The Sun.
London, England, 1828-05-15 00:00:00

NEW- LONDON BRIDGE.

It etterday a nutnerous Meeting of the Inhabitartt
of the Ward of Bridge was held at St. Magnus
Church to take into considtration what measures
might be most proper, in consequence of the plans
now in agitation for the formation of the approaches
to the New London Bridge.
JOHN GARRATT, Esq., Alderman of the Ward,
in the Chair.

The Citatasease said, the London Bridge Com-
mittee had recently thought proper to take into con-
sideration certain plans laid before • 'theta' by the
engineer, and had resolved to "lay them before the
Lords of the Treasury, especially recommending one
which made a new line of approach, with an arch
over Thames-street, of 19 feet from the crown, and
about four feet of surface above it. By this means,
Thames-street and its immediate neighbourhood
would be 23 feet below the level of the required ap-
proach. This being so great a deviation from the
plan originally intended, it became a.question how
far the interests of the inhabitants, and neighbour-
hood generally, might be affected by it; and, there-
fore, as their Chief Representative in the Corpora-
tion, he co-Isieered himself bound to communicate
the fact for their co'neideration. The grounds upon
which a new Bridge was moved, would be in their
recollection. The Parliaments appointed a Com-
mittee to consider the expediene7 of enlarging the
archer of the old, or of building a riew bridge. It
appeared, upon the whole of the evidence, that the
expense of altering the Bridge was such, that the
Committee resolved to recommend a new one. It
was evident that they had kept in view the local
interests of the present approaches, by the insertion
of these words in the Report :
" It appears to your Committee, considering the
the
local interests connected with tnrh
teahse
schedulepnssapproachesibl
e totoot.
present Bridges that a new Bridge should be erected
on the present site,
the
same,"—(llear, hear)_b as
the
Act, certain property in Uppee and Lower Thames-
streets, as well as Fish-street-hill, was marked, which
might.be affected in forming the approaches. Tine
evidently showed, that the object in v;en• was to
maintain the old line of road, by which the smallest.
possible destruction of property would ensue. Re
assured the meeting that, although a friend to im-
provemeat, yet he thought the local interests of the
Ward of Bridge ought to be protected.
Mr. LOCKE raid, that in October, 1827, four plans
were submitted to the Bridge Committee, and after
a long discussion, Mr. Rennie was directed to re-
consider them. An improved plan was produced in
April, when it was resolved to consult the Com-
mittee of Taste upon the several plane submitted.
The Chairman of the Committee produced a rough
estimate, in which the amount of the expenses was
estimated as follows :—Firets or contract plan,
360,000/. ; second, 790,000/.; third, 600,000/, ;
fourth (without any arch over Thames-street),
790,0001.; fifth (likewise without any arch) was
960,0001. There was also another plan, providing
an arch, at 567,501. Mr. Montague, however (the
City Surveyor), stater the first at 312,2001.; the
second at 521,1301.; the third at 531,5001. The
fourth and fifth (the plans without arches) lie esti-
mated at 549,140/. and 566,380/. The sixth was
372,0901. In coming forward to resist the proposed
arch over Thames-street, he did so entirely
from principle; and should have acted just the same
if he had been resident out of the Ward. It was
original
amend
dtep,tp
eoe
rc precedent
originaletiedhi dteert sAot
intooicgt upon,
:hvweicra
tact, that the ground could be let to Mcffr advantage
n
a
d
without the archway than with it,
Mr. THORNHILL said the variety of intaests
iro.pfoeofacarstdtsoih.etreedsi
eoshtrtsei went to
London.
destroyi;e i, partro .
affected by the projected approaches to the bridge,
in
of
h
called loudly for an adherence to the old line of
sanc-
tions
the e
of
any ys tutihn ga which
lie could
ui
road.h e construed tumn
y
plausible plans were before the Committee, for
erecting over, or desolating the property in ques-
tion, but he hoped, for the honour of the coun-
t
ew
the
try, that Parliament would never consent or sane-
isenvi
et; valuable Irilelitiagoeip roof prer t yd
sanc-
tion such an arch discovery of the London Bridge
Committee. It was a most wanton violation of
property, and, he was sure, every one would resist it,.
The supporters of the arch said that they were
net going to take any thing away from the inhabi-
tants of the Ward, and why, therefore, should they
be called upon to pay ? Was it nothing to take away-
the trade and traffic by which .numerous families
were supported ?—Was it justice to erect a new in-
tercourse to the destruction of the old one ? The
meeting would recollect the many thousands that
passed from London Bridge up Fish-street-hill, and
need not be informed that these thousands mainly
contributed to support the retail trade carried on
in that part of the City. He was certain a petition
to the Lords of the Treasury, or an appeal to the
House of Commons, would compel art adherence to
the original Bridge Act, or procure compensation iu
full for the damage sustained. He would not de-
tain the IVieeting longer, bui, with its permission,
read the various Resolutions which he had prepared
for ad op
wholetan of the Resolutions were cat: led una-
nimously. Mr. PEWTRESS, in seconding the second Resole,
Lion, contended that the destruction of the retail tradt
was a serious subject, and one which, more than any
The
other, demanded compensation. He was not per-
sonally affected by the proposed alteration; but he,
in common with every other individual of honour
and justice, would come forward and oppose every
measure, having for its object the destruction of his
neighbour's property.
Mr. J. SAUNDERS hoped that the injurious pro-
gress of the proposed plan would be stopped.
Mr. DUNN hoped the Legislation would act to all
parties concerned with perfect equity and justice.

Mr. DAVIDSON corroborated what had fallen from
Mr. Thornhill, with respect to compensation awarded
to certain parties for the loss of trade in erecting the
West India Docks.

The CHAIRMAN adduced a cats in point, where
2,0001. was awarded to the owner of a warehouse for
the loss which accrued to him.
Messrs.Garratt, Thornhill, Child, Pewtres, Lucky,
Cartright, Wrench, E. Wrench, Dal',Vl'S, Davidson,
and Sharpe were then appointed a Committee pur-
suant to the resolution.
Mr. PEWTRESs moved the thanks of the Meetiii
to Mr. Alderman Garratt, for the promptitude with
which he took the Chair, and the valuable services
he had rendered them that day.
Mr. THORNHILL cordiail y seconded the motion.
Mr. J. SAtisrams moved,
the words " a 6 an amendment, that
highly honourable, upright, and manl,
conduct" be inserted in the Resolution p 1 • • -Op05111,,„
thanks to the Chair.
The Resolution was carried by acclamation.
Mr. Alderman GARRATT returned thanks.
The Meeting, which was extremely numerous,
then
separated, after voting thanks to Mr. Locke
aridThornhill,
for their valuable
exertions.

His .ATAJEsTY gave a grand dinner yesterday
at his palace hi St. James's, to some members of the Royal
Family, and a distinguished party of Nobility and Gentry.
Among the company were the Duke of CustaERLAND, the
Duke and Duchess Of GLOUCESTER, the Duke of WEL-
-I.lNwroN the Duke of DEVONSHIRE, the Duke of
LEEDS, the Marquis and Marchioness and two Ladies Cu.
NYNeHAM, Earl _DUDLEY, the Earl and C(' mutess
SCARBOROUGH, the Earl and Countess of 1VAr..1%
Lord ST. HELEN'S, Lady I. THTNNI:: Mr. and Mrs. A.
out! of Naval Officers')
STANHOPE, &c. In the evening, LIS MAJESTY
his illustrious guests with a concert.
The Duke of CLARENcE gave a grand dinner
.t:oesit:teas ir3,4dtn.;:yißm'oEfni.),sirnoeße Es° LJD.
Row
eart°ll7ispraerstiyde(nccheiefliny cth°elllP Admiralty. The party
im'
; Admirals Sir E. NacLr.
LEY, LAMBERT, Wrsl,
fIALKETT, and LAWYORI); Captains VINCENT, PRES-
COTT, D. PRING, C. GOSLING, H. PATTON, J. D. BOs-
,-ELL, M. H. DIXON, TOxER, Roctirowr, F. BRACE.
G. DIGBY, SPENCER, OLIvEr., and SzYmorn.