tion is that no difficulty has been experienced in obtaining an adequate supply of native labour.
The terminus of the new railway on the Red Sea will not be Suakim, on account of the difficulty caused by coral reefs in approaching its harbour. A satisfactory port has been found thirty miles up the coast. The name of the new port has caused considerable discussion. Its native name is Sheikh-el-Bargoud, which literally means Saint Flea—rather curiously, as, although the Sudan possesses many other insect pests, it is said to be too hot for fleas. Such a name being clearly impossible, what is it to be called? So far the name settled upon is Bunder Sudan, meaning the Port of the Sudan, not a very striking title. No doubt the really appropriate name would be Port Cromer, but if that is rejected, it seems a pity that it should not be named after the present Khedive of Egypt, on the analogy of Port Said, and called Port Abbas. In an Oriental country such compliments are very greatly appreciated. They are also (the Sudan is not yet a wealthy country) inexpensive.
The new railway is, for the time being, the central point of Sudan politics, and beyond a doubt the country is ripe for the development which is looked for. It is still, of course, a considerable drain on the Egyptian exchequer, but Egypt gets a more than sufficient return for her expenditure. Command of the all-important water-supply, a peaceful and contented neighbour, and an ever-increasing market for her trade, are things worth many times over the outlay she has made. Very shortly the Sudan may be able to provide the whole cost of its own administration, and so relieve Egypt entirely of the annual burden. Such a result would have appeared almost incredible six years ago. Immense credit is due to the little band of British officers and civilians, who, in spite of all discouragements, and in the face of one of the hottest climates in the world, have laboured so unceasingly and so skilfully at the great task committed to their care.
