The Sun.
London, England, 1857-07-31 00:00:00

. . .
~,.
•
„..,...4.,:...
, .
~.
;g'`,44,-", .`..!:;,,,,, .4,,.40:4": . .•
v., , '41:',7:.,01 111.,,,,-
~-:4
~....„.
'.'-1.-I:‘,-ii...„: ' • •• - .' -
1,11
..i•is
1. 1,
vw,,.._,.),-, - .
...,... \, ~,....44... b.., _, ...,:.41.‘ • • iN,,. . vo, ,
_,...'.1 4410;4,',... -
, -411 ,
'
~..
''' . .
. . ..
:
t ._ ,
~,,
,t„. 141,
,- ~„.).,,0,1, ,4:_,... ,t., 7.10)5i i 91:
" ' C"l4
'''
- ) R°ll..
-''''
'''
' . 11:7.
-----
-4:4,.."v43*.77,1' k-r:;L:,,,
1,,f , .
1
i
(........
' • 0'
I '

.4%7'

NEWS PAP

~ ,-
..., .-
.z- .
THE iv17707r. -- • **--, :-,
''' * r, - -;...•,t,
1-`A
~..
lim.ivayr 11. '4"'
)dtafikeit.. b . t.l

_>

(Prom the
It may not be forgotten ,
bqc,k we gave publicity to a r
current among persons the mo:
informed upon the subject of the National Gal-
)ery, The rumour was this :—lt was said that
when Parliament had risen, and during the recess,
it was the intention to remove the pictures now in
the National Gallery to lietriiegton-gore. The
Royal Commission appointed on an Address froni
the House of Commons, as we stated, had made its
Report, and we added that this. Report was in
favour of the site of the present National Gallery.
Last week the subject, in consequence of what was
said in the columns of this journal, was very pro-
perly mentioned by Mr. Wise in the House of
Commons. In answer to 4 question from that gen-
Colman the Chancellor of the Exchequer ende tvoured
at first to treat the rumour and the alleged Report
of the Royal Commission in the good old style of
At ecncsoi
rvdei n x
tpoe rsi nro cfce
olrintdteul
wer iannligo
Lewis,t i
cteh. e”
the Treasury Bench, of which we had such, ax-
is eea nr
uc.
ornWuoladn"
was deserving
however, assure the honourable gt:ntleman that the
Report of that Commission had not yet been' pre-
sented." This was a little too much eveo'for the
practised pat'ence of the Hon e ; accordingly our \\\
Parliamentary report for the day proc •edo,—
" (Murmurs of dissent.) Well, 4e had not seen a
copy of it, he was" ignorant of its contenti, and
he could only say that the Government had come
to no decision upon the subject." It was never \
said that the Government had come to any decision
upon the subject. If the rumour be true—and WO
repeat that it came to us accredited by the highest
authority of which " rumour"• is susceptible—the
obvious policy was for the present a wis 3 inac-
tion. During the recess, when the representa-
tives of the people were all absent, it would N
have been ample time to take the Report of
tie Royal Commission into consideration, to
treat it as a nullity, and to carry the change into
effect. When Parliament again assembled it would
have been almost impossible to compel the •
Government to retrace its steps. To proceed with
the diacusaion pf last week :—Mr. Wise, very_ •
naturally with the inibiguons answer,
of the Chancellor of the 'Exchequer, persista'- •
ill --his inquiry. Sir George Grey then rose in
support of his friend and colleague ;—" be was the
only member of the Government who had seen
the Report, and he had not had time to read it."
The Report, which we publish elsewhere, consists
of three pages and a-half of printed matter, and
the perusal of it will possibly task, the facultit
of an ordinary reader for the space of ten
m_au_es,
or those of a Minister for, say, a quarter of an hour.
Sir .G. Grey, added that which at the time we be-
lieve was true--namely, "Ho hail received a copy
of it, and also a letter from- Lord Broughton, the
Chairman of the' Commission, stating that they had
as yet been 'unable to append to the 'report the
documentary evidence connected with it. When •
the report in a complete state was in the ha•ids of
the Government it would be
_laid before Parlia-
ment ; at present it was impossible for him to say
what conclusions would be drawn from it, but he
had no doubt that it would receive the fullest con-
sideration." In this way Sir G. Grey and tte
Chancellor of the Exchequer endeavoured to fence
off Mr. Wise's question. At the conclusion of the
conversation,, hOwever, in reply to a remark from
Mr. Ayrton, who asked for something like an
assurance that the Government would not commit
the House to any course without an opportunity
for discusiion,l Lord Palmerston decisively said,—

[ PRIG ril AD: • STAMPKD

not easily reconcileable and afforded us but little
assistance.
" The same may be said of the recorded judg-
ments of an eminent individual. Sir C. Barry was
examined before the committee of 1848. He was
thus questioned by the chairman, Lord Morpeth:—
" Since you were last examined by the commit-
tee have you directed your attention to the site of
the present National Gallery with a view of ascer-
taining the capabilities of that building for the re-
ception of additional works of art?' His answer
WBB :-" Yes, I have, a'id I am now prepared to
reporteto the committee on the subject. I am of
opinion that if the site of St. Martiu's Workhouse
were purchased, an alteration were made in the
form of the barrack-yard, and a portion of Castle-
street stopped ; if the Royal Academy were located
elsewhere, the portico and other projections be-
yond the line of the present front taken down, and
considerable additions were made to the present
building, a National Gallery could be obtained on
the present site that would be an ornament to the
metropolis, and afford accommodation equal to the
requirements of the country for the national pic-
tures for ages to come. Lahould aid, the proposed
.additions to the present building would have the
effect of entirely concealing the front of it. I have
gone very minutely into the subject, and have pre-
pared certain plans and diagrams to illustrate my
proposition, and I shall have great pleasure in sub•
nutting and explaining them if it be the wish of the
committee.' (Answer 182).
"The whole tenor of Sir C. Barry's evidence in
1848 is in favour of the site of the present National
Gallery ; but when examined by us on the 2d of
last April, and his former evidence being referred
to, he said,,'" would not hold to •that answer
now, because I have had opportunities since of
examining very carefully the capabilities of the
British Museum ; I have considered also the ad-
vantages of the greater centrality of its position,
and other matters which I was not aware of and
did not consider when I gave that evidence. My
opinion is now modified, and I have no hesitation
in saying that the site for the National Gallery, in
my opinion, is the British Museum, in preference to
that of Trafalgar-square.*
" We have referred to these striking differences
of opinioU of the same eminent persons at different
times, to show the small amount of assistance we
have received from consulting authorities on the
matter in question, and also to suggest an excuse
for any differences of opinion which the minutes of
our proceedingS will prove to have existed among
ourselves. And it may not be improper to add that
our difficulties have not been diminished by the
fact that our commission originates in a difference
between a decision of a committee of the late House
of Commons and a vote of that house itself, the
vote in each instance having been carried by a very
small majority.
" Atethe outset of our deliberations it appeared
that many sites might be considered worthy of espe-
cial notice, but on closer examination we found our
choice to be limited to a very few. We felt that any
encroachment on the royal parks would meet with
general opposition, and we must add that it would,
in our opinion, be most undesirable. This convic-
tion excluded us also from recommending the site
of either of the Royal Palaces, supposing that such
a proposal could with propriety be made, for no
suitable structure could be raised on such a site
without to a certain degree encroaching on the
parks, either by the building itself or by the requi-
site approaches to it. A suggestion was made in
favour of the_inner circle of the Regent's-park by a
witness who has given much attention to the sub-
ject,t but our-resolution not to advise the erection
of large buildings on any of the open spaces now
u ed for public resort, as well as objections to the
nature of the soil, induced us to exclude that site
from our final consideration.

" Surely no pledge is necessary. No steps can be
taken to build a new Natio' al Gallery without
the vote of the House." We take note of this
assurance. Lord Palmerston's high position and
higher character inspire us with full confidence
that he will not permit any disingenuous dealing
upon a matter which he has thus virtually assured
the House shall be reserved for their decision, as
it should be of right.
And now-for the-Report of the Commision. The
Royal Commissio er,s, 'wore originally in number
g
six. Mr. -Ford,„the well known Spanish traveller,
was one of ;these, but in conssjuence of ill-health
he declined kact. ,-Five.commissioners remained,
—namely, Lord Broughton, , the chairman, Dean
ProfessorParadO,y,•Mr. C. Cockerell,
and air. !G. Richmond. .:.The -conclusion 'at which
the .ROYaI "Commisaione!s arrived was this :—" It
only. remains for.us .taistate, that having duly con-
sidered, the premises, we
,have decided by a ma-
jority of three votes to one One of our colleagues
having declined to vote) in favour of the site of the
present National-Gallery." The Commissioner who
declined to' vote at all ;,was we;believe, Professor
Faraday. Now, is it posiible to treat such a deci-
sion as a nullity ? We have no wish on the subject
but that the best site, whatever that may be,
shall be selected ; and surely this is a point upon
which the judgment of the Commission is entitled
tro respect. We well know how greedily their
decision would have been snapped at had it been
in favour of Kensington. It is our belief that the
vast preponderance of opinion is in favour of the
retention of the present site, which is the most
central one in London, and in every way the best
adapted for the purpose. The only point which
can be urged against this is, that in Trafalgar-
square the pictures are more liable to be sullied
by the metropolitan smoke than in a more sub-
urban situation. This point is tnus noticed by
the Royal Commissioners :—" In regard to atmos-
pheric impurities, it is, as has been previously
admitted, inferior to the site at Kensington-
gore ; but addional care, the more general pro-
tection of the pictures by glass—which is strongly
recommended by some of our more competent
witnesses—architectural improvements in a new
building, and recent legislati, n—which has do'ne
much to purify the metro} olitan atmosphere,
and may do more—would probably much improve
its present condition." Of this there can belittle

" We could not adopt the proposal to remove the
national pictures to the upper floor of the British
Museum, although the plan came_ recommended to
us by a high authority.
" After these and other deductions, for which we
do not think it necessary to E ive detailed reasons in
this report, we found our choice, in fact, limited to
two sites—the site of the present National Gallery,
sufficiently enlarged, and the Kensington-gore
estate.

" The advantages and disadvantages of the Ken-
sington-gore estate were stated in full and minute
detail before the select committee of 1853, and we
examined some of the principal witnesses who then
gave evidence on that subject.
" So far as space for a building of great magni-
tude with capacity for future enlargement is con-
cerned, this site is, in our opinion, undoubtedly,
to be preferred, and we cannot but conclude that
the air must be on the whole less impure there than
at Charing-cross. Whether it will continue to be
so when the neighbouring land to.the south-west
and west shall be covered with buildings and be-
come part of the metropolis may by some be
doubted.

" We ought not altogether to overlook the fact,
although it need not govern our decision, that the
choice of this site would occasion a saving to the
amount of whatever ou lay might be requisite for
the purchase of land elsewhere.
"On the other hand, the site of the present Na-

tional Gallery is incontestably more accessible—
more in the way of all classes, and, from long usage,
more familiar to them, than any position in the
outskirts of the metropolis. The surpassing merits
of this site in this respect are fully set forth in the
unanimous report of the select committee of 1848,
to which we have previously referred. And in re-
gard to capacity for enlargement, which seems to
be the chef matter of doubt, there can be no
impediments now which were not known to the
eminent practical statesmen who composed the
committee and preparel the report of 1848.
"In regard to atmospheric impurities, it is, as
has been previously admitted, inferior to the site
of Kensington-gore ; but additional care, the more
general protecton of the pictures by glass, which
is strongly recommended by some of our more com-
petent witnesses, architectural improvements in a
new building, and recent legislation, which has
done much to purify the metropolitan atmosphere
and may do ince e, would probably much improve
its present condition. Considered architecturally
the site of Trafalgar-square stands by common con-
sent without a rival ; and the substitution of a
building worthy of the British people for the pre-
sent edifice would command universal admiration,
and do honour to the age.
"It only remains for us to state that, having
duly considered the premises, we have decided by
a majority of three votes to one (one of our col-
leagues having declined to vote) in favour of the
site of the present National Gallery.
" Witness our hands and seals this 15th day of
June, 1857,

doubt, while, on the other hand, the merits of
the present site, as far as locality is concerned,
are unquestionable. It is not only that the
National Gallery in such a situation would be most
easy of access to all classes, but, when we look to
the architectural devolpment of the town, there
can be no doubt that our national pictures would
be most fitly placed in a suitable building at one
end of that magnificent street which leads to West-
minster Abbey and the Houses of Parliament.
This ought to be one of the finest, perhaps the
finest, street in Europe, when the block of houses
between King-street and Parliament-street is re-
moved, when the public offices are erected, and
when proper fountains are sub. ituted in Trafalgar-
square for the miserable squirts which at present
disgrace it. If for the present it should be judged
advisable not to incur the expense, let us ho'd our
hands and wait until we can afford it. But, when
the thing is done, whether it be now or at any
future time, let it be properly done. Let us crown
that magnificent street which runs from Ch tring-
cross to Westminster Abbey with a stately building
in which the pictures of the English nation shall be
fitly deposited. Let the building be worthy of the
wealth and glory of the British name.
The Committee of the House of Commons which
was appointed in February, 1848, to report upon
this subject unanimously decided in favour of the
present site. Sir Charles Barry was examined be-
fore this Committee, and we refer to his evidence
merely to show that sufficient accommodation can
be secured there. Sir Charles Barry said,—" lam
of opinion that if the site of St. Maitin's Work-
house were purchased, an alteration were made in
the form of the Barrack-yard, and a portion of
Castle-street stopped,—if the Royal Academy were
located elsewhere, the portico and other poojec-
tions beyond the line of the present front taken
down, and considerable additions wore made to the
present building, a National Gallery could be ob-
tained on the present site that would be an orna-
ment to the metropolis, and Ilford accommodation
equal to the requirements of the country for the na-
tional pictures for ages to come." It is perfectly true
that at a later period Sir Charles Barry came to
the conclusion that it would be a good plan to re-
well all form
re-
move the pictures to the British Museum. This is
oausrteopwonniuthdgempropriety fit
INliilelhbe we
remarked can
wo only quote Sir Charles Barry's
evidence to Show
th af, in his opinion, there is ample room for a
National Gallery at and b a out the present site in
Trafalgar-square. It is
also true that another Com-
mittee of the House of Commons sat in 1850, which
reported against any further expenditure upon the
present National Gallery in Trafalgar-square, but
which would not positively recommend its removal
elsewhere. The preservation of the pictures and
convenient access were the only points touched
upon in the second report, and we venture to think
that the Committee of 1848 had already dispesed
of one point, and the Royal Commission of 1857
has now successfully dealt with the other.

" BROUGHTON.
"H. H. AMMAN.
"M. FARADAY.
" C. R. COCKERELL.
" GEO. RICHMOND."

* " See a report by Sir C. Barry to the Board of Works
Ln 1853, in the appendix.
t Mr. Alexander J. B. Beresford Hope, M.P.

PRIVATE AND JOINT-STOCK BANKS.

The Bankers' Magazine furnishes the returns of circu-
lation of the private and joint-stock banks in England
and Wales for the four weeks ending the 4th of July,
1857, and gives. the following as the average weekly cir•
culation of those banks during the past month, viz.:—
Private banks
Joint-stock banks 3,008,534

Average weekly circu1ati0n........... £6,625,775
On comparing the above with the returns for the pre-
ceding month, ending the 6th of June last, it shows—
A. decrease in the circulation of the private
banks of • £361,981
A decrease in the circulation of the joint-stock
................................................ 69,212
banks of

Decrease on the month £431,196
And, as compared with the return for the correspond-
ing period of the preceding year—viz., July 52 1856; it
shows—
A. decrease in the circulation of the private
banks of .......................................... £123,5,6
A decrease in the circulation of the joint-stock
banks of

Decrease on the year
On comparing the above with the amounts of the fixed
issues the following appears to be the comparative state
of the circulation :
The private banks are below their fixed issues £878,304
The joint-stock banks are below their fixed
issues

haTe English,
vehnotifiedth ttaStcaottibhse, and
iriaeeAtientsztrli
oanatoheC4bathrtoerfel
üßgaurikt
ftheree doi
fvi
idnecnodm willea xb, e
waht
itl
eh
,rsaotae of 6 p
ontd. w3:ll64ebor cent.
el.w will
i per
itltlenb e(affnandpudmree.
d,
It
ion
ihf: the reserved
urfEe seaesnrEvdne ihuuernrrdne. :se nos; Co7Tox. —A large and in -
fluential deputation from the Cotton Supply Association
of Manchester, comprising merchants sod manufacturers
from Lancashire, Glasgow, and the midland counties,
bad an interview with Lord Palmerston at his residence,
Cambridge-house, Piccadilly, yesterday at 1 o'clock, for
the purpose of making certain statements to his lordship
as to the present supply of this important raw material,
and to submit to him certain proposals by means of
which, in the opinion of the deputation, a large increased
supply might be obtained from British[ die. NO re•
porters were admitted

293,823

Total below the fixed issue £1,172,127

THE HARVEST—Harvest is progressing most rapidly.
The crops are large and heavy. Wheats are remark-
able for the length and squareness of the ear. Oats in
many places are already housed. Some large breadths
of barley are cut in good condition. Peas and beans
are abundant. The crops are ripening so fast that it is
eifficult to decide which field to begin first. If the
weather holds fine for 10 days the bulk of the harvest
will be got over, and by this day week many kamples
will, have been laid on the market tables.