A dispute arose later between the Russian and British Governments on this word “any” (_tout_). The latter interpreted it to mean any port secured by Russia in China, while the former claimed that the Czar’s Government had never promised to open Port Arthur to foreign trade.—March 13, 1898; _China, No. 1 (1898)_, pp. 47–48, No. 114. Footnote 214: _Ibid._, No. 76. Footnote 215: _China, No. 1 (1898)_, No. 83. Footnote 216: See p. 133, below. Footnote 217: Compare the Russian reply to Secretary Hay’s note of September, 1899, pp. 135–138, below. Footnote 218: On January 17.—_China, No. 1 (1898)_, No. 56. Cf. No. 62. Footnote 219: _Ibid._, Nos. 65, 69, 75, 78, 79. Footnote 220: In his speech before the House of Lords on February 8. See _ibid._, Nos. 82, 83, 87; the _Parliamentary Debates_, 4th Series, vol. 53, pp. 40–41. Footnote 221: _China, No. 1 (1898)_, No. 54. Footnote 222: _Ibid._, No. 59. Footnote 223: _China, No. 1 (1898)_, No. 85. Footnote 224: _Ibid._, No. 88. Footnote 225: _Ibid._, Nos. 95, 96, 99, 100, 101, 103. Footnote 226: _China, No. 1 (1898)_, No. 95 (Salisbury to MacDonald). Footnote 227: The Russian Government soon had occasion to gauge the strength of the British protest, for, on March 8, Sir N. O’Conor made a striking statement to Count Muravieff, as will be seen in the following report (_ibid._, No. 108, O’Conor to Salisbury): “I alluded, as no doubt his Excellency was aware, to the junction of the Burmese and Chinese railway systems. This demand became at once still more necessary and reasonable if greater privileges of the same kind were accorded to Russia in the Liao-tung Peninsula, as they had apparently already been accorded in Manchuria. Count Muravieff did not, however, respond to these remarks beyond saying that he supposed the Burma-Chinese line would, in this case, descend to the valley of the Yang-tsze.” The Count’s remark may be considered a sufficient reply, when it is seen in connection with another remark he made a few moments earlier. When Sir N. O’Conor alluded to the objectionable features of leasing Port Arthur, the Foreign Minister reminded him that British interests were principally represented in the neighborhood of the Yang-tsze. Russia would evade the British protest by turning England’s attention to her own sphere, in which Russia had little interest, and would not object to a British repetition there of Russia’s conduct in Manchuria. Muravieff must have thought that O’Conor, by his reference to the Burmese Railway, now voluntarily threw himself into his net. Russia later succeeded in inducing England to conclude the Anglo-Russian railway declaration of April 28, 1899, delimiting in a negative manner the railway spheres of the two Powers in China, Russia pledging not to seek concessions and not to obstruct those of the British in the