The Sun.
London, England, 1854-07-15 00:00:00

THE METROPOLITAN BRIDGES.

We have just received an early copy of the report
submitted to the House by the Select Committee on
Metropolitan Bridges :
" Your committee have examined witnesses, with a
view to discharging the duty entrusted to them, and have,
in the first place, directed their attention to the state and
condition of the several metropolitan bridges. With re-
spect to these, they have to report that, with two excep-
tions, namely, Blackfriars and Westminster, the whole of
the metropolitan bridges are in a satisfactory and durable
condition. Southwark, Waterloo, and Vauxhall bridges,
Charing-cross foot bridge, are toll bridges, in the hands
of private companies. Asto Blackfriars-bridge, the evidence
brought before your committee leaves no doubt as to its
being in an unsatisfactory state ; and the Court of Common
Council has approved of a proposal for removing the pre-
sent structure, and replacing it by a new bridge. Your
committee do not consider it within their province to re-
port on the condition of Westminster-bridge, as a contract
for pulling it down and rebuilding it has actually been
entered into.

" With regard to the adequacy of the present bridges in
the metropolis to accommodate the existing traffic, your
committee have examined numerous witnesses, whose
opinion they consider valuable as connected with the
bridges ; and they report that the present accommodation
is insufficient ; that there is every probability of this defi-
ciency being still further felt, and that it is necessary to
adopt measures to mitigate the evil. To meet this end se-
veral schemes have been submitted to your committee : Ist,
It is proposed to open free of tolls those bridges which are
at present private property. 2ndly, To increase the width, and
consequently the convenience, of some of the existing
bridges. 3dly. To enlarge and improve the approaches to
them. 4thly. To make the Thames Tunnel available for
traffic. sthly. To construct a tubular iron superway, so
as to connect the most important points in the metropolis;
and, lastly, to build additional bridges.
" After a careful consideration of the evidence which
has been brought before them, your committee con-
sider that the expediency of removing the present tolls,
on the different bridges between Staines and London-
bridge, is established. They find that, by the pre-
sent system, the traffic is diverted from the direct route ;
and in consequence the open thoroughfares are choked, and
rendered at times almost impassable, by the collection of
merchandise and passenger traffic, which would disperse
and spread itself if there were more channels of escape
provided. This inconvenience is especially felt at London-
bridge, where not only delay but even danger is incurred
by the concentration of traffic on one spot, owing not only
to the ordinary London traffic, but to the additional traffic
produced by the neighbouring railway termini. Similar
inconvenience is felt at Westminster-bridge ; and your
committee are of opinion that in both instances it would
bo materially diminished if the intermediate toll bridges
wore thrown open to the public. The evidence with re-
spect to the bridges from Vauxhall to Staines establishes
the fact that by the present tolls not only is the public in-
convenienced, local trade impeded, and the accommodation
diminished, but that the burden of the tax falls most
heavily upon those who are least able to bear it.
" Your committee are of opinion that, although it may
become necessary, owing to the ever-increasing traffic of
the metropolis, to build additional bridges, it will be better,
in the first instance, to ascertain the effect of throwing the
present toll bridges open to the public, provided they can
be obtained on reasonable terms.

" Upon the question as to whether additional bridges
are required, your committee have examined Mr. Bennoch,
Mr. Tite, Mr. Page, Mr. M`Lean, and other competent
witnesses. These witnesses agree in the necessity of pro-
viding further means of communication across the river.
" The sites proposed by them are-
-Ist. Tower-hill, below London-bridge.
2ndly. St. Paul's.
3dly. Charing•cross.
4thly. Horseferry-road.
" Without entering into the comparative merits of
these several propositions, your committee are of opinion
that the bridges opposite Charing-cross and St. Paul's will
become speedily necessary, especially should the negotia-
tion with the proprietors of the toll-paying bridges prove
abortive.

" With regard to the best mode of providing for the
purchase, and the future maintenance and increase of the
bridge accommodation, your committee are decidedly of
opinion that a rate to be levied over the whole of the dis-
trict to be benefited by the proposed alterations is at once
the most just and the most simple plan to be adopted."

THE RIFF PIRATES.—ADMIBALTT, July 12, 1854.—
Sir,—With reference to the recent acts of piracy which
have been committed on the Riff coast, I am commanded
by my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to ac-
quaint you, for the information of the committee for
managing the affairs of Lloyd's, that her Majesty's
steam-sloop Prometheus has been again despatched to
that coast.—(Signed) R. B. OSBORNE. Captain G.
A. Halstead, R.N., Secretary, Lloyd's.
HERTFORD, JULY 13.—CROWN COURT.--M. Ysquierdo
a Spaniard, was placed at the bar to take his trial for the
wilful murder of George Seeles. It will be remembered
that at the Spring Assizes the prisoner was charged with
the same offence, but in consequence of his refusal to
answer any questions that were put to him, or to plead
to the indictment, a jury was empannelled to try the
question whether he was wilfully mute or mute by the
visitation of God, which decided that !re was wilfully
mute. In consequence of the prisoner a giving no au_
swer to the question whether he would wish to be tried
by a jury composed of Englishmen and foreigners, or
not, the trial took place before a jury of Englishmen.
The jury returned a verdict of guilty. Mr. Justice
Erle directed that he should at once be called up for
judgment, and the decision of the jury was explained to
him by the interpreters, and he was asked in the usual
form whether he had anything to urge why sentence of
prisoner
made should not be passed upon him. The
made no answer, and did not betray the slightesritseomneor-
tion when the sentence was pronounced. He left the
bar without uttering a word,