New-York tribune., 1905-01-08
A SECOND SUEZ CANAL.
Sir Theodore Angier Has Concession
for 1t From KhediUe IsmaH.

or Egypt afford to lend any countenanca IN the
project now being actively pushed by Sir Theodore
angler and number of other great English ships
owners and merchants for the construction of a
second Suez Canal a project for which the capi-
TAI has already been assured and the contract
undertaken by the Ards the constructors Of the
Nile dam works
According to the terms of the concession original
" granted by the Egyptian government to Ferdl-
hand de Lesseps, the existing canal becomes the
solute property OF the Egyptian government in sew
| ehty years from now. and that government there
Tore has interest in facilitating the construc-
ton OF a rival canal by Sir Theodore Angler and
MS friends, even were the English government 70
give its consent. That the latter would be granted
Is 10 the last degree improbable no matter what
the political party in power. For the British gov
ei'iihent has made too many sacrifices OF life and
treasure to secure what may be called an unassail-
aole monopoly of the sole waterway between the
mediterranean and the Red Sea to tolerate the
construction OF another canal. no matter how
clusivey English the capital invested in the enter
prise might be-
1t must be remembered that England's entire
policy with regard to Egypt since the opening of
the Suez Canal FIVE and thirty years ago, has been
ihnueneed by one all predominating idea-to secure
control OF that canal. 1t with this object in
view that she brought about a military occupation
OF Egypt, reorganized the tangled finances and the
corrupt administration of the Land OF the Nile.
crushed the Dervish insurrection. reconquered the
Soudan. exposed herself for time the Ill will of
Europe in connection with the matter. and spent
$50 100000 in cash for the purchase of the late Khe
dive Ismairs founders shares in the canal COM
pany-shares which which worth at pres
ent quotations five times what paid for them
through the Rothschilds by Lord Beaconsheld when
he was Premier Moreover, everything points tow
ard the ultimate absorption by England Of Egypt,
which perhaps not in this generation but at any
rate before threescoTe years and ten have passed.
is bound in the natural of events TO become
as much of an English dependency as Malta in
which case the British government would, in the
place of the Khedivlate become possessed OF the
existing canal as its full hedged owner on the ex-
pration OF the concession.
Sir Theodore Angler asserts that he is in the pos
session of concession granted by old Khedive
Isman before his deposition and after he had sold
his founders shares in the existing company 10 the
En- glish government. Ismai might have been guilty
of such piece of sharp practice especially in view
OF the fact that he received large sum for the
grant of this concession. and it seems that as far
back as 1888 Mr.. Gladstone. when Premier, after
taking advice from the great law officers OF the
Crown. came the conclusion that England had
no right TO prevent the construction of a second
canal if the Egyptian government had granted a
concession for the enterprise Mere right however,
is often compelled to take back seat where great
interests Of national policy are concerned. and
although matter is to be fought out in Parlia-
ment, when the latter meets shortly at Westmin-
ster, it may be taken for granted that the
Khedive will repudiate the concession granted by
his grandfather, Ismail and that the English gov
ernment will prohibit the execution OF Sir Theodore
Anglers scheme.
The motive for the construction Of the second
canal is to be found in the enormous dues charged
by the present canal company dues which, even
with the existing high prices for COAL render IL
more profitable to send vessel all the way around
the Cape of Good Hope rather than through the
Suez Canal. 1t agreed in 1888 by the canal
company that when the dividends on the stock
amounted to 5 per cent, anything above that
amount should be devoted to the reduction OF the
dues which present exceed 50 ton, that Is TO
saw $4,000 for a 10000 ton battleship or liner ex-
elusive OF all sorts OF extra charges or an equalI!
onerous character. The dividends have exceeded
q r,er cent for a number of years yet all efforts
on the part OF the shipowners and merchants OF
London to secure a reduction Of the dues have
failed.
The cost Of the existing suez Canal esti-
mated at s4OOO0O0O and. despite the fact that all
the unskilled labor was 'coryee'-that Is TO say
furnished without pay by the unfortunate Egypuan
fellaheen-it cost over $10OOOOOOO eonsloeraole
portion Of which it is said, was misapproprlateo
by Khedive Ismail and the gang OF dishonest
harpies foreign and native, by which he was sur
rounded while much was also spent in Europe
Sir John Arid the great English contractor basing
his experience his construction OF the Nile dam
and other great public works in Egypt' undertakes
10 build the second canal within four years. at
a cost of between s25.OO0.O00 and SSo'OcOW and TO
furnish for the money a wider and deeper canal
from the Mediterranean to the Red sea, hned IN
such a fashion to obviate the sitting process
which is the most dangerous enemy or the eXlsuhg
canal It will be readily seen that If the latter can
afford to pay dividends considerably over 70 per
cent on capital of sOOOOO0Oo. canal costing less
than q third Of that should prove profitable
venture providing consent for its construction coud
be obtained from the Anglo-Egypttan government
II seems 10 me that in view of the fact that the
American government has now the Panama Canai
undertaking on its hands enterprise in which the
prestige of the American nation is involved people
here NAV be interested to learn something about
tba Great rrohIeu which is confronting England
and Fgvpt in connection with the question of cut
tino another waterway through the Isthmus Of
SueZ MAhQCl0f> Dr- RO-' H4-NA'