rehuikiiiig London Bridge, 35 



the screen of what is called the Orphans' Fund, and indirectly, 

 by the introduction of a clause to exempt the corporation ^^from 

 the payment of any damage to persons, or their houses, estates, 

 vessels, or property, by reason of the increased rise of the tide 

 of the said river above the said bridge, or the alteration of the 

 channels or currents of the said river, or of the want of water 

 for navigating the same, nor for any nuisaiicc, obstruction, or 

 injury, to be occasioned thereby*." 



But it being understood that the direct taxes might be in- 

 digestible, that part of the bill is struck out, and a less visible 

 mode of taxation is to be adopted, by allowing the Commis- 

 sioners of Customs and of Excise, of England, Ireland, and 

 Scotland, with consent of the Lords of the Treasury, to remit 

 taxes on stone, brick, timber, or other materials used in build- 

 ing the bridge, and its appurtenances. For this purpose, the 

 ordinary course of Government is to stop, and there is to be a 

 particular interposition; but the poor people, who may be 

 ruined in their fortunes, diseased by the damps and miasms 

 caused by tlie saturation of their habitations by frequent floods, 

 or overwhelmed by floods, from an inabihty to provide against 

 them, consequent on this revolution of the ancient and now 

 constitutional habit of the river, are left to the care of a higher 

 Power, who has set his bow in the heavens as a token. The 

 scheme seems now to bef, to pass the act and get up the bridge, 

 relying, in the case of a deficiency of money to rebuild it, that 

 Government would be compelled, by the urgency of the occa- 

 sion, to provide the means. Such a scheme, in respect to the 

 Post-office, foiled : but that was a singular case, an exception 

 to the general success of such policy. 

 The new bridge, proposed by the late Mr. Rennie, 



was estimated by him to cost ^430,000 



A temporary bridge 20,000 



The purchase of property \ On the north side 150,000 



for approaches /On the south side 150,000 



^750,000 

 This sum, by reference to absolute costs, compared 



• Those who have built their houses low in the low-lands, and feed their 

 cattle there, the proprietors, and others, who have allowed the foundations 

 of their bridges to be laid at an insufiicicnt depth, are informed that they 

 came to the river, and not the river to them ; and that they ought, in 

 choosing such a neighbour, to have provided against such an event as the 

 proposed alteration of the habits of it. 



t It would have been but justice to state that this scheme is not to be 

 imputed to the corporation, which has from the first remonstrated agamst 

 the destruction of London Bridge, as a project set on foot by interested 

 persons. And to the assertions of those who declared their conviction, from 

 what had conic to their knowledge of the proceedings of the Committee 

 of the House of Cumnions that the whole wub a job, no answer has ever 

 been given.— Edit. E 2 wilh 



