The Sun.
London, England, 1847-01-12 00:00:00

REMOVAL OF WESTMINSTER
BRIDGE.

A numerous and respectable meeting of the inhabit•
ants of Westminster, Pimlico, Lambeth, and the adjacent
districts, was held last evening, at seven o'clock, at the
Westminster Literary and Mechanics Institution, Great
Smith-street, Westminster, to consider the proposed erec-
tion of a bridge at Charing-cross, in lieu of Westminster-
bridge.
General Sir De Laces Evans occupied the chair.
Amongst those on the platform we observed the Dean of
Westminster, B. Hawes, Esq., M.P., P. Wood, Esq.,
Q.C., Whateley, Esq., Q.C., Charles Cochrane, Esq.,
Rev. Mr. Ripston, H. A. Hunt, Esq., G. Trollope, Esq.,
J. Wilkinson, Esq., Carter Wood, Esq., W. Frewen,
Esq., W. Hallett, Esq , and a number of other gentlemen.
Mr. TROLLOPE, the hon. secretary, stated that letters
had been received from Mr. Antrobus, M.P., and Mr.
D'Eyncourt, M.P., expressing their inability to attend,
and their desire to support the determination to which
the meeting might arrive.
The CHAIR3IAN, who was received with loud cheers,
said there were several gentlemen on the right and left
of him, who might have been advantageously called to
the chair, and who would have discharged its duties with
more propriety, or at least have been able to give more
effect to any determination to which they might come,
than he could. However, he had been called to that po-
sition on the present occasion is consequence of having
the honour to represent that city in Parliament, and also,
he presumed, because he was one of the Commissioners
of Westminster-bridge. It was not usual on such occa-
sions for the Chairman to enter at length into the details
of the subject to be discussed, that duty devolving upon
those who proposed and seconded the resolutions ; but
really he could not on that occasion withhold from them
some observations, in consequence of a double capacity
in which he found himself placed, independently of his
situation as Chairman. They had been called together,
not really to consider whether there should be another
bridge at some other part of the river, in the place of the
existing bridge, but to consider whether it was
politic or judicious, or just, or right, that that
bridge should be abolished, and to adopt the best means
for preventing its removal.—(Loud cheers.) He was
sure, unless there were some of the representatives pre-
sent, of what he could not help characterising as a job,
to persuade them to the contrary; they would be of
but one opinion.—(Cheers.) It was one of the most
extraordinary jobs that he had ever heard of in the
whole course of his experience.—(Hear, hear.) Many
present were, no doubt, aware of the general outline of
this matter; but, nevertheless, it was his duty to state it
clearly to them. It was now exactly one hundred years
since Parliament passed an Act authorising the con-
struction of the present bridge and the creation of funds
for its maintenance. It appeared, however, that much
wisdom was not exercised in its construction. The
piers were, he believed, originally intended for a
wooden bridge of slight weight, but in the course of its
erection the original determination was abandoned, and
it was resolved to build the bridge of stone. It was
then proposed that the piers should consist of a re
lative substance, in order to support increased weight ;
and, he believed, that one of the scientific gentle-
men concerned, proposed that piles should be inserted
in the bed of the river to secure the slighter piers, which
would have involved an expense of from 5,0001. to
6,000/.; but the Government of that day thought it
better to save the expenditure of such a small sum—
thus acting in contradiction to the well known saying—
" penny wise and pound foolish," and consequently those
piers became insecure, on account of not being sufficient
to bear the increased weight. However, with the aid of
repairs, it remained in a good state for sixty or seventy
years. The cause of the present state of the bridge was
really attributable to the removal of old London-bridge;
the removal having given greater rapidity to the current
both during the flood and reflux of the tides. A portion
of the bottom of the river had thus been carried away,
and thereby rendered the bridge insecure; and in conse-
quence of the expenses that had been incurred in repair-
ing it, a Committee of the House of Commons was ap-
pointed last session to consider what steps should be
adopted. It consisted of several of the ablest men in the
country, and sat for six months. It included some of the
members of the Metropolitan Improvement Commission.
The names of the Members were Lord John Russell, Lord
Palmerston, Lord Robert Grosvenor, Sir R. Inglis, Sir
G. Clarke, Sir H. Douglas, Mr. Cardwell, Mr. Hawes,
Mr. Wise, Mr. Stafford O'Brien, and a great number of
other Members, who had paid great attention to the sub
ject. The fourth resolution in their report which was
laid before the House stated " that, irrespective of the
approaches, the expense of a new stone bridge near the
site of the present bridge, and retaining the present
bridge for temporary use, would not exceed 360,0001.,
according:to the highest of the estimates furnished, either
in 1844 or in the present year ;" whilst the sth resolu-
tion states " that the bridge estates would furnish a clear
surplus of at least 100,0001. in aid of the funds." Such
were the decisive resolutions of that Committee.—(Hear,
hear)—from the evidence adduced before whom, it ap-
peared that no less than about 20,000,000 of people
passed over Westminster-bridge in the course of a year,
and that the increase of both persons and carriages had
been very great of late years ; in fact, that a greater
amount of traffic passed over it than over the four other
bridges, with the exception ofLondon-bridge.—(Cheers.)
In fact, the result of this evidence was, that from
4,000,000 to 5,000,000 of horses passed over the
bridge, and about 20,000,000—nearly the whole
population of this kingdom—in the course of a year.
Perhaps the bridge in its original state, 100 years ago,
was wide enough for the traffic that passed over it ; but
it was not so now. Mr. Barry, he believed, had planned
an iron bridge for the same site, to cost, some said,
260,000/., but objections had been made to it, in conse-
quence of its being considered inadequate for the im-
mense traffic, and the committee appeared to consider
a atone bridge preferable on the same site, or near it,
at a similar cost. The estates of the bridge would
realise about 170,0001., so that the expense to the Ex-
chequer would be comparatively small. The traffic over
the bridge was the greatest bridge traffic in the empire—
in fact he might say, with the exception of London-
bridge—the traffic was greater than over any other in
the whole world—(Loud cheers) ; and this being
reiterated in the recommendations of the committee to
the Legislature, to the astonishment of every ono who
knew anything of Parliamentary proceedings, they were
informed that some parties during the recess, and with
the apparent sanction of the Woods and Forests, but who
they were it was hard to divine, proposed constructing a
new bridge, to wall up in fact this great communication,
and to put an end to all those important interests which
had been congregating together in its vicinity for 100
years.—(Cheers.) He had been seventeen years in Par-
liament, and he never met with anything so astoundin g
so totally opposed to the recommendations of that coni:
mittee, and so totally unheard of, in the history of Par-
liamentary proceedings. He was aware in making these
remarks, that he was in some degree speaking harshly
of the Hon. Gentlemen who were members of the Me-
tropolitan Commission, the head of which wast Lord
Morpeth, for whom he had the greatest
respect,aand he
was sure that they would agree with him, every
act of Lord Morpeth's life had by
been guided that
the mosti
enlightened and generous motives.—(Cheers.) B was perfectly convinced that his name had beenutii;- properly used, and that he had been imposed
the grossest mermen—Meer, hear.) But thnepyonhaldn
fallen upon speculative times, in which there were an
immense number of railways and of railway committee
s,
and did not know but what the project might have
originated with some of those interested in the railway
termini of the two great railways to be constructed near
the spot from which the proposed new bridge was proposed
to branch, and who, it was possible, having a large pe-
cuniary interest in those railways, might have set their
engines at work, and having got the ear of some
influential person, induced him, at all events, to
allow the notices to appear in the name of the Commis
sion.—(Hear.) It was right to state that the Com-
mittee bad not given any doubtful opinion, but had, as
he had said, reiterated their opinions in favour of a
bridge on the present site. The Gallant General then
read a. series of resolutions and extracts from the report,
which were to the effect that the completion of the new
Houses of Parliament was a matter concerning the com-
forts of the Members of both Houses only, whereas the
bridge was a matter of paramount importance to hun-
dreds of thousands; that the traffic had so much in-
creased that it was difficult at times to get over it. It
was obviously immense. Sir James M'Adam had stated
in 18.44, that he caused to be counted the number of
horses which passed Charing-cross annually, and that it
had been ascertained that the number amounted to
6,600,000, and though there was no record of
the proportion that passed over the bridge, he
considered that by far the larger proportion
did, particularly the heavier carriages. Then, Mr.
Rendall stated, in 1844, that no part of the Thames was
better suited for a bridge than the site of Westminster-
bridge. The approach to the existing bridge from the
Middlesex side, was along Bridge-street, almost the
whole property on the north side of which, comprised part
of the bridge estate; therefore a new bridge on the exist-
ing site could be erected with little sacrifice of that pro-
perty. As one of the representatives of Westminster,
he had no objection to the erection of half a dozen
new bridges across the Thames, but the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, undoubtedly, would. He was sure if
Lord Morpeth had read the words, " obviously immense,"
he would not have allowed his name to have gone forth
in connexion with the project. Then, again, it was little
more than twelvemonths since the Commissioners of
Woods and Forests were authorised to expend 50,000'.
to construct a new street from Westminster-bridge to
Pimlico—(Hear, hear)—and the parishes of St. John's
and St. Margarets, had, with great public spirit and
generosity, allocatedl3o,ooo/. in aid of its construction,
but if the new bridge were made, it could not be expected
that they would incur this expense. After expressing
his determination as a representative of that city, and as
one of the Commisioners of the bridge, (whom the pro-
moters of the new one had not thought proper to consult
—to inquire whether they considered it consonant with
their duty to support the erection of a new
bridge elsewhere,) he should feel it his duty
in conjunction with his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hawes), and
no doubt with other metropolitan members, to do his
utmost to negative the measure, should it come before
Parliament, which he doubted. He resumed his seat
amidst general cheering.
The Very Rev. Dr. BUCKLA.ND (the Dean of West-
minster) in proposing the first resolution, said he had
felt it his duty to attend the meeting, on behalf of the