The Express.
London, England, 1863-05-13 00:00:00

lIIOR WATICRAT LONDON iILIDOIL

Two DooZlica4isiToo;:io.-7.7A1100r1h.
tu.itotoow.-liorodsg. 114 Ora .. . Afiassoa. Oh. On.

LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MAY la

THE citizens of London, delivered from their
fear of Sir Glows GREY and Sir RICHARD
MAYNE, are alarmed for the safety of their
daintiest thoroughfare. Ludgate-hill, which has
been called the Regent-street of the City, is threat-
ened with something like destruction. Three years
ago the Corporation, which has no raison d'etre but
that of being the protector of the interests of the
citizens, permitted the London, Chatham, and
Dover Railway Company to obtain an Act autho-
rising them to carry a viaduct across Ludgate-
bill. The time has come for carrying out that
project. The Company must purchase all the land
they want by next August, or forego this portion
of their scheme. But time has brought expe-
rience and reflection. A viaduct may sound fairly
in a speech, or agreeably diversify a landscape ;
but a real railway teldge across a narrow, crowded
street, obstructing light and air, eclipsing St.
Paul's, and replacing attractive shops by a mon-
ster beam, is too terrible to think of. So the
citizens are meeting in councils and committees,
and petitioning Parliament, besides addressing indi-
vidual legislators, praying to be protect3d from this
invasion of brick and iron. The tradesman of
Ludgate-hill are naturally most active in this op-
position ; but the great bankers and merchant',
whose interests are least local, have also
joined in it. The City petition against the
construction of the bridge bears amongst other
names those of Baring Brothers and Co. ;
Prescott, Grote, and Co.; N. M. Rothschild
and Sons ; Glyn, Mills, and Co. ; Finley, Hodg-
son, and Co. ; Copestake, Moore, and Co. ; Jones
Loyd and Co. ; Roberts, Lubbock, an Co. ;
J. and R. Morley ; Leaf, Sons, and Co. ; Master-
man and Co., and Gregson and Co. It is only
by favourable chance that the opponents of the
Bill have got an interval for their efforts. Had
the Chatham and Dover Company remained of the
same mind, and quietly proceeded with the con-
struction of the bridge within the prescribed time,
it would have been difficult, if not impossible, to
hinder them. It so happens, however, that through
some cause the Company is not prepared to do so,
and it has now two Bills before Parliament : one
for extending the time for purchasing the required
land from August, 1863, to August, 1885; and ano.
ther for transferring their powers for the construction
of this portion of their original "cheme to a new
Corporation—the Ludgate Station and Junction
Railways Company. Thus the whole project of
the proposed Railway Viaduct is raised anew, and
the Legislature has an opportunity of reconsidering
it after an interval of three years on its merits.
The Ludgate Station Company's Bill is to be
opposed in Parliament by the City Corporation.
The position of this body is of course considerably
weakened by the fact that three years ago they
consented to the construction of the viaduct, in the
avowed belief that the railway would prove of
great advantage to the trade and commerce of the
City. Parliament, however, will look to the public
advantage, and not allow the general interest to be
prejudiced by the omissions of this or that set of
men. Now there can be no two opinions about
the effect of the proposed work upon the int-
portant neighbourhood of which, if constructed,
it would be the most conspicuous feature. This is
not simply the concern of the few householders
in a short street. The millions of inhabitants
II of London and the millions of Englishmen from all
parts of the country who annually visit the capital
have an interest in the preservation of its main
artery. The proposed viaduct, besides irreparably
injuring Ludgate-hill as a place of business, would
destroy the prospect of the greatest Protestant
temple in the world from that side by which nine
people out of ten approach it for the first time. A
distinguished foreign author of our own race has
remarked on the selfish and even cruel aspect
which belongs to the great mechanical work of
this age, though he had not seen the frightful struc-
ture built at the southern foot of London-bridge.
The same impression would be produced by any
bridge thrown across the proposed site. No
amount of surface decoration could possibly com-
pensate the loss of that satisfaction of which
the obstruction would rob everybody who passes
down Fleet-street or up Ludgate-hill.
The question has, however, become practical.
The local opponents of the Bill urge in their
petitions that the purposes of the railway will be
served equally well by the substitution of a tunnel
for a viaduct. That is a proposition in