The Fielding Star. SATURDAY, SEPT. 22, 1883. The Suez Canal Question.

Feilding Star, Volume IV, Issue 47, 22 September 1883, Page 2

The Fielding Star. SATURDAY, SEPT. 22, 1883. The Suez Canal Question.

This is a question which is of such deep interest to England and her colonies in the South Seas that a brief 1 account of its present aspects in Eu rope must be of interest to our readers We will not allude to ita political " features here. We will merely remark that men of all shades of opinion h-ive combined in the expression o' feelings of disappointment at the scheme offered by the English Cabinet. '. The provisional agreement laid before the House of Commons failed, to pro- ' vide for an adequate share of British - control over the second canal ; it ' failed also to ensure a sufficiently early and satisfactory reduction of tolls ; and, in the last place, it surrendered to M. De Lrsseps more than he ever claimed for himself or his • company. '1 his may have been the • result of the threat of the Barou that if some rapid decision was not comf to with respect to the "econd canal. he would appeal to tbe French to resist any further concession*-. M> Childers, the Chancellor ofthe I'x- > chequer, threatened to resign if th. agreement was rejected. Sir !-taf [ ford Northc >tb gave a notice of motion that the claim- of De I ksskps to the monopoly for tbe construction • of canals through Egypt be repudiated in any parleying that mig-hc take • place betweeu tbe British Government and the Suez Canal Company, and theGovernmentsupported this motion, ■ The concessions made to De Lksseps were unaccountable from the fact that the principal merchants and ship owners of Kngland had beeq for months before in communication with Earl Granville, and had distinctly informed his lordship that a second i canal was needed, bu . that it ought to be under British control, with a greatly reduced tariff, and with a domicile in London. The Knglish were entitled to this because 41 per cent, of the present shares belong tv them, four-fifths of the traffic through the canal comes from Great Britain, and the canal is insufficient for the present and utterly inadequate for the future development of British com merce, and that the tolls were excessive. We may remark, parenthetically, tbat telegrams received a few day* ago informed ns that the directors of the Suez Canal Company have decided to introduce from the Ist January. I*B4, some modifications of the regulations under which traffic through the canal is conducted. The company have decided to reduce dues ->ayab!e by vessels in ballast, and to undertak • charges f->r floating ships that may become stranded in passing through the canal. A second canal would have been needed in vain if faith and honor were pledged to Dn LessePo that the exc'usiv • right of water con- ! veyance should be with him artd hia company. No i.nglish gentleman would attempt to violate such a con-

COSMO ii if weli and clearly e..rabli>h-*d. and more especially in the case of one to whose personal irfluence, keen int-'llig-M'ce, and untiring energy the eomniorcia' world is indebted for the present canal. When it was H^nraed that, De Lfbsf.p-. possessed such a privilege, Lord I* a pier iii-mediutel*. challenged it. The case was subtiii*teit to Mr Undeiiwoi'D and Mr Davey, two -.--entlemen who s'.and unrivalled in tbe interpret ation of international law, nnd in their opinion no such claim could 'he substantiated, and thoir vi--ws are supported by •rentletnen almost equally well informed. ..gainst this opinion *he Government cliim the authority or the Lord Gha-iceiior and ihe Aronioy General, 'i'he mutter is therefor-- i*i j a doubtful, nt'd certain!;,- nor a settled, position. The British Mail says that several plans have been diniiy shadowed out by which the (;:_::••<_ or can-iis should be t nken cut of lb<* ': ■t-n-i:-* o) private enrerprise. tind be :uad • i-t-'r nation:.! iv ".haracter. Thin would probably be the safest and \>fM solution ot a difficulty which will not be otherwise easily overcome. It may be assumed that, a.s M. De Lksskpwas aot unwilling to sell the canal to the maritime Powers in 1"_71. h« would not be averse to its purchase at the present time for a lik-h-water-way for the world iv general. His terms were, as might have been expected, heavy; but it several European Powers joined in the purchase, the cost would oe a mere nothing-, and the gain to commerce by lower tolls and increased facilities of traffic would be immense. 1 his* would be in accordance with the spirit of the aj.*e; it would abolish the present monopoly, it would throw all petty nationul jealousies to the winds : it would afford new securities to the careful preservation of the wor s : and it would form another and a strong bond of peace amo' _ all tinnation-- to whom it belonged.