, ▁the ▁plans ▁for ▁a ▁floating ▁har bour ▁to ▁accommod ate ▁vessels ▁of ▁up ▁to ▁ ▁were ▁dropped , ▁and ▁the ▁entrance ▁lock ▁was ▁moved ▁further ▁along ▁the ▁original ▁course ▁of ▁the ▁River ▁Br ue . ▁This ▁saved ▁money , ▁but ▁meant ▁that ▁ships ▁did ▁not ▁have ▁to ▁pay ▁lock age ▁charges ▁to ▁reach ▁High bridge . ▁ ▁The ▁propriet ors ▁failed ▁to ▁raise ▁all ▁of ▁the ▁capital ▁promised , ▁and ▁there ▁were ▁financial ▁difficulties . ▁The ▁Commission ers ▁of ▁S ew ers ▁were ▁unh appy ▁with ▁some ▁of ▁the ▁work ▁at ▁High bridge ▁in ▁ 1 8 3 0 , ▁and ▁reported ▁that ▁the ▁contract or ▁" had ▁run ▁away ", ▁and ▁work ▁had ▁stopped ▁in ▁ 1 8 3 1 . ▁The ▁company ▁had ▁also ▁failed ▁to ▁l odge ▁£ 1 , 0 0 0 ▁with ▁the ▁Commission ers ▁which ▁was ▁required ▁to ▁cover ▁any ▁costs ▁they ▁might ▁have ▁as ▁a ▁result ▁of ▁the ▁construction ▁of ▁the ▁canal , ▁and ▁they ▁su ed ▁for ▁the ▁money ▁in ▁ 1 8 3 1 . ▁Even ▁R enn ie ▁threatened ▁to ▁sue , ▁as ▁much ▁of ▁his ▁fee ▁remained ▁un pa id . ▁The ▁cost ▁of ▁construction ▁was ▁about ▁£ 3 0 , 0 0 0 , ▁but ▁it ▁appears ▁that ▁some ▁deb ts ▁were ▁never ▁paid . ▁On ▁ 1 6 ▁December ▁ 1 8 3 1 ▁the ▁propriet ors ▁borrow ed ▁£ 5 , 0 0 0 ▁from ▁the ▁Ex che quer ▁at ▁a ▁ 5 % ▁rate ▁of ▁interest .