However, in Stow’s time, both sides were built up, and it had the appearance of a regular street, there being only left three openings, with stone walls and iron rails over them, to afford a prospect east and west of the Thames. These were over three of the widest arches, usually called the navigable locks.
Thus we see that the bridge in Stow’s time nearly resembled what it was before the houses were lately pulled down: and the continuator of Mr. Stow observes, that it continued in the same state till the year 1632; when on the 13th of February, the buildings on the north end of the bridge to the vacancy on both sides, containing forty-two houses, were burnt down by a maid servant’s carelessness, in setting a tub of hot sea-coal ashes under a pair of stairs, at a needle-maker’s near St. Magnus’s church: this fire burnt very furiously, and there being a scarcity of water, occasioned by the Thames being almost frozen over, these buildings were all consumed within eight hours.
In this condition the bridge continued for several years; the confusions in the state interrupting the government of the city, and putting a stop to all farther improvements. However, some of the houses next the city were rebuilt of timber in the years 1645 and 1646; these edifices were three stories high; they had flat roofs adorned with balustrades, and had cellars contrived within and between the piers.
The bridge had not indeed intirely recovered from its ruinous condition in 1666, when it again suffered in the general conflagration of the city, most of the buildings being totally consumed, except a few at the south end, erected in the reign of King John; and the very stone work of the bridge was so injured and weakened by this melancholy event, that it cost the bridge-house 1500l. to make good the damage of the piers and arches.
The stone work was, however, no sooner secured, than a sufficient number of tenants offered, who agreed with the bridge-house for building leases of sixty-one years, paying to the city the annual rent of ten shillings per foot running, and to build in such a form and manner as was prescribed. This was carried into execution with such dispatch, that within five years the north end was completely finished, with houses four stories high, and a street twenty feet broad between side and side: after which all the old buildings at the south end were rebuilt in the same manner.
In the year 1722, the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council, being sensible of the great inconveniences and mischiefs which happened by the disorderly driving of coaches, carts, and other carriages, over the bridge, published an order, that all carriages coming out of Southwark into the city, should keep all along on the west side of the bridge, and those going out of the city on the east side; appointing three persons at each end to see this order executed: and this method is still observed.
Three years after this order, the gate at the south end being greatly damaged by a fire which broke out at a brush-maker’s, and destroyed several of the adjacent houses, it was built with stone, with two posterns for the convenience of foot passengers. This gate was finished at the expence of the city in the year 1728.
At length the building leases being expired, the city was sensible of the inconvenience of not having a footway, which had occasioned the loss of many lives, from the number of carriages continually passing and repassing, projected a plan for rebuilding the street over the bridge with colonades on each side, by which foot passengers might be both secured from the horses and carriages, and sheltered from the weather. Part of this plan was a few years ago carried into execution, from the first opening on the north-east end, and its advantages were so obvious, that every body was desirous of seeing it completed.
However, in 1746 the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and Common Council, considering the many lives that were lost thro’ the streightness of the arches, and the enormous size of the sterlings, which took up one fourth of the water way, and occasioned the fall at low water to be no less than five feet; as well as the great expence of repairing the bridge, which for several years had annually amounted to 2000l. came to the resolution of taking down all the houses, and to widen and enlarge one or more of the arches. Accordingly the Court ordered their surveyor to draw a plan, and make an estimate of the expence; which having done, the total amounted to 95,000l. when it was immediately agreed not to grant or renew any lease or leases of the houses, but to let those unexpired run out, and consequently the houses run to ruin. Stow. Maitland.
Indeed this scheme was in part proposed immediately after the fire of London, by both Sir Christopher Wren and Sir John Evelyn; these ingenious gentlemen proposing, instead of houses, to have a substantial balustrade on each side; and after them, the author of the Review of the public buildings had the following remarks, “As some people are ignorant enough to admire the bridge merely because it is encumbered with houses from end to end; it will not be amiss to observe, that nothing can be more ridiculous than this invention; nothing can possibly offend the eye more, or extinguish so many beauties as might take place, in case this popular nuisance was removed: suppose the present structure of the bridge was still to continue as it is, there would, at least, be room for a magnificent breast-work and balustrade above, and the top would afford one of the finest prospects in the world: on one hand a fleet of merchant ships, equal in value and importance to half a nation; on the other, two of the most considerable cities in Europe, stretching along the banks of a beautiful river, and ending with a distant view of the adjacent landscape.”