Linking Two Seas.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVII, Issue 7715, 18 January 1905, Page 4

Linking Two Seas.

■ ANOTHER SUEZ CANAL. some: past and present ' SCHEMES. The proposal for another means of connecting the Mediterranean with the Red Sea—referred to in a cable message a few weeks ago is not a new one. The subject, however, has a deep interest for Australia, as the opening up of a new waterway would necessarily result in cheaper communication with Great Britain and the continent, and vice versa. As' far back as 1882 much dissatisfaction was expressed by British shipowners with the condition j of the Suez Canal service, and schemes' for rival waterways wort started, or rather revived. One reason for protest than was the high charge imposed by the Universal Company of the Maritime Suez Canal. Added to this was the delay in getting ships through ; it then took a vessel nearly forty hours to make the journey. The latter cause does not exist to such an extent nowf as an improvement to the waterway, combined with excellent nianaigtment, has reduced the time occupied in the passage under favourable circumstances to eighteen hours. But the financial question is still the subject of grave complaint by shipowners. Reductions have certainly been made in the tonnage dues and fees charged for passengers, but they have

gid for passengers, but they have , been trifling as compared with the enormously increased profits of the company. When the agitation occurred twenty years ago there were several pro- - posals for new canals. One of these provided for a fresh-water canal from Alexandria to Cairo, and thence -by way of Tel-el Keliir to Suez. This is a project on the • same, lines as that now suggested by Sir Theodore Angicr, of the firm of Angicr Bros., steamship-owners, of London. Another scheme discussed -yi 1882 provides for a canal from Alexandria to Mansurah and Ismailia, proceeding thence in a parallel line to the original canal to Suez, while a third dealt with the. construction of a second Suez Canal, wtiich it was intended was 'to be completed in six years. However, all three proposals fell to the 1 ground, principally owing.it • was believed, to the impracticnbili- . ty of carrying out the cheaper schemes. Besides, tho Suez Canal authorities met the difficulty to some .extent by determining to widen the canal, so as to meet with the increased traffic. Since then, of course, the traffic has increased to a very great extent, until the number of vessels annually passing through the canal numbers nearly 4000. The transit receipts for the year- envied June, 1903, amounted ' , to £4,148,000 exceeding that of any previous year since the canal has been opened. The excess of rereceipts over expenditure during the a , three years ended 1902 was £6,949800. The shipping companies which have their headquarters in London . object to the heavy burdens imposed upon them by this monopolistic *■ institution, and the question of abandon rug this route for a portion of the year has been seriously ' raised by one of the large compan- , les which trades to Australia the , 1 Orient-Pacific. If this proposal is •J acted, upon, the company's stearnV; crs will travel by way of the Cape _V t of Good Hope, and this route, it is . explained, is actually shorter than that taken by the company's stcamr .ers in the Mediterranean. Recently the dues that had to be paid on i> : account of the Orontes for her pas»age through the canal amounted to £2317, and this was at the reduced figure of BJfr per passenger, a reduction of -Jfr upon the former tar- & iff. Heavy fees like this have produced the enormous annual profits of nearly £2,500,000 a year for the comJ pany, and naturally these changes have produced a protest, which s threatens once more to take a prac- « tical shape in the fonn of the construction of a new canal. But the enormous difficulties which had to " "be overcome in the making of the , present canal—one of the most remarkable engineering worts of mojj.. dern times—must of necessity delay Ja. the progress of such a scheme. And £ there are also' those who believe . that it. is impracticable. On the ■*. other hand, there are engineers who ' make light of the project, in view SL on the advancement of the science of |W» their profession and labour-saving jr • machinery, and express entire conjjt; -*'JMence in the possibility of its fulr/; fllmeot. The view is held, too, that mL , the threat of the prosecution of a §■/_ . new scheme is only made with the jjr object of compelling the controllers b '' of the Suez Canal to reduce their PV, tees. Controversially, therefore, the g position is much t)ie same as when jV Ferdinand Be Lesseps, M. Talabot, Sir John Hawkshaw, and others were originally attempting to unravel the problem which had exercised the minds of the ancients, and jL iwhicly in 1798 attracted the aliens' #vho took the SE. first movement that je" ended over halT"^t-century later in Sb . the construction of tlie Suez Canal, ft' There is, however, one cncourag- . advantage in favour of the proSi. moters of tie now scheme—engineer--1". tag has advanced so much of late years that the cost would not be |f- nearly so great as was the case f with the Suez Canal. It look thirjK- teen years to build the present can- , al. Although the scheme suggested t' by Sir Theodore Angier would jnfe- yolve a journey, of three times the &.. *listance of the present waterway, it I* is believed that the work could be |r* accomplished in these enlightened I? engineering days in half the time. t" The cost of the Suez Canal is said $ to have been £20,000,000, whereas ,v Sir Theodore Angier estimates that E tho cost of the new canal will be k only be £6,000i000, pa. ■ The scheme now proposed by Sir j¥ Theodore Angier is similar in many g important points to that planned by £ the eminent French engineer, M. Talt*. abot. This was to traverse the K. course of the Nile. He proposed to • carry the canal along the line of fe tho bed of the old canal of the | Pharoabs, a distance of 135 miles, 3*-: to a spot on the Nile just above the bifurcation of the Delta. Cross|V icg the river, the canal was to y .wind along the edge of the cultivatgs_ ed land to Alexandria, a distance of g about 120 miles. One of the adR., mi tted great difficulties of the un-

J dertaking was the passage of the jL.<- Nile. The river was not deep ;"?V enough to allow of vessels drawing p; . 25ft or 26ft to cross from shore to shore. M. Talaibot then suggested than when the ''barrage" was corns' pleted it might dam up the waters to a sufficient depth for the pur- £ pose. Another great difficulty arose *" from the fact that the waters of the £~ Nile arc, at one season of the year, ft: from 18ft to 26ft higher than they

j ore at another. The French, engineer suggested that the only possible J mode of getting over the difficulty j£ was by an aqueduct, the surface of f the water in which was to be ft" Wised 40ft above the level of the high -water of the Kile, and 60ft above the low-water level. This r huge edifice was to (be 3300 ft or 'iS 3500 ft <n length, of the same secf t on as the locks, and to be reached fc b four locks at each end, forming

a sort of giant stairs, by ascending which the summit level was to be attained'by the largest line of battleships. The estimated cost of tlie whole project was set down by M. Talabot at £8,000,000, but experts j doubted whether it could have, been executed for twice that amount. There was still another scheme proposed toy Captain W. Alien, of the It oval Navy, hut it was deemed to 'be utterly impracticable. His proposal was based on the Enowledge that the level of the l>oad Sea was at least 1800 ft below that jf the Mediterranean or Red Sea, ind that the Sea of Galilee was in like manner depressed to the extent jf about Gsoft f so that the mean level of the Valley of the Jordan, with its two lakes, might he taken it JCOOft below the neighbouring *eas, and its extent as covering about 2000 square miles. Captain Allen proposed that this vast area should be converted into a great nland sea by cutting a canal from Vcre across the Tlain of Esdraelon .o th<? Jordan, a distance of about orty miles, and another from Aka•joh, on the Red Sea, to the southern limit of the Dead Sea, a distance of about 120 miles.—Tela-