Report of the Special Mission to Egypt under Lord Milner, and related papers [‎123r] (247/473)

unpleasant oxperianoes when Egypt proceeds to conclude special
tariff “bargains with other Countries.
It is assumed above that the Miner Oonnoiaeicmseriously
intend that Egypt shall have full control over her foreign
oomercial relations. This is clearly stated in the original
Report, hut in the very same sentence it is stated that
Egypt 11 should have the right of concluding treaties of a
non-political nature " with the assent of Great Britain^ -
which would appear to give us the uLtimate control of Egyptian
consnercial treaties* .Again, in the later mamorandun of
August we read that %ypt will n unilertake not to enter into
any agreement with a Foreign Power which is prejudicial to
British interests"* If "British interests" are to he under
stood to include "commercial interests" this stipulation, if
intended to he effective, involves British control at some
stags and in some form over Egyptian ooraneroial agreements
with foreign countries* On the other hand the Foreign Offica
Memorandum (page 7 paragraph headed "Trade") evidently under
stands the Commission to propose full commercial autonomy for
Egypt* The ambiguity certainly needs to he cleared up.
As regards Export Duties, which are now limited to IJ©
ad valorem (also a legacy from Turkey under the capitulations)^
weEave already, I believe, concurred in a proposal to raise
the limit from 1$ to &/o 9 hut this concession was blocked by
Italy, which insisted in excepting raw cotton. Here, againr
we might try to get Italy 1 s assent to 2$ with the offer to
extend the period of limitation for another ten years. It
is certainly desirable to avoid exciting apprehensions of
countries which are large consumers of Egyptian cotton that
an uncontrolled Egyptian Government will abuse its freedom
by excessivo export duties on an article of which she has to
a great extent a monopoly, and which is becoming more and
more essential to Industry.
The Anglo-Egyptlan Convention of 1889 already referred
to authorised exceptional tariff arrangements between Egypt
and Turkey or Persia. Any need for such special airangemeirta,
has now disappeared, and no such Article should be included
in the contemplated Anglo-Egyptian Treaty*
Presumably the ordinary stipulations as to national treat
ment of shipping will be included in any arrangement, together
with the other stipulations as to trade and shipping generally
included in commercial treaties* (Most of these matters are
dealt with in the Convention of 1889, which, howevor, is not
in the most modem form and can be denounced by either side t
by twelve months 1 notice.)
It also seems very desirable to insert the.Article which
is included in all our recent Treaties with the Hew States
and in the Palestinian and Mesopotamian and Syrian Mandates
requiring Egypt to adhere to various International Conventions,
including, among others, any conventions relating to transit,
oommuni oat ions, and equitable treatment of commerce, which may
be concluded under the auspices of the League of Nations.
The Suez Canal.
Presumably sufficient safeguards will have to be inserted
in any Treaty to guarantee the protection of the Canal .Lone.,
and of course the International Conventions with regard to