Sir Henry (who with great good sense had already taken precaution that his position at the British Museum should not be known to his host at Pomard, in the hope of precluding any exaggeration of terms) remonstrated against the burden of such a demand, but all entreaty was vain. The Baron was bent on having—in addition to his £4400—either a step in nobility, or, at the least, a handsome remission of customs duty. The Trustees, in the end, declined to treat. When it came to Sir Harris NICOLAS’S knowledge that ELLIS’S journey to Pomard was apparently to have no result in the way of bringing historical manuscripts into England, he felt angry as well as disappointed. It was his earnest belief—whether right or wrong—that a valuable occasion had been somewhat trifled with. He told the story,[25] and treasured up the memory, and both the story and the narrator’s personal reminiscences of the transaction had their share in bringing about the parliamentary enquiry into the affairs of the British Museum. [Sidenote: THE PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY INTO MUSEUM AFFAIRS OF 1835 AND 1836.] Originally, and immediately, that inquiry was proposed to the House of Commons by Mr. Benjamin HAWES, then M.P. for Lambeth, at the instance of a Mr. John MILLARD, who had been employed, for some years, on an Index of MSS., and whose employment (upon very good grounds) had been discontinued. Sir Harris NICOLAS also brought his influence to bear. Mr. HAWES, personally, had a very earnest intention to benefit the Public by the inquiry. But his own pursuits in life were not such as to have given him the literary qualifications necessary for conducting it. With not less wisdom than modesty, when he had carried his motion for a Select Committee, he waived his claim to its chairmanship. The Committee chose for that office Mr. SOTHERON ESTCOURT. The burden of examination, on behalf of the Trustees, was borne—it need not be said how ably—by men of no less mark than Sir Robert Harry INGLIS and the late Earl of DERBY, then Lord Stanley.