complained that this bill had been brought forward without sufficient information on the subject having been afforded to the House. He complained of the great inconveniences which the public would be subjected to, and of the large profits which the bank unfairly derived from the issue of their tokens. It was desirable that it should be known what was ultimately to be done with these tokens. He had not heard how the old coin was to be exchanged for the new; but particular care ought to be taken to protect the public from any difficulty that might arise. He thought every man ought to be enabled to effect this exchange at his own door, without being exposed to either trouble or expense. Much distress had been experienced already, in consequence of old silver having been refused, a great portion of which was in such a state, that he did not know how it was possible to determine whether or not it had ever been issued by the mint, and this he apprehended would be particularly felt whenever the time arrived for exchanging the old for the new.

agreed that there would be much inconvenience attendant on calling in the old silver coin; but this was an inconvenience which must be encountered at some time or other. As to the difficulty of detecting bad silver, he believed it would not be found so great as the noble lord imagined. There were persons connected with the mint who could distinguish the good from the bad with great accuracy.

was satisfied it would be desirable to have a coinage in gold of twenty shilling pieces. It had been argued against this, that it would become necessary to re-coin all the guineas. The number of these now in the country had been estimated at half a million. Great inconvenience could not be anticipated from the re-coinage of these. The public convenience would be greatly consulted, by their being accommodated with money of the value he had mentioned. While, however, the bank restriction act continued, he thought any new silver coinage would be likely to be melted down, and disappear as the gold had done in our time, and as it was known the newly coined silver had done in the reign of king William. When the price of bullion was greatly above the mint price, he thought it would always be better to raise the denomination of the coin in circulation, as had been done by the bank tokens, and let it pass current for what it was worth in the market, than by acting on an opposite principle, to lose our metallic circulating medium altogether. A coinage of gold, he was of opinion, ought to be issued, simultaneously with that of silver.

thought his noble friend had fallen into a great error, when he supposed the bank to be gainers by the issue of their tokens. At the time the bank tokens were issued, they were worth about 2s. 10d. each. From the fall which had taken place in the price of silver, the intrinsic value was at the present moment but 2s. 4d. The bank having issued them when the silver they contained was equal to 2s. 10d., the difference between that sum and 3s. having been allowed for working them off, and the expense of issuing them, it followed that the bank, compelled now to allow 3s. for them, would lose 8d. on each token. He was in favour of a coinage of 20s. pieces.

after showing how heavily the bank would suffer on calling in their tokens, said that he could see no objection to the alteration of the gold coin from the value of 21 to that of 20s.

said, that it was necessary for him to intrude for a short time upon the indulgence of the House, in consequence of what had fallen from the noble lord, who had thought proper to censure him for remissness in not giving the House further information upon the subject, upon moving the second reading of the bill. He was, he confessed, rather surprised at such a charge; he was sure, that if the noble lord had heard him a few nights ago, when he opened the subject to the House, he would rather have been disposed to find fault with him for entering too much into detail, than for withholding any information which it was in his power to give. However, as the noble lord, and perhaps several other members then present, were not in the House when the resolutions were moved upon which the bill was founded, he would shortly re-state the grounds upon which the measure was introduced, premising, however, that all the noble lord's objections were directed against the details of the measure, and that this was the stage for discussing the principle. The noble lord begun by stating that he had not heard what measures were to be adopted to relieve the public from the loss and the distress which must be felt when the new coin was issued. If the noble lord had been present when he opened the measure, he would have known that that was a subject which had particularly engaged his attention, and that he had stated very fully the means by which he proposed to prevent, or at least to mitigate, the inconvenience as much as possible. It was proposed in about seven months to issue a silver coinage amounting to two millions and a half sterling (sixty-two millions of shillings and sixpences). Previous to bringing this coin into circulation, it was intended to ascertain the amount that might be necessary for supplying the various great towns throughout Great Britain, and it was proposed to deposit such sums as were requisite for the exchange of the coin; an arrangement was in contemplation for a simultaneous issue and exchange. By the adoption of this plan there was every reason to hope, that in a very short time all the old coin would be brought in, and exchanged for new, without any serious inconvenience to the public. He hoped that it might be found practicable to prevent individuals from having more than 15 or 20 miles to go to exchange their silver. With respect to the loss which individuals would sustain, it was impossible to prevent it to a certain extent, because there was such a large quantity of counterfeit coin in circulation; but the persons who would be appointed to exchange the new for the old coin, would receive instructions to act in a liberal manner in receiving the latter, and where-ever any doubt really existed, to decide in favour of the public. The noble lord had said that great distress had already been felt upon this subject from the refusal of tradesmen in general to receive the greater part of the coin now in circulation. The fact was, that from the very defective state of the currency of this country, a great deal of French silver had got into circulation, and as it never could have been expected that government would exchange the new silver coin for all the French trash that had been lately imported and mixed with the coin of the realm, it was very natural for persons to refuse taking that, as coin, which they knew they would not be able afterwards to exchange. He lamented the inconvenience which individuals suffered, but it was an evil which it was impossible to remedy, and the longer that French coin was allowed to continue in circulation, the greater the loss would ultimately be. But he begged to assure the House that government had not been inattentive to the loss which individuals would sustain who had what was called coin of the realm in their possession; in many places remedies had already been applied to the evil and he was happy to say that the bank of England had very effectually co-operated with government in their efforts upon this subject. It afforded him great satisfaction to be able to say that all the accounts which had reached him, represented the inconvenience which was felt as much less than could be supposed, certainly much less than he had anticipated. With respect to the question put by the noble lord, relative to bank tokens, they would naturally go out of circulation when the new coin was issued, because they were 21 per cent. under their current value, and the new coin would be only 6 per cent. The bank would take them at their nominal value, and they would probably be sent to the mint to be recoined. The noble lord had fallen into a great error in supposing that the bank would gain by this transaction; it was obvious from the material reduction in the price of silver that the bank must be considerable losers by all their tokens being brought in. But, said the noble lord, they must gain, because they will receive 66 shillings for their pound of silver, instead of 62, consequently they will gain 4 shillings upon every pound of silver bullion which they coin. But if the noble lord had considered for a moment, he would have perceived that the bank could gain nothing by the new coinage, because though the pound of silver would be coined into 66 shillings, yet 4 shillings would be retained for seignorage, and therefore the bank; or any individual who sent bullion to be coined, would only receive 62 shillings as heretofore.—With respect to what had been said about gold 20 shilling pieces, he confessed, that what he had heard had made a great impression upon him. It was a subject which had very much engaged the attention of the committee of coin before they made their report. The committee were strongly impressed with a well founded opinion that our gold coin, reformed as it had been in 1774, stood very high in repute throughout Europe for its accuracy in weight and fineness, and as it was so generally known and approved they were unwilling to make any alteration in the denominations of our gold coin, lest it should affect our exchanges, or create any difficulty or confusion in our mercantile transactions abroad. On that ground, therefore, and also on account of the expense which a re-coinage of the guineas would occasion, they had recommended that no alteration should be made in the gold coin. With respect to the number of guineas at present in the country, it was impossible to form an exact estimate. An hon. bank director had supposed that there were 500,000 guineas in the kingdom, exclusive of what might be in the bank, upon which point the directors had given no opinion. In 1805, lord Liverpool calculated the number at 30 millions. If there were any thing like that number in the kingdom now, the expense of re-coining them would certainly be very great. He had however, no hesitation in stating, after all he had heard upon the subject both in the House and out of doors, that it appeared to him that there was a general wish that 20s. pieces should be coined; and he trusted that if the measure were to be adopted, it would not be difficult to produce twenty shilling pieces so different from the old guineas, that the coins might circulate at the same time without any danger of their being mistaken for each other. He should feel it his duty to bring that subject again under the consideration of the committee of coin. An hon. member was correct in stating that there was no novelty in coining twenty shilling pieces. In fact, the guineas up to the year 1718, were denominated twenty shilling pieces in the mint indenture, though they circulated for a great deal more, and rose at one time as high as thirty shillings. At that time both gold and silver were considered as standards of value; and though the legislature interfered at different times, it was found impossible to keep them both in circulation together, almost the whole of the silver coinage of 1695 went out of the country in a very short time. By the plan now adopted, the relative value of the metals was of no importance, if they were to cut the pound of silver into 100 shillings, it would make no difference as long as silver was not considered as the standard of value; but only taken in change to a limited extent.—Mr. Pole then gave a historical account of the gold coins at different periods—the Unit, the Laurel, the Sovereign, the Angel, the Royal, the Guinea, &c.—He would not take up more of the time of the House at present, as the committee was the proper place for details. He was glad to find that there was no difference of opinion upon the principle of the measure, or upon its necessity; and upon the whole, he flattered himself that he should carry it through with as great a degree of unanimity as was ever manifested upon a question of such interest, importance, and difficulty.

thought that government were right in taking a seignorage on the coinage of silver. To prove that they were so, he referred to the fate of Mr. Bolton's excellent copper coinage, which came out twenty years ago, and which was issued at but a little below the market price of copper. The consequence was, the whole of that coin was melted down, and presently disappeared. A copper coinage was afterwards brought out, which was not so nearly equal in value to the market price of copper, and all the fluctuations which had since occurred had not put that coin out of circulation. He wished for a coinage of 20s. pieces; he felt gratified at the course pursued by government on this occasion, and considered what they were now doing, as a proof that they were sincere in their professions of anxiety for the resumption of cash payments on the part of the bank.

rose to express his satisfaction that there was now every probability of there being an issue of 20s. pieces, because it was a recognition of the principle of applying the decimal division to out coinage. He begged to take this opportunity of remarking, that the whole system of our coins was in the most irregular and unsatisfactory state. We had one measure for weighing our gold by carats, another for our silver by troy weight, and a third for our copper by avoirdupois. Again, the relative proportions of our different coins could not be ascertained but by perpetually resorting to fractions. The measure now before the House would not remove these anomalies. It would, in fact, alter the relative value of every piece of coin in the realm. He did not object to it on that account, but he wished to press on the House, that the present was a most favourable opportunity for giving all the parts of our circulating medium a decimal relation to each other. Perhaps it might be well to follow the example set us by the French. The revolution had enabled them to make a change in their money. We had now a fair opportunity for doing the same. On this subject he would throw out, but with great diffidence, a proposition for the consideration of the House. He should regret deeply if this opportunity were neglected of establishing our coinage upon just principles, when all the other nations of the continent were assimilating their coinage to the decimal arrangement adopted by France. It did so happen at the present moment, that the prices of gold, silver, and copper, bore such a relation to each other, as would easily admit of a new coinage being formed on the decimal scale. It so happened, that if every ounce of gold was to be divided into five parts, each of them would be of the value of twenty shillings of the new coin, and each shilling would be worth ten pence of the present money. The value of an ounce of gold was 99s. 7½d.; and the pound weight of silver was equal to 80s. Thus there was every facility for such an arrangement as that which he proposed, and by which the gold coin would consist of 20s. pieces, and the shilling of ten pence. We should then have our coin on the same principle which had been almost universally adopted by our neighbours. He was very sorry that the question had come on at so late a period of the session; but still the advantages of the decimal calculation would be so great, that even if its adoption were to cause some delay in the supply of the new coin, he thought this would be an objection which should be overlooked in attaining so important a point. It would be almost unpardonable for the legislature at this time to re-enact and legalize a-new those barbarisms in the division of our coin which were attended with great inconvenience.

agreed with the hon. gentleman that this would, in some respects, be a most convenient period for adjusting the relative proportions of the coins of the realm. A great deal would be gained towards this object by the issuing of 20s. pieces. For his part, he did not attach much importance to the introduction of the decimal calculation in regard to shillings and pence. If we had been to start for the first time with our currency, it would be the most eligible system; but it would take some years before the people became habituated to it; and, after all, the capacity of division by halves and quarters, which attended our shillings, was extremely convenient for the common purposes of life, which, upon the whole, was the best criterion of any system. A great convenience, would, however, be gained by the introduction of 20s. pieces. But the observations of the hon. gentleman relative to the principles of a new coinage did not appear quite applicable to the present question. The present measure went upon the principle of abandoning the intrinsic relative value of the silver coinage as compared with the gold standard. On the one hand the shillings were not to have too high an intrinsic value, so as to create a temptation to melt them down; and, on the other, they were not to be so low as to give encouragement to coiners to imitate them. The whole of the system went to disregard the intrinsic value of the coin. One effect of the introduction of 20s. pieces would be to throw out the 7s. pieces, which were altogether very awkward and inconvenient. The hon. gentleman here adverting to the late bill for the uniformity of weights and measures, said, that all the disputes about ascertaining some unit of measure appeared to him nonsensical and absurd. It did not signify whether you took the Prince Regent's foot for a measure, provided it was uniformly adhered to. Allusions had been made to a remark of his on a former night as to the quantity of gold in circulation. He believed that, generally speaking, there was none in the country, excepting what was in the possession of a few singular people who hoarded it. No possible inconvenience could therefore result from the issue of 20s. pieces.

considered a decimal division altogether unnecessary.

thought the question deserved more consideration than seemed to be bestowed upon it. The expense of the new coinage was to be 500,000l. Now, it was to be considered whether this was the proper time for incurring such an expense. For his part, he thought it ought not to be incurred until the cessation of the bank restriction act. He regretted that silver had not been taken as the only standard. It seemed to him impossible to keep up any currency at its due value, unless the coin was made to pass by Weight as well as by tale. This mode was one which was almost universally adopted on the continent, where it was found to be very advantageous.

said, that when he was in France two years ago, he was told by the director-general of finance, that so immense was the amount of English guineas melted down in the mint of France, that it was astonishing to him that any remained in this country. He did not think that any inconvenience could result from coining 20s. pieces; but he was against the adoption of the decimal division.

hoped that the system of brassage would be adopted at the mint.

said, that he was very much against the system of brassage on the principle on which Mr. Locke had opposed the doctrine of Mr. Lowndes; namely, supposing a landlord now received a rent of 44½ guineas from one of his tenants, this was equal exactly to a pound weight of gold. Now if the system of brassage was adopted, it was obvious that instead of this pound of gold to which the landlord was by law entitled, he would receive considerably less; and this he conceived would be great injustice.

spoke in favour of brassage, and hoped it would not be rejected without consideration.

was against the system of brassage. It was very true that this system had been adopted in some other countries; but then our gold coin was so very different from that of other countries, that no argument could be deduced from it.

was also against the brassage. He hoped that some means would be devised for lessening the inconvenience which was caused by the shyness as to taking the coin now current.

The bill was then read a second time.

in calling the attention of the committee to this subject, expressed his regret that it had not been decided when under consideration five years ago. On the present occasion he should not take up much of the time of the committee, as he anticipated some objections to his proposition. Where the reputation of his country was concerned, as in cases where opportunities had occurred of purchasing valuable collections in science or art, calculated to enlighten and improve the taste of the people, even under the pressure of war, the House had never shown an unwillingness to listen to any applications made to them on that account. What large additions had been made to the public stock of valuable monuments of this description in the late French war! He need only refer to the Lansdown manuscripts; and what was more analogous to the present case, the Townleian collection of marbles purchased in 1795, when the war was but recently begun, and there was no prospect of its being soon finished. He wished to remind the House what a large vote had been given in the last session for a national monument to commemorate the glorious battle of Waterloo. In the present session, the House had also voted a monument in commemoration of the victory of Trafalgar, though long since past. He made these preliminary observations, in order to meet the objections of economy, which, he conceived, did not apply in this case. By declining to purchase the Elgin marbles, the public must renounce all right in the thing, and leave my lord Elgin at liberty to deal with any person who offers to purchase. The sort of mixed claim which the public had on lord Elgin, was, he conceived, of this description—they had not a right to take his collection from him by force; but they had a right of pre-emption at a fair price, and to say that it should not be taken out of this country. If he had not heard from gentlemen that it was their intention to oppose the present grant, he should not have thought it necessary—supposing the things good in themselves—to press upon the House, of what great consequence it was to every country, to promote public taste, and public refinement. How could these be better promoted than by making the greatest examples of excellence their own, for the benefit of the public? With respect to the manner in which the Elgin marbles had been acquired, the object certainly could not have been attained, had lord Elgin not been a British ambassador; but it was not solely as a British ambassador that he obtained them. No objection had ever been made to the operations of lord Elgin, either by the government, at Constantinople, or the local authorities; nor did it appear that any person had ever been disgraced or superseded on that account. Not only the local authorities of Athens were favourable, but the natives both Turks and Greeks, assisted as labourers. He had to state confidently that in all the examinations before the committee, of persons who had been at Athens, either at the period of lord Elgin's operations, or shortly afterwards, the uniform tenour of the evidence was, that the natives were not only instrumental in carrying the firmaun into execution, but even pleased with it as the means of bringing money among them. He could therefore say, that there was nothing like spoliation in the case, and that it bore no resemblance to those undue and tyrannical means by which the French had obtained possession of so many treasures of art, which he rejoiced to see again in the possession of their rightful owners. A notion prevailed among some gentlemen, that these treasures also should be restored to their original owners. But how was this to be done? Were they to be taken as public property? Though we had a right of pre-emption, we had no right to take them away from lord Elgin without compensation. Did they mean that they should be purchased from lord Elgin, for the purpose of being shipped back to those who sat no value on them? Were not these works in a state of constant dilapidation and danger before their removal? The climate was no doubt less severe than our northern one; but still they were then making rapid strides towards decay, and the natives displayed such wanton indifference as to fire at them as marks. They had also been continually suffering, from the parts carried off by enlightened travellers. The greatest desire, too, had been evinced by the government of France to become possessed of them. We found them however here. The public bad a right to bargain for them; and it would be a strange neglect of the policy pursued by the House of Commons in all times, and especially during the late war, if they neglected to become possessed of them. With respect to the price, in all works of art, the value might be said to depend on caprice. The most eminent artists had been consulted by the committee; by many they were classed above, and by others little below the highest works obtained since the restoration of art; and for forming a school of art they were considered as absolutely invaluable. The House had some actual data to guide them in the price given for the Townley collection. In point of number, the age to which they belonged, the place from which they were brought and the authenticity of the collection, there could be no doubt that they ranked considerably higher than the Townleian collection. If the Townleian collection was worth 20,000l. this was worth at least the 15,000l. additional proposed to be given. There was at least one foreign prince extremely desirous of purchasing this collection. The opportunity would not again recur. In no time had so large, so magnificent, and so well authenticated a collection of works of art of the best time, been produced, either in this or in any other country. In Italy the works of ancient art were found in excavations at different places and different times. But here we had at once the whole of the ornaments of the most celebrated temple of Athens. There was another mode of valuing the collection, the expense incurred in making it. He had no doubt that the sum proposed to be given fell considerably within the expense actually incurred by lord Elgin, exclusive of interest. In 1811, 30,000l. had been offered by Mr. Perceval, provided lord Elgin could make it appear that his expense amounted to that sum. But considerable additions had been made since 1811, no fewer than eighty cases, containing some of the best works had been since received, and persons who were judges had no doubt that such additions greatly exceeded in value 5,000l. Under all these circumstances, he should move, "That 35,000l. be granted to his majesty, for the purchase of the Elgin marbles, and that the said sum be issued and paid without any fee or other deduction whatsoever."

opposed the grant. He cordially joined the hon. gentleman in his sentiments respecting the importance of works of art. The hon. gentleman had referred to the monuments voted for the victims of Waterloo and Trafalgar. He hoped, however, in the present situation of the country, that the House would retrace their steps. No monument could add to the transcendant glory of those victories, or of the heroes engaged in them. A statement had been made the other night, that the expenses of the country exceeded the revenue by nearly 17,000,000l. He wished it were possible to controvert this statement. In such a state was it fit to make purchases of this description, however gratifying to a few individuals, at the expense of the nation? He was afraid that we were fast approaching to that course of extravagance with respect to the public money, which had brought to decay the countries where these works of art were produced. Whatever imputations of want of taste and feeling might be thrown out against him, he would say that the House were bound, however much they admired this collection, and it was admired by every man in the House, to refrain from making the purchase at the present moment. Retrenchments of a very different magnitude from any yet witnessed must necessarily be made.

was as adverse to idle expenditure as the hon. gentleman himself could be, and thought we should not seek occasions for it; yet he considered the present an opportunity of benefiting the public that could not occur again: and it was precisely because it was not against the principle of economy that he voted for the measure. As to the spoliation of Greece that had been so much complained of, no one could be more unwilling than he was that these sacred relics should be taken from that consecrated spot, where they had excited the enthusiasm of ages; no one could have a greater respect than himself for the feelings of nations; but these objects were lying in their own country in a course of destruction: and he wished to consult the feelings of that country by any means short of the actual destruction of specimens so precious. As to the price that had been proposed, it was pretty clear that foreign princes would go to it, if we did not; and it certainly did not exceed the value of the articles.

said, he should oppose the resolution on the ground of the dishonesty of the transaction by which the collection was obtained. As to the value of the statues, he was inclined to go as far as the hon. mover, but he was not so enamoured of those headless ladies as to forget another lady, which was justice. If a restitution of these marbles was demanded from this country, was it supposed that our title to them could be supported on the vague words of the firmaun, which only gave authority to remove some small pieces of stone? It was well known that the empress Catharine had entertained the idea of establishing the Archduke Constantine in Greece. If the project of that extraordinary woman should ever be accomplished, and Greece ranked among independent nations with what feelings, would she contemplate the people who had stripped her most celebrated temple of its noblest ornaments? The evidence taken before the committee disproved the assertion that the Turkish government attached no value to these statues. Lord Elgin himself had not been able to gain access to them for his artists, for less than five guineas a day. The member for Northallerton (Mr. Morris) had stated before the committee, that when he had inquired of the governor of Athens whether he would suffer them to be taken away, he had said, that for his own part he preferred the money which was offered him to the statues; but it would be more than his head was worth to part with them. He had also stated, that the pieces thrown down were certainly liable to injury, but that the others were only subject to the waste of time. The Turks (the same witness said) were not in the habit of shooting at them, nor had he heard any instance of that kind. But whether the Turks sat any value on them or no, the question would not be altered, as his objection was founded on the unbecoming manner in which they had been obtained. It was in the evidence of the noble earl himself, that at the time when he had demanded permission to remove these statues, the Turkish government was in a situation to grant any thing which this country might ask, on account of the efforts which we had made against the French in Egypt. It thus appeared that a British ambassador had taken advantage of our success over the French to plunder the city of Athens. The earl of Aberdeen had stated that no private traveller would have been able to have obtained leave to remove them. But the most material evidence respecting the manner in which these statues had been obtained, was that of Dr. Hunt, who stated, that when the firmaun was delivered to the waywode, presents were also given him, It thus appeared that bribery had been employed, and he lamented that the clergyman alluded to should have made himself an agent in the transaction. It was his opinion that we should restore what we had taken away. It had been computed that lord Elgin's expenses had been 74,000l., of which, however, 24,000l. was interest of the money expended. A part of the loss of this sum should be suffered to fall on lord Elgin, and a part on the country. It was to be regretted that the government had not restrained this act of spoliation; but, as it had been committed, we should exert ourselves to wipe off the stain, and not place in our museum a monument of our disgrace, but at once return the bribe which our ambassador had received, to his own dishonour and that of the country. He should propose as an amendment, a resolution, which stated—" That this committee having taken into its consideration the manner in which the earl of Elgin became possessed of certain ancient scluptured marbles from Athens, laments that this ambassador did not keep in rememberance that the high and dignified station of representing his so vereign should have made him forbear from availing himself of that character in order to obtain valuable possessions belonging to the government to which he was accredited; and that such forbearance was peculiarly necessary at a moment when that government was expressing high obligations to Great Britain. This committee, however, imputes to the noble earl no venal motive whatever of pecuniary advantage to himself, but on the contrary, believes that he was actuated by a desire to benefit his country, by acquiring for it, at great risk and labour to himself, some of the most valuable specimens in existence of ancient sculpture. This committee, therefore, feels justified, under the particular circumstances of the case, in recommending that 25,000l. be offered to the earl of Elgin for the collection in order to recover and keep it together for that government from which it has been improperly taken, and to which this committee is of opinion that a communication should be immediately made, stating, that Great Britain holds these marbles only in trust till they are demanded by the present, or any future, possessors of the city of Athens; and upon such demand, engages, without question or negociation, to restore them, as far as can be effected, to the places from whence they were taken, and that they shall be in the mean time carefully preserved in the British Museum."

was desirous not to take up the time of the committee by entering into the discussion, but he could not help remarking upon one or two of the statements which the last speaker had drawn from the evidence, by reading one part of it, and omitting others which should have been taken in connexion. He had never heard a speech filled with so much tragic pomp and circumstance, concluded with so farcical a resolution. After speaking of the glories of Athens, after haranguing us on the injustice of spoliation, it was rather too much to expect to interest our feelings for the future conqueror of those classic regions, and to contemplate his rights to treasures which we reckoned it flagitious to retain. It did seem extraordinary that we should be required to send back these monuments of art, not for the benefit of those by whom they were formerly possessed, but for the behoof of the descendants of the empress Catherine, who were viewed by the hon. gentleman as the future conquerors of Greece. Spoliation must precede the attainment of them by Russia; and yet, from a horror at spoliation, we were to send them, that they might tempt and reward it! Nay, we were to hold them in trust for the future invader, and to restore them to the possession of the conqueror, when his rapacious and bloody work was executed. Our museum, then, was to be the repository of these monuments for Russia, and our money was to purchase them in order that we might hold them in deposit till she made her demand. The proposition, he would venture to say, was one of the most absurd ever heard in that House. Considerations of economy had been much mixed up with the question of the purchase; and the House had been warned in the present circumstances of the country, not to incur a heavy expense merely to acquire the possession of works of ornament. But who was to pay this expense, and for whose use was the purchase intended? The bargain was for the benefit of the public, for the honour of the nation, for the promotion of national arts, fot the use of the national artists, and even for the advantage of our manufactures, the excellence of which depended on the progress of the arts in the country. It was singular that when 2,500 years ago, Pericles was adorning Athens with those very works, some of which we are now about to acquire, the same cry of economy was raised against him, and the same answer that he then gave might be repeated now, that it was money spent for the use of the people, for the encouragement of arts, the increase of manufactures, the prosperity of trades, and the encouragement of industry; not merely to please the eye of the man of taste, but to create, to stimulate, to guide the exertions of the artist, the mechanic, and even the labourer, and to spread through all the branches of society a spirit of improvement, and the means of a sober and industrious affluence. But he would go the length of saying, that the possession of these precious remains of ancient genius and taste would conduce not only to the perfection of the arts, but to the elevation of our national character, to our opulence, to our substantial greatness. The conduct of the noble earl, who by his meritorious exertions, had given us an opportunity of considering whether we should retain in the country what, if retained, would constitute one of its greatest ornaments, had been made the subject of severe and undeserved censure. No blame had, however, been shown to attach to it after the fullest examination. One of the objects, and the most important object, for which he wished the institution of a committee was, that the transactions by which those works of art were obtained, and imported into this country, might stand clear of all suspicion, and be completely justified in the eyes of the world, and that the conduct of the noble lord implicated might be fully investigated. He (Mr. C.) was entirely acquainted with the noble lord before he became a member of the committee, and could, of course, hare no partialities to indulge. What he said for himself, he believed he might say for the other members with whom he acted. They were all perfectly unprejudiced before the inquiry commenced, and all perfectly satisfied before its conclusion. They had come to a unanimous opinion in favour of the noble lord's conduct and claims, and that opinion was unequivocally expressed in the report which was the result of their impartial examination. With regard to the spoliation, the sacrilegious rapacity, on which the last speaker had descanted so freely, he would say a few words in favour of the noble lord, in which he would be borne out by the evidence in the report The noble lord had shown no principle of rapacity. He laid his hand on nothing that could have been preserved in any state of repair: he touched nothing that was not previously in ruins. He went into Greece with no design to commit ravages on her works of art, to carry off her ornaments, to despoil her temples. His first intention was to take drawings of her celebrated architectural monuments, or models of her works of sculpture. This part of his design he had to a certain extent executed, and many drawings and models were found in his collection. Nothing else entered into his contemplation, till he saw that many of the pieces of which his predecessors in this pursuit had taken drawings had entirely disappeared, that some of them were buried in ruins, and others converted into the materials of building. No less than 18 pieces of statuary from the western pediment had been entirely destroyed since the time when M. de Nointel, the French ambassador, had procured his interesting drawings to be made; and when his lordship purchased a house in the ruins of which he expected to find some of them, and had proceeded to dig under its foundation with such a hope, the malicious Turk to whom he had given the purchase-money observed," The statues you are digging for are pounded into mortar, and I could have told you so before you began your fruitless labour." [Hear, hear!]—Ought not the hon. gentleman who had spoken so much about spoliation to have mentioned this fact? Ought he not to have stated that it was then, and not till then, that lord Elgin resolved to endeavour to save what still remained from such wanton barbarity? Had he read the report, and did he know the circumstances without allowing any apology for the noble earl? Did he not know that many of the articles taken from the Parthenon, were found among its ruins? More than one-third of that noble building was rubbish before he touched it. The hon. member (Mr. Hammersley) had referred to the evidence of the member for Northallerton (Mr. Morrit); but while he quoted one part of it, he had forgotten another, by which that quotation would have been explained and qualified. He had visited Athens in 1796; and when he returned five years afterwards, he found the greatest dilapidations. In his first visit he stated, that there were 8 or ten fragments on the pediment, with a car and horses not entire, but distinguishable: but when he returned, neither car nor horses were to be seen, and all the figures were destroyed but two. If the hon. member, whose statement he was combating, had read the evidence carefully, he would have seen that lord Elgin interfered with nothing that was not already in ruins, or that was threatened with immediate destruction. The temple of Theseus was in a state of great preservation, and, therefore, proceeding on this principle, he had left it as he found it, and only enriched this country with models and drawings taken from it. Much had been said of the manner in which lord Elgin had prostituted his ambassadorial character to obtain possession of the monuments in question. There was no ground for such an imputation. Not a piece had been removed from Athens till lord Elgin had returned, and of course till his official influence ceased. Signor Lucieri was even now employed there under his lordship's orders; and was he still prostituting the ambassadorial character? When his lordship was a prisoner in France, the work was still going on; and was he then prostituting the ambassadorial character? His lordship had remained after his return at his seat in Scotland; and was the character of ambassador injured in his person during his retirement? He (Mr. Croker) might have shown some warmth in defending the opinion of the committee, and removing the imputation thrown upon the noble person whose character had been attacked by the hon. member: but he hoped he would be excused, when the nature of the charges which had excited him were considered.—He could not sit in his place, and hear such terms as dishonesty, plunder, spoliation, bribery, and others of the same kind, applied to the conduct of a British noble-man, who was so far from deserving them that he merited the greatest praise, and to the nature of transactions by, which so great a benefit was conferred upon the country, without any ground for a charge of rapacity or spoliation. But if the charges of improper conduct on lord Elgin's part were groundless, the idea of sending them back to the Turks was chimerical and ridiculous. This would be awarding those admirable works the doom of destruction. The work of plunder and dilapidation was proceeding with rapid strides, and we were required again to subject the monuments that we had rescued to its influence. Of 20 statues that decorated the western pediments of the Parthenon, only seven miserable fragments were preserved: yet this part of the building was almost perfect at the beginning of last century; now only a few worthless pieces of marble were preserved—he called them worthless, not as compared with the productions of art in other countries, but in comparison with what had been lost. They would, however, remain to animate the genius and improve the arts of this country, and to constitute in after times a sufficient answer to the speech of the hon. member, or of any one else who should use his arguments, if indeed such arguments could be supposed to be repeated, or to be heard beyond the bottle hour in which they were made

conceived that lord Elgin had not acted as he ought to have done, whatever opinion might be entertained of the works of art which he had been the means of importing into this country. He regarded the improvement of national taste much, but he valued the preservation of national honour still more. He could not approve of a representative of his majesty laying himself under obligations to a foreign court, to which he was sent to watch the interests and maintain the honour of the country. Such an officer should be independent, as by his independence alone he could perform his duty. He had obtained the firmaun out of favour, and had used it contrary to the intention with which it was granted. What would be thought of an ambassador at an European court, who should lay himself under obligations by receiving a sum to the amount of 35,000l.? But even the firmaun lord Elgin had obtained did not warrant him to do as he had done. The firmaun could do nothing without bribery. Could the words in which it was written admit the construction that was put upon them? It merely gave a power to view, to contemplate and design them. Did this mean that these works were to be viewed and contemplated with the design of being pulled down and removed? Lord Elgin himself did not say that he had authority to carry off any thing by means of the firmaun. His lordship was himself the best interpreter of the instrument by which he acted, and he was here an inter preter against himself. If he erred, he erred therefore knowingly, though his design might be excusable or praiseworthy. Dr. Hunt's evidence had been quoted, to show that his lordship had authority from the waywode of Athens for what he had done, but his words would not bear such an interpretation. Dr. Hunt said only that the waywode was induced to allow the construction put upon the instrument by lord Elgin. The powerful argument by which the waywode was induced to allow the construction alluded to, consisted in a present of a brilliant lustre, fire-arms, and other articles of English manufacture. But were these the arguments that ought to have been used by a British ambassador? Was he to be permitted to corrupt the fidelity of a subject of another state—the servant of a government in al liance with our own; and under obligations to us? But it had been said that if the works of art had not been brought here, they would have been destroyed by the Turks. This would not have been the alternative. The Turks would have been taught to value these monuments, had they seen strangers admiring them, and travellers coming from distant countries to do them homage. They could not but now learn their value, after they were deprived of them, by hearing that 35,000l. had been paid for them to the person who imported them to England. It had been said that lord Elgin would advance the arts by lodging these remains of antiquity in a country where eminence in arts was studiously attempted. This he denied, or at least thought doubtful. Such works al ways appeared best in the places to which they were originally, fitted. Besides, with this example of plunder before their eyes, the Turks would be a little more cautious in future whom they admitted to see their ornaments. These marbles had been brought to this country in breach of good faith. He therefore could not consent to their purchase, lest by so doing he should render himself a partaker in the guilt of spoliation. He did not object to the bar gain on the ground of economy, but of justice.

was not aware of the trans- action being so flagitious as it was said to be. He equally disliked the idea being entertained that we had got them by bribery. Every person who knew the Turkish character must be sensible that when they gave any thing away it was with the view of receiving an equivalent. He could not condemn the transaction on the ground of the marbles being a gift from a foreign government, and therefore affording a bad precedent; for he did not think that a gift of 35,000l. purchased at an expense of 64,000l. was a precedent likely to be much followed. On the principle of economy he knew it was the duty of the House to act, but economy was often ill-judged, and very much misapplied. Considering them a valuable accession in every point of view, and that the same opportunity might never recur, he had no objection to the grant.

would vote against the motion, even if the country were in affluent circumstances, on account of the unjustifiable nature of the transaction by which the marbles in question were acquired.

said, he was ready to agree in all the objections founded upon the unfitness of the time for any acts of lavish expenditure; but the present was an occasion, which could not again present itself, of acquiring for the country these exquisite specimens of art. It was fair to say that the purchase of these precious remains of antiquity was for the gratification of the few, at the expense of the many. The amendment of the hon. gentleman was somewhat inconsistent with his professions of economy, for he proposed to give 25,000l. to lord Elgin, for obtaining these marbles dishonestly, and then to send them back to those who would not thank them for their trouble.

was aware that an apology might be expected from all those who objected to a grant that was to put the country in possession of these invaluable monuments of ancient art. He could not, however, agree that they had been acquired consistently with the strict rules of morality. They appeared to him to have been obtained by lord Elgin through his influence as ambassador from this country, and it was not unnatural that the Turkish government should view with suspicion a national purchase arising out of such circumstances. The objection to the purchase he should deem niggardly and ill-advised at any other time; but the pre- sent was one of peculiar distress, and one in which the want of subsistence was the cause of riot and disturbances in many parts of the country.

said, the hon. gentleman who had talked of this being the last opportunity, reminded him of the auctioneer's cry of " going, going, gone." He desired to know whether any offer had been made for these marbles by a foreign power; and whether they were not in fact, under sequestration at present by government for a debt due to the Crown by lord Elgin.

considered that there was no doubt as to the desirableness of our possessing these interesting monuments, from their general tendency to improve the arts. The only question upon which he hesitated was, whether we could afford to buy them. The purchase-money, they were told, was but 35,000l.; but he apprehended that, when purchased, it would be necessary to build a proper receptacle for them, and the whole expense might be estimated at 70 or 80,000l. Had we, then, this money at present in our pockets, with which to gratify ourselves by so desirable a possession? The stronger the temptation was to this purchase, the greater satisfaction he felt in redeeming his share of the pledge given to the country, that no unnecessary expenditure should be incurred.

declared in favour of the original motion, observing, that that would be a mistaken economy, as well as bad taste, which would deprive this country of such valuable works of art as lord Elgin had collected.

The House divided: For the original Motion, 82; Against it, 30.