On Monday, Sir Charles Dilke raised an important debate upon
Egypt. In a speech full of detailed knowledge, he main- tained that both parties in Great Britain were pledged to the lips to evacuate Egypt when the time arrived, and that the time had arrived, the new Khedive being a man of will and a strong Mahommedan, whom we might, if we did not depart, be com- pelled to dethrone. He would therefore call Europe together for consultation. All through his speech, moreover, ran the thought that we had much better voluntarily come to terms with France about Egypt, if not about other things. Mr. Gladstone, in reply, fully admitted our engagements, and that we might with perfect honour call Europe together, explain the "unmeasured benefits" we had conferred on Egypt, and ask that she should be still kept in tutelage, if not for ever, still for an indefinite time. He denied, however, that France "quid any special title to intervene in the matter." Her Majesty's Government were willing to retire when they had assured themselves of "permanent peace and the security of Egypt ;" but in presence of recent events, and after the loss of the late Khedive, they could not at present feel fully assured. He must decline to be pressed into any further statement. This is a statesmanlike decision, and is rightly interpreted in France and in Europe as a declaration that the policy of Great Britain, in regard to the Nile Valley, is continuous ; and that we shall not retire until the main object, the permanent peace and security of the country—that is, security from foreign invasion—has been effectually secured.
Previous page
