VI. THE CRUX.

Concert of foreign Powers unstable—Divergent aims—Aggressive and non-aggressive Powers—Unpromising outlook—The progress of Russia the only permanent element.

If conflicting forces in China have been united in an effort to expel the foreigners, so the non-Chinese world has been forced into temporary agreement in order to extinguish a conflagration which endangered all interests. But the Powers assembled to execute judgment and restore order in China present a picturesque diversity of ulterior aims. Their unity can hardly, therefore, be expected to survive the emergency which gave it birth. After the storm has passed—if it does pass—the permanent policy of the several Powers may be expected to resume its normal sway. Of the character of these different policies we are not left in doubt, for in the history of the past six years it has been revealed in overt acts bearing a higher authority than the most solemn official manifestoes.

The principal Powers concerned may be ranged in three groups—the aggressive, the non-aggressive, and the absorbent. Under the first must be ranked Japan, France, and Germany. Facts which cannot lie have proved that these three Powers have long cherished designs upon the territory of China. No doubt they flatter themselves with the belief that their rule over such portions of Chinese soil as may come under their control would be a blessing to mankind, an opinion which it would serve no good purpose to controvert. And they reckon that, in addition to the higher civilisation which they propose to confer on the Chinese people and Government, they will secure material advantages for their own populations. The ruling characteristic, however, of this policy is that it is factitious, adventurous, and ideal, in search of interests to defend rather than framed for the defence of interests existing. It is essentially, therefore, an aggressive policy, though, in a sense, also progressive. Dividing the world into communities to be conquered and nations who are fitted to conquer them, it represents the primeval moving power in ethnic evolution. But it is a policy quite unsuited for co-operation, and the attempt to yoke together Governments, certain of whom are moved empirically by facts as they exist and as they arise, and others by the desire of creating facts, ends—as all concerts of antagonistic interests must end—most likely in explosion. A safe calculation may be made as to the action of a non-aggressive Power, under given circumstances, as the action of a man of business may be approximately inferred from obvious considerations of pecuniary advantage. But in the case of States with ideal policies, like France and Germany, no such forecast can be made. This radical divergence between the aims of the Powers who are called upon to decree the fate of China must render a sincere agreement between them, under any circumstances, impossible; and if the policy of one of them should happen to be directed by a political genius ambitious of distinction, the course of the whole would be subject to aberrations incalculable. It is true that the Governments which have marked out for themselves these extensive plans of aggression may begin to perceive that their proceedings in China have been somewhat in advance of any justification, also that they have been reckoning without their host, and that to found and maintain empires in further Asia may put a strain upon their resources out of proportion to the material gains to be derived from the enterprise. Perceiving that their "vaulting ambition may o'erleap itself" and land them on the off-side of the horse, they may show themselves willing, for the moment, to attenuate the significance of their previous energy. The discovery that the conquest of China involves something more than a military promenade may induce them to make professions which, however sincere for the time being, accord but indifferently with established facts. In the procession of history, however, it is the facts and not the words which ultimately prevail.

And this is the only canon by which it is safe to interpret the apocalyptic exchange of notes just announced between Great Britain and Germany, whose significance, like that of the conversation of a Chinese, lies in the things which are not said. Considered as a convention, it must be classed with those elastic bargains of which several examples occur in the preceding narrative, in which one party has a definite aim and the other not, and which is therefore destined to be employed exclusively to the advantage of the former. Vigilantibus non dormientibus servit lex. Without knowing what secret inducements led to such a declaration of policy between Great Britain and Germany it is impossible to assign a value to it. Its most authoritative expositors in the German press rejoice in the fact that it pins Great Britain down to the only policy which she has ever pursued, or ever will,—a policy in which her public utterances have throughout coincided with her overt acts,—that, namely, of opening Chinese and all other markets not for herself but for the whole world on equal terms. An agreement, however, which does not arrest French encroachments in the south, Russian appropriations in the north, nor German exclusive exploitations in Shantung or elsewhere, contributes little to that maintenance of the integrity of China which is its professed object. Neither the world at large nor China herself will benefit greatly by a verbal restriction on the one Power to whom the "open door" and the integrity of China are articles of political religion and of undeviating practice. And the clause which solemnly reserves to the two parties the right of consulting together in certain contingencies gives to the transaction a very platonic character. But a covenant whose meaning is veiled is always a hazardous operation, even in private life, where the power of definite interpretation lies with the more aggressive of the two parties.

The non-aggressive Powers may be defined as those whose citizens have established in the country a substantial position, which their Governments have been slow to protect. The principal representatives of this group are Great Britain and the United States, whose interests in China have many times been defined as commercial, and not territorial. They have acted consistently on the conviction that there is no country in the world where conquest for the sake of commerce was less justifiable than in China, which possesses a large population inured to labour, accustomed to the luxuries of a civilised society, and with unsurpassed aptitude for business. No special credit is due to the two Anglo-Saxon nations for their recognition of these circumstances, except in so far as it indicates an intelligent appreciation of their own interests. They desire, as an ordinary trader or manufacturer would, that a good customer may be kept on his legs, and that a promising inheritance shall not be alienated from the next generation of their merchants. Their policy, however, being essentially passive and conservative, suffers from the defects of these qualities, and is liable to be overborne by the more energetic action of the Powers which we have ventured to place in the aggressive class.

There remains the third group, which consists of one member, and that is Russia. Although Russia is in effect more aggressive than all the others put together, her annexations have been conducted under a different formula from those of Germany, France, or Japan. It is not merely that she has avoided hostilities, and effected her purpose by patient and adroit diplomacy, but that her acquisitions of Chinese territory have not been of the "wild-cat" order, but genuine integral additions to her existing possessions. The expansion of Russia, whether a matter to be deplored or applauded, is at any rate a natural growth, unduly forced at times, but steady and progressive. It is the shadow of this secular advance of Russia that covers the whole Far Eastern situation, and has in fact done so for nearly fifty years. The character of her progress could not be better described, even with the lights we now possess, than it was by Sir Rutherford Alcock as far back as 1855. With rare clearness of vision and firmness of touch he thus foretold the position which Russia was destined to occupy in the Far East:—

China has long been impotent. Russia has within the last few years, by force of diplomacy, appropriated half the province of Manchuria, the ancient patrimony of the reigning dynasty, and with it the command of the river Amur. If this other great Leviathan ... has not yet swallowed the whole empire, it can only be that, great as are its capacities, there are limits imposed by nature to the powers of deglutition and digestion in the largest boa-constrictor or predatory animal yet discovered. In the mean time the danger is more immediate and menacing to Europe than to China, perhaps; for Russia has at Sakhalin, the mouth of the Amur, and the adjoining coasts of the Western continent, laid the foundation for a position as menacing to European commerce as any now existing at the opposite extremity in the Baltic. Stretching with giant arms across the whole breadth of Northern Asia and Europe from fastnesses at each end, Asiatic hordes, directed by Western genius and science, are held in leash, ready to let slip over the fair and fertile south of both continents. The wealthiest regions of both Europe and Asia are at once threatened by this modern colossus.... China, India, and the kingdoms of Southern Europe form but the three different stages of invading progress. Long before the whole of such a gigantic scheme of rule and conquest can have its accomplishment in China—the most helpless as well as the richest of all the victims—Russia will be enabled to reap the first-fruits and take instalments of the larger and more distant spoil, by controlling the trade of Northern China and the rich European trade so recently developed in its seas.

Russia alone has a policy independent at once of accidents, autocrats, shifting governing bodies, and of all personalities, weak or strong. With the accumulated force of past achievements, an unbroken tradition, and great military forces massed on a frontier which is no frontier, Russia among the other Powers now masquerading in the Far East is as the iron vessel floating among the earthenware pots. Russian publicists, in order to strengthen the dominant position to which they aspire, have been proclaiming with increasing insistency that they are the only nation who can deal with the Chinese Question because they are themselves an Asiatic people. They justify this pretension by their primitive Asiatic military ethics, and it is an instructive spectacle to see their forces massacring Chinese populations wholesale while their diplomatists are ostentatiously shielding those in high places from the just consequences of their crimes. The German Emperor has said many clever and some foolish things, but perhaps he never did a wiser one than in making over his schemes of vengeance to his august ally, for the work is more becoming to an Asiatic than a Teutonic people.

From an areopagus composed of these incongruous elements great achievements are expected, but the comparison between the end and the means inspires little confidence as to the result. The task itself is gigantic enough to appal the boldest political experimenter that ever lived, while its complexity involves insoluble contradictions. China, the very Government itself, has been guilty of outrages against foreign nations such as no nation can forgive another. The foreign Powers have been openly and persistently defied—their people massacred throughout the empire. Yet the nations so hated and flouted assume that they have a mission to fulfil in setting up a stable Government in China, a Government to be created for their own convenience, with which they may in future negotiate,—a puppet Government, therefore, yet one which is to maintain peace and good order throughout a vast empire by the prestige of its authority over a loyal and devoted people. As buttresses to the stability of the new régime, "the loyal southern viceroys," as they are termed—loyal to whom, or to what?—deriving authority, it is to be presumed, from the Government which is to be patronised by foreigners, are expected to meet the convenience of the dictators and prevent anarchy in the provinces. In short, the subjective Chinaman, as we have ventured to call the fabulous animal so often evolved from Western consciousness, is once more to be brought on the scene, and do everything that is expected of him.

A puppet Government is an intelligible thing, but of a puppet pulled by a dozen strings no clear conception can be formed. Such, however, has been the anomalous history of foreign relations with China, that the identical state of things now threatening has not been absent from the minds of observers for a whole generation. The missionary question alone was thought likely to result in a deadlock between China and the Powers. More than thirty years ago Sir Rutherford Alcock was impressed with the destructive effect of "each treaty Power dictating to the Government and coercing its officers in their jurisdiction wherever Christians were concerned." This, he thought, "would tend to paralyse and bring into contempt the executive, leading to a process of disintegration fatal to the existence of the Empire." What was then thought applicable to the missionary field now affects the whole range of international intercourse and of Chinese government. We are, in fact, confronted by two anarchies of most serious portent—anarchy in the administration of China, and anarchy among the foreign Powers who are so active in that country. From the beginning of the intervention to protect the Legations anarchy among the Allies has been the predominant feature: it was that which frustrated effective action in June, and led to such severe loss and suffering. Anarchy alone can account for the lawless proceedings at Tientsin, Peking, and on the Chinese coast, which on any other hypothesis would be a disgrace to civilisation. Anarchy has characterised all the utterances of the Western Powers. Beginning at the wrong end with great swelling words full of sound and fury, the Powers who assumed to lead have gradually toned down their threats as they obtained more light on the situation and on their own incapacity to deal with it. The latest expression of this incapacity is the Anglo-German Agreement, already referred to, which perpetuates the fallacy of excluding the Chinese factor from the China question. Yet out of, even by means of, this confusion it is expected that order may be established in China! Similia similibus!

In this desperate imbroglio the ultimate advantage will no doubt fall to those members of the unnatural coalition who have the clearest views and the firmest resolution in giving effect to them. The dubious and vacillating Powers frittering away their political forces, espousing every contradiction in succession, and turning in weariness from the disgusting scenes in which they will have reluctantly participated, will in all probability leave the path open for their neighbours who have steadier aims and fewer scruples.

Russia has been in real, though not nominal or legal, possession of Manchuria since 1896. She has absorbed in times past many stony deserts and barren solitudes, but in Manchuria she has for the first time acquired a rich territory with an all-important sea-base and a virile population, whereby her dominant position in Eastern Asia has been rendered inexpugnable. China lies at her feet. Obviously, therefore, her interests in that empire are not only distinct from, but opposed to, those of every other Power: for while they may desire (1) to support an efficient government and keep the empire of China on its legs, and (2) to cut off slices of the territory for their own use,—two contradictory and mutually destructive policies,—Russia has no need to be anxious, either as to the efficiency of any Chinese Government or as to her own ulterior interests in the territory. The looser the substance to be absorbed the more painless will be the process of absorption. Once established in strength in Manchuria, disorder on her frontier may afford the perhaps not unwelcome opportunity of restoring order on her own terms,—of, in fact, continuing the process by which Siberia with Central and North-Eastern Asia have, in the course of two hundred years, been gradually incorporated into the Russian Empire. "It may well be doubted," wrote Sir Rutherford Alcock in 1868, "if this vast empire (of China) is not too large to be any longer governed from Peking. It is impossible to conceive a more disadvantageous site for the capital." Disadvantageous, perhaps, to China, whose centre of gravity lies a thousand miles to the south; but not disadvantageous to a Power whose strength is consolidated five hundred miles to the north.[39]

And the veto which Russia has exercised over the acts of the Chinese Government since 1895, whereby she has been able, at her pleasure, to frustrate the enterprises of other Powers, is not likely to fall into abeyance when that Government has been prostrated by its own folly. For the weaker the Chinese Government becomes the greater will be its need of correction and guidance. But we have only to imagine half-a-dozen Powers, each aspiring, and some of them fully resolved, to exercise their special veto over the proposals of the others, to realise the tragic complexity of the international problems which now present themselves for solution. A government holding together three hundred millions of people ripened for rebellion, potentially at war with the rest of the world, and yet governing under multiple tutelage—such is the prospect before us. Of all the legacies which the nineteenth bequeaths to the twentieth century, there is none more portentous than that of the sick giant of the Far East.

CHAPTER XXXIV.
SIR RUTHERFORD ALCOCK'S LATER YEARS.

Retirement—Literary work—Social and charitable occupations—Geographical Society—Borneo—Failing health—Active to the end.

After twenty-seven years' service in the Far East Sir Rutherford Alcock spent the remaining twenty-seven years of his life in his own country, not in the placid enjoyment of a well-earned leisure or in mere literary recreation, but in labours incessant for the good of his countrymen. Though the scene had changed, the methodical habits of his business life remained unaltered, and were directed in their full activity to the duties that presented themselves in England.

During his whole active life Sir Rutherford had cherished the hope of occupying his years of leisure with work for the sick and needy. His visit to England, 1856-58, perhaps gave the definite direction to this aspiration, and led him to see that hospitals, schools, prisons, and similar institutions would afford the best available medium through which he could reach the object of his desires. No sooner, therefore, was he released from official service than the ex-army surgeon returned to his first love. The associations of his youth were bound up with the two hospitals in Westminster where he had studied. There, accordingly, after the lapse of forty years, his active connection with the medical schools was resumed. Residing in the immediate vicinity, Sir Rutherford was able to devote a large share of his time to the affairs of Westminster Hospital, giving back with interest what he had received from his nursing mother. He was a regular visitor there: before long he joined the Board, and became a prominent figure at its meetings. Being appointed one of the vice-presidents, an office he held till his death, he was, through his constant attendance, the working chairman of the board. There was much good work waiting to be done in the control and direction of the routine service of the establishment, and still more in the way of improvements required to adapt the machine to the needs of the time. Hospitals in general were by no means in a satisfactory condition thirty years ago, and the Westminster was certainly no better than its neighbours. The sanitary state of the establishment was antiquated and unfavourable to the patients. But the structural changes necessary to improve this and to extend the accommodation, and the heavy expenditure involved, demanded first-rate financial and organising capacity, as well as unremitting labour,—desiderata which Sir Rutherford was eminently qualified to supply. The nursing was at such a low level as amounted almost to a scandal. Drastic remedies, in short, and in many directions, were called for. But reform from within is proverbially an unpromising undertaking, the personnel being identified with conservative traditions. That kind of parsimony which is in effect the worst extravagance, inasmuch as it yields no adequate return, was a serious obstacle to improvement. It was not their fault, but that of the system of which they were but creatures, that nurses and other attendants were so perfunctory and so inefficient. It was the system, therefore, that had to be reformed, and into that work Sir Rutherford Alcock threw himself con amore. In his labours for the improvement of the hospital he was supported throughout by the cordial co-operation of the late Lady Augusta Stanley. We are indebted to his colleague, Mr George Cowell, F.R.C.S., for a short reference to the work initiated and carried through by Sir Rutherford Alcock, and for a warm tribute to the zeal and ability which he brought into the service:—

Most of the many valuable reports on such subjects as the nursing, admission of out-patients, structural alterations, and improved sanitation were written by him, and endorsed by the committees over which he so ably presided. The writer of this notice remembers the early controversies with reference to the nursing, and the growing complaints which failed to receive attention until Sir Rutherford came on the scene. Hospital committees in those days were not so liberal as they are now, and all increase in the wages of the nurses was absolutely refused for many years. The result of this parsimony was that as the general rate of wages increased, the best nurses were enticed away by better pay elsewhere, and Westminster had gradually come to be nursed by a lower and lower class, and indeed thirty years ago it was not an unheard-of thing to convict a nurse for consuming brandy ordered for the patient. The medical staff were obliged to make a stand against this crying evil, and at last, with the assistance of Sir Rutherford, and in spite of the determined opposition of the then senior physician, a change was made, and the cost of the nursing was doubled at a bound.

Sir Rutherford was chairman of the Westminster Ophthalmic Hospital for sixteen years, and of the Hospital for Women in Soho Square, to both of which institutions he rendered great services. He was member of the Council of the House of Charity for assisting those who have seen better days, and chairman of the Nursing Home founded by Lady Augusta Stanley, in which he took a keen interest. He was also a Poor Law Guardian and a leader in sundry charitable and other parochial work, his experiences of which he likened to the steps of a dancing-master—"two forward and one backward, with no very sensible advance in any one direction." One important step forward he did, however, succeed in making, and that was in obtaining trained nurses for sick inmates of workhouses. His efforts, while connected with St George's Union, were specially devoted to the treatment of the sick: he also took a great interest in the emigration of pauper children to Canada.

As a member of the committee of the Charity Organisation Society he laboured for many years in a variety of ways to bring about unity of action between that body and the Board of Guardians. In connection with the Westminster District Board of Works, Board of Parochial Trustees, Western Dispensary, and Westminster Nursing Committee, he rendered innumerable services to the populous districts controlled by these organisations. Having been elected to the Board of Works in 1875, Sir Rutherford was at once placed upon the Sanitary Committee, to which the Board delegated the administration of the Public Health Acts then in force. The vestry clerk of St Margaret's and St John's records that the Sanitary Committee of the District Board of Works was Sir Rutherford's favourite field of work—an impression which was no doubt also formed by the executive officers of the other spheres of his multifarious activity. The members of the Board were at that time greatly occupied in combating the evils resulting from the overcrowded and insanitary condition of their district, and Sir Rutherford was largely instrumental in urging upon the Home Office the necessity of legislation to compel medical practitioners and heads of families to give notice of cases of infectious diseases—efforts which eventually resulted in the Act of Parliament of 1889.

In 1881 he was appointed a member of the Royal Commission to investigate the London smallpox and fever hospitals, to the formation of which he had contributed powerfully by his reports and articles and labours in the Medical Conference. In 1882 he presided over the Health Department of the Social Science Congress.

In all the social and philanthropic objects to which he devoted himself he was an original worker, never a follower of routine or one to say ditto to another man's opinions. Whatever he undertook he did thoroughly, and with a single eye to the main purpose. His various activities brought him into contact with all sorts and conditions of men, but chiefly with those on the pathetic side of social life—the unfortunate, the debilitated, the improvident, the suffering. He shirked none of his obligations to the meanest of these, and would suffer the greatest personal inconvenience rather than fail in fulfilment of the smallest promise, or in gratifying the slightest request. This punctilious observance of the minor duties was remarked as a prominent feature in his character. An intimate friend writes, "How I wish I could convey even a faint idea of his kindly and sympathetic friendship, which left the feeling that he was on a plane above one in his lofty sense of love and duty." Pure philanthropy, genuine economy, and sound finance being his guiding principles in all social undertakings, and whatever he undertook being pushed through to a successful issue, he by degrees acquired a reputation for efficiency and tenacity. It was not surprising that his energetic character should have gained him the credit of aggressiveness, or, as Mr Co well puts it, "bellicose individuality," which, however, served him in good stead in every post he occupied. We have already seen throughout his official career how he was stimulated by controversy: he was at his best as a fighting man.

The high qualities which Sir Rutherford devoted to his labours of love received flattering recognition from the Queen, who applied to him to draw up the regulations and rules of the institution by which deserving nurses were to be benefited in commemoration of her Majesty's Jubilee. This honour he accepted from her Majesty on the condition that he should have for colleagues in the work Sir James Paget and the Duke of Westminster, a request which was graciously granted. The balance of the Women's Jubilee offering of 1887 was £70,000, of which fund the three were appointed trustees. They decided that it should be applied to the foundation of an institution to promote the education and maintenance of nurses for the sick poor in their own homes. When the scheme had been matured a royal charter of incorporation was granted, wherein the governing body was styled "The Queen Victoria Jubilee Institute for Nurses," the three trustees being appointed to act permanently in that capacity, and also as members of the Council of the Institute. "Sir Rutherford," says the Rev. Arthur Peile, Master of St Katharine's, "continued to the last to take an unfailing interest in the work, and in many valuable ways aided the committee and council by his advice. From his wide grasp of the subject in its various bearings he was able to make important suggestions." The Diamond Jubilee and the incidents connected with the celebration interested Sir Rutherford greatly during the last year of his life, and the medal he received on the occasion was valued by him more highly than any other distinction, because he knew that the bestowal of it was the spontaneous act of the Queen herself, for whom he had a deep personal affection.

To the larger public Sir Rutherford Alcock was perhaps best known by his work in connection with the Royal Geographical Society, on the committee of which he served for twenty years. Elected President in 1876, it fell to him to receive Sir George Nares on his return from his Arctic expedition in that year, and Mr H. M. Stanley on his return from the Congo in 1877. His various presidential addresses to the Society itself, and to the geographical section of the British Association, are replete with well-digested summaries of the progress of geographical exploration throughout the world. His comprehensive treatment of the subject assisted very much, if not to make geography a science, at least to lift it out of the region of mere technical knowledge, and to assign to the study of it the social and political significance now universally attached to the description of the earth's surface. Personally he did much to stimulate enterprise of that kind in various regions. As Chairman of the African Exploration Fund, he took an active share in the labours which resulted in the despatch of Mr Keith Johnston and Mr Joseph Thomson to East Africa, and, by bringing the country into notice, had such important results in the direction of the opening up of that part of the continent. Speaking of him a few days after his death, the President, Sir Clements Markham, said: "Judicious, patient, and courteous, he was esteemed by us all, and his able advice helped us out of many a difficulty. The period of his presidency will always be remembered for the energy with which he advocated African exploration, the result of his efforts being represented by the memorable expeditions of Joseph Thomson."

We have already had occasion to remark on the personal interest which Sir Rutherford had taken during the earlier years of his service in China and Japan in the London Exhibitions of 1851 and 1862.[40] Indeed the Japanese "show" in the latter was virtually organised by him. His well-known sympathy with, and interest in, all industrial and artistic collections led to his being chosen as British Commissioner to the Paris Exhibition of 1878.

About the same time a question of imperial concern claimed Sir Rutherford's active intervention: that was colonisation in the Eastern Archipelago. Borneo, the largest island in the world after Australia, has from time to time excited considerable interest in Great Britain. The romantic career of the Rajah of Sarawak, Sir James Brooke, on the west coast, had much to do with bringing that part of the world into public notice. Adopting as his country the domain made over to him by the native chiefs, Rajah Brooke laboured among his people like a missionary of civilisation, trampled out the savage customs of the natives, and after many trials gained the confidence of the people by his justice and firmness, and eventually brought the country into a state of prosperity and good order. In this he was loyally seconded by Captain Keppel, now Admiral of the Fleet, whose 'Expedition to Borneo of H.M.S. Dido' is a graphic story of their joint adventures among pirates and head-hunters. Coal having been found in Labuan, adjoining the Rajah's territory, that island was acquired by Great Britain in 1847, under treaty from the Sultan of Brunei, who engaged not to make any cession of his territory without her Majesty's consent, and established as a Crown colony.

The Netherlands and Spain claimed between them, upon a vague tenure, enormous tracts of the coast of Borneo and the adjoining archipelago, effectually blocking all progress in these regions. There still remained, however, an important section of the northern part of that immense island unappropriated by the white man. Portions of this tract had been leased to an American citizen, who transferred it to an American company; but being unable to furnish the capital either to pay the stipulated rent or to develop so enormous a property, in 1877 the holders were glad to part with all their rights to an English association consisting of Baron von Overbeck and Mr (now Sir) Alfred Dent, who undertook to pay the agreed tribute to the Sultans of Borneo and Sooloo. Possessing this immense estate, with the sovereign rights inherent in the proprietor, the English association made arrangements to develop the property. Agents were sent out to occupy certain points on the coast, and a provisional government, suited to the requirements of the place, was set up. But the administration putting too heavy a strain upon a private individual, Mr Dent set to work to find assistance in his undertaking.

At this juncture, 1879, Sir Rutherford Alcock, impressed by the important strategical position of the island of Borneo, lying close to the track of vessels traversing the China Sea, its possession of several good harbours, and prospective coal supply, joined Mr Dent in his efforts to place the British occupation of the Bornean harbours on a secure basis. As a first step it was necessary to organise a company with sufficient capital to take over the government and utilise the resources of the territory. This may well have seemed at the time not only an arduous but an impossible undertaking; for nothing short of a royal charter could supply the necessary guarantee to attract capitalists, and to assure them that their property investment would eventually be productive. The era had long gone past when royal charters were granted to merchant adventurers. Such an institution, therefore, seemed an anachronism, opposed to the spirit of the age. Nor was the political colour of the British Government at the time encouraging to imperial schemes of any description. In spite of these difficulties the knowledge of affairs and insistency of Sir Rutherford Alcock and the other promoters enabled them eventually to succeed in pushing their enterprise with the Government to the point of obtaining a charter of incorporation in November 1881. On the faith of this charter a company was formed, of which the capital now stands at £2,000,000, under the title of the "British North Borneo Company." Sir Rutherford Alcock became the chairman, which post he continued to fill during the ten years which may be considered the probationary stage of the company. To him it owed much of its success in overcoming the numerous difficulties incidental to starting so novel a venture; and among his other labours in its behalf he drew up a full and elaborate handbook of North Borneo. It was not a trading, but a governing and a land-owning company, its revenues consisting of royalties paid by private adventurers for the privileges of mining, agriculture, and so forth, licences and the necessary taxes on commerce. But the interests of a dividend-earning and a governing company were so nearly incompatible that no little ingenuity as well as patient effort were required to bring about reconciliation between the two elements.

The affairs of the company have been conducted with great perseverance, the exploitation of the territory by means of planting, mining, and industries of various kinds having been handed over to subsidiary companies created for the purpose, while the parent body maintains its position as overlord, administering the whole territory.

But amidst his numerous preoccupations in England Sir Rutherford never loosened his grasp on the events which were transpiring in the distant field to which his official life had been devoted. As the only competent and persistent critic of these events, he did as much as one man could to turn the eyes of his countrymen towards their most important interests in Further Asia. Nearly every passing event was noticed briefly by him in the columns of the daily press, while the permanent features of the Far Eastern problem, which are only now beginning to dawn upon the consciousness of the nation, were copiously dealt with in the monthly magazines and in the more stately pages of the 'Edinburgh Review.' Sir Rutherford's contributions to periodical literature, forming a tolerably complete repertory of the questions arising out of the intercourse of Europe with Eastern Asia, would fill many volumes. As late as 1896 the subject was still uppermost in his mind. "In China," he then wrote, "there is a far larger Eastern question than what is occupying us at Constantinople. An open port for Russia, a railroad across Russia, with the French scheming for our commerce in the Indo-Chinese peninsula,—the whole situation is full of danger to all our interests in China." And during the last year of his life the thought of all that had been lost to the country through sheer neglect seemed to weigh heavily on his mind. That his constant premonitions of coming changes passed practically unheeded by the public to whom they were addressed is unfortunately true; and it is trite to say that it would have been well for this country if the warnings of such serious writers as this had been taken to heart before instead of after the deluge. But that would have been a historical anomaly, for mankind has learned little since the days of Noah.

Under the valid plea of advancing age and failing health Sir Rutherford during his last years relinquished one after another the offices which he had filled with so much earnestness and good faith. Deafness alone obliged him to retire from the active chairmanship of the Westminster Hospital, though his attendances at the weekly meetings of the Board were unremitting to the very end. As late as July 1897 he took a leading part in measures he deemed urgent for the wellbeing of the institution. During the Jubilee celebrations he was able to receive a formal visit from a party of twelve Dyak police from British North Borneo, under the command of Mr Wardrop. The Committee of the Jubilee Nurses continued to meet at his house, and he did work for the institution during the summer. While at Wimbledon with his family in August, he was seized by an illness from which he rallied sufficiently to be brought home to his house at Westminster, where he came under the medical care of his old friend and physician, Dr Lionel Beale. Among the few friends who were admitted to see him during the last month of his life were the Dean of Westminster, Lord Lister, Mr Edmund Bagshawe of Bath, and one or two others. His strength was then gradually failing, though he retained his intellect unimpaired till within a few days of the end, on November 2, 1897. He was buried in Merstham churchyard. His widow, nearly his own age, survived him sixteen months, dying in March 1899. How much the maintenance of the husband's long life of active usefulness owed to the support and encouragement of a judicious and devoted wife must remain behind the veil. She had her reward.

MAP OF EASTERN ASIA TO ILLUSTRATE THE ENGLISHMAN IN CHINA IN THE VICTORIAN ERA
By Alexander Michie
[View larger image.]

It may be interesting in conclusion to add a few words of Sir Rutherford Alcock's estimate of himself, which occur in a letter to the friend who had pressed him on the subject of biography, written within a year of his death. "In worldly things," he said, "I have been exceptionally favoured by opportunities, many of them unanticipated, and rather fortuitous than by any efforts or merits. My early life was marked by a great rashness, and a readiness to accept responsibilities which savoured much of presumption and confidence from conceit in my powers to deal with whatever fell in my way—very different from my retrospect in old age and the sobered estimate my judgment is now disposed to form of all I undertook and accomplished, and the risks I accepted, through my fifty years of active life."

If, however, age be the season appropriate for judgment, youth is the time for laying up the materials for it; and he who takes no risks achieves nothing worthy of being judged. We estimate the man by his record rather than by his own review of it, falling back on the criterion, valid in all circumstances, "By their fruits ye shall know them."