WORTH-WHILE?

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 100, 25 October 1934, Page 24

WORTH-WHILE?

PURCHASE OF CODEX

PARLIAMENTARIAN'S ATTACK

"USELESS MANUSCRIPT"

"1 have been to sec this piece of historical work. I wanted to know what is supposed to interest our peoplo, and to got some idea of the aesthetic taste which some people possess in desiring to obtain ancient literature. I cannot say that I was greatly impressed with what I saw.

"I am in the same position that I was before I saw it. It is evidently an old manuscript, and it is in ft glass case at the British Museum, described in language which I cannot understand. A Supplementary Estimate of £41,440 has been passed as our share towards its purchase, and we understand that, if public subscriptions come in, the amount may bo reduced," said Mr. Tinker, M.P., in the House of Commons recently, reports "Public Opinion."

"In any case, there will be a considerable item which this House will have to find. Is it right at a time like the present, when there is such a call for economy and such a cry for people to be provided with the means of life, that the House of Commons should be allowed, without any public discussion at all, to grant such a sum of money for what I consider to be a useloss piece of manuscript." Mr. iJuff Cooper, replying on behalf of the Government as to the reason why the "Codex Sinaiticus" was purchased, said: — "The Soviet Government offered it first, to one Government and then to another, and as they are notoriously and violently anti-Christian and antiall forms of'revcaled religion, I do not think they are to blamo for trying to sell a manuscript that has to them no value, any more than I can see that his Majesty's Government are to blame for spending money on a manuscript that is to this country, more than to any other country in the world, of very particular value. A WASTE OF MONEY? "I would not pretend for a moment that the people of this country are more religious than the peoples of other countries, but there is no country in the world on which the actual text of the Scriptures lias had a greater effect than this country. There is no country where these words are so well known, where they arc so engraved on the hearts and minds of the people, and where they have exercised so powerful an influence, if not wholly over the condition of the people, at least over the whole of English literature. ...■■■ "Tho honourable member says that it is a waste of money to spend such a largo sum on a manuscript of this kind, that the money might have been spent very much better in other ways. You can bring that argument to bear concerning any expenditure of public money not directed solely to improving the health and condition of the peoplo. Is that fair? "No doubt it is true that in private life a person who wanted a thing of that kind would consider it his duty to pay for it out of his own pocket. That is a very different proposition. But the argument appears to be that although people in this country are still in want, yet we spend £41,000 on fin ancient manuscript. "Where does that argument load us if pursued to its logical conclusion? Y*ou may as well say: How would ypu choose between buying a beautiful picture or feeding n. child? If you are to choose between getting a beautiful picture and giving moro money to poor people, what wonld you do? "Does the honourable member " suggest that we should soil tho wholo of the National Gallery and that we should refuse to raise money to prop up the fabric of St. Paul's Cathedral and Westminster Abbey until wo have satisfied the needs of every poor person in tho countryfi GREATER AND LESS. "The Government has to preserve a sense of proportion. It has to harden its heart and say ;that. some things must be of greater importance than others. Money must be ■ spent on maintaining the beauty and dignity of this country. Money must be spent on our museums in making them the finest museums in the world. "You can take the parallel of the father and the child. A father may spond money'on; getting aome.thing for the child when the child would prefer to have some other thing, but, none the less, the money is better spent on .something that the child will not appreciate and cannot hope to appreciate until lie is grown up. ."There are many things in this country today which the vast majority of people do not appreciate. lam unmoved by the argument that the majority of people cannot read the 'Codex.' Tho majority of peoplo do not appreciate the most beautiful works of art in tho National Gallery. Are! we, therefore, to make n. bonfire dC those works of art, or have a sale to tho highest bidder? "Should we not, rather look forward I i the time when most of our people, through improved standards of education and a higher standard of civilisation, will be able to appreciate theso things? "It is the duty of the Government lo act as the trustee of the people in matters of this kind, and not to wait for a popular vote before they spend a fow pounds of tho nation's money in securing a manuscript of international fame, the earliest complete manuscript in the wholo world of the New Testament, which is particularly sacred to the people of England. "Was it not right that the Government should say it was a thing that England ought to possess when it was for sale?"

"The great majority of Britons," says tho "Manchester Guardian," "are like Mr. Tinker in their inability to read the mauueript, perhaps like Mr. Maxtor., who declared that, he would not endeavour to pronounce its name. Are those #ood masons for an attitude which, carriocl to its logical conclusion, loads to barbarism?

"If a few scholars only can appreciate the fine uncials and full interest of the 'Codex Sinaiticus,' the British people, nourished in 11m Bihln as few others, should fool some pride that it now owns another of tho three or four most ancient and most perfect of New Testament sources."