The Suez Canal.
The Suez Canal has been the cause of Egypt's late international importance. It exemplifies several striking paradoxes. Opposed bitterly by England at first, it is now largely under her control; made possible by the heavy investments of the viceroy of Egypt, this country has no shipping today to profit by the canal nor does it receive any benefit whatever because of it. On the contrary, it has been the real cause of Egypt's loss of independence. Before the building of the canal began Egypt had no debt; while the viceroy acknowledged the suzerainty of the Sultan of Turkey, in a large measure he was free to conduct all internal affairs, and hoped in time to gain full sovereignty. The enormous amounts supplied by Viceroy Saïd for the canal with the idle hope of dazzling the eyes of Europe were the first of a long series of extravagances which so burdened his country with debt that progress finally ceased and activities became paralyzed. To protect their subjects, who had loaned money at a rate of interest prohibited in their own lands, European countries stepped in and assumed control of Egyptian finances. Today it is impossible to foresee how Egypt can regain the independence she has lost.
In ancient times canals provided Egyptians access to the Red Sea. When the expedition was made to Punt during the early years of the New Empire, it is probable that ships built at Thebes were dispatched directly to the sea by means of some constructed water way. Again, we know that a canal was built two or three hundred years before the Christian Era and that Cleopatra tried to save the remnant of her fleet after the battle of Actium by means of it; but owing to its impaired condition and the low water at that season, her attempt failed.
When Egypt became a Roman province a water way connecting the Red and Mediterranean seas was projected but not constructed. Napoleon was quick to see its opportunities during his Egyptian campaign and set his engineers to work upon the plan, which was abandoned upon his withdrawal from Africa. The idea prevailed that the two seas were of different levels. In 1847 England, France and Austria sent out a commission to ascertain the facts, and their surveys proved that the levels were the same. However, nothing was done and the matter was forgotten save by a French engineer by the name of De Lesseps, who continued to brood over the undertaking. In 1856, having unusual opportunities to cultivate the acquaintance of Viceroy Saïd, De Lesseps obtained from him a concession for the construction of a canal to join the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, it being distinctly stated that this should cost Egypt nothing, that fifteen per cent of the profits should fall to her share, and that in ninety-nine years, upon payment of the actual improvements made by the canal company along the banks, the canal should revert to Egypt. To prevent the importation of vast hordes of laborers, Saïd agreed to supply peasant labor at a nominal price, De Lesseps and his associates to provide them with adequate food and care; likewise to bring fresh water to the scene of action for their use. The concession was made conditional to the approval of the Sultan of Turkey, suzerain of Egypt, whose consent was to be obtained by De Lesseps without mediation of the viceroy.
When it came to procuring capital sufficient to promote the enterprise, De Lesseps found it far more difficult than he had imagined. England had completed a railroad from Alexandria to Suez in 1858 and vigorously opposed the canal project; private funds might have been forthcoming from Englishmen but for the fact that the government disapproved so heartily; French capital was needed largely at home. The canal company issued 400,000 shares, which for some time went begging. De Lesseps finally persuaded Saïd to take 177,662 shares, which marked the beginning of Egypt's enslavement and at the same time the beginning of De Lesseps' success. Stock was readily sold now, and in 1859 the digging began.
In 1863 Saïd died and Ismail became viceroy of Egypt. He fell into the mistake of his predecessor and became a willing victim for the canal company. The work upon the canal was but one-fourth completed; twenty-five thousand peasants had been impressed every three months, but their insufficient food and cruel treatment had resulted in the death of thousands. Protests were made by civilized countries everywhere—particularly did the English government take a stand for humane conditions, "her philanthropy and political interests being roused to simultaneous action."
It is amusing to review articles written during the years when the canal was first discussed as a possibility, then as an actual undertaking. The following lines have been taken from a magazine published in 1860:
"We have once more to advert to the monster folly of the nineteenth century. It is now understood that our government perceives the wisdom of leaving a project so insane to the fate and ridicule which inevitably await it. It was their opposition alone that gave it any importance, and by exciting the national prejudices of France, enabled the projectors to raise funds which they never could have got without it....
"The project is to cut a ship canal three hundred feet wide and thirty feet deep over ninety miles of flat sand. As the level of the Mediterranean and the Red Sea are the same, the canal will be near thirty feet below the level of both, and hence it will be a stagnant and in all likelihood a pestilential ditch....
"The Suez Canal will be begun but never completed nor half completed. Its wreck, as useless as the Pyramids, but far less interesting, will like to be exhibited to posterity probably under the name of the 'French Folly.'"[A]
[A] Living Age, December, 1860.
England's appeal to the Sublime Porte to have the work upon the canal stopped brought to light the fact that the Sultan's sanction to the undertaking had never been procured. The work done so far had followed very primitive methods, peasants digging the sand up by handsful, putting it in palm-leaf baskets and carrying these up the steep bank to empty. France made great effort to obtain the Sultan's approval, for the situation was critical. His reply was that he confirmed the concession granted by Viceroy Saïd, but that the work henceforth should not be done by impressed peasants. The company's treasury was again empty; it chose to hold the viceroy responsible for the predicament caused by the withdrawal of the peasants and brought him a bill for damages. The claims made could not have been substantiated in any court, for there was no contract, and the concession distinctly stated that the canal was to cost Egypt nothing. However, the viceroy was peculiarly situated; he was dreaming of a day when he might shake off the suzerainty of Turkey and be recognized by the powers as a monarch of independent might. Moreover, he valued the friendship of France—which was to cost him dear. He had been educated in Paris and hoped to make Cairo the Paris of Egypt. Refusing to pay the damages asked, De Lesseps prevailed upon him to submit the matter for arbitration and—strange as it may seem—the emperor of France was agreed upon, his judgment to be final. Napoleon III ruled that the clause wherein the viceroy had agreed to provide peasant labor amounted to a contract; that by the decree of the Sultan this labor was now unavailable; hence the company had suffered severe loss. The fact that the water was already filtering in from the sea, necessitating the use of dredges, was not brought to light. Not only sustaining the company's claim, he added other injuries which they had overlooked. The result was that the viceroy paid a large amount, which added to Egypt's rapidly increasing debt, and at the same time enabled the canal company to continue operations.
In 1869 the canal was finished, and its completion was celebrated by sumptuous festivities. The Empress of France, Emperor of Austria, Crown Prince of Prussia, Prince of Wales, and many other important members of royalty were present. Forty-eight ships were required to convey the guests thither; the celebration lasted one month—the entire cost defrayed by the viceroy, or the Egyptian government. It amounted to about $21,000,000. It was for this occasion that Verdi wrote his opera Aïda, the great Egyptologist Mariette Bey studying ancient costumes and settings to give added interest and reality, while the Egyptian Museum supplied jewels for the gifted musicians brought from various parts of Europe to present the opera.
A few years later it was found that the debt of Egypt amounted to over $450,000,000. Securities for this vast amount were held by English, French and German subjects. Even the stipulated fifteen per cent of the canal profits had been used as security; the Nile valley suffered from insufficient water supply, and the inflated price of cotton, obtaining during the Civil War in the United States, fell. In the face of impending ruin, something had to be done. At the clamorous demands of Europe, the Sultan deposed Ismail, whose reckless policy, together with that of Saïd, had brought this overwhelming trouble upon his country. The British government bought the stock held by the viceroy—177,662 shares—for $20,000,000, thus obtaining a controlling voice in the company. France and England established what was known as the "dual control" in Egypt, which continued until the revolt of 1882, at which time France refused to go to the extreme of bombarding Alexandria and withdrew—thus ending her control in Egyptian affairs. Since 1882 English "occupation" has continued and bids fair to continue for an indefinite time. It is even now evident that if the canal reverts to the Egyptian government upon the expiration of ninety-nine years, this may be a very different government from that which gave the original concession.
From the standpoint of commercial history, few events have been more signal than the completion of the Suez Canal. Heretofore vessels have saved little except time by making use of it, for the tolls exacted have been equal to the expense of about three thousand miles ocean travel. One dollar and ninety cents per vessel tonnage and two dollars per passenger, crews excepted, have been required, thus making the cost of large vessels passing through amount sometimes to $10,000; $400 has been charged for a small yacht. However, it is now contemplated to make the tolls for both Panama and Suez canals uniform—one dollar and twenty cents per vessel tonnage and no charge for passengers being the proposed change. The distance has been greatly reduced by means of the canal; from England to Bombay lessened from 10,860 to 4,620 miles; from New York to Bombay from 11,520 to 7,920 miles.
The Suez Canal is one hundred miles in length, four hundred twenty feet wide surface measure, and one hundred eight feet on the bottom; it was originally twenty-seven feet nine inches deep but has been since dredged to a depth of thirty-one feet, lakes making it deeper in some places. It takes about fifteen hours and forty minutes to pass through, electricity making night passage possible.
The majority of ships passing through fly under the English flag; next in number are those sailing under the French flag; fewer still belonging to Germany. Except for passenger vessels and men of war, few United States crafts have been seen in these waters. However, in view of the opening of Panama, the shipping of this country may be expected to rapidly increase.
A "SHIP OF THE DESERT."
Here one sees ladies of modern Cairo out taking the air—"smelling the air," as they call it. Since one of them has removed her veil, it is safe to conclude that they do not belong to the upper class. Brides are usually transported in such a conveyance as this upon their wedding day, and the tinkling bells and smart trappings of the camel add to the pleasure of the occasion.
