تقرير البعثة الخاصة إلى مصر بقيادة اللورد ميلنر، وأوراق ذات صلة [ظ‎‎٩‎٠] (٤٧٣/١٨٢)

be maintained, but it is out of the question that this connection should take the
form of the subjection of the Sudan to Egypt. The former country is capable of
and entitled to independent development in accordance with its own character and
requirements. It is much too early to attempt to determine its ultimate political
status. For present purposes that status is sufficiently defined by the Convention of
1899 between Great Britain and Egypt, which provides for the necessary political
connection between Egypt and the Sudan without hampering the independent
development of the latter country.
Though it is absolutely necessary for the present to maintain a single supreme
authority over the whole of the Sudan, it is not desirable that the government ot that
country should be highly centralised. Having regard to its vast extent and the varied
character of its inhabitants, the administration of its different parts should be lett,
as far as possible, in the hands of the native authorities, wherever they exist, under
British supervision. A centralised bureaucracy is wholly unsuitable for the Sudan.
Decentralisation and the employment, wherever possible, of native agencies for the
simple administrative needs of the country, in its present stage of development,
would make both for economy and efficiency. At the present time the officials of local
origin are still largely outnumbered by those introduced from Egypt, with whom
service in the Sudan is by no means popular. This difficulty will be overcome as
education progresses and a greater number of Sudanese themselves become capable of
filling official posts. At the same time care should be taken, in the matter of educa
tion, not to repeat the mistake which has been made in Egypt of introducing a
system which fits pupils for little else than employment in clerical and minor
administrative posts, and creates an overgrown body of aspirants to Government
employment. There is no room in the Sudan for a host of petty officials, and educa
tion should be directed to giving the Sudanese a capacity and a taste for employment
in other directions, such as agriculture, industry, commerce and engineering. The
immediate need of the country is material development, and it can do without an
elaborate administrative system.
The military forces still employed in the Sudan are very large. A large army
was, no doubt, required to complete the conquest and pacification of the country, but
the time has come when, in our opinion, the question of the number and organisation
of its military forces should be reconsidered, and the financial burden upon Egypt
which the maintenance of that force involves be reduced. Hitherto, the Governor-
Generalship of the Sudan and the Command-in-Chief of the Egyptian army have
been united in one person. There were good reasons for this in the past, but it is
indefensible as a permanent arrangement. At the first convenient opportunity a
civil Governor-General should be appointed.
In general it should be the aim of British policy to relieve Egypt from any
financial responsibility for the Sudan and to establish the relations of the two
countries for the future upon a basis which will secure the independent development
of the Sudan while safeguarding the vital interests of Egypt in the waters of the
Nile.
Egypt has an indefeasible right to an ample and assured supply of water for the
land at present under cultivation and to a fair share of any increased supply which
engineering skill may be able to provide. A formal declaration on the part of Great
Britain that she recognises this right and is resolved under all circumstances to
uphold it would go far to allay the uneasiness which prevails in Egypt on this
subject. We are of opinion that such a declaration might with advantage be made
at the present time.
E.— Visit of Egyptian delegates to Egypt.
At the close of the discussions which resulted in the memorandum of the 18th
August, Zaghlul Pasha and the other delegates as well as Adli Pasha left London
for France. Four of the Delegation (Mohammed Pasha Mahmud, Ahmed Lutfi Bey
el Said, Abdel Latif Bey el Mukabati, and Ali Bey Maher) proceeded immediately
to Egypt in accordance with the understanding already referred to (see p. 23) in order
to enlist the support of their countrymen for the scheme outlined in the memorandum.
The substance of that document, with certain inaccuracies of detail, had meanwhile
found its way into the press and been received in Egypt with expressions of approval.
About the same time publicity was given in that country to a long manifesto
from Zaghlul Pasha, in which he emphasised the representative character of the
Delegation and the support which it had received from the nation. He referred to
the endeavours made by the Delegation to submit the Egyptian case to the Peace
Conference and to the world at large, claiming that a considerable amount of
sympathy had been gained in foreign countries. He went on to speak of the appoint