The case against the Channel Tunnel is put with admirable
force by M. Harduin, a well-known French journalist, in the Matin. England, he declares, is the only European Power with no frontiers to guard, Nature having surrounded her with an immense and well-nigh insuperable moat. This being so, "how can we imagine that England, now living in perfect security, should be inclined to expose herself to certain danger by allowing a tunnel to be dug under the Channel which would permit the rats of the Continent to enter her territory 9" The fact that a system could be devised to destroy the entrance on the English side instantaneously does not remove the risk ; and as for the advantages, they simply amount to this : that seasickness will be non-existent in the tunnel, that the journey from coast to coast will be reduced by a quarter of an hour, and that the transhipment of certain goods will be rendered unnecessary. Will these extremely small advantages, continues M. Harduin, suffice to induce England to give up a position which has made her a rich and powerful, because an unassailable, island P M. Hardnin's intelligent appreciation of the arguments against the tunnel confirms our view that our existing good relations with France need not be in the least affected by our refusal to sanction the scheme. On the contrary, he clearly indicates that our ability to make our friendship effective if necessary is strengthened rather than weakened by the maintenance of the silver streak.
Previous page
