Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T12:07:11.491Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sir James Craig and the constrution of Parliament Buildings at Stormont

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

Alan Greer
Alan Greer*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Economics and Social Science, University of the West of England, Bristol
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Architecture has its political uses: public buildings being the ornament of a country; it establishes a nation, draws people and commerce, makes the people love their native country, which passion is the original of all great actions in a Commonwealth.

Sir Christopher Wren

When the prince of Wales formally opened the new Northern Ireland Parliament Buildings at Stormont on 16 November 1932, it brought to an end over ten years of controversy, delay, confusion, and wrangling over both finance and design. Although approval to build a new parliament house and administrative offices was given in the autumn of 1922, and preliminary work began on the site in 1923, the above-ground foundation stone was not laid until 1928, and the departmental offices were not occupied until April 1931. There is an extensive literature which stresses the political significance of the architecture of civic and public buildings such as parliament houses, law-courts, government offices and even theatres. Other writers have noted the linkages between architecture, empire, nationalism and state formation. Thomas Metcalf commented that distinctive architectural forms ‘sought to manifest the ideals of imperialism’ and were designed to enhance ‘the hold of Empire over ruler and ruled alike’. For architects such as Herbert Baker, classical design, with its monumentality and ideals of law, order and government, was the only architectural form appropriate for the representation of empire. This was an architecture which gave a ‘visible shape to the new imperialism of the turn of the twentieth century’.

Type
Research Article
Information
Irish Historical Studies , Volume 31 , Issue 123 , May 1999 , pp. 373 - 388
Copyright
Copyright © Irish Historical Studies Publications Ltd 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Sir Christopher Wren, quoted By Baker, Herbert, in Metcalf, Thomas, An imperial vision: Indian architecture and Britain’s raj (London, 1989), p. 193Google Scholar.

2 See Officer, David, ‘In search of order, permanence and stability: building Stormont, 1921–32’ in English, Richard and Walker, Graham (eds), Unionism in modern Ireland: new perspectives on politics and culture (Basingstoke, 1996), pp 130-47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 See, for example, Conway, Hazel and Roenisch, Rowan, Understanding architecture: an introduction to architecture and architectural history (London, 1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Markus, Thomas, Buildings and power (London, 1993)Google Scholar; Goodsell, Charles, The social meaning of civic space: studying political authority through architecture (Lawrence, Kans., 1988)Google Scholar.

4 See Sayyad, Nezar Al (ed.), Forms of dominance: on the architecture and urbanism of the colonial enterprise (Aldershot, 1992)Google Scholar; Wright, Gwendolyn, The politics of design in French colonial urbanism (Chicago, 1991)Google Scholar; Metcalf, Imperial vision; Fermor-Hesketh, Robert (ed.), Architecture of the British Empire (London, 1986)Google Scholar; Metcalf, Thomas, ‘Architecture and the representation of Empire: India, 1860–1910’ in Representations, vi (spring 1984), pp 37–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, ‘Architecture and Empire’ in History Today, xxx (Dec. 1980), pp 7–12.

5 Metcalf, Imperial vision, preface, p. xi.

6 Ibid., p. 177.

7 Lasswell, Harold, The signature of power: buildings, communication and policy (New Brunswick, N.J., 1979), pp 11, 13Google Scholar.

8 Lawrence Vale, ‘Designing national identity: post-colonial capitols as intercultural dilemmas’ in Al Sayyad (ed.), Forms of dominance, pp 316–24; see also idem, Architecture, power and national identity (New Haven, 1992).

9 The place-name ‘Stormont’ is frequently used as a convenient shorthand for the institutions of the devolution period generally. See, for example, Birrell, Derek and Murie, Alan, Policy and government in Northern Ireland: lessons of devolution (Dublin, 1980), p. 1Google Scholar.

10 Buckland, Patrick, James Craig (Dublin, 1980), p. 98Google Scholar.

11 Pevsner, Nikolaus, A history of building types (London, 1976), p. 35Google Scholar; Irish Builder and Engineer, Oct. 1924.

12 The creation of the Northern Ireland administration has been extensively studied. See, for example, Follis, Bryan, A state under siege: the establishment of Northern Ireland, 1920–1925 (Oxford, 1995)Google Scholar; McColgan, John, British policy and the Irish administration, 1920–22 (London, 1983)Google Scholar.

13 Under sections 34 (i) and S24 (1b) of the act, the British government would provide the buildings (including sites and equipment) for the parliament and public departments, and the supreme court respectively.

14 Buckland, Patrick, The factory of grievances: devolved government in Northern Ireland, 1921–39 (Dublin, 1979), p. 45Google Scholar.

15 See earl of Crawford to Sir Lionel Earle, 26 Sept. 1922 (P.R.O., WORK 27/21); Craig to Earle, 21 Sept. 1922 (ibid.).

16 Buckland, Factory of grievances, p. 90.

17 Hansard 5 (Commons), cxxxviii, 1895 (2 Mar. 1921).

18 Crawford to Horne, 25 July 1922 (P.R.O., WORK 27/21).

19 The original intention to place the supreme court alongside the parliament buildings and government offices was discouraged by Whitehall officials. As Crawford told Craig, the ‘Judiciary and Parliamentary buildings should be separated. On broad constitutional grounds I should deplore their contiguity, still less their actual conjunction into a single block’ (Crawford to Craig, 16 Aug. 1921 (P.R.O., WORK 27/7)).

20 Notes of Crawford’s conversation with Craig, 6 July 1921 (ibid); Crawford to Craig, 11 Aug. 1921 (P.R.O., WORK 27/8); Crawford to Craig, 12 Aug. 1921 (P.R.O.N.I., CAB 9H/5/l).

21 Craig to Crawford, 9 Aug. 1921, 15 Aug. 1921 (P.R.O., WORK 27/8).

22 Fermor-Hesketh (ed.), Architecture of the British Empire, p. 202.

23 Office of Works memorandum, 29 July 1922 (P.R.O., WORK 27/21).

24 Cabinet Conclusions, 23 Aug. 1921 (P.R.O.N.I., CAB 4/15).

25 Hansard N.I. (Commons), i, 44 (20 Sept. 1921).

26 Arthur, Paul, Government and politics of Northern Ireland (London, 1984), p. 23Google Scholar.

27 See, for example, Oliver, John, Working at Stormont (Dublin, 1978), p. 16Google Scholar.

28 Cabinet papers (historic buildings), 9 Aug. 1921 (P.R.O.N.I., CAB 9H/5/1).

29 Craig to Crawford, 22 Sept. 1921 (P.R.O., WORK 27/8).

30 Cabinet Conclusions, 15 June 1921 (P.R.O.N.I., CAB 4/1); Office of Works draft memorandum, July 1922 (P.R.O., WORK 27/21).

31 Oliver, Working at Stormont, p. 16.

32 Metcalf, Imperial vision, p. 194; see also Conway & Roenisch, Understanding architecture, p. 125.

33 Metcalf, Imperial vision, p. 190.

34 Craig himself seems to have been responsible for the idea of the replica of Helen’s Tower for the Thiepval memorial: see Belfast News-Letter, 18 Nov. 1919.

35 See Irish Builder and Engineer, 6 Dec. 1919; Ulster Society of Architects to Craig, 24 Sept. 1921 (P.R.O.N.I., CAB 9H/5/1); Craig to Crawford, 22 Sept. 1921 (P.R.O., WORK 27/7); notes of Anderson’s conversation with Craig, 15 June 1921 (ibid.); notes of Crawford’s conversation with Craig, 6 July 1921 (ibid.).

36 Crawford to Craig, 16 Aug. 1921 (P.R.O.N.I., CAB 9H/5/1); Earle to secretary of the Ulster Society of Architects, 27 Oct. 1921 (P.R.O., WORK 27/7). For a flavour of the controversy surrounding this decision see the architectural press of the period, e.g. Architects’ Journal, 5 Oct., 9, 30 Nov. 1921; Irish Builder and Engineer, 19 Nov. 1921. It is interesting to note that the absence of an open competition for Union Buildings in Pretoria was also the subject of much criticism.

37 See, for example, Architects’ Journal, 3 Oct. 1923, pp 499–504; 9 Nov. 1932, pp 579–85; Architectural Design and Construction, ii, no. 12 (Oct. 1932), pp 531–7.

38 Metcalf, Imperial vision, p. 247.

39 See Ministry of Finance to Office of Works, 4 Oct. 1922 (P.R.O., WORK 27/8); Meiklejohn to Office of Works, 20 Sept. 1922 (ibid., WORK 27/21); Crawford to Craig, 7 Sept. 1922 (ibid.); Earle to Sir Ernest Clark, 2 Aug. 1922 (ibid.); Earle to Clark, 2 Aug. 1922 (P.R.O.N.I., CAB 4/13).

40 Hansard N.I. (Commons), viii, 1224 (5 May 1927). The Northern Ireland government also used its own resources to ensure that the new law-courts building had a stone facing to harmonise with other buildings in the centre of Belfast, rather than the brick suggested by the Office of Works.

41 Larmour, Paul, Belfast: an illustrated architectural guide (Belfast, 1987), p. 86Google Scholar.

42 Wright, Politics of design, p. 178.

43 Fermor-Hesketh (ed.), Architecture of the British Empire, p. 202.

44 Section 34 of the act replaced the specific figure with ‘such sums as the Joint Exchequer Board may certify to be necessary for the purpose of providing buildings (including the sites thereof) and for the equipment for the accommodation of the Parliaments and public departments in Southern and Northern Ireland’.

45 Hansard N.I. (Commons), i, 176 (23 Sept. 1921).

46 Horne to Crawford, Aug. 1922 (P.R.O., WORK 27/21).

47 Crawford to Horne, 2 Aug. 1922 (ibid.); Eggar to Treasury, 11 Aug. 1922 (ibid.); Horne to Crawford (draft), [Aug. 1922] (ibid.).

48 Crawford to Earle, 26 Sept. 1922 (ibid.). See also Earle to Crawford, 22 Sept. 1922 (P.R.O., WORK 27/8); Earle to Crawford, 20 Sept. 1922 (ibid., WORK 27/21).

49 Office of Works to Thornely, 21 Oct. 1925 (ibid., WORK 27/7). The decision to revise the plans led to a protracted contractual dispute between Thornely and the British government which was not settled until the mid-1930s.

50 Notes of conference, 4 Nov. 1925 (ibid., WORK 27/8). Savings of £0.5m reduced the cost of Stormont to approximately £1.1 m, but the total cost to the Treasury of providing buildings in Northern Ireland was nearer £2m. It is interesting to note the impact of inflation in this context: the cost of renovations to the Stormont building begun in 1994 were estimated at approx £2.5m, and the bill to repair the debating chamber after its destruction by fire in early 1992 was put at £1.5m.

51 Dixon, Hugh, An introduction to Ulster architecture (Belfast, 1975), p. 82Google Scholar. See also accounts in Oliver, Working at Stormont, pp 16–17; Larmour, Belfast, pp 110–11.

52 Spender to Taylor, 23 Jan. 1926 (P.R.O.N.I., CAB 9H/5/1).

53 Belfast Telegraph, 26 Aug. 1926.

54 Architectural Design and Construction, ii, no. 12 (Oct. 1932), p. 533.

55 Notes of conference, 4 Nov. 1925 (P.R.O., WORK 27/8); Pollock, , Hansard N.I. (Commons), vii, 983 (5 May 1926)Google Scholar.

56 Conway & Roenisch, Understanding architecture, p. 128.

57 Hansard N.I. (Commons), vi, 1728 (6 Nov. 1925); vii, 220 (16 Mar. 1926).

58 Notes of conference, 4 Nov. 1925 (P.R.O., WORK 27/8). The Director of Works, Sir Frederick Baines, gave a guarantee that the new building would be completed in three and a half years if the new proposals were accepted, but the foundation stone was barely laid in this time and the completion of the work was to take almost seven years.

59 See Hansard N.I. (Commons), vii, 243 (16 Mar. 1926)1 and the adjournment motion of Thomas Henderson, ibid., 1940 (26 Oct. 1926). See also Craig’s remarks, ibid., i, 259 (4 Oct. 1921); ii, 945 (10 Oct. 1922).

60 See Jack Beattie to Minister of Finance, ibid., xi, 345 (10 June 1929); Hansard 5 (Commons), cclxx, 953 (15 Nov. 1932). Such a list of contracts can be found in P.R.O., WORK 27/1.

61 StErvine, John, Craigavon: Ulsterman (London, 1949), p. 439Google Scholar.

62 Hansard N.I. (Commons), viii, 727 (6 Apr. 1927).

63 Ibid., ix, 1280 (2 May 1928).

64 Ibid., viii, 732 (6 Apr. 1927).

65 Ibid., vi, 1818 (6 Nov. l925).

66 Ibid., i, 174 (23 Sept. l921).

67 O’Neill to Spender, 24 Nov. 1921 (P.R.O.N.I., CAB 9H/5/1).

68 For the 1974 Assembly the chamber was remodelled in a horseshoe configuration, partly because the previous confrontational arrangement was deemed inappropriate for a consociational system of politics.

69 Hansard N.I. (Commons), viii, 727 (6 Apr. 1927).

70 Ervine, Craigavon, pp 418–19.

71 Ibid., p. 440.

72 Hansard N.I. (Commons), i, 176 (23 Sept. 1921).

73 Ibid., ix, 329 (15 Mar. 1928).

74 Ibid., 1284.

75 XQ, The truth about Stormont (Belfast, 1933), p. 3.

76 Hansard N.I. (Commons), viii, 730 (6 Apr. 1927).

77 Ibid., i, 174 (23 Sept. 1921).

78 Officer, ‘In search of order’, p. 131.

79 Metcalf, Imperial vision, p. 13.

80 Eggar to Treasury, 11 Aug. 1922 (P.R.O., WORK 27/21).

81 Crawford to Horne, 2 Aug. 1922 (ibid.).

82 Office of Works draft memorandum, July 1922 (ibid.).

83 Hansard N.I. (Commons), ix, 1926 (21 May 1928).