With respect to the decision recorded in their Lordships’ Minute, I regret extremely that I cannot consider it to be worthy of the character which their Lordships assign to it, as being either fair or liberal, for the following reasons:-- 1st. Because it appears to be founded upon reports and statements upon which I have not been furnished with the means of making any reply or observations. 2ndly. Because the remuneration proposed is at variance with the long-established custom of my profession, and is far from adequate, when the elaboration of the work upon which I am engaged, and the extraordinary difficulties and disadvantages which have attended its progress, are duly considered. 3rdly. Because it is also at variance with all past and present practice, in respect of the rate of professional remuneration paid by the Government for all other architectural and engineering works of the country. 4thly. Because it deprives me, not only of all remuneration whatever for many extra services, forming no part of my duties as the architect of the New Palace at Westminster, but also of the repayment of a considerable sum of money which I have disbursed on account of them; and, Lastly. Because the several questions at issue, both those which are strictly professional as well as those which are of a legal character, can only, in my opinion, be fairly solved upon evidence before an arbitrator of high standing, such as those whom I have ventured to propose for the purpose, by whose decision I should be perfectly wiling to abide. I remain, &c., (Signed) CHARLES BARRY. (_g_). CONCLUSION OF TREASURY MINUTE OF JULY, 1856. My Lords can arrive at no other conclusion on this part of the question than that Sir Charles Barry has failed altogether to establish his position, that the remuneration of 25,000_l._ awarded to him in 1838, amounted to 4 per cent. on the estimate then before the Board of Woods, &c. My Lords now advert to the correspondence which passed in the following year on the subject.