Chapter XXIX: Appendix: E

ARABI’S PROGRAMME OF 1883 AND MOHAMMED ABDU’S VIEWS

I. MR. BLUNT’S LETTER REPRINTED FROM THE “TIMES” OF 13TH DECEMBER 1883

Colombo, _5th Nov._, 1883.

SIR,

I am sure the “Times” has many readers who will be interested to receive an account from an authentic source of the manner of life and present views of Arabi Pasha and his fellow exiles in the place of residence which nearly a year ago was assigned to them by the British Government.

I have been staying with them now for over three weeks, as their guest, and am therefore able to speak with some authority as to their ideas; and I think the time has come when these may be of service to the public, and, if I may be allowed to suggest it, perhaps even to those all-wise authorities who are still seeking to regenerate Egypt by putting round men into square holes, and square into round from their official chairs in Downing Street.

With regard to the material welfare of the exiles, I am glad to have an excellent account to give. Although some of them suffered at first from the extreme dampness of the climate, all are now acclimatized; and even Toulba Pasha, who six months ago was pronounced by the doctors to be incurable with asthma, is enjoying perfect health.

They are all, too, I think, contented in mind and grateful for the treatment they receive from the Colonial authorities, which has been throughout most courteous to them; and except for certain inequalities in the amount of their allowances, with which I will not here trouble you, they would have nothing to complain of beyond the unavoidable bitterness which mingles with the bread of all exiles.

The way of life of the exiles is simple. Each family occupies a separate dwelling, and most of them have chosen to reside in a rather remote suburb of Colombo, which has ceased to be fashionable, and where house rent is proportionately low. They send their children to school, attend the local mosques, pay visits to each other or to their neighbours, and attempt, with more or less success, themselves to learn a little English. Their society they find in the numerous Mohammedan community at Colombo, which, unlike such communities in many parts of India, is entirely mercantile, and possesses not a few men of substance, whose commercial establishments the more practical of the exiles hope that some day their sons will enter, and thus be enabled to earn an independent livelihood.

The Mohammedan community regard their Egyptian guests with feelings of the highest respect, as martyrs to their religion, and especially Arabi, as its late most famous champion; and so strong is this feeling regarding him among the lower class in Colombo that on Fridays, whatever mosque Arabi may choose to attend is sure to be thronged with a special crowd of worshippers. Besides this, however, there are certain English houses where the exiles are well received; and, on the whole, I think I may say that they are as popular as their ignorance of English will allow with the official community and the official residents.

I have naturally had constant conversations with the exiles on political matters, and more especially with Arabi, and have learned from him and unlearned much as to the events of last year. We have spoken, too, not a little of the future, and of the hopes which the national leader still cherishes of being one day recalled to Egypt, there to work out to its accomplishment the plan of reform he had conceived, and which I firmly believe that he alone possesses the genius to realize. For, whatever may have been his faults and failings (and they were doubtless great and many in his conduct both of the political and of the military campaigns of last year), I have been more than ever impressed during my present visit with the reality of Arabi’s claim to be considered a patriot and a man of genius. By a man of genius I understand one who is capable of large and new ideas, who has the passion to impress these strongly upon others, and who above all possesses the courage and persistence required to work them to their end. These qualities Arabi certainly has, and I know of no other Egyptian of whom anything corresponding can be said.

His view of the present situation in Egypt is worth quoting:

“The English Government is attempting,” he says, “an impossible task. They wish to make Tewfik popular and they wish to introduce reforms. But Tewfik will only remain popular as long as he is supported by the English troops; and when these are withdrawn he will fall. Personally, Tewfik is without a friend in Egypt. The Egyptians hate him for having betrayed his country, and the Circassians despise him for having betrayed his religion. The better friend he is to the English the less chance he has of conciliating his countrymen. In one way or other he will disappear. Then it will be for the Powers finally to decide what it is they really intend for Egypt. If they mean to annex it, one or other of them will do so at the cost of a new revolt. If not, they must allow the Egyptians to choose their ruler and to work out their freedom for themselves.”

The choice of a ruler should be made, Arabi thinks, by the Notables. The fellahin are not sufficiently instructed yet for a plebiscite. But the Sheikhs of the villages with the Notables of the towns would form a reasonable elective body. They would choose whom they would, a Mohammedan, a man of mark, Arabi hopes an Egyptian. But before investing him with power they would bind him by some Constitutional form which should prevent the recurrence of mere arbitrary rule, the rule which has ruined Egypt. Lord Dufferin’s charter, Arabi considers, is insufficient for that purpose. It is a make believe, too weak to restrain the abuse of power, and liable through its weakness to become itself an instrument in the hands of despotism. Egypt, however, under a leader elected by the Notables, would find Notables capable of asserting and maintaining their rights; and a Constitutional Chamber would form itself without the need of any more foreign assistance. The Liberal Party, it is true, is now crushed and in hiding; but it would start from the ground with the least encouragement and find life again. Arabi does not at all despair of his countrymen, could the present unnatural regime be replaced by one sanctioned by public approval. The approval of the people is the basis of all stable government; and, whoever the new ruler of Egypt is, he must be made to understand that Egypt is not given him as a property but as a trust. Ismaïl Pasha thought all Egypt was his private garden. Tewfik Pasha is being taught to think that there is no law but what rests on his decree. This must not be in the future; the Prince must obey the law, not make it.

Again, the English Government is trying to introduce reforms, but through what instruments? It has driven away all the real reformers. They are in exile or in prison, or have been fined and otherwise frightened by police persecution to live “underground.” The men who are left are either those who are too timid or too indifferent to join the party of liberty, or else the very men against whom the reformers rose. “How,” asks Arabi, “can the English Government expect to establish justice through the Pashas who served Ismaïl, or liberty for the Egyptians through those very Turks and Circassians who have always hated liberty, and who look upon the Egyptians as their natural servants?”

With regard to finance, Arabi is of opinion that the best chance of permanently saving the solvency of the country lies in a new arrangement with the creditors. He says that the calculations of the Budget in recent years have been made without reference to the periodical recurrence of seasons of scarcity. There have been now five good Niles in succession, and there must come soon a bad one, which will upset the estimates. Also no allowance has been made for the recent great loss of capital by the fellahin, the murrains which have destroyed their oxen, the debts they have incurred, their now universal poverty. Unless the burdens of the fellahin are made very light for them for several years to come, they will never recover their prosperity and the land will become deteriorated and impoverished. Arabi is of opinion that in the interest of the creditors themselves it would therefore be prudent to lower the rate of interest for a fixed number of years, full payment to be resumed only at the end of the term when the country would be able to afford it. He thinks this, with great economy everywhere, is the best means of averting bankruptcy. The private debts of the fellahin should be settled also without delay by an arrangement to be made with the creditors by the Government; and I may say here that while I was recently in Egypt I ascertained from some of the leading money lenders that a composition would probably be accepted by them at from eight to ten millions, the total debts being valued by the same persons at about fifteen millions.

The future of the Suez Canal we have thoroughly discussed together, and it is Arabi’s opinion, as it has long been mine, that the Canal is certain, sooner or later, to be internationalized. Arabi considers that it would be far better for Egypt that she should abandon as soon as possible all sovereign rights over it. The Isthmus of Suez, he says, is not necessary to Egypt, and the connection as long as it exists will form a pretext with Europe for intervention. If ceded to Europe this danger would cease, and Egypt might even claim a money indemnity for the rights yielded and so relieve herself of part of her financial difficulties.

Another important point on which the late national leader has distinct views is the Soudan question. Although he is of opinion that a certain connection will always be necessary between the lower and the upper waters of the Nile, he holds that in the present military and financial position of Egypt it is unwise to attempt the reconquest of all, or perhaps any of the lost provinces. He believes that the movement of the so-called Mahdi is not one merely of fanaticism, or that it is only a revolt of the slave dealers. He thinks that Mohamed Ahmed commands the goodwill of the inhabitants, and that it would be far wiser for the Egyptian Government to come to terms with him than to continue their military operations against him. The Soudan brings nothing into the Cairo treasury, and if Egypt is to enjoy liberty at home she should avoid ideas of conquest abroad. What terms could be made with the Mahdi Arabi has been too long out of Egypt to judge; but from the communications which reached him while in power, he does not believe a friendly arrangement acknowledging Egypt’s suzerainty to be impossible. The suzerainty of the ruler of Egypt the Soudanese would probably be glad to acknowledge, for it would protect them against European aggression.

Lastly, Arabi suggests the following as the most urgent matters requiring reform in his country:

“1. That a settlement should be made by the Government of the existing debts of the peasantry, accompanied with a return to the old laws affecting the mortgaging of land and the recovery of debt so that the peasantry shall be thenceforth protected against usury.

“2. That the mixed tribunals should be abolished.

“3. That there should be a reformed common law in Egypt for all who reside there, placing Europeans and Egyptians on an equal footing in civil and in criminal matters.

“4. That there should be security against arbitrary arrest and imprisonment (habeas corpus).

“5. That the village Sheykhs should be chosen by the villages, not appointed as now by the Mudirs.

“6. That the abuses connected with forced labour should be reformed.

“7. That education should be extended to girls as well as boys in Egypt.

“8. That domestic slavery should be completely abolished.

“9. That the position of officials in public offices should be made independent of ministerial caprice.

“10. That taxes should be made equal to all, foreigners alike with Egyptians.

“11. That a settlement should be made as soon as possible of the Moukabala claims.”

Such are Arabi’s ideas. I believe many of his reforms will be found identical with those contemplated by Sir Evelyn Baring, but I fear their realization will have to wait the advent of a more enlightened policy than any which now prevails at Cairo. As Arabi says, schemes of reform are of value only when in the hands of reformers, and there is no sign as yet in Egypt of any such being employed. Still, common sense will in the long run assert itself over political experiment, and there is an old proverb about the stone which the builders rejected, which may well in the present instance prove itself a true one; and I cannot help thinking that the day will come when the man who first proclaimed Egyptian wrongs will be called upon to right them, and when Arabi, the first fellah who ever gloried in the name “Egyptian,” will be brought back with something more than his old prestige to Egypt.

A rather severe attack of fever, from which I am hardly yet recovered, prevents me from continuing this train of thought. But I hope on a future occasion to renew it, and in the meanwhile I am sure that Arabi’s friends may make themselves happy as to his present lot. He is not yet forty-five years of age, and can well afford to wait a while for the hour of his restoration, and till it comes he could hardly have a pleasanter home or a more secure abode than that which Providence and the humanity of the British public have chosen for him.

I am your obedient servant,
WILFRID SCAWEN BLUNT.

II. INTERVIEW WITH SHEYKH MOHAMMED ABDU, AS PUBLISHED IN THE “PALL MALL
GAZETTE,” AUGUST 17TH, 1884

Sheykh Mohammed Abdu is, we are inclined to believe, the first real Egyptian who has visited this country. We have had among us false Egyptians in plenty—Turks, Circassians, Syrians, Armenians, Jews—all claiming the nationality of the Nile; but a true son of the Ahl el Ful, “the Race of Beans,” never. Sheykh Mohammed Abdu, however, is an undoubted fellah. He wears a blue gown and a white turban, talks neither French nor English nor even Turkish, but only his mother tongue, Arabic, and is without the least varnish of western manners. He is a man of middle height, dark-skinned, black-bearded, and keen-eyed, grave in his general demeanour, but possessed of a pleasant smile, and, when excited, speaking with much modest eloquence and cheerful vigour. His countenance is decidedly an agreeable one, and brimful of intelligence. His father was and is still a peasant of the Delta, cultivating forty acres of land at Mehallet Nasr, and laying no claim to nobility of birth other than that given by countless generations of peasant ownership on the same plot of ground. But the son is far more now than a peasant. Sent twenty years ago as a promising boy to Cairo, he received his education in the ancient religious seminary of El Azhar, and is now one of the most distinguished of its Ulema, or rather was, for, in common with the rest of the Liberal religious party in the university, he is in disgrace with the powers that be, and is now an exile both from it and from Egypt. Although by temperament a moderate man, he joined Arabi and the popular movement before the war, became one of its chief leaders, and was involved in its ruin; and after Tel-el-Kebir he was singled out by his eloquence no less than by his liberalism as a dangerous man, and having narrowly escaped hanging was glad to reach Syria with his head safe upon his shoulders, but condemned to three years’ exile and its attendant penury. Now he is on his first visit to Europe, to see with his own eyes the country which has been the ruin of his own. These particulars our representative, who called two days since on the Sheykh at Mr. Wilfrid Blunt’s house in James Street, learned from his lips, and being acquainted with Arabic he was able to hold with him the following conversation:

_Our Representative_: Without discussing past history, which we all admit to have contained fearful mistakes, what is your opinion of the present state of Egypt and of the policy now to be pursued?

_Sheykh Mohammed Abdu_: Since I have been in England all have asked me the same question. Every Englishman says he wishes Egypt well; but which of your statesmen has tried to prove his declarations? We Egyptians of the Liberal party believed once in English Liberalism and English sympathy; but we believe no longer, for facts are stronger than words. Your liberality we see plainly is only for yourselves, and your sympathy with us is that of the wolf for the lamb which he designs to eat. You have ruined everything that was good in us so that you may have an excuse for keeping possession of our country.

_O. R._: Believe me, this is not true. It may appear to you so; but it is not so. Neither Mr. Gladstone, nor any of the Ministers, wish otherwise than to leave Egypt as soon and as absolutely as possible. No one wishes to annex your country.

_Sheykh_: If so, why not leave it at once? The only thing that the English Government has taught us is to be united in the wish to see you gone. Before the war and during the war we quarrelled with each other. We wished to break down the tyranny of our rulers; we complained of the Turks as foreigners; we wished to improve ourselves politically, and to advance as the nations of Europe have advanced in the path of liberty. Now we know that there are worse evils than despotism, and worse enemies than the Turks. We see in them our brothers in religion, if not in race; and if you would only leave us alone with them we should know how to get on in peace. There is no Mohammedan in Egypt so oppressed as to wish for any more of your help. We ask only one thing of you, and that is that you will leave us at once and for ever.

And Tewfik, do you include him in your forgiveness of the Turks?

_Sheykh_: Tewfik Pasha did us a great wrong in bringing you into our country. He joined the enemies of his religion at the time of the war, and it is impossible he can command our respect. But if he should repent, and especially if he should get rid of you, we might yet forgive him. Only we desire no traitors with Egyptian faces and English hearts.

And the French? Our leaving Egypt now would surely mean that they would occupy your country in our place.

_Sheykh_: We do not think so. The French know that they could not gain our consent to their rule any more than you have gained it for your own. We should resist them, as we have resisted you. We want no foreign rulers from any country, and we know how to make all such rule impossible. The French could not in any case do us more harm than you have done.

And the Mahdi?

_Sheykh_: Mohammed Ahmed is only dangerous to Egypt through your presence there. Were you to leave Egypt he would neither wish to attack us nor would his doing so be any danger. At present he has the sympathy of the masses, because they see in him a deliverer from Christian aggression, and they will join him when he comes to them.

And when will this be?

_Sheykh_: The partisans of Mohammed Ahmed are already in the Saïd (Upper Egypt), but he will only himself advance when Khartoum is taken. Your Government are doing all they can to strengthen him.

How so?

_Sheykh_: By the treaty they have made with the King of Abyssinia. This has made every man a fanatic, for it is written in our traditions, and is known to all, that through the Abyssinians our Holy City, Mecca, will be one day attacked and destroyed. The people everywhere see in this a new danger to their religion. How can your statesmen have made an alliance with this barbarous people? How can they have added this new trouble to the rest?

But were not all the Soudan people fanatics already?

_Sheykh (laughing)_: The Soudani are no more fanatics than I am. When I taught philosophy at Cairo many of the Egyptian students were afraid to come to my lectures; but there were eighty-four students from the Soudan, and every one of them came. When, however, they are threatened with a foreign invasion they become fanatical, just as you would be if a Mohammedan army were in the streets of London.

And has this anything to do with the news of a rising in Arabia?

_Sheykh_: The news is true. We had been expecting it for a long while; and I do not doubt that your treaty with the Abyssinians has hastened it. When they are threatened, the Moslems take up arms. The people of Yemen are not fanatics more than the Soudani; but they love their liberty, as all the Arabs do.

And what ought we to do to allay the storm?

_Sheykh_: Cease to threaten us, and leave our country.

But what would become of the Christians in Egypt were our troops to leave? Would there not be new massacres?

_Sheykh_: There have been no massacres in Egypt except those caused by yourselves. The arrival of your fleet at Alexandria made the riots there begin. The landing of your troops brought on the riots at Tantah. There was no loss of Christian life until you came; nor will there be any when you go away. We have no quarrel with Christians as long as they abide by our laws and do not attempt to interfere with our Government.

There is then, you think, no obstacle to peace and prosperity in Egypt except our presence there? Would you not wish to see the National party restored before we go? Would you not like yourself to return to Egypt?

_Sheykh_: If I believed that your Government had any serious wish for our good I would propose a policy. But what is the use of my wasting words?

Speak, nevertheless. Whatever the Government may mean or wish, there are many in England who would see justice done to Egypt at any cost.

_Sheykh_: If England wanted to repair the wrong she has done us she would, as I have said, give us a first proof of her sincerity by ordering back her troops from Egypt. Next she would agree with the Powers of Europe and his Majesty the Sultan, with regard to a new ruler for us. It is not for me to say who this ruler should be. But whoever may be chosen, he should be some one not distasteful to the people and approved by the Sultan, and he should be named for a term of years, say seven or ten, at the end of which term the people should be allowed to elect their rulers finally for themselves. If he proved an honest man he might then retain office. But if dishonest, the people would have the comfort of thinking that he would not be there for ever, and so would take patience.

But how could we ascertain the wishes of the people? By what form of election?

_Sheykh_: Any new ruler now who should be a Moslem, and should come into office as the deliverer of Egypt from the English troops, would be loved by the Egyptians. Only he must be a Mohammedan, and, if possible, an Egyptian by birth. It is essential, however, that he should be content with limited power. What we want is not a new king, but a chief of our Egyptian nation, acting under the religious sovereignty of the caliphate. This kind of ruler the Egyptians understand, and they do not want a king.

And under such a ruler you and your fellow exiles could return to Egypt? What do you say about Arabi?

_Sheykh_: I should like to see his return. If he holds office Arabi’s place is in the Council, which must always supplement and control the ruler of Egypt. He speaks well. His ideas are noble. He is an honest man. His influence would all be on the side of good. But he is too careless of details to be a good administrator or a good general. Let him return as President, if they choose him, of the Mejliss—that is his place.

And the Ministry? What our Government complains of is that they cannot get a working set of men to rule the country.

_Sheykh_: It is their fault if they have failed. Egypt is not wanting in honourable men, or men of capacity. But you insist on having those who will do your work; and no honest man in Egypt will work for the English Government. Again, you insist that they must rule your way and speak your language. The honest men generally do not speak English. They do not love English ways. Let us have a ruler we like, and we will all join to help him. We all want reform. We all want justice. We all want instruction. But there is an old proverb which says that “if the fish stinks at the head there is no freshness in the tail,” and we want a ruler we can respect. Give us an honest chief for our nation, get him the sanction of our Sovereign the Sultan, and leave us to ourselves. With God’s blessing we will have peace. We will even try to pay our debt.

But do all the Egyptians think as you do? I am inclined to believe that nine out of ten of the fellaheen would sooner have their taxes lessened by a Christian Government than raised by a Mohammedan.

_Sheykh_: Do not delude yourself. The fellaheen are overtaxed, but at the present moment they do not complain of their taxes. They think first of how to deliver their country from the stranger; and, if it were possible, they would willingly pay more to see this end accomplished. I know it, as I have correspondents everywhere in Egypt. You might abolish all taxation, and they would not bless you if at the same time you took it as an excuse to stay. No, no. Leave us now, and we will call on God to reward you as our benefactors. But do not attempt to do us any more good. Your good has done us too much harm already.