Chapter XXVI: Appendix: C (1)

AUTHOR’S CORRESPONDENCE WITH DOWNING STREET

THE EARL OF DUFFERIN TO MR. BLUNT

_Private._

Cairo, 16 _December_ ’82.

MY DEAR BLUNT,

Many thanks for your letter of December 8th, and especially for having sent me the pamphlet, of which I had heard, and which I have studied with the attention it seems to deserve.

I am quite alive to the importance of the question you refer to of the indebtedness of the peasantry. It is one of those evils which meet us both in India and in Ireland, and you may depend upon my doing my best to discover a remedy if any such there be.

We have induced the Government to let out of prison at once, something like 450 of those who have been shut up in jail.

Yours sincerely,
DUFFERIN.

MR. BLUNT TO THE EARL OF DUFFERIN

_January 23rd_, 1883.

MY DEAR LORD DUFFERIN,

I have delayed thanking you for your letter of the 16th December informing me of the release of 450 of the political prisoners, until I had seen Napier and learned from him a little more clearly than I could by letter what were the terms of agreement come to with regard to them when the trial was compromised. I had understood from Broadley that the terms would include an amnesty, and I had hoped it would have been a general one, and that the whole of the unfortunate people detained in the prisons on charges rising out of the “rebellion” would have been set free. Now, however, it seems that, though an amnesty has been decreed, many exceptions to it have been made, that while some have been released, others are being arrested, and that the Courts are still trying and executing men on criminal charges connected with the events of June and July. I trust that the interest I take in opposing this particular form of injustice will excuse me with you if I say a few words on the matter. The world, it is true, is full of injustice which we cannot remedy, but here the remedy would seem within our hands, and the injustice is one for which every Englishman who knows the facts is responsible.

First, as regards the exceptions made to the amnesty, it would seem most unfair that the leaders of the “rebellion” having foregone their right of being publicly defended, any of their followers or associates should be punished for rebellion. Arabi’s defence included the defence of every man in Egypt, and with the commutation of his sentence every other sentence should have been commuted. The two strongest cases I have heard of, of persons excepted from the amnesty, are Akkad’s and Awwam’s, men charged with no crime, but who have nevertheless been exiled, the one to Massowah and the other to the White Nile, punishments which Malet has, I think, explained in his despatches to be equivalent to death. These two cases I also recommend to your special attention from the fact that the sufferers are men whose quarrel was originally with English, not Egyptian, officials, and whose exception from the amnesty has consequently a rather compromising appearance for them. Akkad’s original offence lay in his having protested in 1879 against Rivers Wilson’s confiscation of the Moukabalah claims, a thing he was perfectly justified in doing, which, moreover, he had been invited to do by a notice published by Wilson in the papers. For this he was sent by Riaz on a false charge to the White Nile; the details, Napier tells me, he has laid already before you.

Awwam’s case is still stronger, and it affects Colvin. Awwam was an employé under Colvin on the Cadastral survey, and was dismissed for having drawn up a report showing the incapacity of the officers conducting the survey and their waste of public money—all which is now admitted. The wrong done him made a martyr of him with the Nationalists, and when Arabi came into office in February he was appointed his secretary. For this, and presumably at Colvin’s suggestion, he was arrested by the English authorities on their landing at Alexandria in July, and put in irons. He then wrote a letter to the Khedive demanding to know the reason of his arrest, and was transferred, still in irons, to the Borgho prison, where Ninet saw him seventy-four days afterwards. Then, when the disclosures relating to that prison began to be made, Awwam would seem to have been sent without trial to Khartoum, and is probably there at the present moment. These are strong cases, but I have little doubt there are many others quite as strong.

Secondly. It is surely a mockery to decree an amnesty affecting only persons who happen to be actually in prison, and omitting from its operation both men already dealt with and men to be dealt with in the future on charges connected with the past. From all I hear the reign of terror has not been diminished in the provinces by the decree—whatever may be the case at Cairo—the prisons are still full and men are being arrested daily.

Lastly. I cannot understand how it can be the wish of our Government to make scapegoats of the rank and file of those charged with the criminal acts of June and July while the chief offenders enjoy immunity. If one thing has been proved to the satisfaction of the Government more than another, it is that Omar Lutfi was responsible for the murderous character of the riots of the 11th of June. Yet we read still of executions at Alexandria for crimes committed on that day by others, the chief culprit himself being the while at large, in honour, and holding high office under the Khedive. I say nothing of the Khedive himself, though you doubtless know how little his conduct on that day would have borne investigation.

Having thus discharged my conscience of what I consider a duty, let me now allude to the other part of your letter, that relating to the debts of the fellahin. It was the scheme of Arabi and the Nationalists last February to solve the difficulty by making it illegal to lend money on mortgage of land except with the consent of an officer to be appointed for the purpose in the chief town of each district, and then only to an amount small in proportion to land value. Thus the only borrowers would have been persons able and intending to repay. I quite understand that such a regulation might have checked the flow of capital into the country and in consequence have reduced the public revenue, but the object of the Nationalists was to prevent at all costs the passing of the land into the hands of strangers; and I repeat that this _must_ be prevented if there is to be a cessation of the popular discontent in Egypt. This seems to me a far more vital matter than the form of government of the country, or even the reform of the administration. But probably it can only be effected by a reduction of the revenue, and consequently of the rate of interest on the debt. The Nationalists also intended to form a National Bank to make the required advances. But I feel that very likely it is useless my saying anything on this head, for I fear the Government at home has no serious desire to effect anything but a makeshift arrangement agreeable to the European public, and strong enough to last their time. I wish you could have seen Mohammed Abdu or some others of the Nationalist leaders before they left Egypt. They would have told you in an hour more than you could learn from all the English officials at Cairo in a fortnight. Nevertheless I beg you to believe that I still look confidently for a solution compatible with Egyptian aspirations at your hands, and I remain yours truly,

WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

THE EARL OF DUFFERIN TO MR. BLUNT

_Private and Confidential._

Cairo, _12th Feb._ ’83.

MY DEAR BLUNT,

I hasten to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 23rd of January. It must have been delayed en route.

You are really under a wrong impression as to what is going on here, as you will see by the enclosed memorandum from Sir Charles Wilson, to whom I referred your letter.

As for el Accad, he is quite unworthy of the interest you take in him. His complicity with Arabi is beyond doubt, and he misappropriated some funds which Halim Pasha entrusted to him for the purpose of bribing Arabi to support his, Halim’s, candidature.

I have sent home a report on the reorganization of Egypt, from which you will see that I am doing what I can to promote the establishment of just principles of Government in this country.

Believe me, my dear Blunt, yours sincerely,
DUFFERIN.

P.S.—I need not remind you that there is no man who has done more to prevent this Government from exercising undue severity in the case of the rebels than Sir Charles Wilson.

MR. BLUNT TO MR. HAMILTON

10, James Street, _January_ 16, 1883.

MY DEAR EDDY,

I think you will admit that the despatches published to-day, taken in connection with Colvin’s reappointment as Controller in Egypt, absolve me from any duty of reticence I may have had toward Mr. Gladstone on the events of the past year. In spite of all that has been said and promised and avowed, annexation stares us in the face as unmistakably as if the word had been written. I am sorry, more than for Egypt, that it should have come to this.

Yours affec.,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

MR. HAMILTON TO MR. BLUNT

_Private._

10, Downing Street, _12th March_ ’83.

MY DEAR WILFRID,

As Campbell Bannerman has to answer a question this afternoon founded on your letter which will (I understand) amount to what he could tell you, were he to see you, perhaps an interview would be of little good. He tells me that every piece of fresh information they get at the Admiralty (_e.g._ from Lord Alcester) fully confirms his account in the House of Commons; and therefore it seems to resolve itself into a question of the known intentions of the authorities in Egypt as well as of the Government at home against what Gill and Palmer _fancied_ their mission to have been.

I apologize for having perhaps expressed myself too strongly yesterday. But the Government have nothing in the world to conceal; and the organisers of the Expedition surely ought to know better the objects of it than the unfortunate men charged with the mission.

Yours as always affec.,
E. W. HAMILTON.

MR. BLUNT TO MR. EDWARD HAMILTON

Paris, _Sep._ 14, 1883.

DEAR EDDY,

When I saw you on Wednesday I told you that I had thought of taking Sabunji with me, but had given up the idea. Since then, however, I have heard that the man I counted on to help me in Egypt is no longer there, and I have consequently determined to take Sabunji. The fact is I should be very helpless without him, and if it should so happen that I could be of any good it would be as well to have him at hand.

I shall leave him at Port Said or Suez till I have seen Baring, and as I told you, I have no intention of doing anything without Baring’s countenance. If Baring will not listen to anything I have to propose I shall not waste any time in Egypt, but shall go on to Ceylon and India. I shall caution Sabunji to get into no mischief, and he has always acted as far as I am aware squarely in his service with me. We start to-night for Marseilles, and so farewell. I will write to you from Egypt.

Yours affec.,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

MR. BLUNT TO MR. HAMILTON

Cairo, _September 28th_, 1883.

MY DEAR EDDY,

I promised to write to you, and I will keep my promise, but you must not expect me to say anything pleasant or flattering. I found Baring extremely amiable and willing to listen to all I had to say, and I believe he told me his own views frankly. Our ideas on many of the reforms wanted in Egypt were the same. His scheme for relieving the debts of the peasantry seemed a sound one—and he struck me generally as being a man of sympathy and courage. But when I have said this I have said all. On the main point of giving Egypt back her liberty we are worlds apart. He neither wishes it, nor has the least idea of attempting it. “What Egypt wants,” he told me, “is peace and order, not another revolution; we have restored the Khedive and the Circassians to power, and I shall do my best to keep them there.”

With regard to Dufferin’s famous Charter I find neither he nor any one else look upon it as in the least serious or in the least important—and they are right. The elections are not serious, nor were ever intended to be by those who drafted the Charter. The electoral lists are drawn up by the Government, the voting takes place under the eye of the Governor and in the Prefecture of Police—and in most instances the Governor or the Prefect of Police are the candidates chosen. It could not have been otherwise. The Circassians have been encouraged to re-establish their rule by a reign of terror. There is no protection of any kind against arbitrary arrest, arbitrary confiscation of property, and imprisonment without trial. The prisons in the country districts are still full of untried men. There is no liberty of speech, or of the press—and at Alexandria they began the elections by hanging two more men charged with instigating the riots of last year. How should any one but the Prefect of Police be chosen? Mr. Gladstone, who knows everything, doubtless knows that in India, where the people have been crushed for ages, they worship Siva the god of destruction. Here they worship the Prefect of Police. Yet less than two years ago there were both freedom of speech and of the press, elections fairly representative, and the beginning of a real Constitution. It may have been necessary for Imperial or international reasons to destroy this and to revert to a system of “peace and order” as Baring calls it, but it cannot be necessary to talk of having given the Egyptians liberty!

Baring himself is too honest to pretend that his system is anything but “Egypt for the Turks.” But he fancies he can manage Tewfik and the half dozen men who form his party, and give Egypt a mitigated and not altogether inhuman despotism. If he succeeds in this he will have accomplished something, but I cannot believe that he will at all succeed. Tewfik and Sherif have no following in this country beyond the palace walls, and, even supposing them to be the absolutely supple tools Baring believes them to be, they have no kind of moral influence and very little energy. The minor English officials tell me they are unable to redress the least wrong or introduce the simplest reform in the departments in which they serve; and that Baring and Maxwell should be able, through the weak medium of Tewfik, and Sherif, and Fakri, to do more than obtain a shadow of justice and compassion for the people I cannot understand. You know how different this is from my own idea of reforming the people through men of their own race whom they respect, and are ready to work with, and you may imagine my disappointment at getting from Baring nothing better than poor Malet’s stale idea of Egypt for the Turks.

I spoke to Sir Benson Maxwell, who is a really good man, about getting some kind of protection for the people from arbitrary arrest, and he has promised to do so. But he is going away on leave and nothing will be even begun before Christmas. On the whole it seems to me that no fate could possibly have been devised for Egypt more sad or more hopeless than what I see before me, and it would have been far more merciful to have put the Egyptians at once out of their misery by annexing their country last year than to play at giving them “_native_ rule,” under conditions which through much suffering will lead to exactly the same result a year or two years hence. I consequently leave Egypt a sadder and a wiser man than I came. I shall publish my poem—and make my protest and set out “to-morrow for fresh fields and pastures new.”

Yours, etc.,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

PS.—I wonder whether Mr. Gladstone knows that there are still twelve Bedouins in prison at Suez arrested for the Palmer murder and untried. Among them a woman and two or three children kept as hostages!!

MR. BLUNT TO SIR EVELYN BARING

Cairo, _Oct._ 1, 1883.

MY DEAR SIR EVELYN,

I have received a letter from Abd el Razak Bey, F.R.G.S., ex-director of the Naval College, who with some four others has been in prison here for the last three months on a charge originally of connection with a political plot. He was, however, ordered to be dismissed by the Commission appointed to inquire into the matter, but was nevertheless retained by Osman Pasha Ghaleb through superior orders “on suspicion,” and is still in the Zaptieh prison. He now asks me to come and see him, and as I am leaving Cairo to-morrow I shall be much obliged to you if you can kindly obtain me an order to enter the prison.

Since seeing you on Wednesday I have had opportunities of ascertaining the feelings of the people here, and I am convinced that unless something is speedily done to relieve their sufferings you will have trouble.

I am, dear Sir Evelyn, yours truly,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

SIR EVELYN BARING TO MR. BLUNT

Cairo, _Oct._ 1, 1883.

DEAR MR. BLUNT,

I regret that I am unable to accede to the request contained in your letter. The decision as to permission being given to prisoners to receive visits lies entirely within the competence of the Egyptian Government. I must decline to interfere in the manner in which they exercise their discretion in dealing with the subject.

Very truly yours,
E. BARING.

MR. BLUNT TO SIR EVELYN BARING

_Private._

Suez, _October 3rd_, 1883.

MY DEAR SIR EVELYN,

Your note by some accident was posted by your cavass instead of being sent by hand, and so did not reach me till just as I was leaving Cairo yesterday morning, and I think it is right you should know that receiving no answer I had already gone to the prison, and seen Abd el Razak Bey and the others. I found them comfortably lodged and in good health, with the exception of Mustapha Bey Sidki, who seemed seriously ill, and I received from them all the same account, that their release had been ordered by the Commission (which included two of the Belgians who came here as judges) more than three months ago, since which time no further inquiries had been made into their case. Abd el Razak had written to the Khedive, but without reply, and they believe themselves to be detained by the order of Osman Pasha Ghaleb. No English inspector had been to see them, and no inquiry had been made into their case. Now, however, that I have got your letter I fear that, should my visit become known to the Prefect of Police, or the fact that they wrote to me, the prisoners might be made to suffer from their and my imprudence. They believe themselves likely to be sent without further trial to the Soudan, and, as so many have suffered that fate during the past year, I trust that you will give them your protection. They were arrested on a charge which would seem to have been false, for their release was ordered by the court which examined it, and in any other country in the world they would be now at liberty.

As far as I can learn, Lord Dufferin interfered with these matters as long as he was here, for he had promised a political amnesty at the time of Arabi’s trial, but after his departure arrests were again made, and I understand on very high authority that there are at the present moment several thousand untried prisoners in the various towns of the Delta and Upper Egypt. I can speak from experience of the terror in which respectable people, in no way connected with the army, but known to have sympathized with the Liberal party, are now living in Cairo, and, as I said before, the excessive tyranny of the police and the Mudirs is goading men to new disquiet. Trusting that you will forgive me for not having waited for your answer, and that as far as the prisoners are concerned the fact of their having written to me and of my having seen them may be kept a secret, I remain, dear Sir Evelyn,

Yours very truly,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

MR. BLUNT TO MR. HAMILTON

Suez, _October 3rd_, 1883.

MY DEAR EDDY,

You will have perceived that when I wrote the other day I was very angry, and I think that I had cause. But that is no reason why I should not write again. When I saw Baring I had not had any conversation with my own political friends, and I could not guess the condition of affairs. Now I have seen and talked to a great number of them, and I can speak with certainty as to their feelings and, I believe, with equal certainty as to the general feeling of the country.

The first and only obstacle that I see to a peaceable settlement of the country is the present Khedive. It is absolutely impossible he should remain, unless it is intended to occupy the country permanently with our troops—and I doubt if even that would altogether protect him. I have asked people of every class about him and I have not found one that did not despise him. The Circassians and the rest of the fanatical class look upon him as a traitor to his religion, and the liberals as a traitor to his country. You know that till the bombardment I supported him with the National party as against Halim or Ismaïl or other pretenders, but I am certain that no reconciliation is possible. You do not believe in his culpability in the matter of the riots of June, but all the Egyptians here do, and within the last three days I have had very important evidence on that head offered me. Now, I don’t wish to make too much of this—it was a stroke of party politics. But what the Nationalists will never forgive is that he has had innocent men as well as men who acted at his instigation hanged for these very acts. I have now the evidence of two men of the highest respectability, one of whom is Ahmed Bey Minshawi, the Sheykh who is so honourably mentioned in the Blue Books as having saved the lives of several hundred Christians at Tantah, to the effect that the riots there were equally the work of the Khedive’s friends, and that Yusuf Abu Diab, who was hanged for the affair, was not only innocent but did his best to save lives. Innocent men have everywhere been arrested and imprisoned on charges connected with these things to gratify the spite of the Khedive and his few partisans. You will say perhaps that these tales are not true, but they are certainly believed in—and in the belief lies all the difficulty of reconciliation. For myself I believe so strongly in the Khedive’s treachery that I would certainly not advise Arabi to return to Egypt, were the option given him, under Tewfik’s rule.

The Circassians of course do not quarrel with him on this account (for they look on the fellahin as their proper scapegoats), but for his conduct during the war and his feebleness of character. As you know, they are very few in numbers in the country, only a few thousand, and they say they want a _man_ not a woman to protect them against Europe and against another rising of the fellahin. I believe there is a strong party among them for Ismaïl Pasha, a few for Husseyn on account of his extreme bigotry, and a few for Hassan, his brother. Among the more liberal-minded Halim is a favourite, as he is among many of the Egyptians through Abu Nadara’s advocacy, though very few people know him. His enemies say he is not a politician and cares only for cats and birds. Nobody will hear at all of Ibrahim on account of his letter to the Duke of Cambridge. The Khedive of course has a party, though he has no friends. This consists first of the Ministers who have come into power through his restoration—though all these cannot be counted on—secondly of Butros Pasha and other rich Copts, and I believe the Coptic money-lenders of the Said. The Patriarch and the mass of the Coptic clergy belong to the “Hesbu el Horiye,” the party of liberty, which now occupies the place of the National party of two years ago. Also, thirdly, of the financiers, bankers, and rich Syrian and Greek merchants of Alexandria. It is, however, safe to say that there is nobody of the Khedive’s party, except the Ministers, who do not support him as a natural stepping-stone to annexation.

The fellahin of the Delta, as far as I can gather, are divided in opinion, those of the remoter districts caring nothing for politics, and having still a traditional respect for Effendina—whoever he may be—the other part believing that Arabi will return. Of this there has grown up within the last few months a very strong belief in Cairo and the towns—and there is no doubt in the world that he is popular in spite of his misfortunes. I have heard people complain of him for his conduct in the war, for his neglect of blocking the Suez Canal, for his praying when he ought to have been fighting, and for his running away at Tel-el- Kebir. But they talk kindly of him and are proud of him as the first _fellah_ who ever held supreme power in Egypt, and I had abundant proofs of their goodwill to myself as his friend. Except the Khedive I see no obstacle to his recall. Sherif might, I believe, work with him again as far as the Nationalists are concerned, and Ismaïl Eyoub certainly could. But Ali Mubarak Pasha, Khairi Pasha, Omar Lutfi Pasha, and Osman Ghaleb, the Prefect of Police, and Sultan Pasha would have to retire from power. I cannot conceive their being any loss—and there are certain Mudirs, too, in the provinces, who have been exceptionally bloodthirsty and tyrannical, whose position would be incompatible with a return of the liberal party to office. I am of opinion that the only prince of the family of Mehemet Ali who could unite parties is Halim. But I think you would do far better to make Arabi himself the chief of the state—Halim after all is a Turk and the people only look to him as the alternative to the present regime.

The more I have seen of the people the more convinced I have become that the present reign of terror cannot continue. If you withdraw the troops without establishing something and somebody that the people like, you must have trouble. The army may be as fond of Sir Evelyn Wood as he is said to think, but that will not prevent them owning the first resolute man who proposes to dethrone the Khedive—he is too unpopular with the people to be popular with the army—and, if the Nationalists are too crushed to turn on him yet awhile, the Circassians certainly will. You will then find yourselves with some really unscrupulous adventurer at the head of a revolution, and you or your successors will annex the country. I am writing in the belief that you do not intend or wish for such a result, but to persist in thrusting Tewfik on the Egyptians is to invite annexation.

I had intended to write this to the “Times,” but I write it instead to you, hoping that you may show it to Mr. Gladstone. I would rather you did not show it to the F. O., for they would only use it to my friends’ disadvantage. The whole thing depends now on Mr. Gladstone. If he insists on restoring liberty to Egypt nothing is easier—but not on the present lines.

Yours affectionately,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

MR. HAMILTON TO MR. BLUNT

Haddo House, Aberdeen,
_21st October_, 1883.

MY DEAR WILFRID,

Your two interesting letters written from Egypt, for which many thanks, have both reached me while I am holiday making in Scotland; but I have taken steps to secure their being seen by Mr. Gladstone. Your account of affairs in Egypt is, to say the least of it, depressing. I won’t make any comments on what you say. I will content myself with being the receptacle of bad news and the conduit pipe of it to headquarters. I will only say that I can’t conceive how it would be possible, without the grossest breach of faith, for the English Government to countenance the ousting of Tewfik, whatever sort of fellow he may be.

Holiday making is neither conducive to letter writing, I find, nor to the catering of news, so I am afraid I shall, as far as being a correspondent is concerned, make a poor return for your budgets. Good luck to you and a pleasant trip to India.

Yours affectionately,
E. W. HAMILTON.

SIR EVELYN BARING TO MR. BLUNT

Cairo, _December_ 31, 1883.

SIR,

I have received a letter from Chérif Pasha informing me that the Egyptian Government intends to forbid your disembarkation in Egypt on your return journey from India—His Excellency adds: “Par courtoisie, et en vue d’empêcher tout incident facheux de se produire dans le cas où il entrerait dans les intentions de Monsieur Blunt de s’arrêter en Egypte, à son retour des Indes, je crois devoir vous demander Monsieur le Ministre, de vouloir bien informer d’avance votre compatriote de cette interdiction.”

In compliance, therefore, with the request of the Egyptian Government, I beg to communicate their decision to you.

I am, Sir, your most obedient humble servant,

E. BARING.

MR. BLUNT TO SIR EVELYN BARING

Delhi, _January_ 26, 1884.

MY DEAR SIR EVELYN,

I have to acknowledge the receipt, under flying seal from Mr. Primrose, of your letter of the 31st December, which reached me yesterday. I confess that the contents surprised me, not merely on account of the nature of the message your letter contained for me from the Khedive’s late Prime Minister, but still more from the fact that you should have transmitted it in an official form without comment, explanation, or expression of disapproval.

That the Government of which Sherif Pasha was the head should have disliked my presence in Egypt I can well understand, for I have been more than once, as you know, instrumental in bringing their abuse of power to official ears; but I am ignorant of having offended against any law which should authorize my exclusion, as the subject of a friendly Power, from Egypt; and still less am I conscious of having done what should forfeit me my right to your diplomatic protection. Indeed, the circumstances of my recent visit to Egypt would seem to entitle me to this last in an especial manner; for you will not have forgotten that I came there last September with special recommendation to you from the highest official quarter, and that my renewed interest in Egyptian politics was authorized by suggestions emanating from the same high source. But for this, I believe I may say with truth that I should not have stopped in Egypt at all on my way eastwards, and most certainly that I should not have encouraged hopes there which the sequel might fail to justify.

With equal truth I can assure you that, had you informed me in a less formal manner that the interests of Egypt would be best served by my not returning to Cairo this spring, I would have willingly consented inasmuch as at the moment of my receiving your letter I had all but abandoned my intention of so doing, partly on account of quarantine difficulties, partly because I recognized in Nubar Pasha’s accession to office an adjournment by our Government of the special hopes which interested me.

Now, however, in face of your official communication, I feel myself obliged to do something towards asserting the right, which is mine as a British subject, of residing where I will abroad under British protection, and especially, because I hold property there, in Egypt. Nubar Pasha is an enlightened man, with whom I have the pleasure of being personally acquainted, and he is not likely of his own motion to renew his predecessor’s threat of excluding me from the country, but I fear I must ask you, as I do most formally ask you, to be good enough to give me your written assurance either that the prohibition forwarded by you has ended with Sherif Pasha’s dismissal, or that you are prepared, should I be so disposed as to wish to land in Egypt, to take all necessary measures to protect me from annoyance. Less than this would be equivalent to my abandoning a right which, as a matter of principle as well as of convenience, I am not prepared to forego.

I will only add that letters from you in this sense will reach me, if addressed to the Rubattino Steamer “China,” at Aden on the 8th of March or at Suez on the 12th, and will prevent further misunderstanding.

I am, my dear Sir Evelyn, yours faithfully,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

_Private._

Bombay, _January_ 30, 1884.

MY DEAR EDDY,

What, in the name of all that is blunder-headed, does Baring mean by sending me _in official form_ and without explanation a threat of the late Sherif Pasha’s that he would prevent my landing in Egypt? You surely explained to him the meaning of my last visit and the encouragement which had been given me (I don’t mean merely through yourself) to make a move in Egyptian politics. Or what is the history of it? Of course I have been obliged to answer, but as yet have done so semi-officially only, and without putting all the dots upon the I’s, and have left him a door of retreat from what you must see is quite a false position. Please don’t let him force me to go any further.

Seriously, would it not be better to work with me frankly at last by telling me exactly what it is you want in Egypt. Unless you really mean annexation, you will need every honest man’s help to get you out of your difficulties, and the day will come when you will not despise mine. It is only two years ago if I remember rightly that you told me Gordon was mad. But you must not drive me too far. I have a serious work to do in the East, a work of which the establishment of good government in Egypt is only a small part, and one way or other, with God’s help, I mean to do it. It is a good work and you could further it greatly in Downing Street if you chose to trust me, but I am sure you cannot hinder it, certainly not by shutting me out of Egypt. I had nearly given up the idea of going back there this spring, for my thoughts were in another direction, when I got Baring’s letter. But I shall most certainly fight the matter out if he insists. Only I beg of you think it carefully over and if possible let Baring be advised to send me a sensible reply.

We leave Bombay on the 1st of March.

Yours affectionately,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

SIR EVELYN BARING TO MR. BLUNT

Cairo, _Feb._ 26, 1884.

DEAR MR. BLUNT,

On receipt of your letter of January 26th I placed myself in communication with Nubar Pasha. I enclose for your information a copy of my letter and of Nubar Pasha’s reply.

You will observe that Nubar Pasha’s views are identical with those entertained by Cherif Pasha.

Very truly yours,
E. BARING.

MR. HAMILTON TO MR. BLUNT

10, Downing Street, 28 _Feb._, 1884.

MY DEAR WILFRID,

Thanks for writing to me. I know nothing whatever of the steps which the Egyptian Government have taken with regard to yourself; and I am certainly not aware that they were taken at the instance of the English Government or of its representative at Cairo.

I am afraid—and my fears are confirmed by what you say in your last letter—that you have considered the fact of your corresponding with the Prime Minister’s Private Secretary on Egyptian matters as an encouragement, however intentionally guarded the correspondence may have been on my side. This may lead to misunderstanding; and I feel bound to consider not so much myself (for that matters little) as my master. Moreover it is difficult for me in writing to show exactly how far I write on my own account—a difficulty which is enhanced by the impossibility of my devoting the time and care necessary for corresponding on important subjects.

Having regard then to these considerations I think it my duty not to attempt to write about such subjects, and that it will be better for you and me if we drop writing to one another on public questions. I daresay I am to blame in this matter, as it has always been an interest and pleasure to me to hear your views which you have the power of expressing so well, and I have been tempted to egg you on. I hope you will not misunderstand what I have said. I don’t think I need have any fear on this account, for I am sure our friendship is strong enough not to be affected by anything I may do from a sense of public and official duty. I have been awfully busy of late, busier than ever. Whenever not wholly absorbed in work, my thoughts have of late been mainly occupied by the long and very serious illness of poor Pembroke. . . . I wish I had time to send more news; but that is not possible.

For the sake of your friends, if not for your own sake, I hope you won’t act in the matter of the order of the Egyptian Government in such a way as to bring yourself into trouble. I hope I have said nothing which will annoy you, and you will make due allowance for the difficulties and delicacy of my position.

Yours affectionately,
E. W. HAMILTON.

MR. HAMILTON TO MR. BLUNT

10, Downing Street, _April_ 4, 1884.

MY DEAR WILFRID,

Welcome back. I am truly glad to hear of your and Lady Anne’s safe return. I shall like of all things to arrange an early meeting, etc. Thanks for taking my remarks in such good grace.

Yours affectionately,
E. W. HAMILTON.

MR. BLUNT TO THE RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE, M.P.

Crabbet Park, _April_ 23, 1884.

MY DEAR SIR,

A few days ago some gentlemen of the many interested in the fate of General Gordon called on me to ask my advice as to the best means of extricating him from the imminent peril in which he lies, and they suggested the formation of a band of volunteers which should endeavour to run the gauntlet of their besiegers and having forced their way to Khartoum should bring him back with them in safety by the same road. The idea seemed to me a generous but wholly impracticable one, and I told them so, frankly adding that much as I should wish to join in any reasonable attempt to save General Gordon’s life, I could not with the principles I hold, be a party to an armed attempt against the Arabs whom I hold to be in the right as I hold General Gordon to be in the wrong. I promised however that should anything in the shape of peaceful negotiation be proposed I would willingly aid them to the full extent of my power.

Since then I have most opportunely received information which leads me to feel certain that if properly approached not only could terms be obtained from the besiegers of Khartoum which should include General Gordon’s safe return with such of his companions as might choose to accompany him, but that a general pacification of the Upper Nile might at the same time and by the same means be effected. In view therefore of the urgency of the situation (for believe me, Sir, it is urgent), I deem it a duty to offer through you my services to H. M.’s Government as mediator in this matter. I say to H. M. Government, because it is clear that no merely private negotiations could be effectual in a case where such large public interests are involved. But I do not apprehend that any absolute departure from the general principles of policy announced by the Government would be required in conducting them to a successful termination.

With regard to my own part in the matter I will only add that, although I believe it would not be necessary for me to go myself to the Soudan, I should be ready to do so if the circumstances of the case should absolutely require it.

I am, my dear Sir, yours faithfully,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

MR. HAMILTON TO MR. BLUNT

_Private._

10, Downing Street, Whitehall.
_24th April_, 1884.

MY DEAR WILFRID,

Mr. Gladstone is obliged for your letter. He must to-day confine himself to saying that he is communicating its contents to his colleagues in the Cabinet.

Yours,
E. W. HAMILTON.

_Private._

Same date.

MY DEAR WILFRID,

I add a private line. Considering all that has gone before, I can’t help thinking you would do well to approach the Government by other means than those in Downing Street. Could you not take Harry Brand into confidence with a view to your viewings sifting through him to Lord Hartington?

Yours aff.
E. W. H.

MR. BLUNT TO MR. HAMILTON

10, James Street, Buckingham Gate,
_April_ 24, 1884. 7 o’clock p.m.

MY DEAR EDDY,

If it was a matter concerning my own wishes or one of small importance I would willingly consult Harry Brand, who would do all he could I know to serve me. But this is the most serious step I have taken in my life and one which involves consequences not to me only but to this country and to many besides, and I dare not treat it except with those wholly responsible. If Mr. Gladstone cannot see me now, perhaps he may be willing to do so later. I was in the House this afternoon and listened attentively to his declarations, and I gathered from them that he has not yet closed the door to negotiations by any absolute decision of an immediately warlike nature. So that I will wait his time, confident that if I can be of use he will not scruple, on a point of formality in connection with past events, to give me timely notice. Only I fear that perhaps the time given us all may be shorter than he thinks, for already according to my latest advices the tribes are gathering from every side in arms, and though I still think it not too late it may well be so soon. I shall be in London till Saturday when I go back to Crabbet but shall be always within reach if required.

Yours affectionately,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

MR. HORACE SEYMOUR TO MR. BLUNT

10, Downing Street, 30 _April_ 1884.

MY DEAR BLUNT,

Mr. Gladstone desires me to thank you for your offer to act as mediator in the Soudan, of which, however, Her Majesty’s Government are not able to make use, inasmuch as it must already be known throughout that region that they, in common with the Government of Egypt, have no other desire than to promote the evacuation of the country and the restoration of its liberties.

Believe me, yours truly,
HORACE SEYMOUR.

SIR PHILIP CURRIE TO MR. BLUNT

Foreign Office, _May_ 17, 1884.

SIR,

I am directed by Earl Granville to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 1st instant in which you complain of the refusal of the Egyptian Government to allow you to land in Egypt on your return from India, which refusal was communicated to you through Her Majesty’s Agent and Consul-General at Cairo.

I am to inform you that the decision not to permit you to visit Egypt is one with which Her Majesty’s Government are not prepared to interfere.

I am, Sir, your most obedient humble servant,
PHILIP W. CURRIE.

MR. HAMILTON TO MR. BLUNT

_Private._

10, Downing Street, _21st May_ 1884.

MY DEAR WILFRID,

Rumours have reached me that you are about to found your complaint against the Government for being excluded from Egypt partly on the ground of certain “interviews” which you had with me last autumn.

I feel bound to notice these rumours by writing you a line; but I may say at the outset, knowing you as I do, that I wholly and entirely discredit them for more than one reason.

In the first place, I unfortunately saw so little of you before you left England that I know we had no “interviews” with the solitary exception of your coming to say good-bye to me, when I recollect that our conversation was limited to wishing you “bon voyage,” adding as I believe I did that letters from you abroad would continue to interest me as they always had.

In the second place, I studiously avoid ever attempting to quote Mr. Gladstone’s views—(and his views alone have weight)—which I have no title whatever to represent.

In the third place, had I committed any indiscretions—as to which my conscience is absolutely clear—any use of them by yourself could only have one result; and that would be, to show that I was quite unfit for my present post of confidence. Of doing this I am sure you have not the smallest intention.

You will I know excuse my bothering you on this matter. All that I want is the shortest authority from yourself to deny the truth of the rumours. For this purpose only do I ask for such an assurance, and not for my own satisfaction, because I am convinced that you would be the last person in the world to take at a disadvantage one of your oldest and sincerest friends, who occupies a place of great trust and delicacy.

Yours affectionately,
E. W. HAMILTON.

I hope if fortune favours me to see you again soon.

MR. BLUNT TO MR. HAMILTON

Crabbet Park, _May_ 22 1884.

MY DEAR EDDY,

I have no wish to make a scandal of this or any other matter, unless absolutely forced into it, and still less to do you an injury; and so I have decided, before going further, to lay the whole facts privately before Mr. Gladstone. He will then be able to decide whether I have or have not cause to complain. You may rely upon me to be scrupulous in not exaggerating anything that passed between us, but I have a memorandum of the circumstances written at the time, imperfect indeed but sufficient to prove to me, if I had any doubt of the accuracy of my recollection, that our conversation in Downing Street the day I saw you there before I went abroad was by no means limited, as you suppose, to “wishing me bon voyage.” I do not however rely wholly upon this for what I have all along asserted, namely that I was encouraged to stop in Egypt on my way Eastwards. Unless I was altogether deceived by another person, whom you probably know, Mr. Gladstone was at that time desirous of a reasonable excuse for restoring the Exiled Nationalists, and I went to Egypt and called on Baring distinctly under this impression. You will say that I have been the subject of a mystification, but I find this very difficult to believe, and at any rate the doubt should be cleared up. I repeat, I have no wish to have it done in public, if I can have it done in private. I do not wish to make a scandal. I look upon Mr. Gladstone as in reality a friend to most of my ideas, and I would far rather not be driven into a position of antagonism to him. But the withdrawal of my right of protection in Egypt is a violent proceeding and one that I cannot accept without protest. The notice was served on me formally, publicly and I may say brutally, and Lord Granville has refused me even a reason. This is not fair, and my only resource is to force an answer through Parliament, when the whole matter will be sifted. I have fortunately made it a rule to have no political secrets as regards my own acts, and so am prepared to argue it out. But I quite understand that others are not in my free position; and, if you can assure me that Mr. Gladstone will give the matter his serious private attention and not merely put me off with an official reply I will write to him on the subject. With regard to my really going to Egypt I have no wish in the present position of affairs to do so. I could do no good there politically nor could I even if I wished it make matters worse; and I am far from well and want rest and not a new campaign. But my right to protection is a matter of principle and I have certain real, if not very large, material interests in Egypt which I may at any time require to see to. Indeed Baring’s action in withdrawing his protection and preventing my landing has already cost me perhaps a couple of hundred pounds. This is exactly how things stand, and I await your answer, before taking further steps.

Yours ever,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

MR. HAMILTON TO MR. BLUNT

_Private._

10, Downing Street, _24th May_ 1884.

MY DEAR WILFRID,

Thanks for your letter.

I am very sorry that your recollection of what took place last autumn should be so entirely at variance with my own recollection of it. But I cannot conceive that any private conversation between friends, whatever complexion you may put upon it, can be construed into what you call “a scandal”; and I recognize the kindness of your desire not to cause me bother.

Mr. Gladstone never fails to give his personal attention to every communication made to him; so I need hardly assure you that a statement coming from you will be fully considered by him.

I am very sorry to be the cause of adding at all to your labours, etc.

Yours as always,
E. W. H.

MR. BLUNT TO THE RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE, M.P.

Crabbet Park, _May_ 31, 1884.

MY DEAR SIR,

The privilege you have, at various times during the last three years, accorded me of addressing you on public matters must be my excuse if I now appeal to you on a matter mainly personal, namely my recent exclusion from Egypt on my return from India, and the still more recent refusal of H. M.’s Government to afford me protection there invariably given to British subjects. The circumstances of my case are briefly as follows: