551. Mr. Wilkinson.] Taking into consideration the crowded state of London Bridge?—Yes; the state of London Bridge will be considerably improved when the alteration which has been suggested by the City architect, Mr.Bunning, has been carried into effect, viz., giving additional width to the bridge by projecting the footpaths over the face of the bridge and taking the whole width of the bridge for the carriage traffic. I think that laying out the bridge by a system of trams, so as to keep the heavy traffic on one line and the light traffic on another line, would do much to relieve London Bridge, as much, perhaps, as the widening of it would do.

552. A great deal of the inconvenience felt is in the approaches to London Bridge, not actually on the bridge itself, though it is felt there strongly; is not that an evil which nothing but a new bridge would remedy ?-It is; but I think you could by a proper arrangement of the police make the traffic upon the approaches conform to the principal traffic on the bridge. There is on the Surrey side, besides the principal approach from the Borough, the approach from Tooley-street, which must tend very materially to inconvenience the traffic, and there is also the fork at King William-street and Gracechurch-street on the City side. If between the fork on the City side and at Tooley-street there were some very strict police regulations (I am not aware that there are not), which regulations were such that there should be no interruption to the traffic between those points, I think London Bridge laid out under a system of trams would be almost sufficient for the traffic that passes over it. Generally, in any bridge, the great inconvenience arises from there being heavy carriages often before the light ones; you ought to have the heavy carriages travelling on one line, and the light ones upon the other.

553. Chairman.] Would you extend the principle of widening ?--I think I would to Blackfriars.

554. Did you hear Mr. Walker's evidence upon that subject?—I only heard the commencement of it.

555. Mr. Walker said that at present the width of the free bridges altogether was 138 feet, and he suggested a plan by which they might be brought to 323 feet, by widening the bridges now in existence, and by throwing open the tollpaying bridges; do you think that feasible?-That would necessitate widening the substructures as well as the superstructures of some of the bridges.

556. Mr. Wilkinson.] You are aware that Mr. Bennoch stated in evidence his belief that the bridge he proposed, including the approaches, might be executed for 500,000 l.; have you any means of forming any judgment yourself as to the correctness of his estimate?-The expense of the bridge would lie more in the purchase of property, and in making compensations, than in the construction of the bridge itself; I have no doubt that the gradient of Southwark Bridge would be very considerably improved by raising Thames-street a few feet.

557. Mr. Alderman Challis.] With an arch?—No, raising the street itself; I was looking at it a few days ago, with Sir John Rennie and Mr. Bunning, when we surveyed London Bridge; a great improvement might be made by raising Thames-street three or four feet, and raising the Surrey side, and taking off a foot or two from the bridge at the crown, which I believe can be done.

558. Mr. Wilkinson.] Would not that subject the whole of the traffic that went along Thames-street to a rise?—Yes.

559. Would not that lead to considerable obstructions?-It would not be any great objection, because the traffic passing up from Thames-street to Cannon-street has to go from a lower level to a higher level, and it would make the ascent easier there; so that for the traffic which passes along Thames-street, and diverges to the right-hand or the left, it would be an advantage; it would be an inconvenience to the traffic in the direct line of Thamesstreet, but a convenience to the branch traffic.

560. Chairman.] Have you made an estimate of the cost of the two bridges which you suggest in the West-end of London; that is, the Charing Cross Bridge and the Horseferry Bridge ?-An estimate was made in 1844, and for the bridge proposed at Charing Cross it was 150,000 l., and 100,000 l. for the bridge at the Horseferry.

561. Without reference to the approaches?-Without reference to the approaches. 562. Have you made any estimate for the approaches? No. The works

T. Page, Esq,

9 May 1854.

T. Page, Esq. necessary for the approaches would not be very considerable, but the cost of the purchase of property would.

9 May 1854.

563. Mr. Alderman Challis.] Is the river about the same width as it is at the spot where it is proposed by the City to cross it, viz., Doctors' Commons ?—It is considerably wider at Charing Cross than at Doctors' Commons.

564. That would cost about 140,000 Z.-It would cost 150,000 7. at Charing Cross, irrespective of the approaches; the abutments of the bridge would coincide with the proposed line of embankment on that side.

565. Mr. Wilkinson.] Are you speaking of an iron bridge or a stone bridge? -Of an iron bridge.

566. Chairman.] What would be the widtth of the bridge?-Sixty feet.

567. Sir J. Shelley.] Do you think the bridge at the Horseferry would cost 120,000 l.?—Yes.

568. Do you conceive it would cost 120,000l. to buy Vauxhall Bridge?—Yes, I think it would cost more than that.

569. Chairman.] It pays better than any?-I believe it does; I have here a tabulated statement of the dimensions of the bridges over the River Thames. 570. Will you hand it in ?-(the same was handed in).

Robert Few, Esq.

16 May 1854.

Vide Appendix,

No. 3.

Robert Few, Esq., called in; and Examined.

571. Chairman.] I THINK you are Chairman of the Charing Cross Bridge Company?—I am.

572. When was the structure commenced?—The Act for authorising the construction of the bridge was passed in 1836; the construction of the bridge was commenced in 1841, and it was finished and opened on the 1st of May 1845.

573. What is the traffic at the present time?-I have taken it from this return, given me by the secretary, of the gross traffic; the amount up to the present time is 28,978,021 foot passengers, giving an annual traffic of 3,121,980 passengers.

574. Has the traffic increased very much from year to year?-The traffic has gradually and regularly increased. I should add that this return of traffic is exclusive of the steam-boat traffic.

575. Mr. Alderman Challis.] How has the traffic been in the last three or four years?It has been very regular, except the year of the Great Exhibition, and then of course there was a sudden and considerable increase.

576. Chairman.] Have you a table of the traffic which you can put in ?—No; the traffic consists only of foot passengers, and therefore in giving you the gross or annual return, which is something above 3,000,000 passengers per annum, I have given you the whole.

577. Sir J. Shelley.] Have you only one fare for all descriptions of passengers? Yes, only one fare of a halfpenny for all descriptions of passengers; but then in addition to that, there is the steam-boat pier, at which the traffic at present is about two millions and a quarter; that has been rapidly increasing of late

years.

578. Could you give these particulars in detail?—That I could get; I give it to you as it was furnished by the clerk who attends to this business; it is no part of our revenue. That shall be laid before the Committee.

579. Chairman.]

579. Chairman.] You contemplate making a carriage-way there, do not you? Robert Few, Esq. -We contemplate entirely changing the nature of the present structure; the existing structure is wholly for foot passengers, as I have already explained. 16 May 1854. The original project was never fully carried out; the original project was to make a line of communication from Hungerford Market to the York-road; but from want of means it stopped short at the Belvedere-road. Since the opening of the bridge we have arranged to extend the approaches to the York-road, and in 1845 an Act was passed authorising the extension. By that Act an increase of the capital was authorised also, which has been partly applied to the purpose, and the residue is in our hands applicable to the completion of the scheme.

580. Mr. Alderman Challis.] What sum have you now in hand?-About 10,000 l., including 3,3337. to be borrowed, the Act providing altogether 13,3337. for the extension of the Surrey approach.

581. Sir J. Shelley.] What sum have you in hand?-We consider that we have already in hand, including the call not made, and the 3,333 l. which we are authorised to raise, 10,000l. We have 5,000l. upon deposit account at this

moment.

582. Mr. Alderman Challis.] Did I rightly understand you to say, in answer to a question from the Chairman, that the traffic has increased to a large extent? -I was then speaking of the steam-boat traffic.

583. The amount of passenger traffic over your bridge has been pretty steady of late years ?-Every year it has increased about 100l. The increase of this year has been at the rate of 800l. a year; for the last three months we have had 2001. over the general average receipts of those months.

584. The Committee wish to ascertain whether the general desire to cross the bridge be increasing to such a degree that the present conveniences afforded by it ought to be extended, and therefore it will be important to have an account of the progressive increase for the last few years put in ?—That shall be furnished to the Committee.

585. Mr. Jackson.] Will you furnish all the accounts of this traffic since the -opening of the South-western Railway to Waterloo Station ?-I will furnish an account of the whole nine years.

586. Chairman.] What cost will it necessitate to make it a carriage-way ?— The details of the cost will be given in evidence. I believe it will cost 150,000 7. to make the bridge and the approaches. Mr. Baly, the engineer, is prepared to produce the plans; he is more familiar with and better competent to give the particulars of the items than myself.

587. Do you consider the situation of your bridge calculated to facilitate traffic to the metropolis if there be a carriage-way constructed?—I think that it is unquestionably the position for a bridge from Charing-cross. I had better show you the ground-plan of our bridge and its approaches, which I have here (producing the same), and which will better explain the matter.

588. Will you show it to the Committee (the same was shown to the Committee)? -Originally it was intended to have come to the York-road; but from want of funds in 1836, or rather, I believe, to cut off opposition to the Bill, it was cut short at Belvidere-road. We now have power to carry it on, and have arranged terms for the purpose with the Archbishop of Canterbury, and with the owners of the fee of the land we intend to take. We have funds sufficient, not only to pay them, but also to complete the approaches. Now it is proposed to carry our Middlesex approach through the market, widening Hungerford-street, which is to be thrown back. If necessary, the corner house in the Strand, opposite the market, will be taken, but I doubt whether it is necessary. It is also exceedingly easy to make an approach through Great Scotland Yard if it should suit our purpose.

589. Do you include that in the estimate?-No; all that we include is the dark line.

590. Chairman.] That includes the station at the end?-It includes the Middlesex approach.

591. Mr. Jackson.] What is the nature of the locality (pointing to the Surrey side)?-There is a great brewery (Messrs. Goding's) there, but otherwise it is very poor indeed. The dotted line on the plan shows the direction of the socalled Government street to the Town Hall, Southwark, which is close to our intended route. Our project has been in agitation for upwards of 12 months,

Robert Few, Esq. and we have been in communication with the directors of the South-western Railway about these improvements, though not at all officially; they felt that if 16 May 1854. they did not adopt this course across their vacant land, a street along here might be formed by widening Griffin-street, which has houses only on one side, on the opposite side, and bring it out into the Westminster Bridge-road. In fact, this extension I brought forward last spring as chairman of the Bridge Company, in consequence of what took place in the House, and feeling that something must be done, and that we might as well do it ourselves. We have had returns taken of Westminster Bridge, to show the traffic over it; and we felt sure that by opening a direct line here, although of course it would be better that a more direct line should be made, we should essentially lighten the traffic of Parliamentstreet. Those were the main points which induced the directors to entertain the notion of altering the bridge in this way; and speaking only my individual opinion, and not for my colleagues, I entertain a strong opinion that, particularly if accompanied by this street, it is a bridge that will be perfectly selfsupporting, and one which we should be justified in putting forward.

592. £. 150,000 will be the expense, will it not-I find that the amount in the deposited estimate is 156,000 l.

593. What is the width of the proposed bridge?-It is 48 feet, but the engineer would be better able to speak to that.

594. Sir J. Shelley.] You said "self supporting;" is it then proposed to put a toll on it?--Yes, a very low toll.

595. Supposing Westminster Bridge to be free from toll, do you think that the public would come over a toll bridge in preference?—Yes, I feel perfectly satisfied that they would; it will be our fault if they do not go; if we put a low toll on the bridge I am sure that it will answer our purpose.

596. You do not think that the fact of a toll, no matter how small, is of itself a check to persons going over a bridge when they have an opportunity of going over?-Certainly not. Mr. Walker said in his evidence that he would not go over a toll bridge because of the inconvenience it occasioned to him; but he subsequently stated, in the same evidence, that he went over Southwark Bridge constantly. The toll on Vauxhall Bridge is exceedingly high; it used to be 4 d. for a cab.

597. Mr. Jackson.] Have you any estimate of the cost of making the approaches to the bridge?—No, I have not. I propose putting quite a low toll upon the bridge. I will now put in our returns of the Westminster Bridge traffic, taken by our own men, which give the following results: the foot traffic of one week was 341,398; of gigs and horse carriages there were 7,660; of cabs, 19,157; of carriages drawn by two or more horses, 2,192; of omnibuses and stage-coaches drawn by two or more horses, 5,326; of carts, waggons, and drays, drawn by one or two horses, 24,879; carts, waggons, and drays, drawn by three or more horses, 1,299; of vans, 2,265; of donkey-carts, 526; of trucks, 1,942; and of equestrians and led horses, 3,046.

598. Will you hand that in ?—I will. (The same was handed in.)

599. Mr. Wilkinson.] Did you take that on any particular week?—No; they were taken in consequence of this Committee.

600. Is there a date on it?-From the 2d of August 1853 to the 9th of August. Then, as bearing upon that question, I beg to hand in a table of distances. between various places and the Nelson Monument over Westminster Bridge, Waterloo Bridge, and Charing-cross Bridge respectively, by which I find the measurements to be very much in favour of Charing-cross Bridge. We have taken both the existing roads and the proposed roads, and the saving of distance is very great indeed, particularly to the South-western Railway Station.

601. Chairman.] You base your calculation upon that statement?—I do. 602. Mr. Alderman Challis.] You say that the toll will be so small as not to prevent traffic going over the bridge; what is the toll that you propose to take? Speaking only my own views, I should propose twopence for a carriage with four wheels and one or two horses; and if you save half a mile by this route, cab passengers will readily pay the 2 d. rather than the 6 d. extra fare, which they would have to pay by the other route. I am quite sure that a low toll will induce travellers to come over this bridge.

603. Mr. Wilkinson.] Have you taken the distance to London Bridge, for instance, by your road, and by Westminster Bridge, and by Waterloo Bridge? -Perhaps I had better read my statement. From Nelson's Column, Charing

cross,

16 May 1854.

cross, to where the Government new road intersects the Waterloo-road over Robert Few, Esq. Charing-cross Bridge, the distance is six furlongs 160 feet by our proposed new street, and by the existing streets it is six furlongs 590 feet; over Waterloo Bridge the distance is one mile 260 feet; there is about a quarter of a mile difference between these two. We have then taken the distance from Nelson's Column, Charing-cross, to the booking-office of the South-western Railway, coming along this street which has been widened in order to enable us to pass under the railway, it is six furlongs 620 feet; whereas over Westminster Bridge it is one mile, one furlong, 630 feet, making upwards of three furlongs difference; and over Waterloo Bridge it is one mile, one furlong, 280 feet. If the station be extended into York-road, as successive directors have told me they contemplate doing, and if the short traffic be carried to this extreme point, and the long traffic be kept where it now is, then it is evident the advantage will be even more in favour of Charing-cross Bridge; for in that case coming over Charingcross Bridge the distance will be five furlongs 400 feet; over Waterloo Bridge, one mile 465 feet; and over Westminster Bridge, one mile 480 feet, making very nearly half a mile difference.

604. Mr. Jackson.] Which is the nearest route, by Westminster Bridge or by Waterloo ?—In one case it is shorter over Westminster Bridge, and in the other case over Waterloo.

605. Mr. Locke.] That is supposing that there will be a second station of the South-western Railway?-Yes; I have taken the route which I fixed after consultation with them. I have omitted one measurement which was particularly requested by the Committee, namely, that from the Nelson Column to the Town-hall in the Borough, over Charing-cross Bridge. By the Government road it is only 1 mile 4 furlongs 25 feet; round Fleet-street and through New Cannon-street it is 2 miles 3 furlongs 410 feet.

606. Mr. Jackson.] Have you measured the distance between this point and the point where you strike the Westminster Bridge-road ?—I have not.

607. Were you rightly understood to say that you could reach that point by a short road?—Yes.

608. Mr. Alderman Cubitt.] I think you said that in one year there was a difference of 800 l. as compared with former years; was that in the year of the Exhibition ?-No; what I stated was this, that the increase of the past three months in the present year was at the rate of 800 l. for the whole of this year.

609. That is an increase of 1,000 persons a day, is it not?—Yes, about that. 610. Chairman.] What is the whole amount of the cost of the bridge at present ?—The cost of the bridge was returned at about 113,000l. I have here a list of the claims (producing the same).

611. Will you hand it in ?-(The same was handed in.)

612. The Committee desire to know the whole amount you have expended the present bridge; what is your capital at present?-The capital includes items for incidental expenses of various kinds.

upon

613. Mr. Jackson.] What is the total amount of capital that you have raised for the present undertaking in round numbers?—I think it is, as nearly as possible, 137,000 l., including the 10,000 . raised for the extension.

614. What additional capital do you contemplate raising to carry out the plan that you now propose?-£. 150,000.

615. £. 300,000. would cover all your expenditure, and give a profit to the shareholders ?-It would.

616. Can you give the Committee what you have estimated the revenue, according to the lowest scale of tolls that you would advise?—I have not the materials here from which I made my estimate; I have assumed certain proportions of the traffic over Westminster Bridge and an increase of traffic over Charing-cross Bridge; I make the gross amount about 30,000 l. a year; but that, of course, must be open to doubt, as another person may draw a different conclusion from my data.

617. Mr. Alderman Challis.] Would your existing bridge relieve you from the expense of building a new bridge ?-Yes, to some extent; we propose to use the same piers, which are wide enough for the new bridge, and strong enough to bear the extended structure.

618. Mr. Jackson.] Are you prepared to state what in your opinion would be