Report of the Special Mission to Egypt under Lord Milner, and related papers [‎10v] (20/473)

4
cost of a garrison of about 5,700. This figure has ^rhce remained unchanged, though
the garrison had in 1914 grown to about 6,300 and cost per head was rising. Ihe
total cost of that garrison at the then levels of prices and pay was about three-quarters
of a million.
16. The sum to-day involved, even on the extra cost basis, is (as shown above) s >
greatly increased, and the political difficulty of an unlimited military contribution is so
evident, that it appears necessary for a decision to be taken on general policy before
exact calculations can be profitably made.
E. —Customs Dues.
17. Connected with the question of military contribution is that of the customs
dues leviable on army imports into Egypt. Before the war, duty was paid from army
funds on dutiable articles imported for the public service, if they were of the character
of general merchandise (provisions, &c.), but not on arms or other specifically warlike
stores. The duties so paid were, however, reckoned as a factor of extra cost in
calculating the amount of the military contribution, so that as leng as that contribu
tion adequately covered the extra cost, no duties on imports for the public service were
in effect paid ; but this has not been the position for many years past.
18. During the w^ar, relaxations were secured locally which, while not taking the
form of complete exemption of all public army imports {e.g., imports for the army
arriving as part of mixed cargoes in ordinary merchant vessels were still liable), had
practically that effect.
19. The question of future peace arrangements has been under discussion locally,
and Sir Paul Harvey, recognizing that any dues levied on public army imports are
properly recoverable as part of the military contribution, and that the 150,000/. fixed
in Lord Cromer s time must now be revised, has advised that the Egyptian Govern
ment should waive all claim to duty in respect of goods the property of the British
Government imported into Egypt for the use of the army. 1 his is satisfactory.
20. A further question has arisen as to duties on go* ds of dutiable character
imported for the private use of the troops, either by the Canteen organization or by
individual officers and men; but this dues not affect the British Exchequer and is
being dealt with separately. A technical question as to the mode of fixing the rates
charged for services rendered to the British forces by the Egyptian State .Railways is
also under separate reference to a Board of Arbitration.
CONCLUSION.
21. It is suggested, as a basis for discussion, that the liability of Egypt as regards
annual Military Contribution remains in principle as defined by the Treasury in 1885
(paragraph 13 above), regard being had, within the maximum so arrived at, to taxable
capacity ; and that in view of the abounding prosperity indicated in paragraph 7, if the
action referred to in paragraph 5 is regarded as finally disposing of the expected
contribution to the cost of the war, then a substantial sum should be forthcoming in
respect of the civil disturbances of lat>t year, in fixing which the obligation in regard to
gratuities (paragraph 11) might properly be taken into account.
June, 1920.