New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-08-06
THE SUEz CANAL.
WHAT ENGLAND THINKS OF 1T AND OF THE
LATE BARGAIN.

lFRoN THE REGULAR coRREsfoNphNi We -inA
LONDON July %.
an. s.ez Canal agreement is dead
and Mr.. Gladstones speech in the House
! Mo,dav afternoon was the funeral Grafton
pronounced over its lifeiess body; an Grafton
eloouenf elevated in tone. and more than worthy OF
fbe subiect. But the evil that men do lives AFTER
them and this unhappy compact will prove source
of misfortune to generations yet unborn; and more
Immediately to the generation that is born. LOOK
at 1t from whatever point of view you can take the
prospect is a gloomy one. IL does not much matter
where You begin. but an Engishman wonld begin
at home. and If he were politician, he wouid con-
slider the probable inhaeuce OF it on tho Govern
ment. That, we may be sure, has been well studied
in Downing Street, and in whatever mysterious
nook the conciaves of Conservatism are held Never
I suupo,e was n decision more reluctantly taken
in any Cabinet Council whatever than that wmcn
led to the announcement Of Monday in the House
OF Commons.
Ihear-It is one of those matters on which IL Is
never prudent to speak TOO positiyely-enas M
Gladstone Was last of all to consent to lowering the
colors thew had run up to the masthead so recently
ana with such confident elation. Even Mt. Chiia-
srs the one man responsible than any otner III
the Cabinet for the bargain with NJ de Lesseps' saw
how HOPELESS the situation The failure OF so
great scheme is heavy blow to reputation
already impaired but the Chancellor OF the Ex-
chez Ter Is not the man to struggle against iate'
Illness they say, has weakened DIS
mower of work and the clearness OF has views
and that is why he gave In to project
which bears in every part the stamp of needless
concessions to the Suez Company For Mr. Glad
stone different plea IS urged lie was TOO ousy 70
give 70 the details perhaps to the main features
of this strange negotiation. the minute attention 10
commonly bestows matters much less momentous
g.. ID. ia nd biu
the Canal Board rs Eng ish Directors.owe allegiance
40 two sayereigns: the English Government aud NJ.
de Lesssps, each with conflicting interests. lney
were moreover, continually in contact WITH the
oyermasFering personality OF NJ. de Lesseps. ihey'
like NJ. ChiIders resisted him on details, but they
began by concedlng the most vital point In the
whole busness--the exclusive monopoly-and there
after NJ de Lesseps was lord of them and the stua-
ton.
This, which seems to bear on the business side OF
the aucstiou does IN effect to the root of the po
litical side Mr. Gladstone, who has the keenest eye
in England for whatever influences votes, must have
/; seeu this and 1t was because he saw il that he
( sbrank from the surrender which the rest of the
Cabinet early agreed In regarding as inevitable
The country would never have sanctioned the pre-
posterous terms agreed on the ininiesimal conces-
sions O. dues and the long post2onement of them;
the recognition Of the eompanys claim TO dividends
reaching ultimately 90 per cent; the continuing
control OF the French over the administration OF the
canal; the failure to obtain edequste redress for
the most urgent grievances of shipowners
who contribute so per cent of the rev.
enue of the canal; the stubborn refusal
of H. de Lesseps to accept the jurisdiction
: of a competent tribunal. or any legal domicile
IN England; aud the advance ola vast sum OF Egg
lish money to a company which not only remained
French but which remained. for all practical pur-
poses subject TO the caprice and the impcrious
DOMINATION of lis founder and sole director
On these and other points the country | say,
would have held, and did hold, the Government TO
q stern account They were gross errors aud weak
nesses but they were remediatle. Another bargain
might have them right But the point on wuicn
public opinion con lemns the Government. and the
fault it will never pardon, is the admission. by Ar
Gladstone that NJ Dc Lesseps's power OF eating q
canal on the IsthInas of Suez is exclusive power
The admission wac needless. Ministers themselves
have told us that the point not raised IN the ne
gotiatious Ii Yves not expressly asserted by NJ
de- Lessons nor expressly conceded by Mr.. ChiiIers
But it was taken fer granted When Mr.. Chiiders
came to defend his action before deputation OF
shipowners he haG TO confess that the whole trans
seton had proceeded on that basis. He lad dealt
with ~ de Lesseps as with a man who had 1T IN his
power 10 refuse ALI concessions Whatever. because
he had il in his power to say that no other canal
should be made on the Isthmus of Suez. BIT.
Childers pointed 10 everything he had wrung from
the other side ms due to mere good WILL
He argued NJ. de Lsssepss case before the British
public Mr. Gladstone did the same thing in the
House. The transaction could not otherwise DO de-
Tended, and Mr.. Gladstone it must BE- said. in his
eagerness for an srgumentatiye victory or in the
stress under which be found himself from his oppo-
nents. and the absolute necessity of making some
hair ks ted n
the gravest indiscretons Of bis political life He
declared his conviction that the NJ. deLe.seps was in
possession of b monopoly.
Now whether the ponroir ercIas1 granted TO NJ. de
Lesscps means what Mr. Gladstone and the Law
Officers OF the Crown say 1t means is a question
that need not be argued. Lord Selborne and Sir
Hcury James and Sir Farrar Herchel have given an
opinion one side, and Mt. Horace Davey Sir Har-
dinye Clifford and Lord Cairns known to hold
a contrary opinion. All that need be said is that
the question Is doubtful; Is arguable; and that Mr.
Gladstone was not called upoa to give away the
English case, whether strong or weak. For the pur-
poses of this negotiation his remark in the House
was purely obiser dic.um He has since endeavored
to minimize tho significance Of his admission by
saying that be did makeit I'm communication
with any persons abroad The Government. he de-
ciared have never placed any construction upon
the instrument of concession with regard to any
exclusive right or claim. Nor, added he. have they
done anything to bind this country to any particu-
lar view of the conc ion. Perhaps not, In any
diplomatic or other technical sense But they have
bound themselves They have put their own opin-
ions ON record. If they should enter upon a
fresh negotiation with 81. de Lesseps they would he
completely estopped. 1t may be said, from
questioning that exclusive power which
they have gratuitously declared themselves con-
siaced belongs to NJ. de Lesseps.
That brings us to tbs final and most serious part
of the whole business in Its political aspect. The