THE CHANNEL TUNNEL.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1077, 23 May 1882, Page 4

THE CHANNEL TUNNEL.

The project of connecting England and France by a submarine tunnel has been brought twice before the public notice in the course of a few days, the Channel Tunnel Company, under the presidency of Lord Richard Grosvenor, and the submarine Continental Railway Company, under the presidency of Sir Edward Watkin, having held their meetings within a day of each other. These rival bodies have the same end in new. They both aim at constructing a tunnel between the English and the French coasts. Both are equally confident that they themselves are setting to work in the right way, and both agree in predicting failure for their opponents. The Channel Tunnel Company has Sir John Hawkshaw on its aide. The Submarine Continental Railway Company has obtained the scientific advice of the most eminent men of the day, and is in possession of the only territory from which, in their opinion, it is possible to make a successful start. French opinion seems about equally favorable to both companies. Each of the two has its allies on the opposite eoast, ready and waiting to co-operate with it, and to meet it half way. Each is sufficiently well furnished with the funds necessary for its enterprise. The whole capital asked for by fhe Channel Tunnel Company has been subscribed, and it counts among its shareholders a good sprinkling of bankers and of other influential gentlemen, on whom it depends for future help. Sir Edward Watkin's Company has a round quarter of a million in hand, and shareholders besides, who will be even more ready to supply fresh capital than Sir Edward Watkin will be to ask them for it. Both companies have deposited their Bills, and both trust to obtain the necessary Parliamentary powers for completing the works they have begun. Sir Garnet Wolseley has lately been expressing his opinion against the scheme. Any tunnel, he says, is objectionable, on account of the extreme danger it would entail upon England. Our fleet would then be useless to defend our coasts from attack. A “ tunnel onee made,” he says, “ its approaches on this side might be seized by a coup de main by an enemy who could at the same time take care to get at once into his possession all the electrical apparatus planned to destroy the tunnel or render it useless for a time. Such a seizure might be carried out by a force of 2,000 men any night, who could suddenly pounce upon the approaches on this side. If that were done by some bold leader, it would at once place us at the mercy of the enemy, for in four or five hours afterwards2o,ooo men could be sent through the tunnel to their support, and before daybreak the tunnel would have completely passed into the enemy's possession, and could be used as a tete de. pont, from which a great army could got forth against London, and with the

seizure of London ends England’s power." Sir Garnet does not believe that the tunnel would in the least degree increase our commercial relations, or lessen the risk of war breaking out.