The Sun.
London, England, 1851-10-23 00:00:00

THURSDAY " EVENING, OCT OBEF

our own. If the Pacha be completely independent of
the Sultan, then is our Consul-General in Egypt an
independent diplomatic potentate also, subject only
to orders from Downing-street. Whereas, if Egypt
he still considered a province of the Porte, there is a
consular agent there bound to consider the British
Minister at the capital as his superior. Whether this
weighty matter is settled by the award of Downing-
street, or by a profound inquiry into the nature of the
Tanzimaut, we are not fully aware. That the affair
of the railroad would be settled, and satisfac-
torily, without armies or war, or even prolonged
quarrel, we were well aware. Reschid Pacha
is not a statesman who would choose for
his ground of quarrel with Egypt a
question in which British interests were so
deeply concerned. But the permission to execute the
railroad, and the setting aside all remonstrances or
diplomacy respecting it, by no means appeases the
rivalry or extinguishes the quarrel between the Sultan
and the Pacha. It will assume some other form, put
for ward other causes or pretexts. And the defeat of
the Porte,which its waiving its objection, is tantamount
to, will but augment the inclination to quarrel. We
must confess to taking the same view of the Tanzi-
maut quarrel as of the railroad business, which is,
that it is much better to make matters up, dissuade
the Sultan and Reschid Pacha from falling into the
old blunder of Mahmoud, whose' grand policy it was
to strengthen his empire by subduing Egypt; and to
represent to Abbas that his true strength lies far more
in a good understanding with Turkey, than even in
complete independence, however one or other great Eu-
ropean power might support him for the moment in such
pretensions. There can be no doubt, however, that the
opening of the railroad, making Egypt the great place of
transit between east and west, and especially between
Great Britain and her principal colonies, consider-
ably alters the old relations between Turkey, Egypt,
and England, and has a but too natural tendency to
place Egypt under English influence, and Constanti-
nople under Russian patronage. Do what we will for
the Turks, they will soon come to perceive that we
are more identified with Egypt than with Constanti-
nople, and feel more interest in the Nilo than the
Bosphorus. A retrograde party, hating England,
would soon whisper this to an undiscerning Sultan
or inexperienced Vizier; and neither Reschid nor
Abdul Aleschid are immortal. In that case we might
have to pay for our supremacy in Egypt by a total
sacrifice of our political and commercial consideration
and justice in Turkey. This renders such diplomatic
quarrels extremely delicate, and requires at least a cer-
tain unity and subordination amongst our own agents ;
for if they disagree, how are Turk and Arab to be kept at
peace ? We have not yet been favoured with the
Turkish view of the dispute between them and Egypt;
whilst from Egypt we have had some very just objec-
tions to an introduction of the Tanzimaut. But it is
unfair to allege that the Sultan has made no progress
in the reform of his administratiOn, and in the assimi-
lation more and more of his provinces to the better
sense and equity of Europe. We are well aware, indeed,
that Turkish reformers are timid, slow in their ad-
vances, and as often deterred by obstacles as bravely
surmounting them. There is still lamentable disor-
der in finance, peculation and corruption amidst offi-
cials high and low. But, on the whole Turkey is
more tranquil than ever it was under the most fierce
and cruel administration, and there is throughout the
empire that general decay of ferocity and fanaticism,
which gives hope of a Christian spirit growing over
the country, the best prelude to Turkey taking rank
amongst the civilised countries of the world, and gra-
dually sharing in the political, social, and religious
enlightenment which can, better than armies, secure
its independence.