Barry's abilities and fame as an architect, no
okinenieo.ewnh
:wed h
weredisputed
ether
tt them,
therefore
lore
was
thrown
thenyar.eisamauyathr. He
wanted
made in their
ority resapnotneelsibtioe
for the future xpenditure of the building ?
Mr. EWART advocated inquiry by a Committee.
Mr. BANKES considered that the time was come
when that House ought to cheek the public expenditure.
He objected to a Committee, and did not agree with the
Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, that they
ought to concentrate the expenditure in this instance,
but, on the contrary, it the expense must be gone on
with, that it should be spread over as wide a period as
possible.
After a few Words from Mr. A. HOPE,
Mr. DRUMMOND demanded a simple reply to the
simple questi n; " who was responsible for the excess of
expense over the estimate," but no reply being given,
Tne SPEAKER put the question that the Clouse re-
solve itself into a Conerrittee on—
THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT BILL.

The Earl of LINCOLN said he felt it necessary to
interpose some remarks at this stage of the Bill ; and
proceeded to show that the present constitution of New
Zealand, although correct and beautiful in the abstract,
was yet so erroneous in form, so theoretical iu its appli-
cation, and had been so universally condemned by
Members of that House, and by those competent to form
an opinion out of it, as to justify a discussion of the
question upon the present Bill, in order that they might
consider what had been the errors already committed
by the Government., and what was their best remedy.
The Noble Lord referred to former debates, to show that
the opinion of the House had been in favour of a repre-
sentative government for New Zealand, beginning
with municipal institutions. The Right Honourable
Baronet the Member for Tamwoith had stated that

he regarded municipal institutions as the germ of
representative government. The Noble Lord (the
First Lord of the Treasury) had said that a muni-
cipal constitution was the proper prelude to a repre-
sentative constitution. He moreover distinctly
stated, that he did not anticipate that it would
be wise or desirable that a colony should at once jump
from a state of despotism into an elaborate and fine-
drawn constitution. Such a constitution had not been
desired by any party, or any Member of that House;and
in a petition presented by Lord Howick, in July, 1845,
asking for a representative government, without distinc-
tion of race, the petitioners stated that, looking to the
ignorance of the lower orders, it was desirable that the
local constitution of the country should be as little de-
moc*tic as possible, and should be composed of persons
having an Merest in common with the colonists, and not
of strangers who went there in search of place and salary.
How disappointed must those petitioners have been when
they received at the hands of the Noble Lord through
whose instrumentality tl'ay had made known their sen-
timents, a constitution which they now perceived had not
attained the objects intended by it—a constitution which
might be said to be half American and very little Eng-
lish. He (Lord Lincoln) regretted that the Noble Lord
bad act ,d with such extraordinary haste, and without
obtaining the opinion of the Governor,lof the colonists, or
of residents in this country competent to advise upon it.
The machinery of that constitution, :though perhaps
perfect in itself when put into operation, was found
wholly inapplicable. The Noble Lord, for instance,
proposed a franchise intended to be democratic, being
limited only by the ability to read and write English ;
but if ever there was a plan devised to produce, not an
amalgamation as anticipated by the Noble Lord, but a
war of races, this was the plan ; for, according to the
authority of Captain Grey, not one of the natives
could read or write English. This suffrage was there-
fore limited to a small minority of English settlers, and
the entire natives deprived of it. The Noble Lord, too,
had had his attention drawn to these and other points by
four leading colonists resident at the time in this country
in a report containing their objections to his proposed
constitution. They were most anxious that these cor-
porations should have a more extensive bearing. The
Noble Lord had proposed the establishment of these
corporations in some few districts of the colony ; they
were to consist of mayor, aldermen, and burgesses, who
were to elect the Parliament of New Zealand. or Provincial
Assembly. Besides these, the Governor was to appoint
two legislative councils, who were to elect another; and
thus the system was one of great complexity. The
franchise for the election of the corporations had been
strongly objected to by the gentleman he had before
referred to, on the ground of the electors being subject
to undue influence. In the election at Wellington,
where there wore 355 electors, an influential man had
made 25 of them drunk, and led them up to the poll to
vote at his dictation. Surely this system was not so
much approved of in this country as to warrant its in-
troduction into a distant colony.—(Hear, hear.) About
the time that the Noble Lord (Grey) succeeded to the
Colonial-office a body of Free-Church colonists prepared
to leave Scotland for New Zealand, on the understand-
ing that they would there find representative