would have been necessary: short-sighted interest and ava rice opposed his endeavours, and the shores exhibit only the inconveniences of narrow wharfs. Fishmongers Hall serves as a specimen of the ornament, which that great architect intended.

Several suggestions have since appeared; and had Mr. Gwynne's plan in 1765 *, of sweeping away the whole of the south side of Thames Street been adopted, the benefit which would have arisen to the commercial interests of the city, would not only have compensated the loss of these inconvenient structures which compose that street; but the necessity of new docks would have been prevented, and the advantage to property in mercantile concerns incalculable.

We will state what Mr. Gwynne says on the subject:

"The space occupied by the piers and sterlings of London Bridge, is considerably greater than that allowed for the passage of the water, consequently more than half the breadth of the river is in this place entirely stopped, whereas the obstruction occasioned by the piers at Westminster Bridge, is not near one-third of the water-way, and it is needless to mention the effects of this obstruction, since the most melancholy instances are too frequently experienced to need a repetition. The truth is, this wretched bridge ought to have been entirely demolished ages ago, and a greater mistake never was committed than that of making the late repairs, and endeavouring to improve so intolerable a nuisance, the execution of which has manifestly proved its absurdity, since the main design of those improvements (which was to lessen the fall at the ebbing of the tide) has by experience been entirely defeated, and shews that the best repair that could possibly have been made, was to have taken it entirely down. Indeed, at the time when it was become necessary to add sterlings in order to preserve the foundation of the piers, and prevent the superstructure from falling, at that very time the whole bridge should have been demolished, and rebuilt in an elegant and commodious manner,

London and Westminster improved.

and

and the money which at that time was expended in piling and securing it, and the annual sums which it has since cost in repairs, exclusive of the last enormous one, would have been more than sufficient to have defrayed the expence, and had the least attention been given at that time to this consideration, it must have been a sufficient motive for rebuilding the bridge. It has been often ignorantly asserted, that the arches of this bridge were originally constructed in the manner they are, in order to restrain the ebbing of the tide, to preserve the navigation of the river above the bridge; others have with like ignorance and confidence said, that if the arches of the bridge were widened, the tide would ebb away so fast, that there would be scarce any navigation above the bridge a little after high-water; that is, it would be lowwater much sooner than it is at present, and thereby the navigation would be hindered. This last assertion is so very absurd, that it is scarcely worth mentioning, for had these objectors once considered that the river is navigable so very far above the reach of the tide, they would never have thought of advancing so wretched an argument. In fact, a new bridge, as has been before observed, was absolutely necessary in this place, and should have been built instead of repairing the old one, this would, besides the preservation of many lives, have reflected honour upon the city of London, have very considerably improved the navigation of the river, and been a most noble and useful ornament; in-. stead of which, an immense sum of money has been thrown away, the bridge itself is left a greater nuisance than it was before (owing to the prodigious rapidity of the stream under the great arch) with this additional aggravation, that will

The present alteration of London Bridge cost near one hundred thousand pounds. Seventy-five thousand pounds, part advanced by parliament at five times, and seven thousand five hundred pounds, part of twenty-four thousand pounds, remainder allowed to have been expended in that alteration, besides the materials of the houses, many of which were new.

The parish of St. Magnus consisted of about one hundred and five houses, eighty of which are destroyed for opening the avenues and clearing the bridge.

very probably, be continually calling in the aid of quackery, remain a perpetual expence for a considerable time, and a standing reproach to the present age, which by no means deserves such treatment.

"It appears upon the further consideration of this great nuisance, that (as if the miserable contrivance of the bridge itself was not impediment enough to the navigation) it is most terribly encumbered with the engine for raising water, which occupies no less than four arches, the effect these works have upon the navigation therefore is very considerable, besides the shocking appearance they make as an ob ject. It is proposed therefore, to take this whole machine. entirely away. Such a proposal will undoubtedly be thought extravagant by some people, and the profit accruing to the proprietors of the water-works will be objected as an obstacle, but as it is apprehended that the chief part of the revenue arising to the London Bridge water-works, is produced from the Borough of Southwark, it is proposed to bring the river Wandle from Mitcham, in Surrey, to the Borough, which, as it is but a small distance from London, may be easily done, and at no very great expence; Bromley river might be made to supply Deptford and Rotherhithe, and the New River Company might supply all that part of the city of London, which is now served by the London Bridge water-works. It may be likewise objected, that the New River will be insufficient to supply the whole metropolis; in answer to this it may be said, that the New River is certainly capable of supplying the whole quantity wanted; but as it may not be so conveniently done, there is another great resource for the supply of this very useful element. There is reason to hope the river Coln will be made navigable from Uxbridge, and brought to Mary-la-Bone; which will more than serve all the new buildings and parts adjacent, as well as the city of Westminster. It has been objected to this last very useful scheme (and some objection will eternally be made to every design for the public good) that the navigation of the river Thames will be prejudiced by the want of the water which this scheme will direct from

its usual course; but this has before been fully refuted by the observation, that the river is navigable for the west country barges many miles higher up than at the place where the Coln falls into it, and therefore its waters are of little consequence to the navigation of the river Thames. There is one consideration above all the rest that ought to be attended to, which is, that whilst the supplying of water is chiefly in one company's hands, it becomes a kind of monopoly, and has this danger attending it, that the proprietors of the works have it in their power at any time to lay whatever tax they please on the inhabitants."

It was this gentleman's opinion, that the whole of Thames Street, from London Bridge to the Tower, should be removed; that the Custom House should be rebuilt upon an extensive scale, with its back to St. Dunstan's Church; that the church of St. Magnus should be re-erected on the north side of the street; that the east end of Fishmonger's Hall should be ornamented with an elegant front towards the Tower; and that the wharf should continue along the shore without interruption.

The late James Sharp, esquire, a member of the common council, and brother of the benevolent Granville Sharp, took great pains to assert and maintain the right of the city of London to the conservation of the navigation, fishery, &c. of the river Thames and Lea, and to render the navigation, or communication by water more certain, expeditious, and beneficial to the city and the public at all times; he proposed to the common council, the making two canals, sixty feet wide, the one extending from Brentford, on the river Thames, upwards to Boulter's Lock, beyond the city's jurisdiction, and communicating at various places with that river; and the other from Moorfields, in the direction of the river Lea, and communicating with it at various places, as far as Waltham Abbey. Both canals were intended to become FREE TO THE PUBLIC as soon as the money advanced for the works should be defrayed by the tolls, except such small proportion of toll as might be necessary for repairing

the

the works; so that NO PRIVATE PROPERTY was to be made of these two great PUBLIC highways, though the city was to guarantee the repayment of the sums borrowed!

Perhaps there were never two propositions more perfectly disinterested, and generously intended for the public or.national advantage, than these two plans which were approved and adopted BY THE CITY OF LONDON, without any view of peculiar advantage or interest whatsoever, except what was ·equally open to the public: so that the city on this occasion, has left on record A NOBLE EXAMPLE FOR ALL OTHER CORPORATIONS AND PRIVILEGED SOCIETIES.

The first plan was surveyed by Mr. Brindley and his assistant Mr. Whitworth; was printed at the expence of the city, and proposed to parliament, but was VIOLENTLY OPPOSED, and THROWN OUT.

The second was surveyed by Mr. Whitworth alone, and printed also at the expence of the city, but was EQUALLY After which, the city' once

UNSUCCESSFUL IN PARLIAMENT.

more adopted a plan (the third) of the same proposer, to make a towing-path on the banks of the Thames, from Putney upwards, to the full extent of the city's jurisdiction up to London Stone, above Staines. The work was surveyed at the expence of the city, as before, by Mr. Whitworth, and the plan and proposals were printed. The city (very generally) proposed to advance ten thousand pounds for the work, on being allowed a proportionable toll or tonnage, until reimbursed, which proposal was at length carried through parliament, after an indefatigable attendance, by the said proposer, on all such members of both houses, as he could possibly procure access to, in order to explain the propriety of the measure, and the disinterestedness of the city in what they requested for the public good!

The work was happily completed, and proves of great public utility to this day*!

When it is considered that the quays of London have had no extension since 1666, it cannot be wondered at that trade,

* Tatham's Political Economy of Inland Navigation,

increased