Wuun writing lately of the Telegraphic Convention we were very careful to shew that we wrote from hearsay, not having certain knowledge of the terms of the convention, or of the sum promised to buy off the Chinese opposition, and our correspondent "F." has confess sed that we were well-informed. The Great Northern Telegraph Company and the Eastern Extension Telegraph Company had, we were informed, agreed to make the Chinese Telegraph Administration an annual payment of alundred thousand taels for fifteen years, to prevent its lowering the price of telegraphic messages to Europe; and we repeat that this isa more than questionable arrangement, utterly unworthy of the great nation Russia, and the nation that aspires to be thought great,. China. We couple Russia in this reproach with China, because without her cooperation the agreement could not have been effected, and indeed we hear from Peking that M. Coumany, the Russian Minister, has been giving his strongest supporttoMessrs. Juddand Henningsenin their endeavours to persuade the ''sung-li Yamen to ratify the Convention. The letter which we publish elsewhere from these gentlemen states that a subsidy of Us. 100,000 had not been proposed or even contemplated. But it does not seem to us that it matters a straw to the public whether the animal payment is called a subsidy, arent, or anything else. What we know is that a large yearly amount will be paid to the Chinese, that out of a part of the coast business, which we should say does not amount to a fifth of the traffic of the companies, a sum that is estimated to give over a fifth of the annual amount has been arranged to be given as rent of places which the companies had erected. We frankly accept the assurance given by Messrs. Judd and Henningsen that no irregular or improper means were used to obtain the Convention and we congratulate them on having in this instance worked without the customary methods. dent F. on behalf of tue Great Northen The special pleading of our correspon Company—for the Eastern Extension Company has, as he points out, no locus standi in the negotiations, and has only taken part in them as the eme damnée of its Danish colleague—is so transparent that it is almost a waste of time to point out its tenuity. We are told that the position of the Great Northern is de facto and de jure wassailable, as it has an agreement with the Russian Government that for fifteen years more no junction of Chinese land telegraph lines with those of Russia shall allowed. But is it certain that the Russian concession extends to land lines, is it not limited to an undertaking that no sea cables except those of the Great Northern Company would be allowed to be landed on the Siberian coast in order to join the Russian land lines? We are not certain as to this as the Danish Company took alarm when the Marquis Tseng visited Berlin Inst year and obtained some changes and additions to their privileges. Our correspondent's statement that this agreement was ited "as an inducement to that company to construct telegraph lines to the East," is obviously ridiculous, as the Great Northen Company has not constructed a single mile of lie to the East, but has merely joined Wladiwa stock to Shanghai and Hongkong. But the question that must have in stantly occurred to every reader of F's letter is, if the Great Northern's position is unassailable, why do they undertake to pay China some uncertain sun a year to buy off assault? It seems to have struck our correspondent that this was the weak point in his argument, for he tells us that "it would be quite beside the present exposition of the telegraphic convention to explain" it; and he weakly suggests that the swn may be given to compensate China for allowing the companies toland the end-of their cables on Chinese territory; the Great Northern having landed its cable at Shanghai over fifteen years ago, and being so firm in its assertion of a sole right to land cables in China, that when the Eastern Extension Company decided to continue their line to Shanghai, the Great Northern was able to keep the steamer employed here in idleness for weeks, until the Eastern Extension came toa humble arrangement within. Again our correspondentshews what is the value he really puts on the alleged agreement between Russia and the Danish Company when he tells us, not that it was this agreement, but the obstinate refusalofthe Chinese to allow the Russian telegraph lines to be extended for many years past from Kinchta to Peking, that justified Russia in keeping the Chinese waiting for the next fifteen years before their lines are allowed access to Europe by means of the Russian lines. Again towards the close of his letter he tells us distinctly that hina would not be in its present position of exclusion from the Russian lines, if it had not so long obstinately refused to allow telegraphs from Russia to China, which can only mean that the agreement between Russia and the Great Northern would not have been allowed to stand in China's way for a minute if she had been more complaisant in allowing Russia to build a line.
The last paragraph of our Correspon ent's letter is hardly worth an answer. Politically it would be no loss if the Great Northern had to cease working, as every message it sends to Europe goes over the Russian lines just as much as if it were handed to the Chinese Administration. There is no chance of the Eastern Extension Company being swamped, as long as it has the monopoly of the traffic between Europe vid Singapore and Australia, and between Singapore and French Indo-
China and Hongkong, so that we do not readily discover what are the "strong political complications" which necessitate our paying two dollars a word for our home messages when one dollar, or at the most a dollar-and-a-half, would amply suffice. But when all other arguments fail, it is a common device to allude to occult political reasons which the writer is not at liberty to explain openly. It will have been observed that our corespondent does. not attempt to impugn our statement that but for this disastrous convention we should soon see a reduction of from twenty-five to fifty per cent in the charge for telegranis from China to Europe. The Chambers of Commerce at home are as. much interested as those in the Far East in getting this unholy convention upset, if it is what we believe it to be. It is very good of Messrs. Judd and Henning sen to promise to make it public after it has been ratified; but we consider that it is our duty in the interest of our fellow-residents in the Far East to draw such attention to it while there is yet time, as will prevent its being accepted by the authorities at Peking.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.