THE THAMES TUNNEL. (Hansard, 1 April 1833)

§ Sir Edward Codrington

presented a Petition from the proprietors of the Thames Tunnel, praying for aid to enable them to complete that work. The gallant Admiral said, the work was peculiarly entitled to the support of the House. The petitioners had already expended 170,000l. in prosecuting it, and surmounted difficulties which were never contemplated. They had worked through water and rock, and what was still worse, they had worked through loose and shifting sand. They had already shown the practicability of the undertaking, and the only difficulty now, was the want of funds. If, then, there was such a necessity for so many bridges in so short a distance as between London Bridge and Westminster Bridge, it was but reasonable to believe, that in a place two miles below London Bridge (there being no intervening bridge), such an undertaking as the 1333 Tunnel would be of great practical utility. The two intervening bridges, Southwark and Waterloo Bridge, had gained 20,000l. a-year since they were constructed. Waterloo Bridge paid to the shareholders 14,000l. a-year, and Southwark 6,000l. In July, 1811, there passed over London Bridge 99,000 persons; and, in the same month of the same year, over Blackfriars, 66,000 persons. So that it was not too much to say, that this Tunnel—a sort of Irish bridge, since it passed under water—would be of great utility. If the Tunnel were completed, vast quantities of goods would pass through it from the Commercial Docks, which now had to be carried four miles round by London Bridge. If Government would purchase the property, or allow it to be sold by lottery, the petitioners would be happy to come forward and meet such a proposition. In the United States, lotteries were granted for charities, and in London there was now a lottery for some property in Glasgow. The gallant Officer moved that the petition be brought up.