I. K. Brunel, Esq. money?-To the best of my recollection, it would involve an expenditure of about 100,000l. to 150,000l. 16 May 1854. 764. Mr. Wilkinson.] That is, to form the approaches on both sides?-On the two sides. 765. Mr. Pellatt.] Would not it be necessary to make a very long incline plane, which would remove a good deal of property, or would you have a tunnel? -On the Wapping side, it would be decidedly necessary to make it circuitous; on the other side, now that the directions of the traffic are more determined than they were at that time, it might more cheaply, or at least more advantageously, be carried out straight. 766. You are aware of the amount of the traffic across the water at that point? - It is so entirely a matter of opinion, that I cannot speak certainly as to it. A good many years ago, when the tunnel was first projected, the traffic was taken very correctly, in order to ascertain what proportion came towards London Bridge from the east, and turned back again by Tooley-street and various other streets towards the east, and it was found to be very considerable; but of course everything has changed so much since then, that the former figures would not apply still I should suppose that unquestionably it would be considerable. I think it is very likely that it would not be so much the traffic which now comes round by London Bridge that would go across the tunnel, but it would be a traffic created to a great degree by the tunnel, which would cause a diminution in the traffic which at present exists over London Bridge. 767. Would there be any disposition on the part of the tunnel proprietors to make concessions for the benefit of the public?-I should fancy that there is every disposition on the part of the tunnel proprietors to do anything that may be required of them; they get no dividend at present, and therefore I should suppose they would be very ready to make any terms; and besides that, I am sure that the leading men concerned in it would be deeply desirous of having it completed, and thrown open to the public. 768. What sum of money did the Government advance for the completion of the project?-We are paying something like 1,400 l. or 1,500 1. a year at the present time to the Exchequer Loan Commissioners. The amount borrowed was 250,000 l. 769. What proportion of that do the present tolls pay?-The total receipts are somewhat about 5,000 1. a year; but there are considerable expenses of repairing and watching, and lighting, and various things, and my impression is, that there is a balance of 1,400 l. or 1,500 l. a year, which goes to the Exchequer Loan Commissioners. 770. The repairs and other expenses being paid now, do not you think that if the project were carried out, so as to fit it for heavy traffic, the money raised would be above the margin of the expenses; so that there might be a possibility of paying the proprietors something? - I have no doubt that the completion would enlarge the traffic, and bring a larger revenue too; it would increase considerably the foot traffic; at present the foot traffic is less, I believe, than it was before the tunnel was made. At the time when the tunnel was making, the amount of traffic by the ferries across there was very large indeed, and everybody supposed that the making of the tunnel would increase it. But the improvements that have taken place everywhere else by bridges and railways and other new works, have left the property in that neighbourhood now comparatively deserted. The actual foot communication between the two sides is, I believe, considerably less than it was at that time; because that is a part of the river where the shores are cut off completely from all good means of access; and I have very little doubt that the making of an access there would enable people to communicate with the mills and other commercial yards, and would increase very considerably the amount of passenger traffic. 771. Mr. Wilkinson.] What is the width of the roadway? - There are two of 15 feet each; it would only do for a thoroughfare for carts; it would not answer for any quick traffic. 772. Mr. Locke.] What is the height of the archways? - Sixteen feet; there was an idea some few years ago of making it available for railway communication, and an offer was made by one or two of the large companies; and it was found sufficient for the railway height, which is 16 feet. 773. That idea has quite gone off now? --All such railway projects at the present moment have gone off. 774. Chairman.] 774. Chairman.] Do you think that if the expenditure necessary to render it I. K. Brunel, Esq. available for heavy traffic were laid out, it would pay for that expenditure?I should think it would repay the expenditure now required; I do not look for much dividend upon the original capital. 775. Mr. Locke.] Should you think that an expenditure of 150,000 1. upon the approaches would be sufficient ? - I think so; there is very good access to it on the Wapping side, and there are very good roads to it on the north side. 776. Is there sufficient property on either side to justify such an expenditure ? -It passes through a very great extent of property which would be very materially benefited by it, but whether there would be a great deal of traffic I cannot take upon myself to say. There are a good many worse communications across the Thames, over or under. 777. Have you turned your attention to the question of bridges across the Thames? Yes. 778. Do you think it would be advantageous to the metropolis that the bridges should be bought up and made all free?-That is a very wide question. I have no doubt in the world; in fact it is almost a truism to say, that it would be a public advantage to buy the bridges and throw them open, but I have great doubts in my own mind as to the advantage to the country of introducing a system which interferes with the true proper spirit of commercial speculation. But that spirit seems to be very much interfered with in the present day in numerous cases, in railways and other matters, and therefore I do not know why an exception should not also be made in this case. I would rather leave the different plans entirely to the speculation of the public, although some speculations are bad, yet I think that you must take the bad and good together. 779. Would that opinion of yours be affected by the consideration that there are some bridges toll-free and others not?--No; the great principle would govern me still, if the public were left free to act upon the great principle of commerce. But, as I said, it is departed from so constantly now; and here is a case which probably may, as was argued, be different from ordinary cases. Without doubt it will be a great public convenience to have the bridges thrown open. 780. Sir J. Shelley.] Looking to the result of the speculations which have been made hitherto with regard to Waterloo Bridge and others, and considering the general belief that all those speculations have been losing concerns, do you see any prospect at the present time of any companies being formed to build fresh bridges? I think if the Legislature does not unnecessarily interfere to prevent it; if the Board of Works and various Government departments did not step in to dictate what should be done, you might get half a dozen bridges built across the Thames next year. 781. Mr. Wilkinson.] Do you mean as speculations ? - Yes. 782. Mr. Locke.] You are aware that there is a scheme on foot for widening Charing-cross Bridge? I am, but that is interfered with now; everybody is afraid to propose anything; because the instant they do, Government steps in, and the next Session Parliament legislates differently. Nobody knows how they may safely invest their capital in these public works, or from one year to another what principles may guide them. If people were left perfectly free, with a due regard to private interests, for everybody to lay out their money as they thought best, I believe you would get half a dozen bridges across the Thames, and that they would be profitable. 783. Sir J. Shelley.] In what way does the course which Parliament or the Government pursue affect the case of the existing Waterloo Bridge, which is known to be a losing concern?-I do not say it would affect that; the people who made Waterloo Bridge chose to spend a great deal of money more than the public_convenience required; I do not believe that that bridge would ever pay. But if parties come forward and adopt reasonable plans, the building of the bridge would not cost them a large sum of money; and if they put it in a part of the river where it was needed it would pay; but there are so many impediments in the way, that it is almost impossible to carry any such scheme into execution. In answer to a question that was put to me, I may say, that I do not think that the fact that Waterloo Bridge does not pay, or rather the fact that Waterloo Bridge cost one million and a half, and that Southwark Bridge cost a very large sum of money, will at all prevent parties coming forward to-morrow to propose a bridge upon a moderate rate of expenditure at some part 16 May 1854. : I. K. Brunel, Esq. of the river where it would pay, if there were not other causes interfering with 16 May 1854. them. 784. You think that, supposing a joint stock company were formed at the present time to build a bridge, the shares would be likely to be taken and the money paid?-I do not mean to say at this moment; but I think that in the course of a very few years it would be done very easily. 785. You think that this Committee would do well to report that in our opinion the public, if we left them alone, will step forward of their own accord, and start these speculations? - If that were the result of your inquiries you would; but, of course, I cannot pretend to say that you would do right in expressing that opinion, because I believe it; but my individual opinion is, that if the public were allowed free action, the public would presently provide bridges for the accommodation of the public. 786. Mr. Wilkinson.] Do you not know any instance in which a bridge constructed over the Thames has paid ?-I cannot at once give you an instance in London; but I suppose that Hungerford Bridge is not far from paying. 787. Mr. Locke.) Do you know whether Vauxhall Bridge pays? I do not know what the value of their shares at present is. 788. Mr. Alderman Challis.] You wish to express the opinion that either by a reduction in the cost of the materials, or by the aid of more skill in the construction of the bridges, they might be built for so much less a sum than any of the present bridges cost, that by building them in an economical manner and in a good situation they might be made to pay?-I do not give quite the reasons you mentioned in the question. Waterloo Bridge and Southwark Bridge both cost a great deal of money, because people chose to spend that money upon them, not merely because prices were high at the time, but because they chose to make a more costly bridge than was necessary. But with present prices, and the present information upon the subject, I believe economical constructions could be made which would afford sufficient remuneration to those people who embarked in them. 789. Sir J. Shelley.] Will you explain what you said just now as regards the course pursued by Government as to the difficulties which they throw in the way of such schemes being started ?-I should not like to adopt the expression, “the Government throw difficulties in the way." What I said was, that we have for several years past constantly had (and perhaps very properly) so many inquiries by the Government, and expressions of opinion by the Government, as to what ought or ought not to be done in matters connected with the river embankments, railway stations, bridges, and things of that sort, that parties feel that if they propose anything which Government are opposed to, they run great risk of not getting their measure through Parliament; and there would also be a great difficulty in their obtaining money support to a measure which is unfortunately opposed to the views expressed by the different departments. Then, on the other hand, those of much experience would hesitate very much how they adopted a plan in accordance with the views of a Government department; because, from whatever cause it may arise, they have been in nine cases out of ten rejected by committees of this House. Therefore, they are placed in a dilemma between the two, and that has constantly interfered with the projection of plans. I believe there has been something proposed or recorded by Government, or parties connected with Government, in opposition to or connected with the Hungerford Bridge scheme. I constructed Hungerford Bridge, and therefore I have cognizance of a good deal that is doing with respect to it. I know that certain schemes have been proposed, or Mr. Baly's plans have been objected to by parties connected with the Board of Woods and Forests. 790. Mr. Locke.] Without giving isolated examples, do I understand you to say that there are impediments raised by Government and the Board of Works to plans suggested by private individuals which have the effect of impeding those projects?-I cannot adopt those words. I do not say that there are impediments raised by the Government offices, but that difficulties result from the mode of procedure in the Government offices which cause impediments to private proceedings. 791. Do you find, as a general practice, that Committees of Parliament very frequently object to plans which have received the sanction of Government?As I stated just now, as a mere calculation of chances, my calculation has always been been that they would decide against the previous decision of Government I. K. Brunel, Esq. authorities. 792. Sir J. Shelley.] I presume that the Government department takes the 16 May 1854. opinion, probably, from its own engineer in any case that they might have before them?-Yes, and I think there is a great risk consequently with all Government departments, from the circumstance that the public does not know what governs the opinion of the engineer attached to a Government department; it is all done in secret; and as he is, of course, subject to the same weaknesses as the engineer attached to a railway company or any other body, he advises what he thinks consistent with the wishes of those he acts with, and consequently you are not so sure of a good and wise decision as you are with the conflict of opinions of professional men canvassed in public. 793. The Government engineer constantly gives an opinion adverse to the opinion of the engineer projecting a particular scheme, and therefore, before it can be settled, the project dies? - Very often that is the case; I may refer to the Health of Towns, and several other things. With regard to the supply of water to London, for instance, as the plans proposed by all the civil engineers of the water companies of the day were not perfect, we were told to wait, and taught to expect a much more perfect scheme from the Government. I do not know how many years have elapsed since, and nothing has been produced. When conflicting schemes are proposed, and it is open to the public in Parliament to have one or the other, they can choose pretty well between these different schemes without the assistance of Government. 794. Mr. Wilkinson.] Is it your opinion that, with regard to this matter, bridges are no exception to the principle of leaving these things to private competition? -I believe none whatever. 795. Mr. Alderman Cubitt.] As to the cost of bridges, you were asked just now whether, by improvements in science or other means, bridges could not now be constructed much cheaper than they could once. You built Hungerford, about 20 years ago, and I think your capital has been stated to have been somewhere about 200,000 l. or 300,000 l. ?-The bridge cost 100,000 l. 796. If you were to construct a bridge to do what that has to do, could you do it for less than that bridge cost? - I do not suppose that a bridge of that span would vary five per cent. at the present moment; but a bridge would not necessarily have so large a span as we were driven to there in order to avoid opposition from the City, or some other parties, I forget who, and that adds to the expense. 797. I believe that in the accounts of this bridge, there is very little set down as expended upon the approaches; it is nearly all spent upon the bridge ?I think the cost must have been somewhere between 90,000 l. and 100,000 l. for the bridge alone, together with the immediate abutments, and the approach from the market. 798. The Committee have had an estimate of what it would cost to alter the bridge?--I have not gone into that. 799. The object of these questions is, to apply it to bridges elsewhere. You have been asked whether bridges could not be built cheaper than they are at present; what is your opinion about that? -I think bridges could be built cheaper now than 20 years ago, from a number of circumstances, partly because we possess now cheaper modes of construction; for example, we should not think it necessary to have a 700-feet span in the middle of the river, and Government has set us the example of having bridges of less height than has usually been required; they have carried through the House an Act for a bridge with less headway than usual; if it is a bridge with arches, that would help to reduce the expenditure. Bridges built at the present day will admit of more arches than the three of Hungerford Bridge. There are various other modes of construction which are now adopted by civil engineers which will admit of a cheaper mode of execution. 800. Sir J. Shelley.] You have spoken of Westminster Bridge; I believe that, as to the height of the bridge, a good deal turns upon the kind of traffic which comes up the river short of Westminster Bridge? - Yes. What I said was, that some private individuals have been restricted to a higher limit, whereas when Government come in they have two or three feet cut off. Private individuals have no chance, of course, when Government begins building; circumstances change, and the public suffers. 801. Mr. Locke.] What you think is, that the public departments require a vast deal more than the public interest demands?-They require a great deal more than they consent to do themselves, and Westminster Bridge is a proof of it. 802. You do not mean to say that they sacrifice the public interest, but that they require of others more than the public interest requires?-I think both. 803. Mr. Alderman Challis.] Are you aware that a large number of highly respectable commercial houses were much vexed at the proposed height of the bridge? Yes; I was applied to professionally to assist in opposition to that, but I did not like mixing myself up in it. 804. Chairman.] The object of this Committee is, first, to ascertain the fact, which is pretty well generally known, that the present bridge accommodation of the metropolis is inadequate to its wants; and, secondly, to ascertain whether we cannot construct other bridges to facilitate the traffic. Will you tell the Committee where you would suggest the construction of other bridges, looking at the population and the manner in which the traffic is divided ?-I have hardly given the subject sufficient consideration to be able to point out upon the map exactly the spot where it would be best to put other bridges; I think there are a great many private and other interests affected by that, which I should hardly like to express an opinion upon; I really have not looked at the question; if I had, private interests would not prevent my expressing my opinion, but I have not done so. It strikes me that there is room for two or three bridges between Westminster Bridge and London Bridge. 805. There are two suggestions before this Committee; one is to widen London Bridge by throwing the footways over the sides, leaving the whole bridge for carriages. The second is one which was suggested by Mr. Bennoch, to build a bridge opposite St. Paul's. Do you think that that situation would be advantageous? I should imagine, from my knowledge of the thoroughfares on the banks of the river, that a bridge across there would be advantageous in some respects, but that, unless it were constructed with very extensive approaches on the south side, it would not be of much public utility, because nothing leads to it on that side; it would lead into a miserable set of crooked and narrow streets that would not serve as approaches to a bridge. 806. Mr. Locke.] Is it supposed that if a bridge were placed there it would be connected with a street running nearly parallel to the river on the south side of London Bridge to the Railway station; would your opinion be modified by that? -Unquestionably. 807. Probably you think that if any additional bridge were built across the Thames, either at St. Paul's or anywhere in that locality, a communication with the south side of the river would be very desirable, in order to take off a part of the traffic rom London Bridge? - If a bridge were made nearly in that position, it would be absolutely essential that some street of that sort should be made on that side. Mr. J. Pleros, with |