CHAPTER VII.

THE WATERWAYS OF FRANCE.

Within recent years, the advocates of water transport in Great Britain

and other countries, have been accustomed to point to France as a

notable example of the advantages of improving and extending the

internal navigations of a country. It is true that no nation has done

more with this end in view. From first to last, France has expended a

larger sum on canal navigation than any other nation. Her system of

water transport is also in some respects more complete than that of any

other country, having been designed and carried out upon a systematic

plan, which permits of the ways of water communication being connected

with each other, and with the chief centres of population and industry.

The waterways of France, are, moreover, mainly owned by, or under the

control of the State, which has instituted elaborate inquiries from

time to time into the subject of their development and utilisation.

It cannot, nevertheless, be claimed for the canals of France, as a

rule, that they present any unusual economic or engineering features,

although they provide for a low cost of transport, of which we shall

have more to say when we come to deal especially with that branch of

our subject.

A glance at a canal and river map of France, is sufficient to show that

in the more important parts of the country, there is a very excellent

system of communication by water. Between Dunkerque, Gravelines, and

Paris, there is a large traffic carried to the latter city, through an

elaborate system of main and lateral canals. The river Seine connects

Paris with the ports of Havre and Rouen. From the Belgian frontier,

quite a network of canals connect with Paris; and on the German

frontier, near Nancy, the Canal de la Marne au de Rhin gives access to

the capital, both by the Marne river to the Seine, and by the Oise,

through the Aisne canal.

On the Mediterranean seaboard, the Canal du Midi connects with the

Canal des Etangs and the Canal de Beaucaire, and thence by the Rhone

and Saône, the Canal du Centre, the Canal de Briare, the Canal de Loing,

and the Seine to Paris, taking Lyons, Chalons, Dijon, Nivers, and other

important towns _en route_. In the south of France, the only important

canal is that of the Midi, which connects Bordeaux with Cette; and

on the west, the ports of Brest and St. Nazaire are connected with

the main line of communication already described—the former by the

Canal de Nantes à Brest, and the latter by the Loire river, the Canal

Noyers du Berry, and the Canal d’Orleans. It is, however, on the north

that the canal system has its greatest development, and especially

on the Belgian frontier. The system has been contrived to meet the

requirements of all the populous places on the line of route, so that

it is very far from having been arranged to save time and distance.

This, however, is no disadvantage in cases where density of traffic

was the point to be kept in view. Some of the canals have at one end

no outlet or through communication. The Canal du Berry, for example,

terminates abruptly at Montluçon, the Canal de Roanne à Dijon at

Roanne, and the Canal de l’Ourcq at Port-aux-Perches, but this is very

exceptional. The system is generally designed to enable one waterway to

give immediate access to another, so that through routes are the most

characteristic and valuable feature which it presents.

The very elaborate statistics which the French people make it their

business to collect relative to all their mundane affairs enable us

to obtain information as to the character of the traffic on French

waterways, and the conditions of its movement, that are not accessible

for most other countries. In order that some light may be thrown upon

the problem of “how they manage these things in France,” we have been

at some pains to get together the most important _data_ bearing on the

subject.

_Imprimis_, then, it appears that the total tonnage carried on the

canals of France in 1887—there are no returns yet issued for a later

year—was 21,050,180 tons. As this traffic was carried for a total

distance of 1762 millions of miles, it follows that the average

distance over which each ton was carried was 84 miles.

It is interesting to compare these returns with the corresponding

returns for the French railways, which carried 80,360,000 tons for a

total distance of 6801 millions of miles, giving an average transport

or lead of 84½ miles per ton.

There are no detailed returns at command of the amount of expenditure

at which the traffic on the waterways of France has been carried on. In

the nature of the case, indeed, there could hardly be such information,

seeing that the rivers, and to a large extent the canals as well, are

free of tolls, and the expenses of haulage will vary in every case,

according to the means employed, and other determining circumstances.

On the French railway system, however, the average rate charged for

the transport of goods per ton per mile amounted in 1887 to less than

0·9_d._, taking the eight great companies as a whole.[60]

Roughly, therefore, the average distance over which each ton was

transported on the waterways and railways of France was almost exactly

the same, but the railways carried almost four times as much traffic

as the waterways. This difference applied almost as much to heavy as

to light traffic. The total quantity of coal and coke carried on the

waterways was 5,964,000 tons, while on the railways it amounted to

22,395,000 tons, being again nearly four times as much.

The total length of the canals of France in 1887 was 4759 kilometres,

or 2998 miles. The average number of tons carried for each mile of

canal constructed was, therefore, 4005. The railways of France had,

at the same time, a length of 28,922 kilometres, or 18,095 miles, and

the average number of tons carried per mile was about 4400. The French

waterways, therefore, had a somewhat less density of traffic than the

railways.

Many of the canals of France, however, have almost ceased to be used,

and their traffic has become so small that it is hardly worth reckoning.

In the case of Paris, the second largest city in Europe, the total

quantity of traffic brought within the municipal bounds for the use of

the inhabitants amounted, in 1886, to 9,412,589 tons, of which 60 per

cent. was received by railway and 40 per cent. by waterways. Of the

traffic sent out from Paris, amounting to 2,989,000 tons, 80 per cent.

was despatched by rail, and 20 per cent. by water.[61] In reference to

the traffic entering Paris, it would seem as if the waterways competed

with some measure of success with the railways, but as regards the

traffic sent out from Paris, the railway is by no means so successful.

The waterways that give access to Paris are mainly the High Seine, the

Low Seine, and the Canal de l’Ourcq. The Seine carried 1,979,000 tons

to Paris in 1886, as compared with 1,791,000 tons carried on the canals

as a whole.

These are the broad general facts of the situation in which Paris is

placed as regards her supplies of food, fuel, and other requirements.

The details of the movement of this traffic are equally interesting,

but we have no space to devote to them here. We may, however, remark

that from every part of the empire, from Belgium and the Ardennes, from

the north and the east, from Marseilles on the one hand and from Rouen

and Havre on the other, the traffic on which Paris is dependent from

day to day is carried as well by waterways as by railways. From the

coal basins of the Nord and of the Pas-de-Calais the waterways carry

almost as much fuel to Paris as the railways; from the basins of the

Loire and of the Centre they carry much more. Belgium, again, sends

a large proportion of the total quantity of coal that she supplies

to Paris by water, but German and English coal is received mainly by

rail.[62]

It would be interesting to compare the quantities of merchandise and

food supplies of all kinds received by water and by rail in different

large centres of population, but the materials do not exist for a

very exact comparison over a wide area. In no English city can such

materials be obtained, inasmuch as no record is available of the

different quantities that constitute the transit trade; but in several

German cities there are more accurate materials at command, and the

following figures show how the import traffic of Paris compares with

that of some German towns for the year 1887:—

──────────────────────┬────────────┬───────────

Tonnage brought into │ By Rail. │ By Water.

──────────────────────┼────────────┼───────────

│ tons. │ tons.

Paris │ 5,647,000 │ 3,765,000

Berlin │ 3,504,000 │ 3,348,002

Hamburg │ 1,191,000 │ 3,221,000

Cologne │ 1,132,000 │ 314,000

Magdeburg │ 1,650,000 │ 1,118,000

├────────────┼───────────

Total │ 13,124,000 │ 11,766,000

──────────────────────┴────────────┴───────────

During the year 1886 the traffic of the port of Paris amounted to a

total of 5,455,000 tons, which was transported in 35,291 boats. The

boats thus carried an average of about 155 tons.[63] This, however, was

composed of a considerable range of variations, the boats from the

Sambre, on the canal of that name, carrying an average of 216 tons,

while those on the canals of the Aisne and the Ardennes only carried

about 55 tons. On the Seine, from Oise to Paris, the average size of

the boats was 166 tons.

More than a fourth of the water-traffic entering Paris belongs to the

Ourcq Canal, which is connected with the Marne and with the Seine, both

above and below Paris, by means of the St. Martin and the St. Denis

Canals. These and the Ourcq Canals belong to the Municipality of Paris,

which has recently increased the width of the swing bridge across the

canal from 25½ to 50 feet, and has provided an uniform depth of 10½ feet

According to an interesting statement issued by the French Minister of

Public Works in 1880,[64] the length of the canals then constructed in

France was 2882 miles, of which 2248 miles were described as principal

lines, and cost about 10,300_l._ per mile, while 634 miles were

secondary lines, and cost 7200_l._ per mile. The total amount expended

on canals of both categories was about thirty-three millions sterling.

There were besides, 4598 miles of rivers which had been adapted, by

canalisation or otherwise, for purposes of navigation, at a total

cost of about 11½ millions sterling. About 1398 miles of river routes

were classed as principal lines, and upon these an expenditure of

7,918,000_l._ had been undertaken, or about 5700_l._ per mile. About

3200 miles more were classed as secondary lines, and had been improved

for navigation at a total cost of 3,561,000_l._, or 1113_l._ per mile.

On both canals and rivers the total amount expended had been over 44

millions sterling. Besides this, however, 190 miles of additional

waterways had, up to 1880, been constructed and improved, at an

additional cost of 3,400,000_l._, and were described as new waterways;

and it may be added that, up to the same date, about 19¾ millions

sterling had been expended on the ports of France, especially those

of Havre (3,300,000_l._), Marseilles (2,800,000_l._), St. Nazaire

(1,100,000_l._), and Bordeaux (960,000_l._).

These figures appear large, but while it may very well be that the

amount expended upon canals _pur et simple_ has been greater in France

than in our own and other countries, the expenditure upon the rivers of

France and upon the improvement of ports and harbours is very greatly

below that incurred in our own country. At Liverpool alone the sums

expended in this direction from first to last will probably exceed the

total amount expended upon the harbours of France up to the present

time. France is, however, so fully aware of the importance of providing

good shipping facilities, that she has quite recently undertaken a

large expenditure in improving the harbours of Havre and Calais,

canalising the Seine, and other similar works.

At the end of 1886, there were thirty-one chief canals in operation in

France having a total length of 3267 kilometres, and 1446 kilometres of

smaller canals, making a total of 4713 kilometres. The canals varied

in their volume of annual traffic from over 3½ millions of tons each

on the Deûle (Haute) canal, 63 kilometres in length, and on the St.

Quentin canal, 93 kilometres in length, to 243,700 tons on the _Latéral

à la Garonne_, 204 kilometres in length. The total traffic carried

on the canals from year to year has been remarkably constant.[65] The

canals have, moreover, carried a considerably larger quantity of

traffic than the rivers of France, notwithstanding that the latter have

a total length of 7825 kilometres, or 66 per cent. more, and that one

or two of them, especially the Aisne and the Oise have been specially

canalised.[66]

The waterways of France are classified by basins, and according to the

statistics published for 1886, the number of waterways in each basin

with the number of vessels of all kinds making use of them, and the

number of tons transported were as under:—

FRENCH RIVERS AND STREAMS ONLY (CANALS NOT INCLUDED).

───────────────┬────────┬──────────────┬───────────┬───────────

│ │ │ Number of │

│ Number │ Total Length │ Vessels │ Tons of

Basin of the │ of │ in │ employed │ Traffic

│ Lines. │ Kilometres. │ in 1886. │ carried.

───────────────┼────────┼──────────────┼───────────┼───────────

Aa │ 1 │ 29 │ 12,778 │ 1,308,564

Adour │ 9 │ 257 │ 19,903 │ 423,666

Charcute │ 8 │ 301 │ 20,169 │ 239,069

Escaut │ 8 │ 219 │ 42,242 │ 8,184,233

Garonne │ 25 │ 1752 │ 30,952 │ 1,096,482

Loire │ 22 │ 1660 │ 17,669 │ 1,084,542

Moselle │ 6 │ 231 │ 1,601 │ 200,980

Rance │ 1 │ 16 │ 1,832 │ 66,498

Rhone │ 22 │ 1731 │ 25,799 │ 2,358,675

Sambre │ 1 │ 54 │ 2,589 │ 580,761

Seine │ 18 │ 1191 │ 102,117 │18,843,313

Vilaine │ 4 │ 151 │ 4,450 │ 216,601

Vire and Taute │ 3 │ 113 │ 6,494 │ 111,207

───────────────┴────────┴──────────────┴───────────┴───────────

We may now appropriately follow up the more general information already

afforded by some details as to the history and topography of the chief

canals and river works in France.

SOME FRENCH CANALS.

_Briare_, &c.—The canal of Briare was begun in the time of Henry

IV. and the Duke of Sully, and was completed under Louis XIII. and

Cardinal Richelieu. Its length is eleven French leagues, and it forms

a communication between the Loire and the Loing, which is one of the

tributaries of the Seine. Under Louis XIV. another canal was drawn from

the Loire, near Orleans, which flowed to meet the first canal of

Briare, near Montargis; and as in summer there was an insufficiency

of water in the Loing to supply a considerable navigation, under the

minority of Louis XV. they determined to run another canal along the

banks of the river to the vicinity of the Seine, which is, properly

speaking, the continuation of the old canal of Briare. In this canal

there are, in all, forty-two sluices; and in that of Orleans, twenty.

In the reign of Louis XV., and under the inspection of the celebrated

Belidor, the canal of Picardie was carried out, forming a junction

between the Somme and the Oise, which afterwards enters the Seine about

five leagues from Paris.

_Languedoc._—The famous canal of Languedoc, better known as the Canal

du Midi, which forms a communication from the Mediterranean Sea to

the Garonne and the Ocean is one of the best known in France. By this

canal, for many years, boats have passed in a few days from the one sea

to the other, traversing valleys and hills, and ascending to the height

of 600 feet above the level of the two seas. The harbours of Bordeaux

and Marseilles formerly avoided, by this means, a circuitous route

of communication of several hundred miles. This great undertaking,

projected under three other kings, was at last perfected in the reign

of Louis XIV., after a labour of fourteen years, at an expense of

eleven millions of livres, without reckoning the additional expense of

two millions more, incurred in re-establishing the harbour of Cette.

Andressi first suggested the plan, and Riquet directed almost the

whole of its execution. He began the work in 1666. The canal begins

at a lake nearly four miles in circumference, which, collecting the

waters of Mont Noir, conveys them at Naurose into a reservoir, of very

considerable extent, whence the waters are distributed to the right

until they meet the Garonne near Toulouse, and to the left as far as

the Lake of Tau, which is near the port of Cette. The breadth of the

canal is 30 feet, its length is rather over 125 miles, which equals

50½ French leagues. Nearly a sixth part of the canal is carried over

mountains deeply excavated; and, at a spot called the Mal Pas, it

crosses a rock cut into the form of an arch, eighty toises in length,

four toises in width, and four and a half in height. It has one hundred

sluices, and a great number of aqueducts and bridges.

[Illustration: VALLEY OF THE GARONNE VALLEY OF L’AUDE]

[Illustration: PROFILE OF THE PROPOSED CANAL BETWEEN TOULOUSE AND

CARCASSONNE]

Admiral Lord Clarence Paget undertook, in 1881, a canal voyage through

this Canal, of which he has supplied some interesting particulars. The

yacht, the _Miranda_, was 85 feet over all, 11 feet beam, and 4 feet 8

inches draught of water. She carried 6½ tons of coal, equal to about

eight days’ consumption, at full speed.

“Originally,” writes Lord Clarence, “the canal, which immortalised its

constructor, P. P. Riquet, was only intended to connect the head waters

of the Garonne at Toulouse with the Mediterranean, and it was opened

with great pomp and ceremony by Louis XIV. in 1681, but it was soon

found inadequate to the purposes required, as the Garonne was subject

to all sorts of vicissitudes of drought and floods.

“It was not, however, till our own times that the ‘Canal Latéral,’

between Toulouse and near Bordeaux, has been completed, and, curiously

enough, just at the moment when the railway between Bordeaux and Cette

has almost entirely absorbed the traffic. So here is this magnificent

canal, with its 99 locks and its viaducts and bridges comparatively

unused, save by an occasional barge loaded with wine. Nevertheless, it

is kept in admirable order, and the passage can be made, with certain

precautions, without any difficulty.

“A pleasant, though not very picturesque voyage of thirty miles of

river, brought us to the entrance of the canal. It was necessary to

put on our canal screw before entering, so we laid the vessel on

the ground, and entered on the following tide, through the lock,

which is double, or rather twin, so that two vessels can pass at the

same time. The dimensions of this, and indeed all the locks, are as

follows:—Length, 28 metres; breadth, 5·80 metres; depth, 1·60 metres.

The height of the bridges varies, but no vessel is allowed to pass

which is higher above the level of the canal than 2·72 metres.

“Thus, it will be seen that we had about six feet of length, and five

feet of width, to spare, one foot of height, and one foot under our

bottom; nor is this by any means too large a margin, since, however

well a vessel may be steered, and however quickly stopped, it is

impossible at all times, particularly if there be a strong breeze, to

ensure her entry into the locks with exactly sufficient speed. Moreover

it is quite necessary that a boat should be afloat, to make a rope fast

to the shore, where the canal has very sharp curves, as is the case in

the old part of it, between Toulouse and Cette; and inasmuch as the

boat cannot be hoisted up to davits or inboards, it will be manifest

that room must be left for her in the lock. We had just room under the

stern for one 13 feet boat athwart. The safe passage through the first

lock and under the first bridge caused us pleasant anticipations.

“We were satisfied to have accomplished our first lock, and made fast

opposite the house of the ‘Chef du Section,’ of which there are seven

on the canal. He and his lady paid us a visit, as did the curé and

principal inhabitants of La Reole. Next morning, the 28th, we fairly

tackled the business, and accomplished that day eleven locks, stopping

at Buzet. It would be tedious to describe our daily routine, and I

need only remark that we took advantage of all the daylight—at this

season only about 8½ hours—and accomplished some 35 to 40 miles per

day, always ascending, till we arrived at Toulouse on the sixth day.

This ‘Canal Latéral’ follows much the course of the Garonne. It is

a splendid work, and is kept in beautiful order. The grand features

are the bridges which carry the canal across the Garonne and other

rivers. There are three, but by far the grandest and most interesting

is that at Agen, where we found ourselves in mid-air, with the river,

the railway, the high road, and part of the town far beneath us. The

centre arch is a hundred feet high. After leaving Agen, the scenery

became picturesque, and sometimes grand; but to really enjoy this trip

it should be taken before the fall of the leaf. The whole length of the

canal is lined on either side by poplar, plane, and other trees, many

of them of great height, so as almost to shade the vessels passing. The

locks are admirably managed, and it is surprising how little delay they

cause—always supposing that there is no vessel to take precedence; but

whether by chance, or that orders had been sent on to keep the road

clear, we were rarely detained, and the average time in passing through

was about five minutes. As we approached Toulouse, the air became keen

and the nights frosty. Our ‘Chef du Section,’ who always accompanied

us, informed me that some years since the canal was frozen up in the

middle of December, and we consequently delayed as little as possible,

and only spent a couple of days at Toulouse, which I regretted, as,

besides being a pretty town, it is especially interesting as being the

grand central depot of the canal, and the junction with the old ‘Canal

du Midi,’ a name which has outlived the original title of Louis XIV.,

who christened it ‘Canal de Languedoc.’ Here, or rather a few miles to

the eastward, are the numerous reservoirs and alimentary canals which

bring the waters from the ‘Montagnes Noires.’ We could not stop to see

them in detail, but could trace their outline far away in the distance.

“When the celebrated engineer, Vauban, came to inspect these works, he

was astonished, and exclaimed that one thing was wanting only, namely,

a monument and statue to the founder. This has since been rectified,

and a grand obelisk is visible at the source of the canal. The story

of Pierre Paul Riquet is that of many, nay, of most, great patriots.

He met with scant assistance from the Government, and strenuous

opposition from his countrymen; he was treated as a madman, and died

of a broken heart before the great work was finished. His career seems

to have been very similar to that of an illustrious man of our own

day—Lesseps—save and except that the latter, happily, has been spared

to see the final achievement of his splendid work.[67] He had, however,

one attribute which is not common among inventors—he knew how to

strike a bargain; and his contract still enriches several families, his

descendants, especially the Caramans.

“On December 5th, we arrived at the summit of the canal, and it was

interesting to observe the alimentation going both ways. Here the whole

character and structure of the works change; instead of many miles of

straight reaches of uniform width of about 100 feet, the canal becomes

tortuous to a degree which is almost absurd, but which is accounted for

by the fact that, in Riquet’s day there was no law ‘d’expropriation,’

and he had to make a bargain with every little landowner for permission

to pass through his grounds, and being in many cases refused, he had to

cut away in another, and often opposite direction. The locks here are

also peculiar, being oval-shaped, to admit of two abreast; the effect

of this is, that although on the map, Toulouse is at least two-thirds

of the distance from Bordeaux to Cette, it is, by the canal, not quite

half-way.

“These sharp curves are inconvenient, as it is necessary to turn the

comers very slowly, for fear of running into vessels coming in the

opposite direction, and often they are so very acute as to necessitate

stopping the engines and using poles, and sometimes ropes, to get round

the comers.

“Another peculiar feature of this part of the canal is the constant

recurrence of multiple locks. On the first approach to double, treble,

quadruple, and even quintuple locks, one feels somewhat like going over

a precipice, but this soon wears off, and in reality, the ground is got

over quicker than with single locks.

“The famous octuple lock at Béziers only required half-an-hour to

accomplish, and it is one of the most wonderful features of this canal,

it is like going down a steep ladder from the top of a cliff to the

valley below. Our passage must have been a source of amusement to the

natives, judging by the crowds which met us at each stopping place.

I never could quite understand the exact cause of this. I asked M.

Moffre, to whom I have already alluded as the obliging and amiable

chief, but he did not satisfy me by saying, ‘It is the first steam

yacht we have had, except one which belongs to the Emperor of Austria,

and which passed through five years ago.’ ...

“From Carcassone we descended rapidly by multiple locks to the plain

of Agde, having always as a grand background to the south the range

of the Pyrenees, but this plain is anything but picturesque, being

rocky and barren. Here we pass what the ignorant and misguided people

of Riquet’s days thought would be a barrier to his great work. A

sharp spur of the ‘Montagnes Noires’ here juts out into the plain,

which looks like ‘thus far, no farther,’ but he was equal to the

task, and set to work to tunnel an imitation of the only tunnel

existing in those days, the grotto of Pausillipo at Naples, which

he visited on purpose, and it is exactly similar and about the same

length. Who does not remember the odd mysterious passage, high enough

to pass a line-of-battle ship through? A part, unfortunately, has

given way, and necessitated arching the roof, which has somewhat

marred the effect, but it is still interesting and imposing. From

here, a sharp descent through several multiple locks, brings us to

the level of the Mediterranean, whose blue waters are seen in the

distance; and on Saturday, the 10th of December, being our fourteenth

day since leaving Bordeaux, we emerged from the canal into the

Etang du Thau, at the mouth of which is Cette, giving access to the

Mediterranean.”

_The Crapponne Canal._—The authority to construct this canal was

conceded to Adam de Crapponne, an eminent engineer in the year 1554.

It takes its water through sluices, from the river Durance, near St.

Estève-Ianson, at an altitude of 492 feet above sea level. There the

river varies from 600 to 6500 feet in width, and the bed consists of a

succession of sand and gravel banks, and alluvial deposits, intersected

by numerous branches, which shift at every flood. Such a state of

things cannot be considered as constituting the bed of the river,

in the ordinary acceptation of the term, and to have constructed

a permanent and fixed barrage across the river, to lead the water

through the sluices, would not only have been a costly work at that

time, but also one of considerable difficulty. Crapponne constructed,

therefore, what are termed “barrages volants” across the river. These

are formed where the depth of the water is about two feet, by stakes

with fascines, and filled in with stones. In the deeper parts of the

river, which may be sometimes 12 to 15 feet, “chevalets” are driven in

place of stakes. These consist generally of trunks of trees cut near

the point of the bifurcation of the principal branches, and which are

placed closer together in proportion to the depth. The “chevalets”

are bound by cross-pieces and supported by fascines. These “barrages

volants” are always placed obliquely to the current of the river, for

the purpose of causing the fascines to press against the stones or the

“chevalets.” Such “barrages volants” need continual repair, but their

cost is comparatively trifling. It is mostly a question of labour, as

the material employed is cheap.

The average cost of maintenance of the barrage for the Crapponne

canal is about 500_l._ per annum. This system, adopted by Crapponne

more than 300 years ago, has never been changed, and has been found

by experience to answer its purpose of diverting the Durance waters

through the sluices into the canal in all seasons, and the same system

is adopted for some other irrigation canals. The Crapponne Canal, is

the main canal from the river Durance to Lamanon, and is 14¼ miles in

length. At Lamanon the canal has two main branches, one flowing south

towards Salon and St Chanas, and the other to the west towards Arles.

The total length of the canal is about 77 miles, not comprising the

whole development of the branch to Arles, which is a special property,

independent of the original canal.

The quantity of water supplied by the canal, is as follows:-The main

canal is 26 feet wide, and 6·5 feet deep; the mean velocity is 5 feet

per second. The branch to Salon is 10 feet wide, and 6·5 feet deep; the

mean velocity is 6·5 feet per second. The branch to Arles is 16·5 feet

wide, and 3·28 feet deep; the mean velocity is 5·3 feet per second. The

branch to Istres is 6·6 feet wide, and 3·3 feet deep; the mean velocity

is 6·6 feet per second.

_The Alpines Canal._—This canal, which was commenced in 1773, takes

its water, for the main channel, from the Durance at Mallemort, and for

the west branches, near Chateaurenard. The main canal is considered one

of the best in Europe as regards its utility. The system consists of

more than 194 miles of canal, disposing of 770 cubic feet of water per

second, which, with the west branches of the canal, irrigates more than

20,000 acres. The branches to Carascon and Barbentane, have generally

an inclination of 1 in 2000. In some portions of the former branch, the

inclination is 1 in 4500; in other portions 1 in 1250, while over some

of the aqueducts it is as much as 1 in 154. The widths at the bottom of

the west branch canal vary from 7·8 to 9·2 feet, and for a branch to

Barbentane, between 5·2 and 6·2 feet. The inclinations of the slopes

varies from 1 to 1, to 1½ to 1, in ordinary cuttings and embankments.

The west branches of the canal have passed through considerable

financial difficulties, and are now managed by an independent company.

In order to develop irrigation, numerous syndicates have been formed,

as some of the land was held in small parcels by proprietors and

farmers who had neither the funds nor the power, in opposition to

intervening landowners, to obtain branches to conduct the water from

the main irrigating canal to their properties. The price charged for

the water is regulated by the price charged for corn on the basis of

1·66 bushel per acre irrigated. The quantity of water given at the

above rate, is fixed about 0·57 gallon per acre per second, supposed

to flow continuously during the irrigation season, commencing on the

1st of April and terminating on the 1st October of each year, which is

equal to covering the ground for the total number of irrigations to a

depth of 66½ inches, and with 22,130 cubic yards of water. In 1874,

the cost of irrigation was equivalent to about 11_s._ 6_d._ per acre,

being the price of 1·66 bushel of corn. The price has recently been

reduced to about 8_s._ per acre, for three irrigations required during

the season for such crops as corn and olive orchards. The same reduced

price per acre is also charged for inundating vineyards during the

autumn, as a preventive to the phylloxera.

_Lens la Deûle Canal._—Lens, a town of 11,800 inhabitants, and the

capital of the coalfields of the Pas-de-Calais, has recently been

connected with the existing system of navigable waterways by a canal,

which passes near a great number of pits belonging to the companies of

Lens and of Courriéres, the most important of the district, and serves

the Liévin mines, which previously possessed no water communication.

The probable traffic on this canal has been estimated at 290,000 tons,

with a prospect of future increase. The canal starts a little beyond

Lens, and passes close to the town; and after a course of 4 miles 7

furlongs it joins the Souchez Canal at Harnes. This canal, about 2

miles 1 furlong in length, was constructed about 1862, and connects

the Lens Canal with the Deûle Canal a little beyond Courriéres. The

total fall of the Lens Canal is 31 feet 10 inches, which is effected

by three locks, the first by a fall of 8¼ feet and the other two of

11 feet 9½ inches. It has a bottom width of 17¾ feet in the straight

portions, and in the curved portions the width at the bottom is

regulated according to the formula (17¾ × 1246/R) feet; and its depth

is 7¼ feet for an available draught of 6½ feet. Crossing places, 31

feet wide at the bottom and 360 feet long, have been formed about every

5 furlongs; and places for barges to wait in have been constructed of

the same width, at the commencement and end of the canal, 2300 and

1800 feet long respectively. Above the third lock the canal traverses

fissured chalk for a distance of 1640 feet, and has accordingly been

lined with concrete up to 1 foot above the water level at a cost of

2_l._ per yard; and where the canal passes over a marsh, filled up with

stones from the pits, for about 330 feet, it has been cut off from

the marsh by a puddle-trench carried down into a substratum of clay

13¾ feet below the water-level. The locks are of the ordinary type,

17 feet wide, 126⅓ feet available length, and 8¼ feet in depth, with

sluices in the gates; and the gates have iron ribs and a wooden skin,

and cost on the average 4_l._ per square yard. The canal is fed by the

river Souchez only 620 feet from its commencement. The discharge of

the river during the long drought of the summer of 1886 did not fall

below 4·6 cubic feet per second, whilst the traffic on the canal only

required 2½ cubic feet per second, allowing for losses from evaporation

and leakage. There is, therefore, an ample supply for other purposes,

and for increased demands for traffic. The canal was begun on the 1st

of February, 1885, and was opened for traffic on the 30th of October,

1886. The works, including land, cost 74,000_l._, or 15,206_l._ per

mile.

_The Marne Canal._—The original canal was constructed between the

years 1838 and 1853. It commences by a junction with the Upper Marne

Canal at Vitry le Français, and terminates by a junction with the river

Ill and the Rhine Canal, near Strasburg, thus connecting the valleys of

the Seine and the Rhine, and also the intervening rivers, which include

the Maas, Moselle, Soar, &c. Its length between Vitry and Strasburg is

193½ miles, and it crosses the four watersheds dividing the catchment

basins of the Marne, Maas, Moselle, Soar, and Rhine; there are,

however, only two summit reaches, as the divides between the Maas and

Moselle, and the Soar and the Rhine, are tunnelled through at Fory and

Arzweiler, respectively. There are altogether five tunnels, with a

total length of 5½ miles.

The level of the water above the sea is, at Vitry, 332·62 feet; at the

Mauvages summit tunnel, through the Marne-Maas divide, 922·75 feet; at

Nancy, 648·10 feet; at the Vosges summit level, 873·93 feet; and at

Strasburg, 444·18 feet. There are 177 locks on the canal, and the mean

rise of each is 8·60 feet.

Some years since it was contemplated to increase the water supply, but

the improvements were delayed by the Franco-German war, which resulted

in a transfer to Germany of the Alsatian portion of the canal, and also

of one of the most important sources of supply, viz. the river Soar.

To render the system independent of this latter portion, in 1874 the

construction of the East Canal was authorised. This commences at Givet,

on the Belgian frontier, joins the Rhine-Marne Canal at Troussey, and

again leaving the latter canal at Toul, follows the course of the Upper

Moselle to Epinal, where it branches off in a south-westerly direction

to its termination at Port-sur-Saône. The depth of water in this canal

was fixed at 6 feet 6 inches.

The Rhine-Marne Canal had originally a depth of 5 feet 3 inches, a

bottom breadth of 32 feet 10 inches, and sides sloped at 1½ to 1. This

depth has been increased to 6 feet 6 inches, the canal bed has been

cleaned and lined with concrete 6½ inches to 8½ inches thick, where

necessary, and the headways of the bridges and tunnels has been raised

to 12 feet 2 inches above the new water-level. Through the Mauvages

tunnel a chain has been laid, and all the traffic is worked by two

chain steam-tugs with fireless boilers (Francq’s patent).

The most important of the new works are those for the additional

supply of water. They comprise pumping-stations at Pierre-la-Treiche

and Valcourt, near Toul, at both of which the pumps are actuated by

turbines, and a steam-pumping station at Vacon, as well as ducts for

conveying the water from the pumping-stations to the canal, and an

impounding reservoir at Paroy.

Gallons.

The total amount of water required annually for the

Rhine-Marne canal is 1,364,620,000

The total amount of water required annually for the

East canal is 748,340,000

─────────────

Total 2,112,960,000

─────────────

In addition to which there is the Meurthe branch,

requiring 462,210,000

─────────────

Making a grand total of 2,575,170,000

─────────────

Besides the above artificial sources, the canals are fed by springs at

Vacon, and by the Moselle, &c.

The arrangements at Pierre-la-Treiche and at Valcourt are nearly

similar. There are two turbines, actuating force pumps, capable of

raising from 143 to 198 gallons per second to a height of 131 feet 3

inches, through a line of cast-iron pipes of 2 feet 7½ inches diameter,

delivering into an open duct connecting with the east end of the Pagny

Reach of the canal. This duct commences at Pierre-la-Treiche, and is 8¼

miles long, and feeds both canals.

£

The cost of these works was 51,920

Of which the pumping station at Pierre-la-Treiche cost 15,616

And the pumping station at Valcourt 26,908

The steam pumping-station at Vacon is near the west end of the Pagny

Reach. The pumps are 250 H.P., and capable of lifting 8,804,000

gallons per twenty-four hours to a height of 121 feet 4 inches, or

110 gallons per second. The water is conveyed into a duct, which also

carries the water from the Vacon springs, and empties into the Pagny

Reach. The reservoir at Paroy has an area of 180 acres, and contains

376,371,000 gallons. The dam is 1378 feet long, and 18 feet 3 inches

high; the cost of construction was 20,800_l._ The canal traffic in

1884 amounted to 634,936 tons.[68]

_The Canalisation of the Moselle._—The French Government, in the

period from 1836 to 1860, undertook the regulation of this river from

Frouard to the Prussian frontier by means of works parallel to the

existing river-bed, and by embankments; but sandbanks and shoals were

nevertheless deposited which impeded the navigation, and led to the

proposal, in 1860, to erect a series of sluices and movable weirs

extending from Frouard to Thionville, which would, if constructed,

entail an estimated outlay of 11½ millions of francs, the total

distance being 92 kilometres, and the minimum depth of water to be

maintained being set down as 1·6 metre. Owing to the opposition of

some of the Communes, who dreaded the injury to their land by the

alterations in the water-level, the plans were modified, and only

certain reaches of the river, where the riparian conditions were

favourable, were kept up by weirs and locks, side-channels fed from the

main stream being constructed to connect these deepened sections.

_The Proposed Mediterranean and Biscay Canal._—The project for

connecting the Mediterranean and the Bay of Biscay by a ship canal

has often been under discussion, and would, no doubt, if carried out,

prove of considerable utility. Not only would such a canal shorten by

several days the distance between the principal ports on the North Sea

and the eastern basin of the Mediterranean—thereby bringing England

into closer contact with the far Orient—but there would be a greater

security to shipping, as a result of avoiding the stormy coasts of

Spain and Portugal during the winter months. The proposed canal has

been variously named the “_Canal de deux Mers_,” the “_Canal du Midi_,”

&c., but it would practically be identical with the Languedoc Canal

already described, and by means of which boats of small size are even

now passed between the two seas.[69]

The route proposed for the Mediterranean and Bay of Biscay Ship Canal

is from Bordeaux to Cette by Agen, Montauban, Toulouse, Carcassonne,

and Béziers. The canal, after following largely the course of the

Garonne, from Bordeaux, would tap the Dorpt, the Lot, the Aveyron, and

the Tarn, whence it would draw its water supply. From Toulouse, the

canal would follow the course of the South Canal, and would thence

proceed by Béziers, to the Lake of Thau, which would be transformed

into an inland port. The financial and other difficulties in the way

of the project have, however, proved insurmountable up to the present

time. Both the City of Bordeaux, which is the port chiefly interested,

and the Government of France have declined to aid in the realisation of

the project; and the State has even refused to grant the necessary

concession for its construction, on the ground that its cost would be

quite out of proportion to its utility, that it would isolate a large

portion of French territory, and that costly works would have, in any

case, to be provided by the Government at both ends of the canal.

It is pointed out,[70] on the other hand, and with some force, that in

the case of a maritime war between France and England, the proposed

Atlantic and Mediterranean Canal would allow of vessels reaching the

former sea without passing Gibraltar. Brest and Toulon could also be

brought into more rapid activity, and the concentration of troops could

be more readily effected. A plan and profile of the proposed route

appears at p. 101.

_The Rhone Canals._—At the mouth of the Rhone artificial waterways of

considerable importance have been provided for navigation purposes, the

chief of which, the St. Louis Canal, has a draught of water of 19⅔ feet

at low sea-level; its width is 100 feet at the bottom, and 207 feet at

the surface of the water.

The channel into the sea is 200 feet wide, at the bottom, from the

shore out to the 4-metre (13 feet) line, and 656 feet wide from the

4-metre (13 feet) line to the 6-metre (20 feet) line. The canal is

separated from the Rhone by a lock having a depth of water of 24½ feet,

a depth of 72 feet, and an available length of 525 feet. Below the

lock, at the commencement of the canal, a basin has been excavated, 30

acres in area, and with 20 feet depth of water. The works were begun in

1863, and finished in 1873.

The St. Louis Canal is a work of far greater importance, as regards

navigation, than the results anticipated from the improvement of the

mouth of the Rhone, to vessels finding a sufficient depth to get up to

Arles. This depth was restricted to 6½ feet at low-water level. The

St. Louis Canal Works afford access to the Rhone for vessels up to 20

feet draught, and provide these vessels with a harbour, opening into a

sheltered bay, in which they are able with ease to load and discharge

their cargoes.

The project of the St Louis Canal was from the first assailed by the

partisans of the embankment works, as well as by those who considered

that the proper expedient was to enlarge the canal from Arles to Bouc.

It was urged that the canal would soon be silted up by deposits from

the Rhone, both at the sea end and also at the lock. The canal from

Arles to Bouc was constructed in 1802, but as it has only a depth of 6½

feet and a width of 26¼ feet on the locks, it has not been available

for the craft usually navigating the Rhone since steam navigation was

established.

_General Features of French Canals._—The general characteristics of

the principal canals of France will be understood from the following

table, which gives the number of locks, the length of the locks, and

their average width and depth on fifteen of the principal canals in

the country, as recorded in the Government Reports on the French

Waterways:—

STATEMENT showing the number of Locks, with their length,

width, and average depth, on the chief Canals in France.

──────────────────────────┬─────────┬──────────┬─────────┬─────────

│ │ │ │ Average

│ Number │ Length │ Width │ Depth

Canals. │ of │ of │ of │ of

│ Locks. │ Locks. │ Locks │ Locks.

──────────────────────────┼─────────┼──────────┼─────────┼────────

│ │ metres. │ metres. │ metres

De la Deûle │ 1 │ 38·70 │ .. │ ..

Meuse │ 26 │ 45 │ 5·70 │ 2·42

De la Sambre │ 38 │ 37·60 │ 5·20 │ 2·34

De l’Est │ 33 │ 38 to 45 │ 5·20 to │ 2·60

│ │ │ 5·70 │

De l’Aisne de la Marne │ 24 │ 35 │ 5·20 │ 2·68

St. Quentin │ 35 │ 34 │ 5·20 to │ 2·29

│ │ │ 6·40 │

De l’Ourcq │ 10 │ 38·80 to │ 5·20 to │ ..

│ │ 63 │ 6·20 │

De Briare │ 43 │ 33 │ 5·20 │ 2·87

Du Muernais │ 116 │ 33 │ 5·10 │ 2·07

Du Rhone au Rhin │ 73 │ 30 │ 5·13 to │ 2·23

│ │ │ 5·30 │

De Neufosse │ 6 │ 34·80 to │ 5·20 │ 2·67

│ │ 36·53 │ │

De l’Aire │ 1 │ 37·95 │ 5·20 │ 2·00

De la Somne │ 23 │ 45 │ 6·30 │ 2·49

De l’Oise et à l’Aisne │ 35 │ 34 │ 5·20 to │ 2·29

│ │ │ 8·40 │

De la Haute Marne │ 34 │ 25 to │ 5·20 │ 3·10

│ │ 38·50 │ │

──────────────────────────┴─────────┴──────────┴─────────┴────────

The French Assembly adopted, in August 1879, a law which decreed that

the principal lines of canal communication ought to have a depth of

2 metres, and locks not less than 38 metres 50 long, by 5 metres 20

wide. In the South of France the only canals that conform to these

requirements are those of the Midi and the Aulize; in Central France,

the Canal du Centre, the Canal Roanne à Dijon, the Canal du Berry,

and the Canal du Rhone au Rhin. The Canal de Bourgogne, the Canal de

Briare, and the Canal d’Orleans, are also up to these requirements. In

the north of France, and on the Belgian frontier, it may be said that

all the waterways are of the required minimum dimensions.

Paris is the natural centre of the French canals. Barges find their way

there from the ports of Dunkirk, Gravelines, Calais, and Havre, large

quantities of coal, iron, and wheat being carried, and in the fall of

the year the cargoes of numerous timber vessels are made into rafts and

floated to their destination. Of late years, however, the increasing

quantities of planks and deals sawn in the north, are loaded into the

barges. The important coal and iron districts of Belgium, at Mons and

Charleroi, provide a good deal of freight for Paris, which goes _viâ_

Condé from the former, and _viâ_ Landrecies from the latter, the two

routes uniting at La Fere, whence the Seine, at Conflans, is reached

by descending the river l’Oise. The river Rhine is communicated with

at Saarbruck and Strasburg; Switzerland at Bâle, and the important

ports of Marseilles and Cette by the Yonne, the Burgundy Canal, and

the rivers Saône and Rhone. The western ports of Nantes, Brest, and

Bordeaux have also canal communication with Paris.

The large _péniches_ of 270 tons, which are about 116 feet long, 16

feet beam, bluff at bow and stem, and almost flat bottomed, draw 1·80

metres when loaded. They are usually worked by two men and the wife of

the captain. The value of these craft, with their equipments, is from

10,000 to 15,000 francs, and they are always insured against damage

or loss. In all rivers and places with the slightest risk, the use of

pilots is compulsory.

During the latter part of 1888, the French Chambers had under

consideration a proposal to reimpose the tolls that were formerly

levied on canals and navigable rivers, but which, within recent years,

have been removed. It was contended that the waterways, exempt from

tolls, were likely to be dangerous rivals to the railways. The railway

interest clamoured accordingly for what they called fair play. The

Budget Commission, however, refused to entertain the idea of resuming

the canal tolls, holding, as expressed by their spokesman, that “by

developing the waterways, and thereby serving industry in the cheap

transport of raw materials which were incapable of bearing a high

charge for carriage, production would be increased, and the traffic of

the railways in manufactured goods would be proportionately augmented.”

A considerable amount of light has been thrown upon the circumstances

of the internal navigation of France by a census that was recently

taken of the boats employed upon the navigable rivers and canals. This

census showed that, at the end of 1887, there were employed on the

national waterways no fewer than 15,730 vessels, having a total tonnage

capacity of 2,724,000 metrical tons, or an average of 173 metrical tons

per vessel. Of these boats, 933, with a total tonnage of 342,933, or

an average of 370 tons per vessel, had a length of 38 metres 50 and

over; 4863 boats, having a total tonnage of 1,415,904 metrical tons,

or an average of rather under 300 tons each, had a length of 33 metres

to 38 metres 50; while 9934, with a total tonnage of 965,000 tons,

or an average of 96 tons, were less than 33 metres in length. Of the

15,730 vessels employed in the inland navigation of France, 14,252 were

found to have been constructed in the country, 1017 in Belgium, 339 in

Germany, and 122 in other countries. It would thus appear that France

retains in her own hands the shipbuilding involved in the navigation of

her own waterways. Finally, it appears that 8537 boats, with a total

tonnage of 1,632,000 tons, were employed on the canals, and 7203 boats,

with a tonnage of 1,092,000 tons, on the rivers.

It would take up far too much of our time and space if we were to

attempt to speak of the resources of the principal rivers of France,

and of the means that have been taken by the State to maintain and

improve them. Much has been done in this direction within recent years,

and more is proposed in the near future. Until quite recently, if not

actually up to the present time, the cost of transporting a ton of coal

from Cardiff or Newcastle to Paris has been about 16 francs, being 9

francs to Rouen, and 6 francs from Rouen to Paris, with 1 or 1½ francs

for unloading into river boats at Rouen. The consumption of coal in

Paris is from 2½ to 3 million tons a year, and it has been argued that

the cost of this coal could be reduced to the consumers by some 6

francs if Paris were converted into a seaport by improving the Seine.

One objection offered to this proposal is that it would interfere with

the French collieries in the Nord and the Pas-de-Calais, if so obvious

an advantage were given to English coal; and to meet this difficulty it

has been proposed to have another special canal from those districts,

which would start from St. Denis or Creil, and would communicate by two

branches with Antin and Lens. It is argued that the cost of conveying

coal from the north to Paris by this means would not exceed 2 to 2½

francs, or 4 francs less than at the present time.

FOOTNOTES:

[60] This does not include the six small companies, whose united

lines only make up 217 kilometres, nor the _reseau de l’Etat_, which

has 2164 kilometres more. Over the latter system the number of

tons carried one mile was 133 millions, and the receipts therefrom

amounted to about 12 millions of francs, which corresponds to an

average of 0·91_d._ per ton per mile, showing that the independent

companies carry traffic cheaper than the State lines.

[61] ‘Bulletin du Ministère des Travaux Publics,’ Tome xviii. p. 329.

[62] The proportions of the total coal supply of 3,065,800 tons

received by Paris in 1886 were contributed thus:—

─────────────┬───────────┬───────────

│ By Water. │ By Rail.

├───────────┼───────────

│ tons. │ tons.

French coal │ 839,200 │ 889,700

Belgian ” │ 402,300 │ 557,200

English ” │ 26,700 │ 191,100

German ” │ 26,400 │ 133,200

├───────────┼───────────

Totals │ 1,294,600 │ 1,771,200

─────────────┴───────────┴───────────

[63] It is interesting to compare, or rather contrast, this with

the traffic of the port of London, where, in 1888, the entrances of

shipping amounted to close on 12½ millions of tons, carried in 49,213

vessels, the average tonnage being over 700 tons.

[64] ‘Album de Statistique Graphique.’

[65] Traffic on French canals:—1883, 11,975,000 tons; 1884,

11,936,000 tons; 1885, 11,102,000 tons; 1886, 12,027,000 tons.

[66] Traffic on French rivers:—1883, 8,873,000 tons; 1884, 8,936,000

tons; 1885, 8,353,000 tons; 1886, 8,950,000.

[67] Lord Clarence Paget here refers, of course, to the Suez Canal,

since the Panama Canal, which is dealt with elsewhere in this volume,

is in quite a different category.

[68] These details are abstracted from the ‘Minutes of Proceedings of

the Institution of Civil Engineers,’ vol. 86, p. 419, _et seq._

[69] Lord Alfred Paget’s paper, originally published in the ‘Journal

of the Society of Arts,’ giving an account of a yacht voyage which he

made over this canal, has already been referred to.

[70] M. E. Couillard in ‘Annales Industrielles,’ June, 1887.

Waterways and Water Transport in Different Countries With a description of the Panama, Suez, Manchester, Nicaraguan, and other canals. · 第 7 / 23 章