The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1889-06-13
An Iron Isridge The Best,

uus peeu HHlu Nuu pFlnteu on tue SUI
iect | am inclined to concur in thi
opinion:
Our experience with stone bridges il
this vicinity Is not calculated to inspirI
confidence in stone as suitable materia
for large costly structure intended Il
be permanent. / know OF but one here
abouts that has stood any time without
repairs, namely, the Hempheld bridge
near the tunnel, This, 1t will be OBJ
served, consists Of several arches o
small span, The stone bridges on the
National road east OF the city can hardly
be cited as arguments in favor Of stone
They are all small arches, consequently
free from the tremendous crushing pres
sure imposed upon the stones where the
arch Is large and fiat,
Notwithstanding this several Of these
bridges have crumbled into ruins, Others
have been rebuilt, few II any Of those
now standing but have needed extensive
repairs, and, Notwithstanding that they
have had the constant care OF an efficient
superintendent, their condition now in
dictates the weakness OF our stone as q
building material,
Our old stone bridge at Main street,
after having stood less than ffty,four
years, (no long life for q structure in
tended to be permanently tumbled down
on very slight provoCation. 1t had
been VIGOROUSLY unsafe for twenty-five
years, How much repairs had been put
upon 1t ! will not endeayor TO say, but l
know that tons OF iron ties and fasten-
ings were used upon 1t in the effort to
hold II up and make 1t secure.
One OF the strong arguments Justly
urged in favor Of the erection Of the
present Market street bridge when 1t was
projected twenty years ago was the un.
safe condition OF the Main street bridge
and its liability to fall at any time. Taken
altogether our experience with arched
stone bridges has been unsatisfactory.
The reason for this Is manifest enough.
Our stone hereabouts does not possess
the strength and durability necessary for
such bridges,
Very many OF the stones in the piers
and arches OF our old Main street bridge
were broken or crushed owing TO in
ability to resist the pressure OF tue arches
or the disentegrating effect OF the ele-
meuts. The old bridge had three arches.
1t is now seriously proposed to erect In
It's place bridge OF an immense arch Of
the enormous span OF 100 feet. No
doubt such bridge would be architeC.
turally imposing, aud II tho arch could
be safely constructed without raising the
road way much above the level, it would
admirably supply our needs. But u dit-
ticulty Is here presented. The available
space is scarcely sufficient for the spring
OF such an arch. Tho ends OF the arch
ought to start at least twenty feet above
low water. The road way OF tho old
bridge was not more than forty feet from
low water. After subtracting from this
this height, say seven feet for paving
and room for water and gus pipes and
masonry OF the arch, there Is left but
thirteen feet for the rise OF the proposed
arch. The material OF such an arch
would besubjected to enormous pressure.
II the stone pealed off and broke to
pieces under the pressure OF the three
small arches Of the old bridge, how can
1t be expected that the same material
will resist the infinitely greater pressure
OF the proposed arch2
A bridge OF several arches like the
Hempfeld, II carefully constructed,
might stand; but the security against
floods OF the residents Of the low grounds
above, demands that the stream should
not be INSTRUCTED at that point with
piers.
The old bridge was unsafe for many
years and finally tumbled into ruins.
Can q reliable guarantee DO given that
the proposed new bridge would have u
better iate2
II the foregoing statements are facts,
and | believe they are, the conclusion is
inevitable that 1t would be imprudent to
build the bridge with q single stone arch.
But another, and 10 my mind astronger
argument against the proposed plan, is
It's excessive cost and the consequent
necessity 1t causes fon the making Of an
other loan. 1t Is really disgraceiul that
we should DO coming before our voters
asking new loans so frequently.
Our citizens have very large expendi-
lures before them in the near future; for
water works, for paving and sewering
and for county railroad subscriptions and
for other purposes.
In view OF these the cost is IN import
ant consideration in determining the
plan Of the new bridge.
II, as many OF our citizens believe, o
steel or iron bridge can be built for half
or less than half the cost OF q single arch
stone bridge, this consideration alone
ought to settle the question.
1t may be argued that We cannot now
afford to build any suitable bridge at
Main street without borrowing the
money to pay for its erection.
To this II may be answered that pub.
lie convenience would not suffer il the
new bridge was postponed q year or two
until our,revenueB have somewhat re.
Cuperated.
The present temporary bridge at that
point, with small outlay to protect II
against Ice, will answer q good purpose
until the ordinary revenues Of the city
will provide q satisfactory structure.
ANTI.LoAN.
Wheeling, June 12.
|