From The National Review. SOME ANGLO-FRENCH PROBLEMS.

IT will be found upon examination that the more important questions between the French government and our own have arisen in connection with the delimitation of frontiers in Africa and in Asia, and that the difficulties with which the two governments have to contend are in great measure due to the absence of reliable knowledge of the geographical conditions prevailing in the remote regions in which the two empires meet. The map of Africa, in fact, requires re-editing month by month. The geographical and ethnographical knowledge which we possess of that continent is amplified, where it is not contradicted, by the stores of information which each returning traveller brings, and nowadays their name is legion. Since the times of Cameron and of Stanley, of Monteil and of Binger, our information of Africa has increased by leaps and bounds. The consequence is, that as fast as our governments draw imaginary lines upon the blank spaces of our maps, fresh knowledge reaches them materially altering or qualifying the information which they thought they possessed, and compelling a reconsideration of many points, which were thought to have been disposed of.

When this stage has been concluded, the unfortunate Warina incident, when Captain Lendy and Lieutenant Maritz were killed, will be ripe for solution.

It is not the intention of this article to recall all the points of dispute within the scope of the review which is now proceeding. It will be sufficient to indicate in outline the most important of them.

THE NILE VALLEY.

THE debate in the House of Commons on the 28th March respecting the position of Great Britain and of France in Central Africa, and the speech which was delivered on that occasion by Sir Edward Grey, have attracted a good deal of attention both in this country and in France, an attention which the subject matter fully deserves, not only by reason of its immediate interest, but also by reason of the serious consequences which, in certain eventualities, might ensue in the relations existing between the French nation and ourselves. The immediate cause of the debate was an uneasy feeling on the part of a portion of the public that an attempt was being made by France to establish herself upon the banks of the Upper Nile by means of a secret expedition, which was supposed to be marching in that direction with the In the summer of 1894, the British assent and encouragement of the and French governments entered upon French government, but the exact a review of all African questions at whereabouts of which has not been that time pending between the two hitherto definitely ascertained. Exgovernments, for the purpose of arriv-pression was first given to this feeling ing at a satisfactory adjustment. That by an article which appeared in the review comprised about a dozen ques- Times of 5th March, entitled "France, tions of more or less importance; it has been continued up to the present moment; it still continues; and some time must yet elapse before it can be finally disposed of. The only tangible result which has at present been reached, is to be found in the agreement recently effected, defining the precise boundaries to the north and to the east of Sierra Leone, and even this matter cannot be considered to have been satisfactorily settled until a joint delimitation commission has gone over the ground and fixed the boundaries.

England, and the Upper Nile." For some years a large armed force has been collected on the Mobanghi River, prepared originally for the purpose of taking action in support of French claims against the Congo Free State, should the dispute between the two powers relating to the frontiers of the latter in that region reach an acute stage. The well-known Colonel Mon、 teil was to have taken command of the force, and had actually started for the purpose when he was ordered to proceed to the western Soudan upon other

military employment. France and the | Egyptian rights over the said territoCongo Free State have adjusted the ries, which were in suspense. The disputed frontier line. The expedition has not returned to the coast, and with the knowledge that we possess of the designs upon the Upper Nile of some of the most violent French politicians, a not unnatural anxiety has been felt as to the precise destination and whereabouts of this large armed force. Her Majesty's government have not been able to throw any light upon the mat

ter.

In the House of Commons debate on the 28th March, Sir Edward Grey, speaking with due deliberation, said:

western sphere was, however, still further delimited by the first article of the Agreement of 12th May, 1894, between Great Britain and the Congo Free State, wherein the frontier was defined as following the 30th meridian east of Greenwich up to its intersection by the watershed between the Nile and the Congo, and thence following this watershed in a northerly and northwesterly direction. This was the western limit of the territory of which Great Britain granted a lease to King Leopold and his successors under the second article of said Agreement. It

The advance of a French expedition, under secret instructions right through is true that at a subsequent period the from the other side of Africa into a territory over which our claims have been known for so long, would be not merely an inconsistent and unexpected act, but it must be perfectly well known to the French government that it would be an unfriendly act, and would be so viewed by England. This declaration received the general approval of the House of Commons.

king renounced his rights under the lease to a considerable portion of the leased territories. But, so far as Great Britain is concerned, a recognition by the king of the right of Great Britain to lease these territories still remains valid, notwithstanding the surrender of his own rights at the instance of a third party. It is true that up to the present we have not sought effectively to occupy a territory, the right to which has been acknowledged by Germany, Italy, and the Congo Free State. We

It is somewhat remarkable that M. Hanotaux, speaking in the Senate on 5th April, did not say a word with regard to this expedition, when a word from him would have relieved the anx-have, however, proclaimed a protecto ieties of many people in this country.

What, then, are our rights, if any, in the region towards which this expedition is thought to be directing itself?

The British sphere of influence is defined by the Agreement between Great Britain and Germany of the 1st July, 1890, and is stated therein to be bounded "to the west by the Congo Free State, and by the Western Watershed of the basin of the Upper Nile."

rate over Uganda. We have also advanced to the Albert Nyanza, and reached Wadelai. It would be a comparatively easy task to send a small expedition down the Nile to Lado, or even farther north, and it is one which her Majesty's government ought seriously to contemplate in the view of possible eventualities in that region. Public opinion in England would never permit a foreign power to intervene By the Agreements of 24th March and establish herself upon the Nile in and 15th April, 1891, between Great such a way as to cut off our access to Britain and Italy, the western fron- Egypt down the river. So long as we tier of the British sphere was not are responsible for the good governspecifically referred to, although the ment of Egypt, the control of the head existence of that sphere was recog-waters of the Nile must remain in our nized. The Agreements dealt more hands. particularly with the eastern boundary of that sphere, and a line from Ras Kasar on the Red Sea to the Blue Nile, and from the Blue Nile to the river Juba, was agreed upon, subject to

Sir Edward Grey, therefore, did not go too far when he said that we should consider as an unfriendly act the mission of an expedition by France to the Upper Nile water, and indeed it is not

improbable that even stronger language | at a modern map of Africa will reveal has been used, in Downing Street or at vast tracts colored as French and as the Quai d'Orsay, of which the British yet unoccupied by French officials, for public has not been made aware.

which it would puzzle French statesmen to produce any better title-deeds than an occasional convention or agreement. In asking France to accept as binding the international agreements upon which we rely, we are only doing what she herself expects us to do in her own case; we are only asking her to do unto us what she expects others to do unto her.

THE NIGER.

The speech of M. Hanotaux on the 5th of April upon this point is of a reasonable and moderate character. He points out that the sphere of British influence has never been defined towards the north, and that the regions in question, if they belong to anybody, belong properly to the khedive of Egypt. The former proposition we are prepared to admit, but if we admit the latter, the admission would debar France as well as our- A DIFFICULTY involving questions of selves from establishing a position considerable importance, has arisen within these territories. Our object, between Great Britain and France, after all, is to safeguard the valley of upon the banks of the Middle Niger. the Nile in the interests of Egypt, and The telegraphic despatch received in in our own, as trustees for Egypt, as England on the 26th March informed long as we remain there, and provided the public that two French expeditions that France will recognize and accept had suddenly appeared upon the banks this position in any engagement which of the river. One was stated to have may be come to, we shall not be likely reached Bagibo, in Nupe, and to be to quarrel over a few miles more or encamped on the left or the east bank less upon the summit of the Nile and of the Niger; the other to have Congo water-shed. But we cannot reached Boussa, a town of some imsubmit to the French sphere being car-portance on the banks of the Middle ried across from Senegal on the Atlan-Niger, and the capital of the kingdom tic to Obok on the Indian Ocean. Such of that name. The territory of Nupe a stretch of country would be useless to France except as a spoke in our Egyptian wheel. If, as appears from M. Hanotaux's speech, exception is taken to the western frontier of the British sphere of influence, the views of France could and would be met in a friendly spirit, provided that no attempt be made to drive in a wedge between the southern limit of the Egyptian sphere and the northern limit of our own. As for the taunt that after all our rights are only paper rights, and that France may jump through them, as a columbine jumps through the paper hoops at a circus, it does not lie in the mouth of France, or of any of the great powers which have competed in the scramble for Africa, to utter such reproaches. Are none of the rights which France undoubtedly has in Africa "paper" rights? Are all her rights due to, and based solely upon, effective occupation? A glance

has been considered to be within the sphere of British influence ever since March, 1885, when the emir of Nupe signed a treaty with the National African Company, which subsequently became the Royal Niger Company. The same year also witnessed the signature of a treaty between the emir of Borgu or Boussa, and the Niger Company; whilst five years later, in January, 1890, a fuller treaty was signed between the emir and chiefs of Borgu or Boussa, with the Niger Company, which confirmed the treaty of 1885, and granted to the Niger Company 66 complete jurisdiction over all persons within the territories, who are not our native-born subjects." The treaty also contained a clause to the effect that the native chiefs would not enter into any agreement or treaty with any foreign governments, except with the consent of the company, or of her Majesty the queen of Great Britain.

the chiefs, whose territories they have traversed, the matter becomes more serious, and some further explanation beyond that vouchsafed by M. Hanotaux may fairly be demanded by Great Britain, and ought in justice to be given by France.

These treaties have all been submitted | mercial results very successful, seeing to the Foreign Office, and have re- that they will have to compete with a ceived the assent of the secretary of large and old-established trading constate. These regions are also included cern in the shape of the Niger Comin the proclamation of the British Pro- pany. If, however, these expeditions tectorate over the Niger districts, have in the course of their wanderings which was made on the 18th October, been making a series of treaties with 1887, and which included "all territories in the basin of the Niger and its affluents, which are, or may be subject to the government of the Royal Niger Company, in accordance with the provisions of the charter." It is difficult to understand upon what ground France can base any claims to acquire influence or possessions in this portion of the Middle Niger. It may be true that the exact frontiers of such kingdoms as Boussa and Nupe are not accurately ascertained or delimited, but, however that may be, it is perfectly clear that no expedition has a right to penetrate as far as the Niger without the assent of the Niger Company, which is charged with the administration of these countries. These expedi- THE difficulties which have arisen tions, presumably, must have come between Great Britain and France in from Dahomey, a country which did not | Siam relate to two matters differing in fall into the possession of France until character and of unequal importance. 1893, eight years subsequent to the dates of the treaties with Nupe and Boussa.

In the interpellation of the 5th April in the French Senate, M. Hanotaux gave no explanation as to the origin or the object of these expeditions, but contented himself with challenging the supposed claim of the Niger Company to monopolize trade within the districts more or less effectively occupied by it, and to forbid all transit contrary to the Act of Berlin. Upon this point there can be no difference of opinion between the British and French governments. The Act of Berlin laid down a series of propositions relating to the navigation of the Niger, which Great Britain is prepared to carry out, and to enforce upon the Niger Company. If these expeditions are purely of a commercial and trading character their advent within the British Protectorate of the Niger districts need not cause us much alarm. Their stay is not likely to be very prolonged, nor their com

The statement of M. Hanotaux, that several questions relating to the rights of the Niger Company are at present the subject of discussion between Great Britain and France, is not sufficient, and is no excuse for sending expeditions into the British Protectorate, pending the completion of the negotiations in question.

SIAM.

The one is concerned with a delimitation of boundaries, intended to be permanent; the other with the cessation of the occupation of a port, originally of a temporary character.

By the Franco-Siamese Treaty of the 3rd October, 1893, Siam undertook to renounce all claim to the whole of the territories on the left bank of the Mekong, and thereupon the portion of the province of Luang-Prabang, situated on the left bank of the river, passed under the dominion of France. But, in addition to Luang-Prabang, Siam was exercising exclusive jurisdiction over the province of Chieng-Kheng, which lies astride of the Upper Mekong, under an arrangement entered into between Siam and Great Britain. This arrangement included a provision for the retrocession of this province to Great Britain in the event of Siam contemplating its abandonment.

The Franco-Siamese Treaty has now brought France, by virtue of her possession of a portion of Luang-Prabaug,