CURRENT TOPICS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCIII, Issue 10595, 2 March 1895, Page 4

CURRENT TOPICS.

Assuming no nes?a to be good news, we may eon-

EGYPT.

gratulate the English administrators in Egypt upon having averted the crisis which threatened to develop into disorder and massacre on the last day of February. The Khedive, secretly encouraged by a Frenchman, who promised the armed support of Prance, instigated and carried out certain actions, which, being construed by the populace into signs of hostility to England, were accepted as incitements to revolt. Lord Cromer, by an application of diplomatic pressure, induced his Highness to alter his tone and to perform various acta which showed English ascendency to be real and active. The result has been a complete change of attitude on the part of the native Egyptians, who are a curious mixture of arrogance and ser- 5 vilify. The pretensions of France to have a dominant voice in the control of Egypt are absurd. The Journal des Debats was very wide of the truth when it recently declared that “ the French have, at the present moment, financial and industrial interests in Egypt, incomparably superior to those of the other nations.” Whether in the matter of population or commerce France has no claim to priority. She is third among European Powers in point of population in Egypt, and fourth in value of imports and exports. Out of Egypt’s total external trade of .£21,509,000 about one-half is with Great Britain, viz., .£10,719,000, while Prance’s share is only .£1,829,000. As to the traffic passing through the Suez Canal, the following are the figures for 1893 British, 2505 ships, 5,752,934 tons; French, 190 ships, 461,197 tons; all other nations,746 ships, 1,444,937 tons; total, 3341 ships, 7,659,068 tons. Thus of the commerce of Egypt England has 50 per cent and Prance 8£ par iOjEfbiJ- of the commerce- iofr the^'Canat

England baa 75 per cent and France 6 per cent. The continual irritation engendered by the putting forward of French claims in Egypt is the work of a small but noisy minority in France. A correspondent, writing from Paris, puts it thus t—“ Voice the financial world of Paris to-morrow, and it would plump for the continuance of the English occupation, which is certain to bo continued whether they plebiscite or not.”

RAMADAN.

Not French jealousy, but Mussulman fanaticism, is

what we have really to fear in Egypt. If the faithful followers of Mahomet are once aroused, they may make a determined effort to drive out the “ infidel” English. It was this element of fanaticism that gave acuteness to the recent crisis. Bedouins and other strangers were flocking into Cairo, and it was feared that the Fast of Eamadan, commencing on Fob. 28, would give them an opportunity for indulging in the luxury of a popular rising against the English. Wo have formerly referred to Eamadan as a ee feast,” and that description appears to answer just as well as the other. The faithful are enjoined to fast frbm sunrise to sunset, but nothing being said about the hours of darkness, it is assumed that these may be given over to gluttony and riotous living generally. It is one of those oracular utterances of the Prophet which (like his prohibition of a certain part of swine as food) enable his followers to obey the letter of the commandment and yet “go the whole hog” in the way of self-indulgence. It is easy to see how such a "fast,” with its midnight revelries, could be made the occasion of a revolt and massacre, and the so-called “ prophecies ” of a popular uprising were simply incitements to that course. All danger may not yet be over, for the fast endures for a month. It may be added that Eamadan is the name of the ninth month of the Mahometan year, and it is a holy month because in it the Prophet received his first revelation. The last war must have satisfied the bulk of Egyptians of the futility of attempts to throw off British control, and any rising that may take place will probably prove to be participated in by only a small fanatical section of Arabs.

POMAHAKA.

. Conservative writers and speakers are never tired of

citing the state of affairs among the Pomahaka settlers as a proof of the failure of the Government’s land settlement policy. It seems that their allegations are as baseless as were those which they at first made regarding Cheviot. For example, great prominence has been given to the report of proceedings that they alleged to have taken place at a recent meeting of Pomahaka settlers. It is now shown to be extremely doubtful if such a meeting took place; or if it did, it was no more representative of the Pomahaka settlers than the three tailors of Tooiey Street were of "the people of England.” Mr Soren Hansen writes to the Southern Standard as follows“ I saw a paragraph from the TuapeJta Times, saying that it had been informed that the Pomahaka settlers had held a meeting, at which it was decided not to pay any more rents due on their holdings to the Government. This statement has not a particle of truth in it. 1 have asked all the settlers on the mg, and everyone absolutely denied any estate, save two, if they were at the said meetknowledge of such a meeting having taken place.” It will be interesting to watch what will be the next “ invention of the enemy.”

METHODIST UNION.

Bypassing: resolutions in favour of the union of the Methodist churches of Aus-

tralasia, the district meeting of the United Methodist Free Church now sitting in Christchurch has placed itself in line with the other conferences of what is known as “ Minor Methodism " in these colonies, including Primitive Methodists, Bible Christians, and in fact all Methodists who are not classed as Wesleyans. The terms of union were formulated by last year’s Wesleyan Methodist General Conference, and it is hoped that the forthcoming meeting of thae body, representing the whole of Australasia, will finally ratify the union. As showing the attitude of the Minor Methodists, we quote the following from the report of the Methodist Union Committee of the minor Methodist churches of South Australia South Australian Minor Methodism comprises 60 circuits, with 6347 members and nearly 30,000 adherents. The question of union upon the basis submitted has been considered by 58 quarterly meetings. Seventeen urge general and simultaneous union; five make it a sine qua non; two others, while heartily desiring such union, recommend sectional union if it cannot be effected within a reasonable time. Seven meetings express approval of s federal council, one disapproves of it, and four vote for an intercolonial Minor Methodist convention. Forty-eight of the 60 circuits favour union upon the basis, nine oppose it, and three are set down as neutral. Of the 492 present at the quarterly meetings, 371 voted for the basis, 88 against it, and 88 were neutral. The circuits for the basis contain 5072 members; those against, 1275. Thus, four-fifths of the circuits, three-fourths of the leaders of Minor Methodism, and representing 80 per cent of the members,pronounced for union upon the General Conference basis; but the prevailing opinion ia that the union should be simultaneous; and such desire for union in Minor Methodism, where it is relatively strongest, augurs well for the consummation devoutly and generally wished by the Methodist people of Australasia. The movement is a commendable one, and is thoroughly characteristic of these days of tightening of federal bonds. It is too early to discuss the question of electing Methodist bishops, but if union should be consummated that question will, doubtless,, come to the front.