The sun., 1919-03-16

were getting five -siXths of our food
supplies from abroad and subma-
rine craft were developing remark
able qualities which were not gem
orally realized. What would be the
condition Of our food supplies IL
there We're twenty-five hostile sub
marines off the Kent coast and
twenty-five in the Irish Channel?
Tho price of food would reach an
almost prohibitive figure?'
While certain of the dyed in the
wool mlitarists were utterly opposed
to the tunnel 1t is a matter of sig
nificant record that both Lord Roberts
and Lord Kitchener were outspokenly
, in favor of the plan. Fond as the Brit
ish are OF the traditional shilling, still
the financial, economic and CONNER
Cial advantages promised in the build
ing of the subaqueous route utterly
failed to shake the apprehensive con-
victiOn of those who followed the die
tum OF Lord Wolsey against the pro-
posed undertaking.
In 1911 Baron dE.rlanger chairman
of the Channel Tunnel Company, said
that f16,000.000 spent on the project
y
the richest nations in the world would
constitute productive enterprise for
all time. He computed that by 1920
when he said the company could hope
to open the tunnel if begun at once
the annual receipts would amount to
quite FL 53S, 900. Allowing something
like % per cent. for working expenses
he declared the profit would be fully
1905 900, ii return of more than per
cent. on the capital invested. Sixteen
million pounds sterling. in round fig
sres, is equivalent to SS0,000.000.
10000 Men to Handle Freight.
Three years ago, 1t was estimated
that tho British had on the French
coast 40 900 men engaged in unloading
and loading craft at the water termi-
nails and in handling. freight bound to
and from the military bases and battle
fronts. At home virtually n like force
was employed in packing and slowing
all shipments destined to the other side
of the Channel.
Manifestly the maintenance OF an
organization of $1,000 men. largely for
the purpose of adjusting the gap be
tween land and water carriage, must
have proved very costly matter, and
there are figures which put this out
lay at somewhere between $4,000, 900
and $40 100000 anpSSry.
1t takes no mathematician to grasp
the fact that during the first three
years of the war Great Britain thus
spent more than the total calculated
cost of the Channel tunnel.
Now, quite apart from the war time
aspect of the subject, it Is n matter of
pretty general knowledge just how
large part of each year stormy
weather or obscuring fogs prevail in
the English Channel and the North
Sea. The dangers OF navigation are
many during these trying periods, and
each twelvemonth shipping pays heav-
lily for its enforced ventures in these
waters. Who, then, would not rather
cross the Channel beneath it than On
its tumultuouS surface?
Passenger Tranic.
Just what the probable passenger
traffic is likely to be has been made
evident by NJ. Albert SartiauX, who
has so long eloquently advocated the
construction of the subaqueous pas
sage. Before tho outbreak of war. ac-
cording to this authority, by the eight
water lines then in service. more than
100000 passengers arrived and de-
parted in the traffic maintained be-
tween England on one side and France,
Holland and Belgium on the other.
With the restoration of peace this
movement will probaibly reach in a
short while a volume of quite 100000
persons yearly.
1t is his opinion that OF this traffic
the Channel tunnel would draw to it
80 per cent OF the passengers now
crossing via Calais or Boulcgne. 50