Saad Zaghlul Pasha: Father of Egyptians - Part 2http://pontosworld

Saad Zaghlul Pasha: Father of Egyptians

http://pontosworld.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=658&Itemid=87Page 1 of 2

This short article documents the early life of Egyptian nationalist leader,Saad Zaghlul Pashawho came from a peasant (fellaheen) background to become Minister of Education (1906-1910), Justice (1910-1912) and was elected Vice President of the new Legislative Assembly (1914) during the time of the British occupation of Egypt during the period 1882-1922. Zaghlul went from being a rebel in 1882 to a prominent Egyptian Judge and Lawyer before entering the world of Egyptian politics. As Minister of Education he instituted a number of reforms that were designed to raise the literacy levels of young Egyptians.

Saad Zaghlul Pasha: "Father of Egyptians"By Stavros T. Stavridis, the author of'The Greek-Turkish War 1919-23

See also:Part 2andPart 3

"Unless I am much mistaken, a career of great usefulness lies before the present Minister of Education, Saad Zaghlul Pasha. He possesses all the qualities necessary to serve his country. He is honest; he is capable; he has the courage of his convictions; he has been abused by many of the less worthy of his own countrymen. These are high qualifications. He should go far."Lord Cromer, British Pro-Consul in Egypt, in 1907 in Ronald Storrs, The Memoirs of Sir Ronald Storrs, Arno Press, New York, 1972, p.52

IntroductionThis short article documents the early life of Egyptian nationalist leader,Saad Zaghlul Pashawho came from a peasant (fellaheen) background to become Minister of Education (1906-1910), Justice (1910-1912) and was elected Vice President of the new Legislative Assembly (1914) during the time of the British occupation of Egypt during the period 1882-1922. Zaghlul went from being a rebel in 1882 to a prominent Egyptian Judge and Lawyer before entering the world of Egyptian politics. As Minister of Education he instituted a number of reforms that were designed to raise the literacy levels of young Egyptians. He did not get along too well with Khedive Abbas Hilmi and British Consul General Lord Kitchener. It is against the latter that he held a personal grudge that started him on the road into becoming anti-British after World War 1.The fiery Zaghlul kept quiet during the First World War thus making it easier for Britain to maintain its control over Egypt.

1. The early years 1870-1906He was born in Ibiana village, Gharbiya province, in the Nile Delta, either in 1857 or 1860 whose father was a prosperous landowning village headman. His family enjoyed prestige and political influence in their local community. Zaghlul was a very bright student who entered Al-Azhar University in 1870. In 1880 he was appointed assistant to Sheik Muhammad Abdu "in editing the official gazette" where he took an active interest in law reform. He took part in the El Arabi rebellion in 1882 and was arrested and incarcerated in Kasr el Nil Barracks. He learnt French whilst serving on the bench and studied at the French law school in Cairo. Zaghlul was appointed a judge to the Native Courts of Appeal in 1892 where he served with distinction.

Zaghlul was also concerned about the plight of poor children and was one among the founders of the Muslim Benevolent Society in 1892. The main purpose of this organization was to set up schools for poor children "which would serve as an experiment in private education" and would "give students a modern education whilst emphasizing a Muslim upbringing." Even at this stage, Zaghlul clearly understood the benefits of education for young Egyptian children.

As a lawyer, he occupied a privileged position in Egyptian society which also opened the door to a political career. Having come to the attention of Princess Nazli, she made it possible for Zaghlul to come to the attention of Egyptian Prime Minister, Mustapha Fehmy Pasha (1885-1908). Zaghlul's marriage to Fehmy's daughter in 1896 paved the way for him to climb the higher echelons of Egyptian society. Such an elevation also came to the attention of the British Pro-Consul, Lord Cromer who immediately saw that Zaghlul possessed the administrative competence to hold a high office. All these political connections led to his appointment as Minister of Education in 1906. The British Consul-General (1882-1907), Lord Cromer cited the main reason for Zaghlul's appointment as Minister for Education "was mainly due to a desire to associate an able man and enlightened Egyptian of this particular section of society with the work of Egyptian reform." It was important from a British point of view to introduce western civilization that would greatly assist Egypt's development into becoming a modern nation.

2. Minister of Education and Justice 1906-1912During his tenure as Education Minister 1906-10, he instituted a number of reforms that were designed to raise literacy levels of young Egyptians. For example the number of schools in the cities and particularly in the villages was increased. The latter showed that the great majority of Egyptians lived in rural communities. Even night school education was expanded. He achieved in having Arabic replace English as the language of instruction in Egyptian schools and also increased the number of Egyptian school inspectors.

Douglas Dunlop, an adviser attached to the Egyptian Education Ministry, tried very hard to stop Arabic as the language of instruction in Egyptian schools but Zaghlul stood his ground and prevailed. When Zaghlul became Minister of Education, he forced Dunlop to come and see him and demanded reading all important documents pertaining to his ministerial portfolio. Obviously Dunlop resented such treatment but acquiesced in the end. He returned to the Education Ministry after Zaghlul's appointment as Minister of Justice in 1910.

A table reproduced below highlights the number of students attending educational institutions run by the Ministry of Education for the years 1906-10.

Type of institution19061907190819091910

In Government Kuttabs (Village Schools)904511014123691336513545

Institutions for training of Kuttabs29392978278827472766

Higher primary schools79188544858583868644

Technical schools and classes7698598198541352

Secondary schools13801910211322432197

Professional colleges9621304151115481599

When examining the data above, it reveals an overall expansion in education under Zaghlul's stewardship. Zaghlul also favored the expansion of primary education for girls. The Ministry of Education also inspected private schools to ensure that they adhered too government regulations. In 1910 the Ministry audited 3664 private Kuttabs (202,095 students), thirteen private higher primary schools (3535), nine trades schools (1412), one training school for nurses and midwives (35) and the Ghizeh Reformatory (715).

Another educational reform introduced by Zaghlul was a training college for Qadis (Judges for Muslim courts) in 1907. Since there were an insufficient number of them, he worked out a scheme with the Chief Ulema (Muslim scholar trained in Islam and Islamic Law). The school had a committee of management "composed of the Sheikh of Al-Azhar as president, the Grand Mufti of Egypt (a jurist who interprets Muslim religious law and who can issue fatwas (legal judgments), the head-master, and two members nominated by the Minister of Education in agreement with the Minister of Justice." It received over 1,000 applications but only 200 students could be accommodated.

Whilst Zaghlul worked tirelessly to expand educational opportunities for his fellow citizens, he also had to operate within a tight financial regime imposed by the British.Lord Cromerand his successors tightly controlled Egyptian finances to ensure that budget surpluses were achieved. According to the 1907 census only 6% of boys and 2% of girls of school age attended elementary or industrial education under the direction or supervision of the Ministry of Education out of a total population of nearly 11,200,000 inhabitants. Taking this figure at face value, it reveals the prevalence of high illiteracy rates amongst young Egyptians. Paying moderate fees at government schools would have acted as a disincentive for many poor Egyptian parents to educate their children. Zaghlul offered a limited number of scholarships to needy secondary students so that they could complete their high school education. The British educated a limited number of Egyptians for middle and lower civil service positions "to prevent the emergence of an indigenous political leadership that might spearhead a nationalist movement."

Another political appointment was when he served as Minister of Justice 1910-12. He came into that position immediately after the assassination of Egyptian Prime Minister, Boutros Ghali Pasha in February 1910. In 1909, Khedive Abbas Hilmi approached Ghali and asked him to raise the renewal of the Suez Canal concession in the General Assembly. Ghali believed that the Khedive should raise this matter with the British Consul General, Sir Elston Gorst. Ismail Abaza who led the opposition in the Assembly met Ghali in October 1909 where the former stated that the Assembly needed to be advised of this development. Gorst concurred that it should be debated in the Assembly. The renewal meant that the concession would be extended for a further forty years from 1968 to 2008. A committee established by the Assembly studied the Suez Canal Concession and presented its findings on March 21, 1910. It found that the General Assembly could not alter the agreement as the financial accounts would show a great loss for Egypt. Obviously financial projections were very difficult to measure so far into an uncertain future. The committee thought that the present generation could materially benefit so long as the revenues collected could be employed for productive purposes. The Assembly, finally, rejected the extension of the Suez concession on April 4, 1910. Originally Zaghlul had rejected the Suez concession but ended up defending it in the Assembly much to the annoyance of the extreme nationalists.

Zaghlul also took the initiative to create the Bar Association in 1912, thus elevating the status of the legal profession. As a former Judge and Minister of Justice, he had the experience, status and high profile to give this new organization the prestige it needed to represent the legal fraternity in Egypt. In 1897 a young Coptic lawyer named Murqus Fahmi (1870-1955) unsuccessfully tried to establish a Bar Association. He sought the assistance of Muhammad Farid, the future leader of the Watani Party, and together they established the Society of Laws. They also drafted a proposal for an official association and presented their plan to the Minister of Justice, Fuad Ibrahim in 1902 who rejected it. The Egyptian government preferred to deal with lawyers individually rather than on a collective basis. Prior to 1893 any individual could enter the legal profession without a law degree but the Egyptian government closed this door. This helped to raise the education qualifications and improve the training of lawyers in Egypt. Zaghlul wasn't interested in assuming the presidency of the Bar Association but preferred to use his experience in the General Assembly. It is here where he could be most effective in applying his vast legal and ministerial experience for the benefit of his country. The Bar Association held its first official meeting in November 1912 to elect a president and a committee.

In 1912 Zaghlul came into direct conflict with Khedive Abbas Hilmi when he complained to the British Consul General,Lord Kitchenerover irregularities that were taking place in the Wafq administration. Zaghlul pointed the figure right at the Khedive. The Khedive asked him to produce the necessary proof to substantiate his claim but failed to do so. Kitchener forced Zaghlul to resign as Justice Minister and latter believed that the former had betrayed him. He, thereafter, held personal grudge against Kitchener.

3. Vice President of the new Legislative Assembly 1914The Egyptian elections were contested under the new organic and electoral laws proclaimed on July 23, 1913. This meant the former Legislative Council and General Assembly was combined into a new Legislative Assembly increasing the membership from 30 to 89 "composed of ... six Ministers, who are ex officio members; of sixty-six members elected in the second degree, by the electors-delegate; and of seventeen members nominated by the Government, thus making a total of eighty-nine members." Under the new system, the election of sixty six members would guarantee the "representation of the population at about the rate of one representative for every 200,000 inhabitants." Furthermore nominated members would provide representation for minorities such as the Christian Copts offering them four seats in the new Legislative Assembly. Others groups such as the Bedouins would have three members, "merchants two; medical men, two; engineers, one; representatives of general or religious education, two; the municipal representatives."However there were some restrictions raising the eligibility age from 30 to 35 years and a "land or house tax" qualification. The aim behind this reform was to make the electoral system more inclusive thus giving Egyptians an opportunity to participate in their domestic political affairs.

During the November-December 1913 election campaign, Zaghlul published his election program giving voters an indication of his political agenda something which was copied by other candidates. In Cairo, Zaghlul received 60% of the total vote giving him "an overwhelming majority over his opponents." An article published in The Times on December 24, 1913 appeared sanguine about the new Egyptian assembly. It mentioned that "the general tone is higher and the prospects are favourable, and if the principal members adhere to their intentions the labours of the Assembly should prove decidedly helpful." The article even asserted that Zaghlul would behave in a dignified manner. On January 22, 1914 the Khedive officially opened the new Legislative Assembly by stating that he hoped members would work for the benefit of the nation and the Assembly and Government would find ways of co-operation and resolve any of their differences in an amicable way. Egypt had an opportunity to move forward with this new Legislative Assembly.

Zaghlul was elected second Vice President in the Assembly by 65 votes. This was the first modern Egyptian election campaign fought "on a platform of greater Egyptianisation of the administration." In one of the early session of the new Legislative Assembly a controversy occurred as to "whether in the absence of the President, a Government nominee or an elected Vice-President should preside over the Assembly." Zaghlul argued that it was more important to set up a Court of Criminal Appeal rather than haggle over the motion of the Vice-Presidency.' A majority of the Assembly thought that the Vice-Presidency was a more pressing issue than the Court of Appeal which made Zaghlul very angry. He "refused to acquiesce and attacked the vote, raising different objections....Saad Zaghlul left the hall, followed by 27 members, amid much uproar, which continued outside. The sitting was suspended till this afternoon."

The Times Cairo correspondent thought Zaghlul's behavior was inappropriate for someone of his political standing and that the new Assembly differed "little from its predecessors and does not yet realize that the first duty of representative institutions is to respect the decision of the majority."Zaghlul was now the undisputed leader of the secularized educated members of the Egyptian Assembly and also began to show his opposition to the British presence in Egypt. As a politician he was poised against the notables and aristocrats who were allied to the Khedival Court. The Assembly was suspended due to the outbreak of the First World War.

4. First World War and retreat into the background.On December 19, 1914, Britain declared Egypt a protectorate with Prince Hussein Kamil proclaimed as Sultan replacing his deposed nephewKhedive Abbas Hilmiwho had cast his lot with the Central Powers: Germany, Austro-Hungary and Ottoman Empire. It must be remembered that before the war, Egypt was part of the Ottoman Empire with the Khedive acting as viceroy for his sovereign in Constantinople. The Capitulations were also suspended for the duration of the war and Sir Arthur Henry McMahon was appointed British High Commissioner.

Zaghlul kept a low profile for most of the conflict. In 1916, Zaghlul sought a ministerial position when McMahon was prepared to offer him the Minister of Wafqs portfolio. However McMahon referred the matter to Lord Kitchener who vetoed it. Zaghlul became more resentful towards Kitchener and British rule in general.

During March 1917, the Egyptian government appointed a commission headed by Sir William Brunyate, a British Judicial and Acting Financial Adviser in Egypt 1916-1919, to eliminate the capitulations. The capitulations granted Europeans economic privileges and allowed foreign consuls to adjudicate legal cases of their nationals in their own consular courts in the Ottoman Empire.However Egyptian Prime Minister, Nubar Pasha created a Mixed Court system in 1876 that allowed foreigners and Egyptians to have their civil and commercial cases settled by European and Egyptian judges. American, British, Italian, Russian, German, French and Austrian judges served on this body. The Mixed Courts in no way undermined the capitulatory system.

Britain desired to combine the capitulatory and mixed court system which angered foreigners, mixed court judges and Egyptians. Many thought that Brunyate was trying to Anglicize the Egyptian legal system and ignoring "the national aspirations of the populace." Harry J.Carman states that "throughout [Egypt] local committees were formed, public meetings held and a campaign waged for "freedom."...there were indications that the people were determined and that the situation was serious." The British government simply ignored the sentiments of the Egyptian population and regarded "the nationalist movement as a shallow affair headed by a small group of discontented politicians." It is interesting that Zaghlul along with "nine of his associates were summoned before the military officials and warned not to take action which might incite disorder or hinder or embarrass the work of authorities." Zaghlul and his followers issued a mild protest regarding this incident.

Towards the middle of 1918, Zaghlul began to think of independence for his country from British rule. An independence movement emerged that was composed of landowners, financiers and "incipient and commercial entrepreneurs" who represented the core element of a native Egyptian national landed and commercial middle class. Zaghlul became the leader of this new movement and founded the Wafd Party that was a well-organized mass political party. He dominated Egyptian in the post-1918 period until his death in August 1927 where he was dubbed "father of Egyptians."

Part 2

Saad Zaghlul Pasha: "Father of Egyptians"PART 2 5. The Egyptian revolution of 1919: the arrest of Zaghlul Pasha PashaSaad Zaghlul along with two associates Abdel Aziz Fahmy Bey (a lawyer) and Ali Sharawi Pasha ( a wealthy landowner) met the British High Commissioner, Sir Reginald Wingate in Cairo on November 13, 1918 advocating Egyptian independence and proposing that an Egyptian delegation led by him should proceed to London to present its case before the British Government. Wingate told Zaghlul that he would pass this information onto London for their consideration. Lord Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary, informed Wingate on November 27 that it would serve no useful purpose for the nationalists to come to London. The British Government denied Zaghlul's request because it had major political, strategic and economic interests in the Suez Canal. Zaghlul was prepared to allow Britain to supervise the public debt and grant them shipping facilities at Suez. Wingate was recalled to London in January 1919 for consultation leaving Egypt in a state of turmoil.[1]

The Egyptian nationalists were dismayed to learn that Emir Feisal was permitted to present Syria's case before the Allied (Great Britain, France, and Italy) and Associated Powers (United States of America) in Paris. This was an affront to the Egyptian nationalists who believed that they as well had a right to attend the Paris Peace conference to argue the merits of their case. At the same time, Zaghlul and his followers tried to interfere with the formation of a new ministry. The Sultan regarded Zaghlul's action as treacherous which imperiled and undermined the authority of the Sultanate and the former appealed to Sir Milne Cheetham, the Assistant British High Commissioner, to arrest Zaghlul and his followers. The British arrested Saad Zaghlul, Ismail Sidky, Mohammed Mahmoud and Hamad-el- Bassal Pashas and deported them to Malta in early March 1919.

Once this information became known, a wave of demonstrations and strikes swept Cairo, Alexandria, and other towns resulting in violence against British troops and foreign communities composed of Greeks, Armenians, Syrians, Jews and Italians who had migrated to Egypt during the 19th and early 20th century. Telegraph communications between Upper and Lower Egypt were cut along with railway lines being destroyed. It should be noted the strikes affected most sectors of the Egyptian economy where striking workers showed solidarity with the nationalist cause of the Wafd party. The Wafd party was founded by Zaghlul in 1918.[2]

General Edmund Allenby was appointed Special High Commissioner who arrived on March 26, 1919 in Cairo to take charge of the situation. He immediately restored law and order and also released Zaghlul and his followers from detention in Malta. Once freed Zaghlul proceeded to Paris to try an address the peace conference.[3]

The release of Zaghlul was greeted "with delirious joy by Egyptians, crowds of whom in gala dress were careering through the city all day yesterday waving flags and branches cut from the street trees, shouting "Long Live Zaghlul", Long Live Egypt for the Egyptians," "Vive l'independence," reported the Times. Zaghlul Pasha was regarded as a national hero by all sections of Egyptian society who had the audacity to challenge British authority in Egypt.[4]

On April 19 Zaghlul Pasha and his followers arrived in Paris and called themselves the The Egyptian National Deputation'. They demanded the "complete independence for Egypt" and "immediate official recognition of Saad Zaglul and Nationalist leaders, as the representatives of the Egyptian Nation". They were imbued with the Wilsonian concept of self-determination. Unfortunately Zaghlul failed to get a hearing in Paris but "they devoted all their energies to obtaining foreign support for their cause, and an emissary was despatched to America to canvass opinion in the United States". Zaghlul was a determined individual seeking Egyptian independence from Britain.[5]

6. The denial of self-determinationSelf-determination was the driving force behind the Egyptian nationalists push for independence in early -1919. On April 22, 1919 Robert Lansing, the US Secretary of State, who was attending the Paris Conference addressed the following telegram to the American Agency in Cairo. It stated "I have delivered today to Mr Balfour [British Foreign Secretary] following letter. In answer to your inquiry the President has authorised me to inform you that he recognises the British protectorate over Egypt which was announced by His Majesty's Government on December 18, 1914. The President has no objection to this decision being made public as he understands that it may help in the restoration of order and in the prevention of further bloodshed in Egypt."[6]The Egyptian nationalists took US President Woodrow Wilson's concept of self-determination to heart and were furious when his note appeared in the Cairo press.The Egyptian nationalists believed that Woodrow Wilson would have been sympathetic to their case for self-determination. This very concept should have terminated the British Protectorate. Such high hopes were dashed when the US President supported the British Protectorate which angered the nationalists. Mahmoud Pasha, a member of the Egyptian delegation in Paris, stated that Britain should have terminated the protectorate after "the signing of the armistice." Egypt simply demanded its independence based on Woodrow Wilson's fourteen points. The Egyptian nationalists were determined to fight for the independence of their country.[7]

After Zaghlul's release from detention, there were loud cheers for America, Woodrow Wilson and France. TheWashington Postcorrespondent, William T Ellis captured the Egyptian mood when he stated that "President Wilson had been the Egyptian idol, their mahdi, their messiah" but the publication of Wilson's note wasn't well received by the nationalists. They lost faith in America and felt betrayed thinking that the US was no different to Britain. Some Egyptians even thought that that it was a British trick or Britain encouraged America to forestall Egyptian self-government. Egyptians also believed that its delegation would succeed in convincing the peace conference of the merits of its case. In the end, the Egyptian delegation failed to present its case in Paris.[8]The US Diplomatic Agent, Hampson Gary dispatch to the Secretary of State stated that Wilson's note had "shattered the Egyptian nationalist structure of hopes and aspirations overnight" and was generally well-received by the local population including the Palace. Wilson's comments assisted in isolating the nationalists from moderate Egyptian opinion thus giving the Sultan an opportunity of breaking the political impasse that had paralysed the country.[9]In his dispatch Gary attached editorials from three major Cairo newspapers regarding Wilson's note.Al Watanargued that Wilson's note offered a middle course with the restoration of public life being of paramount importance. It also was important to maintain the friendship of the foreign residents who greatly contributed to Egypt's needs. This would assist Egypt to find her rightful position.[10]

Another newspaperLe Bourse Egyptiennementioned that the US had confidence in the British Protectorate of Egypt. The US sympathisized with the Egyptian claim for self-government but preferred it to be under the British Protectorate. Wilson's note was couched in terms that offered the US the opportunity to safeguard its own interests in Egypt.[11]TheEgyptianMailindicated the similarity of ideals between the US and Great Britain and showing the "liberal policy and governing traditions" which Britain exercised in Egypt. If the nationalists sat down and thought rationally that British rule of the past 40 years had prepared and trained Egyptians to govern themselves. On the other hand, the nationalists' incitement of violence did not assist their cause in Egypt and reflected badly for them on the international stage.[12]

7. The Milner MissionThe British government dispatched a commission of inquiry in late 1919 led by Lord Milner to investigate the causes of the disturbances that had taken place earlier in that year and to develop a "constitution which under the Protectorate, will be best calculated to promote its peace and prosperity, the progressive development of self-governing institutions and the protection of foreign interests." Lord Milner, (Secretary of State for Colonies and Chairman), headed the British delegation to Egypt which also included Sir Rennell Rodd, General Sir John Maxwell, Brigadier-General Sir Owen Thomas MP, Sir Cecil JB Hurst (Foreign Office), AT Loyd (Secretary) and EMB Ingram (Assistant Secretary and Private Secretary to the Chairman).[13]

There was a vigorous campaign waged against the dispatch of the Milner mission to Egypt. Zaghlul advocated "boycotting the mission" when a series of strikes and demonstrations gripped the country. Wahba Pasha warned Cheetham "that a general strike in all classes of employment must be expected, and that agitation is a serious one which Cabinet will be powerless to resist." The Egyptian radicals wanted the Milner mission to return empty-handed back to Britain. There were two important elements that guided their thinking. The three divergent political forces Zaghlulists, Nationalists and Democrats were all working in unison and the establishment of many labor syndicates since July 1919 was "a powerful weapon in the hands of Extremists."[14]

In January 1920, Zaghlul stated in Paris that he was prepared to discuss with Milner at anytime "if the mission were able to declare that it had been authorised by the British Government to negotiate with himself and his colleagues as the representative body of the nation." Britain was prepared to receive Zaghlul as representing Egyptian opinion but not as an official representative of Egypt. Milner returned to London in March to present his findings to the British government. Through the intervention of Adly Pasha, Zaghlul came to London to meet Milner in June for discussions regarding the protection of British interests and fulfilling Egyptian aspirations. Adly Pasha and Hussein Pasha also attended these talks. The discussions were adjourned in the middle of August so as to give both parties an opportunity to study all the issues raised. Zaghlul returned to France for the break.[15]

On August 18, 1920 Milner presented a memorandum to the Egyptian delegation outlining the abolition of the protectorate, Egyptian independence would be recognised, treaty of alliance between the two nations and safeguarding Britain's special interest in Egypt. This document was given to Adly Pasha "for communication to Zaghlul Pasha and his associates, four of whom were designated to return to Egypt to place before their countrymen the terms of the settlement which the mission was disposed to recommend."[16]The proposals appeared in the British press on August 24 and in Egyptian newspapers several days later.[17]These four emissaries arrived in Egypt in early September to place these proposals before their countrymen. They were widely accepted though some opposition existed in the Association of Egyptians in Europe, some princes of the Sultan's family andEl Ahlynewspaper.[18]

Discussions between Milner and the Egyptians resumed in London in early October with former feeling optimistic that Anglo-Egyptian relations had come along way since the start of 1920. On November 9, the final meeting between Milner and Zaghlul took place when the whole situation was reexamined. Whilst many Egyptians supported the proposals as outlined in the August 18 memorandum, there were some points in the memorandum that the Egyptian delegates wanted to alter. Several new conditions also were added which forced Milner to terminate the discussions. The only prospect of resuming talks would have been between authorised representatives of the British and Egyptian governments. Britain believed that progress had been made and publication of Milner's report would help to calm the situation.

In Egypt, Zaghlul supporters convened a meeting at the Central Zaghlulist Committee in Cairo on November 13 where 400 people attended. The gathering attended by "princes, professors, clergy, ex-Ministers, members of the old Legislative Assembly, traders, farmers, magistrates, engineers, lawyers, doctors, officers of the army, representatives of labour and civil servants" represented a vast cross-section of Egyptian society. The meeting presided by Prince Yusuf Kemal passed a resolution "assuring the delegation the support of the whole nation."[19]

In February 1921, Milner's report published as a parliamentary paper was generally well received by major British newspaper such as theDaily Chronicle,Daily Telegraph,The Timesand theManchester Guardian. The two newspapers who criticised it were theDaily HeraldandDaily Expresswhere the latter described it as a perilous policy' which was full of danger for the Empire. On the other hand, the former referred to it as a dishonest paper.'[20]

The Tewfik Nessim Cabinet resigned in March 1921 and Adly Pasha became Prime Minister. Zaghlul was prepared to support Adly so long as he fulfilled his promise of ending the British protectorate. Otherwise Zaghlul would undermine his government. Zaghlul returned to Egypt and received popular ovation from his countrymen. In a speech delivered by Zaghlul in Alexandria on April 4, the Wafd leader commented on the publication of the Milner report. He declared the supposed Egyptian independence was really nothing more than a "veiled protectorate."[21]

The British Government invited Zaghlul and official Egyptian delegates nominated by Sultan Fuad to participate in discussions in London. In a record of conversation with a journalist of theEgyptian Gazetteon April 8, 1921 Zaghlul demanded that he lead the Egyptian delegation.[22]He laid down ten demands which are reproduced in full below:-

1. That the delegation shall have complete control of Cabinet, and I am prepared to with Adly, if he will be guided by me.

2. Milner Report shall not be accepted. It is only a veiled protectorate.

3. Martial law shall be repealed regardless of any legal obligations.

4. Retention of Capitulations, as their abolition only means transfer of all existing rights to English.

5. That there shall be no Judicial Adviser; any necessary functions can be performed by Proceurer General.

6. The powers of the Financial Adviser shall be curtailed.

7. That there shall be no British troops except east of Canal.

8. That scheme for reconstruction of Mixed Courts shall [be] opposed, as it interferes with the rights of other Courts.

9. Release of Abdul Rahman Fahmy and his associates.

10. The people demand, and I must follow their wishes, that Soudan shall be beyond doubt Egyptian territory.[23]

All these conditions amounted to Zaghlul leading the delegation and influencing decisions of the Egyptian Cabinet led by Adly Pasha.

Adly Pasha was prepared to work with Zaghlul but didn't seem too confident about the final outcome. Meanwhile Zaghlul and Adly's discussions regarding the formation of an official delegation reached an impasse. Zaghlul wanted the presidency of the delegation something that displeased Adly Pasha. The Egyptian Prime Minister expressed his views in an article that appeared inAl Ahram. Some of the issues Adly raised were the abolition of the protectorate, the composition of the official delegation and termination of censorship and martial law. The issue of the presidency was something that Adly Pasha directly addressed to Zaghlul in which the Prime Minister as head of government couldn't be in a subordinate position during negotiations with the British. As Prime Minister it was his right to officially head the Egyptian delegation. Adly continued " he did not claim, as did Zaghlul, that president, whoever he might be, should have the right to control course of negotiations, and to continue them or break them off as he thought fit. That right belonged to delegation as a whole. If Zaghlul demanded the presidency in order to have that right, there should be no reason why he should not go alone."[24]

Zaghlul responded in an unfavorable manner on April 25 denouncing Adly Pasha by stating that his entire idea for the presidency was done out of patriotic duty and he and his colleagues possessed the experience to conduct the negotiations. Such comments were insulting and also undermined the authority of the Adly cabinet. After this exchange, Adly began to exercise his leadership.[25]

Adly Pasha headed the Egyptian delegation in its deliberations with the British government which dragged on for several months. On November 11, 1921 the British Foreign Secretary Lord Curzon presented a draft treaty to Adly Pasha which contained the following clauses:- termination of protectorate, foreign relations, military dispositions, employment of foreign officers, financial and Judicial administration, Sudan, tribute loans, retirement and compensation of officials and protection of minorities. The Egyptians rejected the draft treaty which they considered incompatible with their future status as an independent nation. Some of their objections included that previous discussions involved the stationing of British troops in the Canal Zone in order to protect imperial communications. Now Britain extended its right to station its troops on any part of Egyptian territory which "destroys every idea of independence and suppresses even internal sovereignty." The Egyptian Foreign Minister would be required to maintain very close links with the British High Commissioner and that "all political agreements" would require the consent of Great Britain.[26]The Anglo-Egyptian draft treaty basically amounted to the continuation of the British protectorate in another guise.

On December 3, 1921, the British High Commissioner in Egypt, Lord Allenby delivered a note to Sultan Fuad expressing Britain's disappointment with Adly Pasha's rejection. Allenby reminded Fuad that Egypt owed its economic prosperity and political development to Britain who had saved it from administrative and financial chaos in the late 19thcentury. Egypt was of vital importance in Britain's imperial communications with its Indian empire and dominions in Australia and New Zealand. The positioning of British troops on Egyptian soil could not be relinquished or reduced. Extreme nationalist leaders did not have the best intentions for Egypt at heart and "the cult of a fanatical and purely disruptive type of nationalism" would not be tolerated. Whilst Allenby's note does not mention the word force in his note, however it is implied in that the British would not have hesitated to use force, if its strategic interests in Egypt were threatened.[27]

Adly Pasha resigned as Prime Minister and his successor Sarwat Pasha was considered a moderate and trustworthy by the British. Many Egyptians disliked the proposed Anglo-Egyptian treaty as tantamount to a continuation of the British protectorate. Allenby believed that the termination of the protectorate and granting Egypt her independence would greatly assist in defusing an unstable political situation. The British had to contend with Zaghlul who wanted complete independence for his country. A proposed meeting organised by Zaghlul in Cairo was banned by Allenby on security grounds. Allenby was prepared to deport him to an overseas British possession should he violate the ban.

Zaghlul protested against this decision and considered this as the first instalment of a new British policy designed to stifle Egyptian opposition to the proposed draft treaty. Under martial law regulations operating in Egypt at that time, Allenby prohibited Zaghlul from "all further participation...in politics. His press is also being warned against further agitation." Even his prominent colleagues Atif Barakat Bey, Fathalla Barakat Pasha, Mustafa-el-Nahas Bey, Sinnot Hanna Bey, Amin Ezz-el-Arab Effendi, Gaafar Fakhry Bey and William Makram Obeid Effendi "were ordered to their homes under police supervision, and to refrain from political activities."[28]The deportation of Zaghlul and his followers will be explained in greater detail below.

In February 1922, Britain recognised Egypt as a sovereign nation, terminated the protectorate and that martial law would be rescinded but retained certain reserved powers. These reserved powers included: securing and protecting imperial communications in Egypt, defending Egypt from foreign aggression, protecting foreign interests and minorities and the Sudan. The Colonial Secretary informed the British Dominions of Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa regarding the termination of the protectorate of Egypt.[29]

In early March, Sarwat Pasha became Prime Minister which included the following cabinet appointments in Ismail Sidky Pasha , Minister of Finance, Ibrahim Fathi Pasha , Minister of War, Gafar Ali , (Minister of Wakfs), Mustafa Maher Pasha, (Minister of Education), Mohamed Choukri Pasha, (Minister of Agriculture), Hussein Wassef Pasha, (Minister of Public Works) and Wassef Semeika Bey , (Minister of Communications). Sarwat's political program involved the establishment of a democratic constitution, ministerial responsibility, parliamentary control and terminating martial law. Fuad's title changed from Sultan to King with Egypt becoming a constitutional monarchy. It should be noted that Sarwat resigned as Prime Minister in November 1922 as his working relationship with King Fuad was never an easy one. His draft constitution and Egyptian representation at the Lausanne conference caused problems for him.[30]

8. The deportation of Zaghlul December 1921- March 1923The Britishconsidered Zaghlul a dangerous opponent who was in a position to whip up extreme nationalist fervor against them. Allenby thought the deportation of the Wafd leader and his associates would defuse a rather dangerous political situation. The Colonial Office had "no objections [in Allenby] sending Zaghlul and his principal associates by first available ship to Ceylon" where the British Governor was duly informed.[31]

There were strong objections from the Indian government and Ceylon Governor that Zaghlul's deportation to Ceylon might allow him to communicate with Indian extremists. Zaghlul and his associates Atif Barakat Bey, Fathalla Barakat Pasha, Mustafa-el-Nahas Bey, Sinnot Hanna Bey and William Makram Obeid Effendi arrived in Aden on January 5, 1922 until a ship transferred them to the Seychelles in the Indian Ocean. On March 7, HMS Clematis sailed with Zaghlul and Nanas for the Seychelles with the others remaining behind in Aden. Zaghlul thought "that the climate of the Seychelles could be dangerous for his health."[32]

Al-Ahramtook the opportunity to inform its readers of the location of the Seychelles and the British deportation was based that the islands "are indubitably blessed with a salubrious climate, which is why the British have selected it as the place for their soldiers in South Africa to recuperate should they fall ill." The British constructed "many large and luxurious buildings" during the First World War. After his arrival, Zaghlul wrote a letter to his friends giving a different picture of the island paradise. He stated "the terrain is tortuous, the houses are small, clustered in a disorganised jumble lacking all imaginable conveniences for comfort. The range of food is limited. Sheep are non-existent and cattle are few. Poultry abounds and fish even more so. Fruit is sparse and vegetables sparser. There is only one doctor on the island, a surgeon by profession but he serves as a general practitioner as well. There is only one licensed pharmacy, although it is the doctor who generally prepares the medications. Certain essential pharmaceutical staples, such as aspirin are virtually impossible to find."[33]

Such information would have raised concerns about the state of Zaghlul's health with his friends in Egypt.

Zaghlul left the Seychelles on August 18thpassed through the Suez Canal on August 28th-29thand finally arrived in Gibraltar on September 3, 1922 where the British authorities provided a residence for him. His health had shown some improvement with his transfer to Gibraltar. The British High Commissioner, Lord Allenby informed Madame Zaghlul that she was free to visit her husband in Gibraltar without any restrictions placed in her way. Zaghlulists worked for his release and other five deportees for their return to Egypt. Many Egyptians sent telegrams to Zaghlul "enquiring as to his health and praying for his return." Finally Madame Zaghlul sailed from Port Said on October 9 to be with her husband in Gibraltar.[34]

After settling into his new surroundings in Gibraltar, Zaghlul petitioned the Governor of the colony against his detention for which he considered illegal, since no charges filed had been against him. His case was heard in London by the judicial committee of the Privy Council in late January 1923 with Mr Upjohn and James Wylie representing the petitioner. On January 25Al-Ahramcommented that "it is difficult for an Egyptian from a fully sovereign and independent nation to comprehend how its most important nationalist leader can be detained by a foreign authority which plays no part in his nation's system of government and has no business being there." Even British newspapers such asNew Statesman,Glasgow HeraldandDaily Newssupported the release of Zaghlul on grounds that it would help to calm the tense political situation existing in Egypt.[35]

On March 29, 1923, a letter signed by 97 British MPs appeared intheTimesnewspaper calling upon the government to change its policy towards Egypt. The signatories were critical of Lord Allenby for having "no new policy" and that his administration caused too many problems. They urged the British government to adopt a new policy, one that was unpopular whereas the other improved Britain's image in Egypt. The former measure involved revoking "the declaration of independence approved last year by the vote of House of Commons; to make Egypt a part of the British Empire; to suppress by military force any resistance; and to hold the Egyptian people in subjection until such time as they acquiesce in the position sufficiently to have some measure of self-measure." The MPs would oppose such a policy showing Britain not honoring its promises. On the other hand, a positive plan of action would be the return of Zaghlul to Egypt. If Zaghlul died in exile, then the Egyptian people would blame Britain for his death.[36]

The American Consul in Cairo, D Morton Howell had an interview with Allenby regarding Zaghlul and Egyptian Prime Minister, Yehia Ibrahim Pasha. On the subject of Zaghlul, Allenby stated that the Wafd leader had been released because of his medical condition than on political grounds. "So long as he held control here in Egypt; Zaghlul would not be permitted to return to Egypt", Allenby said. Allenby had confidence in Yehia to proclaim the constitution and to pass the Act of Indemnity which also would terminate martial law. By the end of March 1923, Zaghlul was given an unconditional release from detention and returned to Egypt in September where he received a hero's welcome in Alexandria and Cairo. His speeches reported in theEgyptian Gazette,Egyptian MailandWatanwere well received by the Egyptian public.[37]

REFERENCES[1]BDFA Series G Vol.1., pp.86-7& 152-3. Great Britain, Command Paper,Cmd1131, Report of the Special Mission to Egypt, Egypt no.1, 1921, HMSO, London, pp.13-4; Peace leaders rest...Egyptian delegates in Paris Demand National Independence',Washington Post, March 24, 1919, p.1; British put down revolt in Egypt by Nationalists. Deportations of Three leaders announced in Parliament by the Government',New York Times, March 19, 1919, p.1; Valentine Chirol, The Egyptian Question,Journal of the British Institute ofInternational Affairs, Vol.1, no.2, (March, 1922), pp.61-2

[2]BDFA Series G Vol.1, pp.211-4 &218;Cmd1131, Report of the Special Mission to Egypt, Egypt no.1, 1921p.14 ; David Fromkin,A peace to end all peace, Penguin Books, London,1989, pp.418-20; More refugees reach Cairo',The Times, April 4, 1919, p.11; British put down revolt in Egypt by Nationalists. Deportations of Three leaders announced in Parliament by the Government',New York Times, March 19, 1919, p.1; Peers and interned aliens',The Times, March 25, 1919, p.16; Marius Deeb, The socioeconomic role of the local Foreign minorities in modern Egypt, 1805-1961,International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol.9, no.1 (Jan 1978), pp.9-11; Zachary Lockman, British policy towards Egyptian labor activism, 1882-1936,International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol.20, no.3 , (Aug., 1988), p.272; Joel Beinin, Formation of the Egyptian working class,MERIP Reports, no.94, (Feb., 1981), pp.19-20

[3]BDFA Series G Vol.1, pp.214-5 ; L.Fromkin, op cit., p. 420; Aims of Egypt's independent Party',Christian Science Monitor, May 1, 1919, p.9; Gen.Allenby intervenes. Rising in hand. Military measures effective',The Times, April 4, 1919, p.11; Frees Egyptian Leaders. Gen Allenby will permit 4 chief agitators to return',Washington Post, April 11, 1919, p.1; Release of Zaghlul Pasha',The Times, April 11, 1919, p.12

[4]BDFA Series G Vol.1, p.220; Fromkin,op cit.,p.420; Wild Scenes at Cairo...Nationalists sail for Europe',The Times, April 14, 1919, p.11;

[5]Cmd1131, Report of the Special Mission to Egypt, Egypt no.1, 1921,p.15 ; Lord Curzon on Egyptian unrest',Christian Science Monitor, July 9, 1919, p.7; For a discussion on the concept of self-determination see Allen Lynch, Woodrow Wilson and the principle of national self-determination',Review of International Studies, 28 (2002), pp.419-36

[6]Egyptinternal 883.00/119 Lansing (American Mission) to State Department, April 22, 1919

[7]Egyptinternal 883.00/151; Tells why Egypt wants freedom',Chicago Daily Tribune, July 23, 1919, p.8

[8]The text of the Woodrow Wilson's note is in The Department of State,Papers relating to the Foreignrelations of the United States 1919 Vol,.2, United States Government Printing Office, Washington DC, 1934, p.204; This note also was published in theNew York Times, April 26, 1919, p.4 &

Washington Post, June, 25, &26 1919, pp.4 &5

[9]Egyptinternal 883.00/203 Hampson Gary , American Diplomatic Agency and Consular-General, Cairo Egypt to Secretary of State , Washington , April 26, 1919

[10]Egyptinternal 883.00/203 includingAl Wataneditorial, April 1919

[11]Egyptinternal 883.00/203 includingLe Bourse Egyptienneeditorial, April 24,1919

[12]Egyptinternal 883.00/203 includingThe Egyptian Maileditorial, April 24, 1919

[13]Cmd1131, Report of the Special Mission to Egypt, Egypt no.1, 1921[14]BDFA Series G Vol.1,pp.330-1;Egypt internal883.00/215 enclosures Strikes based on conditions non-economic',Egyptian Mail, November 1, 1919; Egypt's pressing need',Egyptian Gazette, November 4, 1919; Renewed disorder in Egypt' & Anti-Milner campaign',The Times, October 30, 1919, p.11; Milner Mission Boycott. Nationalist Manifesto',The Times, December 15, 1919, p.13

[15]BDFA Series G Vol.2 December 1919-December 1921,pp.101 &222

[16]BDFA Series G Vol.2 December 1919-December 1921,p.101;Cmd1131, Report of the Special Mission to Egypt, Egypt no.1, 1921,pp.24-6

[17]BDFA Series G Vol.2 December 1919-December 1921,p.102; New era for Egypt. Points of Agreement discussed. Future of Sudan',The Times, August 24, 1920, p.10; An independent Egypt. Terms of the new Agreement. Garrison on the Suez. Security for British Interests', Manchester Guardian, August 24, 1920, p.7

[18]BDFA Series G Vol.2 December 1919-December 1921,p.103

[19]BDFA Series G Vol.2 December 1919-December 1921,pp.103-4; Zaghlul Pasha's Reservations. Delegates leaving London. Effect on moderate opinion',The Times, November 11, 1920, p.13

[20]Egypt internal, 883.00/336 John W.Davis, American Consulate General, London to Secretary of State, March 2, 1921 with enclosures from British newspapers -Daily Chronicle,Daily Telegraph,Daily Express,Daily HeraldandThe Times; Egypt's future. Milner Report parts',The Times, February 19, 1921, p.10; Egypt for the Egyptians. The Milner Plan for a lasting settlement...',ManchesterGuardian,February 19, 1921, p.9

[21]BDFA Series G Vol.2 December 1919-December 1921,p.365

[22]Ibid.,p.365

[23]BDFA Series G Vol.2 December 1919-December 1921,p.366; Hopeful outlook in Egypt. Zaghlul's views. Concessions by both parties',The Times, April 15, 1921, p.9

[24]BDFA Series G Vol.2 December 1919-December 1921,pp.367 &391-2

[25]BDFA Series G Vol.2 December 1919-December 1921,p.392; New crisis in Egypt. Zaghlul's move. Cabinet in danger',The Times, April 27, 1921, p.11

[26]Great Britain, Parliamentary Papers,Cmd1555, Papers respecting negotiations with the Egyptian delegation, Egypt no.4, 1921,pp.1-6 & 8-10; British relations with Egypt. A breakdown. Retention of Garrisons. Native objection to Control' &Future British policy in Egypt. Sequel in negotiation. Official declaration. The delegations reply to the treaty offer',Manchester Guardian, November 21, &December 5, 1921, pp.7 &8

[27]Cmd1555, Papers respecting negotiations with the Egyptian delegation, Egypt no.4, 1921,pp.10-14; Lord Allenby's letter. Martial law to go after Indemnity Act',Manchester Guardian, December 5, 1921, p.8

[28]Great Britain, Parliamentary Paper,Cmd1592, Papers respecting negotiations with the Egyptian delegation, Egypt no.1, 1922(in continuation of Cmd1555)HMSO, London,1922, pp.7-14;Egypt Internal883.00/387 American Diplomatic Agency and Consulate-General, Cairo, to Secretary of State, Washington, December 31, 1921 with enclosures of newspaper articles: Egypt's political crisis...Zaghloul's attempt to stir up trouble',Egyptian Gazette, December 22, 1921; Egypt's political crisis. Military authorities' precautionary action. Rustification of Zaghloul and his partisans..',EgyptianGazette, December 23, 1921

[29]Egyptian internal883.00/410 American Diplomatic Agency and Consulate-General, Cairo to Secretary of State, March 6, 1922 includingOfficial Egyptian Journal, February 28,1922 containing the official British declaration of Egyptian independence;Cmd1592,Papers respecting negotiations with the Egyptian delegation, Egypt no.1, 1922, pp.31-2

[30]Egyptian internal883.00/410 American Diplomatic Agency and Consulate-General, Cairo to Secretary of State, March 6, 1922;BDFA Series G Vol.8 December 1925-May 1927,pp.42-3

[31]BDFA Series G Vol.3 May 1921-December 1921,pp.397-8

[32]BDFA Series G Vol.4 December 1921-December 1922,pp.14-5;Egypt internal883.00/393 American Consulate, Aden, Arabia to Secretary of State, Washington, January 10,1922; 883.00/411 American Consulate, Aden, Arabia to Secretary of State, Washington, March 7,1922; Clamour for Idol's return', Al Ahram Weekly, 2-8 March 2000, issue no.471 inhttp://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2000/471/chrncls.htm(accessed on September 12, 2007). This article was written by Dr Yunan Labib Rizk, the head of Al-Ahram history studies centre.

[33]Clamour for Idol's return', Al Ahram Weekly, 2-8 March 2000, issue no.471 inhttp://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2000/471/chrncls.htm[34]BDFA Series G Vol.4 December 1921-December 1922,pp.306-8, 314 &331

[35]Judicial Committee of the Privy Council',The Times, January 24, 1923, p.5; Clamour for Idol's return', Al Ahram Weekly, 2-8 March 2000, issue no.471 inhttp://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2000/471/chrncls.htm[36]British policy in Egypt. M.P.S' Call to the Government. The failure of nominal independence',TheTimes, March 29, 1923, p,.13

[37]Egypt internal883.00/460 J Morton Howell, Legation of the United States of America, Cairo to Secretary of State, Washington , April 18, 1923; 883.00/469 enclosing clippings from the Egyptian Gazette, Egyptian Mail and Watan , September 18-21, 1923; Clamour for Idol's return', Al Ahram Weekly, 2-8 March 2000, issue no.471 inhttp://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2000/471/chrncls.htmIn January 1924 Zaghlul and his Wafd Party won the election under the new constitution gaining a majority both in the Chamber of Deputies and Senate. He accepted King Fuad's invitation to form a new ministry. An article published in The Times on January 29 mentions the names of Zaghlul's cabinet and his nationalist program. In his acceptance letter addressed to the King which is reproduced in full below. Zaghlul states:

Saad Zaghlul Pasha: "Father of Egyptians"PART 3 By Stavros T. Stavridis, the author of'The Greek-Turkish War 1919-23'In January 1924 Zaghlul and his Wafd Party won the election under the new constitution gaining a majority both in the Chamber of Deputies and Senate. He accepted King Fuad's invitation to form a new ministry. An article published in The Times on January 29 mentions the names of Zaghlul's cabinet and his nationalist program. In his acceptance letter addressed to the King which is reproduced in full below. Zaghlul states:

The majority gained in the elections and the mandate given me by the nation makes it my duty not to refuse responsibility for the government. Therefore I agree to form a Ministry provided this acceptance does not imply recognition of any situation against which the Wafd has protested. The elections have clearly shown the nation's unanimity and attachment to the principles of the Wafd and the necessity for the country's enjoying its rights of real independence in Egypt and Sudan, with due respect to all foreign rights not conflicting with that independence.The nation has shown a strong desire for the pardoning of political prisoners, likewise its rejection of the many agreements and laws recently promulgated which restricted the rights of the country and the liberty of its people, and also its dissatisfaction with the state of the country's administration and finances. It will be my duty of the new Ministry to find means to realize the people's aspirations, remove the causes of grievances, and fix the blame on those responsible. This task cannot be accomplished except by Parliament, and the Ministry will do all that is possible to hasten Parliament's assembling. For a long time Government has been regarded by the nation as an enemy, not its mandatory, and has always been mistrusted. Now the duty of the new Ministry is to remove that mistrust and replace it by confidence in the Government.[1]

The Wafdist leader had received a mandate from the electorate to implement his political program and to ensure Sudan's incorporation into Egypt. Zaghlul determined to use parliament as the forum where electors could feel confident that their wishes and expectations were being fulfilled.

The American Consul Howell believed Zaghlul was a strong leader who possessed the experience and patriotism to improve his country's position, especially in resolving outstanding issues with Britain. TheEgyptian Mailof February 22 published an article titled Egypt and Britain' which captured the confident mood for Egypt's future under Zaghlul's leadership. However the future of Sudan was considered the key issue by theEgyptian Mail.[2]

On March 15, King Fuad opened the new parliament with Zaghlul receiving a warm ovation from his parliamentary colleagues after delivering his opening speech. The new British Labor Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald sent a congratulatory telegram to Zaghlul hoping the two nations would work closely in resolving their outstanding issues.[3]

In late April,Ramsay MacDonaldissued an invitation to Zaghlul to come to London to discuss their unresolved issues. These were "(a) the security of the communications of the British Empire in Egypt; (b) the defense of Egypt against all foreign aggression or interference, direct or indirect; (c) the protection pf foreign interests in Egypt and protection of minorities "; (d) the Sudan."[4]

Zaghlul insisted that Sudan be incorporated into Egypt which obviously annoyed the British. TheTimesnewspaper printed the following headlines Egypt and the Sudan. Zaghlul Pasha's Plans', Zaghlul and the Sudan. "Complete evacuation by Great Britain", Zaghlul Pasha and the Sudan. "Rights of Egypt", and "Egypt and the Sudan. Widespread Depression', on June 10, 24, 25 and 28 respectively regarding Sudan. In its editorial of June 27, theTimeswas very critical of Zaghlul's position over Sudan and that he "may as well abandon his mission" to London. Even Lord Parmoor (a British Labor Peer), was quoted as saying in the House of Lords that Britain had no intention of abandoning Sudan.[5]

When the British statement was received in Cairo, Zaghlul and his followers could not believe the attitude adopted by the Labor Party. Zaghlul thought that Labor would have shown greater sympathy towards Egyptian aspirations over Sudan than the conservatives.Al Siassa, ananti-Zaghlulist newspaper,argued that Zaghlul's "lack of stability is at the bottom responsible for the present development, and claims that he must not be allowed to try to evade responsibility by abandoning office." He was urged to find a solution to this difficult issue. In the meantime, a ministerial crisis ensued over Sudan raising the possibility of Zaghlul's resignation. Zaghlul told the Chamber of Deputies that he would not cede Sudan under any circumstance and his declaration had been received with great enthusiasm by the opposition. They urged him to continue with the policy that would result in Egyptian independence and that he should continue to lead the government. King Fuad refused to accept Zaghlul's resignation as premier minister.[6]

A failed assassination attempt on July 13 shook Zaghlul who went to Europe for recuperation. Abdel Latif Khalik, an Egyptian medical student, "who had returned from Germany on July 2nd, fired a revolver at Zaghloul when the latter was about to board the train." Zaghlul received a superficial wound, spent a few days in hospital before returning home. The Egyptian police arrested a large number of individuals suspected of being involved in the failed assassination. It was a relief for many Egyptians that the Prime Minister and national hero had escaped death. Zaghlul was the only Egyptian leader who could stand up to the British. His meeting with MacDonald in London would show whether he had the mettle to accomplish his stated goals of Egyptian independence and Sudan's integration.[7]

The Macdonald- Zaghlul negotiations took place in London during October 1924 to settle outstanding issues. There was a hope in the Egyptian and British camps that some compromise would be reached between two leaders. Such expectations, however, did not materialise as Zaghlul demanded the withdrawal of all British troops and British influence from Egypt something which MacDonald found unacceptable. MacDonald reminded Zaghlul of the importance the Suez Canal figured in British imperial communications in Egypt and that the stationing of British troops in no way impinged upon Egyptian independence.

Sudan also was one of Zaghlul's demands but MacDonald took the opportunity to remind him of statements that he made in the Egyptian Parliament earlier regarding this territory and the Egyptian army being commanded by a foreign officer. Such official statements would place "Sir Lee Stack, as Sirdar but all British officers attached to the Egyptian army, in a difficult position." Britain had undertaken the responsibility to provide good governance, sound financial management, public order and security for the Sudanese and that Egypt would receive "her share of the Nile water and the satisfaction of any financial claims which she may have against the Sudan Government." MacDonald outlined his differences with Zaghlul in a memorandum to Lord Allenby in Cairo.[8]

The talks finally were abandoned because Zaghlul's case was regarded as an ultimatum by Britain and his attitude did not assist the Egyptian cause. Whilst Zaghlul was a proud and respected nationalist leader, nonetheless, his rigidity, indecisiveness and refusal to compromise wrecked the discussions with MacDonald.

10. Zaghlul's return to Egypt and Sir Lee Stack's assassination, November 1924Zaghlul returned home at the end of October empty-handed to a disappointed Egyptian public and his reputation began to decline as Egyptians started to realise that his administration had not improved things. On November 19, the assassination of the Governor General of Sudan and Sirdar of the Egyptian army, Sir Lee Stack was a fatal blow for Zaghlul. The Sirdar died two days later in hospital. Zaghlul was incensed over this tragic episode when he stated "I believe that those who committed this appalling evil aimed only to disrupt the peace and security of this country." He encouraged his fellow citizens to come forward with any relevant information that might assist the authorities to apprehend the assailants. Over the coming months a number of individuals were arrested and tried for this crime.[9]

Lord Allenby issued an ultimatum to Zaghlul that included "(a) Apology. (b) Pursuit and condign punishment of criminals. (c) 500,000 fine. (e)The withdrawal of Egyptian army from Sudan. (f) Abandonment of 300,000 feddan limit in Gezira. (g) Agreement with His Majesty's Government on certain points touching foreign interests." Zaghlul rejected the British demand for the immediate withdrawal of Egyptian troops and officers from Sudan. British forces occupied the Alexandria Customs House in response to Zaghlul's non-acceptance of the British Government's demand "on certain points touching foreign interests."

On November 24, Ghali Pasha declared the government's official response to Allenby's ultimatum when it issued an apology, denied responsibility for Stack's assassination, promised to pay 500,000, offered to suppress demonstrations and that investigations into the crime were already yielding good results. Later in that day, Zaghlul resigned paving the way for Ziwar Pasha to become Egypt's next Prime Minister who promised "to restore good relations with Great Britain." The new Egyptian Government accepted "the British conditions in regard to the position of foreigners and the Royal Marines are being withdrawn from the Customs House at Alexandria."[10]

King Fuad signed an edict that dissolved Parliament in December 1924 paving the way for new elections to be staged on February 24, 1925. TheTimesdescribed Ziwar as a sincere individual who it appears had support among educated Egyptians and foreign communities who believed he had "only done his duty in advising King Fuad to dissolve Parliament and appeal to the electorate."[11]

With the election campaign underway, Zaghlul took a swipe at Ziwar by claiming "that the Cabinet has flouted the Constitution by dissolving Parliament and by its method of treating the new electoral law." In the beginning the Wafd party thought of boycotting the elections but decided against it in order to protect the constitution. Zaghlul urged his supporters "let the Ministry know that, inspite of all its efforts, you know your duty. Egypt will be in great danger if traitors are elected."[12]It would appear Zaghlul distrusted Ziwar's political motives and the Wafd was the only party that represented the aspirations of ordinary Egyptians. The forthcoming elections would give Zaghlul the opportunity to test his party's strength against his opponents.

The primary elections were held February 24, 1925 and a second one took place in March with both sides claiming victory. The three anti-Zaghlulist parties - Constitutional Liberals, Ittihad and Independents formed the new Cabinet with Ziwar Pasha accepting King Fuad's offer to become Prime Minister. This election saw a complete reversal in the fortunes of the Wafd who lost 80 seats from 1924 indicating a widespread anti-Zaghlul sentiment in many parts of Egypt. There were some defections from the Wafd helping the opposition parties win office. On March 23,King Fuadopened the new parliament and in a secret vote Zaghlul easily defeated Sarwat for the presidency of the Chamber by forty votes.[13]

11. Zaghlul's last political endeavor In early December 1925, a new electoral law was proclaimed revising the qualifications for voters. These included:

All males over 30 years of age have the vote, but those between 25 and 30 only have a vote if they pay land tax of E1 annually; or house tax of E12 annually; or rent cultivable land paying E2 annually in tax; or hold a matriculation certificate.

Primary electors are grouped in 20's, instead of 30's as formerly for choosing secondary electors, while further groups in the case of senatorial elections each consist of five secondary electors for the Lower Chamber.

Deputies must be 30 years of age and literate, and must be resident in the constituency for which they stand.

There is no plural voting.[14]

It is interesting to note that all males over 30 years of age could vote without restriction whereas those between 25-30 years faced property or educational qualifications in order to vote. Women were excluded from voting.

After their 1925 electoral success, squabbles developed between Liberals and Ittihadists with the former withdrawing and forming an "unnatural alliance with the Wafd, to which the Nationalists also joined themselves." This situation made it difficult for Ziwar Pasha to continue as Prime Minister which effectively assured a Wafdist electoral victory. For the first time, Egyptians would be participating in a "system of direct voting and universal suffrage " thus eliminating " the two degree system in which groups of 30 electors chose each an elector delegate and these electors delegate of each constituency in turn elected a Deputy, the voting for latter being consequently on a relatively restricted scale and area." Ziwar Pasha was very brave to implement such an important electoral reform despite opposition within his own political ranks.[15]

Against the backdrop of a Wafd electoral victory, a number of Egyptians-Ahmed Maher Pasha, Addel Halim Bey, Mahmoud Nekrashi Effendi, Dr.Hassan Kamel Shishini,Mahmoud Osman Mustafa Effendi, El Hag Ahmed Gadollah and Mohamed Fahmy Aly Effendi were acquitted of the murders and attempted murders of British soldiers and officials and anti-Zaghlulists. The first four were charged for their involvement "in the murders of Aldred Brown (February 1922), Bimbashi Cave (May 1922), Hasan Abdel Razek Pashas and Ismail Zuhdi Bey (November 1922) and in the attempted murders of Colonel A.F.M Piggott and T.W.Brown (August 1922)." El Hag Ahmed Gadollah and Mohamed Fahmy Aly Effendi were accused of the slaying of Dr Newby Robson with former being sentenced to death.[16]

On May 30, 1926 Zaghlul's meeting with the new British High Commissioner, Lord Lloyd was arranged by Dr Nimr, editor ofAl Mokottam, who acted as an intermediary. The High Commissioner demanded a number of conditions from Zaghlul in order to establish his ministry. These included: "(1) To accept the Declaration of February 28, 1922; (2) That no reference was to be made in the Parliament to the Sudan Question or to the Jarabub settlement which would be adverse to the settlement agreed by the representatives of the two Governments, Egyptian and Italian; (3) that he become personally and officially responsible for the maintenance of good order and proper respect to the King." Zaghlul rejected the first two demands and stated that he could not be held responsible for the action of others. Originally Zaghlul stated that he would not form a cabinet but suddenly changed his mind. The about-face possibly came about through "some articles in the Unionist Press ...taunting him" and "the acquittal of Maher Pasha and Nekrashi in the political murder trial." Even his meeting with Lord Lloyd also would have made him rethink his attitude towards the premiership, as he disliked being dictated too.[17]

Judge JF Kershaw, the President of the Assize Court, handed his resignation to the Minister of Justice over the acquittal of those tried in the political murder trial. He dissented in the final verdict where the evidence clearly showed a "grave miscarriage of justice" had been carried out. TheTimescorrespondent in Cairo believed that Kershaw's decision was "courageous and self-sacrificing gesture [that] will do more than anything else to convince Egyptians of the injustice of the acquittal." An American Consular report from Alexandria mentioned that some British Judges of the Mixed Courts "themselves feel that Judge Kershaw made a mistake" in resigning his position. On the other hand, the Egyptian press was damning over Kershaw's resignation. TheIttihad raised the question of "how many judges would be left on the Egyptian bench, if all who disagreed with their colleagues resigned."Kawkab-esh-SharkandBalaghcensured "Kershaw of complicity with the Residency in a plot to condemn certain individuals, regardless of proof."[18]

Britain delivered a note to the Egyptian government refusing to accept the innocence of the four acquitted and "reserves full liberty to take such steps as the future may show to be necessary to fulfil its obligation to ensure the safety of foreigners in Egypt."[19]On June 7, 1926 Ziwar Pasha tendered his resignation to King Fuad feeling satisfied that his introduction of universal suffrage and improvement in Anglo-Egyptian relations were his contribution to Egyptian political life. Adly Pasha was invited by the King to form the next Cabinet which had the support of the Zaghlul and the Parliament. The new Cabinet included three Liberals-Adly, Sarwat and Mahmoud Pashas, Abul Seud was an independent with remainder being Wafdists. On June 10, the King opened the new parliament with his speech from the throne outlining the political agenda of the new Cabinet. It was important "to strengthen the parliamentary regime and compel everyone to respect the constitution." Furthermore the government had the responsibility to improve the nation's finances and ensure a better utilisation of its resources. In the international arena, Egypt would be seeking to further improve its relations with Britain and would apply to become a member of the League of Nations. Sudan was considered a part of Egypt. Zaghlul was elected President of the Chamber which allowed him to remain influential over the Wafd Party.[20]

Adly Pasha resigned as Prime Minister on April18, 1927 due to the "Chamber's refusal of a vote of thanks" which seemed trivial to say the least. This decision took the Chamber by complete surprise and Sarwat Pasha was destined to become the next Prime Minister. Nevile Henderson, the Acting British High Commissioner in Cairo, outlined five features that emerged from the sitting of the third Egyptian parliament in a dispatch to the British Foreign Secretary Sir Austen Chamberlain. His dispatch described Zaghlul Pasha completely dominating the Chamber, no effective opposition existed in the Chamber, Anglo-Egyptian issues were simply ignored, hostility was shown towards the King and "the tendency of the Chamber to encroach upon the executive functions of the government."[21]

The new Prime Minister faced a Cabinet crisis over his refusal to reinstate the Omda (Mayor) of Deirut when fifteen Senators and Deputies had originally approached him to overturn Adly Pasha's decision. In fact, Sarwat agreed with his predecessor's decision and considered the action of the delegation as usurping the executive authority of the government. Sarwat called a meeting of the Cabinet and told them that he contemplated resigning as Prime Minister. In the meantime, Sarwat communicated with the Palace and Zaghlul to inform them of his intended decision. Zaghlul implored Sarwat to postpone his decision until he arrived in Cairo. On arriving in Cairo from his country house, Zaghlul had a meeting with Sarwat and told the latter that he would support him in the Chamber. Zaghlul's action allowed Sarwat to withdraw his threat of resignation and thus ending the Cabinet crisis.[22]

12. The death of Zaghlul, August 23, 1927

On the evening of August 23, 1927 Zaghlul died of unknown causes at the House of the Nation' in Cairo having recuperated from complications in the right lung following his recent illness. From his bedside with his wife in attendance and four doctors, he told her "I am finished." He then lapsed into a coma from which he never recovered. His nephew Fathalla Barakat Pasha officially informed the Chief of the King's Cabinet, Mohamed Nessim Pasha who immediately was driven to the House of the Nation.' There was a steady stream of visitors to pay their respects to Madame Zaghlul.[23]

Before Zaghlul was buried, the Minister of War Gafar Wali Pasha presented the following brief address:

Saad is dead: what a misfortune! The lofty principles which he spent his life in spreading in this country have taken root in this good nation. The great man who had departed to-day departs only in body; his soul remains alive in his principles and teachings which we keep in our hearts. As individuals, we shall all vanish, but the nation, thanks to the efforts of the man who leaves us, and thanks to his sincerity, will remain free and last forever.[24]

This brief speech was a fitting tribute to an individual who was admired and respected by both friends and foes alike. Whilst his political opponents may have chided him, they recognised his patriotism and loyalty to Egypt.

Whatever thoughts the British press may have had on Zaghlul, their obituaries were laudable of this man who challenged British authority in Egypt. Inits obituary of August 24, The Timesregarded Zaghlul as an astute debater who had the ability to inspire his audience with his oratical skills. On the other hand, he could be extreme and inflame the passions of his followers. "[Zaghlul] missed a great opportunity to establish Anglo-Egyptian relations on a sure and friendly basis. But whatever his faults or foibles he proved himself a political leader of rare energy. From being a mere humble fellah, he rose to be the leader of a nation which had only recently awakened in any strong sense of nationhood. That was in itself a remarkable achievement",The Timesstated.[25]

TheManchester Guardiandid not consider Zaghlul a fanatic or a snob. He was the individual who "never swerved from his purpose "and "Englishmen have reason to lament his death because a friendly, honourable, and charming opponent of a policy their Government has fitfully pursued is gone." The obituary concluded that "to Egyptians the loss is irreparable."[26]

In conclusion, Zaghlul Pasha rose from a peasant background to become Prime Minister in January 1924. The assassination of Sir Lee Stack irreparably damaged his premiership making him to appear a weak leader in the eyes of his compatriots. British demands for compensation compounded his problems.

Zaghlul was a charismatic leader who possessed the oratorical skills to sway and inspire ordinary Egyptians to support the Wafd party and who dominated Egyptian politics for more than twenty years. He proved a thorn in the side of the British who twice deported him to Malta and Seychelles in 1919 and 1921 respectively. He was a fierce nationalist who wanted complete and not nominal independence for Egypt. On the negative side, he was rigid, uncompromising and inflexible when negotiating with his political opponents and the British.

There is no doubt that Zaghlul was a devoted patriot who always had best intentions for his country at heart. Whilst he failed to remove the British from Egypt, his actions laid the foundation for the rise of the Colonels in 1952.

REFERENCES[1]Zaghlul's Cabinet.Nationalist Programme',The Times, January 29, 1924, p.11

[2]Egyptinternal883.00/483 J Morton Howell to Secretary of State, February 24, 1924 includingEgyptian Mail,February 22, 1924

[3]Egypt internal883.00/485 J Morton Howell to Secretary of State, March 29, 1924; Mr McDonald's Message',The Times, March 17, 1924, p.12; MacDonald sends greetings',New York Times, March 16, 1924. p.7; Fuad opens Egypt's first parliament. British King and Premier wire congratulations; Cairo Celebrates',Washington Post, March 16, 1924, p.1

[4]Egyptinternal883.00/489 March 29, 1924; 883.00/492 July 3, 1924

[5]The Times, June 27, 1924, p.5 (editorial)

[6]Egyptinternal883.00/492 July 3, 1924; Egypt and the Sudan. Widespread Depression', & The Sudan. Egyptian Cabinet Crisis. Resignation of Zaghlul',The Times, June 28 &30, 1924, pp.12 &14

[7]Egyptinternal883.00/493 July 21, 1924

[8]BDFA Series G Vol.8 December 1925-May 1927,p.48; Great Britain, Command Paper,Cmd 2269, Despatch to His Majesty's High Commissioner for Egypt and the Sudan respecting the Position of His Majesty's Government in regard to Egypt and the Sudan,, Egypt no.1, (1924), HMSO, London, 1924 pp.2-4; Anglo-Egyptian Conversations. Cause of Breakdown. Zaghlul's impossible demands',The Times, October 8, 1924, p.141

[9]Egyptinternal883.00/502-503 November 19 &21, 1924;Al-Ahram Weekly On-line, October 12-18, 2000, issue no.503[10]BDFA Series G Vol.8 December 1925-May 1927,pp.49-50;Egyptinternal883.00/504,507-508 &514 November 22,24 &25, December 5, 1924; The Egyptian Settlement. Customs House released, resignations from the Cabinet',The Times, December 2, 1924, p.14

[11]Dissolution in Egypt. Election in February', & The Egyptian Election campaign. Rival Addresses',The Times, December 24 & 27, 1924, p.9

[12]The Egyptian election. Zaghlulist manifesto',The Times, December 29, 1924, p.9

[13]BDFA Series G Vol.8 December 1925-May 1927,p.51; The Egyptian Election. Opposition to Zaghlul'; The Egyptian Elections. Zaghlulist Party reduced'; The Egyptian Coalition. Parties in New Cabinet',The Times, March 12, 13 &16 1925, pp.15, 14, & 14

[14]Egyptinternal883.9111/4, December 5, 1925 with enclosures of news clippings; 883.00/568. December 11, 1925; New Electoral law for Egypt',The Times, December 9, 1925, p.13

[15]Egypt internal 883.00/594 London to Secretary of State, Washington, June 1, 1926 with enclosuresDaily Telegraph, May 26, 1926; General Election in Egypt. A new departure',The Times, May 22, 1926, p.12

[16]Political murders in Egypt. Former Ministers to be tried'; Political murders in Egypt. Seven men on trial'; The Egyptian Murders. Six men acquitted', & Zaghlul Pasha's Position. An interview with Lord Lloyd., Difficult Situation',The Times, January 7, March 30, May 26, &31 1926 pp.11, 13, 14 & 14; August 24, 1927, p.12

[17]Egyptinternal883.00/596, June 7, 1926; Zaghlul Pasha's Position. An interview with Lord Lloyd., Difficult Situation',The Times, May 31 1926 p.14

[18]Egyptinternal883.00/600 July 5, 1926;BDFA Series G Vol.8 December 1925-May 1927,p.84; Cairo Murder Trial. British Note to Egypt. Judge's resignation',The Times, June 3, 1926, p.16 &August 24, 1927, p.12

[19]Cairo Murder Trial. British Note to Egypt. Judge's resignation',The Times, June 3, 1926, p.16

[20]The Egyptian Crisis. Cabinet formed by Adly Pasha'; New Egyptian Cabinet.Preponderance of Wafd Party. Ziwar Pasha's Career' & The Egyptian Parliament. King Fuad's speech. Claims in the Sudan affirmed',The Times, June 7, 8 &11, 1926, pp.14,16 &14

[21]National Archives of Australia [NAA],Canberra ACT, Series A981 item no. EGY 11 Part.1 Egypt internal situation 1 1923-31, Mr Henderson (Ramleh) to Sir Austen Chamberlain, September 8, 1927

[22]Cabinet Trouble in Egypt. Zaghlul called to Cairo', & Egyptian Political Crisis ended. Relations with Great Britain',The Times, May 19 &20, 1927, pp.13 &13

[23]Egypt internal883.9111/90 , Bulkeley Ramleh, August 29, 1927 with enclosures ofEgyptian Mail, August 24, 1927 &Egyptian Gazette, August 25, 1927; 883.03/8 August 27, 1927

[24]Egyptinternal883.03/8 August 27, 1927

[25]The Times, August 24, 1927, p.12

[26]Manchester Guardian, August 24, 1927, p.12

The Greek-Turkish War 1919-23By Stavros T.StavridisThis book describes different facets of the Greek-Turkish conflict through the eyes of two Melbourne newspapers: The Age and Argus. There were times when the Melbourne press favored the Greek and opposed the Turks. It also outlines the role that the Australian press played in the development of Australian nationalism and identity.

The Melbourne press covered the Greek-Turkish conflict for three important reasons. Firstly, Australian forces had played a major part in the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East in the 1914-18 War. Secondly, the Greek-Turkish War involved the clash of two opposing armies: the Greek army of occupation at Smyrna (Izmir) and the Turkish Nationalist movement led by Mustapha Kemal Pasha (later known as Ataturk). Australia had no direct involvement in the actual conflict but the Colonial Office did provide the Australian Government through the Governor Generals office, with some information on the events unfolding in Asia Minor. Throughout the period 1919-23, Australia was trying to chart an independent foreign policy within the framework of the British Empire. The Imperial Conferences was the only forum where the Dominions could question Britain on foreign and Imperial policy issues. The Australian Prime Minister W. M. Hughes wanted the Dominions to have some input into the foreign policy formulation of the British Empire. The Chanak crisis of September 1922 nearly brought Australia into direct conflict with the Kemalists following the defeat of the Greek army.

Stavros T Stavridisis a historical researcher at the National Centre for Hellenic Studies and Research, Latrobe University, Bundoora, Australia. He holds an MA in Greek/Australian history from RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia. He has written extensively on Greek, Armenians and Assyrians and conflict in Asia Minor covering the period 1890-1923.