A BACKGROUND OF THE WAR

Dominion, Volume 33, Issue 69, 14 December 1939, Page 8

A BACKGROUND OF THE WAR

Channel Tunnel Plan

WHAT MARSHAL FOCH SAID IN 1922

Il is reported tbat the Channel tunnel scheme lias been revived in the French Chamber of Deputies. The Minister of Public Works lias described the tunnel as a "national necessity,” and a job that should be one of lite first undertaken after the war. Tito sad truth, of course, is that (lie tunnel would be of incalculable value now. During the Great War the cry was: “If only the Channel Tunnel were built!” After the war, no one dreamed that the Allies would again be fighting Germany within 25 years, and the project was shelved. Today the development of the sea mine and aerial warfare makes the tunnel a still more desirable facility. And so it always will be in time of war—provided that France and Britain are fighting side by side Planned 80 Years Ago The idea of driving a tunnel under the Channel from England to France was conceived more than 80 years ago by a French engineer, Thome de Gamond. In 1856 he submitted plans to Napoleon 111, and was joined in his work by the great British engineers, Brunel, Lock and Robert Stephenson, and later by Sir John Hawkshaw. Queen Victoria was enthusiastic and the project was taken up by railway companies in both countries. In 1875 an Anglo-French Convention was signed in order to regulate the project, but political difficulties arose in England when conflicting interests began to be affected. The subsequent squabble reflected little credit on many of the people who took part. The army leaders were not helpful, for they persisted in seeing strategic dangers in the proposal. The government of the day decided against the tunnel and succeeding Governments have all opposed it. In 1924 a British Ministerial committee again considered the proposal and again rejected it. New Complications

With the passing of the years many additional complications have arisen, including the vastly improved Channel ship, rail and air services, in which a great deal of money has been invested. On the other hand, as already mentioned, the strategic advantages to a united Britain and France of an at-tack-proof means of access to the Continent have become more pronounced.

In 1922 Marshal Foch said: “If the channel tunnel had been built it might have prevented the War, and in any event it would have shortened its duration by one half.” If that was true of 1914, what of today?

The French Channel Tunnel Company is still in being and holds a Government concession which empowers it to resume work at any time. The English Channel Tunnel Company exists, too, but requires an Act of Parliament to enable it to proceed. Shafts Exist Today

These two companies actually began work and the shafts they drove are in. an excellent state of preservation. The French one is near Calais, the English one between Folkestone and Dover. The fullest plans for the tunnel exist and have been constantly improved and brought up-to-date. The tunnel, which would consist of two tubes built precisely like London tubes (which are in pairs), would be 31 miles long. The tubes would be 50 feet apart, and bored into the chalk strata, 95 feet below the bed of the Channel in the middle—that is, 260 feet from the surface of the sea. The journey time in electric train would be under three-quarters of an hour. As a feat of engineering the tunnel would "be outstanding, but not miraculous, for the natural conditions are ideal. The London tubes of today go exceedingly deep (three lines pass under the Thames) and the builders have had to overcome a number of engineering problems which would not arise in the case of the England-France link. Military Face-Lifting-

General Gamelin’s message to Lord Gort (reported in this morning’s cable news) indicates that a German mid-winter offensive is not now regarded as being likely. In the meantime, according to reports written by neutral correspondents on the Western Front, the enemy command is striving to nullify the advantage gained by the Allies in securing so many aerial photographs of the West Wall (Siegfried Line). It is said that the Germans are “lifting the face” of the West Wall so as to change the contours of the entire district. What the Germans are doing—if reports by frontier inhabitants passed on to their Luxemburg friends are to be believed —is a vast construction project of new trenches, blockhouses and tank traps. Apparently they have decided, that there will be no big military move till spring, which would give them ample time to carry out this scheme of aiming to confuse the opponent, who would not know whether the new or old defence works were the real thing. Truth For The Moment

A novel explanation of the betrayal of Nazi principles involved in the pact with Soviet Russia was given in a German broadcast to Spanish America. An Argentine student called Requena was put up to survey German “triumphs” and was prompted to justify the pact in these terms: — Christ was able to reach agreement with Hie sinners but never with tlie Pharisees. Biilfiin —1 recall - from my first history books—was always perfido Albion. Moreover, philosophically there does not exist an absolute truth but only a truth for file moment. Thai this offensive piece of inconsistency should be included in a broadcast Io Roman Catholic listeners shows the curious lack of insight of propagandists who work on the principles laid <!<>« ii by 11 il lor. The Standard Meal

Cookery schools have been established throughout Germany where cooks and chefs are being taught to make meals out of the foodstuffs now available. A student at one of these schools stated in a broadcast:— “We have been experienced cooks and chefs for many years, but, of course, we do not know how to make meals out of what we can buy in Germany today. “Here we are taught bow to prepare a national standard meal in spite of all difficulties. For instance, we have cooked a dinner for members of the Nazi party which consisted of leek soup, lentils with potatoes, ami semolina dumpling.”