View report page

56
the Bishopsgate and Cripplegate schemes, the scheme for the Victoria
Hall and the full and detailed scheme for the City Polytechnic
published on the 6th December) differ from those set forth in the
last-mentioned report in nothing but in the greater detail, and in the
fact that the Commissioners have been unable to realise those proposals
so fully as they had ventured to hope and as the needs of the
case require.
The most prominent feature in those schemes, as in the report
of February, 1889, and the point to which the criticism of the Committee
is mainly directed, is undoubtedly that which relates to the
establishment and maintenance of Polytechnic institutes. But
nothing leads the Commissioners to suppose that the public, which,
in various parts of the Metropolis, by energetie co-operation and large
pecuniary aid, and in other quarters by pressing demands for the
extension to their neighbourhood of the Polytechnic system, have
testified their approval of the objects aimed at, and the proposed
method of obtaining them, have withdrawn the favour with which
they have hitherto regarded the foundation of these institutes. On
the contrary, they observe with pleasure that since the passing of the
resolutions now under consideration a western district, comprising
several wealthy and populous parishes, has proposed to take upon
itself the whole burden of establishing a Polytechnic in a neighbour- •
hood to which the Commissioners with great regret felt themselves
unable to render assistance.
The Commissioners could not, without the gravest reasons, take
upon themselves the responsibility of discouraging and retarding the
realization of plans which are of so great promise to the poorer classes
of the Metropolis, and which they have, after careful inquiry, sanctioned,
and by that sanction have no doubt in some degree tended
to promote.
They are not, however, surprised to learn that the Committee
appointed by the Council has found it difficult to examine fully or
accurately into a matter which the Commissioners, acting in the
discharge of their duty, have been so long occupied in investigating
under circumstances whch may at least be thought not unfavourable
to the formation of a sound judgment. They cannot
fail to observe in the report on which the resolutions were founded
inaccuracies so considerable with respect to existing institutions, that,
having regard to the actual division of opinion, they think it would
not be unreasonable to suppose that a report possessing greater exactness
might have led the Council to a different conclusion. Neither
can they omit to notice that the very full and detailed exposition of
their views which is to be found in their report of February last,
seems to have engaged to a very small extent the attention, and to a
still smaller extent the critical examination, of the Committee.
The Commissioners cannot but regard this circumstance as of