Marmelong Bridge
Marmelong Bridge, Madras in this painting by Justinian Gantz around 1850s. There is an interesting story about this bridge around first decade of 19th century. Coja Petrus Uscan the Armenian who built the bridge left an amount of 1500 pagodas with the Vestry of St.Marys Church, Fort St. George for the repairs to the bridge. The interest earned from this amount is to be used for the repairs of the bridge. Any interest on the capital over and above five per cent was considered to be the perquisite of the charity fund and was given to the poor.
The bridge was originally built for accommodation of foot passengers and small country cart. During the wars with Tipoo Sultan the bridge was more used for the passage of troops and heavy artillery. So it needed strengthening and widening around 1804. The vestry was asked to do but refused on the ground that the Trust said nothing about rebuilding but only repairing. The refusal was by a majority of trust members and an account money spent showed that the interest at five per cent had not been spent entirely on repairing the bridge for it was always not needed.
The vestry was asked to pay the arrears which they refused on the ground that the money had long ago been given away in charity. The matter went to the High Court which ruled that there was no authority in the vestry as a body and it had no legal right to administer such a trust as that imposed by Peter Uscan. The vestry ultimately paid nine thousand pagodas being the sum adjudged due including interest and compound interest into the hands of trustees legally appointed on behalf of the Marmelong Bridge Trust.
The bridge was originally built for accommodation of foot passengers and small country cart. During the wars with Tipoo Sultan the bridge was more used for the passage of troops and heavy artillery. So it needed strengthening and widening around 1804. The vestry was asked to do but refused on the ground that the Trust said nothing about rebuilding but only repairing. The refusal was by a majority of trust members and an account money spent showed that the interest at five per cent had not been spent entirely on repairing the bridge for it was always not needed.
The vestry was asked to pay the arrears which they refused on the ground that the money had long ago been given away in charity. The matter went to the High Court which ruled that there was no authority in the vestry as a body and it had no legal right to administer such a trust as that imposed by Peter Uscan. The vestry ultimately paid nine thousand pagodas being the sum adjudged due including interest and compound interest into the hands of trustees legally appointed on behalf of the Marmelong Bridge Trust.
Comments