The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-02 00:00:00

BILL

The House having gone into Committee on the Bill,
Mr. HEADLAM moved, as an amendment, the addition
of the following words at the end of section 1:—" or in any
banking company which may have had, or may hereafter
have, dealings or transactions with any such councillors,
commissioners, or trustees of such borough."
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL having objected to the
amendment,
The Committee divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment ... ...
Against ... ... -
Majority against ...
The clause was then agreed to.
After some observations from Mr. H. EDWARDS,
The remaining clauses of the Bill were then agreed to, and
the House resumed.
The Mutiny Bill and the Marine Mutiny Bill were se-
verally read a third time, and passed; and
The House adjourned at a Quarter to One o'clock.
Rear-Admini

l 3
37
-24

imiral Berkeley, C. 8., paired off for, with Mr.
Colville, against, Mr. Berkeley's motion on the ballot.
Mr. 'George Thompson paired in favour of Mr. Tre.
lawny's motion on church-rates, with Mr. 1:1. C. Lacy.

_.
WESTAIINSIER- BRIDGE.
The followiu4 is the report • of the Westminster'
bridge Commission of 1851:
" TO THE LORDS CoNXISsIONERS OF HER MAJESTY'S
•
" We, the TREASURY.
directions contained in a letter from your Lord-
Commissioners appointed under the
bhips dated the 20th of May, 1851, nominating us
to b 9 ...ConitnisaiOnera for the purpose of '4 con--
sidering the • best and most convenient site for
0,- new bridge at ,
. vv es tminster and, at the same
time, what will be the best mode of' construction with re-
ference both to the traffic over it and to the purposes of
navigation,' having examined witnesses, and taken the
opinion of several most eminent engineers and architects
eu these points, be—
g- to submit the following report:—
subject of the, rebuilding of Westminster-bridge
has already a
oecupii-
-eu, the attention of three Committees
of
1850. e House of Commons in'the years 1844, 1846, and
_

, ,resolveodf
report of
in the year 1844, it the first of these Committees, made
new bridge Would is stated to be their opinion that a
mended certain notalterations
be required; but they recom-
and strengthening'
thelions for the purpose of improving
- "In the
e present structure.
e The committee 1846 took a different view of the
subject, and
bridge should be unanimously that the present
taken down and that a new bridge
should be constructed.
Committee ,
1850, concurring in this opinion,
r should be taken by Act of Perlis-
structure, in case nupeci)irary bridge adjoining the present
madevnitsetdo
ethreaettaapteeze ('`
cessary; and they ' a work should be rendered ne-
should be made for further recommended than an inquiry
bridge[beam"This not having been commenced,
the expediency of Emu'
Parliament in the "beet? under the power conferred by
ration. 'en of 1850 is open for reconside-
" The subject of our i
erenae to the question of 4 site'
reference
divides inteelf into two
portions—one having
for the new bridge, and
the other as to its ' mode of con.
struction.'
suggested for our consideration:-
1.
e
" 1. That the new bridg© In the evidence we have
eiiritiutre.
taken several sites were
builtt at some distance, from the
rd be on the site of the
he river ; and
present bridge.
adjoining, or as near as
"2. That in should be
pres3e.ntTboraidtgite,anloowoeldr dheown
possible to, the present erectedsue
aldSte of the present bridge,'
be provided without addi-
'"lhlriedagdo vaahnotna
11
hoff3
ot hn t
he_
of those plans, 'that the
inadequat® to the requirements
new the approaches vio
tioeal expense ; but, on the et
geeeeeequeently
her hand we consider that
these approaches are inaee
)orary bridge; and we are
of the present daily increa4mq
inconvenience and danger. fhtraffic, and occasion both
old piers would present
involve the erection of a tem s plan would necessarily
before
necessitate the entire
informed that the site of
thediiittuel,,toiersseinweoonnldst,rmucotrienngv(,rb,e
foundationalso of new piers.
occasion delay and
oul_dianot be overlooked. A
the new one could be
oreommornveaeloofd sheandolwdoborlidd
period of time which
inc,,reposeeotnhaeidceorsitnogl tthhiissrpemlaune, 41.119
the completion of
tuborought into use in less
would necessarily be occupied
temporary bridge. We
these fucceesive siructures shod
ttnernanp7Bramryonbtrnidsgteroemeutltda neoonit
for the new permanent structure ement, and the works
deleay of a temporary
ent structure
could not be canalcom-
eced till the opening otpethrtee
so informed that the
Tnent bridge could not
be constructed in two years.
Toe temporary bridge
is
nouthlde dmeelaaynttihmeepteermaelni
inconvenientd substitute. For
tese reasons we cannot recommen the adoption of the
resent sil3 ti 3 the best Suited for
site
new bridge, and
we deem it desirable to select a
which may enable
Us to avoid the expense and the
bridge.
" With respect to the second plan_
bridge should be built at some distance That the new
We
here
from the present
bridge, lower down the river,'
renewed the in-
quiry
at V
various times been
proposed for a bridge
.in 'lieu of the existing Westmin-
ster-bridge, and which are referteodotothi.n the reports of
the Parliamentary Committees
expense and additional
:13 subject.artilesrrace, the India, 'l'ile
followingoit,.i A sitestl t.,:oa have moremc.re pearrtlice: y attracted our
attention:—Chariue-eross, Richinondijable
to
the
sumo i
dtl,ayt-ti Lira, namely,
securing a permanent communication mots
the river. an increase of