The Sun.
London, England, 1853-10-29 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SA

found that there were original proprietors or share-
holders, and preference shareholders, and that the latter I
were secured something like 10 per cent. before the former
could receive anything. (Hear.) It further appeared
that the preference shareholders, who were to have had
10 per cent., got something like li, and, as might be
supposed, the original shareholders got nothing. At
that time, when the railway mania was great, the com-
pany asked 300,0001. for the bridge, a sum much 1
larger than the committee felt it their duty to recom-
mend
the corporation to give for it. At that time the
Court agreed with the committee in their report. What
now were the altered circumstances alluded to? The
report now produced referred to the former interview,
and the committee, in accordance with the directions of
the Court, had revived the question. They had corre-
sponded with the directors to ascertain what their feel-
ings were, and the answer they had received was
300,000/. If the Court thought this a proper sum,
there was no difficulty in the way of getting the bridge. 1
Was the mover of the amendment (Deputy Pewtress)
prepared to say that 300,0001. was a fair price ? (Hear.)
Deputy PEWTRESS—Quite prepared. (Hear, bear.)
Mr. H. L. TAYLOR was sure the court would not agree
to such a monstrosity. Half 300,0001. as the value of
the bridge was nearer the mark, and if he were allowed
to fix the price he would take 25 per cent. ofF the
150,0001. (Hear, hear.)
Deputy Lo'rr thought the negotiation had been con-
ducted with great prudence and discretion on the part
of the Bridgehouse Estates Committee. The question
was, could the bridge be got for a less sum than
300,0001. ? If not, a new bridge must be built, which
would not only cost snore than 300,000/., but a sum
equally large. for the approaches.
Deputy CORNEY said he believed the public were of
opinion that Southwark-bridge was in a very unsound

state.
Mr. ELLIOTT could hardly have supposed that a speech
could have been made in opposition to the amendment.
The bridge had cost 700,0001., and when the share-
holders offered it at less than half this sum, he thought
the proposal ought not to be rejected, especially as the
bridge was worth ten times its value to the city of Lon-
don. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. T. H. HALL had always hoped there would be an
opportunity of purchasing the bridge for the benefit of
the public, especially as no bridge could ever be built
with suitable approaches on the north and south side at
a less sum than between 800,0001. and 900,0001.
Mr. PHILLIPS said he should support the amendment,
for nobody would venture to deny the absolute utility of
the bridge.
Alderman WIRE said he conceived the question to be,
Was more bridge accommodation required ? It was
agreed on all hands that it was. London-bridge was
over-loaded every day, and this in consequence of the
annexation of railways to the London-bridge terminus,
as well as in consequence of the increase of traffic to
the railway in Fenchurch-street. There was, there-
fore, an absolute necessity, apart from the increase
of population, for additional bridge accommodation
over the Thames. (Hear, hear.) The question was,
whether the corporation, by fair and honest nego-
tiation, could agree with the company, because what-
ever the defects of construction, and whatever its
weakness, yet the bridge was placed in the very centre of
the City, and it would, with all the openings now sur-
rounding it, relieve to an immense degree the traffic pass-
ing from the two sides of the river. (Hear.) It was
said that 300,0001. was a very large sum. So it was ;
and he should not agree to the payment of so extrava-
gant an amount unless others thoroughly conversant
with the value of property of this description declared
this to be a fair and reasonable equivalent for the bridge.
Mr. NORRIS thought it exceedingly desirable that the
court should have a report from the committee as to
what the cost of a new bridge would be.
Alderman HUMPHERY said if Southwark-bridge were
thrown to the public, it would cost the corporation
5,000/. a year to keep it iu repair. He had himself
been over it only last week with two engineers, for the
purpose of examining it, when they discovered many
portions of it to be in a very dangerous state. He
thought 10,0001. nearer the value of the bridge than
300,000/.
The amendment was then put, and declared to be
carried.
Mr. DE JERSEY then moved that the words after
" durability of the Southwark-bridge" be omitted.
Mr. Deputy BLAKE seconded the motion, which was
negatived.
The amendment was again put and carried, and the
court adjourned.

LORD PALMERSTON ON CHOLERA AND

NATIONAL FASTS.

At the ordinary meeting of the Presbytery of Edin-
burgh, on Wednesday, the Moderator stated that in
consequence of the conversation which had taken place
at the previous meeting on the propriety of a day of hu-
miliation and prayer on account of the visitation of
cholera, he had written to Lord Palmerston, stating that
" the members of Presbytery were of opinion that it was
likely, under the circumstances, that a national fast
would be appointed on Royal authority. For this reason
(the communication proceeded to say) they delayed
making an appointment for this locality, and directed
me, in the meantime, respectfully to request that you
would be pleased to say—if you feel yourself at liberty
to do so—whether the appointment of a national fast by
the Queen is in contemplation."
In reply, the following letter was received from the
Home-office :

" Whitehall, Oct. 19, 1853.
" Sir—l am directed by Viscount Palmerston to
acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 15th in-
stant, requesting, on behalf of the Presbytery of Edin-
burgh, to be informed whether it is proposed to appoint
a day of national fast on account of the visitation of the
cholera, and to state that there can be no doubt that
manifestations of humble resignation to the Divine Will,
and sincere acknowledgments of human unworthiness,
are never more appropriate than when it has pleased
Providence to afflict mankind with some severe visita-
tion ; but it does not appear to Lord Palmerston that a
national fast would be suitable to the circumstances of
the present moment.
" The Maker of the Universe has established certain
laws of nature for the planet in which we live, and the
weal or woe of mankind depends upon the observance or
the neglect of those laws. One of those laws connects
health with the absence of those gaseous exhalations
which proceed from over-crowded human beings, or from
decomposing substances, whether animal or vegetable ;
and those same laws render sickness the almost inevit-
able consequence of exposure to those noxious influences.
But it has at the same time pleased Providence to place
it within the power of man to make such arrangements
as will prevent or disperse such exhalations so as to ren-
der them harmless, and it is the duty of man to attend
to those laws of nature, and to exert the faculties which
Providence has thus given to man for his own welfare.
" The recent visitation of cholera, which has for the
moment been mercifully checked, is an awful warning
given to the people of this realm that they have too
much neglected their duty in this respect, and that those
persons with whom it rested to purify towns and cities,
and to prevent or remove the causes of disease, have not
been sufficiently active in regard to such matters. Lord
Palmerston would, therefore, suggest that the best course
which the people of this country can pursue to deserve
that the further progress of the cholera should be stayed,
will he to employ the interval that will elapse between
the present time and the beginning of next spring in
planning and executing measures by which those por-
tions of their towns and cities which are inhabited by
the poorest classes, and which, from the nature of things,
must most need purification and improvement, may be
freed from those causes and sources of contagion which,
if allowed to remain, will infallibly breed pestilence, and
be fruitful in death, in spite of all the prayers and
fastings of a united but inactive nation. When nAn has
done his utmost for his own safety, then is the time to
invoke the blessing of Heaven to give effect to his ex-
ertions.—l am, sir, your obedient servant,
" HENRY FITZROY."

The reading of this letter from the Home Secretary
excited a good deal of sensation among the members of
Presbytery.
Rev. Dr. CLARK said— It is not usual, I dare say, to
make any remark on communications of this kind, but I
feel called upon to say that I totally dissent from the
doctrines contained in that letter, and that I can be no
party to share in the responsibility of those who refuse,
or at least who decline, to give an opportunity to her
Majesty's subjects to meet together for prayer on the
occasion of so fearful a visitation. I do not wish to
make any remark on men in high places, but it is the
first time, and I hope it will be the last, that any Secre-
tary of State has ever made any communication of this
kind to any Presbytery.
Rev. Dr. MUIR—I am sure we all concur in the
statement made by our excellent friend. There can be
only one sentiment of unmingled pity and regret enter-
tained by us that such a document should ever emanate
from a professedly Christian Government.
Rev. D. MACFARLANE—Concurring as I do in the
views expressed in regard to this communication from
the Home-office, there is required no further expression
of opinion from me on that subject. I would only ven-
ture to propose that we should take no further Steps in
this matter, hut that we should report this communica-
tion to the Synod, which meets next week, so that
whatever is done may be done not as a presbytery,
but by our brethren within the bounds of the pro-
vince.
Rev. Dr. Mum—That reference of the matter to the
Synod is only, of course, as regards the time. There
is
no dubiety on our minds as to the necessity for
appoint-
ing a day of humiliation. (Hear.)
Rev. Mr. SMITH thought it was desirable, as suggested
by Dr. Crawford at last meeting, that in the meantime
some steps should be taken to see if a day could be ap-
pointed for united Christian worship, and that would be
acceptable to the various denominations. He thought
some communication might be made that there might
be some sort of co-operation.
Rev. Dr. MACFARLANE added that, as a presbytery,
they, of course, could do nothing to that effect. Dr.
Cranford had cx proprio mote made such a suggestion
at last meeting, and, of course, it was open to him to
snake any private communication that might secure that
object.

-Dr. BRYCE expressed his surprise and regret that any
letter should be sent from such an authority to the
Presbytery of Edinburgh, and contended that the Mo-
derator's letter called for no such response.
Rev. Dr. STEVEN also said that he regarded the docu-
ment as unworthy of any Christian Government or
governor.

- On the question being put, whether the document
should be engrossed,
Dr. CLARK moved that it should not, but that it
should be kept in retentis, which was agreed to.
The Moderator was instructed simply to acknowledge
that the letter had been received and laid before the
Presbytery.