GENERAL CONDITIONS
 149
Wales coast. The cost of this wall was £6. io.r. per lineal foot, and not only had the wall to withstand severe sea attack, but, owing to the fact that the filling behind it could not be deposited at the time of its construction, to be left unsupported. It has fulfilled its function with complete success. Fig. 38 is a section of the sea-wall built at Hove. Fig. 39 represents that of the west spur of Newhaven breakwater. In these instances a solid concrete structure has cheaply fulfilled the prime function of a
sea-wall under severe conditions of exposure. Wherever practicable, it is eminently desirable to build a sea-wall in mass concrete rather than in blocks, as a monolithic structure is less liable to dislocation than a structure intersected by joints.
  In many of the textbooks the question of sea defence is treated as a matter of mere cash debit and credit. On the one hand, the cost of constructing foreshore works of defence is defined, and the assumed value of the land to be protected is set in an opposite column, and schemes are either approved or condemned on the standard of direct profit and loss. It is probable that in the near future these problems will be dealt with in a different spirit. So far as the cost of foreshore works
 fiCAJJK O* riET 0 6
A-!■-- ■
10
Fig-. 38.—Hove Sea-wall (Mass Concrete)
Fig. 39.— Newhaven Sea-wall (Mass Concrete)