The Press.
London, England, 1857-05-23 00:00:00

MAY 23, 1857.

With the same light, easy pen does M. de
Saint-Hilaire touch upon the architecture of
Egypt, describe the Pyramids, and detail the
events of his tour. And he is by no means
superficial ; for, though his subjects be few,
yet in his treatment of each he exhibits a
certain amount of diligent investigation, and
distinctly explains his views. The book
would have been more comprehensive if he
bad taken the machine of Egyptian govern-
ment and society entirely to pieces, and given
us a more elaborate exposition and a few solid
facts upon the working of the religion, laws,
finances, industry, and population of the
country.
But it would bo a manifest injustice to M.
de Saint-Hilaire to omit all mention of the
real object of his book, which is to advance the
cause of the Suez Canal scheme. The question
he pronounces to be settled—the capital only is
required to carry out the project; and as M. de
Lesseps and other gentlemen are at this mo-
ment lecturing throughout the country for the
purpose of pushing the scheme, it is worth
while to look slightly into their arguments.
This is an age of wealth and speed. We
make or lose our money faster, and take
shorter cuts than our grandfathers to fortune,
to gaol, or to our journey's end. The Suez
Canal is a case in point. Certain eminent
Frenchmen, acting upon the suggestions of
the First Napoleon, have determined to confer
upon the world the benefi t of a short cut by canal
to Suez, the Red Sea, and thence to India. The
arguments in favour of it are, briefly, that it is
practicable at a cost of 8,000,000/. ; that it
shortens the voyage to India by 7,000 miles—
a material consideration under the prospect of
a rapidly-developing Eastern trade ; and that
a canal along the same route existed in
ages gone by. We believe ourselves that
there is very little doubt of the practica-
bility of the scheme; but then we apprehend
the difficulties in detail and expenses are
far beyond the estimate,—at least we can only
,judge by the comparative cost of similar
works. Take, for instance, the projected
piers. It is proposed to run out at both sides
of the canal two piers, 3,800 and 2,700 feet long
respectively. Now, who that has watched the
construction of similar works will be disposed
to accept the modest estimate of M. de Saint-
Hilaire as the final cost of these projec-
tions? Why, the breakwater at Cherbourg,
with everything in its favour, has taken sixty
years to construct, and cost sixteen millions
of money. No breakwater, under the most
favourable circumstances of ready material,
was ever yet built under half a million
a mile, and the material for these is to
be found, not on the spot, but to be
transported from all quarters of the
Mediterranean. Then, again, the bottom at
Suez and at Pelusium is sand or mud. That
is not a substratum upon which you can safely
calculate that you will erect so many feet of
stonework and no more. You will have to
sink thousands of tons of stone before your
substratum acquires the requisite solidity.
But, to leave the practical difficulties of con-
struction, to say nothing of the shoal water
and sandbanks at Pelusium and its lee shore,
and the heavy gales blowing dead on the
coast for two-thirds of the year, will the
passage be suitable for sailing-ships ? Cer-
tainly not. A sailing-ship from the English
Channel will get to the latitude of the Cape
sooner than she could hope to reach Pelusium.
Then the winds of the Red Sea are of that re-
gular and satisfactory nature that, as some one
somewhere said, for one six months of the
year you can't get in, and for the other
six months you can't get out So that
for our sailing-vessels the passage will be use-
less. Indeeo, it is adulated that to steamers the
proposers of the Canal scheme look mainly for
their profi t,and the question of steam versus sail.
ing;vessels is not yet decided, for long voyages,
in favour of the former. Again, M. de Saint-
Hilaire admits that a vessel would make no
more voyages to India in the lyear by this
Passage than at present ; then where lies the
great advantage of the canal to us ? Looking
at it from a purely commercial point of view,
the question to consider would seem to be,
as at the Isthmus of Panama, whether a rail-
road will not suffice to answer all purposes of
trafAc? 111 r. Stephepson, tho enginper, ap.