FOOTNOTES:

[293] Various plans for reaching India by means of railway communication throughout have been proposed. So early as 1850, Sir R. Macdonald Stephenson brought this matter fully under the notice of the Government. In the Calcutta Review for March 1856 his views are given at length; and his article therein, “The World’s Highway,” was republished in the same year by Weale. In 1859, the same publisher brought out a pamphlet by Sir Macdonald, entitled “Railways in Turkey, &c.,” with beautifully executed plans (the most complete yet in existence) showing the course of these lines from Constantinople to Aleppo, Baghdad and Bussorah, thence along the shores of the Persian Gulf to Bunder Abbas, and thence to Kurachi, Hydrabad, in Scinde and Bombay. Sir R. Stephenson estimated the distance from London to Bombay viâ Paris, Vienna, and Constantinople at somewhere about 5200 miles. He bestowed many years’ labour on this important subject; and had hoped to make it a great international highway, constructed under the supervision of the different states interested. Though unable to overcome the difficulties such a combination would entail, the works he proposed, or others somewhat similar, are being rapidly carried into execution by different persons who have obtained concessions from the respective Governments; more than 2000 miles of the World’s Highway is already made, and when complete the journey from London to Bombay by rail would, at the rate of 30 miles an hour, be accomplished in less than seven and a half days. See also plan of route by Mr. R. H. Galloway, published by Wyld, 1875, in which the distances are given.

[294] Full details of this meeting will be found in the Bengal Hurkara, December 19th, 1823.

[295] The dimensions of the Enterprize were 122 feet length of keel and 27 feet breadth of beam; her paddle-wheels were 15 feet in diameter. She was 479 tons register, 120 horse-power. She was supplied with a copper boiler in one piece, weighing 32 tons and costing 7000l. Her total cost was no less than 43,000l.!

[296] The greatest run the Enterprize made by sail in twenty-four hours, was 211 miles, the least 39 miles; the greatest by steam assisted by sail, 225 miles, the least 80 miles; the greatest heat in the engine-room during the voyage, was 105 degrees, that of the air at the same time being 84 degrees and a half; the total distance was 13,700 miles, and the consumption 580 chaldron of coals, being 9 chaldrons per day for 64 days, the rest being under sail; “the speed of the engines, in calm weather, was 8 knots an hour, the log giving 9 from the wash of the paddles.” Evidence, Mr. T. L. Peacock, Select Committee on Steam Navigation to India, 1834.

[297] Despatches of Sir Miles Nightingall, 1819; Mount-Stuart Elphinstone, 1823-26; Lord William Bentinck, 1828 to 1835; “Annual Register;” Colonel Chesney’s Report, 1832; Proceedings of the Royal Asiatic Society; Captain F. Head’s “Eastern and Egyptian Scenery,” 1833; J. A. St. John, “Egypt and Muhammed Ali,” 1833; Report of the Committee of the House of Commons “On Steam Navigation to India,” 1834; “Egypt in 1837,” by T. Waghorn; Ibid. 1838; Waghorn and Co., “Overland Route to India,” 1844 and 1846; “On Steam Navigation to India,” by Captain Grindlay, 1837; Report of the Committee of House of Commons “On Steam Navigation to India,” 1837; Mr. W. D. Holmes’ plan in connection with the Bengal Steam Committee, 1839; “Modern Egyptians,” by Sir Gardner Wilkinson, 1843; “Facts connected with the Origin and Progress of Steam Communication between India and England,” by J. H. Wilson, Commander, Indian Navy, London, 1850; Letter from Mr. R. W. Crawford, M.P. for London, to the Times, November 22nd, 1869; and from Mr. R. H. Galloway to the Illustrated London News, 23rd October, 1872, as well as other communications on the same subject to various journals and periodicals.

[298] See “Facts connected with the Origin and Progress of Steam Communication between India and England,” by J. H. Wilson, Commander Indian Navy, London, 1850.

[299] Captain Wilson says (page 7), writing of this journey, “He (Mr. Mount-Stuart Elphinstone) started from Bombay on the 15th November, 1827, in the Honourable Company’s brig Palinurus, and was accompanied by Mr. C. Lushington, secretary to the Government of Bengal, Mrs. Lushington, Mr. Steele of the Bombay Civil Service, and Messrs. Wallace and Gordon of the Bombay Medical Service. Mrs. Lushington published an interesting account of the journey, thus creating a considerable, though limited, public interest in the route.”

[300] See his evidence before Committee of the House of Commons, 1834, on steam navigation to India; and his book, “Eastern and Egyptian Scenery, &c.,” with notes, maps, and plans, &c., intended to show the practicability of steam navigation from England to India.

[301] Mr. Waghorn, born at Chatham in the year 1800, was brought up in the Royal Navy, where he served four years. He was afterwards, for twelve years a pilot in Bengal in the service of the East India Company, somewhat later rejoining the Royal Navy, wherein he remained till he passed as Lieutenant. Mr. Waghorn had piloted the Enterprize soon after her arrival in India, and from that time devoted his especial attention to steam-vessels. In his evidence before the Select Committee of the House of Commons in 1834 (page 209), he says with regard to himself, “I was selected in 1827 by the Indian Government (Calcutta Steam Committee) for the purpose of establishing steam navigation between England and India.... My first object was the Cape of Good Hope.... I went to London, Liverpool, and to Manchester; I stated my plans in various parts of the kingdom, and all the success I received after three years’ toil, was the loan of two fifty horse-power engines from the East India Company.” In 1842 he recommended the European route now in use by way of the Adriatic, dying, at length at Pentonville, January 7th, 1850, utterly broken down, and leaving his widow without any means beyond a small pension allowed to her by Government and the East India Company.

[302] See “Annual Register,” October 1829.

[303] Mr. Waghorn, in his evidence before the Committee of 1834, says that, had he met the Enterprize at Suez as he expected, he would have conveyed his despatches from London to Bombay in fifty-three days.

[304] In the Bombay Courier of the 10th April, 1830, there will be found the following notice from Mr. Waghorn: “The undersigned feels it his duty to state, for the information of the public throughout the Presidencies of Bombay, Madras, and Bengal, that he is not in any way connected with any scheme for steam-packet navigation with India, except that which he had the pleasure to lay before the Madras and Calcutta Committees in the year 1828, and that any use of his name in reference to it in any prospectus, &c., is perfectly unauthorized by him.

“His motive in wishing this to be generally known is that it may not be supposed by those, on whom he depends for encouragement and support, that he has in any degree departed from his former engagements.” (Signed) “Thomas Waghorn.”

See also Bombay Gazette, 21st April, 1830, where there will be found the report of a public meeting held on the 17th of that month, where Mr. Waghorn advocated the Cape route in preference to that viâ Red Sea.

[305] Mr. Taylor was one of the earliest proposers and founders of the Red Sea route, and had, in 1823, been associated with Lieutenant Johnston, who subsequently commanded the Enterprize, and with the Calcutta Steam Committee, from whom he seceded because they relinquished the Red Sea route for that of the Cape of Good Hope. Indeed, he was the first to adventure capital on this route, and is said to have lost not less than 12,000l. in an endeavour to combine steam-tugs and sailing-vessels.

[306] Prospectus of an establishment of steam-vessels, dated 1st December, 1829.

[307] Letter from Mr. J. W. Taylor, to Sir John Malcolm, Governor of Bombay, 1st December, 1829.

[308] Letter from the Bombay Government (the Marine Department) to the Court of Directors, dated 18th April, 1830.

[309] Letter from the Court of Directors to the Governor in Council at Bombay, Public Department, 14th March, 1832. To this opinion of the Court I may add that Mr. Peacock, the “senior assistant examiner in the East India House,” in his evidence before the Committee of 1834 (pp. 3 and 4) when asked, if he thought any returns might be anticipated for postages and passengers to justify an expenditure of 100,000l. per annum in establishing and maintaining a quarterly steam service overland by way of Suez between England and India, would pay, replied: “I think nothing to pay the expense; something certainly, but not above one-fourth of the amount.” The gross earnings of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company alone between 1856 and 1874, inclusive of the amount received for the conveyance of mails, passengers, and cargo, amounted to 41,546,818l.

[310] The Hugh Lindsay sailed for Suez on her first experimental voyage on the 20th of March, 1830, the day before Mr. Waghorn arrived at Bombay in the Thetis; and she continued in that service under command of Captain Wilson, making one voyage annually, during the north-east monsoons till April 1836, when Captain Wilson was appointed Controller of the dock-yards at Bombay as an acknowledgment of his services, for it is unquestionable that he did much to “educate” the Governments of England and India on the importance of the overland route, as appears by the official correspondence of the period.

[311] See note ([310]), p. 352.

[312] For an account of the voyages of this ship in detail see Report of the Committee of the House of Commons, 1834.

[313] Cossier, which is about 100 miles from the Nile, was one of the ports of departure for the vessels of ancient times engaged in trade with the East.

[314] The reasons for preferring the Euphrates route, are given at great length in the Bombay Gazette, 7th August, 1833.

[315] To question 64, p. 6 (Committee, 1834) “Would there be any political or other advantages in our opening the line of the Euphrates?” Mr. Peacock replies: “I think it would be highly serviceable, if possible, to prevent Russia pre-occupying it and excluding us; it would be exceedingly easy for Russia to follow the steps of Trajan and Julian, construct fleets in Armenia, and float them to Bussorah; they have the possession, at least the command, of the Armenian part of the Euphrates now.”

“Would there not (question 65) be more danger to be apprehended from the Russians from their making use of the Oxus and Caspian, than by making use of Bussorah, where they would be met by the nation which happens to have the pre-eminence at sea?”—“But the pre-eminence at sea,” Mr. Peacock replies, “is not a talisman; it is to be kept up by constant watchfulness, and the exertion of adequate force. I know there is danger by the Oxus, but there is also danger by the Euphrates, and I would stop both doors, if I could.” In reply to further questions (66) he says: “The first thing the Russians do, when they get possession of, or connection with, any country, is to exclude all other countries from navigating its waters;” and in reply (question 67) to “How the establishment of steam along the Euphrates would serve in any respect to counteract Russia?” he says, “It would give us a vested interest and a right to interfere;” adding “they (the Russians) have been long supposed to have designs on Baghdad; they have had emissaries there a good while; the Pashalic of Baghdad is a very valuable possession, and would pay for protecting it, either to them or to us.”

Mr. William J. Bankes (and others) entertained similar opinions. In reply to (question 2626) “What is your opinion of the political advantages between the one and the other?” he says, “It is very much in favour of the Euphrates.” “Will you state in what respect?” (question 2627) “I think by anticipating the Russian, you will exclude him; I think he will afterwards, perhaps, do that by force which you could now, perhaps, do by treaty.”

[316] For Colonel Chesney’s elaborate report on the advantages of the Euphrates route, I must refer my readers to the Appendix of the Report of the Committee of 1834.

[317] In furtherance of these instructions Colonel Chesney made a most elaborate survey, and wrote a voluminous book with maps, for which he, some time afterwards, was compensated by a grant of 4000l.

[318] Return of the number, cost, ages, power, tonnage, and speed of steam vessels forming the Indian Navy, distinguishing the vessels employed on the Bombay mail line, so far as the same can be made out. (They were all built of wood, and propelled by paddle-wheels):

Names of Vessels.Cost.Ages.Horse Power.Tonnage.Speed———
£s.d.Knots per Hour.
Acbar76,37398built 18413501,1438½Employed on the Bombay Mail Line.
Ajdaha80,515165built 18475001,4408Employed on the Bombay Mail Line.
Atalanta36,6511710built 18352106167¼Employed on the Bombay Mail Line.
Auckland43,05232built 1840220946..General Service.
Berenice40,123116built 1835230664..General Service.
Feerooz67,21900built 18465001,4408⅔Employed on the Bombay Line.
Medusa (iron)9,972181built 184070432..General Service.
Moozuffer81,57696built 18465001,440..General Service.
Queen44,4091711built 1839220760..General Service.
Semiramis43,447128built 18403001,000..General Service.
Sesostris52,38882built 1839220876..General Service.
Victoria39,820156built 18392307146⅝Employed on the Bombay Mail Line.

[319] Hill was an engineer, and Raven a wheelwright in the service originally of Galloway Bey, and, subsequently, in that of the Pasha of Egypt, Muhammed Ali, who, when they were in difficulties to carry on their work, rendered them pecuniary assistance.

[320] Mr. Waghorn, in his evidence before the House of Commons Committee of 1837, says (question 53), “I can send Mr. Hill and other men of the service at an hour’s notice from Cairo,” &c., by which it appears they were then, at least, under his orders.

[321] In a note I received from Sir Daniel Lange (12th March, 1875), he remarks: “M. de Lesseps often told me how he met Waghorn struggling with man and beast in the desert to carry his mails across, and that it served as an example to him in after-life with the Suez Canal.”

[322] See evidence before Committee of 1834 by Mr. Peacock, pp. 2 and 3.

[323] Messrs. Galloway Brothers (see evidence before Committee of 1837) had established at Boolak (a suburb of Cairo) an extensive iron manufactory, and were in a position to carry out the Pasha’s railway, for which they had imported plant by his orders to the value of 200,000l. Whether any portion of this was used by Mr. Stephenson, who subsequently constructed the railway, does not appear.

[324] Pamphlet by Mr. R. H. Galloway (pp. 15 and 17), published by Willis, Sotheran, and Co., London, 1871.

[325] Evidence of Major Head, Mr. T. T. Peacock, and others, before the Select Committee of 1834.

[326] The truth about these ancient canals seems to be as follows:

1. According to Herodotus, Pharaoh Necho commenced one from the Nile to the Red Sea (ii. 158) which he says was completed by Darius the son of Hystaspes (iv. 39). This canal, we may fairly presume, was open when Herodotus was in Egypt, as he states it was four days’ journey in length, and wide enough for two small triremes to row abreast; it is doubtless the one attributed by Aristotle, Strabo, and Pliny to Sesostris—an identification confirmed by the fact that, in recent times, tablets bearing the name of Rameses (Sesostris) have been found on the site of its present dried up bed. As far as can be now ascertained, it would seem that this canal left the Nile at or near the city of Bubastis (now Tel Basta). The discovery of a Cuneiform inscription of Darius near Suez, gives colour also to the traditional story which refers to him. Diodorus, notices the proverbial opinion of the height of the waters of the Red Sea (i. 33) and adds, that this canal was completed by Ptolemy when he built Arsinoe.

2. There is no doubt that this canal continued in some use under the Roman Emperors, as Trajan formed a new connection for it by a cutting at Babylon (Old Cairo) (Ptol. Geogr. iv. s. 54), and, further, Sir Gardner Wilkinson has shown that the whole line from the Nile to the Gulf was restored by the Khalif Omar, and was in use for a century and a half after his time. The work of Necho appears also to have included a canal from the head of the gulf to the Pelusiac mouth of the Nile, as of this considerable remains still exist.

3. It may be further remarked, that the bed of the Bitter Lakes was, even in the time of Strabo (xvii. p. 804), filled with Nile water, as the same fish were noticed in both. At the same time, we may be sure that nothing like a ship (in our sense of the word) ever passed through the isthmus until M. de Lesseps completed his great work.

[327] Ferdinand de Lesseps in his youth was attached to the Consulate at Lisbon, and then, in 1828, to the Consulate-General at Tunis. In the following year he was appointed Vice-Consul at Alexandria, and in 1832 he was advanced to be Consul at Cairo, where he remained for seven years. In 1842, he received the appointment of Consul-General at Barcelona; in 1848 he went to Madrid as French Minister Plenipotentiary; and later on, to an important mission in Rome, after which he retired to Berri (France) to mature his plans for the Suez Canal, which had been the almost constant subject of his thoughts since his residence in Cairo.

[328] See a very interesting paper read by Mr. (now Sir Daniel) Lange before the Society of Arts, London, April 27th, 1870.

[329] It is fair to recollect that my old friend and colleague on the Harbour of Refuge Commission, Captain Vetch, R.N., more than thirty years ago (and therefore before M. de Lesseps) proposed a ship canal from Suez to Tineh, on the Mediterranean, a distance of about 75 miles, to be carried out by British capital. At that time the idea of the height of the water at Suez above that of the Mediterranean prevailed. Captain Vetch therefore calculated that, with a canal 180 feet wide at the top, 96 feet at the bottom, and 21 feet in the depth, the steady descent of the water along this gradient would produce scourage sufficient to clear away the sand and mud accumulated at the Mediterranean end. No doubt Captain Vetch’s observations and details tended to satisfy M. de Lesseps of the feasibility of some such canal.

[330] Some preparatory steps had also been taken which, by getting rid of unscientific hypotheses, facilitated in some degree M. de Lesseps’ views. Thus, at the suggestion of the Viceroy, the English, French, and Austrian Governments had sent in 1847 a joint commission of scientific men to take the various levels on the isthmus of Suez, especially as regarded the relative heights of the water in the two seas. Mr. Robert Stephenson represented England; M. Talabot, France; M. Negretti, Austria; and Linant Bey, the Pasha. Stephenson watched the rise and fall of the tide at Suez and Negretti at Tineh, the result being the demonstration that the two seas have exactly the same level within a few inches. A full account of the plan developed by M. Talabot from the observations of this commission will be found in the “Révue des Deux Mondes,” and there seems little doubt that, but for the determined opposition of Mr. Robert Stephenson, whose imagination (to the day of his death) was perpetually haunted with ideas of the sand, silt, and mud with which he maintained any canal must be filled up, the great work, which was the glory of M. de Lesseps, would have been carried out by English enterprise some years earlier than 1869.

[331] Sir Daniel Lange was knighted after the opening of the Suez Canal. He is a native of London, and the holder of various foreign honours. He unsuccessfully contested Midhurst in 1868.

[332] Not however by all her statesmen, for Mr. Gladstone, Lord Russell, Sidney Herbert, Mr. Cobden, Mr. Bright, Mr. Milner Gibson, and others strenuously objected to any hostile interference on the part of Government with the project.

[333] My readers will find an excellent account of the early works of the Suez Canal, in a little book published by Mr. A. K. Lynch, entitled “A Visit to the Suez Canal,” Lond. 8vo. 1866, with several excellent lithograph drawings of Port Said, Ismailia, and other places on it. A French mètre is 39 English inches or 1-19th more than an English yard.

[334] Herodotus (132) speaks of the vast amount of forced labour employed in the construction of the great Pyramids; hence various writers, recalling the hardships these “slaves” had to endure, protested against the employment of “similar bodies of men” in the construction of the Suez Canal, commenting on the scandalous treatment to which they were subjected. But I have enquired minutely into this question, and I cannot find any just grounds for these complaints. On the contrary, the men employed appear to have been free labourers, fairly remunerated according to the work they performed, and, on the whole, kindly treated.

[335] Besides the dredging-machines and men employed, there were at work upon the canal during the last six months of 1864, 42,929 camels, 9350 horses, 2489 mules, and 2835 donkeys.

[336] Paper read to Society of Arts, p. 7.