Washington sentinel., 1898-04-16
Our EIeN EWs
fgaHSI1ksa and Selected from IsadfnR
EHv0peGH6abeVSI0y The SENTINEL.
ENGLAND.
Has RUSSIA SECURED THE UsUFRucT'
OF PORT AR1HUa?

Has RUSSIA SECURED THE UsUFRucT'
OF PORT ARlHUs}
ZiHeS-London, March 90.
Yesterday Mr. Curzon could only tell
the House that Russia he d secured from
China the "usufruct" Of Port Authur
and Ta-lien-wan and the adjacent terri.
tories HI was not even in a position
to explain the meaning OF this importa-
ton from the vocabulary Of the Roman
law, at least as it is Interpreted by Rus.
sian commentators. II would be unwise
for others TO rush in where Mr. Curzon
fears to tread, but it may be assumed
with some confidence that "usufruct,"
in any agreement where China is the
grantor and Russia is the grantee, signi
ties the most beneficial kind Of tenure
which the wit of man can devise, freed
as far as possible from all the onerous
conditions incidental to ownership.
1t will be remembered that
early in the session Mr.. Curzon reas.
sured the House by declaring that,
although our warships had withdrawn
from Port Arthur, they would return
there when they chose, Whatever else
the Russians may read into their 'usu.
iruct" Of that harbor, we are Inclined to
doubt whether they will hold il to be
compatible with this treaty right OF ours.
Ls Temps
Russia has just obtained great dIplo.
matte success At the Tsung
Ii Yamen there is happily, a practical
common sense on which one can gener-
ally count, Nothing is more uncongenial
to the temperament Of these upper class
mandarins than dashing their heads
against a wall. The most of which they
are capable is to suffer, like Prince
Kung, a diplomatic indisposition. AS
soon as the conferences had convinced
that body how irrevocable was the
| decision Of Russia, measures were taken
to remove the friction and facilitate an
understanding. The choice of the two
plenipotentiaries for the interview with
NJ. Pavloh, the best known of whom in
the West was Ii Hung Chang, was OF
| itself pledge OF Cancellation. Indeed.
the agreement was speedily arrived at
on the very basis Of the apparently quite
J reasonable demands put forward by
| Russia. This treaty has the
double justification of C, rrying into
| effect eYentualites long ago foreseen and
admitted by competent and impartial
men. and OF re establishing for the
| benefit Of Russia the balance recently
disturbed by the success Of German
policy at Kao Chau.
Daiiy Ne50S-London, March 80.
The Torres used to be fond OF asking
the electors to believe that their party
was the one Of businesslIke administra-
ton, especially IN foreign affairs. After
recent performances they will not find
it easy to palm off that fallacy again.
| Turning, however, from the credit OF
the Government to the interests Of the
nation, we entirely refuse to believe
that the Empire IS in jeopardy because
| Russia is in occupation OF Port Arthur
The hue and cry which some of the Tory
| papers are raising in this matter is both
mischievous and undign6ed, and we
hope that no Liberals will be tempted
to join in It. II ;he anti-Russian diatribes
in which the Times and others are in.
dulging mean anything, they must
mean that Great Britain should have
gone, or should still go, to war to pre-
vent Russia having Port Arthur. Lord
Selborne's critici m of this proposition
is excellent. To prevent the Russian
ization of Manchuria is an object which
we probably could not secure, if we
would and which we certainly should
not attempt, even if we could, for our
Government has invited Russia to the
sea already Do not then, let us 60 off
on this false scent. The practical ques
ton is not the fact OF the Russian occu
patton, but the terms of it. In itself
there is nothing intolerable, or even very
disadvautageOus in the Russian occu-
patton. What we have to see to is that
British rights and interests are not inn
perilled thereby,
DaiIy Graphic-London, March 90.
According to Count Muravief's note,
Chinese sovereignty is still recognized
in both Port Arthur and Talienwan, and
while this is the case the treaty rights
Of this country apply, Thus in Talien.
wan we have the right to demand the
ordinary Chinese saufi and in Port
Arthur we have the right OF anchorage
for our ships of war. No doubt these
points are now engaging the attention
OF the Government. They are. how
ever, not the only points raised by the
cession ''in usufruct" of Port Arthur
AS we have frequently pointed out there
is astrategical question to be considered.
It is certain that the interests of this
country will not be sufficiently vindI-
Gated until we also have obtai led
naval base ''in usuiruct" which will
adequately eounterbalance the Russian