io8 THE STORY OF THE KHEDIVATE.

European bondholders of being the cause of Egypt's insolvency, owing to the usurious character of their contracts. I never could see any justification for these accusations. Of course, as in all loans contracted on doubtful security, the prices charged for interest and commission were above what may be called normal rates. But I find no evidence to show that the bondholders demanded any excessive interest for their money. Indeed, the result proved that if either lender or borrower had any just cause to complain of the terms of the contract as modified by subsequent events, it was the former, and not the latter. On the other hand, I have no doubt that the private loans contracted by the Khedive represented an amount of cash advanced far below the face value of the debt. How could it be otherwise ? Almost from the commencement of his reign, Ismail was in constant need of money to meet the enormous liabilities he had undertaken. The loans raised from private individuals, were, as a rule, never repaid at maturity, but had to be constantly renewed, the overdue interest being, as a rule, added to the principal. When any creditor pressed for payment, and could not be induced to renew, the money to settle his claim had to be borrowed elsewhere. In public, as in private life, when persons are living beyond their means, and paying old debts by contracting new— and larger — ones, indebtedness mounts up in a sort of geometrical progression. I am therefore quite prepared to believe that if Ismail Pasha's accounts could ever have been