— 89 — 
estimate as it was in my original programme. Mr. Webb’s criticism 
of the project was based on facts which are outside the project. 
He supposed that the Wady Rayan was to remain a reservoir for all 
time and that it was not to be aided by the works on the Upper Nile. 
Now the project I proposed and which I propose now, presupposes 
that the Wady Ray an will be a temporary reservoir and final flood 
escape for the Nile, and that it will be aided in years of very deficient 
flood by the gradual improvement of the Upper Nile owing to the 
works undertaken there. 
37. Sir William Garstin’ s programme for water storage 
and flood control. — In the first appendix to his Report on the 
Upper Nile, Sir William Garstin, G.C.M.G., Adviser to the Ministry 
of Public Works, has drawn up a programme of works for water 
storage and flood control in the Nile valley. He approves of the 
raising of the Assuan dam for £500,000, and the conversion of the 
Rosetta branch of the Nile into a flood escape for £900,000. He 
then conditionally approves of a proposal suggested by Mr. J. S. Beres- 
ford, C.I.E., for making a straight cut from Bor on the Albert Nile to 
the mouth of the Sobat river at the tail of the Albert Nile. The line 
would be 340 kilometres in length and is estimated to cost £5,500,000, 
and carry 600 cubic metres per second in summer. In case of the 
line being found impracticable when it was surveyed and levelled, 
Sir William proposed abandoning the Albert Nile and thoroughly 
widening and deepening the Zeraf river for £3,400,000. 
As a criticism of the Bor cut project I cannot write anything more 
convincing from my point of view than a letter written by me and 
published by “The Engineer” in October of this year. 
“ In your issue of the 16th September Sir Hanbury Brown has 
reviewed the scheme suggested by Mr. J. S. Beresford, C.I.E., and 
conditionally approved by Sir William Garstin, for diverting the 
waters of the Albert Nile (known as the Bahr-el-Gebel) from Bor to 
the mouth of the Sobat river, on a length 340 kilometres, and sending 
them down a canal capable of carrying 600 cubic metres per second, 
at an estimated cost of £5,500,000. In his review Sir Hanbury puts 
his finger on the weak point in the project, viz., the difficulty and loss 
of water entailed at the crossing of the Albert Nile just upstream of 
the Sobat mouth. The difficulty will be got over, as Sir Hanbury 
himself suggests, by an earthern embankment provided with a regu- 
lator. The loss of water cannot be got over. 
