Finite element analysis-aided seismic

behavior examination of modular

underground arch bridge - eBook PDF
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebooksecure.com/download/finite-element-analysis-aided-seismic-behavior-ex
amination-of-modular-underground-arch-bridge-ebook-pdf/
 Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 118 (2021) 104166

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology

incorporating Trenchless Technology Research
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tust

Finite element analysis-aided seismic behavior examination of modular

underground arch bridge
Toan Van Nguyen a, Junwon Seo b, Jin-Hee Ahn c, Achintya Haldar d, Jungwon Huh a, *
a
Department of Architecture & Civil Engineering, Chonnam National University, South Korea
b
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, South Dakota State University, USA
c
Department of Civil Engineering, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52725, South Korea
d
Department of Civil Engineering and Engineering Mechanics, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this study, a 3D finite element analysis (FEA) is performed to examine the seismic behaviors of a three-hinge
Modular Underground Arch Bridge modular underground arch bridge (MUAB) subjected to a series of synthetic ground motions with a wide peak-
Prestressed Rebar ground-acceleration (PGA) spectrum. The FEA model of the MUAB under longitudinal and transverse synthetic
Arch Length
ground-motion loading is described by several modeling parameters [e.g., arch-to-arch interaction (AAI),
Arch-to-Arch Interaction
Soil–Structure Interaction
soil–structure interaction (SSI), and stiffness of prestressed rebar], to determine its various seismic response
Finite Element Model-Based Seismic Behavior characteristics (i.e., maximum displacement, maximum tensile and compressive stresses, and maximum crack
depth). The FEA results show that the MUAB’s seismic responses differ with respect to earthquake-loading di­
rection owing to the different levels of seismic resistance associated with the considered modeling parameters. To
elucidate the influence of each modeling parameter on the seismic response, we performed MUAB parametric
studies featuring different arch lengths, SSI and AAI friction coefficients, and prestressed-rebar stiffnesses. The
key findings indicate that the seismic behaviors of MUABs depend on the PGAs and ground-motion directions;
furthermore, they exhibited a sensitivity to the arch length and prestressed-rebar stiffness. In addition, the SSI
friction coefficient exerted a minor influence on the seismic responses of MUABs, especially on their maximum
compressive and tensile stresses and maximum crack depths; meanwhile, the AAI friction coefficient had a
moderate influence upon seismic response.

1. Introduction modular precast concrete forms offers various benefits, including

Underground precast arch bridges are a type of culvert; they have
been widely implemented in underground infrastructure developments
(Abe and Nakamura, 2014). In recent years, these underground arch
bridges have been modularized into precast components. The con­
struction of modular components via the assembling of modular forms
has been applied in the field of structural engineering; in underground
arch bridges, these forms offer several advantages in terms of con­
struction and structural performance. For example, the modular bridges
have a greater load-carrying capacity than conventional bridges owing
to the efficient load sharing between the bridge and soil embankment
(Abe and Nakamura, 2014; Fairless and Kirkaldie, 2008; Sawamura
et al., 2011). When constructing underground arch bridges, the use of
simpler and faster construction processes and high-quality member
control.
Types of underground precast arch bridges are classified into several
categories including hinge types based on the cross-section sizes of the
arch and the sizes of the arch span (Miyazaki, 2019). For the hinge types
of underground precast arch bridges, two-hinged arch bridges and three-
hinged arch bridges have been used commonly because they are most
effective in soil-arching. Technically, the hinge types of underground
precast arch bridges allow for motion and rotation to mobilize earth
pressure compared to rigid arch bridges. The three-hinged arch bridges
are made from two segmental precast units resulting in three hinge
points. It harnesses passive resistance of an embankment by permitting
deflection, resulting in a mechanically stable bridge structure

* Corresponding author at: Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Chonnam National University, 77 Yongbong-ro, Buk-gu, Gwangju 61186, South
Korea.
E-mail addresses: 198047@jnu.ac.kr (T. Van Nguyen), junwon.seo@sdstate.edu (J. Seo), jahn@gnu.ac.kr (J.-H. Ahn), haldar@u.arizona.edu (A. Haldar),
jwonhuh@chonnam.ac.kr (J. Huh).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2021.104166
Received 11 September 2020; Received in revised form 12 July 2021; Accepted 24 August 2021
Available online 21 September 2021
0886-7798/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166
(Sawamura et al., 2019). However, there needs to be a thorough
investigation into the mechanical behavior of three-hinged arch bridges
under seismic loadings.
Underground arch bridges constructed from these modular compo­
nents are referred to as modular underground arch bridges (MUABs). In
general, the occurrence of cracks at component edges is common in
MUABs (Abe and Nakamura, 2014). Numerous studies have attempted
to determine the seismic responses of different bridge types (Huh et al.,
2017a; Huh et al., 2017b; Jeon et al., 2015; Mangalathu et al., 2018;
Rogers and Seo, 2017; Seo, 2013; Seo and Linzell, 2012, 2013; Seo and
Rogers, 2017; Siqueira et al., 2014; Tavares et al., 2012); however, very
few have investigated the structural behaviors of cracked MUABs under
static and/or dynamic loadings. These studies have employed numerical
analyses (Byrne et al., 1996; Jeon et al., 2019; Sawamura et al., 2012;
Wood and Jenkins, 2000), laboratory testing (Miyazaki et al., 2017a,b,
2018; Sawamura et al., 2015; Toyota and Takagai, 1999; Sawamura
et al., 2016) and field measurements (Kim et al., 2019) as the research
methodology. Most recent works on cracked concrete components and
embankment soils were based solely on linear elastic fracture mechanics
while neglecting nonlinear behaviors (Miyazaki et al., 2018, 2020).
Furthermore, Jeon et al. (2019) constructed a 3D nonlinear structural
model for a slice of a multi-hinge precast underground arch bridge with
outriggers to assess its structural behavior and the interactions between
segmental precast arch members during backfill construction; however,
this study neglected dynamic effects.
A small number of studies (Abuhajar et al., 2015; Abuhajar et al.,
2017; Kang et al., 2020; Le et al., 2014; Miyazaki et al., 2020; Santos
et al., 2020) have sought to simulate MUABs by partially considering the
arch-to-arch and/or soil–structure interactions. In particular, Miyazaki
et al. (Miyazaki et al., 2020) modeled arch segment components by
considering the interactions between precast arch members and the
surrounding soil. Furthermore, considerable efforts have been devoted
to modeling the arch-to-arch interactions of MUABs. Abuhajar et al.
(Abuhajar et al., 2015; Abuhajar et al., 2017) demonstrated the signif­
icance of soil arching in controlling the structural static load responses
of MUABs by conducting 2D finite element analysis (FEA) alongside
corresponding downscaled centrifuge tests. However, Abuhajar et al.
(Abuhajar et al., 2015; Abuhajar et al., 2017) only tested individual
samples; as a result, their study did not capture the influence of pre­
stressed rebars on the MUAB.
This study aims to develop a sophisticated 3D FEA model of a MUAB,
to evaluate its seismic behaviors. More specifically, the FEA model is
used to study seismic deformation and stress development in the
segmental component structure by incorporating the friction co­
efficients of arch-to-arch interactions (AAIs) and soil–structure in­
teractions (SSIs) and the influence of the prestressed rebar. Parametric
studies for various arch lengths, soil–structure and arch-to-arch in­
teractions, and prestressed rebars were also conducted to examine the
seismic responses of MUABs subjected to different seismic loadings. This
paper is organized into five sections (including the present one). Section
2 describes the 3D FEA model of the MUAB. Section 3 presents the modal
analyses and seismic responses of the MUAB model. Section 4 discusses
the findings of the parametric MUAB-model studies with respect to the
key modeling parameters. Finally, Section 5 presents the conclusions
drawn from the work.
2. 3D FEA modeling
In this section, we describe the 3D FEA model used to conduct
seismic-response evaluations of three-hinge MUABs. More specifically,
in the following subsections, we describe the studied MUAB—its con­
crete, surrounding soil, contact surface, and prestressed rebar modeling
specifications as well as its design response spectrum under synthetic
ground motions.
2
2.1. Studied MUAB
The three-hinge MUAB model previously employed by Miyazaki
et al. (2020) was used for this study. This MUAB was constructed ac­
cording to Korean standards (KDS, 2019); that is, it was designed to be
resistant to an earthquake with a 500-year return period and another
with a 1000-year return period. The peak ground acceleration (PGA)
values of 500- and 1000-year-return-period earthquakes are 0.4345 g
and 0.5744 g, respectively.
The three-hinge MUAB was bounded by wing walls and embank­
ments that matched its geometrical properties; these were modeled
using ABAQUS to numerically determine the MUAB seismic behavior (as
shown in Fig. 1). Detailed dimensions for the MUAB (arch length: 7.5 m;
outer diameter: 10.5 m) are provided in Table 1. Notably, the total
length of the MUAB (including wing walls) was 8.75 m, and it consisted
of 2 types of segmental arches: Segments 1 and 2. These segments
featured identical thicknesses and inner/outer radii, though their widths
differed (Segment 1: 1.25 m and Segment 2: 0.625 m). The MUAB was
placed on a concrete invert foundation (thickness: 1.0 m), and a concrete
wing-wall (thickness: 0.625 m) was placed on the wing-wall foot. The
surrounding soil consisted of a 7.5 m-thick embankment and 6 m-thick
subsoil lying on top of the bedrock.
The studied MUAB was generated using the eight-node brick
element, C3D8 [available in ABAQUS (Abaqus, 2014)]. The first-order
elements C3D8 were sufficient to obtain results with the desired accu­
racy for the FEA model and saved computing costs. The elements C3D8
were the most suitable for problems related to contacts between
deformable bodies in nonlinear dynamic analysis. The element sizes
were finalized based on the number of trial analyses and also on the
stability limits, which was a function of mesh size and wavelength of the
FEA model (Abaqus, 2014). Finer meshings were provided in the con­
crete parts, especially in the segmental arches, and other coarser
meshings were provided in the surrounding soils. The most optimal
meshing of MUAB (Fig. 1a) was adopted to lay a foundation for the
study. The total numbers of model elements and nodes were 44,744 and
79,476, respectively. The total mass of the model was ~ 15,000 tons.
A two-step dynamic analysis was performed. In the first step (static
analysis), a gravitational load was applied to the FEA model; this was
used to eliminate the abrupt influence of dynamic effects when ground
acceleration was applied. The lateral surfaces were fixed against trans­
lation movements in the normal direction; meanwhile, the bottom face
was fixed against all translation movements. In the second step (dy­
namic analysis), a ground motion was applied alongside the self-weight
maintenance load. Thus, the boundary condition was changed to reflect
the new loading condition. A viscous-spring artificial boundary was
imposed by installing springs and dampers on the truncated boundaries
of the surrounding soil corresponding to excitation directions; thus, we
assumed that incident waves were absorbed upon reaching the corre­
sponding truncated boundaries. As a result of the two-step dynamic
analysis, the FEA model closely reproduced the actual response of far-
field soil.
2.2. Concrete and prestressed rebar
The concrete used in the MUAB was modeled using ABAQUS. We
considered its nonlinearity (Hognestad, 1951) using the plastic-damage
model established by Lee and Fenves (1998a, 1998b). This model can
represent the damage-cracking behavior of concrete, particularly for
MUABs under seismic loadings. In quasi-brittle materials, this model can
be defined by evaluating the dissipated fracture energy required to
generate microcracks in the concrete of the MUAB. The uniaxial
compressive and tensile responses of the concrete were assumed to be
influenced by the damage plasticity, and this assumption formed the
basis of the model. The key components of the inviscid-concrete damage
plasticity model under strain-rate decomposition were assumed for the
rate-independent model. The total strain tensor was comprised of elastic
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166

Fig. 1. Schematic of the studied MUAB.

Table 1 Table 2
Segment component characteristics. Properties of MUAB model concrete.
Characteristic Unit Segment 1 Segment 2 Property Unit M40 M30
3
Number of segments – 11 2 Unit weight, γ kg/m 2450 2400
Outer radius, Rout m 5.25 5.25 Young’s modulus, Ec MPa 30,000 26,600
Inner radius, Rin m 5.00 5.00 Poisson’s ratio, υ – 0.2 0.2
Segment thickness m 0.25 0.25 Compressive strength, f’c MPa 40 30
Segment width m 1.25 0.625 Tensile strength, ft MPa 4.0 3.0
Number of prestressed holes on each lateral – 4 4 Dilation angle ◦
31 31
face Eccentricity – 0.1 0.1
Number of prestressed holes on top face – 2 1 fb0/fc0 – 1.16 1.16
K – 0.67 0.67
Viscosity parameter – 0 0
and plastic components.
Two damage variables (in terms of failure mode: tensile cracking and
compressive crushing) were considered for the MUAB model. Hardening descended after reaching the maximum (referred to as the softening
and softening variable values were applied to determine the cracking section of the curve). After the curve descended, crushing failure
and crushing trends, respectively. These were responsible for the loss of occurred at an ultimate strain of 20% f’c. However, the elastic strain
elastic stiffness and the development of the yield surface. Therefore, the increased up to the tensile strength. Cracking strain occurred beyond the
compressive and tensile damage states were characterized indepen­ tension stress peak (i.e., at the tensile strength). Stiffening failure
dently by two hardening variables. In this section, the numerical simu­ occurred at an ultimate strain of 1% ft.
lation of concrete material was briefly introduced. Details can be further The dynamic properties of M40- and M30-grade concrete were
referred to Zhang et al. (2013). employed for nonlinear seismic analyses. Structure damping was
M40-grade concrete (modeled in ABAQUS as having compressive incorporated in the FEA model by using Rayleigh’s damping and
strength f’c = 40 MPa) was used for the segmental arch and wing wall; assuming mass and stiffness to be proportional. A 5% damping was
meanwhile, M30-grade concrete (modeled as having compressive considered for the fundamental vibration modes of the MUAB system to
strength f’c = 30 MPa) was adopted for the invert foundation, as listed in determine the mass- and stiffness-proportional damping factors. Besides,
Table 2. In terms of compressive behavior, the inelastic strain was the concrete material damping values were defined for direct integration
initialized as 50% of f’c. Above this point, the curve increased gradually in the implicit ABAQUS application by using a mass-proportional
up to f’c. The initial crack occurred at 85% of f’c. The stress–strain curve damping αR of 0.77 and a stiffness-proportional damping βR of 0.003.

3
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166

The static analysis (with the self-weight of the MUAB) was initially Table 3
performed under the static stress state; however, nonlinear seismic Mechanical properties of prestressed rebar.
analysis under ground motions was performed by considering the dy­ Property Unit L-J and C-J
namic properties.
Young’s modulus MPa 19,700
Two types of prestressed rebar (length: 500 mm and diameter: 36 Poisson’s ratio – 0.2
mm) are aligned along the longitudinal (L-J) and circumferential (C-J) Ultimate strength, Fu MPa 1860
joints in accordance with the L-J holes and C-J holes, as illustrated in Yield strength, Fy MPa 1339
Fig. 1(c). The prestressed L-J and C-J rebars were modeled using spring
elements available in ABAQUS (Abaqus, 2014), as shown in Fig. 2. The
mechanical properties of the spring elements representing the rebars can Table 4
be seen in Table 3. The stiffnesses (K) of the rebars can be determined Properties of surrounding soil.
using Eq. (1). Property Unit Subsoil Embankment
AE Unit weight, γ kg/m3 1800 1750
K= (1) Young’s modulus, E MPa 45 50
l
Poisson’s ratio, υ – 0.33 0.28
where K = equivalent stiffness (N/m), A = cross-sectional area of Internal friction angle, ϕ ◦
25 35
rebar (m2), E = elastic modulus of material (Pa), and l = length of the Dilatancy angle, Ψ ◦
1 5
rebar (m). Cohesive force, c KPa 100 20

2.3. Surrounding soil
The surrounding soil plays an important role in maintaining the
overall stability of the MUAB via efficient load sharing. Embankment
shape patterns affect the seismic behavior of the MUAB. These shape
patterns can cause severe damage or collapse in large earthquakes owing
to the shallow soil cover (Miyazaki et al., 2017a). A symmetrical sur­
rounding soil profile and shallow embankment cover on top of the
segmental arch were adopted for seismic analysis. The soil properties
considered in the FEA model of the MUAB are given in Table 4 for soil
generalizability. Notably, these are common values for the soil types
applied to MUAB constructions, including normal clay subsoil and high-
quality mixed sandy embankment soil. The FEA soil model geometries
(see Fig. 1) were based on the Mohr–Coulomb plasticity model, which
allows for soil hardening behaviors. We assumed the soil properties to be
identical before and after seismic loadings.
2.4. Contact surface
In the FEA model, contact surfaces were used to model the shear-
force resistance between segments. These surfaces were classified into
two groups: arch-to-arch interactions (AAIs), representing contacts be­
tween segmental components [as shown in Fig. 3(a) and Fig. 3(b)], and
soil–structure interactions (SSIs), representing contact between the
concrete and surrounding soil [as shown in Fig. 3(c) and Fig. 3(d)].
These contact surfaces were modeled with surface-to-surface contact
Fig. 2. Prestressed rebar arrangement with L-J and C-J holes.
interactions that incorporated their mechanical contact properties by
using the hard contact and standard Coulomb friction model available in
ABAQUS (Abaqus, 2014). The Coulomb friction model was defined with
an interface friction coefficient of 0.6 for both the lateral and top AAI
surfaces of the segments to model a normal-weight concrete cast against
hardened concrete (Mattock, 1977; ACI, 2014). Interface friction co­
efficients of 0.3 and 0.45 were selected for the subsoil–concrete and
embankment–concrete SSI interactions (Sheng et al., 2007),
respectively.
Furthermore, the FEA model employed tie constraints as a semi-rigid
link connecting the arch segments and concrete invert foundation.
Surface-based tie constraints bind two surfaces together. The surface-to-
surface discretization method was adopted (Abaqus, 2014). These con­
straints facilitated the modeling of kinematic relationships between the
points and surfaces of the arch base and top face of the concrete foun­
dation. The connection between the wing-walls and the concrete foun­
dation was modeled with a rigid link based upon an assumption of cast-
in-place construction. Note, the arch segment-foundation concrete and
wall-foundation concrete were unified as a single modeling component.
2.5. Synthetic ground motions
Synthetic ground motions were generated using the procedure rec­
ommended by the Hallodorson and Papageorgiou (Halldorsson and
Papageorgiou, 2005). As stated above, we assumed that the MUAB was
located in Seismic Zone 1 [according to the Korean standards (KDS,
2019)] with Ground Type S4 bedrock, which has an average shear-wave
velocity (at a depth of 30 m) of Vs30 = 620 m/s (Borcherdt, 1992, 1994,
2012). The ground motions were generated to simulate far-field earth­
quakes of magnitudes below 6.9.
The elastic spectrum with 5% damping was adopted for the calcu­
lation. The deconvolution procedure was used for matching the ground
motions. The soil beneath the MUAB foundation was assumed to consist
of a single-layered soil overlaying the bedrock. The accelerogram was
defined starting from a synthetic one. The accelerogram was compatible
with the target spectrum and adapted to its frequency content using the
Fourier Transform Method (see Fig. 4). As a result, seven different
synthetic ground motions were generated, which achieved convergence
errors smaller than 8% [as shown in Fig. 5(a)].
The ground motions were matched to the Korean-code-based spec­
trum corresponding to a 500-year-return-period earthquake (KDS,
2019); these motions were then scaled up and down via intensity indices
with PGAs of 0.1–1.2 g. As shown in Fig. 1, the generated ground mo­
tions were applied individually to the bottom face of the structure in the
longitudinal and transverse directions of the MUAB model. The vertical
direction was not considered in this study because the MUAB having

4
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166
Fig. 3. Contact surfaces for AAIs and SSIs.
Fig. 4. Flowchart of generated synthetic ground motion.
shallow cover depth was much more influenced under the horizontal
ground motions than the vertical direction (Byrne et al., 1996; Jeon
et al., 2019; Sawamura et al., 2012; Wood and Jenkins, 2000). The set of
different ground motions was applied to study the maximum seismic
response of the MUAB. The median ground motion was adopted as a
representative, which matched well to the design spectrum and closed to
the median of the generated ground motions [Fig. 5(b) and Fig. 5(c)].
The representative ground motion was used to investigate crack prop­
agation in segment components and evaluate the influence of modeling
parameters on the seismic response of the studied MUAB.
3. Results and discussion
This section summarizes the computational results obtained from
FEA. The dynamic characteristics and seismic responses of the MUAB are
presented and discussed below.
5
3.1. Dynamic characteristics
The natural periods of the MUAB were calculated, to investigate the
vibrational characteristics of the MUAB according to the Lanczos
eigenvalue-extraction procedure (Lanczos, 1950; Ojalvo and Newman,
1970; Paige, 1971) available in ABAQUS (Abaqus, 2014). The periods of
the first twelve modes (along with their corresponding effective masses)
are listed in Table 5; these mode shapes are shown in Fig. 6. The sum of
the effective masses in each component direction for the first 12 modes
exceeded 90% of the MUAB total mass. The effective mass distribution
characterizes the relative contributions of the modes when the MUAB is
excited along a specific direction with a given frequency. These modes
can contribute to the interface loads. The interface-load-based effective
mass was measured to identify two target modes determining the
MUAB’s dynamic behavior. The natural periods of the first and second
modes were 0.430 s and 0.386 s, respectively. The figure and table show
that the first two modes of the MUAB were dominated by flexural and
torsional effects. On the other hand, the first two mode shapes suggest
that the other modes were directly associated with the effects of sur­
rounding soil deformation.
3.2. Seismic response
Nonlinear time-history analyses (using the generated synthetic
ground motions) were performed using ABAQUS to investigate the
MUAB’s seismic behavior. For these analyses, a Hilber–Hughes–Taylor
time integrator with full Newton–Raphson iteration was employed to
solve the nonlinear equations of motion for the MUAB. All segment
components of the MUAB were evaluated at each of the arch cross-
sections. More specifically, the seismic responses of the segment com­
ponents with respect to the angle [from 0◦ (bottom) to 90◦ (top)] for
both sides of the arch were determined through nonlinear time history
analyses, as indicated in Fig. 7. In this figure, the longitudinal and
transversal ground motions were applied individually to the bottom face
of the MUAB.
3.2.1. Maximum seismic response
Fig. 8(a) depicts the arch crack depths and extensions for different
PGAs. The crack depth reached 5 cm under a longitudinal PGA of 0.47 g
or under a transverse PGA of 0.59 g. Crack depths of 12.5 cm were
realized for longitudinal and transverse PGAs of 0.73 g and 0.84 g,
respectively. When the PGA (either longitudinal or transverse) does not
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166

exceed 0.47 g, the segment components may be repairable, because the

crack depth is smaller than 5 cm (equivalent to one-fifth of the arch
thickness). The MUAB can be extensively damaged when the PGA ex­
ceeds 0.85 g (greater than the half-thickness of the arch components).
The depth extensions of cracks produced by transverse ground motions
were smaller than those arising through longitudinal motions owing to a
greater seismic resistance in the transverse direction.
The stress changes in the MUAB for a spectrum of ground motions
(various PGAs) are presented in Fig. 8(b) and (c). Both tensile and
compressive stresses were significantly increased (compared to those
generated by self-weight loads) by the ground motions under initial
tensile and compressive stresses of 2.3 MPa and 7.5 MPa, respectively;
this indicates that the ground motions dramatically increased the stress
across the segment components. The tensile stress exceeded the tensile
strength of the concrete (4 MPa) under longitudinal ground motions
with a PGA of 0.3 g; meanwhile, this occurred at a PGA of 0.39 g for
transverse ground motions. Generally, for normal concrete, the
strain–stress curve is linearly elastic up to one-third of the maximum
compressive strength; thus, the compressive stress exceeded 20 MPa
(half of the compressive strength of concrete) under longitudinal and
transverse PGAs of 0.61 g and 0.79 g, respectively. The initial
compressive-strength-induced cracks corresponded to 34 MPa when the
longitudinal and transverse PGAs were 1.04 g and 1.1 g, respectively.
The maximum displacement of the MUAB subjected to ground mo­
tions is displayed in Fig. 8(d). The displacement increased by 71% and
52% for longitudinal and transverse PGAs of 0.4 g, respectively.
Furthermore, the difference in displacements between the 2 ground-
motion directions was more evident when the PGA increased to ~ 0.5
g. The deflection limit for buried concrete structures (such as MUABs)
should be mandatory in urban areas (AASHTO, 2012). However, no
specific reference number for MUAB deflection limits is available as yet;
thus, we defined the displacement criteria for MUABs as a ratio of arch
span (D) to 500 mm. The MUAB’s displacement exceeded these criteria
when the longitudinal and transverse PGAs exceeded 0.43 g and 0.55 g,
respectively.

3.2.2. Crack propagation

Fig. 9 depicts the contour plots of the equivalent plastic strain
(PEEQ), which represents the cracking patterns for the arch of a MUAB
subjected to ground motions. It was assumed that macrocracks start to
propagate through the arch when the PEEQ value exceeds 0.0001 (Feng
et al., 2011; Pan et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2013). The ground-motion-
induced seismic behaviors of the arch differed with respect to the two
Fig. 5. (a) The elastic response spectra (5% damping) for synthetic ground seismic loading directions (i.e., longitudinal and transverse). Under
motions, which matched to the Korean-code-based spectrum corresponding to a longitudinal ground motions, slight cracking appeared at the bottom of
500-year-return-period earthquake, (b) spectral acceleration of representative component of the arch when the PGA exceeded 0.3 g. The crack prop­
synthetic ground motion, and (c) time history of the representative synthetic agated from bottom to top in both width and depth directions. When the
ground motion scaled to a PGA of 0.3 g.
PGA exceeded 0.6 g, the cracks moderately expanded at the middle of
the arch; when the PGA exceeded 0.9 g, these propagated to the arch top.
Table 5
However, under transverse ground motions, the crack development was
Vibration periods and effective modal masses. considerably less detrimental than that observed under longitudinal
ones. No cracks were formed in the arch when the PGA was smaller than
Mode no. Period (s) Effective mode mass per total mass (%)
0.2 g; cracking became notable when the PGA exceeded 0.4 g, with crack
x-component y-component z-component formation focused on the longitudinal center region of the structure at
1 0.430 5.45 2.58 4.13 an angle of 22.5◦ . More cracks initialized and developed under further
2 0.386 0.93 3.06 51.25 increases in PGA. Cracks expanded from the longitudinal middle (at an
3 0.356 0.01 5.49 10.85
angle of 22.5◦ ) to the edges, bottom, and top of the arch.
4 0.340 4.23 0.01 0.09
5 0.333 0.13 3.17 6.63
Fig. 10(a) shows a plan view of the MUAB subjected to ground mo­
6 0.315 2.66 1.72 0.79 tion PGAs of 1.2 g; the structure becomes significantly damaged (i.e., the
7 0.288 5.07 0.19 0.28 cracking and peeling of segment components) under the effects of lon­
8 0.284 0.55 9.35 11.89 gitudinal and transversal ground motions. Under longitudinal ground
9 0.283 26.83 14.01 0.04
motions, deep cracks (with depths exceeding 10 cm) appeared at the
10 0.281 14.16 1.66 1.10
11 0.273 31.06 2.40 2.02 bottom of most segmental components at angles of 45◦ in the edge
12 0.271 2.64 52.22 3.38 components, marked S1-1, S1-6, S2-1, and S2-2 and in the components
– – Σ ¼ 93.72 Σ ¼ 95.86 Σ ¼ 92.45 adjacent thereto, marked S1-2, S1-5, S1-7, and S1-11. However, under
transverse ground motions, deep cracks appeared in the middle

6
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166

Fig. 6. Mode shapes for the first 12 modes.

Fig. 7. Sketch of critical MUAB sections and their monitoring points.

components at angles of 22.5◦ (see S1-3, S1-4, S1-8, S1-9, and S1-10)
and in the edge components at angles of 10◦ (see S1-1, S1-6, S2-1, and
S2-2). Peeling was clearly visible at the tops of all segmental components
under longitudinal ground motions, though it was less prominent under
transverse ground motions. It can be concluded that the longitudinal
ground motions lead to significant damage because the longitudinal
cross-section of each segment component is weaker than the transverse
one. Furthermore, cracks scattered in many different locations (from
along the bottom to the top of the segment components) under
longitudinal ground motions. Therefore, the components sustained
greater damage under longitudinal ground motions than transverse
ones.
Many three-hinge modular underground arch bridges suffered
damage under the Great East Japan earthquake (Abe and Nakamura,
2014). Crack propagation and damage signs of MUAB from the site are
shown in Fig. 10(b). Noticeable signs of recorded damage consisted of
the edge defects and cracks on the arch members, damage to the
waterproof sheet by peeling and penetration between the segmental

7
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166
Fig. 8. Peak seismic response of MUAB subjected to ground motions with varying PGAs: (a) crack depth, (b) tensile stress, (c) compressive stress, and (d)
displacement.
arch members. Damage by cracks and defects appeared at the bottom of
the segmental components, especially on the edge components. Besides,
not only did peelings occur at the top of the arch, but they also occurred
on the concrete foundations. Abe and Nakamura (2014) and Miyazaki
(2019) noted that the damage levels of these MUABs were different,
which might have depended on the geometry of arch cross-section, the
length of the arch, the type of foundation, the height of the embankment
road, and the seismic excitation direction.
4. Parametric studies
The 3D FEA-developed model was applied to evaluate the effects of
arch length, SSIs, AAIs, and prestressed rebars on the seismic response of
a MUAB subjected to longitudinal and transverse ground motions. Each
input parameter determining the MUAB’s seismic response is discussed
at length in the following sections.
4.1. Arch length
Fig. 11(a) shows the effects of arch length (L) on the maximum
displacement of a MUAB subjected to longitudinal and transverse
ground motions, assuming a consistent arch diameter (D) of 10 m. When
L was increased from 3.75 to 18.75 m, the maximum displacement
generated by the longitudinal and transverse ground motions was
increased by 65% and 117%, respectively. This is because the seismic
resistance of the arch in the longitudinal direction exceeds that in the
transverse direction when L exceeds D. For all examined values of L,
8
both the longitudinal and transverse displacements increased signifi­
cantly as the PGA increased. When the PGA was increased from 0.3 g to
1.2 g, the displacement difference between the longitudinal and trans­
verse ground motions increased by 33% (from 83% to 116%). Interest­
ingly, the displacements produced by the transverse ground motions
exceeded those produced by the longitudinal ones when L exceeded 15
m. Both longitudinal and transverse displacements increased slightly
when L was smaller than 11.25 m; however, they increased significantly
as expected when L was increased from 11.25 to 18.75 m owing to the
increase in PGA. This is because the increase of L decreases the seismic
capacity of the MUAB under increased PGAs.
Fig. 11(b) and Fig. 11(c) illustrate the effects of L on the maximum
compressive and tensile stresses in the segment components of the
MUAB, respectively. When the PGA was increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g,
the maximum compressive stress increases generated by the longitudi­
nal and transverse ground motions were 214% and 313%, respectively.
The difference in compressive stress between the longitudinal and
transverse ground motions decreased by 67% (from 105% to 38%).
When the PGA was increased from 0.3 g to 0.6 g, the compressive stress
generated by the longitudinal and transverse ground motions was
reduced by only 5% for values of L smaller than 7.5 m. However, the
longitudinal- and transverse-ground-motion-induced compressive
stresses were maximally increased by 45% and 90%, respectively, when
L exceeded 15 m. For all values of L, the compressive stress produced by
both longitudinal and transverse ground motions was smaller than the
compressive strength of M40-grade concrete (i.e., 40 MPa) when the
PGA was smaller than 0.9 g. Meanwhile, the tensile stress of the
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166
Fig. 9. Cracking patterns of MUAB loaded with longitudinal and transverse ground motions.
longitudinal ground motions exceeded that of the transverse ground
motions, exhibiting a downward trend under increasing L. Similar to the
compressive stress results, for all analyzed cases of L, the longitudinal-
ground-motion-induced tensile stress exceeded the tensile strength of
M40-grade concrete (i.e., 4 MPa). A PGA increase from 0.3 g to 1.2 g led
to a maximum increase of 156% and 181% in the tensile stress generated
by the longitudinal and transverse ground motions; this suggests that,
for values of L exceeding 15 m, the greater the MUAB arch length, the
more detrimental the ground motion’s effects.
Fig. 11(d) illustrates the effects of L on the maximum longitudinal-
and transverse-ground-motion-induced crack depths in the segment
components. When L was below 11.25 m, the crack depth produced by
longitudinal PGAs of 0.3 g was ~ 2.5 times that produced by the same
ground motions in the transverse direction. However, for all intensities,
when L approached 18.75 m, the crack depth maximally decreased by
26% under longitudinal ground motions; meanwhile, it maximally
increased by 58% under transverse ones. This is primarily because the
crack depth is determined by the tensile stress, and the longitudinal
seismic resistance of the MUAB is greater if L exceeds D.
4.2. SSI
Fig. 12(a) shows the effects of the SSI coefficient on the maximum
displacement of a MUAB subjected to longitudinal and transverse
ground motions. For all PGA values, increasing the SSI coefficient from
0 to 0.45 led to a decrease of 20% in the ground-motion-induced
displacement. In contrast, within the SSI coefficient range of 0.5–0.55,
the displacement values remained almost constant. When the PGA was
increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g, the difference in displacement between the
longitudinal and transverse ground motions decreased by 18% (from
25% to 7%). Moreover, the maximum displacement increases generated
9
by longitudinal and transverse ground motions were 427% and 440%,
respectively. This indicates that the influence of SSIs on the MUAB’s
displacement is relatively similar between both loading directions. In
particular, the maximum displacement generated by ground motions
with a PGA of 0.3 g was almost 2 cm, which is approaching the MUAB’s
predefined displacement criteria. Thus, when the SSI coefficient exceeds
0.5, the MUAB’s displacement criteria can be ensured if the PGA is
below 0.45 g and 0.55 g under longitudinal and transverse ground
motions, respectively. This is because SSIs are fundamental in the global
compaction and stability of MUABs under external loadings: larger SSI
coefficients result in more compacted MUABs.
Fig. 12(b) shows the influence of the SSI coefficient on the maximum
compressive stress in MUAB segment components. The influence of SSI
variation on the compressive stress produced by longitudinal ground
motions was more significant than that produced by transverse ones.
When the PGA was increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g, the maximum increases
in the longitudinal- and transverse-ground-motion-induced compressive
stresses were 218% and 280%, respectively. The difference in
compressive stress between the longitudinal and transverse ground
motions increased by 30% (from 93% to 123%). The longitudinal-
ground-motion-induced compressive stress under a PGA of 0.3 g was
increased by 27% when the SSI coefficient was reduced from 0 to 0.5;
then, it stabilized at 15 MPa, which corresponds to 37.5% of the
compressive strength of M40-grade concrete. However, when the SSI
coefficient exceeded 0.3, PGAs of 0.6 g and 0.8 g were required under
longitudinal and transverse ground motions. The compressive stress
exceeded the compressive strength for all SSI coefficients when the PGA
reached 1.2 g; thus, an increase in the SSI coefficient can increase the
compressive stress owing to the increase in soil aching associated with
ground motions.
As illustrated in Fig. 12(c), a significant variation of maximum
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166

Fig. 10. (a) Plan view of MUAB subjected to ground motion with PGAs of 1.2 g, and (b) Schematic of damage to three-hinged arch bridges subjected to Great East
Japan earthquake reported by Abe and Nakamura (2014) and drawn by Miyazaki et al. (2020).

tensile stress was observed with respect to the ground-motion intensity
of both longitudinal and transverse ground motions. When the PGA was
increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g, the maximum tensile strength increases
produced by the longitudinal and transverse ground motions were 162%
and 225%, respectively. The maximum tensile stress increases for SSI
coefficients ranging from 0 to 0.9 were 4% and 6% under longitudinal
and transverse ground motions, respectively. This shows that an in­
crease in SSI coefficient does not significantly reduce tensile stress in the
components because the composite soil arching that arises between the
arch and surrounding soils is not sustainable under the repeated shear
impact of strong ground motions. Regarding all SSI coefficients, the
tensile stress produced by the longitudinal and transverse ground

10
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166

Fig. 11. Maximum seismic responses of MUAB with respect to arch length and Fig. 12. Maximum seismic responses of MUAB with respect to SSI coefficient
ground motion direction: (a) displacement, (b) compressive stress, (c) tensile and ground motion direction: (a) displacement, (b) compressive stress, (c)
stress, and (d) crack depth. tensile stress, and (d) crack depth.

11
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166

motions exceeded the tensile strength of M40-grade concrete when the

PGAs approached 0.3 g and 0.4 g, respectively.
No significant change in maximum crack depth was observed within
the SSI evaluation range for any of the ground-motion intensity levels, as
shown in Fig. 12(d). For all PGAs, when the SSI coefficient approached
0.9, the crack depths produced by the longitudinal and transverse
ground motions increased by as much as 17% and 14%, respectively.
When the PGA was increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g, the difference in crack
depth between the longitudinal and transverse ground motions
increased by 72% (from 24% to 96%). Hence, the crack depth variation
was almost independent of the SSI coefficient, though it depends on the
ground-motion direction.

4.3. AAI

Fig. 13(a) shows the relationship between the AAI coefficient and the
maximum displacement of a MUAB subjected to ground motions; an
increase in the former leads to a considerable decrease in the latter.
When the PGA increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g, the maximum displacement
increases produced by longitudinal and transverse ground motions were
470% and 434%, respectively; the difference in displacement between
longitudinal and transverse ground motions decreased by 51% (from
93% to 42%). When the PGA was below 0.6 g and the AAI coefficient
below 0.2, the displacements produced by the transversal ground mo­
tions exceeded those caused by longitudinal ones. However, when the
AAI coefficient reached 0.6, the maximal decrease in transverse-ground-
motion-induced displacement was 2.7 times higher than that produced
by the longitudinal motions. When the AAI coefficient exceeds 0.7, the
displacement criteria of the MUAB can meet for longitudinal and
transverse PGAs smaller than 0.48 g or 0.59 g, respectively. Thus, the
AAI coefficient can considerably strengthen the seismic capacity of
MUABs subjected to strong ground motions, especially when loaded in
the transverse direction.
Fig. 13(b) and Fig. 13(c) illustrate the influence of the AAI coefficient
on the maximum ground-motion-induced compressive and tensile
stresses in the segment components, respectively; a significant change
can be seen in both owing to the change in AAI coefficient. When the
PGA was increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g, the maximum increases in
maximum compressive stress were 231% and 305% for longitudinal and
transverse ground motions, respectively. Meanwhile, the difference
between the longitudinal- and transverse-ground-motion-induced
compressive stresses increased by 46% (from 78% to 124%). In partic­
ular, for PGAs of 1.2 g, the compressive stress exceeded the compressive
strength under both ground motions for all AAI coefficients, leading to
significant compressive damage to the MUAB components. When the
PGA was increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g, the maximum tensile strength
increases produced by longitudinal and transverse ground motions were
153% and 200%, respectively. On the other hand, for AAI coefficients
from 0 to 1, the maximum decreases in tensile stress under longitudinal
and transverse ground motions were 15% and 33%, respectively. The
tensile stress produced by the longitudinal ground motions with PGAs of
0.3 g exceeded the tensile strength for all AAI coefficients. This shows
that longitudinal ground motions pose a higher damage risk than
transverse ones.
Furthermore, Fig. 13(d) shows the influence of the AAI coefficient on
the maximum crack depth in segment components subjected to ground
motions. For all PGAs, the crack depths under longitudinal and trans­
verse ground motions decreased by 37% and 62%, respectively, at the
maximum AAI coefficients (i.e., approaching 1). When the PGA was
increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g, the difference in crack depth between the
longitudinal and transverse ground motions decreased by 34% (from
Fig. 13. Maximum seismic responses of MUAB with respect to AAI coefficient
46% to 12%).
and ground motion direction: (a) displacement, (b) compressive stress, (c)
tensile stress, and (d) crack depth.
4.4. Prestressed rebar

Fig. 14(a) shows the effects of the prestressed rebar stiffness on the

12
T. Van Nguyen et al.
Fig. 14. Maximum seismic responses of MUAB with respect to prestressed
rebar stiffness and ground motion direction: (a) displacement, (b) compressive
stress, (c) tensile stress, and (d) crack depth.
Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166
maximum MUAB displacements under longitudinal and transverse
ground motions. For all PGAs, the displacements produced by the lon­
gitudinal ground motions exceeded those produced by the transverse
ones within the studied stiffness range. However, for identical PGAs
(especially at larger PGAs), the longitudinal displacements tended to
converge earlier than transverse ones; meanwhile, the stiffnesses
increased because the connections between the L-J and C-J components
were more stabilized in the longitudinal than the transversal directions.
In particular, when the stiffness was increased from 0 to 40 MN/m, the
displacements in all analyzed PGA cases maximally decreased by 54%
and 56% under longitudinal and transverse ground motions, respec­
tively. When the PGA was increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g, the maximum
displacement increases produced by the longitudinal and transverse
ground motions were 655% and 584%, respectively. The difference in
displacement between the longitudinal and transverse ground motions
decreased by 12% (from 18% to 6%). This indicates that the longitudinal
displacements dominate over the transverse ones. It can be generally
concluded that the stiffness increase reduces both the longitudinal and
transverse displacement because the strengthened joints between
segment components increase the MUAB resistance.
Fig. 14(b) and (c) demonstrate the effects of the prestressed rebar
stiffness on the maximum compressive and tensile stresses in the
segment components. For different stiffnesses of the prestressed rebar,
the tensile and compressive stresses produced by the longitudinal
ground motions exceeded those produced by transverse ones. When the
PGA was increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g, the maximal compressive-stress
increases produced by longitudinal and transverse ground motions were
214% and 313%, respectively. When the stiffness increased from 0 to 50
MN/m, the maximum decrease in compressive stress produced from the
longitudinal and transverse ground motions is 15% and 21%, respec­
tively. When the stiffness increased from 0 to 40 MN/m for PGAs smaller
than 0.6 g, the compressive stress produced by both ground motions
gradually decreased by 20%. The recorded compressive stress was much
smaller than the compressive strength of M40-grade concrete for all
stiffnesses. Meanwhile, when the PGA was increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g,
the maximum tensile stress increases produced by the longitudinal and
transverse ground motions were 163% and 245%, respectively. The
maximum tensile-stress decreases for stiffnesses ranging from 0 to 50
MN/m were 12% and 14% under longitudinal and transverse ground
motions, respectively. Thus, the structural joint strength of segment
components is significantly strengthened under an increase in stiffness,
which enhances the component tensile and compressive strengths as
well as the overall seismic capacity of the MUAB.
Fig. 14(d) shows that the prestressed rebar stiffness affects the
maximum crack depth. When the PGA was increased from 0.3 g to 1.2 g,
the difference in maximum crack depth between the longitudinal and
transverse ground motions decreased by 34%. Within the stiffness range,
when the PGA was below 0.3 g, the crack depths produced by transverse
motions were unremarkable. When the PGA exceeded 0.9 g, the MUAB
components exhibited substantially deep crack extensions. The crack
depth decreased by 26% under a stiffness increase from 30 to 50 MN/m.
This was primarily because the strengthening of joints between the
segment components enhances the overall seismic capacity of the
MUAB.
5. Conclusions
This paper presented a sophisticated 3D FEA of a 3-hinge MUAB with
an arch diameter of 10 m and an arch length of 7.5 m. The MUAB was
developed and subjected to a suite of synthetic ground motions via
simulations generated to match the Korean Standard Design Response
Spectrum (KDS, 2019). We performed FEA-based seismic evaluations of
the MUAB under synthetic ground motions with PGAs ranging from 0.1
g to 1.2 g in the longitudinal and transverse directions, taking into ac­
count the effects of AAIs, SSIs, and prestressed rebar stiffness. Further­
more, changes in arch length, SSI and AAI friction coefficients as well as
13
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166
the prestressed rebar stiffnesses were modeled in parametric studies of
various MUABs subjected to representative synthetic ground motions.
Thus, the study provides valuable insights into the procedural aspects of
seismic behavior evaluations for MUABs. The key conclusions drawn
from this study are as follows:
(1) The FEA results show that the seismic behaviors of MUABs sub­
jected to ground motions differ with respect to earthquake loading di­
rections owing to the different levels of seismic resistance. The crack
depth reached 5 cm when the PGA of the longitudinal ground motion
was 0.47 g; meanwhile, this occurred under a PGA of 0.59 g for the
transverse ground motion. A crack depth of 12.5 cm was observed for
the longitudinal and transverse direction earthquakes at PGAs of 0.73 g
and 0.84 g, respectively. When the PGA was below 0.47 g, the segment
components of the MUAB might be repairable because the crack depth
was smaller than 5 cm (equivalent to one-fifth of the arch thickness)
under both longitudinal and transverse ground motions. However, the
segment components were significantly damaged by compressive
stresses when the PGA reached 1.2 g. The MUAB displacement exceeded
the required displacement criteria when the PGA exceeded 0.43 g and
0.55 g under the longitudinal and transverse ground motions,
respectively.
(2) The parametric study revealed that the seismic behavior of the
MUAB depends on the PGAs and ground motion directions; furthermore,
it is sensitive to changes in the arch length and prestressed rebar stiff­
ness. When the arch length was increased from 3.75 m to 18.75 m, the
maximum displacements generated by the longitudinal and transverse
ground motions were increased by 65% and 117%, respectively. This
was because the seismic resistance of the arch in the longitudinal di­
rection exceeded that in the transverse direction. The influence of the
prestressed rebar stiffness on the segment components depended heavily
on the ground motion direction and the PGA. The increase in the pre­
stressed rebar stiffness decreased both the longitudinal and transverse
displacements because the structural joints of the segmental components
were largely strengthened by the stiffness increase, resulting in an
enhanced seismic resistance. The tensile and compressive stresses pro­
duced by the longitudinal ground motions exceeded those produced by
the transverse ground motions for various prestressed rebar stiffnesses.
(3) From the parametric study, it was also found that the SSI coef­
ficient had a minimal effect on the MUAB’s seismic response, especially
in terms of its compressive and tensile stresses and crack depth; how­
ever, the AAI coefficient had a moderate impact on this response. For all
PGAs, the increase in SSI coefficient from 0 to 0.45 led to a decrease of
20% in the MUAB displacement under both ground motions. This was
because the MUABs could be more compacted and stabilized at larger
SSI coefficients owing to the efficient soil arching effect of the SSI in­
crease. The increase in AAI led to a decrease in the maximum
displacement, tensile and compressive stresses, and crack depths in
components because it could strengthen the seismic capacities of the
MUAB, particularly under PGA increases in the transverse direction.
The present study had been limited to the number of ground motions
to evaluate the seismic behavior of MUABs. Therefore, to assess the
seismic performance of MUAB fully, a database of ground motion re­
cords is required. It is the key component in future attempts to overcome
the uncertainty in the ground motion time history in that the selections
must ensure an adequate number of ground motions to meet site char­
acteristics. Hence, further studies could fruitfully explore this issue by
investigating the seismic vulnerability of MUAB.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Toan Van Nguyen: Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original
draft, Validation, Visualization. Junwon Seo: Writing – review & edit­
ing, Methodology, Visualization. Jin-Hee Ahn: Conceptualization,
Validation. Achintya Haldar: Methodology, Writing – review & editing.
Jungwon Huh: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – review &
editing, Supervision.
14
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by the Korea Agency for Infrastructure
Technology Advancement (KAIA) grant funded by the Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure, and Transport (Grant 20CTAP-C151892-02).
References
AASHTO, 2012. AASHTO LRFD bridge design specifications: customary US Units, Sixth
ed. Washington, D.C.
Abaqus, V., 2014. 6.14 Documentation. Dassault Systemes Simulia Corporation.
Abe, T., Nakamura, M., 2014. The use of and the caution in the application of the culvert
constructed by large pre-cast element in the expressway construction. Found Eng
Equip 42, 8–11.
Abuhajar, O., El Naggar, H., Newson, T., 2015. Static soil culvert interaction the effect of
box culvert geometric configurations and soil properties. Computers and
Geotechnics 69, 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2015.05.005.
Abuhajar, O., Newson, T., El Naggar, H., 2017. The Effect of Soil Depth and Box Culvert
Geometry on the Static Soil-Culvert Interaction, Geotechnical Frontiers 2017,
Orlando, Florida, pp. 202-211. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784480441.022.
ACI, C., 2014. Building code requirements for structural concrete (ACI 318-14).
American Concrete Institute: Farmington Hills, MI, USA.
Borcherdt, R.D., 1992. Simplified site classes and empirical amplification factors for site-
dependent code provisions, Proc. NCEER, SEAOC, BSSC Workshop on Site Response
during Earthquakes and Seismic Code Provisions. University of Southern California,
Los Angeles, California, pp. 18-20.
Borcherdt, Roger D., 1994. Estimates of site-dependent response spectra for design
(methodology and justification). Earthquake spectra 10 (4), 617–653. https://doi.
org/10.1193/1.1585791.
Borcherdt, R.D., 2012. simplified earthquake resistant design, GMPEs, and ShakeMaps,
The.
Fairless, G., Kirkaldie, D., 2008. Earthquake performance of long-span arch culverts. New
Zealand Transport Agency Research. Report.
Feng, Jin, Wei, Hu, Pan, Jianwen, Jian, Yang, Wang, Jinting, Zhang, Chuhan, 2011.
Comparative study procedure for the safety evaluation of high arch dams. Computers
Geotechnics 38 (3), 306–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2010.10.008.
Halldorsson, B., Papageorgiou, A.S., 2005. Calibration of the specific barrier model to
earthquakes of different tectonic regions. Bulletin of the Seismological society of
America 95, 1276–1300. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120040157.
Hognestad, E., 1951. Study of combined bending and axial load in reinforced concrete
members. University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, College of Engineering http://
hdl.handle.net/2142/4360.
Huh, Jungwon, Le, Thai Son, Kang, Choonghyun, Kwak, Kiseok, Park, Inn-Joon, 2017a.
A probabilistic fragility evaluation method of a RC box tunnel subjected to
earthquake loadings. Journal of Korean Tunnelling Underground Space Association
19 (2), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.9711/KTAJ.2017.19.2.143.
Huh, J., Tran, Q.H., Haldar, A., Park, I., Ahn, J.-H., 2017b. Seismic vulnerability
assessment of a shallow two-story underground RC box structure. Applied Sciences
7, 735. https://doi.org/10.3390/app7070735.
Jeon, J.-S., Shafieezadeh, A., Lee, D.H., Choi, E., DesRoches, R., 2015. Damage
assessment of older highway bridges subjected to three-dimensional ground motions:
Characterization of shear–axial force interaction on seismic fragilities. Engineering
Structures 87, 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.01.015.
Jeon, S.H., Cho, K.I., Huh, J., Ahn, J.H., 2019. The Performance Assessment of a Precast,
Panel-Segmented Arch Bridge with Outriggers. Applied Sciences-Basel 9, 4646.
https://doi.org/10.3390/app9214646.
Kang, Junsuk, Im, Hwangi, Park, Jong Sup, 2020. The effect of load reduction on
underground concrete arch structures in embedded trench installations. Tunnelling
Underground Space Technology 98, 103240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tust.2019.103240.
Byrne, P.M., Anderson, D.L., Jitno, H., 1996. Seismic analysis of large buried culvert
structures. Transportation Research Record 1541, 133-139. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0361198196154100117.
KDS, 2019. KDS 41 17 00 :2019 Building Seismic Design Code. Korea Construction
Standards Center.
Kim, H.J., Lee, G.-P., Lim, C.W., 2019. Investigation for the deformation behavior of the
precast arch structure in the open-cut tunnel. Journal of Korean Tunnelling and
Underground Space Association 21, 93–113. https://doi.org/10.9711/
KTAJ.2019.21.1.093.
Lanczos, C., 1950. An iteration method for the solution of the eigenvalue problem of
linear differential and integral operators. United States Governm. Press Office Los
Angeles, CA. https://doi.org/10.6028/jres.045.026.
Le, T.S., Huh, J., Park, J.-H., 2014. Earthquake fragility assessment of the underground
tunnel using an efficient SSI analysis approach. Journal of Applied Mathematics
Physics 2, 1073. https://doi.org/10.4236/jamp.2014.212123.
T. Van Nguyen et al. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology incorporating Trenchless Technology Research 118 (2021) 104166
Lee, J., Fenves, G.L., 1998a. A plastic-damage concrete model for earthquake analysis of
dams. Earthquake engineering & structural dynamics 27, 937–956. https://doi.org/
10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(199809)27:9<937::AID-EQE764>3.0.CO;2-5.
Lee, Jeeho, Fenves, Gregory L., 1998b. Plastic-damage model for cyclic loading of
concrete structures. Journal of engineering mechanics 124 (8), 892–900. https://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1998)124:8(892).
Mangalathu, S., Jeon, J.S., DesRoches, R., Dynamics, S., 2018. Critical uncertainty
parameters influencing seismic performance of bridges using Lasso regression.
Earthquake Engineering 47, 784–801. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.2991.
Mattock, A.H., 1977. Discussion of “Considerations for the Design of Precast Concrete
Bearing Wall Buildings to Withstand Abnormal Loads” by PCI Committee on Precast
Concrete Bearing Wall Buildings. PCI Journal 22, 105–106.
Miyazaki, Y., 2019. Fundamental study on seismic behavior of hinge types of precast
arch culverts in culvert longitudinal direction. Kyoto University. https://doi.org/
10.14989/doctor.k21736.
Miyazaki, Y., Sawamura, Y., Kishida, K., Kimura, M., 2017b. Evaluation of dynamic
behavior of embankment with precast arch culverts considering connecting
condition of culverts in culvert longitudinal direction. Japanese Geotechnical Society
Special Publication 5 (2), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.3208/jgssp.v05.020.
Miyazaki, Y., Sawamura, Y., Kishida, K., Kimura, M., 2017a. Dynamic Centrifuge Model
Tests on Seismic Performance in Culvert Longitudinal Direction of Hinge-Type Arch
Culverts due to Patterns of Embankment Shape. Journal of Japan Society of Civil
Engineers, Ser. C (Geosphere Engineering) 73, 429–441. https://doi.org/10.2208/
jscejge.73.429.
Miyazaki, Y., Sawamura, Y., Kishida, K., Kimura, M., 2018. Dynamic behaviour of three-
hinge-type precast arch culverts with various patterns of overburden in culvert
longitudinal direction. In: Physical Modelling in Geotechnics, 2. CRC Press,
pp. 915–920. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429438646.
Miyazaki, Y., Sawamura, Y., Kishida, K., Kimura, M., 2020. Elasto-plastic 3D FE analysis
of the seismic behavior in culvert longitudinal direction of three-hinge type of
precast arch culverts. Advances in Computer Methods and Geomechanics. Springer
223–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0886-8_18.
Ojalvo, I., Newman, M., 1970. Vibration modes of large structures by an automatic
matrix-reductionmethod. AIAA Journal 8, 1234-1239. https://doi.org/10.2514/
3.5878.
Paige, C.C., 1971. The computation of eigenvalues and eigenvectors of very large sparse
matrices. University of London. https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.eth
os.307848.
Pan, Jianwen, Xu, Yanjie, Jin, Feng, 2015. Seismic performance assessment of arch dams
using incremental nonlinear dynamic analysis. European Journal of Environmental
Civil Engineering 19 (3), 305–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/
19648189.2014.960950.
Rogers, Luke P., Seo, Junwon, 2017. Vulnerability sensitivity of curved precast-concrete
I-girder bridges with various configurations subjected to multiple ground motions.
Journal of Bridge Engineering 22 (2), 04016118. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
BE.1943-5592.0000973.
Santos, R.R.V., Kang, J., Park, J.S., 2020. Effects of embedded trench installations using
expanded polystyrene geofoam applied to buried corrugated steel arch structures.
Tunnelling Underground Space Technology 98, 103323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tust.2020.103323.
Sawamura, Y., Ishihara, H., Kishida, K., Kimura, M., 2016. Experimental study on
damage morphology and critical state of three-hinge precast arch culvert through
15
shaking table tests. Procedia Engineering, Advances in Transportation Geotechnics
III 143, 522-529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.06.066.
Sawamura, Yasuo, Ishihara, Hiroyuki, Otani, Yoshinori, Kishida, Kiyoshi,
Kimura, Makoto, 2019. Deformation behavior and acting earth pressure of three-
hinge precast arch culvert in construction process. Underground Space 4 (3),
251–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.undsp.2018.09.005.
Sawamura, Y., Kishida, K., Kimura, M., 2011. Numerical approach on dynamic
interactive behavior between embankment and installed multi-arch culverts, Proc.
In: of the 13th Int. Conf. on Computer Methods and Advances in Geomechanics,
pp. 798–803.
Sawamura, Y., Kishida, K., Kimura, M., 2012. Numerical Study on Dynamic Interaction
Between Embankment and Consecutive Culverts. 2nd International Conference on
Transportation Geotechnics (ICTG) International Society of Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering (ISSMGE).
Sawamura, Yasuo, Kishida, Kiyoshi, Kimura, Makoto, 2015. Centrifuge model test and
FEM analysis of dynamic interactive behavior between embankments and installed
culverts in multiarch culvert embankments. International Journal of Geomechanics
15 (3), 04014050. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000361.
Seo, Junwon, 2013. Statistical determination of significant curved I-girder bridge seismic
response parameters. Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Vibration 12 (2),
251–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-013-0168-y.
Seo, J., Linzell, D.G., 2012. Horizontally curved steel bridge seismic vulnerability
assessment. Engineering Structures 34, 21–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
engstruct.2011.09.008.
Seo, Junwon, Linzell, Daniel G., 2013. Nonlinear seismic response and parametric
examination of horizontally curved steel bridges using 3D computational models.
Journal of Bridge Engineering 18 (3), 220–231. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)
BE.1943-5592.0000345.
Seo, J., Rogers, L.P., 2017. Comparison of curved prestressed concrete bridge population
response between area and spine modeling approaches toward efficient seismic
vulnerability analysis. Engineering Structures 150, 176–189. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.07.033.
Sheng, Daichao, Wriggers, Peter, Sloan, Scott W., 2007. Application of frictional contact
in geotechnical engineering. International journal of geomechanics 7 (3), 176–185.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532-3641(2007)7:3(176).
Siqueira, G.H., Sanda, A.S., Paultre, P., Padgett, J.E., 2014. Fragility curves for isolated
bridges in eastern Canada using experimental results. Engineering Structures 74,
311–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.04.053.
Tavares, D.H., Padgett, J.E., Paultre, P., 2012. Fragility curves of typical as-built highway
bridges in eastern Canada. Engineering Structures 40, 107–118. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.engstruct.2012.02.019.
Toyota, Hirofumi, Takagai, Makoto, 1999. Dynamic Behavior of 3-hinge Arch in Terre
Armee Foundationテールアルメ盛土中における3ヒンジアーチの動的挙動. Doboku
Gakkai Ronbunshu 1999 (624), 255–266. https://doi.org/10.2208/jscej.1999.624_
255.
Wood, J.H., Jenkins, D.A., 2000. Seismic analysis of buried arch structures, Proc. New
Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, Wellington, New Zealand.
Zhang, S., Wang, G., Sa, W., 2013. Damage evaluation of concrete gravity dams under
mainshock–aftershock seismic sequences. Soil Dynamics Earthquake Engineering 50,
16–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2013.02.021.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
the Jews were still pursuing the path of knowledge, amassing
learning, and stimulating progress, with the same unflinching
constancy that they manifested in their faith. They were the most
skilful physicians, the ablest financiers, and among the most
profound philosophers; while they were only second to the moderns
in the cultivation of natural science, they were also the chief
256
interpreters to Western Europe of Arabian learning.”
In modern Europe also we have seen how varied and how
beneficial has, since their emancipation, been the activity of the
Jews in other than financial departments. In face of these facts how
ineffably ridiculous seems the anti-Semite’s homily on “A Jew of the
Coheleth type” who “pursues gain with an undivided soul, whereas
the soul of the Christian or the Idealist is divided,” and his calm, self-
sufficient pronouncement that “much of the best Christian and
Idealist intellect is entirely given to objects quite different from gain or
power.” The remark, of course, is true in so far as the two “types” are
concerned. But, unless the writer means to make the astounding
assertion that, other conditions being identical, the one type is
peculiar to the Jews, and the other to the Christians—that the
ordinary Jew is born a materialist, and the ordinary Christian an
Idealist,—his statement is pointless. It becomes worse than pointless
when he proceeds to emphasise the “compact organisation” of
Jewish, as contrasted with the “loose texture” of Christian society,
and to proclaim that “in this respect the Gentile, instead of starting
257
fair, is handicapped in the race.” The only logical inference to be
drawn from these premisses is that the balance must be redressed
by oppressing the Jew. But the author shrinks from drawing that
inference. Mediaeval and Continental anti-Semites have been more
consistent and courageous.
Such was the genesis of English anti-Semitism. However, the
bulk of the public took little or no notice of these utterances. The
English people is not intellectual enough to be moved by literary
theories. Its very slowness in discarding old errors is a guarantee
against precipitancy in embracing new ones. But, when a grievance
is presented to it in the more tangible form of a practical and
mischievous fact, then the English people begins to think.
The persecution of the Jews in Russia, Roumania, Hungary, and
Germany threatened to flood England with a crowd of refugees more
industrious than the English workman, more frugal, and far more
temperate. The consequence would have been a fall in wages. The
danger was too practical to be ignored; fortunately, both for the
English workman and for the Jew, it was temporarily averted by the
Jewish charitable associations, which directed emigration into safer
channels. But, though the immediate cause for alarm disappeared,
the anti-Jewish feeling remained; and was fed by the influx of new
crowds from Eastern Europe at a later period. Again the Board of
Guardians, the Russo-Jewish Committee and other organisations
exerted themselves strenuously to prevent the immigrants from
becoming in any case a burden to the British rate-payer. With that
object in view, measures were taken that those victims of oppression
who remained in England should be enabled without delay to earn
their own bread by that industry for which they might be best fitted;
but, wherever it was possible, a home was found for them in
countries less populous than England and more suitable for
colonisation. At the same time, by means of representations
addressed to Jewish authorities, and published in Jewish papers
abroad, regarding the congested state of the British labour market,
258
efforts were made to stem the tide of further immigration. But
these efforts have not proved entirely successful. So that the
interminable cycle of prejudice and platitude, interrupted for a while,
has again resumed its ancient course. As in the early days of the
nineteenth century, so now, at the commencement of the twentieth,
our libraries are slowly enriched with volumes of exquisite dulness.
We are called upon to fight the old battle over again. The enemy
appears under many colours; but all the legions, though they know it
not, fight for the same cause. And, though their diversity is great,
none of the banners are new.
First comes our ancient friend, the theologian, Bible in hand; as
valiant of heart as ever, and as loud of voice. He is a worthy
descendant of St. Dominic, though perhaps he would be horrified if
he were told so. But History is cruel, and the records of the past
remain indelible. What student of history can fail to catch the note of
familiarity in our modern missionary’s oratory?
“Jesus is the Way”: saith the preacher, “Although the Jews have
the law, they cannot come to God, because Jesus is the Way.
Although they have the Old Testament, they do not know the truth,
because Jesus is the Truth and Life!” and after several sentences
rich in emphasis, fervour, and capital letters, comes the old, old
conclusion: “adoption and true spiritual life there is none, where
Christ has not kindled it. Israel, in its present state, the Christless
Israel, shows this to the whole world. Notwithstanding the great
activity and energy of the religious life of the Jews, they have—we
say it with great sorrow—no life indeed—what they have is all carnal
—and this accounts for the phenomenon that they have not been of
much spiritual use to the world since Christ’s coming. In Christ alone
259
will Israel live again and be a blessing to the world.”
So speaks the advocate of conversion. His hope in the future is
as great as his forgetfulness of the past. “The great God,” he informs
us with touching assurance, “is, in His providence, now rapidly
preparing the way for the final and only possible solution.” Ah, my
good friend, it is very natural in a Christian to believe that “true
spiritual life there is none, where Christ has not kindled it,” it is very
pleasant to point the finger of scorn at “Christless Israel,” it is very
well to prophesy that “in Christ alone will Israel live again and be a
blessing to the world.” But how are we to convince Israel that it is
so? This ancient nation which, having defied the onslaughts of
centuries, has lived so long, seen so much, suffered so much, and
survived so much, is it likely to succumb to our timeworn arguments?
Or would you advise us to bid the Jew once more choose between
baptism and the stake? This argument also has been tried and found
inadequate. Convert the Jews! You might as hopefully attempt to
convert the Pyramids.
Thus far the apostle. Next comes the patriot—a student of
statistics, sad and, so far as religious bias goes, quite sober. In tones
of sepulchral solemnity he warns us that, if England is to escape the
fate of the Continent, namely, “of the Jews becoming stronger, richer,
and vastly more numerous; with the corresponding certainty of the
press being captured” by them, “and the national life stifled by the
substitution of material aims for those which, however faultily, have
formed the unselfish and imperial objects of the Englishmen who
have made the Empire”—if these dire calamities are to be averted,
England must “abandon her secular practice of complacent
acceptance of every human being choosing to settle on these
shores.” Should nothing be done to check the evil, there is bound to
ensue an outbreak against the race “the members of which are
260
always in exile and strangers in the land of their adoption.”
The appeal to the Empire is quite modern, although, if the author
had any intelligent conception of his own case, he might have seen
that Imperialism is the very last thing in the world he should have
summoned to the support of his narrow Nationalism: the two things
differ as widely as the author differs from Julius Caesar. If the British
Empire were confined to Englishmen, it would soon cease to be an
empire. Equally novel is the interpretation of our expansion as due to
an unselfish zeal for somebody else’s good—the author does not
state whose. But the specific charge brought against the Jewish race
as one “the members of which are always in exile and strangers in
the land of their adoption” is hardly worthy of the author’s originality.
The prophet objects to the Jews as not having been “of much
spiritual use to the world.” It is hard to dispute the statement,
because it is impossible to know the particular meaning which the
prophet attaches to the word “spiritual.” His position is unassailable.
The patriot, however, denounces the Jews as the promoters of
“material aims,” and thereby convicts himself either of gross
ignorance or of deliberate distortion of facts. What the world of
thought owes to the Jews has already been described with a fulness
of detail which will probably appear superfluous to most educated
people. As regards the assertion that the Jew still looks upon himself
as one in exile and a stranger in a foreign land, we propose to deal
with it when we come to consider the attitude of the Jews towards
the Zionist movement. Here it is sufficient to point out that the term
“Jew” is far too wide to warrant any sweeping generalisation. There
are Jews and Jews, just as there are Christians and Christians.
History abundantly proves that the Jew in the past retained most of
his clannishness where he was most grievously oppressed. As to
modern Judaism, since the day of Moses Mendelssohn there has set
in a disintegration which renders a comprehensive and confident
pronouncement only possible to those who consider prejudice an
adequate substitute for knowledge. But there is no necessity for such
a universal pronouncement. If we want an answer to the question,
“Can the Jew be a patriot?” we need only glance at the history of
modern Europe. Did not Jews fight with the Germans against the
French in the days of Napoleon, with the Hungarians against the
Austrians in 1848, with the Austrians against the Prussians in 1866,
with the Germans against the French and the French against the
Germans in 1870, with the Roumanians against the Turks in 1877?
Or can man express his devotion to his country in a more
unambiguous manner than by dying for it? Unless, indeed, the
perfidious Jew even in dying is actuated by some ulterior motive.
But why should we look further than home? In 1831 Macaulay
wrote: “If the Jews have not felt towards England like children, it is
because she has treated them like a step-mother.” England has
ceased to treat the Jews like a step-mother. How far has England’s
change of attitude towards the Jew affected the Jew’s attitude
towards England? On Sunday, December 28, 1902, Lord Roberts
attended a special service, at the Central Synagogue in Great
Portland Street, held for Jewish members of the regular and auxiliary
forces who fell in South Africa fighting for England. The day was well
chosen; for on the same day is performed the annual celebration in
remembrance of the warlike exploits of the Maccabees—a
coincidence which disproves in a practical manner the dogmatic
generalisation that “a man’s heart cannot belong to two nations,” and
which shows that the English Jew, at all events, can be both a
Hebrew and an Englishman: he can cherish the ideals of the past
and yet live in the realities of the present. The soldiers in whose
memory the ceremony was held formed a portion of a force counting
more than 1,200 officers and men, who took a creditable part in the
war. This number assumes new significance, when we consider that
the total Hebrew population of Great Britain that year did not exceed
 261
180,000, and that with us every soldier is a volunteer. The Jew
has done as much for the English mother as any of her Christian
sons: he has laid down his life in defence of her cause. Moreover, to
join the army, the Jew must necessarily sacrifice something besides
life—something that he holds higher than life—some of his religion,
and particularly the ceremonial rites, such as the dietary laws and
the Sabbath. But foremost English Rabbis, like the late Simeon
Singer, maintained that duty to England justified and even
consecrated this sacrifice.
Nor was this most unequivocal proof of patriotism a solitary
instance. For the last ten years the Feast of Dedication has been
associated with a celebration for the men serving in the Regular and
Auxiliary Forces. On December 13, 1903, the Rev. Francis L. Cohen,
to whose initiative the custom is due, inaugurated the second
decade of these celebrations at the New West-end synagogue in the
presence of 38 officers and 167 men, and also a number of new
Jewish officers, including a Major-General and a General. The
preacher dwelt on the promptitude with which Jewish Britons
responded to the call during the last war. He referred to the 127
Jews who then “gave their lives for the flag they all honoured and
loved,” and announced that, as a testimony “to the pride and joy
wherewith the Jews hail their privilege of sharing in the voluntary
burden of their common country’s defence,” they sought to endow a
trophy “to be competed for from year to year at the great annual
meeting of the National Rifle Association, such as might stimulate
others of their fellow-citizens to perfect themselves in the military use
of that weapon which might at any moment again be required to
262
protect the immunity of their Sovereign’s territories.” The truth is
that religion has long ceased to be the principal force in the
composition of nations. In the present stage of the world’s
development sympathy with one’s co-religionists does not exclude
loyalty to one’s country, any more than loyalty to one’s country
prevents hatred of one’s co-religionists in other countries.
The continuance of oppression and persecution in Eastern
Europe has kept the stream of emigration flowing. As was natural,
great numbers of the hunted race turned to England as to the one
European country where liberty has not yet been seriously
endangered by the revival of intolerance. But the welcome which
they met with in this sanctuary of freedom has not been unanimous.
The “Alien Invasion,” as it is termed, has roused considerable
anxiety and apprehension in certain bosoms. We are told by the
melancholic patriot, in a more recent and more popular
263
publication, that it is a menace to the nation, that “British right of
asylum hitherto has been as profitable to the Empire as to the
immigrants,” but that “it is otherwise to-day.” We are exhorted to
reconsider our position, and to ask ourselves whether we are right in
“permitting free import of the sweepings of foreign cities to
contaminate our English life, to raise rents, and lower the standard of
existence.” We are, lastly, advised to shut our doors to “undesirable
aliens.” The question thus put admits of but one answer. If these
aliens are undesirable, we ought not to desire them. No one would
cavil with our advisers were it not that under the mask of a
movement for the exclusion of “undesirable” individuals there seems
to lurk in some quarters a retrogressive animosity against the Jewish
race as a whole, or a wish to stir up such an animosity. The
melancholic patriot opportunely reminds us that “the foreigners who
settle in England are almost entirely of the Jewish race, and it is
therefore impossible to discuss the question of foreign immigration
without raising the Jewish question.” Thus, having thrown off the
mask, he proceeds to give utterance to candid and undisguised anti-
Semitism:
“The peculiarity of this race is that they refuse assimilation by
intermarriage, equally with Russians in Russia, with Arabs in Tunis,
or with the English in England, just as rigidly as did their ancestors
refuse intermarriage with Gentiles in the days of Nehemiah.” The
matter presented in this form offers the interesting point of being not
new. The aloofness of the Jew has already been shown to have
been the fundamental cause of his sufferings. Had the Jews not
formed a “peculiar people” they would not have been made the
milch-cows and the scapegoats of the nations through the ages. But
it can also be shown that at the present day this is only partially true
in the countries which have genuinely adopted the Jews. It is
estimated that there occur far more marriages in England between
Jews and Christians than between Protestants and Catholics. By the
Jewish law marriage between a Jew and a proselyte is perfectly
lawful. The barrier is thus, after all, one of religion rather than of
race. Naturally an inclination towards such intermarriage would not
prevail on either side except in comparatively rare cases. Yet the
strange fact remains that such mixed marriages are at least as
common in the lower as in the upper classes of Jewish society.
Besides, though the clannishness of the race in the past explains
its persecution, does it excuse it? Is it an argument that a modern
statesman in a free country should accept as justifying exclusion?
Moreover, if the Jews really are so black as the author paints them,
is it not rather unpatriotic of him to wish to see them intermarrying
with us, and thus contriving “to contaminate our English life” far more
effectively than they will be able to do if they continue to be a people
apart? However, consistency in reasoning is not, as has already
been remarked, the anti-Semite’s forte.
The oracle supplies us with seven reasons—mystic and ominous
number—why “the immigration of the poorest Jews from Russia and
Poland is a national evil.”
1. “They lower the Englishman’s standard of comfort, and are
unduly addicted to the calling of usury.”
2. The competition is injurious to the Englishman because it is
“not to determine the survival of the fittest, but to determine the
survival of the fittest to exist on a herring and a piece of black bread.”
3. “They subsist contentedly on a diet which is insufficient to
sustain the meat-eating Anglo-Saxon.”
4. “Their habits of huddling together under circumstances of
unmentionable filth destroy the possibility of dealing with the housing
question, and set at naught our municipal sanitary laws.”
5. “They lower the wages of unskilled women and unskilled
labourers.”
6. “They raise rent.”
 7. “They enlarge the area of the sweating system.”
The usury charge has been answered by experience and
Economic Science ages ago. But the patriot contributes to the
discussion quite a fresh element when he describes the Jewish
immigrants as paupers and, in the same breath, as usurers. He does
not deign to explain how men who, as he later asserts, are induced
to leave their homes by destitution and are drawn to London by the
“magnetism” of the Jewish charities, how these penniless beggars
can “adopt money-lending as a means of livelihood.” If they are
paupers they cannot be money-lenders, and if they are money-
lenders they cannot be paupers. To starve and to lend at the same
time is a feat that even a Jew is hardly capable of.
As to sweating and sanitation, these are matters for which
legislation, if it is worth the name, ought to be able to devise far less
drastic remedies than that proposed by statistical patriotism. The
remaining reasons, when pruned of repetition and reduced to their
logical dimensions, resolve themselves into this: We do not want the
Jew, because he can work harder than we, for less wages than we,
and can live more frugally than we. In other words, because for the
purposes of the struggle for existence he is better equipped than we.
He is too formidable a rival.
But on this point also the enemies of the Jew are at fatal
variance. Another writer pronounces the explanation of the Jewish
immigrant’s success as due to his lower standard of living and
greater capacity for labouring, paradoxical. “It is,” he says, “as
though one were to maintain that of two pieces of machinery the
worse did most work and required less fuel.” He seeks and finds the
true reason of the displacement of the English craftsman, not in the
“alleged frugality of the foreign comer” or in “his readiness to do
more for his money,” but in “the Jewish system of out-door poor relief
... which makes rivalry and successful competition an impossibility.”
As an instance, he quotes the fact that poor children who attend the
Jews’ Free School in Bell-lane are partially fed and clothed by a
charitable Hebrew family. The writer, though apparently resenting
even competition in philanthropy as something monstrous and
dishonest, yet is charitable enough to admit that “it may be good, it
 264
may be bad; fair or unfair to other schools.” One would think that
schools were shops competing with one another as to which of them
will attract the greatest number of customers and not disinterested
institutions for the education of the community. Furthermore, one
would think that the fact quoted alone ought to move good Christians
to an emulation of the Jewish rival and thank him for the example of
beneficence which he sets them, instead of turning that very
example into a new reproach and adducing it as a reason for
excluding him from the country. Finally, one would think that, instead
of reviling the Jew for assisting his less fortunate co-religionists, a
true patriot might be induced, in sheer rivalry, to assist his own. But
what actually happens is this. We tell the Jew, “We let our own
unemployed starve, and you don’t. This is not fair to our poor
unemployed.” Verily, the ethics of anti-Semitism are as wonderful as
its logic.
The same narrow-minded dread of the alien competitor is at the
present day exhibited in South Africa. At a meeting in Cape Town on
Sept. 23rd, 1904, the speakers began by denouncing the Indians as
Asiatics, but they soon extended their objections to Jews, Greeks,
and Italians. The Jews were accused of working on Sundays, the
Greeks of keeping their shops open later than the natives, the
Italians of sending large sums of money (their hardly earned
savings) out of the Colony to their homes. A writer commenting on
this report sensibly remarks: “Against stupidity of this sort argument
265
fights in vain.” And his opinion will be shared by most sane people
in England. Yet many of these people will probably be ready to
approve the exclusion of the Jewish immigrant, not seeing that what
is rightly condemned as stupid intolerance in one country can hardly
be justified as enlightened statesmanship in another.
Time was when thrift, extreme frugality, success in life, and
clannishness were the causes of the Englishman’s hatred for the
Scotch competitor, when the latter after the Union began to emigrate
to the South. Those aliens were, like the Jews, accused of “herding
together” and of living on little, were envied for getting on in the
world, and were denounced for pushing one another on. The
clamour has passed away, and no sober Englishman of to-day would
dream of reviving it. Patriotic bigots in those days advised the
exclusion of the Scotch “undesirable,” and had a goodly following
among people who, having failed in life themselves, could not forgive
the foreigner his success. “But,” as a writer on the subject pertinently
asks, “would it have been well for England, even in a purely
commercial point of view, if the Scotch had been legally excluded?
Have not her children reaped benefits from the labours of those
266
whom their forefathers desired to forbid the country?”
To such considerations, however, our modern patriot is nobly
invulnerable. He soon forgets even his seven reasons, feeble and
contradictory as they are, in his Nationalist enthusiasm. The Jewish
millionaire is as hateful to him as the Jewish pauper. He describes
the Jews as a race gifted with indomitable cunning and an
extraordinary capacity for perceiving “with lightning glance the exact
moment to corner a market,” as “a powerful, exclusive and intolerant
race” of experts “in the flotation of companies,” as adepts “in the art
of deluding the public by the inflation of worthless securities with an
artificial and effervescent value,” as a tribe whose “undue economic
predominance” has been promoted by—O ye shades of King John
and Torquemada—“the mild spirit of Christianity!”
To descend from the ludicrously sublime to the sublimely
ludicrous: “Jewish ascendancy at Court is so conspicuous as to be
the subject of incessant lamentation on the part of full-blooded
Englishmen.” Surely the end of the British Empire cannot be very
distant when the King goes to Newmarket “accompanied by a Jewish
financier,” “is the guest of a Jewish financier,” and when, highest
horror of all, “in the published names of the dinner party on the first
night every one was a Jewish financier, or his relation, with the
exception of the King’s aide-de-camp and the Portuguese
Minister”—the latter, if not a Jew, an alien!
The patriot then warns us in tones irresistibly reminiscent of
Lewis Carroll: “The time has come to speak out about this alien
influence. There is danger ahead.... There are ugly rumours to the
effect that wealthy members of the Jewish community have placed
the King of England under undue obligations. If this be true, it is the
duty of the people of England to extricate their Sovereign from the
toils of the modernized version of Isaac of York. If it be untrue, there
is the less reason for Jews occupying their too prominent position at
Court. No sincere lover of his country can contemplate without
anxiety the gradual disappearance of the old families and the
ascendancy of the smart Semites who treat as trenchermen and led
captains what remains of English society. The efficiency of the British
nation requires the ascendancy of the Anglo-Saxon, not the Semitic,
element in it. It is time to restrict the immigration of potential money-
lenders from Eastern Europe.” The Jeremiad concludes with a truly
ominous reminder: “In 1290 the Jews were expelled from England.”
Continental anti-Semitism can show nothing superior to these
lamentations of our “full-blooded” “Anglo-Saxon.” In them we have all
the hereditary features of Jew-hatred exaggerated by insular distrust
of everything foreign and by provincial lack of sense of proportion or
humour. This manifesto, however, despite its limitations, is a fair
specimen of a kind of literature common enough on the Continent,
though still rare in these backward islands. Those interested in the
subject will find in the German anti-Semitic pamphlets and in the
Russian Panslavist newspapers the prototypes of all the arguments,
sentiments and self-contradictions of which those embodied in this
lugubrious production are pale copies. But the pamphlet is more than
a literary curiosity. Like the proverbial straw which, of no importance
in itself, yet deserves notice as indicating the direction of the current,
this product of a provincial mind is worthy of some attention as a sign
of the times. Already there have been found Englishmen illiberal
enough to overlook all the good points in the character of poor
Jewish immigrants—their untiring industry, sobriety and self-sacrifice
—and to ridicule, in supreme bad taste, the pathetic devotion which
impels these wretched wanderers to seek solace for their sufferings
in prayer and in the study of the Book which has been the only
source of comfort to millions of their people for the last twenty
267
centuries and to millions of our own for more than half that time.
From another point of view also the pamphlet is a document,
even more valuable, because more candid, than a less crude
performance would have been. It forms a hyphen of connection
between pure anti-Semitism—a small matter in England as yet—and
another tendency entirely different in origin, far more widely spread,
and shared by persons who, in other respects, have little in common
with the provincial patriot. This is the tendency towards a reaction of
which the anti-alien agitation is one symptom, and the clamour for
protection another; both pointing to a change of sentiment in favour
of the political ideals fashionable before the reign of Queen Victoria.
Until the nineteenth century England was essentially a Tory
country. The few ruled the many, and their rule was based on the
assumption—no doubt largely justified in those days—that the many
were not fit to rule themselves. A seat in the House of Commons was
virtually a family heirloom; patronage filled the Church, and
favouritism controlled the army and the navy. The whole of English
public life—civil, religious, and military—was under the sway of an
oligarchy, and fair competition was a thing unknown. It was the reign
of Protection in the broadest acceptation of the term. Then came the
awakening of the masses—an awakening the first token of which
had already appeared in the transference of a literary man’s homage
from a noble patron to the general public—and gradually the
lethargic acquiescence in the decrees of an aristocratic Providence
was supplanted by healthy discontent. The fruit of this deep and slow
evolution was the series of reforms which, by transferring to public
opinion the power which was formerly vested in a privileged class,
turned England from a pure aristocracy into a moderate kind of
democracy. The rotten boroughs were swept out of existence, and,
by the removal of religious disabilities, the English Parliament and
the English Universities became truly representative institutions.
Along with these changes came the demand for free competition in
another sphere—commerce—and the agitation resulted in the repeal
of the Corn Laws. In every department of life the individual claimed
and, in part, obtained freedom of initiative and action. Laissez-faire
became the motto of the Victorian era, and the free international
exchange of goods promised at last to realise the ideals of
international friendship and reciprocity which the eighteenth century
had preached but proved unable to practise.
 We now seem to be entering on a new chapter in our history. It
looks as though the Liberal current which has carried the nation thus
far has spent its force, and the counter-current is asserting itself. The
House of Commons still is an assembly of popular representatives,
but it has lost much of its power for good or evil, and much of the
respect which was once paid to it. Laissez-faire is only mentioned to
be derided, the principle of free competition is openly assailed,
internationalism is branded as cosmopolitanism and appeals to
humanity as proofs of morbid sentimentality; while protection is
confidently advocated in commerce and industry. How has this
change of sentiment come about? One of its causes may be found in
the growth of the Imperial idea. The history of all nations shows that
national expansion, though often achieved by individual enterprise,
can only be maintained by organised effort, by concentration of
power in a few hands, and by a proportionate diminution of individual
freedom. Democracy and Empire have never flourished together.
That the one may prosper, the other must perish. For this reason we
find the true democrat necessarily what is now called amongst us a
Little Englander; the true Imperialist as necessarily a dictator. The
anti-democratic reaction in England was inevitable, owing partly to
the expansion of Greater Britain itself, and partly to the development
of other countries on Imperialist and despotic lines. For it is now less
possible than ever for England to develop uninfluenced by the
example of her neighbours. And the example set by those
neighbours, as has been shown, is narrow and militant nationalism in
their relations with foreigners, and with regard to domestic matters
despotism and centralisation. But the growth of this inevitable
reaction has in England been accelerated by other and more specific
causes.
For a generation after the establishment of Free Trade England
enjoyed an unparalleled prosperity—an unchallenged commercial
and industrial supremacy. The British flag commanded the seas over
which British fleets carried the products of British labour to the four
corners of the earth, and the British traveller abroad made himself
unpopular and ridiculous by patronising Mont Blanc and by looking
superciliously down upon all who had not the good fortune to be born
British. Those were the proud days in which Lord Palmerston
described Prussia as a country of “d——d professors,” and Matthew
Arnold wrote his parable of the young Englishman and the upset
perambulator.
But this undisputed sovereignty could not last for ever. Europe
recovered from the devastating cataclysm which had left England
alone unscathed. The heaps of ruins with which the Napoleonic wars
had strewn the Continent were replaced by new edifices. Young
states arose out of the ashes of the old ones, and a new life chased
away the shadows of death. All these renovated countries, having
once set their houses in comparative order, began to look abroad for
expansion. Germany proved with marvellous quickness that she
could produce other things than “d——d professors”; France
likewise; not to mention the smaller countries of Belgium, Holland,
Denmark, and Switzerland. On the other side of the Atlantic also the
American Republic emerged from the ordeal of her Civil War with
renewed vigour, which soon displayed itself in commercial and
industrial activity. The upshot of this perfectly natural revolution was
that England found herself degraded from an autocratic mistress of
the world’s trade to the position of one among many competitors. We
saw with surprise and dismay that we were no longer the models
and the despair of others. Then our Olympian complacency gave
place to nervous anxiety, and our arrogant self-sufficiency was
succeeded by serious scepticism concerning the titles on which our
former estimate of ourselves rested. We ceased to brag of our own
“unparalleled progress,” and began to watch more and more
carefully the progress achieved by others. We acquired the habit of
asking ourselves how is it that the monopoly which we had foolishly
regarded as our inalienable birthright was slipping from our hands;
whence sprang this rapid development of countries which until the
last half-century were in their commercial and industrial infancy; how
came it to pass that nations which until yesterday were content to
copy us slavishly or to admire us passively are to-day rivalling us so
successfully? This inquiry led to the discovery that the foreigner’s
progress arose from superior intelligence, better education, greater
adaptability, and other advantages of a similar nature. We came to
the conclusion that, unless we rouse ourselves to strenuous
exertion, we shall be left behind in the race. This conviction has
already found a most laudable expression in the earnest efforts
made in every part of England to revise and to improve our
commercial and industrial methods and by special education to
qualify ourselves for the struggle under the new conditions. So far
our loss of the monopoly has proved a blessing in disguise, for it has
aroused that spirit of manly emulation to which undisputed
supremacy is fatal. But, unfortunately, the same consciousness of
our altered position relatively to the rest of the world has also
aroused a spirit of an entirely different kind. Many among us—too
intelligent to ignore the changed state of things, not intelligent
enough to diagnose the real cause of the change—have come to the
conclusion that our competitors owe their success to those very
fiscal and administrative fetters which we had discarded as obsolete,
and that if we wish to save ourselves from ultimate defeat we must
adopt their antiquated systems. Freedom, they say, means anarchy,
and victory is only possible by discipline, organisation, centralisation.
Individualism is hostile to efficiency. The democratic ideal is out of
date. At the same time, the cult of humanitarianism has been driven
out by the cult of nationalism.
As might have been foreseen by anyone who has watched the
march of events with some comprehension of their meaning, the cry
for protection was accompanied by the demand for the exclusion of
alien immigrants. The sequence was logical and unavoidable. If it is
to our profit to exclude the products of foreign labour by prohibitive
duties, it is in the same way to our profit to exclude the foreign
labourer. The two things, whether viewed from the economic point of
view, the political, or the psychological, are indissolubly connected.
They both are one expression of the twofold tendencies towards
despotism and nationalism—control over the individual and hostility
to the foreigner—reaction against free competition on the one hand
and against internationalism on the other. Lukewarm or unintelligent
pleaders for the one policy may oppose the other. But that the two
demands are only two manifestations of one and the same principle
is proved by the fact that, in their most uncompromising form, they
are defended by the same advocates. At a meeting of the members
of an East-end club which the late Home Secretary addressed on
Dec. 7, 1903, a resolution, approving of the new trade policy was
moved by Mr. D. J. Morgan, M.P., and was seconded by Major
Evans Gordon, M.P., both prominent champions of the anti-alien
cause. A protectionist writer on the subject of foreign immigration
into England concludes his study of the problem with the following
illuminating remarks: “Strong rivals, devoid of sentimentality and of
the capacity for being fascinated by magic words—such as the word
‘free’—are striving to thrust us from our position. It is full time for us
to abandon our long-played rôle of philanthropist among nations, and
so to order our affairs, social and economic, that we reap as much
advantage as possible and foreign nations as little. And one of these
268
things to be altered is the free entry of foreigners into England.”
As the numbers of foreign immigrants and the numbers of native
unemployed went on steadily increasing, the outcry against the
former went on steadily gaining in volume and vigour, and at last
cohered into a definite campaign which, as might have been
expected from the nature of the case, included in its ranks not only
the friends of their own country, but the enemies of every other; not
only aggressive Protectionists, but also philosophical Revisionists;
not only the advocates of the British labourer, but also the
adversaries of the Jew.
The first authoritative alarm of the Alien Peril was sounded in
January, 1902, when Mr. Balfour, in the course of the debate on the
Speech from the Throne, pointed out that, owing to America’s
adoption of severer measures against alien immigration, England
would be receiving even more immigrants than before. Not long
afterwards a Royal Commission was appointed to inquire into the
matter, and, after forty-nine public sittings, in which the evidence of
one hundred and seventy-five witnesses was received, came to the
conclusion that, although “it has not been proved that there is any
serious direct displacement of skilled English labour,” “the
continuous stream of fresh arrivals produces a glut in the unskilled
269
labour market.” Five out of the seven members recommended the
exclusion of certain classes of immigrants, who were pronounced
“undesirable” either on account of their character or owing to the
economic position of the districts in which they settled in great
numbers, and expressed the hope that the legislature would act on
their recommendation.
Both objections—moral and economic—had been anticipated
outside the Commission. On one occasion a London magistrate, in
sentencing a foreign thief to six months’ hard labour, availed himself
of the opportunity for stating that “the case fully illustrated how
desirable and necessary it was to check the unwelcome invasion of
alien criminals. At present,” he said, “the dregs of foreign countries
flowed incessantly into hospitable England, and within a few days
were engaged in committing all sorts of offences. The sooner
Parliament framed laws to prohibit the landing of these undesirables
270
the better.” Such cases, and cases far less serious, accompanied
by similar comments from the bench, became matters of daily
occurrence. So unpopular did foreigners become that their exclusion
would be urged because some of them at times obstructed
thoroughfares with their wheel barrows, thus wasting the valuable
time of the Police Courts and disturbing the equanimity of the
Metropolitan constables. One day, for example, a Russian lad was
brought up at the City Summons Court for causing obstruction with a
barrow of fruit. Sir Henry Knight, the Magistrate, imposed on the
offender a fine of two shillings, and, with admirable sense of
proportion, improved the occasion as follows: “We must have these
people stopped from being dumped down upon us. It is
271
abominable!”
On February 16, 1903, was formed an Immigration Reform
Association, with the object of enlightening the public in general and
legislators in particular on the alien question by means of pamphlets
widely distributed among Members of Parliament and other
speakers, as well as among working-class organisations. The
information thus liberally supplied emphasised the connection of
foreign immigrants with crime and vice, described the economic evils
which result from the inflow of resourceless aliens and from their
competition with the native labourers, and dwelt with especial
minuteness on the overcrowding of certain districts of East London
and the consequent dispossession of the native working population
by the invaders. Towards the end of the same year (Dec. 7, 1903),
Mr. Akers-Douglas, the Home Secretary, addressing the members of
an East-end London Club, discoursed, amid great applause, on “the
dumping of undesirable aliens,” quoting statistics to show how
rapidly their numbers grew, and how the grievances of overcrowding,
of crime and of competition grew with them, and concluding with the
assurance that the Government was seriously contemplating
stringent measures for checking the evil in time. A few months later
(March 29, 1904) the Home Secretary redeemed his promise by
bringing in a Bill “to make provision with respect to the Immigration of
272
Aliens, and other matters incidental thereto.”
In introducing this Bill Mr. Akers-Douglas took pains to persuade
the House that the proposed measures were not directed against
aliens as aliens, but against aliens as undesirables, and then
proceeded to describe the evils, already mentioned, which the Bill
was intended to remedy. Sir Charles Dilke protested against the
measure on the ground that the majority of the aliens who came to
this country, and who would be struck by the Bill, were the helpless
victims of political and religious persecution. He affirmed that the
native tradespeople had no grievance against foreign labourers,
because they were able to absorb the comparatively small number of
the latter by making them into good trade unionists. He disputed the
figures quoted by the Home Secretary, asserting, on the strength of
the Census and of the Royal Commission’s own Report, that the
number of foreigners in this country all told was a mere drop in the
ocean, and infinitely smaller than the number of foreigners resident
in almost every other civilised country—in fact, that many more
destitute Britons emigrated from the United Kingdom than destitute
aliens came into it. The speaker next pointed out that the Bill would
be used to exclude from England people whom afterwards we
should be ashamed to have excluded. This measure, he said, had it
been enforced at the time of the Paris Commune, would certainly
have excluded many of the most distinguished exiles who arrived
here in a state of starvation and whose return was afterwards
welcomed by France with every expression of gratitude to this
country for having maintained them—men like Dalou, one of the
greatest sculptors of modern times, like the brothers Reclus, and
many of the greatest scientists to whom we had been proud to give
hospitality, or men like Prince Peter Kropotkin, who arrived in
England stripped of every particle of his property by the Russian
Government and was welcomed by the people of this country. The
Russian Jews, against whom the heaviest allegations were made,
inhabited Stepney and some portions of the East-end, and there
were some in Manchester and Leeds. Of these some 20,000 were
engaged in the tailoring industry, some 3500 in cabinet-making, and
some 3000 in the boot and shoe trade. These were the whole of the
people against whom this agitation was directed. The speaker had
seen the broken-down prisoners from the “pale” sent for political
reasons across Siberia. Those men were not the dangerous persons
they were represented to be, miserable as might be their condition
when they came here. They were not of a stock inferior to our own;
and their stock, when it mixed with our own in the course of years,
he believed, went rather to improve than to deteriorate the British
race.
Leave was then given to bring in the Bill, which was read a first
time. A month later (April 25, 1904) the Bill stood for second reading
in the House of Commons and gave rise to a long and lively debate
which lasted through the afternoon and evening sittings. In the
course of the debate, the measure was discussed in all its aspects,
was strenuously attacked by one party and defended as strenuously
by the other. Sir Charles Dilke was again foremost in the fray. He
moved an amendment “that this House, holding that the evils of low-
priced alien labour can best be met by legislation to prevent
sweating, desires to assure itself, before assenting to the Aliens Bill,
that sufficient regard is had in the proposed measure to the retention
of the principle of asylum for the victims of persecution.” This
amendment the mover supported by an eloquent speech in which,
having once more traversed the Home Secretary’s statistics, and
once more reminded the House that these immigrants against whom
the measure was directed were the victims of persecution for their
religion—people whose friends had been burnt alive and hunted
from their homes to death—finally expressed his conviction that
behind this measure, not in the House, of course, but in the country,