Poverty Bay Standard. Published Every Evening. GISBORNE; FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1882.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1204, 17 November 1882, Page 2

Poverty Bay Standard. Published Every Evening. GISBORNE; FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1882.

Some time in September, about the 21 st of that month if we mistake not, "The Times” had a leader upon the disproportion of the interests of England In the Suez Canal and the means at its command for protecting them. M. De LkssePh takes umbrage at the plain language used by the journal referred to, and addresses to the Editor a letter, a cony of which we annex, deprecating certain misstatements and exaggerations which he declares exist therein : A MONSIEUR I’EDITEUR DU TIMES.

Monsieur, —Je viens de prendre connalssance du leading article du Times t cn date du 21, dans leouel vous conscillcz a votre Souvemement d occuper le Canal de Suez ou e construire a cote un autre canal maritime.

Vous feriez bien, avant de vous engager serieusement dans cette question, de retire les articles de 18-54 a 1860 dans lesquels le 77mw,d’accord avec Lord Palmerston, traitait de buble uniquenient propre d seduire les petiies gens de France mon projet de percement de I’lsthme de Suez. Vous ferez bien aussi d’etudier les finnans de concession et les statute de la Compagnie Universelle fonnee par les capital)x libres de toutes les nations, surtout <lc la France.

L’Angleterre, en portant atteinte aux droits de notre societe, atteindrait en meme temps un des grands principes de liberte individuelle sur les quels repose son organisation intericure et sa puissance exterieure. Quant a la construction d’un second canal maritime, vous pouvez choisir tout autre point que I’lsthme de Suez, oil la concession declare que la Compagnie Universelie possede pendant 99 ans le privilege exclusif d’une communication maritime ent-re le Golfe de Peluse et le Golfe de Suez. Je dois en outre relever un autre detail de votre article. Vous dites que sur un capital de 200 millions de francs I’Angleterre a contribuc dans la proportion <lc SO pour cent. C’est une double erreur. Le capital qui a Fermis d’ouvrir an monde le passage de Isthme de Suez a etc de 437 millions de francs. Les 176 actions primitives achetees par le gouvernement britanniquean Khedive d’Egypte an taux de JOO francs, valant aujourd’hui 2,700 francs, et dont les interets lui sont payes par le Tresor Egyptien, avaient deja leurs coupons engages a des actionnaircs francais pendant trcilte ans. C’est co que I’on a appele les delegations! En coneqnence le Tresor Anglais naura encore pendant vingt ans que la nue propriety des dites actions, sans en avoir la jouissance. Malgre cette inegalite a I’egard de ses associes, notre conseil d’administration a obtenu I’admission des actions anglaises aux assemblies generales et la nomination de trois adadministrateurs anglais faisant partie du conseil et du comite de direction. C’etait un acte de eonvenance plutot que de droit strict. On devrait nous en savoir gre an lieu de chcrcher a entraver la marche legale do notre compagnie taut qu’elle observe fidelement les contrats qui la lient vis-a-vis du gouvernement territorial et des navignteurs de toutes les nations.

Je compte faire publier dans mon Bulletin de Suez, a la suite de votre article, cette reponse, qui, dans la retraite oil jemc trouve a la campagne, ne representc que mes impressions personnelles. Veuillez agreer. Monsieur I’Edlteur, les nouvelles assurances de mes sentiments les plus distingues. Ferd. De Lessees. La Chenaie (Indre), 23 Septembre. The “ Septuagenaire de vingt ans” would appear from the tenor of the criticisms in his paper, the " Bulletin de Suez,” to have gone to some considerable trouble to place misconstruction without end upon the words of the English journal, as he ingeniously construes tne statement that England holds stock to the amount of four millions sterling and owns four-fifths of the tonnage passing through the Canal, into an assumption that the capital of the Canal Company’s capital is two hundred million of francs, and the portion held by England amounts to 80 per cent, of that sum. Either M, de Lessep’s usual appreciation of English idiom must have been at fault, or he has made an erroneous and careless statement. Again, M. de Lessep’s makes a a doubtful and questionable statement when he says that the Suez Canal Company possess for 99 years the exclusive right of fanning a maritime highway between the Gulf of Pelusium and Suez. The original concession of Said Pasha gives M. de Lessees exclusive rights to form and direct a Company for the colonization of the Isthmus of Suez, but there the concession appears to terminate. The convention of 22nd February’, 1866, simply refers to the concession so made by Said Pasha in 1854 as having so terminated. The “Times” of the 27th of September, in striking language, and at great length, replies to M. de Lessees, winding up in the following remarkable words :— “Even the neutrality in whose name so many extravagant things have been said, has not by any means the character sometimes assigned to it. The concession of 1856 declares the Canal and its ports open in perpetuity to merchant ships of all nations, without distinction, or preference. Neither there nor elsewhere can any distinct enactment be found governing the admission of ships of war, and when these ships enter by the authority of the Khedive for the purpose of reestablishing his Government, it scarcely become M. De Lessees, who, as President of the Canal Company, is an Egyptian subject, to stretch his Company’s charters in order to throw obstacles in the way. This country may, however, thank him for having called attention to defects which might otherwise have passed unnoticed until some more dangerous crisis brought them into prominence. The points to which we adverted in the article which has called forth M. De Lesseps’s strictures will not again be suffered to drop out of sight. Is will be the duty of the English Government to devise effective measures for the protection of its great interests against such usurpation of power as the Canal Company seemed disposed to carry out; and it will be wisdom on the part of M. De Lessees to co-operate loyally with a nation not less interested than himself in the success and security of his undertaking.