282 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



[Sept. 



from the region of Belgrave-square to the right bank of the river, and 

 generally to Lambeth, Southwark, and London bridge, and the railway 

 termini now established in its neighbourhood, or hereafter to be so estab- 

 lished. It has been also suggested, as a consequence of such removal of 

 M'estniinster bridge, tliat a new bridge might be thrown over the Thames 

 at the east of Whitehall yard, with an access from Charing-cross, and 

 another access from the Horse Guards. But independently of the objec- 

 tion, more or less valid, of ilisturbiog the present traflic from Charing-cross 

 to the north, and from George-street, the rest of \t estraiuster, and the 

 parks to the west, the committee think it right to refer to the evidence of 

 Mr. Kendel in 1844 ; '■ I do not believe that there is a part of the Thames 

 better suited for a bridge, by which I mean a permanently founded bridge, 

 to stand upon, than the site of Westminster bridge." It is right to add, 

 that the approach to the actual bridge from the left, or Middlesex bank of 

 the river, is carried along Bridge-street, almost the whole of the property 

 on the north side of which is part of the bridge estates ; and therefore, 

 that a new bridge, on the existing site, would be erected with little sacri- 

 fice of that property ; and that a new bridge erected to the north of the 

 present structure, that is, further down the river, and at a better point of 

 view for regarding the New Palace, need involve no other sacrifice of the 

 bridge estates than that of the ten houses forming part of the north side of 

 Bridge-street, and without any considerable outlay in the purchase of the 

 other houses on the same side. In connexion with this consideration, it 

 was at one time assumed, that, though there was no prospect of perma- 

 nently preserving the present bridge, it might, nevertheless, continue avail- 

 able for the temporary passage over the river, while the new bridge was in 

 the course of erection in Juxta-position to it on the north. But Mr. Wal- 

 ker urged, in the spring of 1845, the erection of a temporary bridge as 

 even at that time desirable ; and he has urged it with increasing earnest- 

 ness in the course of the present examination. He estimates the first cost 

 of a temporary bridge, of which he has prepared a plan, at £40,000 ; and 

 he considers that a certain portion of that expenditure might be recovered 

 by the sale of the timber forming the materials of that temporary bridge, 

 when the new bridge should be opened ; and that the remaining portion of 

 the cost of such temporary bridge would be met by the value of the mate- 

 rials of the existing bridge, if used up ou the spot. 



Estimate of New Bridge. 

 Your committee will now proceed to consider what means remain in the 

 hands of the commissioners of M'estminster bridge, in aid of the expense 

 of a new structure; and what, in the first instance, is the constitution of 

 the commission itself. 



The management of Westminster bridge is in the hands of 94 commis- 

 sioners : 26 sit by virtue of their offices ; 57 by virtue of their seats in 

 the House of Commons, as representing the metropolitan counties ; and 

 11 sit as elected by virtue of the Bridge Act, 9 Geo. II. The annual 

 expense of that management, irrespective of the expense of repairs, is in 

 salaries : 



£ s. d. 

 Treasurer . . . . 300 

 Clerk . . . . 40 



Cleik of the Works . . . 140 

 Sir James M'Adam for "coating the 

 road," including a small sum to himself 

 for superintendence . . . 772 10 

 Police . . . . 169 10 

 Gas .... 65 



1,487 6 

 The general expenditure in connexion with the bridge from the 5th of 

 April, 1810, to the present time, that is to say, to the quarter ending 5th of 

 July, 1846, has been £190,221 ISs. lOid. There is a further sum re- 

 maining due to Mr. W. Cubitt, under his contract ; and another sum due 

 to Mr. Walker in respect to his per-centage. Probably, if the account 

 could be closed at the date of this report, the aggregate charged and 

 chargeable upon Westminster bridge would not be less than £200,000 

 from the 5th April, 1810, to the Cth July, 1846. 



The sum actually expended is distributed over three periods : I. From 

 the 5th April, 1810, to 5lh April, 1838, when the commissioners began 

 their great system of repairs and alterations in the structure and founda- 

 tions of the bridge. II. From the 51h April, 1838, when that great system 

 may be held to have commenced, to the 5th April, 1844, which may be 

 taken as the period when the attention of a committee of the House of 

 Commons was called to the question of the expediency or inexpediency of 

 continuing that system. III. From the 5th April, 1844, to the 5tb July, 

 1846, namely, from about the period when the said committee concurred 

 in the expediency of con, inning the system of repairs, and thereby encou- 

 raged the commissioners to proceed therein, to the period when the present 

 committee, on a review of all the circumstances which had occurred up to 

 the 15th July, 1846, unanimously, on that day, recommended the removal 

 of the existing bridge and the erection of a new bridge. 

 The sum for the repairs under the old system, 



and for management, &c. was for the first £ s. d. 



period 83,097 6 9i 



The sum for the repairs under the new system, 

 and for management, &c. was for the second 



period 81,341 16 8 



And for the third period .... 25,782 12 o 



190,221 15 li)i 



In addition to this sum, in addition to the two items which remain 

 chargeable upon the bridge estates for work already done, and for the per- 

 centage upon it, it must always be remembered that, in order to complete 

 the great system of repairs commenced in 1838, two, at least, of the piers 

 remain to be included in that system, at an expense proportionate to that 

 of the others, and the widening of the bridge 12 feet to make it equal in 

 width to London Bridge, that is to say, building a bridge 12 feet broad, in 

 union wilb the existing bridge, on its south side, at a cost of £40,000, the 

 aggregate of all which was stated by Mr. \\ alker, the professional adviser 

 of the bridge commissioners, at £100,000, about the time when the works 

 generally were discontinued on the bridge ; namely, in the early summer 

 of 1845. 



The House will observe that the committee in their resolutions took the 

 sum remaining to complete the repairs, and which might be saved and 

 applied to a new bridge, if those repairs were discontinued, at no more 

 than £70,000 ; they also took the amount which might be raised on the 

 credit of the bridge estates, in aid of the fund for erecting a new bridge, 

 at no more than £100,000 ; — in both cases preferring to understate rather 

 than to overstate the facts on which their recommendation has been found- 

 ed ; — but, as they have placed on record the evidence, parole and docu- 

 mentary, which they received on the general subject, — the excess of charge 

 which might remain to be incurred if a new bridge were not built, and the 

 excess of assets, above the amount which they have been willing to take as 

 available for a new bridge, if such new bridge be built, \\M be open to 

 the judgment of the House. 



The commissioners began the works with an amount of £51,124 19s. 6d. 

 in the funds, and a cash balance of £4,299 Os. lOJd., being the accumula- 

 tions of their income above their expenditure. Since that time, besides 

 the expenditure of their current income, sales have been made, in order 

 to provide for the repairs which they had undertaken. These sales have 

 reduced the capital to £10,000 Consols, giving an income, after deducting 

 the properly tax, of £291 5s. The value of their estates was estimated 

 by their architect and surveyor, Philip Haidwicke, Esq., in 1843, at 

 £172,521. 



The aggregate of this sum, and of the funded property, might almost 

 have suiHced, according to some of the plaus before the committee of 1844, 

 to build a new bridge ; or if not, at all even's to have required but a com- 

 paratively small sum from the public Exchequer in order to complete the 

 whole structure, as well as the approaches, of a new bridge. 



It is right to recollect that the case of bridges in the metropolis differs 

 widely from the case of those in the counties of the empire ; not only in- 

 asmuch as all the Queen's subjects have a common interest in their resort 

 to her capital, and a share in the fame which its aggrandisement rellects 

 ou all her dominions ; but specially, because, perhaps from this cause, the 

 State did, in fact, erect the only bridge which for centuries existed in 

 London; and in the last century did create, directly and indirectly, by 

 grants from the Treasury and by money raised by lotteries, the very fund 

 from which the present Westminster bridge was actually itself builtaiiun- 

 dred years ago. If, therefore, it be said, that the nation does not erect 

 bridges in the county towns of England, or did not erect the other existing 

 bridges in the metropolis, it may be replied, that the case of Westminster 

 bridge, built in a large part by annual votes from the Treasury, stands on 

 difi'ereot and now exclusive grounds ; that the structure has been adopted 

 by the nation ; and that when Parliament enacted, — see 9 Geo. II., c. 29, 

 s, 20, — that it should be extraparochial, and should not be a couuty 

 bridge, chargeable either to Middlesex or Surrey, — see same Act, s. 21, — 

 it sanctioned its claim to be national, and to be sustained at the expense of 

 the empire. 



The expense however of a new bridge, if a new bridge shall be deemed 

 essential, will not, as alreudy shown, necessarily fall on the State exclu- 

 sively. It was calculated in 1S44 that a sum of £172,521 could be raised 

 on the credit of the bridge estates, irrespective of a comparatively small 

 amount of funded properly then in the hands of the commissionei's: and 

 even deducting from the number of their houses, those which would be 

 required for the completion of a most magnificent approach on the West- 

 minster side, if that site should be adopted, and indeed on the Surrey side 

 also, there will still be left, in addition to the balance of the fuuded pro- 

 perty, enough to raise at least ±;100,000 



Resolution of Committee. — In this slate of things, the committee felt 

 themselves justified in coming to the resolution which on the 15th of July 

 they adopted unanimously, — That it is expedient that the present bridge be 

 pulled down, and that a new bridge be constructed ; and it is further ex- 

 pedient that a Bill be brought into Parliament next session to transfer to 

 Her Majesty's Commissioners of Woods, ic. the property of the bridge 

 commission; just consideration being had to the claims of those officers of 

 that commission whose services should be discontinued. 



Partial Dkstkuction of the New Locks at Bristol. — By the 



pressure of the high spring tide, on the nigfat uf August i^tti, at CumberlaDd basin, the 

 extensive works now- in progrsss by the dock compacy, with a view to widenhig tlie 

 soutbero entrace lock sulaciently to ndmit of the ingress to the port of vessels of the ca- 

 pacity of the Great Western ai'd Great Briiaiu, were seriously iujured. In order to 

 admit of the necessary excavations and ercLtions, the tlow of the tide had to be kept out 

 of the lock in question, and this was sought to be effected in the usual way, by driving 

 double rows of piles and loading the interstices, so as to form po\ver.*'ul dams. 



