difference to Sir Evelyn Baring has been this. He has had a far freer hand, with far larger personal responsibility, with the certain knowledge that he would be loyally supported at home, and that his measures would not be made subservient to party purposes. This has given free scope to his ability, and the results show how much more advantageous it is to leave such ability unfettered than to crib, cabin, and confine it by crude directions from a country more than two thousand miles distant. The successes of Sir Evelyn Baring's administration, or to speak with more technical correctness, the Egyptian administration under the gentle guidance and supervision of Sir Evelyn, speak for themselves. In 1882, the year of Mr. Gladstone's intervention, the finances of Egypt were such that, taken in consideration with the state of the country, Egyptian stock had sun in the market to 45, and the deficit for the year was £632,368. In 1883 the deficit on the year was £709.397, and in 1884, £665,444. In 1885 there was a small surplus of £3,979, caused by the cutting down of expenditure by nearly one | million, the revenue itself being less than in 1883 and 1884 by between £250,000 and £300,000. In 1886, 1887, 1888, and 1889, though the expenditure increased to more than it was in 1884, the surpluses continued till they reached £653,939 in 1890, and £1,100,000 in 1891. This result has not been produced by an increase of taxation or by an undue lowering of expenditure. On the contrary, though extravagance in various departments has been cut down, there has been a large increase in the expenditure of money upon useful objects, such as education, the improvement of the prisons, and the furtherance of public works, and with it there has been a large remission of taxation. The present healthy state of Egyptian finance has been brought about by a due attention to proper economy, by reforms in the distribution and collection of the taxes, and especially by attention to productive public works. Irrigation is the one thing needful to make Egypt a productive and flourishing country, and to the improvement in the irrigation works, which were completed in 1891, is due more than to any other single cause its present prosperous condition. Sir Evelyn Baring foresaw the necessity of these works in 1884, and chiefly upon his recommendation the powers at the London Conference of that year agreed to the sum of £1,000,000 being added to the debt of Egypt for this purpose. At the time doubts were expressed as to the advisability of adding to the debt of so deeply indebted a country, but the result has more than justified the course then pursued. Altogether a sum of £1,800,000 has been expended since the year 1885 in repairing the "barrage," originally projected by an eminent French engineer, the construction of the Tewfikieh Canal, and other works connected with irrigation and drainage in both Lower and Upper Egypt. The object has been to afford means of water transit independent of the state of the Nile, and to bring water, so to say, to the doors of the fellaheen for them to use for agricultural purposes. In his last report Sir Evelyn Baring says "that he has no hesitation in saying that the expenditure of this £1,800,000 on irrigation and drainage has contributed probably more than any one cause to the comparative prosperity that the country now enjoys." The increase in the cotton crops alone justifies his statement. During the eleven years from 1879-80 to 1889-90 the average yield of the cotton crop annually was two million nine hundred thousand cantars. In 1890-91, when the country had par tially reaped the benefits of the repaired barrage, the crop sprang up to four million one hundred and fifty-nine thousand cantars, and the yield for the year 1891-92 is calculated at not less than four million five hundred thousand cantars. This shows that since the repair of the barrage and the improvement of irrigation works, the crop is one million, six hundred thousand in excess of what it was in the eleven years previous. In money, at even the present low price of cotton, this is an annual gain of £3,000,000. One of the results of this improvement in the finances of Egypt and its increased productiveness, caused by the repairs to the barrage and the drainage works, is a development of its trade, and it is esti mated that, were prices the same now as they were in 1881, the increase in the value of exports and imports would be nearly £7,000,000, and of this trade Great Britain enjoys by far the largest share. There is one feature which requires special notice with regard to this general improvement. Ten years ago wise prophets would tell you that there were three things that were impossible in Egypt Ist, to make it solvent; 2nd, to collect the taxes without the free use of the kourbash; 3rd, to execute public works without that forced and cruel labor which went under | be encouraged and increase without any the name of the corvée. Now, not only change in the law. Finance would again is Egypt solvent, but the use of the kourbash and the corvée have both been abolished. The taxes are now more easily collected than they ever were in the days when the kourbash was systematically applied to the feet of the wretched fellaheen, and more public works have been executed by laborers who are paid a fair day's wage, and are voluntary workers, than ever were in the same time under the remorseless system of corvée. In addition, slavery has been practically abolished; by law slavery is abolished, but there are still many domestic slaves who prefer their present condition to that of free servants. In fact, they rather look down upon the latter with contempt, as holding an inferior status in their master's household. Free servants can be turned away at will, whereas the domestic slave looks upon himself as attached to the domain, and has the right to remain there, and to be kept and fed, till he dies. Whatever socalled slavery exists is voluntary, and not by law compulsory. be neglected, and the taxes be imposed upon the old system of making the poorest pay most and saving the rich. Justice would again become a commodity to be purchased by the rich, and quite out of the reach of those who most require it. In fact, after seven years of prosperity and good government, it is probable that were European control withdrawn, there would be such a rebound that the last state of the country would be worse than the first. Even the great works that have been completed would almost certainly be neglected, and by carelessness and inattention would in time go to ruin. The barrage itself would in time be destroyed. It does not rest on firm rock or on gravel foundations, but simply on the alluvial deposit of the Delta. It is the opinion of experts, and especially of Sir Colin Scott Moncrieff, to whose skill and engineering talents the repair and completion of these works is mainly due, that the great works are safe on only one condition, viz., that they are constantly watched. Speaking of their Very many improvements, that space construction and their present condition, will not permit me to notice here, have he tells us that " while the barrage may be been made in the last seven years, with pronounced a sound reliable work so long regard to the railways, the telegraphs, the as it is carefully watched, and repairs post-office, the army, the police, and espe- always effected as they are required, it cially in the criminal courts and in the would be madness to cease this careful administration of justice. It is no exag-surveillance." Sir Evelyn Baring, who geration to say that, at no period of their has watched the repairs anxiously from known history have the Egyptian people the beginning, adds that, "much as he enjoyed anything like the advantages they do at the present time. Their national prosperity has been greatly increased, and they now enjoy rights and privileges to which they have been strangers for thousands of years. These advantages are directly due to the controlling influence of this country, and so far from these advantages conferred upon them being a burden to us, our population has gained directly by increased commercial trade. The serious question for responsible people in this country to ask themselves is, Whether this beneficial improvement is to continue, or whether it is to be checked and probably entirely destroyed? One thing is certain, that unless there is some European control all the advantages that have been gained during the last seven years will vanish. Were Egypt left to itself, if that be possible, or were it again to pass under the control of Turkish pashas, the kourbash and the corvée would be quickly revived, and though slavery might not be legalized, it would wishes to see natives of Egypt employed in the service of government to the utmost extent possible, he is most decidedly..of opinion that it is essential, in the interests of the whole population, that for many years to come the barrage should be placed under the charge of highly qualified European engineers." Not merely have the works as they stand added enormously to the material prosperity of the country, which would be injuriously affected by any neglect of maintenance, but they are capable of almost unlimited expansion. One of the gravest and most disastrous errors of Mr. Gladstone's government was their disclaiming responsibility for the Soudan provinces in 1883. Had they then owned the responsibility which their own actions of the year before had imposed upon them, and taken in hand boldly the pacification and restoration to order of that country, there can be no doubt that their efforts would have been successful. It is quite true that many of the Egyptian and Turkish governors of provinces and districts in the Soudan abused the powers entrusted to them, and ground down the people under them, and, with greedy rapacity, appropriated to themselves the goods and money they had no right to. It is not surprising that many of those whom Mr. Gladstone described as "men struggling to be free," and to fight whom he immediately afterwards sent British troops, should have been goaded into insurrection. But the rule of even the Egyptian pashas was preferable to anarchy, and under British guidance this rule would soon have been converted into a real and lasting blessing for all the inhabitants of the Soudanese provinces. The results of the anarchy of the last ten years, for which Mr. Gladstone's government is chiefly responsible, are too horrible to contemplate. The population in 1882 was considered to be by those best informed on the subject about eleven millions. Father Ohrwalder, who has recently escaped from Khartoum and made his way to Cairo, is of opinion that three-fifths of this population of the Soudan have been destroyed during the last ten years by war, famine, and disease. The rule of the Mahdist dervishes is cruel in the extreme; there is great discontent, and we are told that the whole population of the Soudan, with the exception, perhaps, of the race that supply the soldiers for the Mahdi's army, "would welcome the re-establishment of Egyptian rule." When Lord Granville disclaimed responsibility of the Soudan in 1883, and adopted the easy policy of letting things take their course, all the consequences of his action were foretold by those acquainted with the country. Nobody understood the circumstances of the country better than Sir Samuel Baker, and again and again in the columns of the Times he raised his voice against England's fatuous neglect, and foretold the dire consequences which have since actually come to pass. The advocates of laissez faire then were certain that the Soudan ought never to have belonged to Egypt, and that when once it was separated it would never again be annexed. I am not quite sure that Sir Evelyn Baring himself did not to some extent share their views. If he did, he has altered them now. He tells us in his last report that the "Soudan, so far, at least, as Khartoum, ought to be, and he trusts will be eventually, re-occupied by Egyptian troops," and adds that, "should that event ever take place, a certain very limited amount of European guidance and assistance will be indispensable in order to avoid a recurrence to the abuses of the past." Everybody will agree with Sir Evelyn that now is not the time to attempt a reconquest or a re-occupation. It is one thing to have kept it in 1883, and another thing to try to retake it in 1892. But it is possible that civilizing influences may spread there without recourse to the sword, and that the different provinces may gradually come under the influence of Egyptian and European control. The continuation of the barrage up the Nile would go a long way towards effecting this. Were the Nile navigable to Khartoum, independent of the obstructions of the cataracts, and were the water stored at various points for the purposes of irrigation, not only would hundreds of thousands of feddans of land be made fertile, but the whole of the provinces would be brought within the reach of civilizing influences. Many schemes for the extension of the barrage are now under consideration, and their eventual success depends entirely upon whether or not Egypt remains under European control. If European control is necessary, as no one acquainted with the East can doubt, for retaining the advantages Egypt has already in recent years acquired, and for still further developing the vast resources of the country and the adjacent provinces, the only remaining question is what European control is the best. Joint control has already been tried and it has not proved a success. One of the evils that retard progress in Egypt now is the liability she is under in various matters to the interference of the various powers. The retention of the capitulations and the voice the various powers have in the expenditure of certain of her funds are distinct and acknowledged disadvantages. dual control of France and England honestly and with good faith on the part of both countries commenced under the government of Lord Beaconsfield, succeeded during fine weather but collapsed on the first approach of a storm. If there is to be any effective and beneficial European control it must be that of one European nation, and the only nations that could exercise that control are either France or England. Considering the events of the last ten years, it seems absolutely impossible that France could take the place that England now holds. The material interests of this country in Egypt have always The The declarations made with regard to Egypt by Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Morley at Newcastle will probably have no real effect upon the policy of this country with regard to Egypt; but in Egypt itself and been far greater than those of France. Our | bors are calculating upon a possible change trade with it is infinitely larger, and for of government. every French vessel that passes through the Canal there are fifteen British. Considering our position in India it is simply impossible that we could quietly allow Egypt to pass under French control. Experts may differ as to whether the Ca-in France, and perhaps in other European nal or the Cape would be the best route to India in time of war, but the safe course is to secure as far as possible_that both should be open to us. In 1882, when danger was at hand, France voluntarily withdrew from the dual control. She practically renounced her responsibilities under that arrangement and by her action compelled us alone to pull the chestnuts out of the fire. During that time she had only one thing to complain of the speeches of Mr. Gladstone. He was then the responsible minister of this country, and while his actions were necessitating a prolonged stay of British troops in Egypt he was constantly declaring that their stay was only temporary and implying that it would be for a very short period. No one would impute to Mr. Gladstone insincerity in the mischievous declarations he was then in the habit of making. He, no doubt, implicitly believed them. They only show that he was entirely ignorant of the country and the people with whom he was interfering, and that when he drifted into interference, he had never considered what the permanent consequences of such interference, from the very nature of the case, must necessarily be. His declarations have undoubtedly rendered the position of Great Britain far more difficult than it otherwise would have been, and are the main cause of the irritation felt by many of the French. Lord Salisbury, recognizing the obligations such declarations imposed upon this country, did his best to redeem them by proposing what is known as the Drummond-Wolff Convention. All candid Frenchmen now admit that it was as foolish for them not to accept this convention as an arrangement entirely redeeming the foolish promises made by Mr. Gladstone as it was for them in 1882 to have withdrawn their ships from the harbor of Alexandria. Every fairminded person must admit that the French as a nation have nothing whatever to complain of in Lord Salisbury's policy of the last seven years. It is impossible to formulate any charge against it, and the chances are that we should hear no complaints of it from the other side of the Channel were it not that our astute neigh countries, they have already had a disturbing effect little thought of by their authors. In Egypt they have done much mischief. With all her present prosperity there is one thing that that country stands greatly in need of, viz., capital; up to now British investors have been very slow in sinking their capital in Egypt, and the sole reason that prevents them doing so is the uncertainty of the continuance of British control there. Were it absolutely certain that the Egyptian policy of this country would be continuous- the same under a Radical government as it has been under the Unionist one-there can be no doubt that British capital would flow rapidly to that country to the mutual advantage of both nations. The one weak plank in the Egyptian platform is the element of doubt, the uncertainty as to the continuity of British control. That it will continue is almost a certainty. Even if the Radical party were to come in, events would be too strong for them again, as they were in 1882, and the Newcastle declarations, like many others similar, would have to be explained away. Lord Rosebery would probably be foreign secretary, and he is certain to continue the policy he adopted for six months in 1886. After Lord Salisbury, Lord Rosebery probably understands the bearings of foreign policy better than any other statesman belonging to any of the political parties, and were he left to himself the interests of the Empire would be safe. The question is, Will he be left to himself? The Radical party of the present day consists of a variety of sections --some with imperial instincts, like the writers in the Pall Mall Gazette and the more moderate members of the party; others, with self-denying views, like Mr. Morley and Sir Wilfrid Lawson, who apparently do not think that any possession we have is worth fighting for; others, like the Irish members, who would always side with the enemies of Great Britain, and others, with wondrous convictions on non-intervention, universal arbitration, and peace at any price and the probabilities are that Lord Rosebery would be hampered, as Lord Granville was, and that the difficulties inherent in the management of foreign affairs would been thousands of French peasants who be enormously enhanced by the diver- had invested their savings in Egyptian gence of the views of his Radical support-securities. ers. Not only have the Newcastle declarations of Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Morley had an injurious effect in Egypt, but they have already raised false hopes both in Turkey and France. Politics, like poverty, makes strange bedfellows, and were the issue not so grave it would be amusing to think of Turkish pashas gloating over the prospect of their old "bag-and-baggage "foe, Mr. Gladstone, coming again into power. That they expect some personal gain from the event, if it happens, is certain. They do not anticipate this happy result from any affection that the late prime minister may have towards them, but they think, not without reason, that in the general hurly-burly which his return to power would inevitably produce, they may gain some of their lost authority, and that there may be some chance of the return of the good old times of kourbash and corvée. The French were so elated with the speeches referred to that they wished to fête the heroes of them, and actually invited the statesman who had made promises which it was impossible to fulfil to a public banquet. Had the invitation been accepted, it would have been interesting to see whether a French audience would have been as satisfied with the explaining away of the obvious meaning of words as are certain constituencies of Great Britain and Ireland. All parties in England are desirous of being on the best possible terms with France. She is our nearest neighbor, and we have far more in common with her, in sentiment and interests, than we have with any other nation of Europe. It should be our aim to maintain the most cordial relations with her. That they feel a certain amount of soreness at our presence in Egypt is unquestionably true. To a great extent they are angry with themselves for the two fatal mistakes their political leaders made in ordering their fleet to run away in 1882, and in rejecting the Drummond-Wolff convention. Great as were the mistakes made by Mr. Gladstone's government in that year, the one mistake of the French government was greater. What, however, now sustain and increase the irritation and annoyance are the false hopes raised by such speeches as those made by Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Morley at Newcastle. If by any untoward chance, and by the folly of the electors in not knowing upon what the true interests of the nation depend, the Radical party were to be returned to power at the general election, one of the first things France would require would be the fulfilment of the expectations raised by Radical oratory. This could not be complied with without the upsetting of all the great work that has been done during the last seven years, and that section of the Radical party which has the same imperial instincts as the members of the Unionist party would not permit it; the only result would be increased irritation on the part of France, and the embittering of the relations between the two countries. France and Turkey are the only powers that in any way are jealous of British intervention in Egypt. The other powers of Europe are content that matters should remain as they are. That they should prefer British control to French is only natural. Had France intervened instead of Great Britain she would probably have As for Egypt, it would be the height of acted as she has in Tunis and in other cruelty to arrest in any way the beneficial places within the sphere of her influence, treatment she is now undergoing. The her protective system favoring French last seven years of good government have producers, and placing those of other improved and benefited her condition far countries at a disadvantage. Now, so long beyond the anticipations of even those as Egypt is under British control, every who have the strongest faith in the effects power has exactly the same rights and of good government. Another seven years facilities for trading and manufacturing as of similar government will vastly increase we have ourselves. Had the French and place on a firm basis those improvegained Tel-el-Kebir there can be but little ments, and Europe and Great Britain, as doubt that short work would have been well as Egypt, will reap the benefit. Should made with the capitulations afterwards. this bright future be marred by the acEngland, on the contrary, in every possi- cession of the Radical party to power, a ble way, has consulted the wishes of the serious responsibility will rest with the various powers, and sought their co-oper-electorate of Great Britain and Ireland. ation, and amongst the chief gainers have W. T. MARRIOTT. |