New-York tribune., 1898-01-12
CLAIMS ON TILE NILE.
the State

The French seem to have established them
selves at Fashoda. with the intention OF claim
ing that country for their own. Moreover.
there are increasing indications that the Paris
| Government is inclined to support such claims.
A correspondent says the question is regarded
mt the Quai dOrsay as the most serious one in
all the foreign affairs of the Republic 1t may
well be- II ownership Of the upper Nile Is TO he
asserted and maintained For the British Gov
ernment is already fully committed to denial
and resistance OF such French claims. and 1t IS
at the present moment taking practical steps to
make It's resistance effective. The advance
upon Omdurman and Khartoum has not been
suspended, but is being pushed In particularly
substantial manner. both from Cairo and from
the Rcd Sea littoral, and there is every reason
to suppose It will be successful far in advance
of the French. Indeed, the latter can scarcely
hope with their present mere handful OF eN-
plorers TO engage the Mahdists and attack ON
durman. They can at best merely raise their
flag at Fashoda and take nominal possession
Of the country, leaving the actual control of II
for later disposition.
The attitude Of the British Government is un-
mistakable In 1890 and 1901 it made agree
ments with Italy and Germany, defining their
respective spheres of influence in that part Of
the Continent Under those agreements Great
Britain was to have control Of all the confines
of Egypt" wherefore. in consequence Of the
claims of Egypt in the Nile Valley. the leSiti-
macy Of which was generally recognized, the
British sphere Of influence covers the whole or
"the Nile waterway" The same principle was
repeated In the agreement of 1894 between
Great Britain and the King Of the Begans. 1t
was officially enunclated by Sir Edward Grey,
Under Secretary Of State for Foreign Affairs,
in 1895 and has not since been withdrawn or
modified Sic Edward declared that these
views of the British Government were clearly
understood by the French Government, and he
declined 10 believe that n French expedition
was preparing to enter and lay claim TO tho
upper Nile region because 'it must be per
"fectlv we'll known to the French Government
that il would be an unfricndly act, and would
"be so viewed by England" Those were ser
Gus words and It is not supposable that the
British Government Is now about to repudate
them But neither does one readily accept the
notion that the French Government Is about TO
defy them.
Yet the latter is exactly what Is made to ap-
pear by the utterances of the explorers them
selves and Of their friends in Paris. Men and
Journals Of wide influence In that capital are
openly declaring that Captain Marchands OBJ
iect IS to take and hold the upper Nile for
France, and not only for France, but specifically
against Great Britain. And when news came
that the expedition had been destroyed by saw
ages so respectable an authority as NJ. Emile
Cere in the Revue Hebdomadaire." did not
hesitate to suggest that the natives had been
bribed to such violence and cannibalism with
British gold! Now the French Government Is
not responsible for such statements. and may
not at all approve them. Its views may be
such as are put forward in the "Debats, whlch
strongly disclaims any policy Of adventure ana
provocation, and insists that France Is merely
seeking to occupy effectually her own Congo
lose Empire on the Ubanghi. But at least these
extreme and mcnacng utterances are being
made and are rousing spirit OF aggression and
OF hostility to Great Britain among the French
people That spirit may not be shared by the
French Government. but 1t may, nevertheless
prove hard thing for that Government to op-
pose and suppress. The outlook is perplexlnS
ore for one or the other Of the governments
concerned, and perhaps for both.