The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-25 00:00:00

DER•

TILE SUN, LONDON, SATtritDAY
__MORNING, JULY 25, 1846.

should persist in their course of placing the statue in the
proposed po .ition.
Lord MORPETII said that his private opinion, which
officiel responsibility could not altogether separate from
him, was that he had certainly some misgivings upon
the subject.—(. tear, hear.) When he succeeded to
office he found that the preceding Government had given
their consent to the parties who wished to erect the
statue. and he did not therefore feel disposed to take the
pleasure of her Majesty again upon the question. He
wished that the subscribers could persuade themselves
to accede to the offer which had been made previously
by her Majesty's Government, but he did not think
himself warranted in interfering in the subject. He
would merely state that in a letter which had not been
laid upon the table of the House, from Mr. Burton, it
was stated that having examined the structure of the
arch he was of opinion that it was sufficiently strong to
support the weight of the statue, but he added that in
his opinion there would he seine difficulty in raising a
statue of the weight of thirty or forty tons to the Neigh I
proposed by the c•minittee. This is all, said the Noble
Lord, I have to submit to the House.—(Laughter.)
Sir F. TRENCH would state the real nature of the
case. None of the committee had any objection to the pro-
posed site—they only objected to the cost, and which side
it should be upon; but the cost was &sided upon and her
Majesty's consent obtained a year before this objection
was made. The next course to adopt was to determine
the nature of the memorial, and it was agreed that the
money subscribed by the public should be devoted to
the erection of an equestrian statue of the Duke of
Wellineton on that arch. They afterwards found it
impossible to adopt any other course than the one deter.
mined upon, as they were virtually appointed to effect
thatiobject. The Queen gave her consent/through Lord
Mel bourne to the site; a deputation of the Committee
then welted upon the Duke of Wellington to announce
their decision, and to congratulate him that he would
have opposite his window the great tribute which the
public of England intended to erect to a loyal servant
of his country. On the Ist of June her Majesty re-
ceived the chairman of the committee, and gave her
consent. On the 6th of June the whole of the sub-
committee went as a deputation to the Duke of Wel-
lington, on the matter of placing the statue in that
position. On the 22d of June, and on the 3d of July,
the letters which had been referred to appeared, written
by a nobleman whom he was proud to observe
had never attended the committee at all. It
was part of the duty of the sub-committee to submit
the plans which were proposed for the statue in ques-
tion, and as soon as her Majesty had given her consent
to its being placed on the arch on Constitution-hill, they
were so submitted, and the opinion then expressed was,
that this was the best position for it. When the design
for the statue now agreed was offered, and her Majesty's
consent was obtained, a meeting of the general commit-
tee was called, which was very frilly attended, there
being no less than twenty-six members present. The
result was, that after a deliberation, the proceedings of
the sub committee were confirmed, there being but one

of the members who objected to the statue being placed
on the arch. He would ask the Hon. Member who so

much objected to the proceedings of the sub-committee
if it was right to charge that committee with
indecent proceedings, or with exceeding their duty.
They consulted the feelings of the general com-
mittee, and considered their duty was nothing
but to carry ir.to effect the wishes of the public. He
considered the House of Commons was not a fit place to

make such an application as had been made that night,
but it should be made to the committee that was ap-

pointed on the 3d of July, 1839. He would take the
liberty of calling the attention of the House to the opi-
nion of a Noble Lord on this subject, who was quite as

competent to give an opinion as either the hon: mover
or seconder of this motion. The Noble Lord to whom
he referred was the Earl of Aberdeen, who stated, that
after her Majesty had given lic,r consent to placing the
statue on the arch in the Green-park, and after the
committee had taken steps to give validity to this by a
resolution, be considered the question settled. Was it
to be supposed that the sub-committee were obstinate.
for it was impossible for them to take any other course ?
He hoped the House would not commit the gross injus-
tice of doing that which he did not think they had a
right to do, and which would be a great disrespect to the
Crown ; her Majesty, having given her solemn pledge,
ought not to be called upoa to reverse it. He hoped the
House would not come to any such resolution as the one
proposed, and which, he thought, would be a gross in-
justice.

Mr. EWART then rose, but was for some time im-
perfectly heard. He maintained that, first of all, the
subscribers ought to have been consulted ; next; the
opinion of the architect, the gentleman who constructed
the arch, ought to have been taken ; and, as much as
any, the sense of the country ought to have been attended
to ; for he thought that if that were considered, the
gentlemen on the committee have attained no very en-
viable immortality.
Sir R. H. INGLIS wished to state his single difficulty.
It was that her Majesty had been pleased to give her
consent, and yet this House was to ask her to withdraw
that consent. But he believed that when her Majesty
gave her consent it was given when no plan was laid
before her Majesty exhibiting the statue as it was pro-
posed to stand. If so, the question was still open to the
House. If the decision of the intelligent community of
London—if the opinions of the Members of that House
were taken seriatim—the vast majority of the community,
as well as the Members of that House, would be in fa-
vour of not placing the statue where it was proposed to
be erected. In conclusion, he suggested that the pre-
sent works should be at once suspended, and that the
Government should be at the expense of carrying out
one of the other plans, and thus obviate what he could
not help thinking would be a great monstrosity.
Mr. F. FRENCH said that the Committee would of
course have to administer the moneys of those who had
subscribed towards erecting a statue to the Duke of
Wellington on the arch, because the greater part of the
money was subscribed for that purpose. But he had no
objection, if the proposition should be satisfactory to the
House, to lay the opinion of the House on this subject
before the committee.—(Cries of " Hear, hear," and

" No, no," in the midst of which the Hon. Member re•
sumed his seat:, when
Sir GEORGE GREY rose and said, he hoped the
Hon. Gentleman would see, or rather infer, from the
manner in which the motion had been entertained by the
House, that they were averse to the placing of a statue
upon the arch; and he (Sir G. Grey) must confess, after
reading the correspondence to which allusion had been
made, that he had a very strong objection to the pro-
posal of the committee—(Hear)—but until the Hon.
Member had submitted to t'ae committee a statement as
to the feeling of the House on the subject. He (Sir
G. Grey) would not say that he would advise her Ma-
jesty to withdraw her consent to the erection of the
statue on the arch, At the same time he must say that
he should advise the House to listen to the proposal of
the Hon. Member as to submitting a proposition to the
committe.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir F. TRENCH accordingly again rose and said that
the Right Hon. Baronet had truly interpreted his
feelings on the subject. He should indeed entertain the
deepest regret if the statue were not allowed to be
placed on the arch, and he would beg to say that if the
statue were placed on the arch in the manner proposed by
the Committee, it would be, in his opinion, one of the
most magnificent ornaments to this great metropolis.
(Hear, hear, and great laughter.) He sincerely thought
so, and he knew that there were a great many Members
of the House who participated in that opinion.—(Hear,
hear.) His proposition at present was, that the House
should delay expressing its opinion on the subject until
he had au opportunity of stating to the committee
what appeared to b 3 the feeling of the
House on the subject.—(llear, hear, and No, to.)
He should be able to do that in the course of two days,

and he hoped that the Hon. Member who had proposed
the motion would, under the circumstances, withdraw
it for the present —(Hear, hear, and Divide.)
Lord MORPETH said, that if the House consented
to the withdrawal of the motion, he hoped that it would
be understood that the Government would be empow-

ered to stop all the works.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BERKELEY— Mr. Speaker, with such an
understanding, I have no objection to withdraw my
motion, provided I have an assurance from the Noble
Lord that the whole of the works are stopped—(Hear,
hear)—and that they shall not bo allowed to proceed
with the statue until this Rouse has expressed its
opinion on the subject.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord MORPETH—I think it is perfectly fair that
the works should be entirely stopped till the com-
mittee signify their assent to the proposition that has
been made, and till this House has an opportunity of
deciding upon their resolution.—(Hear.)
An HoN. MEMaER beggeol to ask the Hon. and Gal-
lant Member whether the committee had not pledged
themselves to erect a statue which should be satisfactory
to the public?
Sir F. TRENCH—They were required to erect a
statue which shuuld be satisfactory to the Treasury, and
the Treasury are now hostile to it.—(Lauhter.)
The motion was then withdrawn, and the subject al•
lowed to drop.
WAYS AND MEANS.

The order of the day was then read for going into a
Committee of Ways and Means.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved
that the sum of 4,000,0001. should be granted out of the
Consolidated Fund fur the use of her Majesty's service.
Motion agreed to.
HALIFAX AND BOSTON MAILS.

On reading the order of the day for going into a Com-
mittee of Sueply,
➢lr. P. MILES rose, in pursuance of the motion of
which he had given notice, to move for a Select Com-
mittee to inquire into the circumstances connected with
the granting of the pre-sent contract for the conveyance
of the mails from England to Halifax and Boston, end
also into the circumstances connected with the granting
of any new, or the extension of the existing contract for
the same purpose. Although the Great Western Steam-
boat Company were in the habit of bringing letters and
treaties for the Government, hitherto they had not re-
ceived a farthing of compensation, and he for one thought
this was most unjust. It had repeatedly been pointed
out to the proper functionary of the Government, that
the contract fur conveying the mail ought to be con-
c;'.,'ded to that company ; and the late Government
decided, just before going out of office, that no other
contract should be signed until Parliament had
had some opportunity of expressing an opinion
upon the subject, but the present Government had disre-
garded this promise, and another contract had lately
been entered into. What rendered it more important
however that the matter should be inquired into was,
that letters brought by the Great Western Company
were always delivered in Liverpool, and he, therefore,
begged to move the amendment of which he had given
notice.—(Hear, hear.)
Captain BERKELEY seconded the motion, because
he thought monopolies of every kind ought to be done
away with. The contract for conveying the mails to
America ought to be thrown open to all the world, and
he thought a company managed with so much spirit and
4 energy as the Great Western §tvgga-beat conPau de-

served encouragement at the hands of her Majesty's
IGovernment. The cot =try was justly proud of the
Great Western Railway, and they ought to be no less
proud of the Great Wes ;ern steam-ship —(hear, hear.)
Well, then, let it be b( erne in mind that the company
who had built; that vessel was the first to prove that
the Atlantic might beovercin ne by the power of steam;
and during the Canadian insurrection they afforded con-
siderable service to this couna sy in conveying and bring-
ing Government dispatches. Then, again, it was by
the celerity of the Great Wet done steam-ship that the
Right Hon. Baronet, the late Premier, was enabled to
announce to the House, before quitting office, that the
Oregon question was settli d, evil his announcement was
confirmed by the Great Bri emin, another vessel belonging
to the Great West raSteam-boat Company.—(llear,
hear.) Ile thought, then, under thsse circumstances,
the of the patronage of the Go-
vernment, e bestowed upon them in a
better way than by giving them a contract for carrying
companyanddeistecrovueldds noton
the Ainelican mails.--(Hear, hem) It must be borne
in mind, too, that besides doing great services for the
Government, the company bad done much to promote
and advance the mechanical ;science of the country.
They it was who first practice fly developed the screw
system ; and he thought, at a 11 events, they were en-
titled to a hearing if they did not participate in the pa-
tronage as htwas the party who made
nt.
troAniare:TGoofuthteuGuoßveisTrn
the present contract fur the col iveyance of the mails to
America, he felt it incumbent upon him to say a few
words. He should endeavour to show that the contract
so made was the best for the public service. In 1839
steam navigation across the Atlantic was first esta-
blished, when Government advertised for parties to
contract for carrying the imails to America, and as
Messrs. Cunard were the only parties prepared to
enter into such a contract, it was of course conceded to
them. They were to provide three vessels, of three
hundred horse-power each, to perform journies out and
home, once a fortnight, and the Government agreed to
pay them a compensation or 55,0001. per annum. It
was subsequently found, ho vever, that these vessels
were not sufficiently powerfe to navigate the Atlantic,
and another contract was entered into, by which it was
agreed that Messrs. Cunard should provide five vessels
of four hundred horse-power, which should be so built
as to be made available for the service of the country
in times of war. Shortly afterwards another arrange-
ment was made for the conveyance of the mails to the
North American colonies, and it was this arrangement
which induced the late Government to think it would be
better to send the mails via New York instead of Boston.
He said that the contract of 1641, not only required the
conveyance of mails to North, America twenty times a
year, but gave the Admiralty power to require Mr.
Cunard to put on vessels and double the number of mails
for the year within nine months after notice. Shortly
after this, a discussion arose as to the best method of
conveying the mails to the North. American colonies, and
in 1845, a proposal was made by the United States of
America to carry the mails overland to the colonies of
the north, and it was thought better to have the mails
carried by way of New York and not by Boston. He
said, then, these mails had been regularly carried, as
we 11 during the winter months as when the season
allowed of more certain voyages. The Government,
however, instead of remunerating Mr. Cunard to the
amount to which he was entitled by the contract of
1841, which should have been 180,0001., cut him down
to 145,0001. for forty-four voyages a year. It had
been stated by the Hon. Gentleman, that the cost was
4,500/. a voyage.—(The Hon. Member from the other
side of the House "It was 4,5001.") He (Mr. Goul-
burn) would tell him what the original cost in whole
was—it was 3,2901. But the proposal made by the
other companies was severally 3,7501. and 5,0001. a
voyage, so that, measuring Mr. Cunard's merits by the
ii mount of remuneration given him, his superiority was
st iblished by that, as well as by the uniform regularity
and asiduity with which he had discharged his duties.
It had been asked why the Government had not ac-
cepted the tender of the Great Western Company, and
kept open two routes to North America ? But he (Mr.
Goulburn) would ask any gentleman, whether a Govern-
ment, maintaining a double line of mails, would not have
exceedingly increased the expense to the country ? But,
besides, that company proposed to give up running early
in November, and begin again only in April. Mr Cu-
nard, on the contrary, against the anticipations of the
Admiralty, had faced and overcome the difficulties of
running across these seas during the winter months.
One other object was looked to in establishing this
mode of conveyance—that provisions were made for a
time of war as well as of peace, so that the mails
might run at all times. This establishment, he said,
owed its origin entirely to the activity of the colonists of
Nova Scotia and the neighbourhood, and he, for one,
should have been sorry to do anything against the zeal
and the energy of these colonists.
Lord CLEMENTS moved that it should be an in-
struction to the Committee to consider the advantage of
the mails to Halifax starting from the western coast of
Ireland. He said there was a gross neglect of Ireland.
In Lord Grey's time the only admiralty station in Ireland
had been removed, and since that time a route connecting
the western coast of Ireland and North America had
been asked and as often refused. He thought, then,
that it would tend much to the conciliation of Scotland,
and to a closer union between America and this country,
if a railway crossed Ireland to the west coast, conveying
the mails that way to America.
Mr. CHRISTIE said that he thought one very strong
point with the Hon. Gentleman who had brought for-
ward the motion, and of which the Hon. Gentleman
(Mr. Goulburn) on the other side of the House had
taken no notice, was, that this contract had been signed
two days after the late Government had tendered their
resignation, and were holding office only till another
Government should be formed. This had been brought
before the House at the time by a question, and the pre-
vailing opinion then was, that the contract would not be
signed till a Government was formed ; and indeed, the
Noble Lord now at the head of her Majesty's Govern-
ment gave his assurance to the House that the contract
would not be signed till further consideration had been
given it. He hoped that some explanation of this would
be given by some Member of the late Government, and
also that a Committee would be granted to the lion.
Gentleman the Member for Bristol on the subject.
Mr. GOULBU RN begged to explain that everything
but the actual signature to the contract was done in this
matter before the resignation of her Majesty's late
Ministers.
_______

Air. SPOONER said, in answer to the remark, that
Mr. Cunard was the first gentle man that bad traversed
the Atlantic in the winter time ; that the reason was,
that he was the only gentleman that had been paid for
doing so.—(Hear, hear.) The fair way would have
been to offer to both companies remuneration for the
carriage of the mails. The public did not complain of
the manner in which Mr. Cunard had carried out the
terms of his contract—every one must admit that he
had carried it out in a most satisfactory manner.—
(Hear, hear.) The public, he contended, should be
made cognisant of the terms of all contracts of this
description.—(Hear, hear.) The Government had kept
all this matter in the dark, and of that the public had a
right to complain. He had no doubt that his
Right Honourable Friend had done his best to-
wards securing the ablest contractor for the
carriage of mails ; but he had at the same
time deprived the public of competition.—(Hear,
hear.) A most dangerous precedent had been esta-
blished, and he hoped that the House would grant this
Committee, for the purpose of making a full inquiry
into the matter.
Mr. GISBORNE said that his commercial consti-

tuents highly disapproved of the conduct of the late Go-
vernment on this subject. The Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite (Mr. Goulburn) had no doubt given a most
satisfactory answer to the Hon. Member for Weymouth
(Mr. Christie) as to the signing of the contract, but he
had not, in the course of his observations, exculpated
himself from the charges of unfairness and injustice
which hed been brought against him. If the late Go-
vernment could show that they had acted justly, the
public would of course be satisfied; but be was afraid
that they could not. Under these circumstances, he
hoped that the present Government would grant the in-
quiry asked for.—(Elear, hear.)
Mr. MARK PHILIPS said that as this subject
created a great excitement out of doors, he sincerely
hoped that a Committee might be granted, for the pur-
pose of justifying the conduct of all parties concerned,
and showing the public that no unfairness had been
committed. He believed that the commercial interests
of this country were greatly indebted to the Right Hon.
Gentleman, the late Cancellor of the Exchequer, for the
manner in which he had exerted himself in obtaining for
the country the earliest possible means of communica
'ion with the United States, but he thought that he had
acted very prudently in establishing a monopoly in favour
of Mr. Cunard. He was most anxious that the Com-
mittee should be granted, that the whole question might
be fully and fairly inquired into, so that the abuses, if
any such did exist, might be removed.—(Hear, hear.)
In voting for the appointment of the Committee, he by
no means meant to throw any discredit on Mr. Cunard,
or any otter r party.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir R. PEEL hoped there would be no opposition
ewd them would
signed, the
whatever to the appointment of this Committee.—
(Hear, hear.) The late Government were of opinion
that Mr. Cunard was entitled to the late contract; indeed
he (Sir R. Peel) felt confident that if the late Govern-
mentmem
have
bs
eil
ide of
dle
if
tit
h.
eo ffiiGic:edv
ebeforetrhnemcconntt
thrteahcacttonnfoot
truabocewte as n
signed
by
the
shabby
asked
y arof
ovecrtwn.
would
therefore
Government,
b,
ep
theyap appointed.—(Hear.
n wouldte dhh._oped r
a(iia
have
ebcen guilty of a most
thath e
a.
ther Committee
)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, after
giving a brief history of the circumstances connected
with the granting of the contract to Mr. Cunard, said
that he felt that that gentleman was the ablest person
with whom the Government could have contracted for
the conveyance of the mails to the United States, but he
was by no means opposed to the appointment of a Com-
mittee, which would afford the House an opportunity of
inquiring into the whole of the circumstances.—(Hear.)
He (lid not wish to say a word calculated to annoy the
South-Western Company; they were fully entitled to
stand well with the public ; they were the first to con-
struct large steamers to cross the Atlantic, and they had
made at their own cost a great experiment lately with
the splendid steam-ship the Great Britain. It was the
duty, however, of the Government to make the best
bargain they could for the public. He was so satisfied
with the course the Government had taken that he
should be the last person in the world to object to such
a Committee as moved for by the Hon. Member. The
adoption of such a course at the present time would
lead, however, to the stoppage of the supplies, and he
hoped, therefore, that the Hon. Member would not press
his motion.
The motion was accordingly withdrawn.
ABUSES IN THE MILBANK PRISON.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE moved, pursuant to notice, that
the petition of Mr. Edward Baker, presented on the 12th
of June, complaining of certain abuses existing in the
Milbank Prison, be referred to a Select Committee. ,He
did not propose to enter iate the Weg4ti946 of the peti-

tioner. The petition contained a number of charges of
cruelty and misconduct against the Governor of the
prison towards the persons confined in that prison.
These charges could, he thought, be all substantiated, if a
Select Committee were appointed to inquire into the
subject. One of the charges was that the prisoners
were sentenced to seven days' confinement, upon bread
and water, for opening their bibles and reading therein
during the time of divine service. Another case was
that of a prisoner who was sentenced to receive 100
lashes for ewting a cat on the wall with a pair of
scissors; and that, in consequence of this corporal pun-
ishment, he had been confined for a period of ten weeks,
during which he was not allowed any religious instruc-
tion, nor was the chaplain allowed to visit him. In the
former case the Governor had exceeded his duty by
confining the prisoner for seven days, for by the regu-
lations of the prison he had only the power of confining
a prisoner for three days. As to the second case, the
prison regulations regarding corporal punishment, it was
ordered that no whip should be used except such as
had been approved by the prison inspectors, and which
had their seal upon the handle. In this case, however,
the night before the punishment was to take place, the
governor sent out for a lash of double the weight, which
lash he had wound round with wax-cord, which in-
creased the severity of the punishment to a considerable
extent. There was also the case of a prisoner who was
confined for twenty-five days, and kept on bread and
water, till he died a mere skeleton. Four suicides had
been committed, and twelve prisoners had attempted to
commit suicide. but had been prevented in consequence
of the vigilance of the warders. There was another
practice to which he would call the attention of the
House. The governor was in the habit of raising a
false alarm of fire, and a hundred and twenty persons
have been called up out of their beds in the depth of
winter for what is called " fire practice;" and this was
in the habit of being done for the purpose of entertain-
ing the dinner friends of the governor. There were also
charges of favouritism, and numerous others, which
into.
An would not then detain the House by entering
An inquiry into these charges ought to take place, and
it would facilitate the solution of the problem of the best
method to treat the criminal. He said it advisedly, and
in his place in that House he was prepari d to prove
every charge which was alleged in the motion.
Sir G. GREY said an inquiry was made already by
the Government into the facts, and the charges were re-
ported not to have been substantiated. There had been
only four suicides out of 11,000 persons who had been
committed, the whole convict population that were
sentenced to be transported passing first through Mil-
bank. He would promise to lay before the House
the report, and it the House did not consider that report
sufficient, he would agree to any inquiry the Hon.
Member chose.

Mr. HUME said, after the frightful atrocities which
were daily coming to light from the Andover Committee,
his confidence was exceedingly shaken in persons who
were possessed of authority. He would, therefore, re-
commend the adoption of the suggestion of the Hor.
Member.
Captain PECHELL would recommend his Hon. Friend
to persevere, for the public would not be satisfied, after
the charges that had been made, that an inquiry should
be delayed.
Mr. SPOONER considered that the Hon. Member
would come with a stronger case to the House if he
would consent to the suggestion.
Mr. AGLIONBY said he hoped no delay would take
place. An inquiry should be made, and not postponed;
the characters of public servants were involved, and
that rendered investigation imperative. The former
was conducted in the walls of a prison, with no one
present to represent the accuser, and it was alleged that
answers were put in the mouths of the witnesses, and
that their answers were stopped when they seemed to
imply the truth of the charges. The public would
never be satisfied unless there was a full and searching
investigation. _ _ _

Mr. WART said, that only one side of the case was
referred to the inspectors, and consequently the investi-
gation was of little use. He considered that a geod case
was made out for an inquiry, and he should support the
motion.

Sir R. INGLIS said that the Right lion. Gnntleman
the Secretary of State, merely stated that the House
was not yet in a condition to pronounce an opinion on
the subject, and merely asked fbr a brief delay till he
made inquiry into the allegations. He thought such a
course was the proper one under the circumstances. He
would support him.
Mr. B. ESCOTT supported the motion. He thought
the inquiry should be granted, as it was a very fit sub-
ject for the House to investigate, and he could not un-
derstand why it was refused. _ .

Mr. CHRISTIE would vote for the inquiry without
hesitation. The report referred to by the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Secretary of State ought to have been
laid on the table before this. He hoped the Right Hon.
Gentleman would grant the Committee.
Mr. HENLEY opposed the motion. If the House
went into inquiries of this sort there would be no end
to them. The course proposed by the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman was the proper one under th• circumstances.
The House then divided when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it
Majority -
The House then went into Committee of Supply.
BRITISH MUSEUM.

Sir R. INGLIS proposed that the sum of 45,406 L be
granted to defray the expenses of the British Museum.
Mr. HUME said that the present was a large sum,
compared to what was formerly granted to that esta-
blishment. He thought there should be a responsible
board of managers to superintend the outlay of so large
a sum of money. There was no establishment in the
country where so large an amount was granted without
some control on the part of this House, yet this board
was wholly irresponsible. The trustees consisted of
three classes of high official men, and he asked if the
present system was not one extremely objectionable ?
The board was composed of too many individuals, and
the result was, that the management fell into the hands
of a few individuals. In 1836 a Committee sug-
gested the propriety of forming a responsible board;
and, with the exception of the raising the salaries of the
officers of the institution, which amounted altogether to
19,0001., no other recommendation of that Committee
was attended to. He thought a change should take
place in this system. He was really at a loss to know
what branch of the Government to address on the sub-
ject, but he hoped the matter would be taken up, for the
public would require that a responsible tody be ap-
pointed. On Tuesday and Thursday the Museum was
open only to private parties. That was the system of
exclusion carried on ; and he wished to know why a
public institution should be open only to private parties.
The public servants were compelled to attend on those
days, and he thought that while the public money was ex-
pended every well conducted person ought to be admitted.
It might be said that it was for the benefit of
artists. He had inquired of artists, and he was informed
that they went on all days whether the Museum was
attended or not, so that this excuse was invalid. There
was another point which required attention, and that
was whether the Museum should be open after five
o'clock. The experiment was tried, but it did not suc-
ceed, for only seven persons per hour entered after that
time, and yet nearly 60 persons were required to be in
attendance. If he had the power the Museum should
remain open on Sundays, for it would afford a means of
amusement to the artisans, which would keep them from
the gin-shop. During the hours that the gin-shops were
open, he would open the National Gallery and the
British Museum in competition. The artisans were fond
of going to the country on Sundays, but on rainy days
they had no resource but the gin-shop, unless they
adopted such measures. He would no longer detain the
Committee from. more important business, but would
earnestly press what he had said on the attention of the
Government. In the year 1843 no less than 247,929
persons went over the establishment, and in
1845 no less than 685,858 persons went over
it. So large an attendance required more and
better attendance than was at present employed
He regretted, however, to state that the number of
visitors to the reading-room had decreased, as well as
the number of artists who used to attend. He did not
make these observations from any unwillingness to give
the money, but he certainly conceived that when so
large a sum was expended, it ought to be made as useful
as possible. He therefore recommended to his Hon.
Friend the course which he had pointed out, in order to
effect the saving he had wished.
Mr. EWART entirely agreed with the tenor of his
Hon. Friend's remarks, but he did not mean to address
his observations to the whole establishment, but simply
to the library. On the continent any man might enter
a public library without any restriction, and receive the
greatest civility from the librarians. In the British
Museum the rules were, that before any person could go
to read in the room, he must be introduced by some per-
son of respectability, or high rank. Any recommenda-
tion from a public man was the only satisfactory
reference, and the only one which would ob-
tain admission for the applicant. Such a sys-
tem existed nowhere but in England. He would
also ask, what was the use of the number of

duplicates of books ? Could they not found another
library at Westminster with them, and so afford in-
creased accommodation. He would say no more, as be
had publicly called attention to what was a public evil.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said, that the complaint made by
the Hon. Member for Montrose was, that there was no
responsibility for the expenditure of this large sum. He
begged to say, that the responsibility existed with the
trustees, and it remained with the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to see their recommendations carried out.
The Hon. Member also said that the management should
be vested in a Board of Management ; but that, be
thought, would not be a vise course, nor would it lead
to a better system of management than now. The
Honourable Member had also said that the Museum
was only open for three days a week, but this
was not the fact. It was really open for five.
days. There were certain days open to the general
public, while Tuesdays and Thursdays were open for
artists and men of science. He thought it was of great
advantage to the public that these parties should have
the opportunity of pursuing their studies in quietness,
which could not be the case if large bodies of people
were passing through, and •therefore it was a wise and
proper arrangement to have three days for the public,
and two for those engaged in artistic and scientific pur-
suits. With regard to children, it had been objected
that they should be denied admission under eight years
of age ; but as some limit must be made, he thbught
that age a reasonable period of limitation. Before that
age, there was some danger of damage being done, unless
children were well looked after. The Hon. Member who
last addressed the House (Mr. Ewart) complained of the
way in which the library was managed, and the difficulty
of parties not being admitted without a pass. He (Sir
11. 11. Inglis) believed that in Paris passes had to be ob-
tained before parties could be admitted into the public
library.
Mr. EWART said that he had been repeatedly in the
Paris library, and no pass whatever was required.
Sir R. LNG 141,5 they linked to Ow howl