The Sun.
London, England, 1856-06-28 00:00:00

14111 SUfif I,ol4_l___)WElL JIATURDA.Y ZVENINGi JUNE Is, 'au;

hopper .4 that ha had fujoyad utinstml oppertubitio ce
becoming acquainted wits; Kensington Coro House, because
he had frequently visited a near and dear relative of his
who had resided there some years ago ; and he could state
that the inmates of the house greatly complained of the ex-
tent to which they were exposed to the dust and smoke of
London during the prolonged prevalence of the easterly and
north-easterly winds iu the spring months. It would, there-
fore, as he believed, be impossible to obtain any immunity
, at Kensington-gore from the most deleterious effects of our
London atmosphere: Let them have one good gallery
within the reach of every one who helped to pay for it.
Let them not confine all their thoughts on this subject to
those who had carriages to ride in and time unlimited to
spend. They should remember those with limited time
and means. Alln-ion had been made to the 150,000/. pro-
posed by his right hon. friend (Mr. Disraeli) when Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer. Now, though a supporter of
Lord Derby's Govern meat, he had always thought that
that was an improvident outlay. He would recommend
the sale of the site of Kensington-gore, as they might, if
what was now said of its value were correct, get more than
they had paid for it. The house ought to require an esti-
mate of the whole expense before it authorised the pur-
chase of one-half of the land which was not theirs, and the
transfer of the other, which was already theirs, but the
title to which was, it appeared, doubtful. He would not
consent to begin alargsexpenditure without knowing some-
thing of its limit. At all events, he would not do so until
they had a surplus. At present they had a deficiency
He had another objection. The people of this country
looking at the palace of Westminster and at other public
works undertaken by Government, complained that in
many instances the estimates were trebled. Indeed, iO the
case of the palace, he believed no one could tell them, to
within a couple of millions sterling, what the total cost
would be. (Hear, hear) Sooner than consent to the pre-
sent proposal he would move a resclutien pledging the
house not to pay one halfpenny of the money asked.
(Hear, hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the proposition before the
house was not what the hon. gentleman opposite (Mr.
Spooner) seemed to suppose. If it were the desire of the
house that any of the royal palaces should be taken, and
that the Queen consented to its arrangement, they would
have to provide her Majesty with another palace, instead of
the one so appropriated. When the late Mr. Hume, dur-
ing his (Lord J. Russell's) administration, proposed that a
palace should be built for her Majesty in Hyde-park, he
(Lord J. Russell) communicated that preposition to the
Queen, who said that she did not wish to put her people
to any expense, and that she would be content with the
palace she had, with such additions to it as it might be
desirable to make. (Hear, hear.) They should not expose
these pictures to smoke as they now were, nor should they
remove them too far from London. He thought that Ken-
sington-gore would meet all the objections, and had all
the requisites. 'lt was in a thoroughfare frequented by
vast numbers of persons, riding and walking. The hon.
member for Bath had given it as his opinion—an opinion
backed by that of an eminent German architect—that a
very beautiful building could be erected there. (Hear,
hear.) There was another question— that of the extent of
the gallery, and the objects to be placed within the gallery.
He quite agreed with those hon. members who said that
they should make up their mind on this subject before
they began to build. (Hear, hear.) They should consider
whether they should remove the archseological and tine
arts collections from the British Museum. (Hear, hear.)
He would not give any opinion on that subject; but he
thought that Mr., Newton's ,opinion, and that of other
competent gentlemen, should be taken on that subject.
(Hear, hear.) He believed that the present arrangements
at the British Museum were very convenient for both the
I public and students. (Hear, hew.) To be sending mine-
rals to one place, archaeological specimens to another, and
natural history collections to a third, would not be a good
arrangement. He, however, believed that the nation
would gain much by having a place sufficiently commo-
dious to receive the national collection of pictures and
statuary ; as uo doubt that collection would be very much
increased by individual and other contributions if there
were such a gallery in existence. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. G. VERNON was in favour of the motion of the
noble lord (Lord Elcho). If they had the gallery at Ken-
sington-gore, they should cnt a road across Hyde park for
the.convenience of the people of Bayswater. The hon.
member for Andover and the hon. member for Warwick-
shire had said that the house should in this matter consult
the convenience of the public. (Hear.) No doubt the con-
venience of the public was an important consideration ;
but the preservation of the pictures for the people to look
at was a still more important one. (Hear.) His vote had
been given in favour of the Kensington-gore site upon con-
dition only that words were introduced into the resolution
of the committee to the effect that the objections to all the
other sites were insuperable. He hoped Lord Palmerston
would take a personal interest in the matter, and not let
our most magnificent buildings be erected upon the worst
possible sites ; and that when this National Gallery was
finished, it would be a lasting monument alike of the taste
and the liberality of the Government, of Parliament, and
of the country. (Hear.)

let us for a moment consider the site which has been sug-
gested by her Majesty's Ministers, for I can hardly ssy that
it is formally before us, but which, in deference to the
course of the debate, I look upon to be the issue now
under consideration. What are the allegations brought
against this site ? No one denies that at least the
atmosphere is pure as compared with that from which
the pictures are to be taken. No one denies that it
is a site which offers much ampler space. Some will
say that its position is not so convenient. (Hear,
hear.) Well, that is a question for the house to discuss.
I only wish to lay fairly before the house that which, is
my opinion, is the important part of the question. I want
this issue to be fairly discussed. We must feol all this,
that, when a public building is concerned -when a build-
ing to be dedicated to public purposes is in question,
nothing is more difficult than to settle what is generally
convenient. The hon. and worthy alderman who addressed
us this evening told us what is a convenient site. A con-
venient site to him is Charing-cross. He lives near it, and
when he goes into the city he has the advant 'go, if he
likes, of looking into the National Gallery, and of refresh-
ing his mind, and relieving it for a moment from the cares
of business, with the aspect of some of those divine pro-
dricticns which are there deposited. But a person who did
not live near Charing-cross would not consider that Tra-

falgar-square was the most convenient site. What have we
to do then under such circumstances, is to see whether the
site is, in the first place, admirably suited to the purpose,
anti, if that be the case, whether it is, generally, conve-
niently accessible to the great population of the metropo-
lis. In the first place, then, I say, if Kensington Palace
is the model site—and that appears to be the general opi-
nion of those opposed to the suggestions of the Minister—
the ground of controversybetween those who are in favour
of Kensington-gore and those who are in favour of Ken-
sington Palace are extremely narrowed. The site of Ken-
sington-gore is much nearer than Kensington Palace; there-
fore, so far as all those who recommend the site of Ken-
sington Palace are concerned, I think the issue is extremely
narrowed. We are debating a question which concerns the
future, and a long future. How are we, then, not rashly,
not precipitately, not from our present habits and feelings
—to decide what is the most capital site and the most com-
manding position for a building for such a purpose? At
this moment there are great complaints from the learned
societies that they have been disturbed in their position
at Somerset-house. They are invited to go to Kensing-
ton-gore—hut they protest against the position awl pro-
test against the distance. They have been accommodated
at Burlington-house; but I believe they would rather
have remained at Somerset-house. But 100 years ago,
or less, the same learned society protested against being
insulated at that very house, and said it was very
inconvenient to have to go so great a distance
from their usual place of gathering, and to a place
se remote from' their residences, and from what was then
the fashionable part of the town, though I cannot pretend
-to decide upon the particular locality. I remember when
Belgrave-square was first planned what objections were
raised against that site. It was said that nobody could
possibly go and live there • it was in the marshes, and
nearly two miles from London; and that it was impossible
that any person who took an interest in society and in the.
multifarious movements of this metropolis could live in that
region. But we have lived to see, in a comparatively short
apace of time, a great and powerful city formed there, and
which is not so remote as that very spot which is so strongly
recommended by many persons as the site of the new Na-
tional Gallery. Let us see what is the character of the site
at Kensington-Gore. The soil of that spot, which has been
described to be a marsh, we know by the evidence taken
before the very committee that sat upon the National Gal-
lery, is a gravelly soil. The position which has been se-
lected for the National Gallery, if the house ever sanctions
that building, is an elevated spot. I therefore cannot un-
derstand, whether we look at the character of the soil, or
at the character of the position, or at its distance from the
metropolis,—l cannot, I say, understand what objections
can be urged against that particular site. It is not so far as
Kensington Palace, which those who oppose Konsington
gore prefer, but which they know it is impossible to obtain.
In all probability it will be surrounded iu time by a new
town, and will suffer from the same circumstance which
has alreadyfproved so very deleterious to the pictures in the
present building,—namely, from the atmosphere. But I will
just observe that from no probable circumstance can it be
inconveniently close to any surrounding buildings. It 'will
always have a spa e of 700 acres—the area of Ken-ingt
gardens and Hyde-park--before it ; and it will always have
in its own garden a considerable area free behind it. The
houses which will rise in its vicinity will brobably be houses
of that high class that will never exercise upon this build-
ing that injurious influence which has been so generally:
acknowledged and expatiated upon. I don't see, therefore,
so far as the proposed site is concerned, that these are ob-
jections which can really be urged against it with any plau-
sibility. But there is one point to be regarded in this case
—where can you find a space sufficient for the purpose if
you do not avail yourself of the offer before you ? It
would be delusive to indulge the idea of ever restoring
the Royal Palaces or of taking away the best sources of re-
creation from the people. Every man, therefore, who has
studied the subject of providing a sufficient and adequate
.site for a public building of this kind wants to know where
it is possible to obtain an area of this extensive nature so
advantageous as that which is before you. These are ques-
tions which ought fairly to be answered by those geotle-
men who interfere so much with the settlement of this
question ; because I apprehend that the question as to
where our National Gallery is to be placed, and the build-
ing of a National Gallery, is of very pressing necessity.
(Cheers.) These points, therefore, ought to be taken into
mature consideration. If we are to have another Royal
Commission which is to enter into every wild suggestion
that might be made, years may be lost before the result of
that commission can be laid before the house. I need not
dwell upon what would be the probable result of such a
proceeding. Every hon. gentleman can form an estimate of
that; but no hon. gentleman can form an estimate of the in-
juries which we should be doing in the meantime. 1 would
oppose the mntiou of the noble lord so far as it proposes an
address to the Crown to retard a decision of 'this house with
regard to a site for a National Gallery, upon the mere
merits of the question, and upon his own statement an ob
vious answer to which must occur to everyone. But I con-
fess I oppose it upon another ground, and one which has
great influence upon me in the course I feel it my duty to
take. The noble lord has referred to what he calls the in-
dustrial system, which was intended to be carried into
effect upon this area, the ground of which system to a cer-
tain degree I was instrumental in bringing before the house
for its consideration. The hon. member fur Warwickshire
on this as on every occasion with stern consistency has
taken every opportunity of depreciating that which the
noble lord calls the industrial system. But I may remind
my hon. friend the member for Warwickshire, who se-,ms
offended that I should have called him a Vandal—(laugh-
ter) —that in the first place, if 1 did make such a mistake it
was not in debate, but it was in the coufid, nce of a private
communication—a sort of Parliamentary whisper. (Laugh-.
ter.) I would also say to my hon. friend as an extenuating
circumstance that there have been very great men who
were Vandals—(laughter)—but I would not seriously have
applied the term to my hon. friend, who is one of the
most consistent and one of the most influential opponents of
that which the noble lord calls the industrial system at Ken-
sington-gore. I would remind my hon. friend that his opin-
ions are not shared upon the subject by those among whom
he lives, and once had the honour of representing, because
remember that the district which first placed itself in com-
munication with the Royal Commission and expressed the
most lively and complete sympathy with those principles
which that commission was designed to promulgate, and
which I believe to be calculated greatly to elevate the taste,
knowledge, and fortunes of the people of this country, was
the town of Birmingham. (Hear, hear.) That great com-
munity of 200,000 persons and the inhabitants of the sur-
rounding district applied to the Royal Commissioners for
advice respecting plans of their own devising for the promo-
tion of a knowledge of practical art and science among their
fellow-countrymen; and in consequence of that movement the
Birmiugham and Midland Institute—an association which
does honour to the enterprise of Englishmen— was founded.
The landowners of the neighbourhood subscribed, if I recol-
lect rightly, the sum of 10,0001 for the site of this institu-
tion; and the people of Birmingham and its vicinity, meeting
them with reciprocal liberality, such an impetus was given
to education in practical science and art in that loca ity as
makes me think that in the county of Warwick my hon.
friend will find no sympathy for the 'opinions which he has
so scrupulously advocated in this house. But I wish hon
members calmly to consider the grounds on which I shall op-
pose the motion of the noble lord. I frankly allow that by
no vote ever given was the House of Commons precluded, or
intended to be precluded, from offering an opinion on the
question before us. Still, I cannot understand the motion of
the noble lord, and I trust I shall be able to assign good rea-

Mr. DISRAELI—As I have been referred to several
times in the course of this discussion, and as I had some-
thing to do with the transaction which has led to the pre-
sent position in which the question before us is now placed,
I hope the house will not consider it intrusive on my part
if I ask permission to make a few observations. (Hear.)
First of all I would endeavour to ascertain precisely the
issue before us. We are not now going to decide whether
the bill introduced by her Majesty's Ministers with refe-
rence to the National Gallery shall be read a second time,
or whether we shall vote any money in order to forward
the views of the Government. There is such a bill upon
our paper to-night, and when it comes on it will be compe-
tent to any hon. gentleman to offer an opinion or to record
his vote upon that issue. The question now before us is
the motion of the noble lord the member for Haddington
(Lord Elcho), calling upon the house to address her Ma-
jesty, praying her to issue a Royal commission to deter-
mine the site of the new National Gallery, and to report
on the desirableness of combining with it the fine art and
archaeological collections of the British Museum." After
the humorous criticisms which have been made by so many
hon. gentlemen, I will dwell but briefly upon the question
of a new National Gallery. I think it will pretty generally
be admitted that a new National Gallery is necessary. The
reasons which have been alleged against the suitableness of
the present gallery are various, and may not all be ap-
proved by every one. It is not necessary to enter into a
discussion as tothe deleterious influences of the atmosphere,
or of other circumstances connected with the present site,
but there is a broader view, which cannot be absentfr om our
consideration—l would almost say from our conviction at
this moment, viz., that on the present site there is not
space sufficient for the formation of a gallery worthy of the
future of a, great country like England. (Hear.) Nor are
there any practical means by which that deficiency can be
supplied. You may expel the Royal-Academy, and you
will thereby extend the boundaries of the National Gallery,
but I maintain that you will not even then have space at
all adequate to the wants of that. (Hear.) Long before
the National Gallery was built there was a prevalent feel-
ing in this country that some ample and adequate means
ought to be supplied by the State for a collection of pic-
tures worthy of the nation. This feeling was forced upon
the country by the fact that we were periodically losing
magnificent collections of pictures which would otherwise
have been given to the country. Before this gallery was
built we lost the Dulwich and the Fitz william collections.
Since the building of this gallery we have lost other valu-
able collections, and at this moment there are other such
collections whichl will not be the property of the country
unless the nation be prepared to provide for them such ac-
commodation as possessions of such rare value deserve..
Can we be surprised at this when within the last few years
two donations of invaluable works of art have been made
to Great Britain, and the Government have been compelled
to admit that, it was not possible to accommodate these
magnificent legacies ? The Vernon collection was for a long
time in a cellar, and the unrivalled pictures of Mr. Turner
—pictures which in future days will vie in beauty, in value,
and in repitation with any which the artists of the middle
ages have left to us—are still stowed away in some unknown
corner, to the disgrace of the country and the great disad-
vantsge of her Majesty's subjects. I think therefore that I
am not indulging in anything like exaggeration when 1 say
that the prevalent feeling of the house and the country is
that a new National Gallery which shall afford adequate
accommodation to those treasures of art which we possess,
and which I trust we shall greatly increase, is necessary.
Having arrived at that point, I need touch but very briefly
upon those which have been already noticed in the course of
the debate, and I shall refer to them only that it may not
be supposed that I shrink from the responsibility of meet-
ing the objections which have been urged: Where is there a
site upon which a National Gallery of adequate size can be
erected? Upon this matter we have had prolonged re-
searches, continued investigations, numerous suggestions.
The most accomplished men have given their attention to
the subject. The wisdom of Parliament has been bestowed
upon it, and to-night we had heard from the noble lord
who introduced this question (Lord Elcho) a summary of
all the alternatives which could be brought forward to
meet the suggestions of the Ministry. Now I ask any gen-
tleman who has listened to these proposals whether any
one of them'was a really practical or practicable suggestion?
It is not necessary for me to go through the list ; and it is
only because there are gentlemen present now who may
not have, been here when the noble lord addressed the
house, that I venture to recall to the house what an extra-
ordinary catalogue of expedients it was which was intro-
duced by him to our notice. The great plans of the 'noble
lord might generally be ranked under two heads—destruc-
tion of her Majesty's palaces, and appropriation of her Ma-
jesty's parks. (A laugh.) Indeed, I listened with astonish-
ment, which was only checked by a feeling which some-
times amounted to error, while the noble lord informed
the house of the means by which adequate accommodation
was to be found for an institution which of all others
should form the manners, mitigate the habits, and elevate
the tastes of the people. Why, Sir, it was not only a ca-
talogue of sequestrations, it was a catalogue of revolutions.
Her Majesty's palace at Kensington was to be destroyed ;
her Majesty's palace of St. James's was to be demolished,
and, not content with outraging the hearth of her Majesty,
another Royal generation was brought forward as a victim
to public taste, and the mansion of his Royal Highness the
Prince of Wales— which we understand is now almost
preparing for his advent—was also thrown into the cal-
dron of destruction. (Laughter.) How did we fare with
regard to the parks ? There used to be a story--which mem-
bers of Parliament cannot forget —that there was once a
Sovereign who consulted his Primo Minister as to what
would be the cost of appropriating one of the parks; and
we all know what the answer was. But it seems that we
live in happier days, and that the parka are no longer
to be considered as the great sources of public health and
public pleasure, but that sites in them are to be seized
upon by a diletantte committee of the House of Com-
mons—(hear, and a laugh)—and difficulties, which for a
long series of years have perplexed the minds of the most
thoughtful men, in the most responsible positions—ques-
tions which really, when they are more narrowly examined
than they have been, I think, by the noble lord, really in-
volve interests of a much !ruse important nature than the
mere po session of a beautiful work of art, are to be settled
in a moment. We are to have a fanciful gallery in one of
the parks, and the whole thing is to be settled in a month,
which, if practical, would be very convenient. It is not
necessary that I should criticise these plans. I shall come
at once to that -point in which there is a difference. I
think the house has agreed that.there is to be a new Na-
tional Gallery, and that it will very generally agree that
the suggestions thrown out by the noble lord (Lord Elcho)
are not practical and practicable ones. For instance, the
suggestion of Kensington Palace. Ido not think it is fair
that we ought to discuss that question. It is not open to
. us to fix upon a palace of our Sovereign, and to say, this
is a site which we will advise ; it will give us all that is
' necessary, without duly cousidoing the resporisibility of
' such advice. And when my hon. friend the member for
Warwickshire tells us that by this vote, and by this ques-
tion to-night, we perhaps shall be entering upon a course
of unlimited expense, I would remind my hon. friend that,
in supporting such a suggestion as that proposed by the
'8

sous to induce the house to entertain the view which I take
myself on this matter I cannot help regarding the motion
as au attempt to rescind the policy inti oda, ed to the notice of
this house in 1852—(" No I")—and which was th• conse-
quence of the great Exhibition of the year preceding. I can
assure hon. gentlemen that there are involved in this subject
considerations far higher than the mere dilettanti sentiments
that have entered into this debate. Let me recall for a
moment the circumstances under which the Great Exhibi-
tion of 1851 took place ; but before doing so I may, perhaps,
briefly remind the house of the manner in which the pro-
position for establishing that exhibition was received in this
country—of the suspicion, the jealousy, the cavil, the con-
stant oppos Lion from almost all classes which its first an-
nouncement encountered. It was looked upon as a design to
injure the industry of this country. (" No.") The hon. gen-
tleman who cries " No" has not seen, as I have, the number
of public memorials presented to that effect; he cannot pos-
sess, as I do, a collection of all the squibs and pasquinades

written upon the smbject ; he forgets, which I do not, that at
the last moment a peer of Parliament, • holding one of the
highest offices of State, moved the Upper House, I believe,
even when the buildinf, had been raised, to prevent its being
opened. It was with the greatest difficulty that the Great
Exhibition was established. Those who promoted it were

obliged to apply to private individuals to guarantee even the
expense of the structure. Remembering all this, I ask the
house to reflect on the vast and beneficial influence which
that exhibition has exercised on the industry of the country,
and to contrast the feelings with which it was originally wel-
comed with the public sentiment which the retrospect of it
now inspires. I however mention this only in passing. What
I want the house to consider—and it is a point the import.
ance of which cannot be exaggerated—is this. What was the

cause of that memorable exhibition which has given atone to

Europe, and produced such extensive effects on our manners
and our industry? It had been known for a long period to
men of study and experience that the industry of England was
about to encounter not only a severe, but—as those capable of
forming an accuxate judgment believed—a fearful and increas•

ing competition. Under those circumstances Parliament
thought fit (and I state the historical fact without now ques-
tioning the wisdom of your counsels) to change the whole
commercial policy of the country. The productions of Eng-
land were brought into competition with foreign productions,
not merely in your colonial but even in your home markets.
These things were known to philosophers and to statesmen,
they were discussed in many literary treatises of the time ;
but the people of England—the most industrious and inge-
nious people—were not aware of the fact that, with the ex-
ception of a better command of the raw material, there was n
single point in which their industry was superior to that o;
the foreigner. (Hear.) How could they be taught this ?
Only by inviting to our capital all the specimens of the inge-
nuity and invention of other nations, by collecting uudcr one
roof all the raw materials, mineral, vegetable, and animal,
which supplied the processes and manufactures of our rivals.
And it was necessary by an exhibition of this kind to convey
a great lesson to the most manufacturing community in the
world. The consequence of the Great Exhibition of 1851,
when it had experienced its immense success and its results
were recognised, vas that those who had undertaken it, for
tified by public opinion, and supported by statesmen •
all parties who were cognisant of the condition of the couu
try, arrived at the conclusion that some decisive measures
ought to be taken by which an education in practical art
and science should he given to our working classes, so that

Nettie Serlb he is, in foot, eutorlog into ft postale oormudi. ' they might be conbloti to rosintalu the ancient nine•
turn to which no person can draw a limit, and that by the macy of their etill and defy the effects of that fearful
selection of such a site, independently of the destruction of competition which, if successful,.would have proved so- in-
one of the Queen's palaces, which would involve a large j injurious to our wealth and our reputation. It was felt to be
ex ense by way of decent compensation for the outrage so necessary, therefore, to establish a great institution of art
calmly propo'sed to .us, he would lead us into hu expendi- t and science in this country, in spite of prejudice so Strong
Lure infinitely greater in all probability than any Minister and obstacles so formidable, that they 'could never have been
would call upon this house to sanction. (Cheers.) Well, Sir, ffercoffino unless those who undertook this difficult task had

been animated by a sense of duty which they
re-
sist. Let the house only consider what has already been
achieved under this head. I can assure hon. gentlemen, who
may think that lam straying from the question, that they
will find these topics intimately connected with the proposi-
tion Coro immediately before the house. Before the year
of. the Great Exhibition you certainly had a partial system
of education in practical art in this country, but it was very
limited in its character and very slight in its resources. You
had 2Q local schools of design in a certain degree dependent
on a central authority. That was the foundation you had to
build upon, and on this basis since the Exhibition of 1851 you
have established a metropolitan school of practical art, an
invaluable museum of practical art, and 700 local and paro-
chial schools of practical art in connection with the mete opo-
litan school. As far as practical science is concerned you had
nothing to build upon. Yon have now, however, in London
a school and museum of practical science, and you are esta-
blishing corresponding institutions in every part of England.
You wanted space for these establishments. Hon. gentle-
men talk with great coolness about sites. They are ready to
vote the pub is money, and wisely so, to encourage scientific
collections ; but let the House of Commons vote night alter
night what funds it may, it will produce no effe .t while you
have no buil iings, in which to place those collections.
The truth is, that until this moment you have never

had the space offered you on winch the required building
could be erected. You have; indeed, buildings and schools
in obscure streets and disadvantageous situations- none of
them aggregated, but all scattered about--one in one place,
and another in another—and the whole producing the smallest
possible result at the largest cost. The idea was therefore
formed that you should obtain the first indispensable requisite
for imparting a complete education in practical science and
practical art to the workmen of England—viz., the space on
which the necessary buildings should be collected together—
(hear, hear)—and that there yon should concentrate the
various museums and schoola now dispersed throughout the
metropolis. Au hon. gentleman talked of destroying Marl-
borough-house. In that establishment you have now a
school and museum of art in which the m- n are educated who
are to be the future teachers of England, and from which—
as from a metropolitan centre--accomplished and capable in-
structors are sent to the chief seats of our manufacturing
industry.. In another situation you have a school of science
—a place by no means adequate to the occasion, in which
expel invents in agriculture are made by men who have pro-
duced, and will continue to produce, the greatest effects upon
that important branch of industry. It was thought advisable
that some attempt should be made to bring all these mu-
seums and schools together, in, order that it might be under.
stood that a great though gradual ehange.in the condition of
the country was at left recognised by its rulers, and that it
might be seen that practical science and practical art are, to
the working community of these kingdoms, quite as impor-
tant as those political rand civil rights which we have so long
enjoyed' and which we so highly prize. Now, I ask the
house how is this to be done? How are you to produce an
effect upon the opinion of a nation, if you admit practical art
and science to be most valuable necessities unless you place
them in such a position that their importance must be recog-
nised by the country ? You have placed your political insti-
tutions and your great officers of State in buildings which
show to the country that
.you have at last recognised their
paramount importance; and, when you can place your mu-
seums and your schools of practical art and science upon this
great site of 80 or 90 acres, if you resolve that the raw ma-
terial shall no longer be an abstraction to the people of this
country, but that it shall be seen in all its forms in your
museums—if you determine ithat your working men shall
have opportunities of instruction in those processes which
will enable them to invent colours—in which they are now
surpassed by foreign artists—l ask- you why such a position
should not be assigned to the gallery of galleries, the National
Gallery When you are seeking to educate a nation in art,
and when you have such a site at your command, why
should not the National Gallery Of the people be one of
the crowning ornaments of this country ? There is nothing
more fallacious, nothing more shortsighted—nay, I will say
there is uothiug more mean and sordid, than to suppose that
you can raise and refine the taste of a people by second-
rate models and by second-rate means. Her Majesty's
Ministers have recommended_ that in the place to which iu
time you will attract all the sympathies, the curiosity, and
the conscious pride of the • community, you should also
raise your National Gallery, and I -am of opinion that
that is a wise and proper recommendation. I should
entertain the same opinion if there were sites that could be
placed in competition with it ; but as no more eligible posi-
tion can be suggested, and as this magnificent site is available
I think it most desirable that amid your museums and schools
of science and art you should raise, as a crowning and conse-
crited ornament of the scene, the Gallery of the Nation.
(Rear, hear) I believe you would thus produce an immense
effect upon the public mind—that you would raise and refine
the taste of the country—that you would give an impulse to
the national spirit that would enable our artisans to meet
successfully the competition they have to encounter; and,
above all, that you would add weight to the central autho-
rity which must regulate and guide all the local schools of
design. (Hear, hear.) These are considerations which I
think we ought to bear in mind ; and when we are told, as
we were told to-night by the noble lord that the National
Gallery is to be distinguished from what he sneeringly called
the industrial scheme of the Royal Commissioners—
Lord E LCHO —I beg pardon for interrupting the right
hon. gentleman. I totally deny having sneered at what he
is pleased to call the industrial scheme.
Mr. DISRAELI—WeII, at what the noble lord, without a
sueer—(laughter)—styled the industrial scheme of the Royal
Commissioners—l would take the liberty of impressing upon
the noble lord and upon the house that, in a full and fair
development of that industrial scheme—namely, the complete
education of the people of this country in practical art and
science—are involved the future wealth and welfare of this
great community. (Cheers.)
Lord PALNIERSTOX—feome subjects have been net=
hv eolutseed
too t
kiene
pt he
ne t
icr
eo
luyr soeu
to
of f tthhi
es
id.debate d
ewr ha
ti
ohn
in wt ihseh v
ot ht
ee
they are about to give, We have been told by some hon.
geentlemen that this is the first s ep t6wards the expenditure
of 1,001,000 k, and the question has been argued as if the
bill of her Majesty's Government involved a large expenditure
of money. The object of that bill, which is really and sub-
stantially the topic now under discussion, is, however, to
enable the public to receive a present. (Hear.) Other hon.
gentlemen have argued that this is a question of taste, that
we ought not preeipitittely to adopt a plan which may lead us
to imitate errors that have previously been committed, and that
the house ought to pause before it assents to the proposition
of the Government. But the house is not called upon to adopt
any plan ; on the contrary, all we propose is, that the house
should accept a site for a building that may be erected at some
future time ; but what shall be the form or the extent of that
building, what shall be its ornaments or its arrangements, or
what shall be the expense of its construction, must be the
subjects of subsequent deliberation in this house ; and the
house will not pledge itself upon any one of these topics by
adopting the bill which has been introduced by the Govern-
ment. When we are told that former transactions with refe-
rence to public buildings justify my noble friend in recom-
mending another commission of inquiry ; and when we are
told, as we have been, that we ought to take warning from
the exampleiof the odifice in which we are now assembled, I
would remind honourable gentlemen that this great building
was the result of commissions and committees. (Laughter.)
I think, therefore, that the multiplication of commissions
is not a very happy remedy for the evils my noble friend desires
to avoid. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) The starting
point from which we ought to proceed has been accurately
described by the right hon. gentleman who hasjust sat down.
It is simply this :—ls it fitting that we should continue to
lodge the national collection •of pictures in the building in
which they are now contained ? Why, sir, I think no man
who reflects upon the subject would entertain that opinion.
The p‘resent building is objeaionable on account of its situa-
tion ; it is too small even for the collection of pictures we
possess ; it cannot be extended in such a manner as to afford
accommoda ion for pictures which may either be purchased
or accepted as gifts ; and, as has been well pointed out by
the right hon. member for Buckinghamshire, not only have
we lost most valuable collections, which might have been the
property of the nation if a fitting place had been provided for
their reception, but we have now collections which have been
given to the country which it is impossible to exhibit because
our gallery is not sufficiently capacious for the purpose. An
hon. gentleman - I think the hon. member for North War-
wickshire—suggested that the National Gallery might be en-
larged by turning out the exhibition of the Royal Academy.
(Mr. Spooner was understood to express dissent, amid loud
laughter.) lam glad my hon. friend has not proved himself
to be a Vandal by encouraging such a proposition—(laughter)
-for I think any one who made a suggestion of that nature
would really deserve that application of the term which the
right hon. member for Buckinghamshire has endeavoured to
explain away. (Laughter.) Is it no national object that
we should have a proper place in which the Royal Academy
may exhibit the annual productions of the art and genius of

this country ? Is it no national object that that place
should be large enough to receive all the contributions that
deserve to be so exhibited ? Why, at the present time about
1,7 k 0 pictures are annually refused admission to the Rod al
Academy because th re is not space enough for their exhibi-
tion. I may be toll that many of these pictures are not de-
serving of admission, but there aro many of them also which
possess great merit, and which would, I believe, attract pub-
lic admiration. All other national exhibitions afford accommo-
dation for the productions of artists of foreign countries, but
from our exhibition the works of any but native artists are'
almost entirely excluded. Here and there we see by accident
the picture of a foreign artist, but is it not desirable that our
exhibition should afford room for the works of foreign artists,
which may come into competition with those of our own
countrymen ? Who that has ever gone into the dungeon in'
which sculpture is exhibited in our National Gallery does not
blush for his country ? There you have works of genius so
crowded together, like ima. es upon the boards of Italians

in the street, that schoolboys long for an opportunity of
smashing them. (Laughter.) lam sure any Englishman who
has visited the galleries of art abroad, and who compares
them with those of his own country, must be ashamed at the
contrast, and must earnestly desire that better means should
be provided for exhibiting the productions of modern

genius and the works of anci nt masters. (Hear, hear.)
Then .I
say that that National Gallery ought to be given up
to the purposes of the Royal Academy for the study of art,
for the display of modern works, and' for those other objects
to which they wOuld apply it. (Hear.) But if we are to
blow, our national collection of pictures from the p'ace where
they now_are, where are they to go ? My noble friend the
member for Haddington (Lord Eleho), like Callebs in search
of a wife, has wandered forth search of a site to all the.

diff.rent places where his imagination led him, and at last he

met with a mirage which induced him to believe there was a
swamp at the site now recommended. Why, that is as de-
ceitful as the mirage which the traveller thinks he falls in
with as ho passes over the sands of Egypt; there is no foun-
dation whatever for the apprehension which haunts my noble

Lets examine the sites which he pro•
poses. In number they are about a dozen or more. Those
sites may be classed iu three divisions. Some of them are
liable to all the objections. which apply to the present site;
they are in the town and would be equally exposed with the
present gallery to the smoke and dirt of London. What, for
instance, should we gain by removing the gallery from ono
end of Pall-mall to the other? Then my noble friend comes
to the parks and the palaces. He has offered to him a free
gift in the site now proposed•—gt site which the country has
only to accept ; but he is not contented with that; he re-
fuses the gift, and says, " I am determined either to rob
the public of those places of air and recreation which they
at present possess, or I will take from the Crown the
palaces which belong- to it." Now, I repudiate altogether
those proposals. (Hear, hear ) I put off the question of
the encroachments upon the parks, because I feel sure
if any Government could be found which- would advise
the Crown to allow such encroachments, there would be
a burst of public indignation which would prevent any
=clime of the sort from being carried into execution.
We all remember the violent opposition which has always
been raised to any such encroachments upon places which
ire preserved for tee use and enjoyment of the people. But
then we are told that a handsome building might be erected
which would be au ornament to the parks. No doubt such
a building might be erected, but we are not talking about

ornamenting the parks ; oar objeot should rather bo o con-
sider how we are to preserve them for the purposes fo which
they a: e designed. With regard to the parks and K nsing-
ton-gardens, therefore, I put these sites altogether out of
view. My noble friend in an easy, good-humoured wak talks
of sweeping away St. James's Palace and Marlborough ouse,
and sending the Prince of Wales to Burlington-house. Now,
I think any man, whether he be prince, peer, or com oner,
who had the good fortune to own Marlboroueh-house, would
pause a long time before accepting the transfer to B ruing-
ton-house, (Hear.) The two situations are by no eans
equally desirable, and yet my noble friend talks of s eping
away the Prince's future residence and erecting fanci 1 fab-
rics in its stead. He reminds me of the German b oness
who was so fond of planting that she cut down whole orests
to enable her to gratify her taste ; or of the old lady 'n the
" Arabian Nights" who was so anxious to exchange Al din's
old lamp for a new one—there being this additional p int of
resemblance, that the • exchange, so unprofita e to
Aladdin, would also involve us in an enormous e endi-
ture. There would be the compensation you , ould
have to give the Crown for these existing tarild-
-1
ings ; there would be the expense of erecting fresh
palaces and of the buildings you would erect o the
sites thus obtained ; and, in short, such a proposal se ms to
be altogether inadmissible. The real question whi the
house has to consider is, I take it, not whether the p sent '
National Gallery is to be removed, because I look upo that
as a settled point—(hear)- -not whether a new Nation 41 Gal-
t
lery is to be erected in Hyde Park, Kensington-gatdens;
Pall-mall, or on the site of Marlborough-house, r St.
James's. The real question is whether you will remo • the
.National Gallery to the site now proposed, or whethe con-
trary to the opinion of all those whose opinion, is enti , ed to
consideration, you are determined to continue it in the neon-
venient, insufficient, and, to works of art, dangerous wild-
ing in which the national collection of pictures now is Sir,
the choice is between this ground or none. I see no . ther
spot within reach of visitors who wish to see this cone, tion ;
I see no other site but this to which it is possible to tr nsfer
the gallery ; and when my hon. friend the member for t ew-
ark (Mr G. H. Vernon) asks me whether the Gover ment
have deliberately considered this question, and, I ~ink,
rather made his vote depend upon the answer which .- ybe
returned, I claim his vote upon that very ground, .. ause
the Government have deliberated upon the subject. ( : ear.)
After full consideration, I am prepared to say that we don't
see our way to any other site for the National Gaiter • , and
we do think it is not fitting either that the collections . pic-
tures we have, or those we may hereafter have, should co . inue
in the building in which they are now placed. (Hear.) Ido
therefore hope that the house will not be led aw, y by
the vivid imagination of my noble friend (Lord `E cho),
or by the romantic march he has taken to a num. •r of
impossible and impracticable sites, but that hon. me .. bers
will consider the real question at issue—namely, not
whether we should determine to launch into that :nor-
mous expense in construction which has been alluded

now awaiting deeision—not whether we will adopt an
ticular plan, but whether we will accept a site which
sufficient capacity ho allow of its application to all those
poses for which it may hereafter be required—a site
the country may receive at present without ny fu
expense, and as to which, when accepted, Parham
mans perfectly free to determine to what purposes it sh
applied, to what extent buildings shall be constructed,
shall be their form and .character, and what-shall be
al
expenie incurred in carrying out these desirable objects.
• Mr. LOCKE did not pretend to say that be had forznl
very strong opinion in favor of Kensington Palace as a

Kensington-gore, because ho thought there were ci;

stances connected with the removal of the pictures
Charing cross to one or other of these sites which trust
of all be taken into consideration. (Hear.) It was not
him to say whether it had been satisfactorily established
pictures deteriorated in the present building, and then
they must necessarily be removed from their present si

don; but ho wonkLremark that those who made this p.

sition for the removal of the gallery to Kensington-gore
not seem to remember that that site must become gr
ally as fitted for building on as others. In a few

there would probably not be a piece of vacant gri
between the site now, fixed on and the river at Chel

and was it,' then, worth while to remove these
tures to Kensington-gore, owing to an alleged

terioration from their continuance in town—a p,
which, he confessed, notwithstanding all that

to as
par-
is of

hich
ther
t re-

rom
first
for
that
fore

been said on the subject, he was not yet prepare to
look upon as established ? (Hear, hear.) But, thouoit he
had not a very decided opinion as between the two sitest ho
had referred to, he confessed he thought that in the conrse
which was originally traced out by the right hon. gentleihan
opposite (Mr. Disraeli) they had laid the foundation for Mis-
chief of which they had rot yet seen the end. (Hear) He
believed, moreover, that that foundation had been laid ufon
false premises. Having studied the character of his country-
men, and had the opportunity of comparing their works with
those of foreigners, he confessed that he had not come to the
conclusion that it was necessary to treat the workman as a
child, and to adopt for his benefit that centralising system
which the right hon. gentleman seemed to have in his mind.
He had himself in the year 1852 stated that he did not agree
in the low estimate that had been formed of tte character of
Englishmen by some hon. gentlemen oppos te, nor that the
perfection of mechanical skill was due to the Governmental
schools. He had great faith in the individual energy of the
country, and if they established central schools they would
lessen the individual exertion which had been the mainstay
of the mechanical industry of the country. (Hear, hear.)
Ho had no objections to grants of money for buildings for the
exhibition of our excellent works of art; but if it were 'in-
tended to introduce central schools by which degrees Were
to be established, so that individuals out of the pale of these
schools might be marked (he alluded to the centralising
system in France, where the Ecole Polytechuiquo had been
established, ont of which there was no opportunity for any
individual, however great his merit), he felt bound to raise
his voice the moment the question was introduced ; and
the right hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire,
then Chancellor of the Exchequer, said that he (Mr. Locke)
had made a startling assertion, for which there was not the
Brightest foundation, to raise an argument against this
vote. He cold assure the hon. gentleman he (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) had heard, for the first time, the
statement respecting this scheme, and ho could say with
perfect confidence that it was an assertion for which there
was not the slighest imaginable foundation.. The speech
of the right.hon. gentleman that evening had been enough
to justify the statement which he had made in 1852, and
to show that so.uethiug was impending which Parliament
ought not to permit, and against which ho wished to enter
his protest.

Lord ELCHO much regretted that he had no right of
reply, because nearly everything which he had stated had
been misrepresented by the opponents of his motion. He
had not proposed that the geological collection should be
given to the Zoological Society, but that it should be
placed somewhere near the gardens of the society; nor had
he stated that 13 commissions or committees had been ap-
pointed on the subject of the National Gallery. He had
not wished to convey to the house that he was opposed to
what the right hon. gentleman called the in lustrial
scheme, but be had endeavoured to draw a distinction be-
tween a scheme which had been supported by the late Mr.
Hume, and that which the right hon. gentleman called a
National Gallery of the people ; and he considered that
the subject involved a much larger question than the mere
choice of a site.

Mr. DISRAELI wished to explain that the statement
quoted by the hon. gentleman had reference to schools of
art and science, which were included in the miscellaneous
estimates for which the hon. gentleman had voted.
The house then divided, when the numbers were—
For Lord Elcho's motion 153
Against
Majority
The announcement of the numbers was received with
loud cheers.

Mr. WALPOLE asked whether, as the numbers were
so equally balanced in the division which had just taken
place, it would not be a good opportunity for adopting the
suggestion thrown out the other evening by the right hon.
member for Carlisle, that addresses to the Crown should
be referred to a committee to be prepared, by which means
the opinion of the house could again be taken on them ?
Lord PALMERSTON said that he thought the propo-
sition of his right hon. friend was well deserving of atten-
tion, but it would not be desirable to apply it until the
house had deliberately adopted it.
EXCHEQUER BILLS (4 000,0000 BILL.
This bill went through committee.
SCOTCH AND IRISH PAUPER REMOVALS BILL.
Mr.BOUVERIE said that this bi/l had now been three
months before the house. It had excited a great deal of
opposition in the metropolitan and manufacturing dis-
tricts, and as he saw no chance of carryieg it in the present
session, although he was convinced that it was founded on
justice and that it would effect a material improvement in
the administration of the Poor Law, bo begged to move
that the order for the second reading be discharged.
After a brief conversation, the vote was agreed to, and
the order discharged.
The Juvenile Offenders (Ireland) Bill was also with-
drawn.