The Sun.
London, England, 1858-08-05 00:00:00

THE ISTMiIItIS OF SUEZ CANAL.

We have been requested by Mr. Robert Stephen-
son to publish the following letter addressed by him
to the editor of the Austrian Gazette :
"Sir,—The Austrian Gazette of the 18th of June pub-
lished a letter under the signature of The Chevalier de
Negrilli, Engineer,' on the subject of a speech delivered by
me on the Ist of June last, in my place in the Commons'
House of Parliament, in the course of a debate on the. Suez
Canal.

"For a long time I have considered it most dignified and
becoming to pass without notice the various statements,
anonymous or otherwise, which have been published on this
subject; but the letter of M. de Negrelli, with whom I was
associated in the first investigation of the practicability of
piercing the isthmus, and who, questioning my statements
in Parliament, has now for the first time declared himself
at issue with me both as to my facts and conclusions, renders
it imperative that I should declare in a formal manner what
arc the facts of this case, and by what circumstances my
opinions are supported.
In the year 1646 I was solicited by my friend M. Tale-
bot, one of the most eminent engineers of France, to inves-
tigate with him the practicability of piercing the Isthmus
of Suez for a ship canal. The project had been suggested
do M. Talabot by Linant Bey, a French enuineer, who bad
been for many years resident in Egypt. The statements
submitted by Linant Bey were so remarkable that they
engaged my co-operation in the interests of science, and, M.
de Negrelli having been secure/ by M. Tatabot as a coad-
jutor, we entered into a formal agreement to share the
labours and the cost of a preliminary investigation.
"The construction of a canal through the Isthmus of
Suez involved two classes of engineering works :-1, The
construction and proper maintenance of the canal itself;
2, the formation and proper maintenance of sea ports and
deep entrances to the canal both on the Red Sea and in the
Mediterranean. It has been generally believed that the
ancient canal, of which vestiges may still be seen near Suez,
was filled neither by the waters of the Red Sea, nor of the
Mediterranean, but by the water, cf the Nile, obtained at
Cairo; and history had declared that Alexander the
Great, in founding the port of Alexandria cn the west side
of the Delta of the Nile, had been influenced by considera-
tion of the fact, that along the coast of the Levant there is
sn almost invariable current from west to east, carrying the
debris poured from the mouths of the Nile int) the Bay of
Pelusdurn, and thereby rendering the maintenance of a deep
harbour in that bay as difficult as at the mouths of the
Danube and the Rhone. Bet, on the other hand, Linant
Bey submitted to us that the French engineers under M.
M. Lepere, who had secempanied the expedition to Egypt
in 1799, had satisfaetorileeestablished that there was a differ-
ence between the levels of the Red Sea and tie Mediter-
ranean of no less than 9.90 metres. Under such circum-
stances it was apparent that nothing would be easier than
to open a channel and establish a sufficient current from
the Red Sea to the Mediterranean, with a velocity
which it was assumed would keep the canal open by
its scour, and maintain a clear channel, not only in the
canal itself, but in the harbour in the Mediterranean.
" Undoubtedly, it was under the impression of the exist-
ence of this diffsrence of level that M. Talabot and myself
entered on the inquiry ; and, as M. de Negrelli would not
have been engaged in it save at M. Talabot'e instance, it is
tolerably evident that the same primary consideration must
have influenced him. That such was ttte case is addition-
ally apparent from the fact that our first 'joint act was to
take measures to confirm the difference of level reported on
M. Lepere's authority. Under the direction of M. Talabot
a corps of scientific engineers was sent to Egypt to take the
levels, upon which they were occupied from about Septem-
ber, 1846, until January, 1847, when M. Bourdaloue, the
chief of the expedition, reported to M. Tatabot that it had
been ascertained beyond the possibility of doubt, uncertainty,
or question, that M. Lepere bad been mistaken ; that no
difference level whatever existed between the two seas;
and that, consequently, a canal capable of being scoured by
the waters either of the Red Sea or the Mediterranean was
impracticable, especially as Loth those seas may be said to
be nearly tideless.
" Upon the accoutate and levels:submitted to him M. Tata-
bot made a report, which, whether considered in an histori-
cal, scientific, or engineering point of view, is at once the
most comprehensive and logical document that has even
appeared upon the subject. After reporting en the non-
existence of a difference between the levels of the seas and
on the effects of the current along the shores of the coast,
he concluded that the maintehanee Of a channel, and of an
entrance in the Bay a Pelusium, to the east of the
Delta, was one difficulte insurniontable :' and from this
he went on to show that, even supposing an entrance could
be established to a cans! in the bay, the pitevelenCe of north
winds during nine months of the year en that part of the
coast would prevent ships from attempting with safety
either to make it, or to leave it) unless a harbour of refuge
Toat, ofsil
nmebt
ahhuemice
anhgspdawei
frffi blown
luucrooul
persuaded
ideyhsd
at oevonatefdh ae
x e ce ue
were established to Sate them froitt the conseqUences
isnhgores;ucial owd,orkasfterheallsuatylist—ig
ia
toat n
bdteoa constructill
eins
fiotrt t:mht :at iktißnh
galn
the
whole of a canal by the way of Alexandria, and that only to
obtain a pass of uncertain success, or, rather, one that is
certainly impracticable.' And M. Talabot concluded that
the result was 'to exclude every project which shall end in
ga,r'dCinognetuhrering projectmost
as entirely
aitnatnheesnede,
the Bay of Tineh' (Pelusium).
olly
°inn(' 1 ctiostiigsnequaenndcereo-f
the premises on which it was based having been found to be
- entirely erronecus, I paid from tny own personal means the
share of the expenses attending the inquiry, for which I had
undertaken to be responsible (one-third of about 14,500),
and all correspondence on the subject ceased. Several years
afterwards—in August, 1855, during the Exposition—l had
the pleasure of meeting both M. Talabot and M. de Negrelli
in Paris, but so utterly was the Suez Canal project closed
and abandoned that, as M. de Negrelli tells you in his
letter, 'no word passed between us on the subject.'
"You will here permit me to mention a personal matter,
which M. de Negrelli has elevated into importance. In
the autumn of 1850, fatigued by the labours of an arduous
year, I sought health and recreation in a yacht voyage to
tha Mediterranean. Arrived at Alexandria, I determined
to made a personal investigation of the district in which
four years previously I had been so deeply interested. Pro-
ceeding ft otn Cairo by tee usual route to Suez, accompanied
for some distance by Captain Lindquist, then the agent of
the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Company, I turned
thence northwards inta the Desert, visited the site of the
Bitter Lakes (now dry and desolate), encamped for two
days at Lake Timsah, and thence proceeded over the high
.
ground towards Lake Balla!), travelling on foot—as, indeed,
it is difficult to traverse otherwise a large portion of the
Deserts. From that rit'ge of comparatively e,eveted ground
I was enabled to overlook the district towards Lake Altnz
leh, which, during the period of high Nile, becomes a shal-
low lagoon, stretching along the coast and far into the
Desert. Then, returning westward, entered the
Ottadee Toutaat, at Sabahier, and, following the
course of the ancient canal, I travelled in the
direction of Bulbies and of the ruins of the
ancient Bubasis, visiting the higher grounds to the north
and thence returning to Cairo. Altogether I spent 15 or 16
days in the district, and all that .I saw and ascertained on
this expedition confirmed my convictions as to the Suez
Canal project, and the finality of M. Talahot's report. On
my return to England I gave, on the 20th of May, 1851, an
account of this expedition, in the course of a discussion on
a paper read at the Institution of Civil Engineers, stating
emphatically the opinion at which I had arrived, that it was
evident that it would not be practicable to keep open a level