We publish to-day, certainly beyond all comparison, the most singular report of an engineer that was ever before made public in this age for schemers and engineers. It is the report of Mr. James Walker, dated December, 1837, on the works and prospects of the celebrated Thames Tunnel Company. The view which this report presents to the public of the work in question is, we have no hesitation in saying, prodigious in absurdity. Would we could add, that the work itself was not also equally prodigious, or, rather, prodigal, in its drafts upon the public purse, and, in fact, in every species of dupery and imposition. Mr. Walker, it will be seen, in his abstract of his own re port, gives as a head that Parliament should agree to Mr. Brunel's proposal to proceed with the works on the Middlesex side, if it be the resolution to complete the works "without present inquiry as to the cost." We could hardly believe our eyes when we read these last words. Was ever such a thing heard of as continuing works "without any previous inquiry as to what they might cost?" Of what faith, or what religion, we should beg leave to ask, is Mr. Walker? Did he ever read his Bible? "Which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first and counteth the cost, whether he hath sufficient to finish it? Lest, haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold him begin to mock him, saying, this man began to build, and was not able to finish."-Luke xiv. 28, 29. Well, then, we ask, if, according to Mr. Walker's proposition, the works may, perhaps, ultimately be finished (if Government will continue them without making any present inquiry as to the cost), in what way are they to be continued? First of all, notwithstanding daily accidents are happening on the river from the superabundance of traffic and the rapidity of steam-boats, these are all to be compressed into the narrow space which is already tunnelled under by the present progress of the undertaking. And for what purpose is the passage thus to be compressed? Why, in order that a new bed of clay may be formed for the rest of the river, in the place of its present bed of silt; and this new bed, whereon Father Thames is to rest one part of his body, is to be completed, before the wondrous machine called Mr. Brunel's shield, be advanced one inch farther. Here, we think, we may repose ourselves, and the public may repose with us; for that such a claybed will ever be made, or ever can be made, notwithstanding Mr. James Walker's ad

mirable scheme of "two rows of close whole timber piles, one row on each side of the Tunnel," is as impossible as that two rows of trees should be planted and form an avenue from this sublunary globe to the satellites which attend it by night. Mr. James Walker and Mr. Brunel, in the contemplation of such a scheme, may well say, that it should be attempted "without making cost an element in the question." Will nothing put an end to this absurd and even murderous project? We say murderous; for, in addition to the four irruptions which have been made into the Tunnel, some with loss of life, Mr. Brunel also mentions "the impregnation of the water with sulphurated hydrogen, which has proved very injurious to the health of the workmen."

Of the causes assigned by Mr. Brunel which had retarded the progress of the Tunnel in May, 1837, one was, the excessive rains of the preceding autumn; which he says, liquified the ground between the ceiling of the shield and the river." How the rain got in there we cannot tell; or how the ground lying between the bottom of the river and the top of the shield could possibly be more " liquified" than it was from its natural position, we defy philosophy and all the dabblers in hydrostatics and hydraulics to discover.

RETURN TO AN ORDER OF THE HON. THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, DATED JUNE 27, 1838, FOR COPY OF MR. WALKER'S REPORT TO THE TREASURY ON THE WORKS AT THE THAMES TUNNEL.

I duly received a letter from Mr. Baring, under date 7th of October, 1837, informing me" that the Lords Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury had under their consideration a report from the clerk of the Thames Tunnel Company of the 13th September, with an account of the breaking in of the river of the 23d of August, 1837, and various papers relating thereto, which, with the former report from the same party, and special reports from Mr. Brunel of the works proposed to be carried on at the Tunnel, were referred to me for my consideration and report, previous to their Lordships giving any direction on the application for consent to the several propositions made by the engineer and directors of the Company for continuing and facilitating the progress of the works."

I gave the subjects my immediate attention, and was preparing a report thereon, when on the 2nd of November another (the fourth) irruption of the Thames took place,

and on the 6th, when I visited the works of the Tunnel, Mr. Brunel, the engineer, and Mr. Charlier, the secretary, requested a postponement of my report for a short time, until they should complete an expected arrangement with the navigation committee of the river Thames, from which they expected increased facility and security. This request I communicated to Mr. Baring by letter on the 9th of November.

I have since seen Mr. Spearman's letter of the 2nd of December, transmitting to me, by command of the Lords of the Treasury, a copy of a letter from the secretary to the Thames Tunnel Company, dated 15th November, together with a report of Mr. Brunel on the present state of the Tunnel, and the best mode of proceeding, and also a plan of the works, with a request that I would communicate to their Lordships my opinion upon the several points referred to in the papers, previous to their determining on the proposals and recommendations of the

company.

Since receiving the above instructions, Mr. Spearman has stated to me the desire to be, that every point, particularly as respects cost or estimate, which I consider of importance in the general question of the Tunnel, should be included in my report, so as to bring the whole fairly under the consideration of their Lordships.

That Mr. Brunel's different reports, in which the same recommendations are repeated, may be brought to their Lordships' recollection, I shall give a short abstract of the main points in the order of date.

In his report of May 2, 1837, Mr. Brunel ascribes the difficulties which had retarded the progress of the Tunnel for the last five months to the excessive rains of the preceding autumn liquifying the ground between the ceiling of the shield and the river, and causing it to run into the works; he states that this has been augmented by his being deprived of the pumping-well and drain from Wapping, which is stated to have been originally intended, and to have been considered the most efficient means of drainage, particularly as the dip of the strata is to that side, and that before any satisfactory progress can be calculated on the proposed pumping-well, with a drain or drift-way, should be made, but that a preferable plan would be to sink the 50 feet shaft for the foot passengers' descent, which would, he considers, be a better means of drainage, and would give employment to the workmen when not in the shield. The fact of the pumping at the entrance of the London Docks having dried the wells in that neighbourhood, is adduced as a proof that a pumping-engine on the Middlesex side would diminish the land-springs in the Tunnel.

Mr. Brunel estimates the expense of the shaft, including the steam-engine, pumps, &c., at 6,8447., and the pumping-well alone at 2,9907., independent of the drift-way or drain, which he calculates at 4,3107., making together 7,000l., which sum he presumes would be saved by forming the shaft rather than the well at the present time, exclusive of keeping the workmen and estabment employed, and thereby reducing the amount which is now charged to the tunnel account. He also mentions the impregnation of the water with sulphurated hydrogen, which has proved very injurious to the health of the workmen, as another reason for making the drift-way, as it would be the most effectual means of drawing it off. The report states, that "the fact of 16 feet of the Tunnel having been completed under the described difficulties, is a proof that it can be accomplished, though, owing to the disadvantages, at an enormous price, and that it never could be intended in the conditions of the Treasury that he should be deprived of the means of completing the work at the estimated cost."

Mr. Brunel's report, dated 9th of August, 1837, recapitulates the substance of his previous report, and adduces the successful result of pumping-engines and drift-ways erected for the purpose of taking off the land-springs that impeded the formation of the Kilsby tunnel, in the line of the Birmingham railway, as a proof of the good effect that would be felt in the works of the Thames Tunnel, by a pumping-engine on the Middlesex side. He states also, as an argument for the works he proposed in his former report, the importance of giving the disturbed and artificial ground time to consolidate, and now proposes, on the completion of the Middlesex shaft, to commence the tunnel on that side also, with a view to greater expedition and economy, and to keep the full complement of men inore regularly employed by having the two ends to work at. This, it is stated, would reduce the cost of conveying the men, materials, and excavation to the shaft on the Surrey side. In this report Mr. Brunel further states, that so soon as the plan he has proposed is in satisfactory operation, the formation of the carriage-roads might be commenced simul. taneously with the tunnel, and that by the various means he now proposes, a saving might be effected in the time of four and a half years, which in my report of April, 1837, I considered requisite for the completion of the tunnel and approaches, and that consequently there would be an earlier receipt of toll, and a saving of current expenses and machinery to the amount of 15,000l., by the works being completed one year and a quarter within the time I had calculated.

Va

rious accounts and calculations in proof of his several positions are appended to this report of Mr. Brunel, and an estimate that to carry on the works as he recommends, the sum of 94,0007. will be required during one year from August, 1837.

The Lords Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury having refused their assent to the tunnel being begun on the Middlesex side, Mr. Brunel in his report, dated the 7th of September, 1837, repeats the other recommendations of his former reports.

The last report of Mr. Brunel that is referred to me is dated the 15th of November, 1837, the fourth irruption of the Thames having taken place on the 2nd of that month. In this report he considers the third irrup tion (that of the 23rd of August) as not having been unfavorable in one point of view, as it would enable substantial ground to be substituted for the loose silt that had been worked into the tunnel by the irruption, in proof of which he states that the work done before the third irruption cost 9001. per lineal foot, while what was done between the third and fourth irruptions cost only 6301. The former recommendations and arguments are repeated, and in addition it is now stated that the fourth, or last irruption, was caused in a great degree by the part of the tunnel then in progress being under the portion of the river chiefly used for navigation, and that the depth being small, the artificial bed of the river, or roof of the tunnel was liable to be disturbed by passing vessels. This Mr. Brunel now proposes to remedy by deepening a part of the river where the tunnel is formed, moving some of the ships in the tiers near the tunnel from the northern to the southern side of the river, according to a plan which accompanies his report, throwing the space which is required to be kept clear for the navigation, from the north side towards the middle of the river over where the tunnel is formed, so as to leave the space which is in advance of the works free for tunnelling operations, and then substituting a thicker roof of clay and gravel raised above the present level, to which, from the navigation not being then over that part, there would not be the same objection as at present. This thicker roof Mr. Brunel proposes to make 100 feet in length, or in advance of the shield, and 100 feet on each side of it. He calculates on a great saving in the end from this artificial covering, which he estimates at 1,800/., and ascribes much of the late trouble and expense to the passing ships, and the want of a sufficient thickness in his roof, which the navigation prevented his having.

The reports are drawn up in great detail, and the above abstract is to be considered not as a substitute for them, but only as bringing the leading points to recollection in

one view, without the repetitions which the reports themselves, being of different dates, naturally contain.

It is now my duty to state my opinion, which is, to recommend Mr. Brunel's proposals to be adopted, as the most economical and creditable way of executing the works, if it be the determination that the Thames Tunnel (a work which for many years has attracted much of the public attention in this, and still more in other countries, and upon which upwards of 80,000%. of public money has been advanced) shall be completed, without making cost an element in the question. I would then even advise more effectual works in front of the shield than Mr. Brunel's description and es timate of 1,8001. contemplates; for if the work is to be considered a national or Go vernment work, a repetition of the danger, the late irruptions, and the enormous expense of the work, would be discreditable, and as it may be, it ought to be prevented. In addition to Mr. Brunel's proposals, I would recommend, after the removal of the clay that has lately been thrown in, and a portion of the silt, that two rows of close whole timber piles should be driven between where the ground begins to rise and the present shield, one row on each side of the line of the tunnel, with space between sufficient for the shield to travel, and to as great a depth as they can conveniently be driven, the heads being level with low water. These, with a return of shorter piles at the end, would form a dam against the silt. The piles being driven, I would continue the dredging of the silt in the space enclosed by the piles, and then fill up with clay, gravel, &c., as at present, to a sufficient height, and afterwards give the mass time for consolidation before attempting to advance the shield, which in my report to the commissioners for the loan of Exchequer-bills, I stated to be an essential element for success in the undertaking. In the progress he has made through very bad strata, Mr. Brunel has fully tried and proved the great power of his excellent shield; but the strata, rendered worse by the irruptions and the causes assigned by Mr. Brunel, are now too bad for even the shield to overcome. By the substitution of good artificial soil to work through, and keeping the silt or sand back by the piles, there would be much less difficulty or danger; and with proper precautions, my decided opinion is, that the tunnel may be completed notwithstanding the late irruptions, and with comparatively little difficulty or risk.

Here the question naturally presents itself, at what cost? and to answer it with the probability of accuracy is still very difficult.

The amount of the company's capital expended previous to any advance of public money was 180,000. On the 27th of February, 1837, when (64,6007.) received from the Commissioners for the Loan of Exchequer-bills had been expended, I estimated the addition then required to complete it, at....

Making, exclusive of the com

64,600

310,600

pany's capital.... .. £374,000 Between the 27th of February and the 2nd of November, 19,3007. have been expended, making 83,9007. of public money expended to the 2nd of November, but the quantity of work done with the above 19,300l. is only 19 feet six inches, making (inclusive of 1,400/. for pumping, excavating, and claying, after the third irruption), nearly 10001. per foot, which very much exceeds all previous estimates, and proves what I stated in evidence before the Select Committee of the House of Commons, that no prudent man would commit himself to the accuracy of an estimate of this work, while it shows also the impolicy of attempting to drive on the shield through the present bad soil without a sufficient covering and time for consolidation.

In the present situation, I consider that the sum of 150,000l. should be taken as the estimate for completing the tunnelling; and that the shafts and other works remaining to be done, together with the purchases, should not be estimated under 200,0007., making, with the 84,0001. of public money already expended, and the company's capital previously expended, a total of 614,000. for the estimate of the work, or upwards of triple the original estimate, and this is allowing but a moderate sum for contingencies, WHICH

HAVE HERETOFORE BEEN VERY HEAVY.

I have estimated the great descents at double Mr. Brunel's estimate, and yet I have, from the nature of the work, as much doubt as to the sufficiency of that sum as of any other item in my estimate.

If, however, in place of determining to complete the tunnel without reference to cost, which the foregoing observations suppose, the Lords of the Treasury resolve, as heretofore, to confine their operations to the advance of the tunnel, so as to remove any doubt of its getting through, before they sanction a further heavy outlay, then, although I agree with Mr. Brunel that the pumping-well or the shaft with the drift-way or drain would lessen the springs, I do not by any means think them so essential to the progress of the work as to agree in recommending their being proceeded in at present. Up to the time of the second irruption, in

January, 1828, the works were under the uncontrolled management of the directors and engineers, and during that period nothing had been done on the Middlesex side with a view of draining the water from the tunnelling, although it had been advanced to the middle of the river, only 155 feet having been done since; but in the report of 1831 the drift-way or adit is proposed and estimated, with the pumping-well, at 6,000. Mr. Brunel informs me that the drainage in the tunnel is now very small, and the short time in which the water, after irruptions, has been taken out, proves that the present pumping-engine is fully equal to the work.

More rain by two inches fell during the last six months of 1836 than of 1835*, an increase, but not such as to cause a very important difference in the workings, which I ascribe almost entirely to the ground towards the Middlesex side being of a looser and more sandy and silty nature than towards the south side; this, it has always been said by the Trinity officers and others acquainted with that part of the river, would be found to be the case; so that, although the spring-water has been an evil and an hindrance, the Thames water has been another and probably a greater, and is the present enemy, which makes the cases of the London Dock or the Kilsby Tunnel parallel to a certain extent only. It is not in preventing the communication with the spring, but with the river water, that the artificial roof of clay, &c., has been useful.

I agree that the air for respiration would be improved by the drift-way, and probably the present air-pump, which is worked by the steam-engine, rendered unnecessary; but this pump, ingenious as all Mr. Brunel's applications are, appears to completely answer the purpose, and would probably be found quite as effectual in abstracting the sulphurated hydrogen as a drift-way at the bottom would be.

I cannot agree as to the saving of expense by the shorter distance to the Middlesex shaft; the difference of distance in the present situation of the shield would be only 70 yards, and as an excellent railway is laid, and machinery attached for working it by the steam-engine, I am sure that the conveyance of the excavated soil along the bottom of the tunnel to the low ground on the Surrey side must be at least as cheap as to the Middlesex side, where the ground is chiefly covered with buildings, and does

The quantity of rain that fell in the last six months of 1835 (as kept at the Royal Society's Rooms) was 104 inches, and in the corresponding period of 1836 it was 12 inches. In the same period of 1834, a very dry year, it was only six inches.