BREAKWATER OP CHERBOURG. In M. de Cessart's .Description des Travaux Hydrauliques, will be •found a very minute and laborious detail of all the preparatory operations, the progress and the expense of constructing the Breakwater of Cherbourg, up to the period of the Revolution. But the history of this great undertaking is summarily stated in a re port made to the National Assembly in 1791, by M. de Curt, in the name of its Committee of Marine, concerning the Marine Establishment of Cherbourg.
It had always been a source of considerable an noyance to the French (and more particularly since thedeasolition of the works and basin of Dunkirk, which cost them more regret than the melees and exl pensive projects for that port ever could be worth), that while the whole line of their coast, bordering on the English Channel, presented only sandy shores with shallow water, or an iron-bound coast bristled with rocks, Nature had lavished on their " eternal rival" of the opposite coast, the incalcu lable advantages of a succession of deep and com modious harbours, or of safe and extensive road steads, inviting their possessors to commerce and navigation, and placing in their grasp " the sceptre and the sovereignty of the seas." M. Curt ob serves, that " the misfortunes of La Hogue, which all the talents of Tourville could not prevent, taught Louis XIV., that, in completing the defence of his frontiers by land, he had too much neglected his frontiers on the sea ; that this great prince, however, profiting by experience, soon discovered that Eng land owed the superiority of her marine to the mili tary establishments which she possessed in the Chan nel. ' With a view of securing to France similar advantages, the Marechal de Vauban was directed to visit the coasts of Normandy, for the purpose of adopting measures for placing in security, against hostile attacks, all such bays, harbours, and inlets, as were favourable for the disembarkation of troops; and to furnish plans of such works as he might judge to be necessary, not only for military, but for naval purposes. Among other projects, he reported that
the roadstead of Cherbourg possessed the means of attack, of defence, and of protection ; that it was very capable of exerting an influence on maritime war, and in their commercial relations with the northern powers ; that it was the spot on which the head-quarters should be established on the coast of the Channel ; and, in short, that it was a central ad vance post with regard to England. He moreover reported, that it might be made a port for the safe retreat of a squadron crippled by stormy weather, or beaten by an enemy, or even for the reception of .a victorious fleet with its prizes. By thus convert. ing the present exposed roadstead of Cherbourg into ,a safe and protected anchorage for a fleet of men of war, France, he said, would be able to watch the motions of England ; to oblige her at all times to keep a corresponding fleet in the Channel ; and to menace her shores with invasion of which she at all times stood so much in dread.
Opinions, however, being divided between the ad vantages of La Hogue and Cherbourg, Louis XVI., immediately after the conclusion of the American ,War, issued his directions to M. de Castries, Secre tary of State for the Marine, to appoint a special commission, to consider and report which of these two roadsteads combined the most advantages, and was, in all respects, preferable for constructing a port and naval arsenal capable of receiving and equipping from 80 to 100 vessels of war of different descriptions. The Commissioners had little hesita tion in deciding upon Cherbourg, because, by means of a Breakwater, it would be capable not only of ad mitting a fleet to ride securely at anchor when thus sheltered from the sea, but also of affording them protection against any attempt of an enemy. It was added, that Cherbourg was an admirable to for to Watching Portsmouth, without appearing have once recollected what an excellent anchorage Spit head was for watching Cherbourg.