ملف من أوراق مطبوعة مصنفة تحت عنوان "التفاوض المصري" بين كرزون وعدلي باشا والوفد المصري [ظ‎‎٤‎٩] (١٧٨/٩٨)

purchase of cotton by the Egyptian Government, ft was a bad and unsound proposal.
It had come through Lord Allenby, who had himself declared that it was wrong, hut
had recommended that, in view of the state of public opinion in Eirypt, it would be
advisable not to object. Lord Curzon accordingly, though knowing it to be wrong, had
not intervened. The object of the proposal had, of course, been to raise the price of
cotton. It had failed in this object and the cotton was still lyin^ there to no purpose,
and, in fact, preventing recovery in the price. He did not wish to blame Sidkv Pasha
for this affair, but he considered that it proved his point.
There followed a statement pointing out that the interests of foreigners in Egypt
were, to a large extent, identical with those of the Egyptians themselves. Lord Curzon
concurred in this, but insisted that the necessity for some control over Egyptian finance
was as much a foreign as a British interest. Were Sidky Pasha to suggest to the
foreign colonies in Egypt that there should be no control, he had no doubt that they
would be the first to protest. He imagined that there was a large amount of foreign
capital invested in Egypt. He had not the figures available, but they were no doubt
known to the delegation. He would cite, for instance, the case of the public debt.
Sidky Pasha interjected that about one-third was now held in Egypt.
Lord Curzon went on to say that at any rate a large proportion of the debt,
amounting to at least 60,000,000?., was in foreign hands. He imagined that though
the greater part of the small retail trade was in Egyptian hands, nearly all the larger
businesses were also in foreign ownership. He would therefore make the point that
some measure of financial control was as much a foreign as a British interest, and he
would add that this was not a political question at all ; it was a matter purely of finance
and economics.
Lord Curzon said that Sidky Pasha went on to speak of the special functions which
Lord Curzon had suggested should be performed by the Financial Commissioner. Three
in number had been proposed, namely, that he should pay (i) the bu Iget of the Mixed
Courts, (•.!) all pensions due to foreigners and (3) the budget of the Financial and
Judicial Commissioners themselves. Sidky Pasha had male the criticism that it would
be unnecessary to invest the Financial Commissioner with these duties because the
treaty itself would make their performance obligatory on the Egyptian Government.
Lord (Jurzon thought that there was force in this argument provided that it could
be arranged that the terms of the treaty provided sufficient guarantees for the due
fulfilment of these obligations. He thought, indeed, that it might not be necessary to
insist on these special powers being invested in the Financial Commissioner.
As regards the main point, however, Lord Curzon was sorry to see that an
agreement had not yet been reached, and he felt that serious efforts should be made to
arrive at some solution. The British Government wished to provide that the Financial
Commissioner should be able to give warning if he saw that a serious error in finance was
about to be committed. Lord Curzon said that it was useless to repeat that this would
constitute an infringement of Egyptian sovereignty. When people spoke of an
infringement of sovereignty he was always rather suspicious. At ' he present moment
the French were talking of an infringement of their sovereignty because the Allies did
not agree to their sending large reinforcements independently to Silesia. In his view
there was no question of Egyptian sovereignty being involved at all. It was simply a
matter of finance. Lord Curzon then mentioned another passage in the delegation’s
statement which reminded him very much of the sort of thing that British politicians
sometimes said in Parliament.
In the passage referred to, Sidky Pasha had tried to make out that Lord Curzon’s
scheme of a Financial Commissioner would mean setting up one man over the head of
the Egyptian Government, the Legislative Assembly and, in fact, the entire nation.
Sidky Pasha had maintained that the Egyptian Parliament would really be in a position
to exercise the most effective restraint upon every possible abuse.
Lord Curzon was quite unable to agree. He would point out that the British
Parliament, with 800 years’ experience behind it, were even now unable adequately to
control public finance. The delegation had only to read the papers and they would see
that, according to the journalists, mistake after mistake was being perpetrated in British
finance. He would urge the delegation to consider whether it would not be possible
to find some formula which would provide the Financial Commissioner with adequate
powers to give warning before mistakes were committed. The Financial Commissioner
would not intrude unnecessarily into their affairs, nor would he in any way infringe
their sovereignty. In fact, the Egyptians ought to welcome him if he was a man of
real technical skill, as he should be. Financial blunders were made by all Governments,