, 1875-12-25

Oh TX SuOICCCSI QuQ NV 10 oO OooiJ GU
ministered, that with almost boundless
resources it has borrowed 100000, 900
in fifteen years, and so wasted the money
that it is compelled to repudiste half the
Debt. A new policy must be found, and
the British Government has found one
which may be unsuccessful, but is, at all
events, decided, ineligible, and moderate.
Turkey must defend herself. II she proves
unable, and the ultimate arrangement OF
her affairs threatens the interests or the
honour of Great Britain, her voice will be
given for a course which, II necessary, she
will support by force. What that course
will be IS not signi6ed, or is, perhaps, not
vet decided, though if the Times has been
inspired, it is clear enough, namely to
support Austrian claims to the reverslon
of European Turkey as against Russian
but meanwhile she guards her one I'M
p~erative individual interest by assuming
the control, not Of Egypt, as M. John
Lemoinne asserts, and still less OF Egypt
and SYRIA, but Of the arm of the sea
through which her and her SOL
diers must heuceforth pass to Asia II the
Khedive, who obviously understands and
approves the arrangement, can remain
independent enough or friendly enough to
Great Britain to make the Canal safe, he
may, if he will abolish slavery by the
Indian method, remain as safe as Scindiah
or the Nizam, and pursue 10 his own way
the policy OF ciyilisiDg Egypt. Many En-
glishmen may wish for the new and
6urdensome task Of ciyilisipg Africa from
Alexandria to the Lakes, for that is what
the absorption Of Egypt would imply but
the Government will avoid that task If
possible, will support and ameiiorate the
Khediye's Government, and will await
calmly the result of the great experiment,
merely insisting against all the world, and
at any hazard, that she shall remain the
chief trustee of her and the worlds most
important highway. That May be-we
will discuss that point directly-a selfish
policy, but at least it is not a treacherous
one. Turkey remains as before the Khe-
dive is not only unmoIested, but supported
and the countries of the Mediterranean
have an additional guarantee for the safety
of their Indispensable road
But, retorts NJ. John Lemoinne, this is
a cynical policy. If you "protect" Egypt,
why should not France protect Belgium
France does protect her France is one of
her guaranteeing Powers, bound, as Eng
land will be in Egypt, to remain friendly
while the conditions of her friendship are
fulfilled. Does NJ. Lemoinne mean to as
sert that if Belgium massacred French
men, or declared war on France, or enter
ed the Gelmanic Federation, or fell into
such hopeless anarchy that transit was
unsafe, The French Government would be
bound to look on unmoved3 And If it
would not look on unmoved, in what res
pect would its motives differ from those
which actuate Great Britain on the Nlle2
The neutrality of Egypt is as vital to US
as the neutrality of Belgium to France,
and we are securing it by the same means,
namely, by insisting that its control, or
rather, that the control Gifts special right
of way, shall pass into no foreign hands.
Even if we held Port Said, we should be
in no better position as regards Egypt than
France is in as regards Belgium, she
possessing by nature the south-westward
gates of the little State. The truth is that
M. Lemoinne, like most French publicists,
is indignant that England should reap the
benefit of NJ. de Lesseps' work, annoyed
that she should not need firm French alli-
ance in the East, enraged that she should
be prepared to resist in certain contingen-
cies Q Power to which France looks as her
most -hopeful immediate ally. He is