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

" London-bridge ...
thavkfriars- bridge ...

Waterloo bridge

Vauxha;l•bridga

" With respect to the height of headway of the centre
arch of the new bridge, we have considered the conve-
nience of the navigation, the proper inclination of the
road for the purposes of traffic, and the effect which the
structure might have on the architectural appearance of
the New Palace.

" In his evidence, given before the Commitve of 1850,
Mr. Barry stated certain conditions which he d:emed
indispensable if the bridge were to be retained iu its
present situation; these were—. That the roadway of
the bridge should be level from shore to shore; that the
width of the roadway should not be less than 100 feet;
that the height of the roadway of the bridge above Tri-
nity wandard should not exceed 20 feet.'
" Thus last condition, if complied with, would leave
for the purposes of navigation a headway of only 16
feet if the bridge were of, iron, and of only 12 feet 6
inches if the arches were constructed of stone. Such a
bridge as Mr. Barry recommends would undoubtedly
improve the
relieving that building from the effects of
the low situation in N./filch it is placed, and, if other
oon.iderations did not interfere, we should agree
with Mr. Barry that the proposed lowness of the bridge
would be an advantage, and that a width which would
give it the character of a terrace, or, as Mr. Barry says,
grand promenade, would be in itself an ornament to
the metropolis, and a convenience for the communica-
tion across the river.

" A briJgo of this limited height and of this ex-
tended width would, however, we believe, be a serious
()Wade to the passage of vessels, while the increase of
the metropolis to the westward renders it important that
every encouragcnsmt should be given to the navigation
of the river.

The height of the centre arch of Westminster-bridge
is 26 feet.

" It has been stated that the largest vessel navigating
the Thames above London-bridge is of 300 tons, and
also that a vessel of that tonnage could pass under an
arch of 25 feet 6 inches of Trinity datum, without any
inconvenience, provided that the arch be of sufficient
span. _ _

We are informed that it would be an advantage to
the coal trade and to consumers, if facilities were af-
forded for the passage of larger vessels, which might
then possibly supersede the smaller craft now employed
in the coal trade of the river. Regarding, therefore,
the interests of the navigation, we are of opinion that
the height of a headway should be limited only by the
easy inclination required for the roadway over the
bridge, and we recommend that the height of headway
of the centre arch should not be less than 25 feet 6
inches above Trinity dation. _ _

" We subjoin the height of headway of the other
bridges across tho Thames : _ . _

feet. inches.
"London-bridge
Blackfriars-bridge
Waterloo-bridge 27 6
Vauxhall-bridge...

" The width of the arch, for the purposes of navigation, is
as important as the headway.
" In an arch of a large span the extent of the headway
is not confined to the exact centre of the arch, but extends
over a wider space, and thereby facilitates the passage of the
vessels.
" The fewer the number of arches adopted, the less will be
the resistance to the current of the stream, and, conse-
quently, there will be the less pressure against the piers 03f
the bridge. The fewer the piers the less also will be the ob-
struction to the navigation. The number of piers li thean.
present bridge contributes to the formation of eddies
shoals in the river. We would, therefore, recommend that,
in constructing the new bridge it should not consist of more
than five arches.
" In our choice of materials we have been guideodf bym theoney
following considerations :—Economy of time and
in the completion of the bridge, and converneuee for the
traffic traffic over the bridge, as well as for the have pre-
tion. Under different circumstances
"that such a bridge
ferred a bridge of stone; but considerionatlen
pumrpigov of naeiga..
would be attended with an increased
t, and would re-
tina further, that its
quire a third more time. to construed.
adoption would necessitate an ad ttional rise of 3 feet
no
6 inches for the roadway over the bbrriiddggee, web()
efueeldl
nobehes ai-
tl
tatiun in recommending that
be
iron structure resting on stone piers.
so much lighter than one ofstone An iron arch being
thA teeregwreinfibre a
spanless pressure
from from the superincumbent weight.
can be obtained in iron
t wthoaunld:bne srteocinuei.red for ethnetycornmnultehtsioins
ofid the iron bridge, and three years the period for the erection
of a stone structure.
',ln accordance with the views here expressed, we sub-
mit the following resolutions, which were unanimously
agreed to :-
1. That the present bridge should be used as a tempo-
rary bridge until a new bridge shall have been constructed.
2. That a new bridge should be constructed adjoining
or as near as possible, to the present bridge on the north side,
that is, lower down the river.
" 3. That the new bridge should not be less than 60 feet
in width, including the footways.
4. That it be constructed of iron, with stone piers.
5. That it consist of no more than five arches.
6. That the height of headway of the centre arch above
Trinity datum be not less than 25ft. Gin.
"7. That it is desirable that no time should be lost in
making preparation for the commencement of the work.
" We beg, in conclusion, with reference to the 7th reso-
lution submitted by us, to state that the dilapidated state
of the present bridge, the uncertain expense of maintaining
it, evee as a I,a,l"r'lly structure, and the inconvenience of
this bridge, both to the fluid and river traffic, render it ,
highly desirable that the permanent bridge should be
commenced
and
4114144 With As little delay as Pali*.