This bridge, which had long been wished for and projected, was begun
in 1787, and finished in 1790. Its southern extremity stands opposite
to the _Palais du Corps Législatif_; while that of the north faces
the _Place de la Concorde_, whence it not only derives its present
appellation, but has always experienced every change of name to which
the former has been subject.
The lightness of its apearance is less striking to those who have
seen the _Pont de Neuilly_, in which PERRONET, Engineer of bridges
and highways, has, by the construction of arches nearly flat, so
eminently distinguished himself. He is likewise the architect of this
bridge, which is four hundred and sixty-two feet in length by
forty-eight in breadth. Like the _Pont National_, it consists of
five elliptical arches. The span of the centre arch is ninety-six
feet; that of the collateral ones, eighty-seven; and that of the
two others near the abutments, sixty-eight. Under one of the latter
is a tracking-path for the facility of navigation.
The piles, which are each nine feet in thickness, have, on their
starlings, a species of pillars that support a cornice five feet and
a half high. Perpendicularly to these pillars are to rise as many
pyramids, which are to be crowned by a parapet with a balustrade: in
all these, it is intended to display no less elegance of workmanship
than the arches present boldness of design and correctness of
execution.
On crossing these bridges, it has often occurred to me, how much the
Parisians must envy us the situation of our metropolis. If the Seine,
like the Thames, presented the advantage of braving the moderate
winds, and of conveying, by regular tides, the productions of the
four quarters of the globe to the quays which skirt its banks, what
an acquisition would it not be to their puny commerce! What a
gratification to their pride to see ships discharging their rich
cargoes at the foot of the _Pont de la Concorde_! The project of the
canal of Languedoc must, at first, have apparently presented greater
obstacles; yet, by talents and perseverance, these were overcome at a
time when the science of machinery of every description was far less
understood than it is at the present moment.
It appears from the account of Abbon, a monk of the abbey of St.
Germain-des-Prés, that, in the year 885, the Swedes, Danes, and
Normans, to the number of forty-five thousand men, came to lay siege
to Paris, with seven hundred sail of ships, exclusively of the
smaller craft, so that, according to this historian, who was an
eye-witness of the fact, the river Seine was covered with their
vessels for the space of two leagues.
Julius Cæsar tells us, in the third book of his Commentaries, that,
at the time of his conquest of the Gauls, in the course of one
winter, he constructed six hundred vessels of the wood which then
grew in the environs of Paris; and that, in the following spring, he
embarked his army, horse and foot, provisions and baggage, in these
vessels, descended the Seine, reached Dieppe, and thence crossed over
to England, of which, he says, he made a conquest.
About forty years ago, the scheme engaged much attention. In 1759,
the Academy of Sciences, Belles-Lettres, and Arts of Rouen, proposed
the following as a prize-question: "Was not the Seine formerly
navigable for vessels of greater burden than those which are now
employed on it; and are there not means to restore to it, or to
procure it, that advantage?" In 1760, the prize was adjourned; the
memoirs presented not being to the satisfaction of the Academy. In
1761, the new candidates having no better success, the subject was
changed.
However, notwithstanding this discouragement, we find that, on the
1st of August, 1766, Captain Berthelot actually reached the _Pont
Royal_ in a vessel of one hundred and sixty tons burden. When, on the
22d of the same month, he departed thence, loaded with merchandise,
the depth of the water in the Seine was twenty-five feet, and it was
nearly the same when he ascended the river. This vessel was seven
days on her passage from Rouen to Paris: but a year or two ago, four
days only were employed in performing the same voyage by another
vessel, named the _Saumon_.
Engineers have ever judged the scheme practicable, and the estimate
of the necessary works, signed by several skilful surveyors, was
submitted to the ministry of that day. The amount was forty-six
millions of livres (circa £1,916,600 sterling).
But what can compensate for the absence of the tide? This is an
advantage, which, in a commercial point of view, must ever insure to
London a decided superiority over Paris. Were the Seine to-morrow
rendered navigable for vessels of large burden, they must, for a
considerable distance, be tracked against the stream, or wait till a
succession of favourable winds had enabled them to stem it through
its various windings; whereas nothing can be more favourable to
navigation than the position of London. It has every advantage of a
sea-port without its dangers. Had it been placed lower down, that is,
nearer to the mouth of the Thames, it would have been more exposed to
the insults of a foreign enemy, and also to the insalubrious
exhalations of the swampy marshes. Had it been situated higher up the
river, it would have been inaccessible to ships of large burden.
Thus, by no effort of human invention or industry can Paris rival
London in commerce, even on the supposition that France could produce
as many men possessed of the capital and spirit of enterprise, for
which our British merchants are at present unrivalled.
Yet, may not this pre-eminence in commercial prosperity lead to our
destruction, as the gigantic conquests of France may also pave the
way to her ruin? Alas! the experience of ages proves this melancholy
truth, which has also been repeated by Raynal: "Commerce," says that
celebrated writer, "in the end finds its ruin in the riches which it
accumulates, as every powerful state lays the foundation of its own
destruction in extending its conquests."