3G 



• KNOWLEDGE 



[Jan. 19, 1883. 



Electric Light and Power Company (Limited), which was 

 formed to work the patents of .John Banting Rogers, a 

 gentleman who has obtained an unenviable notoriety in 

 scientific circles. ,£40,000 in cash and j£70,000 in shares 

 was to have been the cost of his patents, but, fortunately 

 tor the public, only .£1.'J,71-'J has been subscribed, of which 

 but .£6,'2SG has been paid. The smallness of these figures 

 is gratifying, considering the almost universal and un- 

 equivocal plaudits bestowed by the general and quasi- 

 scientilic press upon the " multiple binding-screw " craze. 

 Messrs. Ferranti, Thompson, &, Ince (Limited), out of a 

 nominal capital of £240,000, pay £180,000 in shares to the 

 vendors. 



In the third group are enumerated fourteen " companies 

 which do not appear to have been proceeded with practi- 

 cally," including the " Self-generating Electric Light and 

 Power Company " (unregistered), which, if formed, was to 

 pay a Mr. R. H. Simons £80,000 in cash and £40,000 

 in shares for an incandescent lamp which he hoped to 

 invent (!) and a bichromate battery. The combined 

 nominal capital in this series is stated at £4,450,000, of 

 which the vendors were to receive £40-5, 98G in cash and 

 £1,035,036 in shares. 



The fourth group embraces thirteen " companies, mostly 

 recent, information about which is wanting, or not yet 

 obtainable." 



" We find from our figures," says our contemporary, 

 " that the amount of actual capital issued, £7,888,440, 

 was 48 per cent, of the nominal total of the capital of the 

 companies comprised in Groups I. and II., and but 38 per 

 cent, of that of those comprised in Groups I., IT., and III. 

 Of this issued amount, again, 40 per cent, has been allotted 

 as fully paid up to vendors, &c., leaving GO per cent. — i.e., 

 under 23 per cent, of the whole nominal amount — to be 

 paid up liy the public. Roughly, eleven twenty-thirds of 

 this has been already paid. That is to say, in the case of 

 these companies (which do not include syndicate, agency, 

 or share trust associations), a sum equal to 1 1 per cent, of 

 the total registered capital represents the actual amount of 

 public money received, while 12 per cent, of the same 

 amount forms the extent of liability on future possible 

 calls. Thus, out of a total nominal capital of something 

 under twenty-five millions sterling, less than two millions 

 and three-quarters has been bomt-fide invested, while the 

 amount of shareholders' indebtedness stands at a trifle over 

 three millions. 



"Out of the total paid-up capital, £2,219,094, 

 £1,076,945 has found itswayinto promoters' pockets, leaving 

 £1,142,049 as working capital to earn a dividend upon 

 £5,356,229 share capital. In other words, to pay a 5 per 

 cent, dividend all round, over 23 per cent, must be earned, 

 net, by the moneys actually employed in working the 

 business. Even if all calls were made and paid, and thus 

 absorbed as working capital, over 10 per cent, would have 

 to be earned." 



The shareholders have themselves to blame for this 

 state of aflairs, for had they, instead of relying upon the 

 science of the daily press, consulted trustworthy sources, 

 they would have learned sufficient to guard them against 

 the threatened danger. It is to be feared that, although 

 the money sunk in electric light undertakings is com- 

 paratively very small, the effect will be very prejudicial 

 to the true interests of the new illuminant, and we trust 

 that the stock-jobbing excitement observable last Jlay, 

 when no less than thirty-five companies were registered, 

 will never be repeated. There is a wide field open for 

 real business companies having to earn profits for a 

 working capital only, and we shall look forward some- 

 •what anxiously to the coming spring, when will probably 



be decided tlie fate of very many undertakings, and, 

 possibly, the prospects of the light for years to come ; 

 but wo should seriously deprecate anything like a recur- 

 rence of the events of the past eighteen months. 



WAS RAMESES II. THE PHARAOH 

 OF THE OPPRESSION? 



By Amelia B. Edwards. 



XVI.— TEL-EL-MASKHUTA VEItSUS THE "EAAMSES" OF 

 THE BIBLE (EXAMINATION OF THE EVIDENCE). 



(Conchtsion.) 



G. Pa-Rameses iras supplied with salt and nitre from 

 tiro ncirjlihouring pieces of tvaier. We learn these facts 

 from the Letter of Panbesa* : — 



" The Pool of Horua gives salt ; 

 Lake Pahura gives nitre." 



Lake Pahura, as suggested by Dr. Birch, is doubtless 

 one of the " Bitter," or Natron, Lakes in the Isthmus of 

 Suez (" Records of the Past," vol. vi., p. 14). The name 

 of this lake, Pahura, has not, I believe, been found in the 

 geographical lists, or anywhere save in the letter of 

 Panbesa. 



The " Pool of Horus " is, however, identical in name 

 with the " Shet-Hor " (Pool of Horus) of the inscription of 

 Menephthah at Kamak before quoted : — 



" He established outposts before Pa-Baris (Bubastis) in 

 the vicinity of the canal Shakana, to the north of /ihet 

 Ilor" (Pool of Horus). t 



This is the only occasion upon which the name SJiaka7ia 

 has as yet been found ; but if the " Pool of Horus " here 

 referred to be the same " Pool of Horus " celebrated by 

 Panbesa, then we have to look for the canal in the near 

 neighbourhood of Bubastis and Pa-Rameses, and for the 

 pool somewhere to the southward of the canal. Now, were 

 Bubastis and Pa-Rameses both situate in the open country, 

 and surrounded by a network of water-waj's, we might 

 seek in vain for a probable identification of S/iakana ; but 

 the question is narrowed to a single issue by the peculiar 

 position of the B'l-ltcn of Rameses II. Stationed midway of 

 a contracted valley traversed by one artificially-constructed 

 canal, the waters of which were "derived from the Nile a 

 little above the city of Bubastis,'':}: it becomes evident that 

 the only canal which could be regarded as in the neighbour- 

 hood of both Bubastis and Pa-Rameses is that ancient and 

 famous waterway of Seti the First, called " Ta Tena," or 

 " The Cutting." In this case, Shalatia is but another, 

 and perhaps a more modern, name for " I'a Tena." But, 

 it may be urged, we have no proof that these two Pools of 

 Horus were one and the same ; and, again, Egyptologists 

 may perhaps remind me that ]M. Chabas, noting the not 

 unfroquent recurrence of the name " Sliet-llor " in Egyp- 

 tian texts, obser\'es " qu'il y a lieu de remarquer que ce 

 nom est du nombre de ceus qui ont pu etre multiplies par 

 la piete des Egyptiens." To this objection, however, the 

 improbability that two pieces of water so nearly adjacent 

 should be called by the same name, is a sufficient reply. 



Assuming that the canals S/iakana and Ta Tena are 

 identical, we have now to seek for the site of the Pool of 

 Horus, 



Turning to the sketch-map of Wady Tiimilat, at p. 3,">7, 

 in the second volume of Kxowledge, it will be seen that 



* See Knowledge, Oct. 13, 18S2, p, 324, 



+ Thus translated by Chabas (" L'Antiquito Historique," p, 203) 

 and by Dr. Birch (" Records of the Past," vol. iv., p. -11). 

 X Herodotus, book ii., chap. 158. 



