would be inevitably ruined. It was the same Menes who, upon the solid ground thus rescued from the water, first built the town now known by the name of Memphis, which is situated in the narrowest part of Egypt. To the north and west of Memphis he also sunk a lake, communicating with the river, which, from the situation of the Nile, it was not possible to effect toward the east."

From this interesting and instructive passage we learn, that at a very early period, in the infancy of the Egyptian monarchy, their hydraulic engineers had the boldness to attempt, and the skill to successfully accomplish, the stupendous undertaking of diverting the course of a broad and rapid river, a labour to which the annals of modern engineering offer no parallel; and whose great and many practical difficulties can only be appreciated by those who are acquainted with the nature of the country.

So formidable and so improbable has appeared this enterprise, that many commentators have considered the narrative as typical of some great change effected in the constitution of the country, but the literal truth of the account has been pointed out by Sir Gardner Wilkinson,* as "strongly corroborated by the actual appearance of the Nile, near the spot where, according to Herodotus, the river was dyked off, which he fixes at about a hundred stades above Memphis. Near Kafr el Iyat, fourteen miles above Metrahenni, it takes a considerable curve to the eastward; and would, if the previous direction of its course continued, run immediately below the Libyan mountain to Sakkara."

To this testimony we may add that derived from our personal and careful examination of the spot; and though the gradual elevation of the whole country, by the deposit of the rich soil of the Nile, has concealed the dyke, yet the track of the ancient bed of the river may still be traced by the low ground, extending from Kafr el Iyat to where it joins the Bahr Joussuffee, a little to the north of Bernasht. The Bahr Joussuffee, or River of Joseph, is an artificial canal, branching out from the Nile, near Hermopolis, and forms the trunk which supplies the smaller canals with water for inundation and irrigation. To the south of Bernasht, it is evidently formed by excavation, but to the northward thereof, it loses its artificial appearance, and flows past the ancient site of Memphis, near the Libyan mountain, occupying the broad and shallow channel of the old bed of the river.

It may be here mentioned, that the ignorant inhabitants of the country ascribe the formation of the Bahr Joussuffee to Joseph, the son of Jacob; and this evidently points to a tradition of its

Vide his "Egypt and Thebes," P. 341; and also his Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, Vol. I.

VOL. XVIII.

great antiquity, though the actual name may have arisen from its having been repaired by the Sultan Joussuf Salah é Deen, commonly called by our writers Saladin. It is also called El Menhee and El Bainhee, the former of which names evidently refers to the Menes of Herodotus.

That part of the ancient bed of the river, north of Memphis, appears to have been used as a canal during the time of Herodotus; and vessels coming from Naucratis to Memphis, sailed, during the inundation, along the side of the Libyan mountain, and thus avoided the rapid stream of the river.

Political and religious motives may alike have dictated to Menes the eligibility of diverting the course of the river ;-political, for, by placing the Nile between his new capital and the only vulnerable side of Egypt, it formed a barrier of safety against the sudden irruptions of the Nomade tribes of central Asia, who, from the earliest period, seem to have "breathed the living cloud of war," wherever hope of plunder might lead them; and their fierce and occasional irruptions could only be bounded by natural obstacles.

it

The peculiar tenets of the Egyptians seem to have led them to associate more with the eternal dead than the living; and as the locality for the new city seems to have been pointed out by its situation as commanding both Upper and Lower Egypt, may have been considered necessary to divert the course of the Nile, in order to connect the city with the western mountain, called emphatically in the inscriptions, "the region of the Amenti and abode of the Dead," behind which the bright orb of day sank each night to rest.

We are informed that the inundation was under the care of proper officers, whose duty related to the distribution of the water throughout the whole country, and its withdrawal at the proper period; and the system established by the ancients has probably continued unto the present day, but followed with less vigilance and attention; and the consequence is, that we have often seen some parts of the country over-inundated, whilst others have not had the proper supply; and, during the year of a low Nile, from proper care not having been taken to husband the water, famine has been the result. The difference between ancient and modern supervision, is shewn by the fact, that with a population of seven millions, Ancient Egypt exported grain in large quantities, whilst Modern Egypt, with scarce two millions, is occasionally obliged to import corn from Europe; and the cotton and other articles, intoduced by the present Pacha, cannot be considered an equivalent.

*In the Hieroglyphics Menie.

But we are wandering from our subject.-The whole country is divided into separate portions or levels, by dykes or embankments, which, at various places, are pierced with sluices, the opening and shutting of which regulates the quantity of water in each district. The water being supplied principally by taking it higher up the Nile, is generally somewhat above the level of the river adjoining, into which, should there be an excess, it is run off. It often happens, that individual interest and the public weal are at variance with regard to the quantity of water and the time of its admission and withdrawal; but for an individual to have interfered with this, appears, amongst the Ancient Egyptians, to have been held a sin of no small importance, as in the usual negative confession of the Ritual, one of the sins that the deceased denies to have committed is, " to have pierced the water in its increase, or to have partitioned an arm (or canal) from its course."

In our next, we propose giving an account of their engineering works in the Fyoom, and the mode with which that fertile district was supplied with water; and the following will treat of their skill, as displayed in those wonders of the ancient world,the everlasting Pyramids.

Scientific Adjudication.

BEFORE THE PRIVY COUNCIL.

On the petition of JOHN WOODCROFT, of Manchester, for the extension of the term of a Patent Right, granted 31st March, 1827, to BENNETT WOODCROFT, "for his invention of certain processes and apparatus for printing and preparing for manufacture, yarns of linen, cotton, silk, woollen, and other fabrics." (See vol. I., page 32, of the Second Series of the London Journal of Arts, &c.)

The judicial committee of the privy council met on the 11th of February, to hear and decide upon the petition for an extension of this patent. The judges present were Lord Brougham, Mr. Justice Bosanquet, Mr. Justice Erskine, and Dr. Lushington.

Sir W. Follett and Mr. Teed appeared for the petitioner; Mr. Hill and Mr. E. F. Moore on behalf of Messrs. Delaunay, in opposition to the petition; and the Attorney-General appeared on behalf of the crown.

Solicitors for the petitioner, Messrs. Kay, Barlow, and Aston; solicitor for the opposers, Mr. Harrison Blair. Agents for the opposers, Messrs. Newton and Berry, Chancery-lane, London.

Mr. Teed opened the case, the usual proof of the patent having been granted, and the necessary advertisements in the public prints given. It appeared that caveats had been entered by Messrs. Delaunay, Messrs. Stone and Kemp, and Mr. Lewis Schwabe.

At the suggestion of Mr. Hill, an assignment was put in and read between Bennett Woodcroft of the one part, and John Woodcroft of the other part, reciting several letters patent, and reciting the dissolution of the partnership by the parties in 1835, but that no settlement of the accounts had been made between the parties, and that a bill had been filed in chancery; that to terminate the suit and settle the disputes between the parties, they had been referred to arbitration; that an award had been made which was recited, viz., that £800 should be paid by John to Bennett Woodcroft; and that on payment of that sum Bennett Woodcroft should assign his interest in the letters patent to John Woodcroft; that Bennett Woodcroft had previously granted licenses to certain persons named to use the invention; and that it was agreed that in consideration of the £800. the payment of which was acknowledged, Bennett Woodcroft should assign his interest in the patent in question to John Woodcroft.

Mr. Teed stated that by an agreement made on the 18th of September, it was agreed, in case of an extension of the patents, Bennett Woodcroft should be interested in one-third, and John Woodcroft in two-thirds.

Joseph Brotherton, Esq., M.P., sworn.—Mr. Hill; Are you interested in this patent?-Not in the slightest degree.

You are not a partner with either of these gentlemen ?—Not at all. Examined by Mr. Teed: You are acquainted with the Messrs. Woodcroft ? -I am.

Have you been long acquainted with them?—About five and twenty years. Mr. John Woodcroft and Mr. Bennett Woodcroft ?—Yes.

Do you know of Mr. Bennett Woodcroft being engaged in the printing of yarns?—Yes.

Do you know whether he was engaged for any considerable time in that ?— I think he was, but I cannot precisely state the time.

Do you know whether his health was affected by his application to it ?— I think he was very assiduous in his attention to the invention.

You knew him when the patent was obtained?—Yes, in March, 1827. Have you any knowledge of the expense which was incurred in obtaining the patent?-I always understood

Lord Brougham: You must tell us what you know yourself.—I could only know from the statement of the partners that it was about one thousand two hundred pounds.

Mr. Teed: Have you been engaged in the examination of their acconnts for any purpose?—I have frequently seen their accounts.

Do you know from the result of the examination of the accounts, what it was?

Mr. Hill objected to the question.

The council were informed that the state of the accounts must be proved by the person who kept them.

Mr. Teed: Do you know of Mr. Woodcroft taking any premises for the purpose of applying this patent?—Yes, they took some premises of the late Mr. Berry, a gentleman whose executor I am.

When was that?—I think it was about the year 1830, but I am not quite certain as to the dates.

Do you know what they were?—It was a factory.

Is there more than one factory? There was one principal factory, and probably there might be an additional building, but not to any great extent. Did you negociate the arrangement ?—I was present when the agreement was entered into.

Do you know the rent?

Mr. Hill: Was it in writing ?—I believe there was a memorandum made at the time. I think the rent was about three hundred and forty pounds ayear; I received it as executor.

Mr. Teed: Did they take any dye-mills?—Yes.

Were those taken of Mr. Berry also?-Those premises were also leased to Mr. Berry, and I think Mr. Berry assigned the lease of those premises for the remainder of the term, but as executors we had no interest in those premises. Lord Brougham: Do you know where they had carried on business before one thousand eight hundred and thirty?—Yes, in Manchester, in New Cannon-street, Manchester.

In premises of the same extent or less-They were of considerable extent, but less in extent, but equal in value; the rent was greater for the accomodation. Mr. Teed: Were the premises they rented of Mr. Berry additional to those in Manchester?—I think they must have carried on the printing elsewhere. Lord Brougham: Did they continue to carry on the business in the other premises after they took Mr. Berry's premises?—Yes.

Mr. Teed: Do you know whether they procured any additional machinery for the purposes of these patents?—They did.

Do you know to what extent ?-I think to the amount of five thousand pounds.

Lord Brougham: You are acquainted with machinery so as to know about its value?—Yes.

That was the machinery they put up in the premises of Mr. Berry?—Yes. Mr. Teed: Would that machinery be applicable to the ordinary purposes of cotton printing without alteration?—I think not.

Have you any idea what the value of the machinery would be now, supposing it applied to its ordinary purposes?—I cannot say, but it very much depreciates it in value.

Lord Brougham: What would be about the expense necessary to render it applicable to cotton printing?—I am not able to say.

Mr. Teed: You were the arbitrator to whom the differences between Mr. Bennett Woodcroft and his son were referred ?-I was.

You made an award?-Yes.

In making the award what value did you set upon the patent right?—I do not think that we made any distinct calculation as to the value of the patent, that was included in the value of the machinery and the stock altogether.

Lord Brougham: Whatever you may have done you must have made up your mind before you made that award; now consider whether you are able to state what value you had put upon it?-It was not valued at much, I think, for it was at a time when the trade was exceedingly flat, and very little doing -and I think we did not estimate the value of the patent at any great sum -a few hundred pounds probably.

About how many hundred pounds?-Mr. Bennett Woodcroft's interest was one-third, and of course we allowed what would be one-third of the value, but there was no specific value agreed.

When you say a few hundred pounds, do you mean that the proportion of one-third was a few hundred pounds, or the value of the whole ?—At that time the impression was such with regard to the future prospects of the patent, I should think not more than two or three hundred pounds was considered as Mr. Bennett Woodcroft's interest.

For one-third?-Yes, for one-third.

Mr. Teed: Are you acquainted with the state of the cotton printing trade from the year 1828, downwards?—I was.

Do you know whether or not there was any cause for interfering with the value of the patent after it was granted?-When the patent was granted there was a duty on printed calicoes, and afterwards that duty was repealed; the printing of yarns was not subjected to the duty; of course, the taking off of the print duty on cottons had the effect of reducing the value of these articles that were printed in yarn, because they partook more of the nature of the gingham trade than of printed goods.