Egypt and the Sudan 145
rapprochement with Germany that almost altered the
course of European history, Marchand was forced to
withdraw. The only importance of this incident to-day is
that it reduces any claim that Egypt may have, as
against the Empire, for the Equatorial Sudan.
It was fortunate that before this collision had strained
Anglo-French relations a settlement had been reached
over another matter that, with the Sudan, still compli-
cates the Egyptian question. The British occupation of
Egypt had made it necessary to define the status of the
Suez Canal in the interests both of Egypt and of the
Empire. The British wished to secure such control of
the Canal as would be consonant with their control over
Egypt itself, with their contribution of seven-tenths of the
dues, and with their co-partnership in the shares. They
were willing to concede '' neutralisation'' in the sense
of freedom of navigation, but were against the "inter-
nationalisation " desired by France and the other Powers.
A Commission was convened at Paris (March 30, '1885),
but came to nothing. The Anglo-Turkish Convention
(May 22, 1887) embodied the British view in its third
Art., but this was never ratified. A Convention (April
29, 1888) negotiated a compromise, but as this was only
to take effect after the British evacuation of Egypt, its
importance was inconsiderable. Another Convention
(April 8, 1904) settled the matter, and was put into force
with the exception of the International Board it pro-
vided. The practical effect was that the Canal was
"neutralised/1 and not "internationalised "—that the
British obtained a fair representation on its management—
and that the dues were reduced as they desired. In this,
again, the British fought the battle for the Egyptians,
and secured for them a success over Europe that they
both afterwards have had reason to regret.
10