The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-17 00:00:00

ANATOMY ACT.

Mr. Alderman COPELAND moved for an address
to her Majesty, praying that she Will be graciously
pleasectto lay before this House, a copy of all Commis-
sions, with the names of the Commissioners, appointed
to inquire into the working of the Anatomy Act, and
also into the officill conduct of any inspector or in-
spETtors of schools of anatomy for England, Scotland, and
Wales ; with the dates of each Commission, and reports
(if any) of evidence taken by the said Commissioners.
Mr. Y. BORTHWICK seconded the motion.

Sir J. GRAHAM said that this was a subject not only
of great delicacy, but, as it appeared to him, unsuited to
discussion in a popular assembly. With respect to the
Anatomy Act, his experience in the office of the Home
Department had confirmed him in his opinion of the
successful working of the measure. Indeed, its quiet
and silent operation was ( the best test of its
usefulness. He would remind the Honourable
Gentleman, that previous to the enactment of
that measure, there was hardly a churchyard within a
hundred miles of the metropolis, where the sanctity of
the grave was not violated, and the state of ttie church-
yard was such as to render human life in the neighbour-
hood quite insecure. He had had a quarterly return
made to him, which it was his duty to in.pect, and, like
all his predecessorA, he could answer for its accuracy.
Some irregularities had from time to time been brought
under the notice of the Secretary of State. Commis-
sions of inquiry had bon issued, evidence had been
taken ; reports had in some instances been made,
in others it had been thought better to confine the
information to the Secretary of State. If any
subject could with profit he left to the Government, this
could. He did not ask for a blind confidence ; but
it was notorious that the evils which this Act
of Parliament was passed to remedy had disap-
peared. The schools of anatomy were sufficiently and
regularly supplied ; all outrages on public decency were
avoided ; and it was his opinion that the greatest
possible inconvenience would arise from the pro-
duction of the reports to which the Hon.
Gentleman's motion was directed ; and he hoped, there-
fore, that the House would support him in refusing the
Hon. Gentleman's motion.

Mr. FRENCH said, that when he brought forward
a motien on this subject some years ago, he
was met by a statement that it was under the considera-
tion of the Commissioners. If they had maintained the
delicacy Which the Right Hon. Gentleman wished them
to maintain, they would not have procured the retire-
ment of Dr. Sullvaan.—(Hear, hear.) The Right
Hon. Baronet had affixed the epithet " noxious agita-
tion" to a motion brought forward by a supporter of the
Government.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM—I did not use the words.
Mr. F. FRENCH said]ihere never was a more ill-used
man in the country than Mr. Roberts. The most emi-
nent scientific men in the country had borne testimony
to the merits of that gentleman.
Mr. WARBURTON agreed with the Right Ho-
nourable Baronet that nothing could be more injurious
than this species of noxious agitation. Of the way
in which the Honourable Alderman (Copeland) had
brought the subject before the House there was little to
complain. One expression, only, should he (Mr. War-
burton) comment upon. In speaking of the conduct of
the late inspector, Dr. Sullivan, the worthy Alderman
had said he had been permitted to retire on receiving the
the sum of one hundred pounds. Having investigated
every charge brought against him, he (Mr. Warburton)
could declare, upon his honour—and he believed every
Commissioner concurred in the opinion— that Dr. Sul-
livan's conduct had been conducive to the public interest,
and that throughout every circumstance he had con
ducted himself well. He (Mr. Warburton) also knew
he had not been permitted to retire, but that he had been
dismissed from his office with a gift of one hundred
pounds. He believed that Dr. Sullivan had received a
complete and honourabie acgaittal from every charge
brought against him.
Sir J. GRAHAM said the fact was there had been a
second Committee, and the report of that Committee
had been in favour of Dr. Sullivan.

Mr. P. /RTHWICK said this subject was certainly
not one peculiarly adapted' for popular discussion ; but
he had felt it his duty to present to the House the peti-
tion which had been entrusted to him ; and every
petition, properly worded, sent to him, he should
consider it his duty to present in like manner.
The agitation that had been alluded to had been shared
in by some of the first men in the medical profession—
Sir Astley Cooper, Sir Benjamin Brodie, Dr. Birk-
beck, and others. Unless the evils which the petition
he had presented complained of were remedied, it would
be his duty, at a subsequent period, to call the attention
o: the House to the subject of those complaints. It was
in the power of the Home-office to rectify those com-
plaints, and he would rather it should be done there
than by public discussion in that House. If he were
compelled to bring it forward it would be contrary to
his own inclination.
Mr. WARBURTON asked the Hon. Gentleman if he
intended to raise a discussion on that petition or not.
He had repeatedly attended in expectation of a dis-
cussion, and it had repeatedly, been postponed.
Mr. BORTHWICK--Tt had only been postponed
once. lie trusted it would be unnecessary to bring it on
at all, if the question were taken up by the Home
Secretary.
Mr. MACKINNON thought they were bound to take
the word of the Secretary of State. They must see the
impossibility in which the House was placed with res-
pect to forming an opinion on the subject.
Mr. Alderman COPELAND, in reply, complained
that the returns which the House had ordered on this
subject some years since bad not yet been made. He
desired to know if the Commission of which the Hon.
Member for Kerdal was a member had yet made their
report to the Home Secretary ? If they had not, it was
the duty of the Government to insist on that report being
made. The Hon. Member for Kendal stood in a peculiar
position with regard to the Commission. He was one of
tho principal persons connected with University College,
and it could be shown that the Act had been worked to
the advantage of that establishment, therefore the Go-
vernment ought to call immediately for that report. He
thanked the House for the attention with which they had
heard him, and would beg to withdraw his motion.
_ _

Motion withdrawn.
OPENING OF CATHEDRALS TO THE PUBLIC.
Mr. HUME then moved the -following resolution:—
" That this House, taking into consideration the exem-.
plary conduct of the people during the exhibition of the
Cartoons last year, and wherever they have been ad-
mitted to public edifices, and their general disposition to
improve by the contemplation of works of art, approve
of the following recommendation of the Select Com-
mittee of this house on National Monuments, inlB4l:*--
' That your Committee strongly deprecate any course
which could create an impression that churches were at
any time to be considered merely in the light of places
for the exhibition of works of art; but it is their opinion
that as, by increased facilities of admission to the inspec-
tion of mere woeks of art, civilisation has been encou-
raged and public taste improved, so a more free admis-
sion to religious edifices, under proper regulation, may
be made conducive, not merely to the gratification of cu-
riosity and the acquirement of historical knowledge, but
to the growth and progress of religious impressions, by
leading the mind of the spectator from the contempla-
tion of the building to a consideration of the views
with which, and the purl), ises for which, it
was originally erected, and is still maintained.
Your Committee entertain a hope that arrangements
may be made by the cathedral authorities, to alletv the
larger portions of Westminster Abbey, and of St. Paul's
and other cathedrals throughout the country, to be open
freely to the public daily, and esrecially on Sundays,
reconciling such free admission with the due and undis-
turbed perormance of religious services, though it may
be required to continue a small reduced fee, or other
sufficient restriction, in regard to the chapels and smaller
or more intricate portions of those edifices. Your Com-
mitteo.think it right to add, that if the greater freedom
of admission to those churches should lead, as it pro-
bably must, to an increase. of the number of officers
employed in their superintendence, the additional expense
ought to be defrayed from other funds than those
belonging to the cathedrals.' " In bringing forward
this motion, he hoped be should be introducing a
more aereeable subject to the notice of the House
than the working of the Anatomy Act.—(Cheers.)
The improvement of the people was the great object
which he had in view, and the mode of effecting that
improvement was to make use of the means which the
country possessed to enable them to produce an impres •
sion on the minds of the people which language could
not convey. Some years ago there was an opinion pre-
vailing that museums and collections of art could only
be studied by the rich—that the middle and lower classes
wore too mischievous to be trusted to view them. A
great change had, however, taken place within the last
ten years in the national character, and Englishmen of
all classes could now be trusted to view and to study
valuable works of art without any danger to the objects
of their study.—(Cheers.) The boon which had been
conceded to the middle and working classes by the
Directors of the British Museum and the National Gal-
lery had been acknowledged with gratitude, and had
been looked upon as an advantage. A marked benefit
had been derived from the manner in which these insti-
tutions had..been .thrown open. The Commissioners of
Police bore testimony to the marked improvement which
had taken place in the manners of the people, and they
attributed it to their increased sobriety, and to the
means which the lower orders now had, in their leisure
hours, of improving their minds, by contemplating works
of art. In answer to the question, as to how far, in their
opinion, it would be safe to admit the public to West-
minster Abbey, the Commissioners stated that they could
with confidence depend that good order would be pre-
served by the masses, if they were admitted there, and
that they felt convinced that the people would
do all in their power to protect and preserve the '
building and everything contained in it..(llcar, hear.)
The Hen. Member then quoted the opinions of Mr.
Addison in the " Spectator,'. in support of free admission
to public buildings, as caculated to elevate the national
taste and the national morals. The Queen, soon after
her ascent to the throne, commanded the Secretary of
State fur the Hone Department, the Noble Lord the
Member for the City of London; to endeavour, by every
means in his power, to open the cathedrals to the public.
The Noble Lord is rote, in conformity with her Majesty's
wishes, to the Dean and Chapter of Westminster, and to
the Dean and Chapter of St. Paul's, but he was sorry to
say these dignitaries did not carry into practical effect
her Majesty's wishes. The cathedrals were public
buildings. The Deans and Chapters had only a life in-
terest in them ; and they should not be suffered to dis-
figure the noble and costly architecture of these edifices
by placing unsightly monuments inthem. The menu-
moats of naval and military liepesi—men 'only famous

from deeds of warfare and blood—should'not be sufferel 4,
to pollute the temple of peace. The Government origkt,
to prevent the ;c abominations, for such he would cm'
them.—(Hear, hear.) He would remote all such mo-
numents from these buildings. He • entirely agreed in
the opinion• of Mr. Addison, that free admission
to works of art would greatly tend to in': •
prove the public taste. It had been urged that
indiscriminate admission might prove injurious to the
preservation of these edifices ; but if they consulted the.
opinions of many eminent men who had been examined
before a Committee of that House, they would find that -
such danger need not be apprehended. Sir John Brit-
ton said, the conduct of the public in public plaees bad •
vastly improved within the last few years, "so much
said Sir John, " that had I been fifty years ago in a
foreign country, and on my return witnessed the conduct
of the lower classes in publis buildings, I would not have •
believed that they belonged to the same nation, or were
the same class of people at all." The only unseemly •
conduct Sir John Britton said he had noticed was that
of the vergers, and such functionaries dernandingi
money. Der. Cunninfeham, the author of " Lives
British Artists," and other woks of importance, was ni
favour of free admission to public buildings. He further
said, that these men usually called " the mob "—the
operatives—as far as he knew, generally conducted
themselves in these places with great decorum.-- '
(Cheers.) Mr. Edward R. Bray, the historian of West-
minster Abbey, bore similar testimony. It should be re-
collected that 45,2001. of the public money had been
voted by Parliament in the years 1807, 1808, 1809',
1810, and 1811, towards the improvement of We„s
minster Abbey, and those buildings about it. Ha (Jr.el
Hume) had. received communications from the Bishops
of Wells, Winchester, and Norwich, and all these pre,
lates were in favour of public admission to public but
ings, subject of course to proper restrictions. Lord
Melbourne had told him (Mr. Hume) that, when a KT,'
at Westminster, there was only a charge of twopence lice
threepence to the chapel—all other parts of the edifie
were then open to the public. After some further ob-
servations the Hon. Member concluded by entreating
the House to pass the resolution.—(Cheers.)
Mr. WYSE seconded the motion, and, in doing 0, •
said he thought that his Hon.
•Friend, the Member for
Montrose, was deserving of the highest praise for Or
perseverance and intelligence which he had shown in
bringing the subject before the House. He (Mr.WYse)
thought it was a reproach to the country at largo net to
allow the population to have free access to all our public
works of art, and public movements. He thought the •
time was now come when that prohibition should be re'
moved. Let the House for one moment look at the cone
duct of the immense number of persons who witnessed
the exhibition of the cartoons last year. Thousand,
i;
upon thousands visited that 'exhibition without a sing
scratch occurring to any picture. Cheap catalogues were
published, and fifty thousa,pd were sold in a very shelo
time ; and it was interesting to know that many le"
purchased these cheap catalogues were induced to Pnroi
chase the higher priced catalogues, for the purpeee„,,
obtaining more information with respect to the pietti
than was obtained in the cheap books. Tranquillity •
and peace pervaded that exhibition, but, above all, tiler; ,
was improvement for the people. If such a feeling wit
shown by the people last year oft the occasion of the eV
hibition of the cartoons, why should that feeling be dis-
trusted now with respect to the public exhibition of (Ire
monuments and works of art ? Look at the exatoPi;
of Bavaria and Poland, where the publio monuments were
opened without the least restriction. It was useless
to think of encouraging an art, unless they at the sell"
time endeavoured to cultivate a taste for it in the Min
of the people. What was more hkely. to exalt
English character still higher, than placing.constant.);
before the eyes of the people the history of their count*,
What better means could be found of placing that history
constantly before their eyes than this, of freely opening
our public monuments and works of art? He sincerely
wished that the Government would follow the noble ex-
ample which had been set them in this respect by Fre,llo'
and it was with this view that he cordially supported
motion of his Hon. Friend.
Sir R. H. INGLIS said he should oppose the motion'
He thought there would be very little difference betwee
the debates of preceding years, upon this subject, and ti,
m
debate of that night. The only difference was, that t"h
year the motion was brought forward in April, whereas'
in former years it had generally been brought feral°,
in July or August. He feared that in opPestiol",
the motion lie would have to use the same erg r
rnents which bad been used from year to y,e?,, •
on this subject, and that nothing new would be di
covered in what ho had to say. The Hon. Gentlero 00
who had brought forward this motion had done sett
the ground that cathedrals were national property, 21:14
that by opening them freely to the public, means We'
be afforded of promoting not merely the intellectual etilr
joyments of the people, but also of strengthening th,ehe
religious principles. In the first place, how did,
Bon. Gentleman make out that cathedrals were natto,
property? They had not been endowed by the ne'4,:4
and with the single exception of St. Paul's, not one
""
been built by the nation.
Mr. HUME—They were given by Parliament. 0
Sir R. INGLIS thought the utmost that the gretel
latitudinarian had ever contended for was, that tbeY
e.
been transferred, but this he (Sir R. H. Inglis) was Pro
pared to deny. At the time of the reformation, the„/
cathedrals belonged to the clergy, and when that &lb:4
changed their faith, the cathedrals went with them,
thee-
were still retained by them as their property. If
fee
Zion. Gentleman could by any means show that "..
opening of the cathedrals would be the means of aid
lightening the people, then he (Sir R H. Inglis) we,tbe
be willing to admit that it would be competent for
Government to consideb looking to vested interests age
the rights of property, how far the proposidon of tho
Honourable Gentleman could be carried that
He (Sir R. H. Inglis) did not believe t'o,
there was a necessary connection between :lie
tellectual and moral excellence, and, therefore, he be
not feel called upon to support this motion. At bed
brightest period of the intellectual world, they blic
found that there existed the greatest masses of IA of
and private corruption. Many were the instances
great taste being connected with great personal dePpe to
vity ; and for these reasons he was satisfied thats 4,
make the people skilful judges of statuary and paints 50
was not the soundest mode of enlightening them into,
doctrines of Christianity. He was, however, still 10,
0,
prepared to assent to the second part of the Hon. t'edi
tleman's proposition. The Hon. Gentleman relucteao-
admitted that it was necessary to have come admissliste
fee, in order to maintain the necessary officers. IlL'er
R. H. Inglis) would not enter into the question of to
flier sixpence was a high charge or not for admiesie;ies
Westminster Abbey, but this he would say, that it elf.
a very small sum- compared with what it was forfne',„'cl
It was evident that some funds would be required, ber
there were but two modes of raising those funds, el)the
by means of a small fee for admission, or by paying tit
necessary, officers out of the taxes. He believed lag
was not suggested that the funds should come out o,4the
ecclesiastical revenues; and of the two modes of rtueo
those funds which he had mentioned, the best, in
0,0
belief, was by imposing a small admission-fee on tend
who were the recipients of the advantages to be del"aeo
from witnessing our works of art. The Hon. ure"bet
man attached great importance to those advantages, teat
he (Sir R. H. Inglis) did not think they were 50 g ere
as they had been represented. The Hon. Gentleel„or
(Mr. Hume) expressed a wish that what he called i,ll'ool
gruous monuments should be removed from St..Panlhseecl
Westminster Abbey. To a great extent he sylnPe'e loot
with that feeling; he was one of those who cotik`wite
regard without horror the mixture of allegory eoes
truth, the introduction of heathen gods and god& 101
into places of religious worship ; and he would be go,
to see monuments which were open to this object,!°no 03
moved. In the case of St. Paul's especially, I'll",, tbo
one of the monuments objected to on this groan 'sop'
cortained representations of Mars, Bellona, er he
tune, covered the remains of the deceased Per,seitil
- could see no impropriety in the proposed removsi.;, Fps
respect to the monument to James Watt by Sir xr-s nd
Chautrey, he would venture to say that there ora re'
person having the smallest pretension t° that
ligious feeling, who would not consider t ore'
that monument was utterly misplaced. He was neoies'
pared to deny that there was great value in the °loin
Lion that it might be very convenient to reneerorest'
many of our public edifices, and especially frore
minster Abbey and St. Paul's, those incongruous!: 1501
ments which had been placed in them within the
century and a half.—(Hear, hear„.)' The Hon• uotogitt
man had made another suggestion, which he tlieet'S) •
was well worthy of his Right Hon. Friend (Sir B•A
consideration. It was that of forming in Englennierge
had long existed in France, a commission to take, eh de'
of national monuments. In his opinion it walla ybete
sirable, if possible, to include other objects. , gtotir
could be no doubt whatever that the owner of 'o°l
henge might, if he chose, destroy the relics which cool
d_
hear.) No law proceeding Which„otie°'
issue from any Court would prevent their destrtir
He ventured to hope, from the character of his COe re'
men, that the chances of such an event were very 101,
mote ; but it would be recollected that within
twenty-five years, one of the Logan stones in Li.,,U1).-0 MA •
had actually been removed, although the peril " tore
it removed had been subsequently induced to r,et5.„0013,-,
to its former place. Differing, as he had themis ;its °4
generally to do from the Hon. Gentleman oPPe" eolP
this subject, he had thought it right, when "goes:
agree with him, to state that agreement to the eint
He trusted that the suggestions which had bee,l3,boilg
would not be neglected by his Right Hon. Frienc,,,Ote l)te
at the same time he felt bound to resist the 111'1
fore the House. otiraDie
Mr. M. MILNES would not follow the kint3d
Baronet through the various topics which he 112' pioti;l
e
duced into his speech. There was nothing in the no one
which required that he should do so. There weisod tto
phrase in this resolution which in any way Pi Itjec4.
question whether cathedrals were or were not snoillief,
the control of the State; still less was there n jote
in it which favoured the opinion that morale leo 10/.0
lectual motives and principles were in any degrpropgso
important than religious.—(Hear, hear.) The id coePtbe
before the House was simply that they shell ort tot
what had already been confirmed by the rte lion'tbe
Ciiiiimittee, by the implied consent of the bl.°ldet
the head of her Majesty's late Government, Stew, vie ei
to
,r,aropet
unwearied support which had been given
stated in the resolution by the Right Llon-ifor, hear'
_n
the head of the present Government.—(?t el""of
Now, on the subject of receiving fees at to 01100
of cathedral churches, he was opposed
rose
for whose opinions ho had the greatest fefri.,gar".
declared, with unfeigned earnestness, that ne,,to.oh sots
the reception of any fee at the door of a e 3 posit alt
gross desecration.—(Hear, hear, from the. , tee far
benches.) The Hon. Baronet (Sir H. Inglis) d for .0.
well as he did that these buildings were raised po:si,
higher purposes; and to exclude people frocrla; fie poi to
ble participation in those purposes was, " ano'io.
ble, to nullify the objects of their foun
0,
„0. co
pride
ttleeso.)
render these edifices, which were the
try, morally and religiously useless.—(Heal'' ~ilefisll
was service performed in them every dilY,