Ashburton Guardian Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. THURSDAY, JANUARY 19, 1928. THE SUDAN.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 48, Issue 84, 19 January 1928, Page 4

Ashburton Guardian Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. THURSDAY, JANUARY 19, 1928. THE SUDAN.

The strides that are being’made in the development of the Sudan are emphasised by the completion of an important bridge across the White Nile* forming” a link between two large centres. The history of the Sudan under British rule has been a chequered one, but all through the country's trials and vicissitudes there has been apparent the sincere desire of Britain to better the conditions of the natives. One of the first difficulties that beset its administrators was the attitude adopted by Egypt in regard to control. The question ranks with that of the Suez .Canal as an outstanding point reserved for future settlement when the independence of Egypt was proclaimed in 1922. So long as Zaghlul Pasha was official spokesman for Egypt, there was an insuperable difficulty. Himself acute and well-in-formed enough to realise that Britain had in the Sudan responsibilities which could not he lightly renounced, or indeed renounced at all, he bad made to hi? party extravagant promises about what be would obtain in this direction. Sarwat Pasha is l under no such limitations, and following his recent visit to London the outlook for settlement is more hopeful. The Sudan was subdued by Mahomet Ali in 1820, and the title of Egypt to rule it remained undisputed by any other Power /until 1898. It was not a very profitable domain, for in 1862 Sir Samuel Baker, retained by the then Khedive to supervise the administration, reported that the country had been utterly ruined, and was held only for the very profitable slave trade for which it offered facilities. Later Gordon was even more downright in his denunciation of the so-called government of the country by Egypt. Between 1883 and 1899, when with British aid the Sudan was again subjugated, Dervish domination had swept away any semblance of ordered rule, The reconquest was possible only because Britain intervened. To reduce the chaos then ruling to the order now apparent has been the work of British administrators and soldiers. Egypt bases her claim to a > part in control on two considerations. In the first place, she bore most of the cost of the operations against the Madhi. Since 1899, too, Esrvnt has stood behind the Sudan financially. The aggregate cost has not been 'Treat. It has been calculated that to buy Egypt out would not cost much more than £10,000,900 with accrued interest on a part of that sum. The best plan, it might he thought, would be for Britain to find this money, to meet Egypt’s hill, and become in name and in every practical way sole controlling authority. The second factor is that whoever controls the Sudan controls the waters of the Nile. For many reasons Britain could not meet the Egyptian demand, but for the sake of water control, too, British influence must still he felt in the Sudan. The comprehensive scheme drawn up by Sir Murdoch MacDonald provides fully for Egypt and allows also for extensive irrigation work in the Sudan. If there has ever been any favour shown it has been to the Egyptians, as witness the opinion expressed by an American member of the commission that investigated the position. Yet it is easy to work up aii agitation among the Egyptians on the score of a menace to the water which is life to them.

Their attitude has been such that for the sake of Sudanese development Britain could not hand over administration of the country and control over the Nile headwaters to Egypt.