SIR,--Owing to Sir Charles’s absence in Paris, I have not been able to obtain his final reply on the subject of these claims till this morning. I explained the purport of my interview with you last Saturday, when you stated that your offer was limited to the written paper which you read to me, and of which you had previously furnished me with a copy. The terms of this paper are as follows:-- “PAST ACCOUNTS. “Commission on works to which commission is applicable, 3 per cent. “Amount to 2nd October, 1854, 1,506,845_l._ “Commission for measurement on the cost of works to which measurement applies, 1 per cent. “These commissions to cover all questions of claims of any kind in respect to the Houses of Parliament. “FUTURE EXPENDITURE. “Commission on works performed, 3 per cent. “Commission for measurement on all expenditure to which measurement is applicable, 1 per cent. “Treasury, 26 May, 1855. “FUTURE. “To prevent misunderstanding in future, Sir C. Barry is to order no furniture, &c., except under an authority through the Board of Works from the Treasury.”[123] To these terms I objected that they did not cover a very large amount of services relating to the Houses of Parliament, but not leading to expenditure; and further, there was another claim for interest on outlay, and on deferred payments, and generally, assuming the rates of commission were of the amounts offered by you, I considered that they ought to be on the amount expended, past and future. To your remark, “that the claim for extra services could not be of large amount, and hence you considered it was covered by the commission offered,” and that the claim for interest you could not admit in any way, I replied first, that the services were very considerable, in corroboration of which I now beg to forward a rough statement of them. And I feel I am justified in adhering to this part of the claim, which I fully believe would extend to a sum of at least 10,000_l._ For you will have the goodness to bear in mind that these claims run over nearly twenty years, that they have been the subject of inquiry by no less than seven Committees of the House of Commons, besides two official references relating to Dr. Reid’s plans of ventilation (exclusive of that relating to his final claims, which has been duly met), and that in every case Sir C. Barry has acted with full sanction and authority. I put forward this claim therefore with perfect confidence, because had it been an ordinary case between an independent architect and an ordinary employer, the claim could be supported fully on a _quantum meruit_; and why an independent architect like Sir C. Barry should not have at least the same payment from the Government I am wholly at a loss to understand.