The Magnolia gazette. [volume] (Magnolia, Miss.) 1872-current, 1882-08-04

is necessary as the canal shitts and
fills IN lees than might be expected.
The means most natural TO adopt to
destroy the canal would be 70 blow it
up by mining the banks, and in order
to repair the damages OF such an attack
it would, of course, be necessary to
dredge out the canal where filed up by
such means and to repair the banks. But
with the dredges and other machinery at
the disposal Of the company it wound
not be the work Of many days 70 repair
all the injury likely to be done in this
manner. In the event Of distinctions
being snnk in the canal they could be
promptly removed or, IN case Of necessity,
the nature Of the country is such that IN
almost any place new channel could be
constructed around them In fact,
about the only way to effectually destroy
the canal would be to take the time and
20 to the immense labor of blowing it mp
along its entire course.
About the most serious inconvenience
that could be caused would be TO cut OFF
the supply of fresh water, and that would
not be difficult undertaking. The
fresh water is obtained from o place
called ZagaziR,a point half way between
Cairo and Ismailia. The water is brought
from this place to Ismailia by means Of
canal, and the fresh water canal contin-
ues from this point to Suez, while sup
ply is conveyed from lsmailia along the
canal to Port Said by double row of
water pipes. The other means Of pro-
curing fresh water along the canal and at
eth ar end of it are very slight and insult
ficient. To cut off this supply Of fresh
water would stop business along the
canal, and, while it would be very
simple matter TO restore the supply
when once the country was rid OF the
Egyptian army, yet, as long as the lat
ter held control of the fresh water supply,
the canal would be practically at their
mercy; and, OF course, with this water
supply cut off, it would be dificult 70
maintain force for the defence of the
canal This is the greatest danger that
threatens the canal. II the water sup
ply could be kept up the defense of the
canal could be easily maintained.
The best means would be by gunboatf
and few Of them stationed in the cana,
would be equal to the task. The entire
country over which hostile force would
be compelled TO march to approach the
canal is fit and could be swept by th'
guns of the boats An enemy
conld be seen approaching from
a long distance, and the telegraph line
would make it easy to summon the gun.
boats to any threatened point
Only at the three point
previously referred to where the bank
are high, would the gunboats be unavail
able. There they would be unable &
sweep the shores with their guns, ant
an enemy would be able to approach
and blow up the banks. AT these thre
points it would therefore be necessar,
to station force sufficient to protect th
canal. But in order TO keep force il
position to defend the canal il would b
necessary to keep up the supply Of fresl
water. Otherwise the force would hav
to be withdrawn. Possibly suppl.
sufficient to furnish the force neoessar,
to defend the canal &C uld be Transports
by ship. but otherwise, in the event Q
the canal from zagazig beng cut,
would be necessary to abandon th
mercy of Arab and his army. There
fore the key to the whole situation az
pears to be the town OF zagazig and th
country between it and Ismailia, and j
order to successfully protect and operat
the Suez Canal 1t is necessary to occup
ZagazIg with force capable Of defer
ding that point and the surroundin
/, country from attack. Therefore th
Suez Canal can not be successful
: defended by gunboats. 1t viii be neccel
sary to land sufficient force to penetrat
into the country as far as zagazig an
hold Arab and bis army at bay. or els
to destroy him before he can reach th'
point.