Letter from John Lee Archer, April 1835
CSO1/1/799-17080 p 290
A letter written on April 30th 1835 from John Lee Archer, Colonial Architect and Civil Engineer to the Colonial Secretary, John Montagu, for the eyes of the Lieutenant-Governor, George Arthur, addresses the delay in the construction of the bridge. It relays Charles Atkinson’s reasons for the slowness of the work which Archer seems to accept, yet, he emphasises in the final paragraphs, that more men and their proper management is essential. He explains that the centres, wooden and iron frames on which the arches will be constructed, cannot be erected across the river until after the flood season. However, the arch stones could be prepared during the winter. In Britain, preparatory work and carving was done during the winter under shelter; stonemasons would be accustomed to that.
This implies, that the carvings were not begun until the winter of 1835.
Atkinson is given the chance to resign soon after this date. The local Police Magistrate, John Whitefoord, considers Atkinson’s discipline of the men is not good enough. Proper management arrives in June with Captain William Turner, a veteran officer from the Iberian campaign, who undertakes the role with a practised hand; he has only one having lost his right arm during the Battle of Vittorio.
I have transcribed the letter with punctuations as they are.
Civil Engineer’s Office
31st April 1835
Sir,
In compliance with the instructions conveyed in your letter 390/96 of the 20 ultimo attending to the slow progress of the works at Ross and desiring me to visit the station for the purposes of ascertaining and reporting upon the cause of the delay; I proceeded thither on the 13th inst and have the honor to report that I found very little progress had been made in the work since my last survey for which Mr Atkinson gives various reasons. In the first place, he states that the whole of his gang which was in an efficient state at the period of my last survey was a short time subsequently removed from his superintendence and dispersed to various parts of the colony and that in composing his present gang he was under the necessity of receiving the refuse of the workmen from such works as could from time to time be spared, a strength which was obviously inadequate and incompetent to the execution of such a work as the construction of the new bridge within the time desirable for its completion. He also states that his requisitions remain unanswered for months together, as in the case of the iron required for the centres which tho very urgently and repeatedly called for six months since, has only been delivered within the last few days and was at last demanded through my department, an irregular course for procuring such supplies. Third he states that his means of [constraint] over the convicts are insufficient to insure (sic) a due exaction of the work, his only course being to prefer charges before the Police Magistrate against such men as misconduct themselves and this he can only do when the Police Magistrate visits the station about once in ten or twelve days; under such circumstances the most unsatisfactory results are to be apprehended, and I consider that on my calculations formed by the proportion of work performed during the last six months the bridge cannot be completed within the next five years. As relates to the insufficient supply of men to this work I would state that I have forwarded from the gangs of my department a few fair workmen and that on the 16th ultimo “Mr Cartwright” a good mason was sent from Newtown whom I find Mr Atkinson has now employed as an overseer but as I found it impossible to supply all Mr Atkinson’s requests for good workmen without suspending every other work in the colony. I have forwarded to the Principal Superintendent from time to time such applications as I could not comply with, with a request that the men required might be withdrawn from the loan gang. As regards the placing of the centres I beg to state my opinion that no advantage could at present be derived from such a proceeding, the arch stones not being prepared and in the event of a flood, the obstruction to the course of the water would be so much as to endanger their safety.The remaining abutment has already the two lower courses of masonry completed, I consider that if a sufficient number of masons under proper management be at once on the work this part may be erected to the height of the springing stones before the floods come down, the work of preparing the arch stones could then be proceeded with and the centres erected at the termination of the flood season, the whole of the arches should be turned and the centres removed before the next flood season and this I conceive can only be accomplished by having a sufficient gang of men in good working order and under proper control. In conclusion I beg to observe that the accumulation of alluvial soil just above and below the bridge was ordered to be removed as it forms a principal obstruction to the passing off of the water but from the little progress already made by a gang of 35 men if appears to me it will be a longer job than the erection of the bridge, and I would therefore recommend that a larger body of men may be attached to this work. It will be perceived that in this report the points alluded to in His Excellency’s minute of 11th inst attached to Mr Atkinson’s letter have been embraced.
I have the honor to be, sir, your most obedient servant,
J Lee Archer