Page:The Annual Register 1899.djvu/46

38] Government to be contrary to the treaty of 1862, and to the Sultan's special obligation in respect to the alienation of his territory. The Sultan was thereupon required to cancel the lease, which after some hesitation he consented to do. Mr. Brodrick went on to say that the action of the British agent was taken under the instructions of the Government, and that Lord Salisbury had informed the French Ambassador more than once that it was impossible for the Government to recede from its position in this matter. Apparently the French local agent had acted in excess of his instructions, and Lord Salisbury regretted that it should have been necessary to take such public action on our part as a threat of bombardment, though no blame could attach on that head to our agent. There was nothing to prevent France from having a coal store at Muscat, but that was a different thing from a concession of territory with a right to erect fortifications thereon.

Apparently communications must have passed between Downing Street and the Quai d'Orsai relative to the apparent discrepancy between the two Ministerial statements, for Mr. Brodrick two days later (March 9) took occasion to make a further statement. The site of the French coaling station had not been absolutely settled, but the Sultan would be advised to grant a depôt only at Muscat itself. The French Government, moreover, had accepted our view of the treaty of 1862, that it precluded either country from accepting any cession or lease of Muscat territory. The French Government, therefore, had agreed to accept, in lieu of their former concession, a coal depôt on precisely the same terms as our own.

It was left to a private member, however, to bring in and finally, notwithstanding every discouragement, to carry a measure which in its action promised to be more far-reaching than the London Government Bill, and directly influenced the happiness and well-being of the whole country. The Education of Children Bill, introduced by Mr. W. S. Bobson, Q.C., provided that the earliest date at which a child should be permitted to leave school should be raised from eleven to twelve years, and would apply to all except those who under existing bye-laws were wholly or partially exempt from school attendance. The principle with regard to factories had been already accepted by the representative of Great Britain (with the explicit approval of Lord Salisbury) at the Berlin Conference of 1890, but no steps had been taken by either the Conservative or Liberal Government to give statutory effect to this important reform. Other countries had long since conformed to this or even to a longer period of education, with the result that in technical and even in commercial training their youths had been able to enter upon the struggle for life better equipped mentally and better qualified physically. In moving the second reading of the bill (March 1) Mr. Bobson, in an unanswerable speech, dwelt on the position occupied by England among European nations with regard