The Press. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1886.

Press, Volume XLIII, Issue 6627, 18 December 1886, Page 2

The Press. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1886.

Judging from what has appeared in tbe London papers, which nave just arrived by the mail, the relations between England and France over Egypt were recently more critical than was: realised here. It was not merely that the French wished England to fix a definite date for the evacuation of the country, but it was. further rumoured that in the event of England's refusal, the advisability of war was pressed upon the French Ministry. But whatever may have. been the intention a short time ago, the firm attitude of the English Government appearstohavehad a moderating effect. Our cable advices inform us that when asked, the English Government refused to give any pledges whatever on the subject of the evacuation of the country, although the latest information is that the army of occupation is to be reduced.

The Times of a recent date gives some interesting information as to the present position of England in Egypt which serves to throw a good deal of light on the present complication England, it ib pointed out, has never given any pledge that the occupation of Egypt, " undertaken by her in 1882 with the countenance of Europe for objects acknowledged to be of common though not of co-ordinate European interest, would be brought to au end at any specified period. . . . The right of England to judge for herself when she shall withdraw her troops is indisputable, and cannot be treated as an open question." During the past twelve months the internal condition of Egypt has materially improved, both JnaneiaUy and administratively,----"so much so that it has been possible to withdraw a considerable portion of the British force in occupation, and this process i» still going on." The French Press during the last few months have been seeking every opportunity to raise the question of the English occupatiofi"tj£ Egypt. It is contended that the -London Convention, of 1885 fixed the date of the English departure from Egypt. Such, however, is not the case. All that was fixed by that Convention waa that in the event of the finances at the end of two years proving still unsatisfactory, the Khedive waa to summon an International Commission like that of 1880, and that Commission was to renew the general enquiry into Egyptian finance. But its powers would strictly be confined to financ'al questions, and would not touch that of the English occupation. It tarns oat, however, that such a Commission will not be necessary. The Convention of 1885 arranged that during the two J**** siicceoding ita meeting the English Government was to make exhaustive inquiries "as to the revenue of Egypt, not merely aa to the proper figure of the land tax, but also as to other branches of

revenue; and that during the same period there was to be a 5 per cent, deduction from all coupons, and a reduction of \ per cent, from the interest on the Suez Canal shares held by England, subject in each case to a repayment at the end of two years if the result of the inquiry shows that the revenue can bear it." Curiously enough, at the very time the French Press had been making such demands for the withdrawal of the British troops and pom ing out a way in which pressure could be brought to bear, the Caisse of the public debt was engaged in making up the account in connection with the payment of the November coupon of the unified debt, and the result is " that the surplus will suffice to make good any deficiency in the unassigned revenues, and to reimburse the 5 per cent, coupon tar levied during the last two'years, besides leaving a balance." This result was not unexpected. It has been always contended that under settled government and just administration, the Egyptian taxpayers could bear even the tnormously heavy burdene which their rulers have imposed upon them. The people would be far better off, and the interests of all concerned would be much better conserved were England able to hold Egypt for an indefinite period. The question of the position of England in Egypt ia undoubtedly a difficult one. At present she is able to say that the time has not yet arrived for considering the question of withdrawal. England entered Egypt for a definite object, and that object has not yet been secured. But there is the larger question, will the time ever arrive for her departure? i There is evidently a growing feeling I that it would be highly inexpedient to withdraw the troops, even if it could be proved that the Egyptian Government could btand alone. Has England, it is asked, an interest in occupying the country ? The Times correspondent in Egypt uses elaborate arguments to prove that it would be a fatal step on England's part to abandon it. If it is considered expedient to conciliite Fran«3, Bussia and Turkey by withdrawing from Egypt, Greece, Spain, and Italy could be similarly bought over by giving up Gibraltar, Malta, and Cyprus. If the first is quite useless to us so are the rest. The overland route to India "is a chain of fortifications, with British troops at every link. Upon that chain depends the Empire. Circumstances have given us the opportunity of strengthening our chain, have enabled us to replace one weak link by two strong ones. "We gained it by no fraud, but with the tacit consent of Europe in pursuance of pledges taken by others as well as by ourselves." It is probably the conviction that circumstances will long render it necessary that England should retain her hold over Egypt, which so enrages the French Press at the present moment.