Some people say that museum should be free where as others opine that some entry fee should be there. Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

IT IS AN INPORTANT TO KEEP INFORMED EVERYONE ABOUT THE ANCIENT ARTS AND THE gallery PLAYS THE VITAL ROLE IN IT. CERTAIN FOLKS SUGGESTED TO CHARCHE SOME cost TO VISIT THE MUSEUM, WHILE OTHERS OPPOSE THE IDEA AND ARGUE TO MAKE THE access FREE IN THE gallery. IN MY VIEW, IT SHOULD BE BOTH BY TAKING access FEES TO MINIMUL AMOUNT THAT EVERYINE CAN AFFORD TO VISIT. FIESTLY,

THIS

ESSAY WILL DISCUSS THE BENEFIT OF COLLECTING SOME ENTRY cost AND

SECONDLY

WHY IT SHOULD BE COSTLESS TO SEE IT. FROM A PUBLIC POINT OF VIEW, IF THE VISIT TO gallery IS FREE, ALL THE CLASS FOLKS FROM WEATHY TO IMPOERISHED WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW ABOUT THE ANCIENT HISTORY OF THE PLACE OR NATION.

THIS

FACILITY INCREASE THE FUNDAMENTAL GENERAL KNOWLEDGE TO KEEP AND SECURE THE CULTURE OF THE TERRIORY.

FOR INSTANCE

, ACORDING TO THE UK CULTURAL SOCIETY DEPARTMENT, 70% OF THE COMMON PUBLIC USED TO GO TO SEE THE AND EXCITE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE TERRITPRY DUE TO FREE ENTRY OF TH MUSEUM.

IN CONTRAST

, IF THERE IS SOME TO ENTER IN THE MUSEUM, THAT HELP TO MANTAIN THE OLDER ITEAMS IN THE PLACE AS ANCIENT THINGS REQUIRE MORE AND HIGH MANTAINACE CHARGE. IF IT IS TOTALLY FREE,

THEN

THE GOVERNMENT PROOVES UNCAPABLE TO RESERVE THING AS IT IS BEFORE. AND AT THE END, IT HAS TO DISCARDED BY THE PLACE AS IT CONSIDERED UNUSEFUL. FOR EXAMPLE, THE REGIME OF THE AUSTRALIA, ALWAYS CHARE SOME FEE TO VISITORS AND

THAT IS

THE REASON OF THEIR OLDER ITEAMS LOOKS FRESH AND NEW AS PER THE AUSTRALIAN HISTORICAL SECTION. IN CONCLUSION, IT IS A GOOD NOTION TO CHARGE SOME FEE BUT KEEP TO MINIMAL AMOUNT. SO

THIS

THE WAY AUTHORITY WOULD HAVE SOME FINACIAL SUPPORT TO PRESEARVE IT. AUTOMATICALLY, PUBLIC ARE ABLE TO GO TO SEE THE THINGS IN IT. IN CONCLUSION, IF THE FEE KEPT TO MINIMAL AMOUNT, POOR PEOPLE

ALSO

GETS A CHANCE TO KNOW ABOUT IT.