Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

situated on the eastern coast of the Red Sea."

It is, I understand, contended in sup port of the Senate amendment that the existence of the above provisions in the Suez Canal Convention justifies the demand now made for the insertion of analogous provisions in regard to the proposed Nicaragua Canal.

But the analogy which it has been attempted to set up fails in one essential particular. The banks of the Suez Canal are within the dominions of a territorial Sovereigo who was a party to the Convention, and whose established interests it was necessary to protect, whereas the Nicaragua Canal will be constructed in terri. tory belonging not to the United States, but to Central American States, of whose sovereign rights other Powers cannot claim to dispose.

Moreover, it seems to have escaped attention that Article X. of the Suez Canal Convention receives most important modi. fication from Article XI., which lays down that “the measures which shall be taken in the cases provided for by Articles IX. and X. of the present Treaty shall not interfere with the free use of the Canal." The Article proceeds to say that: “In the same cases, the erection of permanent fortifications contrary to the provisions of Article VIII. is prohibited."

The last paragraph of Article VIII., which is specially alluded to, runs as follows:

“They" (i.e., the Agents of the Signatory Powers in Egypt] "shall especially demand the suppression of any work or the dispersion of any assemblage on either bank of the Canal, the object or effect of which might be to interfere with the liberty and the entire security of the navigation."

The situation which would be created by the addition of the new clause is deserving of serious attention. If it were to be added, the obligation to respect the neutrality of the Canal in all circumstances would, so far as Great Britain is concerned, remain in force; the obligation of the United States, on the other hand, would be essentially modified. The result would be a one-sided arrangement under which Great Britain would be debarred from any warlike action in or around the Canal, while the United States would be able to resort to such action to whatever extent they might deem necessary to secure their own safety.

It may be contended that if the new clause were adopted, Section 7 of Article II., which prohibits the erection of forti. fications, would sufficiently insure the free use of the Canal. This contention is, however, one which His Majesty's Government are quite unable to admit. I will not insist upon the dangerous vagueness of the language employed in the amendment, or upon the absence of all security as to the manner in which

the words might, at some future time, be interpreted. For even if it were more precisely worded, it would be impossible to determine what might be the effect if one clause permitting defensive measures and another forbidding fortifications were allowed to stand side by side in the Convention. To His Majesty's Government it seems, as I have already said, that the amendment might be construed as leaving it open to the United States at any moment, not only if war existed, but even if it were anticipated, to take any measures, however stringent or far-reaching, which, in their own judgment, might be represented as suitable for the purpose of protecting their national interests. Such an enactment would strike at the very root of that “general principle" of neutralisation upon which the ClaytonBulwer Treaty was based, and which was reaffirmed in the Convention as drafted.

But the import of the amendment stands out in stronger relief when the third proposal is considered. This strikes out Article III. of the Convention, under which the High Contracting Parties engaged, immediately upon the Convention being ratified, to bring it to the notice of other Powers and to invite their adherence. If that adherence were given, the neutrality of the Canal would be secured by the whole of the adhering Powers. Without that adherence, it would depend only upon the guarantee of the two Contracting Powers. The amend. ment, however, not only removes all prospect of the wider guarantee, but places this country in a position of marked disadvantage compared with other Powers which would not be subject to the Self-denying Ordinance which Great Britain is desired to accept. It would follow, were His Majesty's Government to agree to such an arrangement, that while the United States would have & Treaty right to interfere with the Canal in time of war, or apprehended war, and while other Powers could with a clear conscience disregard any of the restrictions imposed by the Convention, Great Britain alone, in spite of her enormous possessions on the American Continent, in spite of the extent of her Australasian Colonies and her interests in the East, would be absolutely precluded from resorting to any such action, or from taking measures to secure her interests in and near the Canal.

I request that your Excellency will explain to the Secretary of State the reasons, as set forth in this despatch, why His Majesty's Government feel unable to accept the Convention in the shape presented to them by the American Ambassador, and why they prefer, as matters stand at present, to retain unmodified the provisions of the Clayton. Bulwer Treaty. His Majesty's Government have, throughout these negotiations, given evidence of their earnest desire to meet the views of the United States. They would on this occasion have been ready to consider in a friendly spirit any amendments of the Convention, not inconsistent with the principles accepted by both Governments, which the Government of the United States might have desired to propose, and they would sincerely regret a failure to come to an amicable understanding in regard to this important subject.

Your Lordship is authorised to read this despatch to the Secretary of State, and to leave a copy in his hands. -I am, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE.

The following are Articles I. and VI. of Convention between Her Majesty and the United States of America relative to the Establishment of a Communication by Ship-Canal between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Signed at Washington, April 19th, 1850 :

Article 1.- The Governments of Great Britain and the United States hereby declare that neither the one nor the other will ever obtain or maintain for itself any exclusive control over the said ship-canal; agreeing that neither will ever erect or maintain any fortifications commanding the same, or in the vicinity thereof, or occupy, or fortify, or colonize, or assume or exercise any dominion over Nicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mosquito Coast, or any part of Central America ; nor will either make use of any protection which either affords, or may afford, or any alliance which either has, or may have, to or with any State or people, for the purpose of erecting or maintaining any such fortifications, or of occupying, fortifying, or colonizing Nicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mosquito Coast, or any part of Central America, 'or of assuming or exercising dominion over the same. Nor will Great Britain or the United States take advantage of any intimacy, or use any alliance, connection, or influence that either may possess with any State or Government through whose territory the said canal may pass for the purpose of acquiring or holding, directly or indirectly, for the subjects or citizens of the one, any rights or advantages in regard to commerce or navigation through the said canal, which shall not be offered, on the same terms, to the subjects or citizens of the other.

Article VI.-The Contracting Parties in this Convention engage to invite every State with which both or either have friendly intercourse to enter into stipulations with them similar to those which they have entered into with each other, to the end that all other States may share in the honour and advantage of having contributed to a work of such general interest and importance as the canal herein contemplated; and the Contracting

Parties likewise agree that each shall enter into Treaty stipulations with such of the Central American States as they may deem advisable, for the purpose of more effectually carrying out the great design of this Convention, namely, that of constructing and maintaining the said canal as a ship communication between the two oceans for the benefit of mankind, on equal terms to all, and of protecting the same ; and they also agree that the good offices of either shall be employed, when requested by the other, in aiding and assisting the negotiation of such Treaty stipulations ; and should any differences arise as to right or property over the territory through which the said canal shall pass between the States or Governments of Central America, and such differences should in any way impede or obstruct the execution of the said canal, the Governments of Great Britain and the United States will use their good offices to settle such differences in the manner best suited to promote the interests of the said canal, and to strengthen the bonds of friendship and alliance which exist between the Contracting Parties.

A New Treaty was negotiated by Mr. Hay and Lord Pauncefote and submitted to the Senate, by which body it was ratified on December 16th, 1901. The text, as officially published in Washington, is as follows :

The United States and His Majesty King Edward, being desirous to facilitate the construction of a ship canal to connect the Atlantic and the Pacific by whatever route may be considered expedient, and to that end to remove any objection which may arise out of the Clayton. Bulwer Treaty to the construction of such a canal under the auspices of the United States, without impairing the general principle of neutralisation established by Article 8 of the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty, have for that purpose appointed as plenipotentiaries Mr. Hay, State Secretary, and Lord Pauncefote, British Ambassador at Washington, who have agreed to the following articles :

I. The high contracting parties agree that the present treaty shall supersede the Convention of April 19th, 1850.

II. It is agreed that a canal may be constructed under the auspices of the United States Government, either directly at its own cost or by a gift or loan of money to individuals or corporations, or through subscription to or purchase of stock or shares, and that, subject to the provisions of the present treaty, the said Government shall have and enjoy all rights incident to such construction, as well as the exclusive right of providing regulations for the management of the canal.

III. The United States adopts as the basis of the neutralisation of the canal the following rules, substantially as em

bodied in the Convention of Constanti. nople, dated October 28th, 1888, for the free navigation of the Suez Canal, that is to say-(1) That the canal shall be free and open to vessels of commerce and war of all nations observing these rules on the terms of entire equality, so that there shall be no discriminations against any such nation or its citizens or subjects in respect of the conditions or charges of traffic or otherwise, such conditions and charges of traffic to be just and equitable. (Here follow five other rules for the regulation and use of the canals.)

IV. It is agreed that no change in the territorial sovereignty or international relations of the country or countries traversed by the canal shall affect the general principle of neutralisation or the obligation of the high contracting parties.

V. Ratifications must be exchanged within six months.

PAUPERISM [Cd. 746).

The Report of the Local Government Board for 1900–1901 shows that on January 1st, 1901, the grand total of persons in receipt of relief indoor and outdoor, and including the insane) was 801,347. Excluding the insane the number was 705,183: 209,620 indoor paupers and 495,563 outdoor. The able-bodied adult indoor male paupers numbered 19,470; females, 18,100; children, under 16 years, of such paupers, 13,267. Not able-bodied indoor male paupers numbered 65,587 ; females, 44,110; and children of such parents, 37,561. Vagrants figure at 11,526. On the subject of the decrease of able-bodied paupers the Report thus analyses the statistical tables :

It appears that the decrease in the number of this class of paupers included in the returns has, relatively, been considerably greater than the general decrease in pauperism. The mean number of these paupers (excluding vagrants who are not classified in the returns) for the parochial year ended Lady-day, 1849, was 228,823, the mean number of the indoor paupers belonging to this class being 26,558, and the mean number of outdoor paupers 202,265. For the parochial year ended Lady-day, 1901, the mean number of adult able-bodied paupers had fallen to 91,133, the mean number receiving indoor relief being 33,580, and the mean number receiving outdoor relief 57,553. Without taking into account the growth of the population, the returns therefore show that the total number of this class of paupers had very greatly diminished. The decrease, which is thus seen to amount to more than one-half, was wholly due to a reduction in the mean number of the adult able-bodied who received outdoor relief

and of whom there were 144,712 fewer in 1901 than in 1848–49, being a reduction of 71.5 per cent. On the other hand, there was an increase in the mean number of indoor paupers of this class, which, although smaller than in any year since 1893-94, was larger in 1900-01 than in any of the first forty-six years com. prised in the table. This increase was, however, more than counterbalanced by the decrease in the numbers receiving outdoor relief. The decrease in the total number of adult able-bodied paupers is even more striking when the increase in the population is taken into consideration. In the parochial year 1848–49, according to the returns then received, the mean number of the indoor paupers belonging to this class amounted to 1.5 per 1,000 of the population, and the mean number of the outdoor paupers to 11.7 per 1,000. In the parochial year 1900-01 these proportions had respectively fallen to 1:0 and 1.8 per 1,000. If the mean number of adult able-bodied paupers had borne the same proportion to estimated population in 1900-01 as it did in 1848-49, the number of paupers of this class in the former year would have been 423,080 instead of 91,133. The total mean number of paupers of this class in 1900-01 was smaller than in any of the fifty-two preceding years, with the exception of the years 1876-77 and 1890-91, and the proportion which it bore to the population was smaller in 1900-01 than in any other year comprised in the table.

Pauperism in Metropolis.-A com. parison of the table containing the mean numbers of the paupers in the Metropolis for the parochial years 1861-62 to 1900-01 with the table containing similar information for the whole of England and Wales shows that the ratio which the mean number of paupers of all classes bore to the estimated population was very slightly higher in the Metropolis than in the country as a whole in the eight parochial years ended Ladyday, 1894 to 1901. The former table also shows the extent to which the mean number of the indoor paupers of the Metropolis has increased and the mean number of its outdoor paupers has diminished since the date of the earliest returns given in the table. For the parochial year 1861-62 the mean number of indoor paupers in the Metropolis was 28,943, or 10-3 per 1,000 of the population ; for 1900-01 it was 65,463, or 14:3 per 1,000. The corresponding numbers of the outdoor paupers were 67,679, or 24 per 1,000, in 186162, and 53,836, or 11.7 per 1,000, in 1900–01. While, however, the increase in the mean number of indoor paupers in the Metropolis has been practically uninterrupted throughout the period covered by the table, much greater fluctuation is observable as regards the

are

number of outdoor paupers, and the mean number for the year ended Ladyday, 1901, is by no means the smallest shown in the table. The mean number of indoor and outdoor paupers in the Metropolis in the six years from 1866-67 to 1871-72 ranged from 40:3 to 476 per 1,000 of the estimated population, whilst the ratio in 1900-01 was 26.0 per 1,000.

Cost of Relief.—The gross cost of the relief of the poor during the year ended at Lady-day, 1900, was £11,567,649, which is greater than that recorded in any previous year. It represented an average charge of 78. 31d. per head on the estimated population, being 11d. per head more than in the preceding year. The average charge per head of the gross expenditure on the estimated population was higher in 1899–1900 than in any of the fifty-six preceding years for which statistics are available. It was not, however, necessary to raise poor rates to meet the whole of the above expenditure, a considerable portion of it having been provided for by “ receipts in aid” of the rates, estimated to have amounted to £3,196,978 for the year. Of this amount, £2,088,958 was received as grants from

unty and county borough councils, and it is estimated that the portion of the grant under the Agricultural Rates Act, 1896, applicable to this expenditure amounted to £428,428.

In 1891 the gross expenditure was £8,643,318; in 1896, £10,215,974; in 1899, £11,286,973. The gross cost of relief in the Metropolis in 1900 was £3,594,841,

to the growth of the coal mining unions, the membership of which rose from 409,209 to 482,743, an increase of 73,534 or 18 per cent. This represents nearly three-fourths of the total increase in the membership of all trade unions at the end of 1900. Of the 1,272 unions in existence at the end of 1900 less than half were registered, namely, 609, but these unions contained 1,498,582 members, or nearly 79 per cent. of the total membership of all trade unions. Among the 1,905,116 members of trade unions

included 122,047 women and girls, or about 61 per cent. of the total. Such members are only found in 138 of the 1,272 unions, and they are confined mainly to those industries in which the employment of women has attained to very large proportions. Thus, the cotton industry alone includes 95,975, or nearly 79 per cent. of the total number of all female trade unionists. The income of the 100 principal unions in 1900 was £1,975,000, or about $100,000 more than in 1899. The expenditure shows a still greater increase-namely, from £1,281,000 to £1,491,000. This increase in expendi. diture was not, however, sufficient to check the growth in the accumulated funds of the societies, which now stand at £3,767,000, or about half a million more than at the end of 1899.

SOMALILAND. (See OGADEN

RISINGS: AFRICA.)

SOUDAN. (See EGYPT.)

TRADE UNIONS IN 1900 [Cd.

733]. The Report of the Labour Department of the Board of Trade on Trade Unions shows that during the year 1900 the membership of all trade unions rose from 1,800,869 to 1,905,116, an increase of 104,247, or 5.8 per cent., on the previous year. During the period 1896–99 there were percentage increases of 6-2, 8.0, 2.2, and 9-2, so that the rate of increase was somewhat slower in 1900 than in 1896, 1897, and 1899, but much quicker than in 1898. Going farther back, it is found that there were decreases of 2:0 per cent. in 1895, 2:9 in 1894, and 1.5 in 1893. On the whole, therefore, the member. ship of trade unions increased more in 1900 than in an average year of the period 1892– 99. The increase in 1900 was mainly due

TRANSUBSTANTIATION.

Declaration Against [137].-A Select Committee of the House of Lords was appointed (May 21st, 1901) to consider the Declaration required of the Sovereign, on his accession, by the Bill of Rights (1 Will. III., Cap. 2, Sec. 1); and to report whether its language can be modified advantageously without diminishing its efficacy as a security for the maintenance of the Protestant Succession. The Committee reported (June 25th) that for the future the Declaration should be as follows:

I, A. B., by the Grace of God, King (or Queen) of Great Britain and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, do solemnly and sincerely, in the presence of God, profess, testify, and declare that I do believe that in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper there is not any transubstantiation of the elements of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, at or after the consecration thereof by any person whatsoever. And I do believe that the invocation or adoration of the Virgin Mary or any other Saint, and the sacrifice of the Mass as they are now used in the Church of

Rome, are contrary to the Protestant Religion. And I do solemnly, in the presence of God, profess, testify and declare that I do make this declaration and every part thereof unreservedly.

UPPER NILE. (See EGYPT AND THE

SOUDAN.)

VACCINATION RETURNS [Cd.

746]. The Report of the Local Government Board for 1900-01 gives the following results :

Of 923,059 children whose births were returned by the vaccination officers as having been registered in 1898, 562,737, or almost 61•0 per cent., are recorded as successfully vaccinated; 110,912, or 12.0 per cent.,as having died unvaccinated; and four cases as remaining unvaccinated on account of having had small-pox; while, 3,232 cases, or 0-25 per cent. of the whole, were certified as “insusceptible" of vaccination in consequence of the operation having been three times performed without success; and in respect of 47,423, or 5:1 per cent, of the whole, certificates of conscientious objection were received. There are other cases recorded in the returns, amounting to 1.8 per cent., in which vaccination was temporarily postponed on account of the children's state of health. The proportion not coming within any of the above classes amounts to 19.7 per cent. of the whole.

It thus appears that of the entire number of children whose births were registered during 1898, 21.5 per cent. were not finally accounted for as regards vaccination at the time the returns were made. This percentage is rather less than that for 1896 and 1897, in the first of which years the percentage was higher than any previously recorded since the Vaccination Act of 1871 came into operation. Deducting from the total number of births the children returned by the vaccination officers as having died unvaccinated, we find that of the remaining 812,147, 69.3 per cent. were registered as successfully vaccinated.

London Yaccination Returns.-With regard to the Metropolis, the returns for 1898 show that the number of cases not finally accounted for as regards vaccination amounted to 33.0 per cent., whereas in the previous year the percentage of default was 29.1. In several of the unions the percentage of cases not finally accounted for was exceedingly high. For instance, in Shoreditch it was 68.4, in Mile End Old Town 68.3, in Bethnal Green 66.8, and Poplar 63•4, while in four other unions the proportion of default was 40 per cent. or more, in seven others 30 per cent. or more, and in three others over 20 per cent. On the other

hand the work of some of the vaccination officers has been carried out very effi. ciently, and the proportion of children escaping vaccination has consequently been comparatively low. Thus in 1898 the percentage of default in Woolwich was 5.8, and in St. George, Hanover Square, 8.3.

Country Yaccination Returns. – In the counties outside the Metropolis the percentage of children unaccounted for as regards vaccination in 1898 was 19-6, as compared with 21.6 for the previous year. The greatest proportion of default appears in Bedfordshire and Leicestershire (54.5 and 47.5 per cent. respectively), and this is to a great extent due to the large arrears shown in the returns from the following unions, viz. :-Luton (74:6), Biggleswade (59.2), and Bedford (53.4), in the County of Bedford; and Market Harborough (860), Leicester (63-8), and Blaby (62.9), in the County of Leicester. The unions in which there was the highest percentage of default were Market Harborough (860), Rugby (78.0), Luton (74:6), Halifax (71-7), King's Lynn (71.5), and Chippenham (70·1). In six other unions the proportion of default was over 60 per cent., and in 11 others over 50 per cent.

On the other hand there were several unions in which the proportion of default did not exceed 1 per cent.; and seventeen more unions in which the proportion of default was under 2 per cent., while in many others, some of which have large urban populations, it did not exceed 3 per cent. Thus, in Carmarthen the number unaccounted for 0:6 per cent., and in the Blything, Dulverton,

Crediton, and North Witchford Unions the numbers were respectively 0.7, 0.9, 1.0, and 1.0. In Portsea Island (including Portsmouth) it was 2-3 per cent. ; in Runcorn 2:6; and in Barrow-in-Furness, 2.9. The following are instances of poor law unions comprising large cities and towns in which satisfactory results have also been obtained, the percentages

being that of cases unaccounted for:-Kidderminster, 3:1; Stourbridge, 3.5; Birkenhead, 3.7; Liverpool, 5:3; Stockton, 6:9; Bolton, 7.8; and Southampton, 7.9.

The returns show that in respect of 47,423 children certificates of conscientious objection were received by the vacci. nation officers. A large number of these would probably in previous years have been returned as unaccounted for as regards vaccination, and the effect of them in this year's return is to diminish the percentages of children “unaccounted for as regards vaccination," in the case of many unions where the proportion of default has in recent years been exceedingly high.

In August, 1900, we presented to Parliament a Return (No. 354 of Session 1900), which we had caused to be prepared, showing, as regards each quarter

« EdellinenJatka »