j4 A STATISTICAL ACCOUNT OF THE 



A little out of its order, is mentioned the last unex- 

 edited plan, for erecting a wooden bridge, over the 

 middle ferry, in the year 1767. A subscription for the 

 purpose was circulated, and many respectable citizens 

 agi'eed to contribute. But this, from various causes, 

 fell through ; and all efforts to accomplish the object 

 were suspended for many years. This bridge was 

 contemplated to be of one arch, with stone abutm^ents j 

 a plan still believed by some of its former advocates^ 

 to be practicable and most oeconomical. The intended 

 span was to have been 400 feet: height from the 

 water 47 1-2 feet. 



In theor}^, it seems reconcilable with principles, thai 

 an arch of wood or iron, may be extended to any length 

 of span, with sufficient elevation. The point of either 

 practicability or discretion, has never been precisely fix- 

 ed. In a modern proposal for a single arch of iron, 

 over the Thames^ in place of old London Bridge^ a project 

 is exhibited for an arch of 600 feet span. All agree 

 ' in the theory^, but practical men shrink at the danger; 

 though there a.re respectable opinions of intelligent the- 

 orists, in favour of its principles. According to the best 

 opinions of practical men here, (among them Mr. JFest- 

 €71 and Mr. Pahner^) one of 200 feet begins to be criti- 

 cal and hazardous. The timber arch of Piscataway 

 bridge, erected by Mr. Palmer, spans 244 feet , but he 

 declared he would not again attempt one of similar extent. 

 The most intelligent among those who have gained ex^ 

 perience in the late structure, believe, that the span in- 

 tended for the Schuylkill, in the last project, the draft 

 whereof has been often seen by them, was too extended 

 for this spot; and tliat it would most probably have faiU 



