Correspondence with A J Balfour, Sir R Wingate, Lord Allenby, Lord Milner and others on Egypt [‎29v] (58/300)

‘2
Egypt^n Government and by the British authorities. They circulated petitions for
signature and subscription lists, and were able, in a comparatively short time, to raise
a sum of 50,000L They also formed a committee of fourteen leaders, who were, with
one or two possible exceptions, men of little standing and of doubtful antecedents and
character. As an instance of the false conception which prevailed with regard to the
movement, it may he cited that one of the most influential and loyal notables in the
province of Menutia, Abu Hussein Pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders. by name, told a British inspector that he had
subscribed 10,0001. to the movement, as he understood that it had the support of the
British Government, and gladly cancelled his subscription when informed to the
contrary.
Sir B. Wingate was instructed to make it perfectly clear that this agitation,
which he described as an organised campaign against the Protectorate, was viewed by
His Majesty’s Government with extreme disfavour. Further, that importance was
attached to the Sultan and Ministers showing that they shared this attitude.
Instructions were issued in Cairo to prevent public meetings and demonstrations and
to suppress the distribution of seditious circulars and subscription lists.
On the 5th December SirB. Wingate reported that Bushdi Pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders. and Adly Pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders.
had resigned, owing to the fact that they had not been encouraged to proceed to
London at once. Further, that the Sultan, who was in an excitable frame of mind,
was supporting their attitude. His Highness and his Ministers appeared to fear
that some Htal decision would be come to at the Peace Conference affecting the future
of Egypt without the views of any Egyptian having been heard. In reply, it was
pointed out that the request to defer their visit was solely inspired by a regard for their
own convenience and dignity, and that they would be received here at the eailiest dare
which could be arranged. But the fact was emphasised that any discussions on
Egyptian internal reforms must take place in London and not in Paris, and that no
question vital to Egyptian interests would be raised at the Peace Conference except
that of the establishment of the British Protectorate over Egypt, which the Allied
Powers had already recognised and which the enemy Powers would be required to
accept. This reply did not cause either the Sultan or Ministers to modify their
attitude, and the Sultan felt unable to show clearly, as we had demanded of him,
that he disapproved of the ^Nationalist agitation. They must not be judged too
hardly for this. Once the ball of independence had been set rolling, their position
became one of great difficulty, and Egyptian statesmen are not conspicuous for moral
courage.
At the beginning of January Sir B. Wingate was summoned to London in order to
explain the situation to His Majesty’s Government, leaving Sir M. Cheetham in charge,
and at the ^ame time the two Ministers were invited to come here immediately after his
arrival, that is to say, about the middle of February. They were also requested to
submit at once, in writing, any proposals which they wished to be considered for
discussion. When, however, this invitation was conveyed to them, they declared that
although they felt convinced that a satisfactory agreement with His Majesty’s Govern
ment would he easy, their position in Egypt would be hopeless unless Saad Zaglul and *
the other Nationalist leaders were also permitted to come to England. They did not
ask that the Nationalist leaders should be officially received here. On the contrary,
they desired them to return to Egypt empty-handed and proved incapable of redeeming
their promises.
Sir B Wingate had now reached London, and the whole question was discussed
with 1dm. Sir B. Wingate urged ‘that the restrictions on the movements of the
Nationalist leaders should be removed and that they should be permitted to come to
Europe with the Ministers. He considered that the Ministers would never have and
would not now come without the Nationalist leaders. It would he alleged in Egypt
that the Ministers had not been able to obtain sufficiently satisfactory terms from His
Majesty’s Government, and that the Nationalist leaders, had they been here, would have
been more successful. If, on the other hand, it was shown that the Nationalists were
not received here and had no chance of doing any service to Egypt, their position would
be shaken while that of he Sultan and his Ministers would be fortified. The alternative
to this was to accept the resignations of the two Ministers, which had been held in
suspense, but Sir R. Wingate was of opinion that it would be difficult to replace them.
The following were the objections to the course proposed. It was sincerely desired
that the Egyptian Ministers and other responsible Egyptians should come here, that
the important questions of the exact form which the British Protectorate in Egypt is to
assume and of the necessary constitutional changes should be discussed with them, and
that a settlement equally satisfactory to both sides should be reached. On the other