ÆäÀÌÁö À̹ÌÁö
PDF
ePub

be even more extensive; but twelve was a fair number of competitors. The result would very probably be satisfactory to the country. With regard to the names which had been mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman, he was glad to find that two gentlemen who had formerly refused to compete were now included in the listnamely, Mr. Scott and Mr. Edward Barry. Fashion had run so much on mediaval art, that it was difficult to find an architect

however, that the list of names of the gentlemen who were to send in designs for the National Gallery contained a better mixture of architects of the two styles. Still, on the whole, hon. Members ought to congratulate themselves upon the subject having been brought forward. He believed it would result in the erection of a very convenient and very elegant building.

posed building would be convenient for the courts and offices. In addition, both were men of such acknowledged ability that he doubted whether the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite could name two persons of greater competency. Another member of the Committee was the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whose unrivalled ability they knew extended into the domain of art as well as that of politics. He thought that right hon. Gentleman was as likely as any man to form a sound judgment on the sub-competent in both styles. He must say, ject. Then there was the hon. Member for Perthshire (Sir William Stirling-Maxwell), who had given much attention to the matter of art. The next person on the list of the Committee was himself. He could not say anything of his own fitness, but the office which he held made it necessary for him to apply himself to these subjects, and he trusted he would be able to form an opinion on the question. It was not the intention of the Committee to come to a decision without availing themselves of the assistance of architects of experience. They would call on one or more-probably two-architects, to give them the benefit of their professional assistance. In answer to the hon. Member for Stoke (Mr. Beresford Hope), he had to state that the number of the architects who would be invited to compete for the buildings in Trafalgar Square was twelve. The selection of the competitors had been made with a view to securing the competition of those who had turned their attention to that particular line of construction, and who by their works had shown their competency. They were Mr. Abraham, Mr. Edward Barry, Mr. Scott, Mr. Street, Mr. Digby Wyatt, Mr. Somers Clarke, Mr. Owen Jones, Mr. Cockerell, Mr. Murray, Mr. Penrose, and Mr. Sidney Smirk. The time for sending in designs would extend up to October.

MR. POWELL wished to know if it were proposed to call into the assistance of the Committee practising architects.

MR. COWPER said, it would be undesirable to call in gentlemen who might be supposed to have that sort of bias which was frequently produced by the struggles. of the profession. It would, he thought, be undesirable to bring in men with those personal feelings and partialities which belong to the active prosecution of their profession, but to get good men of experience who were themselves beyond the arena of competition.

MR. TITE certainly had wished that the competition for the Law Courts should

LORD JOHN MANNERS wished to know whether any intimation had been given to the architects who had been invited to compete as to the style of architecture preferred by Her Majesty's Government? The omission to give such an intimation had resulted in a blunder six years ago, and it was therefore desirable to know whether Her Majesty's Government had decided as to the style to be now adopted.

MR. COWPER said, in reply, that the Gvernment had adopted the course of leaving the style an open question. If a blunder was committed on a former occasion it was the blunder of the architect, who might have resigned if he had been required to build in a style with which he was not familiar.

Motion agreed to.

SUPPLY-CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.
SUPPLY considered in Committee.

(In the Committee.)
CLASS I.-PUBLIC WORKS AND BUILDINGS.
National Gallery enlargement, agreed to.
(1.) £45,000, to complete the sum for
(2.) £20,000, University of London.

SIR COLMAN O’LOGHLEN said, he was glad to see this Vote inserted in the Estimates, for it was quite time that the University of London should have not only a name, but a local habitation. He wished, however, to know where it was intended to erect the proposed building?

MR. COWPER replied, that the site would be on the northern side of the garden of Burlington House. As Burling

ton House had been purchased by the country for the purposes of science and art, it seemed to be a most appropriate spot for the erection of the London University. In reply to Mr. HENRY BAILLIE, MR. COWPER said, the University of London had been of immense use in this country, and had rendered good service to the cause of education and science; but still, those whose attention had not been particularly drawn to the subject could see no building in which the University was maintained. It was at present located in the two wings of the court-yard of Burlington House, and the rooms were totally inadequate for the examinations annually conducted there. It was, therefore, absolutely necessary that further rooms should be provided, and it appeared essential that the University should be placed in a more commodious building. The University of London, he might remark, was founded in consequence of an address from that House to the Crown. It was founded by a charter, and was made a Government establishment from its very beginning. The Government undertook to provide a building in which it might carry on its operations. It had been removed from Somerset House to Burlington House, and the time had now come when it was necessary that sufficient accommodation should be provided in the neighbourhood of that building.

SIR COLMAN O'LOGHLEN thought a better site for the University might have been found on the new Thames Embankment, where every one might have been able to see the building.

MR. POWELL asked, what architectural arrangements had been made.

MR. COWPER said, that a calculation had been made as to the amount of accommodation that would be required, but no steps had yet been taken to obtain an architectural elevation. It was necessary to take a Vote before any decision could be come to.

MB. BERESFORD HOPE further asked, whether it was intended to take any pains at all as to the architecture?

MR. HENRY BAILLIE thought the back of Burlington House was not a site worthy of such a building.

MR. TITE said, the rooms now used by the University belonged to the Royal Society, and were used for the meetings of the Royal Society on Thursday evenings. All that the University wanted was a convenient building in which examinations might be held and degrees conferred.

Though he should like to see the building on the Thames Embankment, it was obvious that the central position of Burlington House, which was convenient of access, was well adapted to the purpose-indeed, he did not know of any better place.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE inquired how far the allotting of the ground in Cork Street for the London University would affect the removal, which had been long anticipated, of the National Gallery to Burlington House? Some years ago it was proposed to locate the National Gallery in Burlington House Gardens, and to leave the site in Trafalgar Square wholly to the Royal Academy; but this sensible and cheap plan had been overthrown in the House. It was then understood that the Royal Academy was to go to Burlington House Gardens, and that the National Gallery was to be rebuilt in Trafalgar Square, and although that did not seem to be quite the cheapest and most practical plan, at any rate it provided two sites for the two buildings. If the National Gallery was to be rebuilt, and the London University was to take the Cork Street front, what was to be done with the Royal Academy? Was it to go to Brompton to that large Yorkshire pie, which was to be called the Hall of Science and Art, in which a good many gentlemen had invested sums varying from a hundred to a thousand pounds, and which would, no doubt, be a source of great amusement, if, possibly, not of dividend? Where was the Royal Academy to be located if not in Burlington House Gardens or Trafalgar Square?

SIR LAWRENCE PALK had been under the impression that this outlay of £20,000 was for the London University, but it had just been explained that it was merely for class-rooms, in which the University of London was to conduct its examinations.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE observed, that the University of London was only an examining body.

SIR LAWRENCE PALK said, that rather strengthened his argument. The building was not to be of a character of any great magnificence. The requirements. of the University were at present satisfied by the use of a large room in Burlington House; and, if so, he wanted to know how it could be necessary to spend £65,000 for any such purpose, and why it was necessary to fix upon one of the most valuable sites in London for the building?

MR. GOLDSMID, as a graduate of the University of London, wished to say that the rooms it now occupied were totally inadequate for its purpose. Some of them who presented themselves for degrees were examined in a rifle shed; and some were sent to taverns and other places where they could not be under the eye of the examiner. There was a vast amount of business to be transacted daily by the registrar and other officers of the University, and the present rooms were totally inadequate for the purpose. In the course of a year there were some seventy or eighty examination days. The University required a building in a central, but not a noisy situation, and one that was easily accessible. It had been decided by successive Governments that the University ought to have a building of its own, in the same manner as the Queen's University in Ireland possessed one; and, as the University was dependent upon the House, it was a reasonable proposal to erect a building at a cost of £65,000, of which £20,000 was to be spent this year.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE said, that there was no objection to the University having a building, but there was an objection to that building occupying the site which it was expected that either the National Gallery or the Academy would have had. Thirty years ago, when University College was provided with a building, the design of Mr. Wilkins consisted of a centre and two deep wings. The wings were as yet unbuilt, he supposed because they had not yet been wanted; but now, why not build them and give them to the London University? That would be the most sensible and cheapest way of meeting the requirements of the University, and would be a compliment to its oldest College.

MR. CHILDERS replied, that the students who came to the examinations at the London University came from many Colleges, and belonged to different religious denominations, and surely the hon. Gentle man would not wish the building used for those examinations to be made an adjunct to a College founded upon particular principles. Such a proposal would be most distasteful to the members of King's College; and it was one which had never before been suggested. Last year, the University examined more than 1,000 students, on thirteen different occasions, the examinations extending over fifty or sixty days. The accommodation now provided was entirely insufficient. The

University asked for proper rooms for meetings of the senate and for business offices, a large hall for examinations, which should not be less than the large hall in Burlington House, and a smaller examination hall, with the necessary class and anter-ooms. It would be impossible to construct a building to meet the requirements of the University for a less sum than that now asked for.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE was surprised to hear an argument which savoured so of religious intolerance proceeding from such a quarter, and did not see why physical contiguity should affect religious principles. If they built the walls thick enough between the old building and the new wings, there was no fear of the students of the Protestant King's College of London, or the Roman Catholic students of Oscott, being contaminated with any religious rinderpest. He mentioned the fact that he, who was, he flattered himself, not particularly latitudinarian, had been a party to negotiations for transferring an architectural museum to University College, as a good site for an artistic collection.

MR. OTWAY had always understood that a considerable sum of money had been paid for Burlington House, and that the building now belonged to the nation. He had also always understood that the Royal Academy was to be established on that site; but if the Royal Society had acquired rights there, it would be well for the House to know the fact; and he thought that, before proceeding further, the House ought to be told more about the plan which was to be adopted.

MR. COWPER observed, that the London University had enlarged its operations of late years. Its importance was daily increasing, and it was absolutely necessary that it should have a new building, where its examinations could be properly conducted. The estimate had been framed with the view of giving all the accommodation which the Senate of the London University required, and of constructing a building of such dignity as was befitting for a University. It was a mistake to suppose that the erection of this building in the Garden of Burlington House would at all interfere with the arrangements made with respect to the Royal Academy. The site was no less than three acres in extent, and the building would be erected, not on the Quadrangle, but on the northern side of Burlington Gardens. This was the site

MR. REARDEN suggested that the Vote should be deferred till a uniform scheme was produced for the whole building. At the same time, he must say anything would be an improvement on the dead wall which had so long disgraced Piccadilly.

which the authorities of the University / Burlington Gardens, it became very immost desired, while the Royal Academy portant to know whether the available only wanted the Piccadilly front. They space would not be too crowded. It might, did not wish to go to the Thames Embank- eventually, be found necessary to buy up ment, where probably the noise would be houses in order to open the locality. so great that the business could not be properly conducted; nor did they desire to go to Gower Street, even supposing the site in that quarter were not private property. They wanted to have a Building of their own, and not to be associated with University College, for such an association would keep up the delusion that the London University was nothing but a College. MR. BARING confessed that he felt very jealous of any allotment on the site of Burlington House, for he thought that the requirements of the Royal Academy ought to be first considered. The Senate of the London University only wanted rooms on certain occasions, but the Royal Academy was a permanent institution, and was to be removed from another locality.

MR. COWPER repeated, that the portion of the site proposed to be given to the Senate of the University of London was totally different from that on which the Building of the Royal Academy would be constructed, and that there was not the slightest danger of the two Buildings interfering with each other.

MR. ALDERMAN SALOMONS thought it would be very disadvantageous to the metropolis that the buildings on the important site in question should be overcrowded; and he wished to know whether the main building of Burlington House, facing Piccadilly, was to be devoted to the Royal Academy?

LORD JOHN MANNERS was of opinion that before this Vote was agreed to, the House should be in possession of some general scheme for occupying the ground facing Piccadilly and the Gardens behind. He thought it would be desirable for the Government to postpone the Vote for the present.

MR. TITE said, that the arrangement with respect to the Royal Academy was, that their Building was to have a front next Piccadilly, with a row of galleries running along the east side of the ground. The Vote now under consideration referred to the appropriation of a portion of the Gardens on the west side.

MR. BAILLIE COCHRANE observed, that already three or four different societies were located in Burlington House, and, as it was now proposed to have buildings in

The

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHECELL QUER admitted that the suggestion for deferring this Vote till a scheme was produced for the disposal of the whole of Burlington House was certainly not in the face of it unreasonable. He ventured, however, to hope that the proposal would not be insisted on, for a reason which he would presently state. But, first of all, he must say that the caution about not crowding buildings, though very good and sound, must be taken with some reserve. Government having expended large sums for the acquisition of valuable sites in London, a necessity existed for making an economical use of them. The country would not be satisfied if, after having given a large sum for Burlington House, although he thought it an extremely advantageous purchase, its accommodation were not properly taken advantage of. Besides providing for the University of London and the Royal Academy, the available space would do a great deal more. It was necessary to take this Vote, because the case of the University of London was urgent in point of time. If they were not allowed to take a Vote until they could produce a plan for the appropriation of the whole site, there would be a loss of a whole year, and even then the object in view would not be attained. The Royal Academy was going to build out of its own funds, and it would require a good deal of time to settle the mode of filling up the intermediate portion of the site. The great question related to the frontages to the north and south. Though great architectural questions might not be involved, there would be a good deal of adjustment and arrangement of details, involving either a very wasteful or economical apportionment of space. Suppose, for instance, that half a dozen learned societies held meetings more or less numerous, to propose that each should have halls adapted to its purpose would necessarily require a great deal of space. It might, however, be possible

to

to let the several bodies use the same
large halls, but that arrangement would
require a good deal of time.
On that ac-
count he should like the Committee
pass this Vote. But he accompanied that
with this arrangement. His right hon.
Friend had already the ground plan pre-
pared, and there would be no difficulty in
immediately proceeding with the prepara-
tion of the designs, so as to give hon.
Gentlemen what opportunities for criticism
they might desire before any step was
taken in the erection of the buildings.

who had been excluded from the competition of those courts.

MR. READ wished to know if he was correct in understanding that no plan had been drawn out?

GENERAL DUNNE suggested that as only £10,000 was proposed for a similar object in Ireland the present Vote should be reduced to that sum.

MR. COWPER, in explanation, said, the matter had occupied a great deal of his attention, and that of his architectural adviser, Mr. Pennethorne; and, though he had GENERAL DUNNE hoped the Vote would not thought it necessary to mature the be postponed. He protested against the plans before the House sanctioned the prinextravagant expenditure of money drawn ciple that the London University was to in part from the taxation of Ireland upon have an adequate building, he could assure the embellishment of London. He could the House that the plans would be comnot see why they should have selected so pleted before any of the work was comexpensive a site for the London University. menced, and he would promise to place He could not see that the site offered any them within the reach of hon. Members, so particular advantage, except its proximity as to show the portion that would be occuto the Arcade and the Blue Posts; and, pied by the Royal Academy on the southern in fact, it would be better out of London. side, that occupied by the London UniverMR. BENTINCK wished to know who sity at the northern end, and the intermewas to be the architect of these buildings? diate space which would accommodate the Burlington House was the work of a very learned societies. The plan might be exeeminent architect; and it would be a mat-cuted at different times, but the whole ter of very great regret if Lord Burlington's fine front were pulled down without something very good being substituted for it.

SIR LAWRENCE PALK agreed with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that Burlington House was a valuable site, and ought to be made the most of; but could not conceive a more extraordinary proposal than that of having different styles for the two fronts. Surely the best plan would be to have one plan and one style of architecture. Burlington House ought not to be sacrificed, however, unless it was absolutely necessary, which he did not think had been proved.

MR. BERESFORD HOPE did not attach so much importance to the two fronts being in one style, as they would be some distance apart. Burlington House was a fine specimen of its style, and every endeavour should be made to preserve it. He would throw out one more suggestion before this desultory discussion closed-that the First Commissioner of Works, who had acquired daily instalments of popularity in proportion as he had added architect upon architect to the competition for the New Courts of Justice, should make a sort of "Consolation Stakes" for the design of this University building wherever it might be placed for three or four of the architects

would be settled before any part was commenced. The Royal Academy building would be designed by their own architect, subject to the approval of the Board of Works, and care would be taken that it harmonized in character and general arrangements with the University building. They need not be identical in style, but all the buildings that would cover the site would be viewed as one composition.

MR. BENTINCK thought it would be much better to have but one architect for the whole building.

MR. COWPER was surprised at the hon. Member's wishing to confine the work to one man, either by imposing the Board of Works' architect on the Royal Academy or vice versa. It was surely sufficient to have the two architects work in concert.

MR. HENRY SEYMOUR wished to know how far this system was to be continued, and whether the Government intended to propose grants for Colleges in all the large towns, like the lyceums in France? He could not see what distinction could be drawn between the metropolis and other large towns, and, whereas he had always understood that only the education of the poor was to be aided out of the public purse, this grant introduced a new principle. If the London University was wanted, as he believed it was, and if the Government

« ÀÌÀü°è¼Ó »