no THE STORY OF THE KHEDIVATE.

and as to the expenditure of which he was not in a position to produce any satisfactory proof.

All this any impartial critic of Ismail's reign cannot dispute. Yet, in common justice, it must also be admitted that, if the Khedive had not indulged in any ambitious schemes, or embarked in any extravagant expenditure, Egypt would never have obtained her esent prosperity and security. Supposing Ismail had been a Prince of the ordinary Oriental type — selfindulgent, indolent, and easy-going, so long as his personal pleasure and comfort were left unassailed — Egypt would still be in much the same state as she was at his accession. Unintentionally, but none the less effectively, his Highness rendered two great services to his country. He brought Egypt under the eyes of Europe as a country worthy of notice, from the exploiter's point of view, and he burdened her with a debt which necessitated foreign intervention in his internal affairs. Mahomet Ali made Egypt independent of Turkey, while Ismail rendered her a dependency of England. The former, for his own ends, freed her from external tyranny; the latter, also for his own ends, freed her from the internal despotism his grandfather had established. I am inclined to think that, from the day when the Suez Canal became an accomplished fact, Egypt was bound, by the logic of facts, to pass under the control of the mistress of India. The peculiar mode, however, in which this control was established, was due in the first instance to the action of Ismail Pasha, and to the consequences