very common opinion amongst European residents in the East. It was for a time at last entertained by Prince Metternich; a document published during the troubles of Vienna, show that it is entertained by M. Prokesch; it has been unhesitatingly asserted in the German Encyclopædia (Conversatzions Lexicon) and finally the present Government in England, constrained to admit him into the Cabinet, dare not confide to him the Foreign Department. What Minister has ever before been exposed to the like suspicions, and how could an English Minister be suspected without grounds?

The question is not one of condemnation but of inquirywhether or not there be a prima facie case.

NOTE I.

DIFFERENCE OF THE TWO TREATIES ACCORDING TO LORD PALMERSTON, MARCH 1, 1848.

(See p. 392.)

"This I will say, that the Treaty as concluded does not differ in any material respect from the draft of the Treaty as settled by the Board of Trade and by the Foreign Office, and as sent to Mr. Urquhart to be proposed to the Turkish Government."

"I can state to the house the differences between the draft of the Treaty sent out in consequence of communications between Mr. Urquhart, the Board of Trade, and the Foreign Office, and the treaty concluded by Lord Ponsonby. The draft provided that British goods should pay only the import duty of 3 per cent. after which they might be transported to, and sold in, any part of the Ottoman dominions, without any further payments. The Treaty in addition to the 3 per cent. import duty, laid on a further duty of 2 per cent. upon the transport and sale of goods; and beyond that no other duty is to be paid in any part of the Ottoman dominions. This was one of the things to which in negotiation we were obliged to submit. Nobody can suppose, especially in arrang ing commercial transactions between two countries, that you can go with a draft treaty in one hand, and a pen in the

other, and say to a Foreign Minister, There, Sir, sign that treaty, or jump out of the window.' You cannot do that, therefore, you must negotiate. The draft makes no provisions with regard to foreign goods purchased in Turkey by British subjects with the view of their being again sold in Turkey. This was an omission in the draft (!) but the Treaty provides that foreign goods so purchased may be resold upon the same conditions as Turkish goods (!). The draft allows the Porte to levy upon goods exported a duty not exceeding the rate of 3 per cent. (!); and in return it allows British subjects to purchase all kinds of goods in the Ottoman dominions either for resale or exportation, subject only to the payment of the transport duty on such goods, and to the tolls demanded for the maintenance of the roads along which the goods are conveyed: the Treaty limits the export duty to 3 per cent. (!), and admits of duties being levied upon goods purchased by British subjects for resale in Turkey to the same amount as those levied upon subjects of the most favoured nations (!). It further stipulates with regard to goods reexported, and which may not have paid interior duties, that British subjects shall pay in lieu of such interior duties, one fixed duty of 9 per cent. (!). It was a great object with us to abolish these interior duties (!), which were a great obstacle to the progress of British manufactured goods in Turkey, and which, being made arbitrarily at the caprice of the Governors of the provinces, were uncertain in their amount, and excessively vexatious in their mode of being levied. The draft provides that NO duties shall be levied on goods in transitu: the Treaty limits the duties on goods in transitu to the 3 per cent. impost (!). The draft does not allude to the point I am now about to state. The Treaty specifies in detail the various ports of the Ottoman Empire at which it is applicable (!), and records the consent of the Porte to other powers settling their commercial matters upon the same basis (!). Of course it was intended to bring all other Powers within the same regulations; and this is the memorandum I have upon the draft (!). The above seems to be the essential points to be discussed. I think I have now stated enough with regard to the commercial Treaty."

NOTE II.

TURKISH COMMERCE.

The Prussian statistician, Hubner, makes the total exports of Turkey, for the year 1850, 13 millions, and its imports 10 millions sterling.

The exports from England have increased from 1830 to 1850 sixfold, the declared value being in the last year £3,100,000.

Since the opening of our ports for foreign grain our trade with Russia has diminished 50 per cent., that with Turkey has increased 50 per cent.; but no grain comes from those provinces of Turkey where the English Treaty has taken effect. We imported directly and indirectly, in 1850, from the Danube, above two millions of quarters, and sent to brail and Galatz £998,000 value of goods.

411

CHAPTER IV.

The Red Sea-Egypt.

"Every great man who has looked at the map of the world has thought of Egypt."-THIERS.

EGYPT was of old a broken reed, piercing the hand that leant upon it: the Scriptural proverb has proved itself true in our times. The extreme of insignificance to which this country has attained in contrast to its ancient pre-eminence of splendour, is not however harmless: its wonderful geographical position gives to it an extrinsic value, which, though existing in all times, acquires a new importance from the gradually interlocking around it of the great Empires; England has a dominion in India, France a settlement in Africa, and Russia looks to subverting Turkey.

It is now twenty-three years since Europe was all but plunged in a war, not because a new Napoleon had made it the stepping-stone to India, but merely because of a quarrel between its Pasha and the Sultan. By that event the tenure of Egypt was practically altered, its dependence on the Porte shaken, and the chances increased of its becoming a bone of contention. The Powers then interposed to force the Sultan to concede to its ruler a hereditary title in violation of the maxims of that empire, and in opposition to the principles of its restoration. This change was merely nominal: so long as Mehemet Ali lived and ruled, the power of Egypt was, so to say, a personal matter; it disappeared with him. On his demise Egypt would have merged into its anterior condition, but that under this arrangement the new Pasha, neither being appointed by the Sultan, nor having strength in himself to stand against him, has to lean for support

on Foreign Governments, and will receive it only from those who are inimical to his Sovereign.*

All that is said of danger to that Empire from disaffection of its Christian subjects is idle breath; its danger is from a Mussulman Schism and in such a Schism Egypt disaffected must play the first part; it is a Mussulman Province; it stands between Turkey and the Holy Places, the possession of which is a vital matter; its Ruler may control Syria, and dispose of the predatory Arabs of the Desert, and although regiments of Fellahs may not again traverse Asia Minor, the impression of past events remains, and Egypt in the hands of a Foreign Power may shake the throne of the Sultans to its foundation.

Amongst us the sinew of war is money in the East, as the reader of the Arabian Nights' well knows, it is rice. It affords the largest amount of nutriment in the smallest space, is of all grains that which is least liable to deterioration; it is the accustomed food of the people, not like wheat constituting a portion of the diet, but the whole of it. Rice comes from Egypt: cutting off Egypt is stopping the supplies, and this is its moral as well as its physical effect.

In a war with Russia, Egypt being the province furthest removed, is that from which supplies may be most readily drawn; it is therefore of the utmost importance to detach it from its allegiance. It was by experience of its value that Catherine called Egypt one of the horns of the Crescent (the other was Greece), of both of which that Luminary had to be shorn before, according to her opinion, it could lapse into her amorous embrace. In fact she pre

* I wrote the following words a year before the Treaty of 1840 was signed.

66 The power of Mehemet Ali must fall with himself. The introduction of hereditary succession, a principle at variance with the laws and administration of the empire, can only be proposed for the purpose of perpetuating differences between Egypt and Constanti nople, and allowing the Powers of Europe to interfere under colour of rights conceded to their intervention."