أوراق مكتوبة بالآلة الكاتبة وأوراق مطبوعة لمجلس الوزراء وأوراق برلمانية عن الأحداث في مصر [ظ‎‎١‎٨‎٥] (٥٢٠/٣٧٠)

47. Your Lordship’s telegram then pointed out that in default of such explicit
assurances His Majesty’s Government could not approve of a proposal which would
certainly be represented as an unconditional surrender. In the context and without
further qualification the proposal referred to would appear to be the proposal which
F had recommended to His Majesty’s Government. Had it indeed been my proposal
which His Majesty’s Government intended, upon receipt of the required assurances,
to recommend to Parliament, the first three assurances would. T think, readily have
been given; the fourth, however, would have been refused, since such an assurance
would have armed His Majesty’s Government with a right to insist upon taking
military dispositions even in excess of those contemplated under the draft treaty.
It was doubtless mainly upon that clause of the draft treaty that negotiations with
Adly Pasha failed : Egyptians believe that divergent views exist as to the required
extent of military dispositions: and this was not a matter upon which the Egyptian
Government could conceivably commit themselves in advance to accepting whatever
conclusions His Majesty’s Government might ultimately be found to have reached.
48. But from a later passage in your Lordship’s telegram it appears that the
proposal which His Majesty's Government were prepared to recommend to Parlia
ment was in fact not the proposal which I had made, namely that the protectorate
should be abolished before the conclusion of a treaty. The proposal which they were
prepared to recommend was that the protectorate should be abolished after the
conclusion of an agreement between the two Governments which should settle the
outstanding questions. Four steps were evidently contemplated :—
(1.) The giving of explicit assurances.
(2.) The assent of Parliament to a conditional abolition of the protectorate.
(3.) The fulfilment of that condition, i.e., the successful termination of
negotiations.
(4.) The actual abolition of the protectorate.
It was therefore clear that the Egyptian Government would have had one of
two prospects before them : either they must have given assurances of such a nature
as to allow themselves no scope for negotiation at all; or they might have left
themselves a certain scope for negotiation, but without any guarantee against finding
the actual abolition of the protectorate impossible unless, when they came to negotiate,
they accepted in every respect the desires of His Majesty’s Government.
49. Further, if I understand your Lordship's telegram aright, the
re-establishment of an Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which His Majesty’s
Government had assented to a month before without demur, was now made subject
to the giving of the explicit assurances enumerated above.
50. It was perfectly clear to me that a proposal involving such assurances, so
conditioned, would not be entertained : but the suggestion that I refused to
recommend them to His Highness the Sultan and to Sarwat Pasha is inaccurate, as
I have shown in my telegram No. 41 and in the early part of this despatch. In this,
as in other matters, I have scrupulously carried out your Lordship's instructions.
51. In this despatch I have traced, in so far as they seem to be relevant, the
course of events in Egypt since my return last November, and have set forth the
justification of the form and occasion of the advice I have offered. The substance
of that advice I have fully supported in other communications, and I have not sought
here to recapitulate or elaborate my arguments.
52. The commission which I hold from His Majesty is to maintain His
Majesty's protectorate over Egypt. 1 have done so : but I do not think it has the
elements of durability, and I have now advised its being brought to an end, as it
was established, by a unilateral declaration. I have laid open to His Majesty’s
Government a course which, in my judgment, accords with the general traditions
of British policy and British institutions, and is in the true interest of the Empire,
while it is consistent with that political development of Egypt which His Majesty’s
Government have always desired to encourage, and which has been the goal of the
labours of my predecessors, men who in serving their own country have sought the
welfare of the Egyptian people.
I have, &c.
A ELEN BY,
High Commissioner.