The Sun.
London, England, 1866-01-19 00:00:00

THE HOLBORN VALLEY VIADUCT.

The TowN CLERK read a very voluminous report,
into which a number of other reports from con-
tractors were introduced, from the Improvement
Committee, relative to the Holborn-valley viaduct.
They stated that, in compliance with the sugges-
tions they received, they had made th 6 necessary
preparations to acquire without delay the property
on the south side of Holborn-valley ; that the
principal part- of that property was now in their
possession, and that a considerable quantity of the
ground had been cleared. The Parliamentary esti-
mate for the execution of the structural part of the
viaduct was £53,000, but the tenders sent in for
the contracts were immeasurably in excess of this
estimate. The tenders were six in number. The first
and lowest was for £239,507; the second was for
£243,620; the third for £242,020; the fourth for
£245,320; the fifth for £244,100; and the sixth for
£249,700. The enormous amount of these tenders
placed the committee in great difficulty. They did
not feel themselves justified in accepting any of them,
and they appointed a special committee with a view
of seeing whether any plan for extricating them from
the difficulty could be suggested. The special com-
mittee was unable to arrive at any conclusion. Then
they sought the advice and assistance of the eminent
engineer, Mr. Joseph Cubitt, to whom all the plans
and estimates were submitted, with instructions to
report upon the best course they could pursue to
carry out the viaduct, and also to account if he could
for the extraordinary discrepancies which appeared
between the parliamentary estimate and the tenders.
On the 17th Dec. Mr. Cubitt forwarded his report.
He stated that he had carefully considered all the
plans and estimates, and that it was evident from
an examination of the general plan, and the com-
plete detailed plan on which the tenders were based,
that the works included in the estimates were widely
different from each other. In other words, the works
on which the estimates for Parliament were founded
were quite dissimilar from those on which the esti-
mates were made as put in for the contracts. The
time limited for the construction of the viaduct was
extremely short, and its brevity, added to the high '
price of the labour market, had doubtless caused an
increase in the amount of the tenders. The parties
tendering had evidently added a heavy amount to
cover themselves from risks. Still he confessed that
he could not sufficiently or satisfactorily explain in
some respects the differences which existed between
the parliamentary estimates and the tenders. He had
examined the plans of Mr. Heywood, the surveyor of
the Commissioners of Sewers, and Mr. H. Jones, the
city architect, and found that the views of these gen-
tlemen differed materiallyas to how the viaduct should
be constructed; and he had come decidedly to the
conclusion that the principle of Mr. Heywood's plan
in constructionthan
was
Jones's.
s's. He (Mr. Cubitt)
was of opinion that a viaduct 75 feet wide could be
executed for £llO,OOO, reasonable time being given
for its completion ; and that if it were to be of 80
feet in width, the cost would only be about £6,000
additional. He recommended the committee to
obtain plans and specifications for the viaduct to be
constructed with recurring transverse arches, and
to apply for tenders, but with a distinct understand-
ing on the face of their application that they would
not accept the lowest tender. Mr. Cubitt's report
was referred to the city architect, Mr. Jones, and
Mr. Haywood, and from the two latter replies'
were received. Mr. Haywood, in his reply, said
that the report of Mr. Cubitt was most satisfactory
to him, but that he must decline to comply with a
resolution of the committee that he should prepare
plans under the consulting engineer's advice. He
asked the committee for permission to carry out the
structural designs of the viaduct on his own sole
account and responsibility, at a cost of £101,977,
being £130,000 less than the lowest of the tenders.
In conclusion, the committee reported that they had
exhausted the inquiry, and they recommended that
they should be authorised by the Court to engage
such professional assistance for carrying out the
works as they might deem advisable with a view to
the prompt and efficient execution of the same.
Mr. Deputy FRY, chairman of the Improvements
Committee, in moving the adoption of this report,
said it was with considerable regret that every mem-
ber of the committee had felt himself compelled to
submit the various documents it contained to con-
sideration. Every effort had been made to recon-
cile the differences between the professional gentle-
men who were consulted, but it had proved unavail-
ing, and the committee were in such a difficulty as
to be obliged to ask the Court to extricate them
from it, and to give them that professional assist-
ance which was absolutely necessary. My. Hay-
wood was engaged by them in the first stages of
the Holborn-valley improvement works, and he had
greatly assisted in the preparation of the plans and
in carrying the bill through Parliament. After the
bill was passed a strong feeling was expressed by
the Court in favour of having the works carried
out by the city architect. In consequence of
this all the plans were submitted to that architect,
who recommended the desirability of having the
south side of the viaduct undertaken in the first
instance, and the acquisition of the property on that
side. This was assented to, and then he came before
the committee with detailed plans, a design for the
bridge, and a report explanatory of what he recom-
mended. The committee applied for contracts for
the execution of the work to 12 of the first contrac-
tors of the day, but only six replies were received,
and the committee was completely startled at the
amounts which were asked for by those contractors.
The city architect's estimate was for £lBO,OOO.
These amounts were so terrifically in excess of the
Parliamentary estimate that the tenders were not
received. Mr. Haywood was then again consulted,

and he said that if certain modifications were made
in the plans a very large sum might be taken off the
estimates. He and the city architect were recom-
mended to consult together, and to explain the cause
of the discrepancy between the Parliamentary esti-
mate and the tender, but these two professional gen-
tlemen, having great differences of opinion on public
works of this kind, did not feel quite at home with
each other, and they found it impossible to agree to
a joint report. They came up with separate reports,
which to some extent, but only to some extent, ex-
plained the cause of the difference between the Par-
liamentary estimate and the tenders. Then Mr.
Cubitt was consulted, and the result of that con-
sultation was stated in the report. Under the cir-
cumstances the committee asked to be relieved from
their embarrassing position and to have such pro-
fessional assistance as might be deemed necessary.
He felt that in this matter the character of the cor-
poration was at stake, and that the interests of the
public imperatively required that no further time
should be lost in bringing to a speedy issue the ac-
complishment of the important work at Holborn.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr. AP GEORGE moved, as an amendment, " That,
considering the reference made to Mr. Cubitt and
his report, the Improvement Committee be requested
to make such an arrangement as they may deem
advisable with Mr. Haywood for the construction
of the structural part of the viaduct."
Mr. Deputy FULLER seconded the amendment.

Mr. Alderman J. C. LAWRENCE thought it would
be wise economy to erect such a structure at Hol-
born as would reflect credit on the city.
Mr. Deputy ELLIOTT, in supporting the amend-
ment, said that Mr. Haywood had acquired a large
amount of practical experience in London, and that
he was the most suitable man to execute the work.
He characterised the difference between the Parlia-
mentary estimate and the tenders as monstrous.
Mr. Alderman ROSE supported the motion. He
said that in no other capital in the known world
would such abominable structures be tolerated as
had been erected by engineers in the streets of Lon-
don. They were a standing reproach to the engi-
neers who carried them into execution, and their
only recommendation was that they were cheap.
Mr. LAWLEY said that although he had signed
the report he should vote for the amendment, be-
lieving that Mr. Haywood was the fittest man to
do the work.

Mr. Alderman BESLEY observed that Mr. Hay-
wood would become the master of the committee if
the amendment were adopted.
Mr. Bontems, Mr. Alderman Waterlow, and Mr.
Jones supported the motion, and Mr. Kearns and
Mr. Deputy Scamell the amendment.
Mr. Deputy FRY replied, and said the Improve-
ment Committee would never consent to any struc-
ture being erected at Holborn which would not be
an honour to the city. He believed Mr. Haywood
to be eminently qualified to carry out the work, but
the question was one entirely for the Court.

The question was put, and the amendment was
carried on a show of hands by a large majority.

BANQUET TO FOREIGN HORTICULTURISTS.

Upon the motion of Mr. Deputy OBBARD7 the
use of the Guildhall on Tuesday, the 22d of May
next, was granted to the executive committee of the
International Horticultural Exhibition and Bota-
nical Congress for the purpose of a banquet to be
given to the foreign visitors.
The Court then adjourned.

THE PRUSSIAN DIET.

BERLIN, Jan. 17.

At the sitting of the Chamber of Deputies to-day
Herr von Grabow was again elected President for
the duration of the Session. He entered upon his
duties with the following speech :
" Your choice has again appointed me to the
arduous office of President for the entire duration
of the session, and I return you my most hearty
thanks for the confidence testified by the nomination.
I feel myself in duty bound to follow your honour-
able summons for the last time, and to fulfil the
duties of my difficult post to the best of my abilities
—conscientiously, faithfully, and impartially. I beg
you, however, most urgently to facilitate the execu-
tion of my functions by your further willing, indul-
gent, and powerful support. Gentlemen, the gloomy
picture of the internal situation of our State spread
out last session before you and the country has since
that period become only darker, till at the close of
the Diet, at a time and in a place where all contra:
diction was impossible, this house was accused of
having injured the material welfare of the country
by rejecting bills and refusing to grant supplies, of
having endangered security from without, and of
having stretched out its hand to grasp rights denied
to it by its legal position—in a word, of having sur-
rendered the first law and the highest guide of all
parties—the welfare of the fatherland—in face of
the strife of political opinion. Encouraged by this
grave and unfounded impeachment, unheard of in
the annals of the Diet, the reactionary press ven-
turned, unpunished, to bring accusations of the most
passionate and hateful kind against the second
Chamber of the Legislature. But toleration was
not exercised. A festival on the banks of the
Rhine, in which the Liberal citizens of the Rhine and
Westphalia wished to do honour to the much-abused
Prussian representatives, in thankful recognition
of their unshaken and courageous perseverance for
four years in the hard struggle for the Constitution
they had sworn to uphold, for their chartered popu-
lar rights, was prohibited, and even prevented by
armed force. The constitutional conflict arising
out of the illegally arranged reorganisation of the
army has become chronic without the fault of this
House, which has only uninterruptedly and steadily
defended the right of control over the finances granted
it by the text and spirit of the Constitution, but has
never stretched forth its hand after rights to which
it is not entitled. Notwithstanding that a promise
was made in the Royal Decree of March 19, 1862,
respecting the execution of the elections to the Cham-
ber of Deputies, that, in further development of the
existing Constitution, legislation and administration
should be carried on upon Liberal principles, the
political part of legislation has been brought to an
entire standstill. The Upper House alone has ex-
perienced a definite increase of its members by way
of decree. But the country still hopes in vain for laws
respecting Ministerial responsibility and the arrange-
ments and privileges of the Chief Chamber of Ac-
counts, without which the Constitution is no truth ;
waits in vain for a settlement of educational, trade,
district, and principal affairs, based upon Liberal prin-
ciples. The administration of the State is altogether
devoid of Liberal principles, proof of which is af-
forded by the measures taken against Liberal news-
papers, associations, and meetings against Liberal
officials and citizens. But notwithstanding the non-
fulfilment of all promises, the Prussian people and
its representatives will neither now nor ever deny the
indubitable truth that the material and moral wel-
fare of the State and its external security first and
above all demand the unconditional recognition and
conscientious execution of its sworn public rights, and
that all authority not based upon these rights is a
wrong and immoral. Liberty alone based upon this
truth, while also respecting the right of self-disposi-
tion of kindred races in Germany, limited only by
higher German interests, will lead to moral conquests,
to a satisfactory solution of the Schleswig-Holstein
question, which, notwithstanding glorious successes
in arms, has become more iavolved and difficultbythe
Gastein Convention, and, with that solution to the
Federal unity of Germany. May Prussia, in fulfilment
of her German mission, adopt such a liberal course of
development without delay, before she is overtaken
by a turn perhaps favourable to freedom in the pre-
sent constitutional crisis in Austria, and before it be-
comes altogether too late. The constitutional re-
presentatives of Germany at that period will then,
with joyful hearts, see the great future of our
German fatherland secured in the mighty hands of
our Kings. This is my sincere, honest, and heart-
felt wish upon my last accession to this post."

Herr von Unruh and von Bockum-Dolffs were
re-elected Vice-Presidents by large majorities, and
each returned thanks to the Chamber in a brief
speech.

" Deputy von der Heydt—The order of business
permits me of my protesting, for myself and friends,
against the President's speech. We do not think
that, as President of this louse, he was justified in

speaking in the sense of the majority without also
taking into account the views of the minority.
" President Grabow—The expressions of which I
made use appeared to me to be in the sense of the
minority as well as of the majority. I considered
myself called upon to defend the honour of the
House, which had been attacked elsewhere."