British imperialism has been manifested at its best, as a constructive force, substituting order and economic progress for Arab oppression and general poverty.1

Perhaps it was in part due to the benefits of British rule that during the Great War of 1914-18 the greater part of the Sudan remained loyal. There was a revolt, to be sure, led by the Arab sultan Ali Dinar, in the province of Darfur, which had been allowed to remain as a semi-independent tribute-paying state, lying far out on the western border of the Sudan; and his revolt was only an outstanding incident in a general anti-British movement on the part of the Senussi-a fanatical Mohammedan organization of the desert Arabs. But Ali Dinar's army of dervishes and slaves was cut to pieces by Egyptian troops under British command, and the rebel leader himself was killed. After that, Darfur was definitely annexed to the Sudan, in 1916. Its western border, hitherto undefined, was fixed by an AngloFrench convention signed on Sept. 8, 1919.

Not long after the close of the Great War, Great Britain granted partial independence to Egypt, as we shall see in a later chapter, and thereupon the question arose, what should become of the Anglo-Egyptian condominium in the Sudan. The Egyptian Nationalist leaders insisted that the Sudan was Egypt's rightful heritage-so eager are newly emancipated folk to rule over others. Great Britain, as might be expected, found this claim little to her liking, for by this time Lord Rosebery's speech about protecting the "rights of Egypt" in the Sudan had long been forgotten, and the only rights that were remembered were British interests. In actual fact, British officials continued to rule the Sudan, as they had for a quarter-century.

INDEPENDENT ABYSSINIA

But what about Abyssinia? A sequel to the story of Menelik and Italy may well be added here. As for Menelik, one might use the time-honored ending of novels-and he "lived happily ever after." At any rate, after defeating the Italians at Adowa he made good his claim to independence. Various foreign powers, including the United States, recognized his independence,

'P. F. Martin, The Sudan in Evolution (London, 1921); Handbook of the Sudan (London, annual); Egypt and the Sudan, Cmd. 2269 (1924).

made commercial treaties with him, and sent their envoys to his capital.1

French attempts to penetrate Abyssinia met with discouragement. A French concern, it will perhaps be recalled, had gained in 1894 a concession 2 to build a railway from the port of Jibuti (in French Somaliland) into Abyssinia, by way of the Abyssinian capital, Addis Ababa, to the Nile, and the laying of rails was begun in 1897. Financial difficulties led the company to part with some of its stock, but when it appeared that the purchaser was a British syndicate determined to obtain a controlling interest, the French directors appealed to Premier WaldeckRousseau, with such success that they obtained in 1902 a promise of 500,000 francs annually from the government, for fifty years, on condition that the company remain French, and that the French Government be given the right to ultimate reversion of the property. When this news was communicated to Menelik, French influence at his court vanished, for Menelik was by this time sufficiently sophisticated in the ways of European imperialism to distrust such plans.

As the French company encountered increasingly difficult obstacles, and again sought British capital, the British proposed the internationalization of the railroad. Italy supported the proposal. But Foreign Minister Delcassé of France refused." In the end, a compromise was effected, by a tripartite agreement between France, Great Britain and Italy, signed July 6, 1906. The railway from Jibuti to Addis Ababa was to remain French, but with British, Italian and Abyssinian representatives on the board of directors, and equality for the commerce of all powers; west of Addis Ababa, however, the line was to be continued by the British; and if any line should be built connecting the Italian colonies of Eritrea and Somaliland through Abyssinia, it should be entrusted to Italian enterprise. There would be a French director on the board of any British or Italian company, to ensure complete reciprocity.

This railway agreement paved the way for a political agree'Malloy, Treaties, 1, p. 466; State Papers, 98, p. 414, etc. 'Text of concession in Dubois et Terrier, op. cit., pp. 697-8.

'Woolf, op. cit., pp. 205-18, citing T. L. Gilmour, Abyssinia: The Ethiopian Railway and the Powers (London, 1905).

This section, 495 miles in length, was completed in 1917 and is under French management, receiving a subsidy from the French government. Trains run twice a week!

ment, among the same three powers, in Decembr, 1906, by the terms of which all three agreed to maintain intact the integrity of Abyssinia, and to preserve the political and territorial status quo, if possible; should the status quo be disturbed, they were to act in concert to protect their special interests that is, in plain English, they were to agree on the division of the spoils. Abyssinia, however, manifested so vigorous a spirit of independence, that this contingency never arose.1

The most dangerous crisis occurred during the Great War of 1914. The valiant and shrewd Emperor Menelik had left his throne, in 1913, to a young grandson, Lij Yasu, whose fondness for horses and women was greater than his statesmanship. Under the influence of Turkish and German propaganda, Yasu forsook Christianity, became a Mohammedan, married the daughters of leading Mohammedan chieftains, recognized the Turkish sultan as Caliph of Islam, and planned to intervene against the Allies, hoping to win for himself a great Mohammedan empire in Africa.

Yasu's action scandalized his Christian subjects, for, although more than half the population was Mohammedan, the ruling class had been Christian since the fourth century, when apostolic missionaries converted Abyssinia. The Christian princes met in council. One of them, the young Taffari Makonnen, boldly proposed that the apostate emperor should be deposed, his crown torn from his head and a Christian ruler set upon the throne. When asked to take the scepter himself, he modestly refused, and proposed that the Princess Zaodito (Judith), a daughter of Menelik, be made empress, with himself as regent and heir. His plan was adopted (in 1916) and forthwith he led the Christian princes with their retainers in battle array against Lij Yasu, with such success that the latter's Mohammedan army was defeated, and Lij Yasu himself captured. Had Yasu won, and attempted to carry out his Pro-Turkish policy, Abyssinia would doubtless have been partitioned, like Turkey, at the end of the war. But Empress Judith and Ras (King) Taffari found favor with the Allies, toward whose cause they maintained benevolent neutrality. The progressive and vigorous character of Taffari's administration, moreover, earned golden opinions. The combination of Allied favor and able government enabled Taffari State Papers, 99, p. 486.

in 1923 to obtain admission to the League of Nations, and thus to place his country's independence under international guarantee, while securing recognition for it as a civilized nation. Incidentally, it was necessary to promise that slavery, still existing in Abyssinia, should be abolished. As this book goes to press, Ras Taffari is reported to be protesting to the League against an Anglo-Italian agreement regarding a proposed British concession for a dam on the Blue Nile and an Italian railway project.

One is tempted to compare the development of this independent African state with the neighboring regions which have fallen under European power. In material progress, certainly, Abyssinia's record is not brilliant. The Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, for example, has more miles of railway, more irrigation works, a larger export trade. To be sure, the Sudan is three times as large in area, but Abyssinia has twice the number of people, and is well suited by nature to become a rich agricultural and pastoral country. Travelers have praised the sturdy physiques and active intelligence of the Abyssinians no less than the fertility and agreeable climate of their homeland. Education is legally compulsory but actually confined to a small minority; yet the Abyssinians are not for a moment to be classed with jungle savages. They have a written language, laws said to be based on the Justinian Code, and an established and ancient Christian Church. Economically and politically they are in a condition not very dissimilar to that of feudal Europe of the early middle ages.

A British traveler tells the story of an interview with the Abyssinian queen. He informed her of the many Asiatic and African countries through which he had journeyed, only to be surprised with her inquiry, "Are any of these countries independent?" "No," he replied. She remained thoughtful for a moment, then said, "Our father, the Emperor Menelik, reunited and held the empire against all enemies. We also will keep our country independent. We have no fear."

CHAPTER IX

THE LEGACY OF CECIL RHODES

For those who believe with Carlyle that great events are shaped by "heroes," the history of empire-building is replete with apparent proofs, and no better illustration of the theory can be found than the story of British imperialism in South Africa. So easily may the development of British South Africa be regarded as simply the expansion of the career of Cecil Rhodes, that for the purposes of our narrative his life may well be followed as the central thread of the tale. And yet, as it will be pointed out on occasion, the exploits of the "hero" were more closely related to geographical, political, and economic conditions, and therefore more essentially similar to the work of other empire-builders, than an uncritical admirer would suspect.

DIAMONDS AND GOLD

On September the first in the year of the Franco-Prussian War, a tall, lanky, rather pale young man, hardly more than a boy, stepped from the gang-plank of his steamer to the dock at Durban, on the coast of Natal, South Africa. Doubtless he wondered, as he looked about him in this unfamiliar town, what future this new land of opportunity held in store for him, for, like many another such immigrant, he was a "younger son" of a respectable but impecunious family. His father, a devout Anglican pastor, had sent four sons into the army, three to the colonies, to make careers for themselves, and had intended this youngest son for the Church or the Law. But the boy's health failed, and fearing he would fall victim to tuberculosis, his father felt that the bracing, dry climate of South Africa would benefit the lad. Years after, when the boy had become the great man of South Africa, he explained, "They will tell you that I came out on account of my health, or from a love of adventure, and to some extent that may be true; but the real fact is that I could no longer stand the eternal cold mutton."