Chapter LX: Section 88 (9)

Honorable W. P. Reeves, lately Agent-General of New Zealand in
England, but who was Minister of Education and Labor in New
Zealand from 1891 to 1896, and who is looked upon as the
principal author of the industrial arbitration laws in that
colony, wrote, during the summer of 1900, on the working of
those laws, in an article contributed to the "London Express,"
as follows:

"The arbitration law has been in constant use in New Zealand
for about four years and a half. During those years there has
never been a time when there has not been a dispute pending
before one or other of the Conciliation Boards or the Central
Arbitration Court. Writing, as I do, at some distance from
London, I cannot say from memory what the exact number of
disputes finally adjusted has been; but, so far, they cannot
be less than sixty or seventy. Most of these have been
carried, on appeal from some Conciliation Board, to the
Arbitration Court and settled there. In about two cases out of
seven the Conciliation Boards have been able successfully to
arrange the disputes. Even where they have not done so, it by
no means follows that their labors have been useless. Very
often the appeal to the Arbitration Court is merely on one or
two points out of many involved, and the advice of the
Conciliation Board is accepted on the others. Often, too, most
of the parties to a dispute have been ready to accept a board's
suggestions, but it has needed the firm hand of the
Arbitration Court to bring one or two stubborn men to
acquiescence.

{329}

"The process may be tedious, but it is not costly. Lawyers are
not employed as counsel before either the boards or the court
unless all parties to the action agree thereto, and they very
seldom do agree. A firm of employers may appear by a manager
or accredited representative, a trade union is usually
represented by its Secretary or other official. During the
hearing, of course, the factories concerned remain open, and
work goes on as usual. Employers are secured not only against
a dead stop of business, but against the meaner kinds of
competition of undercutting rivals. In the organized trades
all the shops of a district have to keep the same hours and
pay the same wages. No man may filch trade from a neighbor by
sweating his own people. The fair-minded employer now knows
where he is, and is freed from many anxieties.

"For six years there has virtually been neither strike nor
lockout in New Zealand. All these, except the first, have been
years of remarkable and increasing prosperity. During the time
of depression which came before them, wages had fallen. With
improving times employers would have been faced by resolute
demands from trade unions for a return to former high rates of
pay, and had there been no arbitration system in working order
a series of very bitter conflicts must have ensued. This has
been avoided. Workmen and workwomen have gained notable
advances of pay, and also improved conditions as to hours of
labor and otherwise. But this has come about gradually, and
only after careful and painstaking inquiry. Many of the
demands of labor have been refused; many more have been
modified. In no case has an industry been throttled or
crippled. Not only can we claim that no factory has been
closed for a single day in New Zealand by labor war, but we
can claim that the peace thus obtained has not been bought at
the dear price of hampered industry and discouraged
enterprise.

"When the Arbitration act came into operation the number of
hands returned as employed in the registered factories was
about 26,000. It is now not far short of 50,000. A percentage
of this striking increase may be due to more thorough
registration. Far the larger part of it represents an actual
increase of industry. During these years the imports and
exports of the colony have grown apace. The revenue received
from the customs, from the income tax, from the stamps, and
the railways has risen in each case rapidly. Employment from
being scarce has grown plentiful. Building has been brisk in
all centres of population. The marriage rate has gone up. In a
word, New Zealand shows all the signs which we connect with a
highly prosperous country. It would be too much to claim that
this is chiefly due to the working of the Arbitration act. It
is perfectly fair, however, to claim that the Arbitration act
and the improved condition of labor, and of confidence which
it has brought about, have had some share in leading up to
this happy state of things.

"It is frequently asked, How could you possibly enforce an
award of the Arbitration Court upon an employer or a union
stubbornly determined to go to all lengths rather than obey
it? In the first place, for nearly five years the law has been
in constant use without a single exhibition of this desperate
resistance. That alone should be evidence of some weight that
such a duel is not likely in a British community. It is quite
true that an employer could go out of business rather than
obey an award, and that the court could not prevent him from
doing so. But employers are not given to ruining themselves
merely because they may not like the decision of an impartial
tribunal. It is suggested that the decision itself might be
ruinous. There need be no fear of that. Experience has shown
that if arbitrators err at all it is almost invariably in the
direction of overcaution. They may show too great a desire to
'split the difference'; they are not in the least likely to
impose intolerable conditions either upon masters or men. An
employer who has the choice between accepting a legal decision
arrived at after painstaking inquiry, and being taken into
court and fined, will almost always accept the decision. In a
very few cases he may run the risk of being fined once, but he
will not lay himself open to a second penalty. That is the New
Zealand experience.

"On the other hand, it has been flatly declared that the court
cannot coerce trade unions. Vivid pictures have been painted
of the tragic absurdity of endeavoring to collect fines from
trade unionists by distraining on the goods of poor workmen
whose union is without funds, and who are themselves
penniless. The answer to that is that poverty-stricken unions,
composed of penniless workers, are only too thankful to accept
the decision of a State tribunal. They cannot strike against a
powerful employer; much less can they hope to starve out a
court of arbitration. Its decision may not altogether please
them, but it is all they are likely to get. The Arbitration
Court, therefore, is as potent to deal with trade unions as
with employers. Wealthy unions it can fine. Penniless unions
are helpless to fight it. Finally, at its back is the mighty
force of public opinion, which is sick of labor wars and
determined that the experiment of judicial adjustment shall
have a full and fair trial."

The full text of the New Zealand "Industrial Conciliation and
Arbitration Act" is published in pamphlet form by the United
States Department of Labor, and appeared also in one of the
Bulletins of the Department, in 1900.

NEW ZEALAND:
Land system.

"The Crown lands of New Zealand are administered under 'the
land act, 1892,' and the regulations made thereunder. The
distinguishing features of the present land system are the
outcome of ideas which have been gradually coming to maturity
for some years past in this colony. These features involve the
principle of State ownership of the soil, with a perpetual
tenancy in the occupier. This, whatever may be the difference
in detail, is the prevailing characteristic of the several
systems under which land may now be selected. In New Zealand,
this tendency to State ownership has taken a more pronounced
form than in any other of the Australasian colonies, and the
duration of the leases has become so extended as to warrant
the name, frequently given to them, of 'everlasting leases.'
In point of fact, most of the Crown lands are now disposed of
for terms of 999 years. The rentals are based on the assessed
value of the land at the time of disposal, without increase or
recurring valuations.
{330}
Under this system there is a fixity of tenure practically
equal to freehold, and which, like freehold, necessarily
carries with it the power of sale, sub-lease, mortgage, or
disposition by will. Since all lands held under the Crown 'by
lease in perpetuity' are subject to the land tax, the
necessity for the periodical revaluations under the
perpetual-lease system is done away with, the State reaping
the advantage of the unearned increment through the
before-mentioned tax. At the same time, the improvements made
in the soil by cultivation, etc., are secured to the tenant.

"The advantages of this system to the selector are manifest.
When it is taken into consideration that, with few exceptions,
the Crown lands are, in their prairie condition, incapable of
producing anything until brought into cultivation, the
advantage to the settler of setting free his capital to
develop the capabilities of the soil, rather than having to
expend it in the purchase of a freehold, is very apparent. One
of the most striking benefits of this system is the advantage
it gives to the poor man, who, with little more capital than
his strong right arm, is enabled to make a home for himself,
which, under the freehold system, he is frequently unable to
accomplish. The values placed on the Crown lands are, as a
rule, low, for the State does not so much seek to raise a
revenue directly therefrom as to encourage the occupation of
the lands by the people; this secures indirectly an increased
revenue, besides other advantages, resulting from a numerous
rural population.

"Again, underlying the whole of the New Zealand land system is
a further application of the principle of 'the land for the
people,' viz, the restriction in area which any man may hold.
This subject has been forced upon the attention of the
legislature by defects in former systems, under which one
individual with means at his command could appropriate large
areas, to the exclusion of his poorer fellow-settler. Under
conditions where the price at which the land is offered is
fixed and where choice of selection is by ballot, the poor
settler has the same chance as the rich one and may, should he
wish it, hold as much land. The limit that a selector may hold
is so fixed as to encourage the class of small farmers, and up to
that limit the amount he may select is left entirely to
himself. The act defines the amount of land anyone may select
at 640 acres of first-class or 2,000 acres of second-class
land, inclusive of any land he may already hold. These limits
apply to lands which are thrown open for 'free selection,' as
it is termed, but in some cases, where found desirable, the
limit is by regulation made much smaller.

"In addition to the many advantages offered by the
'lease-in-perpetuity' system, the land act provides others to
meet the wants of different classes. The rule is almost
invariable that land thrown open for so-called 'free
selection' is offered to the public under three different
tenures, and the choice left entirely to the would-be settler.
The three tenures are:

(1) For cash, in which one-fourth of the purchase-money is
paid down at once, and the remainder within thirty days. The
title does not issue until certain improvements have been made
on the land.

(2) Lease with a purchasing clause, at a 5-per-cent rental on
the value of the land; the lease being for twenty-five years,
with the right to purchase at the original upset price at any
time after the first ten years.

(3) Lease in perpetuity, at a rental of 4 per cent on the
capital value, as already described above.

"The present [1895] land laws have been in force since the 1st
of November, 1892, and, therefore, the returns of the
Department of Lands and Survey for the year ending the 31st of
March, 1895, will give a fair idea of the proportions in which
lands are selected under the three tenures above described
during the past two and a half years. The figures given below
include the 'special settlements,' all of which must by law be
held on lease in perpetuity:

(1) Selected for cash, 1,542; area, 110,570 acres.

(2) Occupation with right of purchase, 1,060; area, 236,270
acres.

(3) Lease in perpetuity, 3,224; area, 634,086 acres.

"'The land act, 1892,' provides for a special class of
settlement, which has found favor with the public to a very
considerable extent during the last two years. This is known
as the 'small-farm association' system. It provides that,
where not less than twelve individuals have associated
themselves together for mutual help, such an association can,
with the approval of the Minister of Lands, select a block of
land of not more than 11,000 acres, but there must be a
selector to each 200 acres in the block. The extreme limit
that one person may hold is fixed at 320 acres. Settlements of
this class are held on 'lease in perpetuity' for 999 years, in
the same way as lands under the same tenure when thrown open
for free selection. The conditions of residence and
improvements are the same."

_S. Percy Smith,
in New Zealand Official Year-Book, 1895
(reprinted in United States Consular Reports,
January, 1897, page 4)._

NEW ZEALAND: A. D. 1899.
Old-Age Pension Act.

In the winter of 1899 an old-age pension act was added to the
radical legislation of New Zealand. The Agent-General for New
Zealand in England has described the measure in a review
article, as follows: "As finally licked into shape, the act is
one for giving a small pension to the poorest section of aged
colonists without any contribution on their part whatever.
Briefly summarized, its effect will be that any New
Zealander—man or woman—who has come to the age of sixty-five,
after living not less than twenty-five years in New Zealand,
shall be entitled to 6s. 11d. a week, or £18 a year. The full
pension is to be paid to those whose income from any source is
less than £34. When the private income is above £34 a year £1
is deducted from the pension for every £1 of such excess
income. When, therefore, the private income is large enough to
be £18 a year in excess of £34 no state pension is paid. In
other words, no one who has an income of £52 a year is
entitled to even a fraction of the pension. A rather more
elaborate portion of the act deals with deductions to be made
from the pension where the applicant for it is possessed of
accumulated property. Under this the applicant's real and
personal property are assessed, and his debts, if any, are
subtracted from the total value thereof. Then he is allowed to
own £325 without suffering any deduction therefor. After that
he loses £1 of pension for every £15 worth of accumulated
property. The result is that any one possessed of £600 worth
of accumulated property ceases to be entitled to any allowance
whatever. Men and women are equally entitled to the pension, and
where a husband and wife are living together their property or
income is divided by two for the purpose of the calculations
above mentioned. That is to say, their united income must
amount to £104 or their united property to £1,200 before they
are altogether disentitled to any part of the pension. They
may have, between them, an income of £68, or as much as £650
of property, and yet be entitled to draw their respective
pensions in full."

{331}

The government is only authorized to pay the required amounts
during three years from the passage of the Act, after which
Parliament will have to decide on its continuance or
amendment. Mr. Reeves expects that "the opposition will, more
or less in unison, submit a rival old-age pension scheme to
the constituencies. One of their prominent members, Mr. George
Hutchison, indicated in the debate on the third reading of the
measure scheme which some think will be generally adopted by
his party. This is to draw a distinction between the older
poor of the colony now living and the younger generation of
colonists. All now over fifty years of age are to be permitted
as they attain sixty-five to take advantage of Mr. Seddon's
act without let or hindrance. But for the younger people a
contributory scheme is to be drawn up, under which they would
have to pay some such sum as sixpence a week, to go in aid of
a substantial pension in their old age. Whatever may be
thought of the economic merits of such a scheme, it might
conceivably be expected at election-time to disarm the
hostility of the aged poor to any such interference with their
prospects under the present system as would be entailed by a
complete repeal of the Seddon act."

_National Review, February, 1899._

NEW ZEALAND: A. D. 1900 (March).
Looking towards federation with Australia.

New Zealand did not take part in the movements which led to
the federation of the Australian colonies in the Commonwealth
of Australia, but watched them with evident interest and a
final wakening of inclination to be joined in union with them.
When the Act of the Imperial Parliament "to constitute the
Commonwealth of Australia" was under discussion in England
(see, in this volume, AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1900), the
Agent-General for New Zealand in London addressed to the
Colonial Office (March 30, 1900) the following Memorandum,
which explains the attitude of that colony towards the
federation movement in Australia: "The Government of New
Zealand desires to secure the insertion of certain amendments
in the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Bill shortly to
be laid before the Imperial Parliament. These amendments are
three in number. The first of them is, in effect, that New
Zealand should preserve the right of joining the proposed
Commonwealth of Australia on the same terms as the original
States now about to be united in such Commonwealth. The second
is, that while New Zealand remains outside the Commonwealth,
litigants in her higher Courts, though reserving the right
they now possess to appeal to the Queen in Council, should, as
an alternative, have the right to appeal to the High Court of
Australia on paying the fees and complying with the rules of
that tribunal. The third amendment is, that the Australian
Commonwealth and the Colony of New Zealand should be empowered
to make the necessary arrangements to employ their naval and
military forces for mutual aid and defence, including
operations outside their own boundaries, and for that purpose
to co-operate in forming a homogeneous Australasian force.

"The importance of the first amendment to New Zealand is
great. The Colony is divided from Australia by 1,200 miles of
unbroken sea. It still takes from four to five days for
persons quitting New Zealand to reach any port in Australia.
Though a large and valuable trade is carried on between the
two countries, and though New Zealand is linked to Australia,
not merely by financial ties, but by bonds of intercourse,
cordial friendship, and sympathy, she has also vital and
separate interests. Many, also, of the leading matters on
which the discussions on Federation in Australia during the
last 12 years have turned are topics with which the New
Zealand people is almost unacquainted. It is therefore only to
be expected that the Colony should watch the Federal movement
with caution and reserve. It is also true that, until June of
last year, New Zealand was unable to judge as to the
intentions of the great Colony of New South Wales with regard
to the Commonwealth Bill. It was not until the month of
September that Queensland decided to enter the Commonwealth;
Western Australia has not even yet done so. And it was
directly after the decision of Queensland had become known
that, in response to a request from Sir John Forrest, the
leading statesmen of Australia intimated that, in their
opinion, it was impossible to consider any further amendments
of the Commonwealth Bill. From that moment the only course
left open to New Zealand has been that now taken. About that
time there appeared in New Zealand evidences of the growth of
a feeling in the Colony in favour of a closer union with
Australia. This was on the eve of the general elections, and
Mr. Seddon, the Prime Minister, then defined his position,
stating that the future relations of New Zealand with
Australia were a matter for education and careful examination:
that for himself he kept an open mind, but that prudent
deliberation was advisable. At the general elections which
took place in December last, Mr. Seddon was returned to power
with an unusually large majority. It may therefore very safely
be assumed that this cautious but not hostile attitude fairly
represents the present view of the people of the Colony. Some
stress may be laid on the foregoing facts in view of the
possible objection that New Zealand's action now comes too
late. The Colony virtually asks that, in view of its position
of distance and difficulty, it should have more time given it
to make up its mind than has been found necessary by colonies
which are contiguous or almost so. If it should be proposed to
fix a limit of time to this, that would clearly be a matter
for reasonable consideration.

"In so far as the second amendment would give certain New
Zealand litigants a right of resort to the High Court of
Australia, it is scarcely likely to meet with objection in
Australia unless on the general ground that no amendment
whatever of the Commonwealth Bill is now desirable. In the
event of the amendment being admitted, it is obvious that
certain precautions might have to be taken to conserve the
existing rights of New Zealand litigants, and also to prevent
clashing of appeals, but doubtless these could be provided
for. The third amendment, that providing for a species of
partial federation for purposes of defence and mutual
assistance, seems not only desirable but unobjectionable in
every way.
{332}
It does not propose that any kind of compulsion should be
applied to either the Commonwealth or New Zealand: it merely
empowers them to make such arrangements as may be deemed
mutually advantageous. At present it seems more than doubtful
whether either the Commonwealth or the Colony has the power to
make simple, binding and effective arrangements which would
involve operations and expenditure outside their own
boundaries, and under which each would have to act so as to
affect colonists not subject to their respective
jurisdictions. Recent events have clearly shown that the time
has passed by for regarding the military forces of a colony as
something never to be employed outside of its own boundaries. I
need not point out that such a co-operation would be of value
not only to Australia and New Zealand, but to the Empire which
both are so anxious to serve."

The reply of the Colonial Office to this Memorandum set forth
that its suggestions had been submitted to the delegates of
the federating colonies and did not meet their approval. "They
pointed out that during the period of grace proposed to be
allowed circumstances might arise which would cause grave
embarrassment to the Commonwealth if it were open to New
Zealand to claim admission on the same terms as the original
States, and that Article 121 of the draft Bill provided
sufficiently for the admission of New Zealand at any time upon
such conditions as might be found mutually acceptable to the
Colony and the Commonwealth." It was added that "the suggested
amendments as to the appeal from New Zealand Courts to the
High Court of Australia, and the arrangements for mutual
defence, would, if undertaken now, lead to great delay, and
involve a fresh referendum to the people of the Federating
Colonies, while there does not appear to be any probability
that the Federation would not favourably entertain any
proposals of the kind, if put forward after Federation."

In the Constitution Act as passed, however, New Zealand is
mentioned specifically among the "States" to which its
provisions may apply, though not included in what relates to
the "Original States."

See (in this volume)
CONSTITUTION OF AUSTRALIA.

_Great Britain, Parliamentary Publications
(Papers by Command:
Cd. 158, 1900, pages 30-31, and 51)._

NEW ZEALAND: A. D. 1900 (October).
Annexation of the Cook Islands.

A correspondent of the "London Times," writing from Rarotonga,
the largest of the Cook (or Hervey) Islands, on the 10th of
October, 1900, reported the arrival there of the Earl of
Ranfurly, Governor of New Zealand, for the purpose of
effecting the annexation of the islands to that colony, in
accordance with the expressed wish of the natives. "Lord
Ranfurly," he writes, "landed this morning, and, as the
representative of her Majesty, addressed the Arikis, or high
chiefs, on the question of annexation, for which they had
asked. This is his second visit to the island, and he
congratulated the people on now finding such a satisfactory
condition of affairs in Rarotonga. He expressed pleasure at
their liberality in subscribing so large a sum of money for
the relief of those families who, in the fortunes of the war
in South Africa, might lose their main support, and in sending
one of their representative residents to represent them on the
field of battle. All this and much more about the interest
they took in the British Empire the Queen was aware of, and
their petition for annexation had been laid at the foot of the
Throne and duly considered. He urged them, however, to
consider carefully their decision in this matter, and,
further, that it should be arrived at of their own free and
untrammelled will. He had heard from the British Resident that
the high chiefs and all the people wanted annexation, but he
wished to hear it from their own lips. It would then remain
but for them to perform the act of cession to her Majesty, and
for him formally to annex the group, hoisting the British
flag, and proclaiming that from henceforth they were part of
the British Empire whose prestige and honour they would from
that moment share. The high chiefs unanimously agreed to
annexation. … There are 2,300 Maoris on this island and 70
Europeans. All are intensely loyal to Queen Victoria. The
island was discovered in 1823 by Messrs. Williams and Bourne,
two officers of the London Mission Society, which for many
years has had its headquarters for the Eastern Pacific located
here. The volcanic soil of the island is marvellously fertile,
coffee, cocoa, cotton, oranges, limes, cocoanuts and many
other tropic fruits and trees growing without almost any
cultivation. A British protectorate was declared over the
group by Captain Bourke, of H. M. S. Hyacinth, in 1888. Since
1892 the interests of the protectorate have been guarded and
directed by a British Resident, paid by the New Zealand
Government, so that the islands will now probably be included
within the boundaries of that colony. Nearly the whole of the
trade is with New Zealand. There are six islands in the group
annexed [700 miles southeast of Samoa] the total population of
which is about 4,500." The "Times," commenting on the
annexation, remarked: "The New Zealand Legislature has passed
resolutions expressing its desire that the Suwaroff Island, to
the north of the Cook group and about half-way to the Penrhyn
group, should also be annexed to the colony. This island,
although thinly inhabited, is said to possess one of the best
ports in that part of the Pacific. The only quarter from which
any protest against the acquisition of the Cook Islands has
come so far seems to be New South Wales, which fears the
influence of the introduction of the New Zealand tariff on its
trade with that place."

----------NEW ZEALAND: End--------

NIAGARA, Electric power at.

See (in this volume)
SCIENCE, RECENT: ELECTRICAL.

NICARAGUA.
Nicaragua Canal.

See (in this volume)
CENTRAL AMERICA; also,
CANAL, INTEROCEANIC; and
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1899-1901.

NICHOLAS II. OF RUSSIA:
Coronation.

See (in this volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1896 (MAY-JUNE).

NICHOLSON'S NEK, Battle of.

See (in this volume)
SOUTH AFRICA (THE FIELD OF WAR):
A. D. 1899 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).

NIFFER, NUFFAR, Explorations at.

See (in this volume)
ARCHÆOLOGICAL RESEARCH: BABYLONIA: AMERICAN EXPLORATION.

{333}

NIGERIA: A. D. 1882-1899.
History of the formation of the Niger Coast Protectorate.
Conventions of Great Britain with Germany and France.
Settlement of the boundary of the French Sudan and
Sahara Sphere.

The following "Notes on the Niger Districts and Niger Coast
Protectorates, 1882-1893," tracing the several steps by which
the existing Protectorate was formed, appear in a paper
"presented to both Houses of Parliament by command of Her
Majesty, 1899 (C.—9372)":

"In 1882 a Company, entitled the 'National African Company,
Limited,' was formed to take over the business of the 'United
Africa Company, Limited,' in Central Africa and in the Niger
Regions. In October, 1884, the Company purchased the business
and objects of the 'Compagnie Française de l'Afrique
Equatoriale.' In the same year various treaties were concluded
between Consul Hewett and native chiefs of the Niger Districts,
by which these territories were placed under British
protection. On the 26th February, 1885, the General Act of the
Berlin Conference was signed, Chapter V. of which contained an
'Act of Navigation for the Niger,' which applied, generally,
to the Niger and its affluents the free navigation articles of
the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna of 1815. In
April-June, 1885, the British and German Governments entered
into an Agreement, by an exchange of Notes, defining their
respective spheres of action in the Gulf of Guinea. By this
Agreement Germany engaged not to make acquisition, accept
Protectorates, or interfere with the extension of British
influence in that part of the Gulf of Guinea lying between the
right river bank of the mouth of the Rio del Rey entering the
sea between 8° 42' and 8° 46' longitude east of Greenwich and
the British colony of Lagos, nor in the interior, to west of a
line following the right river bank of the Rio del Rey from
the said mouth to its source, thence striking direct to the
left river bank of the Old Calabar or Cross River, and
terminating, after crossing that river, at the point about 9°
8' of longitude east of Greenwich, marked 'Rapids' on the
English Admiralty chart.

"On the 5th June, 1885, a Notification was inserted in the
'London Gazette' to the effect that a British Protectorate had
been established over the Niger Districts; the territories
comprised within the Protectorate were defined to be—the line
of coast between the British Protectorate of Lagos, and the
right or western bank of the mouth of the Rio del Rey; and
also the territories on both banks of the Niger, from its
confluence with the River Benué at Lukoja to the sea, as well
as the territories on both banks of the River Benué, from the
confluence up to and including Ibi. On the 10th July, 1886, a
Royal Charter was granted to the 'National African Company,
Limited.' In July-August, 1886, a Supplementary Agreement was
entered into between the British and German Governments
defining their respective spheres of action in the Gulf of
Guinea from the Rio del Rey to a point to the east and near to
Yola. On the 18th October, 1887, another Notification was
inserted in the 'London Gazette,' in which it was stated that
the British Protectorate of the Niger Districts then comprised
the following territories:—On the line of coast between the
British Protectorate of Lagos and the right or western river
bank of the mouth of the Rio del Rey, and all territories in
the basin of the Niger and its affluents, which were or might
be for the time being subject to the government of the
'National African Company, Limited' (then called the 'Royal
Niger Company'), in accordance with the provisions of the
Charter of the said Company, dated 10th July, 1886.

"On the 5th August, 1890, a Declaration was signed by the
British and French Governments, which contained the following
clause:—'The Government of Her Britannic Majesty recognises
the sphere of influence of France to the south of her
Mediterranean Possessions up to a line from Say on the Niger
to Barrawa on Lake Tchad, drawn in such manner as to comprise
in the sphere of action of the Niger Company all that fairly
belongs to the kingdom of Sokoto; the line to be determined by
Commissioners to be appointed.' On the 1st July, 1890, another
Agreement was entered into between the British and German
Governments defining their spheres of influence in the Gulf of
Guinea and in other parts of Africa. On the 18th June, 1892,
that portion of the Niger Protectorate which lies on, or to
the north of, the 7 degree of north latitude was, by
notification to the Signatory Powers of the Brussels Act,
placed under the terms of Article 91 of that Act, within the
zone of prohibition of alcoholic liquors. On the 14th April,
1893, an agreement was signed between the British and German
Governments, in which it was declared that the right bank of
the Rio del Rey waterway should be the boundary between the
Oil Rivers Protectorate and the Colony of the Cameroons.

"On the 13th May, 1893, a Notification was inserted in the
'London Gazette,' announcing that the portion of the British
Protectorate of the Niger Districts which was under the
administration of Her Majesty's Commissioner and Consul would,
from the date of that Notification, be administered under the
name of the 'Niger Coast Protectorate,' and would cease to be
known as the 'Oil Rivers Protectorate.' And on the 15th
November, 1893, a further Agreement was signed between the
British and German Governments defining the boundary between
their respective spheres of influence in the region extending
from the Rio del Rey to 'a point to the east of, and close to
Yola,' and on Lake Chad.

"Between 1884 and 1893 numerous Treaties were concluded by the
National Africa Company and by the Royal Niger Company with
native Chiefs and others possessing territories in the basin
of the Niger districts, by which they engaged to make no
cession of territory or to enter into any Treaty negotiations
with Foreign States without the previous consent of the
British Government, and in return for which they were placed
under British protection."

_Great Britain,
Parliamentary Publications
(Papers by Command, C.—9372)._

{334}

In October, 1897, after a number of threatening collisions
between English and French claims and undertakings had
occurred in the Niger region, representatives of the two
nations met in Paris to negotiate an agreement concerning
boundaries. The result of their work was embodied in a
convention signed June 14, 1898, but not ratified by both
governments until June 13, 1899. By this agreement, the
frontiers separating the British colony of the Gold Coast from
the French colonies of the Ivory Coast and Sudan, and the British
colony of Lagos from the French colony of Dahomey, were
defined with precision, and the British and French possessions
east of the Niger were then in the IVth article of the
Convention, delimited as follows: Starting from a point on the
left bank of the Niger which is fixed by the median line of
the Dallul Mauri at its mouth, "the frontier shall follow this
median line until it meets the circumference of a circle drawn
from the centre of the town of Sokoto with a radius of 100
miles (160,932 metres). From this point it shall follow the
northern are of this circle as far as its second intersection
with the 14th parallel of north latitude. From this second
point of intersection it shall follow this parallel eastward
for a distance of 70 miles (112,652 metres); then proceed due
south until it reaches the parallel of 13° 20' north latitude,
then eastward along this parallel for a distance of 250 miles
(402,230 metres); then due north until it regains the 14th
parallel of north latitude; then eastwards along this parallel
as far as its intersection with the meridian passing 35° east
of the centre of the town of Kuka, and thence this meridian
southward until its intersection with the southern shore of
Lake Chad. The Government of the French Republic recognizes,
as falling within the British sphere, the territory to the
east of the Niger, comprised within the above-mentioned line,
the Anglo-German frontier, and the sea. The Government of Her
Britannic Majesty recognizes, as falling within the French
sphere, the northern, eastern, and southern shores of Lake
Chad, which are comprised between the point of intersection of
the 14th degree of north latitude, with the western shore of
the lake and the point of incidence on the shore of the lake
of the frontier determined by the Franco-German Convention of
the 15th March, 1894."

On the 21st of March, 1899, the following Declaration was
added to the Convention, and ratified with it in the following
June: "The IVth Article of the Convention of the 14th June,
1898, shall be completed by the following provisions, which
shall be considered as forming an integral part of it:

"1. Her Britannic Majesty's Government engages not to acquire
either territory or political influence to the west of the
line of frontier defined in the following paragraph, and the
Government of the French Republic engages not to acquire
either territory or political influence to the east of the
same line.

"2. The line of frontier shall start from the point where the
boundary between the Congo Free State and French territory
meets the water-parting between the watershed of the Nile and
that of the Congo and its affluents. It shall follow in
principle that water-parting up to its intersection with the
11th parallel of north latitude. From this point it shall be
drawn as far as the 15th parallel in such manner as to
separate, in principle, the Kingdom of Wadai from what
constituted in 1882 the Province of Darfur; but it shall in no
case be so drawn as to pass to the west beyond the 21st degree
of longitude east of Greenwich (18° 40' east of Paris), or to
the east beyond the 23rd degree of longitude east of Greenwich
(20° 40' east of Paris).

"3. It is understood, in principle, that to the north of the
15th parallel the French zone shall be limited to the
northeast and east by a line which shall start from the point
of intersection of the Tropic of Cancer with the 16th degree
of longitude east of Greenwich (13° 40' east of Paris), shall
run thence to the southeast until it meets the 24th degree of
longitude east of Greenwich (21° 40' east of Paris), and shall
then follow the 24th degree until it meets, to the north of
the 15th parallel of latitude, the frontier of Darfur as it
shall eventually be fixed.

"4. The two Governments engage to appoint Commissioners who
shall be charged to delimit on the spot a frontier-line in
accordance with the indications given in paragraph 2 of this
Declaration. The result of their work shall be submitted for
the approbation of their respective Governments.

"It is agreed that the provisions of Article IX of the
Convention of the 14th June, 1898, shall apply equally to the
territories situated to the south of the 14° 20' parallel of
north latitude, and to the north of the 5th parallel of north
latitude, between the 14° 20' meridian of longitude east of
Greenwich (12th degree east of Paris) and the course of the
Upper Nile."

_Great Britain,
Papers by Command: Treaty Series, Number 15, 1899._

Of the territorial partition in West Africa which this
important treaty as first signed in 1898 determined, and of
the magnitude of the empire which it conceded to France, a
striking English view was given at the time in the following
article:

"Though we are perfectly satisfied with the agreement, and
though we believe that the country as a whole will be
perfectly satisfied, we do not disguise from ourselves the
fact that under the Convention France receives the full
title-deeds for the most magnificent piece of empire obtained
this century by any European Power,—a dominion which, though
'in partibus infidelium,' is yet within easy reach of both the
western and the southern shores of France. We do not grudge
France the great possession that was finally rounded off and
consolidated on Tuesday; nay, rather we are glad to see it in
her hands, for we want monopoly neither in trade nor in
empire. We see, however, no good in pretending that she has
not obtained the most magnificent opportunity for over-sea
development which has fallen to any Power within recent times.
The best way of understanding the Convention is to realise
what it is that France now possesses in West Africa. Let our
readers look at a map of Africa, and first fix their eyes on
Algiers and Tunis, with their rich soil and splendid harbours
and their remains of an ancient and splendid
civilisation,—Phœnician, Greek, Roman, Christian, and Arab.
Then let them allow their eyes to travel downwards to the
right bank of the greatest river of Africa, the Congo. From
Constantine, with its great memories and its scenery almost
European in charm and splendour, to Brazzaville and Stanley
Pool, with their tropical vegetation and savage life, there is
a continuous and uninterrupted stretch of French territory. As
they say in our country districts, the French President might now
ride on his own land from Tunis to Loango. The French dominion
of West Africa (as says an official 'communique' to the Paris
Press with very natural exultation) now extends over a space
as great as that from Paris to Moscow. From Algeria to the
Congo, from Senegal to Lake Chad—i. e., almost to the centre
of Africa—stretches this vast tract of French territory. 'At
the present moment,' to quote the words of the 'communique,'
'all our West African colonies—Algeria, Tunis, Senegal,
Futa-Jallon, the Ivory Coast, the Soudan, and the Congo—are in
communication by their respective Hinterlands.'

{335}

"But probably this will not convey much to the ordinary
English reader. Perhaps we can best make him realise the
immensity of the French West African Empire by pointing out
that, with the exception of certain great German and English
and other 'enclaves' the whole of the huge piece of Africa
which bulges out on the map towards the west now belongs to
France. She has all the connecting links, all that does not
specifically belong to some one else, and she cuts off short
the Hinterlands of all the Powers with possessions on the West
African coast. Let us begin at the most western point of the
coast-line of Tripoli in the Mediterranean, and travel round
the coast, marking off all that is not French.

"First, we come to Tunis,—that is in the possession of France
just as Egypt is in our possession. Algiers comes next,—that
is French. Then Morocco. Morocco is at present independent,
but at the back of Morocco all the land, be it desert or
cultivable, is French. Next comes a strip of Spanish coast,
but it goes only a very little way inland, and all the back
country is French. Next come the great French colonies of
Senegambia and Futa-Jallon, with two little colonies embedded
in them, one belonging to us—the Gambia—and the other
belonging to Portugal. Next come our Sierra Leone and
independent Liberia, but here again the Hinterlands are all
French. Next comes the French Ivory Coast colony, then the
British Gold Coast, then German Togoland, and then French
Dahomey. Here again all the Hinterlands beyond, say, four
hundred miles inland, belong, since the signing of the
Convention, to France. After that comes our Colony of Lagos,
then the German Cameroons, and finally the French Congo—the
last French possession in West Africa. Here, too, the
Hinterlands have been cut off by the French, and our Colonies
have been made into 'enclaves' in the mighty French dominion.
It is true that the Niger or Lagos 'enclave' is a very vast
one, and stretches now up to Lake Chad, which becomes
henceforth as international a sheet of water as the Lake of
Constance. Still, it is an 'enclave,' for, as we read the
Convention, he who embarks upon Lake Chad from the British
shore and steers eastward will land on French territory. In
other words, Nigeria cannot now cross Lake Chad and expand
beyond it. We should be glad to hear that this is not the true
reading of the Convention, but we fear it is. We have
travelled, then, round the map of Africa, from Tunis to the
Congo, and found that France is everywhere the chief owner,
—that hers is the great estate, and that the other Powers only
have odd bits of land here and there. We do not say this in
any grumbling spirit, for our odd bit—Nigeria—is very possibly
worth as much as the great estate if Algiers and Tunis are not
counted. We merely wish to make the public understand clearly
that West Africa as a political and geographical expression
has finally passed to France, though we no doubt have carved
one very valuable piece out of it."

_The Spectator (London)
June 18, 1898._

Nine months later, when the agreement embodied in the
Declaration of March 21, 1899, had been added to the Original
convention, the "Spectator" explained its effect as follows:

"It will be remembered that last year we and the French agreed
upon a delimitation of 'spheres' in West Africa which extended
as far as Lake Chad. As to the country east of Lake Chad
nothing was said. It was left as a kind of No-man's Land. What
has now been done is to extend the area of the French 'sphere'
eastward beyond Lake Chad till it reaches Darfur and the
Bahr-el-Ghazel. Darfur and the region of the Bahr-el-Ghazel
are declared to be in the English 'sphere.' All the rest of
Northern Central Africa is to become French. France, that is,
is to have the great Mahommedan State of Wadai as well as
Baghirmi and Kanem. In the territory between Lake Chad and the
Nile each Power, however, is to allow the other equality of
treatment in matters of commerce. This will no doubt allow
France to have commercial establishments on the Nile and its
affluents, but it will also allow us to have similar
privileges for trade on the eastern shore of Lake Chad. But as
our system of giving equal trading rights to all foreigners
would in any case have secured commercial rights to France, we
are not in the least hampered by this provision, while the
concession to us of equal rights on the eastern shore of Lake
Chad will improve our position in the face of French Colonial
Protection. …

"The first thing that strikes one in considering the French
possessions in Africa, after this latest addition, is their
vastness. Practically, France will now have all North-Western,
and all Northern, and all North Central Africa, except
Morocco, our West African Colonies, Tripoli, Darfur, and the
Valley of the Nile,—giving that phrase its widest
interpretation, and regarding it as the whole of the country
whence water flows into the Nile. … That, if she plays her
cards properly, she ought to make a success of her African
Empire we cannot doubt, for she starts with immense
advantages. To begin with, she is nearer her African
possessions than any other Power. You can go in a couple of
days from Marseilles to Algiers and Tunis. Next, in Algiers
and Tunis she has rich colonies with a temperate climate which
may be made the basis for great developments in the way of
railway extension. Lastly, her African possessions are
conterminous, or, at any rate, connected with each other by
land. She owns, that is, Northern Africa, and the rest of the
Powers have only, as it were, enclaves—very large enclaves, no
doubt, in many cases—in her territory. At present this
advantage may not seem very great owing to the vast distances
and the desert character of many of the French Hinterlands,
but if and when France completes her Soudan railways, the
strength of this continuity of territory will become apparent.
But though France has many advantages, it would be foolish to
deny that she has also many serious problems to solve. We
shall perhaps be stating the most dangerous of them when we
say that France now becomes the undisputed master of the great
sect of El Senoussi. There are reported to be over twenty
million followers of El Senoussi in North Africa, and, except
in Tripoli, an these may now be said to be within the French
'sphere of influence.' The Sultanate of Wadai—which, be it
remembered, is a very formidable State, and one which has
never yet come into contact with any European Power—is a
Senoussi State. But the followers of the Senoussi, besides
being numerous, are extremely fanatical. Though practising a
much purer form of Mahommedanism than the Dervishes, they hate
Europeans quite as ardently, and if once their religious zeal
were to be thoroughly roused they would prove most formidable
foes. We do not envy the French their task if they attempt to
conquer Wadai."

_The Spectator, March 25, 1899._

{336}

NIGERIA: A. D. 1897:
Massacre of British officials near Benin.
Capture of Benin.

An unarmed expedition from the Niger Coast Protectorate,
going, in January, on a peaceful mission to the King of Benin,
led by Acting Consul-General Phillips, was attacked on the way
and the whole party massacred excepting two, who were wounded,
but who hid themselves in the bush and contrived to make their
way back. The Consul-General had been warned that the king
would not allow the mission to enter Benin, but persisted in
going on. A "punitive expedition" was sent against Benin the
following month, and the town was reached and taken on the
18th, but the king had escaped.

"The city presented the most appalling sight, particularly
around the King's quarters, from which four large main roads
lead to the compounds of the bigger Chiefs, the city being
very scattered. Sacrificial trees in the open spaces still
held the corpses of the latest victims[of 'Ju Ju'
sacrifice]—seven in all were counted—and on every path a
freshly-sacrificed corpse was found lying, apparently placed
there to prevent pursuit. One large open space, 200 to 300
yards in length, was strewn with human bones and bodies in all
stages of decomposition. Within the walls, the sight was, if
possible, more terrible. Seven large sacrifice compounds were
found inclosed by walls 14 to 16 feet high, each 2 to 3 acres
in extent; against the end wall in each, under a roof, was
raised a daïs with an earthen (clay) sacrificial altar about
50 feet long close against the wall on which were placed the
gods to whom sacrifice is made—mostly being carved ivory
tusks, standing upright, mounted at base, in hideously
constructed brass heads. In front of each ivory god was a
small earthen mound on which the victim's forehead would
apparently be placed. The altars were covered with streams of
dried human blood and the stench was too frightful. It would
seem that the populace sat around in these huge compounds
while the Ju Ju priests performed the sacrifices for their
edification. In the various sacrifice compounds were found
open pits filled with human bodies giving forth most trying
odours. The first night several cases of fainting and sickness
occurred owing to the stench, which was equally bad
everywhere. In one of the pits, partially under other bodies,
was found a victim, still living, who, being rescued, turned
out to be a servant of Mr. Gordon's, one of the members of Mr.
Phillips' ill-fated expedition. At the doors and gates of
houses and compounds were stinking goats and fowls, sacrificed
apparently to prevent the white man entering therein. The
foregoing is but a feeble attempt to describe the horrors of
this most terrible city, which after five days' continuous
fatigue, working with about 1,000 natives, still presents most
appalling and frightful sights. In the outlying parts of the
city the same sights are met and the annual expenditure of
human life in sacrifice must have been enormous. Most of the
wells were also found filled with human bodies."

_Great Britain,
Papers by Command: Africa, Number 6, 1897, page 28. _

NIGERIA: A. D. 1897:
Subjugation of Fulah slave-raiders.

See (in this volume)
AFRICA: A. D. 1897 (NIGERIA).

NIGERIA: A. D. 1899:
Transfer to the British Crown.

The Royal Niger Company transferred its territories to the
crown in July, 1899, receiving the sum of £865,000. It was
announced to Parliament that three governments would be
formed, named North Nigeria, South Nigeria, and Lagos.

NILE, Barrage and reservoir works on the.

See (in this volume)
EGYPT: A. D. 1898-1901.

NILE VALLEY: The question of possession.

See (in this volume)
EGYPT: A. D. 1898 (SEPTEMBER-NOVEMBER).

NINETEEN HUNDRED, The Universal Jubilee of.

See (in this volume)
PAPACY: A. D. 1900.

----------THE NINETEENTH CENTURY: Start--------

NINETEENTH CENTURY:
The date of the ending of the Century.