The following is a re-print of a past column by former Advertiser columnist Stephen Thorning, who passed away on Feb. 23, 2015.
Some text has been updated to reflect changes since the original publication and any images used may not be the same as those that accompanied the original publication.
Last week’s column described the efforts of Fergus, beginning in late 1877, to force Wellington County to pay for one of the two bridges over the Grand River in its downtown core.
Fergus lost its lawsuit against the county in May 1879, and by June 1879 one bridge was open to only pedestrians; the other was deteriorating rapidly as well.
There was one good piece of news in June 1879 for Fergus. The county roads committee, headed by J. Jeff Dobbin of West Garafraxa, decided to grant $300 to Fergus “to aid in the construction of a bridge over the Grand River at Fergus.”
Dobbin was an intelligent and astute man. The amount would cover only a portion of the cost of a bridge, but several county councillors, upset about the Fergus lawsuit, vowed to do nothing to help Fergus. By not specifying which bridge the grant was to help, Dobbin indicated that he had no desire to take over a Fergus bridge as a county structure.
Fergus did not immediately embrace the offer, but reeve Robert Steele and his council did accept the offer as a truce. At their July 22 meeting they invited the warden and the roads committee to inspect the two bridges, and review the judge’s decision in the lawsuit.
After failing to force the county to assume the St. David St. bridge, Fergus council now hoped to pass the Tower Street bridge on to them. Everyone agreed to look at the bridges on Aug. 8, 1879.
After spending most of the day looking and talking, Dobbin managed to get his nine-man committee to designate the Tower Street bridge as their preferred route, and to offer a further $300 toward the reconstruction costs. If built to the satisfaction of the committee, he was prepared to recommend that the county assume the route as part of the county road to the north.
Dobbin could not guarantee that all of county council would agree at the December 1879 session, but his committee had agreed unanimously to the recommendations, and they represented all corners of the county.
The Tower Street span was shorter than the one at St. David Street. If the county would be taking over one of the bridges, Tower Street promised lower on-going expenses, even though the largest volume of traffic used the other bridge and Bridge Street (which was a late addition to the Fergus Street plan) to get from Tower Street to St. David Street.
Fergus councillors were divided on what course to take at that point. They called a public meeting for Aug. 15 to discuss the bridge crisis, and solicit opinions from the public. The turnout was good, but the long evening frequently degenerated into bickering and exchanges of insults. Reeve Steele tried his best to keep order.
The reeve outlined the various options facing council, and showed engineering diagrams. The Tower Street bridge was a 73-foot span, and had already had stone abutments. The county had already offered a total of $600 toward that bridge, and had offered to assume it when it was completed.
St. David Street was a costlier proposition. The span was 103 feet, and there were no stone abutments. The existing bridge rested on a centre pier which was a constant source of trouble. It was to be eliminated in the replacement. An iron bridge with stone abutments would cost $3,000, and a wooden one, on timber abutments $1,500.
Over the course of the meeting ratepayers rose to present motions to the meeting, amendments to the motions, and amendments to the amendments. At the end of the confusion it appeared that the meeting was in favour of a wooden bridge at Tower Street and an iron one, on stone abutments, at St. David St. But no one was quite sure.
A few people even wanted to resume legal action against the county. Fergus council met three days later, on Aug. 18, to make some decisions based on the public response. In a rare moment of unanimity, councillors agreed to erect a wooden bridge at Tower Street. The county grant would cover all or most of the cost, they argued. An iron bridge would be a much better value in the long run, but because the county had agreed to assume the structure on its completion, that would not be a problem for Fergus.
Councillor Ramore wanted to defer the St. David Street bridge to 1880. Other councillors believed there was nothing to be gained by waiting. Reeve Steele was afraid that any delay with either bridge might jeopardize the county grant. Councillor Henry McCrorey thought, with the water in the river low, that it was an excellent time to construct stone abutments, and there would be at least two months of favourable weather to get the job done in 1879.
Reeve Steele had obtained the opinion of Charles Young, a local mason. Young, surprisingly, thought that abutments of cedar timber would be best, and that it was too late in the season to build with stone and have the mortar set properly.
Three councillors placed resolutions on the table for their preferred plan, but none received a seconder. James Cattanach’s motion, to build both bridges of wood, to plans drawn by engineer John Taylor and with cedar abutments at St. David St., was seconded by J.W. Green-Armytage. The reeve quickly called a vote, and that motion carried 3-2, with his vote the deciding one. Councillors Ramore and McCrorey insisted on recording their negative votes, with their reasons. A sizable portion of Fergus ratepayers were outraged at the decision.
The following morning two petitions were in circulation, one for another public meeting, and the other to build the St. David St. abutments of stone rather than cedar. When presented with the petitions, Reeve Steele called a second public meeting for Aug. 26. Rather than resolve differences, the second meeting succeeded only in putting more alternatives on the table.
A discussion on the merits of wood and stone abutments, and various methods of building the stone abutments, occupied most of the evening. An engineer named Ed Parsons presented an alternate set of plans for the bridge and abutments which he claimed would save considerable money. He wanted to use Portland cement, then a new material, in the construction of the abutments. Most of those in the Fergus building trades were there, and they all had opinions which they shared enthusiastically.
It appeared that those at the meeting overwhelming favoured stone abutments. Councillor McCrorey, who had favored stone from the beginning, was greeted with loud applause each time he rose to speak. Several speakers suggested that council get some expert engineering advice on the practicality of building stone abutments in the fall of the year. Dr. Abraham Groves rose, stating he had no confidence in expert opinions. “We got an eminent Toronto legal opinion before, relative to the liability of the county to maintain the St. David Street bridge, and see where it landed us,” he thundered. He preferred the opinions of local men with practical experience.
Merchant Henry Michie moved that the meeting preferred stone abutments. A vote showed 83 in favour. No one rose in opposition, but several dozen did not choose to vote. By then it was late in the evening, and the reeve adjourned the meeting. The choice of an iron or wooden bridge had only been mentioned briefly.
The next morning the reeve arranged for the specifications to be changed to stone abutments. He did not alter the original decision of council for a wooden bridge. The call for tenders went out in the last week of August.
After almost two years of talk, meetings and an expensive lawsuit, Fergus council believed the bridge question was settled, and that the two projects would proceed smoothly to completion.
That period of tranquility lasted barely a week. At a council meeting on Sept. 1, 1879, a delegation appeared, objecting to the style of trusses specified in John Taylor’s plans, and preferring the design drawn by Ed Parsons.
In a special session the following day, council decided to involve a third engineer in the bridge projects. They would send the two sets of plans to Thomas Ingles of Guelph, who did much of the engineering work for the Royal City.
(Next week: The conclusion of the 1879 Fergus bridge saga.)
*This column was originally published in the Advertiser on Feb. 3, 2006.
