SECOND READING. (Hansard, 15 April 1859)

§ LORD JOHN MANNERS
said, that in moving the Second Reading of this Bill he wished to state that, although there was no chance of passing this Bill during the present Session, he thought it desirable to take as many steps with regard to it in this Parliament as possible. Its main object was to empower the Government to obtain possession of those houses it was necessary to acquire for the construction of the approaches to that half of the new bridge which, as he expected, would be opened in November next. It was necessary to secure them as early as possible, as the expense might be enhanced in price by delay. The total expenses of the bridge were estimated at £316,000, of which £96,000 still required to be voted by Parliament. There was another sum which would arise from the sale of houses already acquired, but the Treasury had thought it wise to defer the sale of those houses for the present, as the value of them would all be much increased by the new bridge, and especially those which lay to the north of Bridge Street.

§ SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBY
asked if the Estimate included the sum required for 1794 the approaches? [Lord JOHN MANNERS: No.] He wished to know, because, by law, counties were obliged to pay for their own bridges out of the county rates, and he thought that the same principle ought to be applied to the present case. He should raise the objection at a future stage of the Bill, but the question that he now wished to be informed on was whether the present works for the construction of the bridge were carried on by contract or by piecework? He had heard that they were being done by the latter mode, and, if that was the case, he wished to know why the usual practice was departed from?

§ LORD JOHN MANNERS
said, that the whole superstructure of the bridge was being done under contract with Messrs. Cochrane, but that the piers and foundations were being done by piecework by Mr. Page, the engineer.

§ VISCOUNT DUNCAN
said, he wished to know what would be the probable expense of the whole, including the approaches?

§ LORD JOHN MANNERS
said, that if he were to name an estimate for the approaches, it might induce a jury to put a higher value on them than they were really worth. A rough estimate of the expense had been made a few years since, which he would be happy to show the noble Lord, but he thought that it was better, on public grounds, that it should not be made generally known.

§ SIR DE LACY EVANS
said, it was too late to object to the approaches now, as, if they had a bridge, they must have approaches.