• THE STATE OF EGYPT.
rilHOUGH we are most anxious not to take up an unnecessarily alarmist attitude in regard to Egypt, we feel obliged to return to the subject treated by us some three weeks ago. Evidence which we cannot doubt convinces us -that serious harm is beiug done to the cause of good government in Egypt—in other words, to the best interests of 'the Egyptian people—by the foolish and ill-considered agitation which is being conducted by a certain section of British Radicals. The fact that those responsible for this agitation are well meaning, and do not realise the conse- quences of their acts, does not in the least mitigate the evil that is being done. Mr. J. M. Robertson and his friends in England imagine that he is championing a popular cause and standing up for the rights of the people. In reality he is in danger of allowing himself to be made the cat's-paw of a combination of selfish and unscrupulous men whose object is not popular rights or sound administra- tion, but simply and solely to get rid of the good govern- ment established by the British people through the inatrumentality of Lord Cromer and his subordinates, and .substitute for it what we have no hesitation in saying would prove the worst and most immoral form of despotism that the world can show,—that is, not the „ crude despotism of primitive Mohammedanism, but of the 'Oriental who, while losing his own faith and principles, has gained nothing but evil from his intercourse with the West.
No one who knows anything of the facts can doubt that the most ruinous type of ruler, i morally and economically. inflicted upon a Turkish province s the Pasha who, with a veneer of European civilisation, has retained the instincts of primitive savagery. If the sophistries of Mr. Robertson and his friends prevail, and if fer enlightened British rule as it exists in Egypt to-day is substituted seine ridiculous travesty of Parlia- mentary government, it is absolutely certain that the result will 'not be' merely a defective and 'blundering system
of democracy, such as can no doubt be tolerated, and ought to be tolerated, while a people naturally fit for free government are learning to use their freedom, but the most degraded form of Oriental despotism. The people of Egypt, we admit, do not appreciate fully the blessings of English rule, and yearn, no doubt, for the happygo-lucky ways of the former regime. But this discontent with what they regard as the irksome tidiness and method 'of European administration is not enough to make them fit for true self-government. Such self-government they would find far more irksome than British rule. In order to avoid it they would, till the revolution-point of misery had been reached, tolerate a return even to the squalid horrors of the Ismail regime. And, unfortunately for Egypt, it is doubtful whether the revolution-point would be reached before the country had been completely ruined, for by nature the Egyptians are the most timid and submissive of men. Serious insurrection in Egypt against any power, however oppressive, is almost unthinkable. It is true that the revolt of Arabi took place; but that was only because Arabi and his soldiers were unpaid. Had they received their pay, the Egyptian people would never have moved, nor would Arabi have come forward as a patriot. But though the Egyptian is absolutely submissive in the face of tyranny, be is a quick-witted man, and has a positive genius for intrigue. If you can assure him that the strong arm of the law will not be invoked to crush conspiracy, and if he also is inspired with the notion, first, that his existing governors are likely to be worried into abandoning the task of governing, and secondly, that when this is accomplished the sovereign authority will fall into the hands of another set of men of whom he has a natural and traditional dread—that is, the old Pasha or Turkish class—he will be quick to throw himself at the feet of those who he imagines are destined to rule over him in the future, and who he believes it will be to his interest to conciliate. That is what is beginning to happen now. The Egyptian people, though they love platitude and sophistry for their own sakes, and to a certain extent enjoy the rhetoric of discontent, are probably at' heart net very much impressed by the talk about liberty and free government with which their native newspapers are now flooded,—partly under the inspiration of British doctrinaires. They judge from such talk, however, that for some reason or other the British people have got tired of ruling them, and are going to give up the task, and that thereupon sovereignty with all its privileges and powers will return into the hands of the Khedive and his entourage. Accordingly, there is a tidal wave of frothy anti-British and pro-Kiedivial sentiment spreading throughout the Nile Valley, and making its impression felt even in the distant Soudan, where the Army and the minor civilian employes of the Government are being made uneasy by the news that there is to be some great though unexplained alteration in the political situation. That they could not describe in detail what that change is to be is quite immaterial. The Oriental's first impulse when he fears change is to take out an insurance policy against that change by currying favour with those whom he thinks are likely in the end to get the upper hand. There is an Egyptian proverb which declares that when one meets "the bear in the day of his wrath," the wise man feeds him with honey, while the fool smites him on the head with a pole. The bear in his wrath used to stand for the British power, and hence that bear was largely fed with honey. Now, thanks to the notion that Mr. Robertson and his friends control the British Government, and are going to put an end to Lord Cromer's authority, the Khedive and his friends, decked out with some phrases about Parliamentary institutions, are the bear which is to be cajoled and propitiated.
We have so often of late had occasion to criticise the action of the present Government that we must take 'care not to let it be supposed that we are suggesting that either his Majesty's Ministers or the Liberal Party as a whole are responsible for the very grave situation which has arisen in Egypt. We are quite confident that not only Sir Edward Grey, but the Prime Minister and the 'net 'of his colleagues, are perfectly sound. in regard to Egypt and have not the slightest intention of withdrawleg their support from Lord Cromer. Unfortunately, however, the knowledge of this fact possessed .by" the British people is not shared by the Egyptians. The Egyptian has been taught to believe that the present Government are entirely in the hands of men like Mr. Robertson, and that that strange and mysterious body, the House of Commons, has entirely altered its views as to how Egypt is to be ruled. In these circumstances, it is most welcome to find a Liberal Member of Parliament like Sir Christopher Furness making a strong protest against the attempts of Mr. Robertson and those who think with him to ruin the splendid work which we have accomplished in Egypt during the last twenty years. Sir Christopher Furness is a thoroughgoing Liberal, but no better appre- ciation of the situation has yet appeared than that con- tained in his letter to the Times of Saturday last. It is true that Mr. Robertson has shown that certain letters published in a Cairo native paper were not written by him for that paper, but were first published in an English paper and then quoted in the Egyptian journal. This correction does not, however, materially affect the issue. Sir Christopher Furness's error does not alter the fact that Mr. Robertson's words have been used to foment disaffection in Egypt. Sir Christopher deals with the apparent increase of crime in Egypt under British rule which has been much i relied upon as a proof of our mis- government, and tells of his close inspection of the large prison at the Citadel and of its admirable management. We believe that he is perfectly right when he says that this apparent increase in the number of offences is almost entirely due to the improvement of the native Bench and of the native police and to the better detection of crime. In old days, if the criminal did not interfere with public order, touch the property of a wealthy man, or annoy any member of the governing class or their employes, the police and the judicial authorities troubled very little about him, and he therefore as often as not failed to appear before the world as a criminal or to be included in criminal statistics. Now it is as unsafe in Egypt to attack or injure a poor man as a Pasha. We have also no doubt that the splendid prison, almost like an industrial home, of which Sir Christopher Furness writes, has not anything like the deterrent effect of the old Egyptian prison, which was often a place of abominable cruelty. It is one of our minor difficulties in Egypt that detention in a prison unaccompanied by any of the seventies practised by Oriental Govern- ments is hardly disliked by the Egyptian. If he is well fed and well housed, the mere confinement has small terrors for him. Hence be is very little restrained from crime by the thought of a term of imprison- ment.
Before we leave the subject of this article we must make a short reference to the interview with the Khedive by the special correspondent of the Temps, published in Monday's issue of that paper. We are most anxious not to treat the Khedive otherwise thau with the respect and consideration which belong to his position. We feel, how- ever, compelled to note that the assumption of political enlightenment and the dislike of despotism expressed by the Khedive are entirely beside the mark. ' If the full record of the Khedive's action as regards the internal government of Egypt, and of his relations with the Sultan and with foreign Powers, were published, it would, we venture to say, convince the world that were the Khedive to be released from the wholesome influences of British control, the rEgime which would be established would be anything but that dreamt of by Mr. Robertson, but would approximate far more nearly to that of the Sultan of Turkey. We do not wish to impute undue blame to the Khedive in these matters, for no doubt his training, the traditions of his house, and even his religious beliefs, incline him to take a view of his rights and responsibilities which differs very widely from the European standpoint. If, however, the Khedive is to be represented as the exponent of abstract liberty, justice, and democratic feeling as it is understood by the British people, a word of warning and protest is called for. If the British people should ever be asked, after a full review of the facts, to decide whether Lord Cromer's or the Khedive's ideal of government is the better and more liberal, and to declare which, in fact, has proved the truer friend of the Egyptian people, we have not the slightest doubt as to the nature of the verdict.
Previous page
