The Pall Mall returns with vigour to its assertion that
it is a matter of common morality for England to pay the whole, expense of the Egyptian Expedition, and for this it argues on the ground that, for the most part, all the pleas alleged for the Egyptian Expedition were pleas resting the case for it on our engagements to Egypt, as given in 1879 and since. Well, as a matter of fact, other pleas were alleged, as, for example,. the enormous benefit to our Indian Empire,—so long as we govern it at all,— of a secure highway for the governing class, and for the troops which keep their Government secure, as well as the great benefit to the Indian commerce, which uses the Suez route in the proportion of 88 out of 143. But even adopting the Egyptian promises and engagements of 1879 and subse- quently as the principal reason for the expedition, the fact remains that the Suez-Canal shares were bought, and the inter- vention in Egyptian finance determined on, chiefly, if not exclusively, because our Indian Empire rendered the protection of Egypt against anarchy, and the renovation of her finance, so vastly important for us. Nor can it be pretended that it is not India, but only the British power in India, which gains by prc. tecting the Suez route, unless, indeed, by those who think that India could govern herself at present without our help better than we govern her; and of these there are very few, Mr. Bright. himself having often denied, we believe, that he is one of them. If we had not India to govern, it is certain enough that we should have adopted a policy of non-intervention in Egypt.
Previous page
