found who understood that style of architecture better than Mr. Gilbert Scott. But he thought the noble Lord should state the reasons why he had rejected the plan to which the first and second premiums were awarded, and adopted that to which only the third place was awarded by the judges. The noble Lord had said that he would place that plan in one of the Committee-rooms for the inspection of Members, but he (Sir Benjamin Hall) thought that it would be only fair to hang up by the side of it the plans of the two other architects in order that hon. Members might see the three designs. The House might also form its own conclusion as to the effect of a Gothic building placed near the Treasury Chambers and Whitehall, with which it had nothing in common. MR. BERESFORD HOPE said, that the right hon. Baronet had asked the noble Lord at the head of the Board of Works why he had passed over the first and second prizemen, and given the execution of the work to the third; but if the right hon. Baronet would look at the tables at the end of the blue-book he would see obvious reasons for that selection. On the list of judges of the designs exhibited there was only one professional gentleman, who was the person chosen to rebuild Montague House; and there were two professional assessors. This judge and the assessors separately drew up their two lists of awards, and it was seen upon them that prizeman No. 1 only gained the sixth place for the Foreign Office, and that he did not compete at all for the War Office; and No. 2, Messrs. Banks and Barry, appeared as first prizemen for the Foreign Office, but for the War Office they appeared nowhere on one of those lists, and only fifth on the other; whereas on both lists Mr. Gilbert Scott was second for both buildings. These lists were overruled by the non-professional majority of this judge, who likewise, in opposition to the object of the competition, refused to give more than one prize to any one competitor. Thus the lists of Mr. Burn and of the assessors remained the only tests of comparative excellence. According, then, to the award of the professional gentleman, who must be supposed to know more of the matter than amateurs, however skilful, the sum total of merit in the competition rested with Mr. Scott, as second for both the War Office and Foreign Office. On this award, no doubt, was based the decision of the Government. Just at that moment the question of building an Indian Office came on, and it was decided that it should be placed on the site and on the footing which the War Office was intended to have occupied, and Mr. Scott having obtained the great sum total of merit among the competitors for that building, if he had not been selected as the architect of the Indian Office as well as the Foreign Office, it would have been a miscarriage of injustice, and a great injury to a most distinguished man. If the House reversed the decision of the Government, the matter would be placedin a most ridiculous position. The Minister for India proposed, out of his own pocket, to build an Indian Office on land bought out of Indian revenue, and he had appointed Mr. Scott the architect, as he had a right to do; and if that gentleman was deprived of the building of the Foreign Office, you would have him building the Indian Office, and next door to it there would be another architect building the Foreign Office, perhaps in a different style. The hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Tite) said that Mr. Scott's designs were Italian Gothic, and not English Gothic, like the style of the Houses of Parliament, and then he spoke of the inconveniences of the latter style, illustrating them by the inconvenience of the windows. It was the fact of such inconvenience which had induced Mr. Scott to choose Italian modifications of the Gothic style, and the hon. Gentleman must recollect that Mr. Scott produced figures before the Committee which proved that by the adoption of this style the windows of the proposed Foreign Office would be wider than those of any other public building in London. The right hon. Gentleman, the Member for Marylebone, (Sir B. Hall) said, that a Gothic building would be incongruous with the Treasury; but had the right hon. Gentleman forgotten his great plan of carrying a block of buildings down to Great George Street, where they would amalgamate, not with the comparatively small mass of the Treasury buildings, but with the great Palace of Westminster and the Abbey? All forms of Gothic were but phases of the same style, and in the present instance there would not be a greater incongruity than existed between the Palace of Westminster and the ancient Abbey. The hon. Member for Bath thought he made a great coup in appealing to Sir Charles Barry's evidence before the Committee with regard to incongruity of style being a defect; but in answer to questions put to him, Sir Charles Barry said that if he were going to erect a great building in close proximity to St. Paul's, it would not necessarily lead him to adopt the Italian style; and when he was asked if he would put a large Gothic building in St. Paul's Churchyard, he replied that he was not prepared to say that he should not. So much for Sir Charles Barry's opinion with regard to incongruity. He (Mr. Hope) trusted that the noble Lord (Lord J. Manners) would not be deterred by the slight opposition which had been manifested from going on with a plan which had received the general approbation of the leading journals, and of all thinking men. If the noble Lord exhibited the other designs with Mr. Scott's in the library of the House it would be very generous in him, but it was not necessary. The Committee had referred the selection of the architect out of the three prizemen, not to the House again, but to the Government, and the Government would only do their duty if they refused to shirk the responsibility which had been cast upon them. GENERAL THOMPSON asked, whether it might not be wise to postpone the question of pulling down their barns and building greater, until after the Bills with regard to India had been brought in? There might be some from other parts of the world too, and if public opinion were taken as a guide, they might be just upon the eve of a European war; and if so, it would be difficult for England not to take a hand in it. Now, private families generally looked ahead, and did not spend money when immediate difficulties might be supposed to be coming upon them. The Government said they could not accede to the wishes of the people and remove the tax on paper, which amounted to little more than £1,000,000 a year; but they could remove the income tax to the amount of £11,000,000 a year, and they now came forward with a plan which he felt sure would be considered very ill-advised in point of expenditure. He spoke for certain poor men among his constituents, who he knew would grumble audibly if he did not raise his voice at such a period. MR. CONINGHAM said, he felt bound to express his regret that Gothic architecture had been adopted for the style of VISCOUNT PALMERSTON :-I have public buildings in this metropolis. The never heard a less satisfactory explanation, disadvantages of it could not be better both as regards the selection of the archiillustrated than by the place where the tect and the choice of the style in which House of Commons were then assem- the Foreign Office is proposed to be built, bled. Gothic architecture gave at the than that given by the noble Lord the maximum of cost the minimum of accom- First Commissioner of Public Works. The modation, and, at the same time, a degree reason last assigned, that of the hon. of darkness which, in London, was most Member for Maidstone (Mr. Beresford inconvenient. The noble Lord talked of Hope), for the choice of Mr.Scott was, that the Gothic as the national style of archi- he was always second in all the trials which tecture; but he would remind him of had taken place, that he was second comthe names of Wren and Inigo Jones, petitor for the Foreign Office, and second and the style of architecture they adopt also for the War Office, and that therefore ed. The Gothic was an European style he ought to be put first; on the principle, I of architecture, and it was a mere revival suppose, that the two negatives make an introducing it into civil edifices. It had affirmative. It certainly is a new doctrine. beauty and merits in the period when great What would be said if it were applied to ecclesiastical monuments were raised, and horse-racing, and the horse which was eminently characteristic of the spirit second in two heats were held to be enof that age. But the day was gone by for titled to the cup? Then, again, Mr. Scott it. It was a barbarous style. We did not live was chosen because he was second comin an age of darkness. We wanted more petitor for the Foreign Office and for the light, and he thought our public offices War Office; but it now appears that there especially wanted both light and ventilation is to be no War Office, and the Foreign in more senses than one. He could not Office alone is to be built; and therefore hear the question discussed without re- Mr. Scott is reduced in point of claim, cording his protest against the use of and we are told that he has been chosen Gothic architecture in public edifices. It to build a Foreign Office because his plan was a style peculiar to a sect of which the hon. Member for Maidstone (Mr. Beresford Hope) was a distinguished representative, but it was antagonistic to the taste and feelings of the English people. ran for that building was second-best. With regard to the Gothic style, we are told that it has been adopted because it is the national style, suited to Teutonic nationalities, and all that sort of thing. If that theory should have to Gothicise the Horse Guards, and apply Gothic exteriors to all the buildings in the neighbourhood. At present all the buildings in connection with the public departments and Downing Street are in different styles-in fact all the principal buildings in London are various in their architectural types. There are the Treasury buildings, the Horse Guards, the Admiralty, the Banqueting House-one of the finest specimens of architecture to be found anywhere-these are to be contrasted with a building which after all does not answer the description of the noble Lord who talks of a "national style," for it appears not to be English Gothic, but, as stated by the hon. Member for Maidstone, Italian or Lombard Gothic. I have not had the advantage of visiting those climes lately, and therefore I do not exactly know what the peculiarities of Lombard Gothic are, but it combines, I suppose, all the modifications of barbarism. Look, too, at that street of palaces, Pall Mall, where the clubs vie in splendour with each other; take St. Paul's and Somerset House, and I venture to say that they are handsomer, in their respective styles, than either Westminster Abbey or the new Houses of Parliament. The Houses of Parliament are no doubt very beautiful, but I think it was a great mistake, both in point of expense and accommodation, to make them Gothic. I had nothing to do with making them so-but I think we made what was certainly a handsome mistake both in point of cost and utility. Then why, let me ask, are we to be doomed for ever to erect buildings in a style totally inapplicable to the purposes for which they are intended? I hope, however, that the decision of the noble Lord is not irrevocable, and that he of nationalities is to be carried out in our public buildings, the noble Lord the Secretary for India, in building his new office, should be lodged in a pagoda or a taj-mahal. That would be adapting the national style to the department over which he presided; and as Mr. Scott cannot be expected to be well acquainted with that style, the noble Lord should invite, as most competent for the purpose, the aid of some architect from India to decide as to what will be best for an Indian office. In my opinion no satisfactory reason has been given why the architects, whose plans were better than those of Mr. Scott, should have been set aside, and Mr. Scott selected. I quite agree with my right hon. Friend (Sir B. Hall) that if Mr. Scott's plans are to be exhibited, it will be more fitting that the plans of the other architects which were adjudged to be better should also be exhibited at the same time. I quite agree with the hon. Member for Brighton (Mr. Coningham) in his protest against the selection of the Gothic style. In my opinion it is going back to the barbarism of the dark ages for a building which ought to belong to the times in which we live. And what, let me ask, is the reason alleged? It is said it is the intention to fill up the entire space between Downing Street and Westminster Abbey with buildings, all of which are to be Gothic, and that therefore it is desirable to begin with a Gothic Foreign Office. This is, in my mind, a reason against the proposal; for if the choice of a Gothic Foreign Office is to involve the necessity of an immense block of Gothie buildings down to Westminster Abbey, it seems to me we are beginning the first step of a course which we shall all have cause to deprecate, and which, instead of being an ornament to London, will create a black spot in the may be induced to modify his views. I metropolis. Then, as to the principle of find, upon reading the Report of the "congruity;"-it is said you should have Committee, that Mr. Scott has studied a Gothic building because you intend to the Greek and Italian style of architecexpend £5,000,000 in covering the ground ture as well as the Gothic and if it between Downing Street and Westminster is finally determined that he is to be the Abbey with buildings belonging to that architect, as he is a person of great style of architecture. But if the principle talent, I have no doubt he may be able to of congruity is to be applied to the future, make as handsome a design in the Latin or why not apply it to the present? The Grecian order, as this Gothic one which the neighbourhood of Downing Street is full of noble Lord favours. If Mr. Scott be the buildings of totally different styles of archi- architect, I hope he will be told to put a tecture. The State-paper Office, a most more lively and enlightened front to his convenient fire-proof building, which cost buildings, than that which he contemthe public £50,000, is, we hear, to be plates, and that we may see them in pulled down; and the mania for pulling harmony with the other public buildings down is to extend not only to it, but, in of the metropolis, either of Greek or order to complete the "congruity," we Italian architecture, and that the noble Lord opposite will not insist upon erect ing a Gothic Foreign Office in Downing Street. MR. BENTINCK agreed with the hon. and gallant Member for Bradford (General Thompson) as to the inexpediency of spending large sums of money under present circumstances on ornamental architecture. Without going into the question of the probability of war, the state of Europe was such as to make it probable that our naval and military expenditure must be greatly increased; our naval armament was insufficient, and in the Royal Speech there was an announcement that a large sum would be needed for the reorganization of the navy. Until the country was put into a perfect state of defence it was the duty of Parliament not to sanction the expenditure of a single shilling that could be spared on such purposes as this. More especially was this their duty if there were any truth in the painful rumour that, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer brought forward his budget, the House would be called upon to supply an inevitable deficiency. THE NATIVE PRINCES OF INDIA. the conduct of the Nizam, and particularly to that of his minister (Sala Jung), who exposed himself to personal risk in putting down a mutiny, and himself arrested a mutineer in the front of the army. Besides these, there had been numerous other cases in which Native Princes and their ministers had seconded our exertions for the suppression of the mutiny, and had cordially supported our cause. It was therefore in his (Mr. Vernon Smith's) opinion most expedient, not only from motives of gratitude, but in order to secure the future well-being and tranquillity of India, that some token of our approbation-that some reward-should be given to these men. He hoped that hereafter we were to govern India by the sympathy of the Native Princes, carrying them along with us in the conviction that we were administering the government better than it had been by their predecessors for ages. If we were to do so we must show that we were willing to bestow upon them rewards and honours similar to those which we conferred upon men of our own nation who were eminent in our service. Upon Jung Bahadoor he believed that some reward had been bestowed, but it would also be wise to restore to him some territory in Oude which had MR. VERNON SMITH rose to ask the formerly been separated from Nepaul. It Secretary of State for India whether any was no great thing for which he was now reward or mark of honour had been con- asking, because it was remarkable with ferred upon those Native Princes or their how little acknowledgment the Native Ministers who have proved faithful to Her mind was contented. A simple letter from Majesty during the late Indian mutiny. the Sovereign put Runjeet Singh in a The subject to which his question referred state of joyous exultation; and in the was one of great importance to the future same way a Queen's Letter, or some siGovernment of our Indian Empire, for a milar mark of honour, would be esteemed good understanding with the Native Princes an abundant reward for the services which would be the safest defence against the these Native Princes had rendered to our recurrence of such disasters as those from cause. He had no reason to suppose that which we were now suffering. In the the noble Lord (Lord Stanley) would be debate upon his Motion in July, 1857, the backward in adopting this course; but if right hon. Gentleman the Member for it had happened that, from the difficulty of Bucks stated that all the Native Princes selection, or the embarrassment arising were against us, and he (Mr. Vernon Smith) from the great amount of business which ventured to assert that the Rajah of Pat- had been cast upon him, he had been teala, the Maharajah of Gwalior, and others unable to attend to this matter, he hoped were and would be faithful to us. The that he would understand that this quesMaharajah of Gwalior took a great inte- tion was put, not with a view of embarrest in our favour, and it was owing to rassing him, but in order to show that his exertions and those of his minister that public opinion would support him in conthe revolted Contingent, for four criti-ferring these rewards. It was not the cal months, was prevented from attacking our forces. We had to thank God that our Native troops in the Presidencies of Madras and Bombay did not revolt simultaneously with those in Bengal, That they did not do so was very much owing to province of a Member of Parliament to suggest to the Crown what honours should be bestowed, or upon whom, but he hoped that he might, without exceeding his province, state what he conceived the public would sauction, and without specifying the instances for its application, what, as a present under consideration. With regard general rule, he thought would stimulate to Nepaul, the House is aware that a the Natives to assist us and be highly distinguished mark of honour has been beneficial to our Government in India. The conferred upon the able minister of that right hon. Gentleman concluded by asking State. It has also been in contemplation his Question. to show our sense of the assistance which we derived from the Government of Nepaul in the manner suggested by the right hon. Gentleman. A correspondence has taken place upon that subject; but in a matter of this kind much discretion must be left to the authorities in India, and I have not yet heard whether any final arrangements have been made with regard to it. I can only remark, in conclusion, that I am as fully impressed, and I believe that the Government here and the Government in India are as fully impressed as the right hon. Gentleman can be with the importance of not destroying the grace and the value of these gifts by deferring them until a time when the memory of the services for which they are the rewards shall have passed away. LORD STANLEY: I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman opposite has put this question to me, and has called the attention of the House to the subject to which it refers. I agree with him that at the present time hardly any subject can be of greater importance to the Government of India, and I fully concur in what he has said, that the whole course of recent events has confirmed the view of that school of Indian politicians who have always maintained the importance of keeping up the independence and dignity of these Native States as against the modern theories of annexation; and have contended that we should find them our most faithful allies and supporters in times of difficulty and danger. The subjects of rewards to our Native allies has not escaped the attention of the Government in this country. Two despatches, one dated the 28th of July, from the late Court of Directors; and the other the 31st of December, addressed by me to Lord Canning, have been sent to the Government of India, naming certain Native Princes as specially deserving of reward, and calling for a general report from the authorities as to the claims of others. That general report we have not yet received, and I need not tell the right hon. Gentleman, or the House, that in a matter of this kind it is impossible for us, in this country, to act without previous consultation with the local Government in India. Rewards, however, have been given to several persons. To the Rajah of Patteala, by a cession of territory worth two lacs of rupees a year, and something besides; to the Rajah of Jheend, territory worth one lac; to the Rajah of Nubba, territory worth one lac; and to the Rajah of Chirkaree some land of which the value is not known. The Guicowar has received a remission of the tribute or subsidy of three lacs of rupees annually, which he was bound to pay for the support of a force of irregular cavalry. That subsidy has been remitted with the sanction of Government, by the advice and upon the representation of Lord Canning. The cases of Scindiah, Holkar, and the Nizam are specially mentioned in one-I think in both of the despatches to which I have referred. That of Gwalior is at WRECK OF THE "CZAR" STORESHIP. MR. BUXTON asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he had received any explanation of the conduct of Commander Dunn, of Her Majesty's steam sloop Virago, who saw the Czar screw storeship go ashore off the Lizard at 2-15 on Saturday, January 22, but continued his course without making any attempt to succour the crew (twelve of whom perished, besides the master and his wife), upon the ground, as he alleges, that he thought very little assistance could be rendered. He did not doubt that the conduct of Commander Dunn would turn out to have been per fectly right, but he thought that the matter ought to be thoroughly cleared up, in order that merchant captains might not be able to allege the example of a commander in Her Majesty's navy as a reason for neglecting to assist a ship which was in peril. SIR JOHN PAKINGTON said, that he was not surprised that the hon. Gentleman should have wished for some explanation of the circumstances which attended the wreck of the Czar and the melancholy loss of life which accompanied it, and with the permission of the House he would state the facts which were immediately reported to the Admiralty. The Czar went ashore in the middle of the day upon a rock very close to the Lizard Point. At that time Her Majesty's steam-sloop Virago was between ten and eleven miles directly to the |