In the Times of the 2nd ult, the. Paris correspondent tells the story of a loan which a group of British banks had agreed to make to Persia, but the conclusion of which was stopped by 8 peremptory prohibition issued by the Russian representative in Teheran. In a leading article dealing with this the Times says We have no wish to exaggerate the intrinsic importance of this incident. The financial operation in dispute is not one of any overwhelming magnitude from the point of view of the lenders, and, though the Persian Treasury may have to remain empty, 8 semi-civilised State like Persia is ae customed to live from band to mouth. Our localised in Southern Persia, and if they were Imperial interests are to a great extent to be seriously threatened we do not doubt that Her Majesty's Government would know how to defend them. The maintenance of British ascendency in the Persian Gulf and along the long coastline which stretches from Aden toKurrachee has been long since definitely sed a8 one of the cardinal principles of our policy, and its surrender would be equally dangerous to the safety of our Indian Empire against foreign attack and to the prestige without which we could never command the loyalty of so many million native subjects, What' is of impartance in this incident is its symptomatic significance. It emphasises the purely political aims of Russian, action throughout Asia.. Russia is not suffering from any surfeit of capital that she should insist upon reserving Persia to herself as_an exclusive field of financial activity. She may possibly look forward in the remote future to such economic and commercial expansion as shall require for an outlet the whole of the vast undeveloped regions of Asia. But that is not the immediate object she is pursuing in so lavish an expenditure of capital which she herself has borrow. Whether she builds what Lord Salisbury calls unprofitable railw or whether she offers to lend Persia millions of roubles she can ill spare at home, her object is to exercise a political leverage b; which alone she can at place in those regions even than British statesmanship have labor-irish enterprise and British commerce more iously built up.
In the Times of the same date there is a particularly interesting article pointing out to thy the imbecility of Lord Salisbury's declaration that there is no precedent for Government assistance in the construction of railways in China. The Times says that country for es and fu conditions Railway construction is being employed in hitherto unknown. Salisbury ignores this vital consideration, enlarges upon the advantages of a strict adhesion to precedent and tradition, and invites private capital to compete with the resources of the Russo-Chinese Bank—the "agent," as Mr. Curzon ledges, "f the innocent Belgian syndicates in whose strictly private character Salisbury professes to believe. If no precedent could be found to cover the case of railway construction in Chioa, a strong Minister might well deem it to be his duty to make one. But, in fact, a precedent exists which amply meets all the objections to such a step urged by the Prime Minister. Did Lord Salisbury's old leader wait for resolations and votes and svowals from persons of Political authority before he pledged the country to the pi of the Suez Canal shares? Where was the precedent for this violation of the traditions of generations Of his own initiative, without apprisin either Parliament or the nation of his design, Lord Reaconsfield undertook to sink enterprise contract foreigners, in a millions of British money i a, commercial foreign and then attceitised "land, and within the dominions of an Oriental Government. He did not doubt, as Lord Salis- Holy Roman bury seems to doubt, but as the states: men of Russis, France, and Germany do not seem to doubt, that the control of such an enterprise would bring with it political power into country where it lay, Ho saw his opportunity, and he seized it with the results argument can be urged against the expenditure for England that we Imow. What single of British public funds' on. Chinese: railway which was not applicable to that great stroke of. provident statesmanship when it was ie? But Lord Salisbury is not. content with refusing to follow the policy pursued by all his rivals in China, He manages to throw a good deal of cold water on private enterprise in that country as, well. Ho thinks it rather a subject for congratulation if our capitalists leave the construction of railways there to our rivals, for ho still declares that we shall resist to the very utmost of our power" any attempts by the nations who build them to exclude or hamper in any degree our trade. It i to be hoped that this conviction upon his part will not. prevent him from lending strenuous sup-Port to those of our fellow-countrymen who are willing to embark their capital in Chinese railways, Mr. Curzon was able to declare Tsungli amen had decided to hand over yesterday that he had not heard that the eking-Chinkiang railway to German capitalists in the event, of the failure of the native concessionaire to find the money. We trust that the Government will at least seo that no final decision is taken on the subject until British capitalists have had a reasonable time in which to come forward with the necessary funds.
One more extract we must make from leading articles in the Times oni this question, and we feel grateful that the "leading journal" should thus keep up its and the public interest in the Chinese question, The Times of the 4th ult, says Her Majesty's Government cannot prevent the establishment of spheres of exlusive or preferential rights, how is it going to secure equal opportunity after these rights are thoroughly consolidated by actual posses: sion of extensive commercial property? To that broad gestion Mr. Curzon does not. supply any hint of an answer, yet until it is answered "satisfactorily no éitmeration. of universal feeling described by Sir Edward isolated Siploneatio successes can remove the Grey, that we are being gradually "but ost' effectually squeezed out. We' shall shortly seo what is the real value of the open door in Manchuria. Our Peking cor. respondent tells us that, Sir Claude' Mac. donald, behind whom, by the way, Mr.
rather ungenerously geeks to chelter the Foreign Office, delivered, on the 24th of July, a strongly-worded declaration to the amen, eubsoquently confirming fin wating, fect that England will not tolerate interference of other Powers the British loan-contract for the construction of a railway connecting two treaty ports in which British commercial interests are predominant. The Russian Charge d'Affaires, nothing daunted by this declaration hus contrast and our dent adds. that roves! against the fulfilment of the the Chinese seem to attach more importance to his protest than to Sir Claude Macdonald's declaration. They are sometimes shrewd judges, and they seem to agree with Me Curzon's critics rather than with Mr. Curzon himself. It is a test case, chosen by himself, we shall. see. just hot. the open-door policy, pure and simple, can-do for wa, 'The articles on the death of Prince Bismarck in the leading London papers are well worth reading, but we have only room for the following' short. extract froma leading article in the Times of the Ist ult.
The unity of Germany and the birth of the new German Empire are, like all great historical events, the result of mavy_ complex causes working together. Without the traditions of the past, without the consciousness of common blood, and of common interests which those traditions, embodied in a common literature, had nurtured and handed down, no statesmanship could have welded together as anew whole the fragments into which wat and time had dissolved the Germans of the ly Empire. It was Biemarck's merit to see very early in his career that.it was,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.