Part 32

The Suez Canal is not so much a triumph of engineering as a monument of successful enterprise and determination on the part of its great promoter, M. Lesseps, in the face of great difficulties. According to the original programme, the canal was to have been constructed by forced labour, supplied by the Viceroy. The unhappy peasantry of the country, called “fellahs,” were compelled to give their labour for a miserable pittance of rice. No doubt, in ancient times, when forced labour was in use, every peasant might cheerfully work, because it was for the general benefit to bring sweet water from the Nile to other dry and thirsty places in Egypt; but to be obliged to work at a waterway of salt, which was only to be of use to foreigners who passed through the country, could not be expected of human beings, and therefore the carrying out of the work was not unaccompanied by cruelties of the nature attending slave labour in other lands. This was one of the reasons why the late Lord Palmerston opposed the canal scheme, for the kind hearted statesman bore in mind the loss of health and life occasioned to poor Egyptians by this mode of labour, and the more so because it had been originally proposed that one of the conditions on which the French Company was to take up the project should be the execution of the work by _free labour_. In consequence, no doubt, of representations from free countries, the Porte was induced to put a veto on the employment of forced labour, and everyone thought that this would be the deathblow to the completion of the canal: but M. Lesseps did not give way to despair, and he since stated that if he had depended on the labours of the fellahs only, the difficulties of the work never could have been surmounted; and that, in fact, the successful prosecution of the work was owing to his having turned his attention to the mechanical contrivances used for dredging on the Thames and the Clyde, from which he obtained better results in half the time and at half the cost.

The dredges used in the construction of the canal were of a new description. They were wonderful mechanical contrivances, and but for them the canal would not have been finished. They were not the contrivance of M. Lesseps, but of one of the contractors, a distinguished engineer, who received his technical education in France but his practical experience in England. The use of the dredging machines was prepared for by digging out a rough trough by spade work, and as soon as it had been dug to the depth of from six feet to twelve feet, the water was let in. After the water had been let in, the steam dredges were floated down the stream, moored along the bank, and set to work. The dredges were of two kinds. The great _couloirs_ consisted of a long, broad, flat bottomed barge, on which stood a huge framework of wood, supporting an endless chain of heavy iron buckets. The chain was turned by steam, and the height of the axle was shifted from time to time, so that the empty buckets, as they revolved round and round, should always strike the bottom of the canal at a fixed angle. As they were dragged over the soil they scooped up a quantity of mud and sand and water, and as each bucket reached its highest point in the round, it discharged its contents into a long iron pipe which ran out at right angles to the barge. The further extremity of this pipe stretched for some yards beyond the bank of the canal, and therefore, when the dredging was going on, there was a constant stream of liquid mud pouring from the pipe’s mouth upon the shore, and thus raising the height of the embankment. When the hollow scooped out by the buckets had reached the required depth, the dredge was moved to another place, and the same process was repeated over and over again. These stationary dredges, however, though very effective, required much time in moving, and the lighter work of the canal was chiefly effected by movable dredges of a smaller size. These machines were of the same construction as those described; the only difference was that the mud raised by their agency was not poured directly on shore by pipes attached to the dredges, but was emptied in the first instance into large barges moored alongside the dredge. These barges were divided into compartments, each of which contained a railway truck, and when the barge was filled it steered away to the bank, where an elevator was fixed. The trucks, filled with mud were raised by a crane worked by steam power, and placed upon inclined rails, attached to the elevator, which sloped upwards at an angle of 45 degrees towards the bank. They were then drawn up the rails by an endless rope, and as each truck reached the end of the rails its side fell open, the mud was shot out upon the bank, and the empty truck returned by another set of rails to the platform on which the elevator was placed, and was thence lowered into the barge to which it belonged. As the elevator could unload and re-load a barge much faster than the dredges could fill it with mud, each elevator was fed by half a dozen dredges, and thus the mud raised from the canal by several dredges was carted away without difficulty at one and the same time. As these floating dredges were much easier to shift than those encumbered by the long _couloir_ pipes, the work of excavating the bed went on much more rapidly. But in places where there was any great mass of earth or sand to be removed, the large _couloirs_ could scoop out a given volume in a shorter time.

The traveller who wishes to see the canal should go to France, and, embarking at the port of Marseilles, cross the Mediterranean Sea, and steam to Port Saïd, which is about 150 miles east of the port of Alexandria, where the isthmus is crossed by the railroad, and is used by travellers to India, being known as the “overland route.” And this railway conveys the mail to and from India, thus saving the great sea voyage round Africa and the Cape of Good Hope. Nevertheless, it involves two transhipments—from the steamer to the rail at Alexandria, and from the railway to the steamer at Suez.

Let us notice in order the places passed by the traveller in going from Port Saïd to Suez and the Red Sea. The arrow (Fig. 126) points in the direction of the compass, and shows that the canal runs very nearly from north to south. Port Saïd is the little town at the northern or Mediterranean entrance to the canal, situated on the flat sands at the entrance of the canal, and is built chiefly of wood, with straight wide streets and houses, and although it now contains several thousand inhabitants, before the making of the canal was begun one hundred people could hardly have been got together. The town contains nothing deserving of notice, and has a striking resemblance to the newly settled cities of America. But in it reside agents who represent numerous varied interests—administrative, financial, mercantile and political. It is provided with docks, basins, quays and warehouses, and has a harbour stretching out a couple of miles or so into the sea, for to that distance two piers, or rather breakwaters, run out.

Fig. 128 shows these two converging breakwaters, which have been built out into the Mediterranean from the coast, the larger and more westerly one being one mile and a half long, the shorter about a mile and a quarter, and the distances between the two lighthouses erected on the extremities of the breakwater being half a mile.

The piers are made of concrete which was cast in blocks weighing 10 tons each. This composition has of late years been greatly approved by engineers where stone cannot be procured. The sea-face of the great canal in Holland is composed of a similar artificial stone, and it is found to bear the wear and tear of the waves almost, if not quite, as well as ordinary stone. It is stated that 25,000 blocks, each weighing 10 tons, were used. They were not laid with the regularity of ordinary masonry, but had been dropped from large barges, so that they presented a very rugged and uneven appearance (Fig. 129); but the object of throwing out these great bulwarks is for the purpose of preventing the sand brought down by the Nile silting in and closing up the canal. Along the western pier there is, from this cause, a constant settlement of sand, which was partially washed through the interstices left between the blocks of artificial stone, and might have given some trouble by forming sandbanks in the harbour; but this was prevented by the introduction of smaller stones, which could readily be carried out in boats at the low tide.

Beginning with the Mediterranean Sea and Port Saïd, there is a run of 28 miles to Kantara, through Lake Menzaleh. Although called a lake, it is, in truth, nothing but a shallow lagoon or swamp, in which water-fowl of all kinds are very abundant, the great flocks of white pelicans and pink flamingoes being especially striking. The waters of this lagoon cover lands that once were fertile, and the salt sea-sands doubtless conceal the remains of many an ancient town.

Of all portions of the undertaking, this one, M. Lesseps states, was the most arduous and difficult, though, at the time, it attracted the least attention. A trough had to be dredged out of the bed of the shallow lagoon, and on either side of this hollowed out space high sandbanks had to be erected, and the difficulty of making a solid foundation for these sand banks was found to be extreme. The difficulty, however, was surmounted, and such is the excellence of the work, that the water neither leaks out, nor does any of the brackish water of the lagoon infiltrate and undermine the great embankments.

At Kantara, the canal crosses the track of the highway between Cairo and Syria—a floating bridge carries the caravans across; and near this spot is stationed an Egyptian man-of-war, which supplies the police for the proper watch and ward of the canal. From Kantara to El Fendane is a distance of 15 miles—that is to say, to the southern extremity of Lake Ballah, where the canal still passes through sand embankments, raised within a mere. The lake is, however, almost dried up, and therefore the difficulties which had to be surmounted at Lake Menzaleh were not felt here.

The traveller may now be supposed to have arrived at Lake Timsah, where, no doubt, in the days of the Pharaohs, a lake existed. When taken in hand by M. Lesseps, it was a barren, sandy hollow, containing a few shallow pools, through which a man could easily wade, but now it is filled with the waters of the Mediterranean Sea. It is a pretty, inland, salt water lake, about three miles in width. On the northern shore stands the town, or, rather, small settlement of Ismaïlia, which is, in fact, the “half way house” where most of the officials of the Suez Canal Company resided, as they could get to either end of the canal with greater facility, or to Cairo by the railroad, which comes to this point, and continues, with the canal, to Suez.

When the canal was opened, in November, 1869, Ismaïlia was the scene of the most brilliant part of the opening ceremony, in which the French Empress Eugénie, the Empress of Austria, the Crown Prince of Prussia, and other distinguished personages took share. The Khedive built himself a summer palace, and M. Lesseps erected a villa, and the town was most artistically laid out, with every prospect of becoming a flourishing place. But the drainage had been so entirely overlooked, that it is said the sewage found its only outlet in the fresh water canal; and the consequence was fever broke out and so infected the town, that it was soon almost quite deserted. In 1882, Ismaïlia was once more the scene of bustle and activity, for here was the base of Sir Garnet Wolseley’s operations in his brilliant campaign against Arabi. The British Navy entered the canal, and took possession of Ismaïlia, where the army and the military stores were rapidly concentrated. From this place, Sir Garnet advanced along the route of the railway and the Sweet Water Canal, and, after storming the lines of Tel-el-Kebir, occupied Cairo, without further resistance, after a campaign of only three weeks’ duration.

From Lake Timsah to the Bitter Lakes the canal again passes for eight miles or so through the desert, where, by partial excavations by hand labour and subsequent flooding to admit the dredges, it was considered that a sufficiently deep channel could be made. The _couloirs_ were set to work, when suddenly “a lion arose in their path” in the shape of a great rock, about 80 feet in length, and lying 12 feet only below the surface, and right in the middle of the main channel. If anything could show the indomitable energy of M. Lesseps it was his courage in dealing with this difficulty, and at a time when a few months only could elapse before the advertised day of the opening. He attacked the sunken rock with gunpowder. A large raft, or floor, supported on barges, was moored over the sunken rock, and from this men, armed with long poles shod with steel, drilled numerous holes, into which charges of gunpowder were placed, and fired in the usual manner by the electric battery. This temporary obstruction occurred opposite to the landing place at Sérápeum.

Passing by Sérápeum, the traveller arrives at a vast expanse of water called the “Bitter Lakes,” because the dry sandy hollow formerly contained a marsh, or mere, of very brackish water. The possibility of keeping this great area filled with sea water had been denied by the opponents of the canal, who said the water would sink into the sand or be evaporated by the intense heat of the sun; but none of these prognostications have been verified, and it is now a great inland sea, far surpassing Lake Timsah, being 25 miles long and from six to seven miles wide. The only difficulty in filling this enormous natural basin arose from the rapidity and force with which the waters flowed in. This was done when the water at Suez was at low tide, and then subsequently the Red Sea was allowed to flow in. Though the expanse of water in the Bitter Lakes is great enough, the available channel is still narrow. But the steamers can proceed at full speed, as here there are no banks to be washed away.

Since the two seas have joined their waters, a strong current has set in from south to north, but there is no eddy or fall at the place where the waters meet. The tide runs up the canal with great force, and there is a difference of six or seven feet between high and low water: but the tide does not extend beyond the Bitter Lakes, where it is gradually diffused and lost. The colour of the current of water from Suez is said to be green, whilst that portion fed by the Mediterranean is blue. Since the Bitter Lakes have been filled the mean temperature of the districts on the banks has fallen 5° Centigrade. It is also stated that, although the canal swarms with sea fish they keep to their respective ends of the canal, as if the Mediterranean fish would not consort with those of the Red Sea, or, rather, make themselves at home in strange waters. There is also, perhaps, another cause, and that is the very bitter nature of the water at the northern end of the Bitter Lakes, which acts as a natural barrier, through which the fish may decline to pass.

The bed of the Bitter Lakes is the only portion of the canal’s course in which it was not necessary to make a cutting. Buoys are laid down to mark the best channel, but such is the width and depth of the water that vessels need not exactly keep within them. Quitting the Bitter Lakes we again enter the canal proper. In order to reach the vast docks which the Suez Canal Company has constructed on the western coast of the Red Sea, the canal is now quitted, and the vessel crosses the neck of the Red Sea. The Cairo and Alexandria Railway has been extended two miles, and is carried through the sea on an embankment, which lands the train close to the docks and quays of the canal, so that passengers by the overland route are able to embark from the train on board the steamer, and thus escape the troublesome transhipment of themselves and luggage.

_THE MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL._

The project of constructing a ship canal to connect Manchester with the sea appears to have been started just before the railway era, but it was then abandoned, as the opening of the Liverpool and Manchester Canal brought about an immediate reduction in the rates of carriage. Perhaps it was the success of the Suez Canal which caused the revival of this scheme, in 1880, combined with the depression of the cotton trade at that period, when the Liverpool dock dues and the comparatively high railway rates proved a heavier tax than usual on the great Lancashire industry. The first definite steps were taken two years afterwards, when two plans were submitted for the selection of a committee. One scheme proposed to construct the canal without any locks; but, as Manchester is 60 feet above the sea level, there would, it was felt, be certain inconveniences in loading or unloading ships in a deep depression. The other plan was submitted by Mr. Leader Williams, a well known canal engineer, who proposed to take the canal from Runcorn, a distance of 20 miles, and making use of locks. When Parliament was applied to for powers authorizing the prosecution of the enterprise, there was, of course, much opposition offered by the various interests involved, and the inquires before the Committees of each House of Parliament were unusually protracted, for they extended in all to 175 days, and the cost to the promoters is said to have amounted to £150,000. Then, when the Bill had passed, it was found that the capital (£8,000,000) could not be raised owing to the financial depression, and partly also to some want of confidence in the soundness of the undertaking on the part of the Lancashire capitalists. But the promoters submitted the whole scheme to a representative committee, who should consider any possible objections. This committee reported (after sitting almost daily for five weeks) upon every point, and were unanimous in pronouncing the undertaking to be perfectly practicable and commercially sound. After this there was no difficulty in raising the required capital, which was subscribed by corporate bodies as well as private persons. The contract was let for £5,750,000, and the work was commenced in November, 1887, the contractor undertaking to have the canal completed and ready for traffic by January 1st, 1892.

The Manchester Docks of this canal will cover an area of nearly 200 acres at the south-western suburb of that city, and from there the canal traverses the Valley of the Irwell, following, indeed, the general course of the river, but not its windings, so that the bed of the river is, in the distance of eight miles, or down to its junction with the Mersey, repeatedly crossed by the line of the canal. From the confluence of the rivers, the canal traverses the Valley of the Mersey, for this is the name retained by the combined streams. The course of the river, in its progress towards the sea, now makes wider bends, but the canal proceeds, by a slight and nearly uniform curve, to Latchford, near Warrington, passing to the south of which last named place it follows a straight line to Runcorn, which is at a distance of 23 miles from Manchester. Here it reaches what is now the estuary of the Mersey, but the embankments are continued along the southern shore to Eastham, where the terminal locks are placed. In this part of the canal, the engineer had difficulties to overcome of a different nature from those encountered in the upper part, where it was chiefly a matter of cutting across the ground intervening between the bends of the river, so as to form for its waters a new and direct channel everywhere of the requisite breadth and depth. But when Runcorn has been passed, and Weston Point rounded, there is the mouth of the River Weaver to be crossed, and this is marked by a great expanse of loose and shifting mud. Other affluents of the Mersey are dealt with by means of sluices, and in one instance the waters of a river are actually carried beneath the course of the canal by conduits of 12 feet in diameter. The total length of the canal from Manchester to the tidal locks at Eastham is 35 miles.