DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.1035#0637
590 ON THE COMMUNICATION
for expedition, whether from Boolaq or from Coptos to
Rasheed, a steam-boat is required on the river; and when
once this is built, it will cost but little more whether it runs
from the latter or the former, and time is thereby gained,
the dangers and delays of the Gulf of Sooez are avoided,
and, though perhaps of minor importance, the advantages
for passengers are greatly increased. Indeed, the steam-
boat from India would generally be required to put into
Kossayr, and thus an additional delay would be caused,
which I have not taken into account. Another objection to
the river steam-boat may be the extra expense, and its
inutility when not employed for the purposes for which it is
intended. But this objection is not so material as may at first
sight appear :—1st. If there are more than one steam-boat
on the Red Sea and Mediterranean in communication with
England and India, the employment of the river-boats will
be advantageous in proportion to their number, and to the
goods they carry; 2nd. There is no necessity that the crew
of the river boat should remain with it in Egypt, as one or
two Europeans will be sufficient to take care of it during the
time it is not required, and the others may be put on board
it from the sea steamers when they arrive either at Rasheed
or the Red Sea; for, as it cannot pay to employ it in car-
rying goods, corn, or other commodities for the Pasha or
the Egyptians, it will not be necessary either to exhaust the
coal or to detain the crew in the country.
In either case, whether Sooez or Kossayr be adopted as
the port to which the steamer should come from India,
there is every reason to condemn the project of a railway
communication from the Red Sea to the Nile, as well as the
re-opening of the Sooez canal. But as these must appear
manifestly chimerical to every one who considers the sub-
ject, and is acquainted with the localities, it is not necessary
to detain the reader by any arguments against them; but I
for expedition, whether from Boolaq or from Coptos to
Rasheed, a steam-boat is required on the river; and when
once this is built, it will cost but little more whether it runs
from the latter or the former, and time is thereby gained,
the dangers and delays of the Gulf of Sooez are avoided,
and, though perhaps of minor importance, the advantages
for passengers are greatly increased. Indeed, the steam-
boat from India would generally be required to put into
Kossayr, and thus an additional delay would be caused,
which I have not taken into account. Another objection to
the river steam-boat may be the extra expense, and its
inutility when not employed for the purposes for which it is
intended. But this objection is not so material as may at first
sight appear :—1st. If there are more than one steam-boat
on the Red Sea and Mediterranean in communication with
England and India, the employment of the river-boats will
be advantageous in proportion to their number, and to the
goods they carry; 2nd. There is no necessity that the crew
of the river boat should remain with it in Egypt, as one or
two Europeans will be sufficient to take care of it during the
time it is not required, and the others may be put on board
it from the sea steamers when they arrive either at Rasheed
or the Red Sea; for, as it cannot pay to employ it in car-
rying goods, corn, or other commodities for the Pasha or
the Egyptians, it will not be necessary either to exhaust the
coal or to detain the crew in the country.
In either case, whether Sooez or Kossayr be adopted as
the port to which the steamer should come from India,
there is every reason to condemn the project of a railway
communication from the Red Sea to the Nile, as well as the
re-opening of the Sooez canal. But as these must appear
manifestly chimerical to every one who considers the sub-
ject, and is acquainted with the localities, it is not necessary
to detain the reader by any arguments against them; but I