i'j4 tH£ MAklTlME CANAL O^ SUe2. 



outlines of the proposed Convention, upon which differences of 

 opinion existed between England and France. 



Firstly, Article V., which' referred to the Canal being opened in 

 time of Peace and War, and that forbade any act of hostility in the 

 Canal during a time of War, England and France differed in opinion 

 on the subject of limit, whether it should be a three mile limit, or a 

 territorial limit, and whether the approaches to the Canal, or of the 

 Ports of access to the Canal, should be defined. 



Secondly, Article IX., which referred to the character of the super- 

 intendence to ensure a proper execution of the Convention, France 

 wished to have a Commission of the representatives of all the 

 Powers, including Egypt, under the presidency of the Delegate from 

 Turkey ; whilst England desired, that the Commission should be the 

 representatives of the Signatory Powers, only, in Egypt, and, that in 

 the event of War, or of internal troubles, or of any complications 

 threatening the safety, or the free use of the Canal, that they 

 should inform their respective Governments, and await their 

 instructions. 



Thirdly, Articles X., and XI., England and France differed 

 as to what Power should be called in to insure execution of the 

 Convention, whether it should be Turkey, or a Neutral State. 



Upon these conflicting questions De Frdycinet urged the desira- 

 bility of France and England coming to a mutual understanding ; 

 and, that being attained, he believed that the concurrence of the 

 other Governments would be easily secured. 



During the months of April, May, June, July, August, of 1886, 

 the diplomatic duel was continued without much advantage to either 

 side j and, tipon the change of Government, with the accession of 

 the Marquis of Salisbury to power, the Earl of Iddesleigh became 

 Foreign Minister, in succession to the Earl of Rosebery, and De 

 Freycinet lost no time in instructing Count D'Aubigny to interview 

 the new Foreign Minister, and press him for a reply to his 

 numerous Despatches, and, to add, that he considered the 

 moderation of the proposals made by France, had been equalled 

 only by the forbearance with which France, has awaited the 

 convenience of Her Majesty's Government. 



The Earl of Iddesleigh's tenure of office, as Foreign Minister, was 

 of short duration, and the solution of the question made little, if any, 

 progress j and it was not until the Marquis of Salisbury became 



