After all, who is the conqueror—he who kills, or he who saves, thousands?
To prove our points, it will not be necessary to recite the full history of the grandest engineering work of this century—a century replete with proud engineering works. Here it can only be given in the barest outline.
Every intelligent child on looking at the map would ask why the natural route to India was not by the Isthmus of Suez, and why a canal was not made. His schoolmaster answered, in days gone by, that there was a difference in the levels of the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. That question has been answered successfully, and the difference has not ruined the Canal. Others said that it was impossible to dig a canal through the desert. It has been done! Lord Palmerston, the most serious opponent in England that Lesseps had,[89] thought that France, our best ally to-day, would have too much influence in Egypt. Events, thanks to Lord Beaconsfield’s astute policy, by purchasing the Khedive’s interest, have given England the largest share among the shareholders of all nations.
It would not be interesting to follow all the troubles that Lesseps successfully combated. The idea had more than once occurred to him, when in 1852 he applied to Constantinople. The answer was that it in no way concerned the Porte. Lesseps returned to his farm at Berry, and not unlikely constructed miniature Suez Canals for irrigation, thought of camels while he improved the breed of cattle, and built houses, but not on the sand of the desert. Indeed, it was while on the roof of one of his houses, then in course of construction, that the news came to him of the then Pacha of Egypt’s death (Mehemet Ali). They had once been on familiar terms. Mehemet Ali was a terribly severe man, and seeing that his son Saïd Pacha, a son he loved, was growing fat, he had sent him to climb the masts of ships for two hours a day, to row, and walk round the walls of the city. Poor little fat boy! he used to steal round to Lesseps’ rooms, and surreptitiously obtain meals from the servants. Those surreptitious dinners did not greatly hurt the interests of the Canal, as we shall see.
Mehemet Ali had been a moderate tyrant—to speak advisedly. His son-in-law, Defderdar, known popularly as the “Scourge of God,” was his acting vicegerent. The brute once had his groom shod like a horse for having badly shod his charger. A woman of the country one day came before him, complaining of a soldier who had bought milk of her, and had refused to pay for it. “Art thou sure of it?” asked the tyrant. “Take care! they shall tear open thy stomach if no milk is found in that of the soldier.” They opened the stomach of the soldier. Milk was found in it. The poor woman was saved. But, although his successor was not everything that could be wished, he had a good heart, and was not “the terrible Turk.”
In 1854, Lesseps met Saïd Pacha in his tent on a plain between Alexandria and Lake Mareotis, a swamp in the desert. His Highness was in good humour, and understood Lesseps perfectly. A fine Arabian horse had been presented to him by Saïd Pacha a few [pg 110]days previously. After examining the plans and investigating the subject, the ruler of Egypt said, “I accept your plan. We will talk about the means of its execution during the rest of the journey. Consider the matter settled. You may rely on me.” He sent immediately for his generals, and made them sit down, repeating the previous conversation, and inviting them to give their opinion of the proposals of his friend. The impromptu counsellors were better able to pronounce on equestrian evolutions than on a vast enterprise. But Lesseps, a good horseman, had just before cleared a wall with his charger, and they, seeing how he stood with the Viceroy, gave their assent by raising their hands to their foreheads. The dinner-tray then appeared, and with one accord all plunged their spoons into the same bowl, which contained some first-class soup. Lesseps considered it, very naturally, as the most important negotiation he had ever made.
BIRD’S-EYE VIEW OF SUEZ CANAL.
Results speak for themselves. In 1854, there was not a fly in that hideous desert. Water, sheep, fowls, and provisions of all kinds had to be carried by the explorers. When at night they opened the coops of fowls, and let the sheep run loose, they did it with confidence. They were sure that next morning, in that desolate place, the animals dare not desert the party. “When,” says Lesseps, “we struck our camp of a morning, if at the moment of departure a hen had lurked behind, pecking at the foot of a tamarisk shrub, quickly she would jump up on the back of a camel, to regain her cage.” That desert is now peopled. There are three important towns. Port Saïd had not existed before: there is now what would be called a “city,” in America, on a much smaller basis of truth: it has 12,000 people. Suez, with 15,000 people, was not much more than a village previously. Ismaïlia, half-way on the route, has 5,000 or 6,000 of population. There are other towns or villages.
A canal actually effecting a junction between the two seas viâ the Nile was made in the period of the Egyptian dynasties. It doubtless fulfilled its purpose for the passage of galleys and smaller vessels; history hardly tells us when it was rendered useless. Napoleon the First knew the importance of the undertaking, and appointed a commission of engineers to report on it. M. Lepère presented him a report on its feasibility, and Napoleon observed on it, “It is a grand work; and though I cannot execute it now, the day may come when the Turkish Government will glory in accomplishing it.” Other schemes, including those of eminent Turkish engineers, had been proposed. It remained to be accomplished in this century. The advantages gained by its construction can hardly be enumerated here. Suffice it to say that a vessel going by the Cape of Good Hope from London to Bombay travels nearly 6,000 miles over the ocean; by the Suez Canal the distance is 3,100, barely more than half the distance.