CHAP. II. OLD LoXDoX BlMlxiK. 265 



w;is the first to introduce in England. The innovation 

 gave rise to a lively controversy at the time, in wliidi 

 Dr. Johnson took part, in opposition to Mr. Mylne, 

 and in support of liis friend (Jwvn, wh<> was tlie aiitlior 

 of a rival ]];in. Boswell, in his 6 Life of Johnson/ 

 defends the design of Mylne, his countryman, and adds, 

 "it is well known that not only has Blackfriars Bridge 

 never sunk either in its foundation or in its arches, which 

 were so much the subject of contest, but any injuries 

 which it has suffered from the effects of severe frosts, have 

 been already, in some measure, repaired with sounder 

 stone, and every necessary renewal can be completed 

 at a moderate expense." This was written in 1791, only 

 twenty years after the bridge had been opened ; and, 

 though it may have been true then, it is so no longer. 

 When the numerous heavy piers of old London Bridge 

 were removed, the velocity of the unimpeded tide, sweep- 

 ing up and down the river twice in every twenty- 

 four hours, and the consequent increased scour of the 

 water along the bottom of the Thames above bridge, 

 soon began to tell upon the foundations both of Black- 

 friars and Westminster Bridges ; and they exhibited the 

 unsightly appearance of numerous props and centerings 

 to prevent the further subsidence of their foundations. 

 Hence Labelye's bridge at Westminster has already been 

 removed, and the probability is that before long Mylne's 

 bridge at Blackfriars will share the same fate. 



the stone, .which must necessarily be had not the foundations of the structure 



capable of resisting the severest com- proved defective, Blackfriars Bridge 



jnvssion. Mylne overcame these vari- | might have stood for a thousand \var* 



O118 difficulties with Lireat ability: and and more. 



