Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-03-03
BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY POINTS.
Sovereignty in the Standardization ogs-
| EneIand's Naval interests.


IBy Anglo-Ameri.an cable to the Dispntchl
LONDON. March Sir James FERGUSON,
political secretary Of the Foreign once, IN
the House of Commons to-day IN reply 10
questions Oh the subject made a statement
to the effect that the Government did not
assume that the whole of the Soudan pc,
longed to Egypt, but, be added, he did
NOT intend to define the limits OF the
Egyptian sovereignty. The Occupation OF
Tokar did not imply an increase III inc
army forces IN Egypt.
Iabouchere asked if the Khcdive had not
endorsed the abandonment OF the Soudan.
Sir James FERGUSON replied that IN the
opinion of the Government the wlthdraW-
al of the Egyptian troops from the sou
dan did not constitute the abandonment OF
the sovereignty of the Soudan. lHear!
hear.l ,r,
Mr. Labouchere then asked: Then
does the Government recognize IN the
sovereignty of Egypt over the Soudan her
sovereignty over Bassala and khartoum u"
Mr.. Ferguson declined TO deal more
specifically with the question, and upon
Mr.. Labouchere's ptrsistinS IN his ques-
tions. after several fencing replies Mr.. Fer
gusson asked tor formal notice OF the qu65-
tions.
Viscount Wolmer, member for Peterfcld,
suggested that the Government appoint
commission to report upon scientific
methods of mitigating the fogs which
prevail in London and commented upon
the fact that the increasing prevalence OF
the fogs had the effect Of curtalhng work
ing hours. IT, NJ
William Henry Smith, expressed himself
as being skeptical of the ability of such a
commission to deal with the matter. MT.
Smith added that O committee OF the
House of Lords had already made long
and exhaustive inquiry into the subject
aud had recommended the use o. non-bl-
luminous coal as possible mitigation OF
the density of London togs; that other
| measures in the direction of abaung the
| FOG nuisance were embodied ina bill which
was now before the House of LORDS aud in
| the course of time the members of the
House of Commons would have an oppor-
| tunity to consider the bill and TO discuss
| the subject of London fogs and the best
| means TO be taken to lessen their intensity.
In the debate on the navy estimates Sir
J. Colomb moved that henceforth the
naval budget must state the total number
| of war-ships in COMMISSION IN reserve,
and building; the aggregate tonnage OF
| the mercantile marine, and the value OF
| the sea-borno commerce of England COM
| pared with that of foreign Powers. be-
sides containing similar returns from the
! colonies He dilated upon the growth OF
| colonial commerce and the increase OF
| British respons
| Sir William Vernon Harcourt described
| the speech of Sir j. ColOmb as similar To
| the notes of alarm which naval experts arc
accustomed 20 issue 10 induce the nation
| TO believe that the naval and military ex-
penditures, enormous as they are, would
| be inadequate in the event of war. Not a
| single ton of imports or exports, the
| speaker continued, would be threatened
| by the declaration of Paris. The whole
| trade of a bclhgerent was absolutely safe.
| Not a quarter less Of corn nor yard less OF
| cotton would be prevented from coming to
| England, for it would come under aneutraI
| flag.
Lord George Hamilton. First Lord of the
! Admiralty, dissented from the views Of SlI
| William Vernon Harcourt. How could we
| lie asked, suddenly transfer oar Tonnage
| all over the world to n neutral flag? Rice
| had been declared cOntraband of war. What
| if wheat also should be declared contra.
| band? Hear Hear j English ship-owners
would be unwise 10 trust oyer-much to the
declaration of Paris They must maintain
the navy so as to hold the fighting
supremacy in every part Of the world
| The Government would grant the ipfor.
| nation asked for.
Sir j. Colomb thereupon modified the
form of his motion, but 1T was ne9atlyed
| without a division.