Churchill, Randolph Henry Spencer, Lord, 1849-1895
I advocate, in the first place, the expulsion ‘bag and baggage’ of
the Khedive Tewfik, with all ‘his Turks and his Circassians, his
Zaptiehs and his Mudirs, his Bimbashis and Yuzbashis, his Kaimakams
and his Pashas’[15]--no great number of them in all; two or three
ships would hold the lot. I advocate the recall of the exiles from
Ceylon, the resuscitation of the national party, the formation of a
genuine popular Government, at the head of which shall be placed a
Prince--either native or European, as you will--who shall be indeed
and in truth constitutional, enlightened, and just. I advocate a
great re-arrangement and reduction of the Egyptian national debt
and a clean sweep of the debts of the victimised, the bankrupt, and
the ruined fellaheen. I advocate the placing of Egypt under the
guarantee and guardianship of united Europe, so that no one single
Power shall be able to exercise there superior influence to
another, so that collective authority shall restrain individual
ambition. In a word, I advocate--I plead for--the real emancipation
of an historic land and the true freedom of an ancient race.
* * * * *
You will be told that Egypt is the high-road to India, and that
Britain must hold it at all costs. This is a terrible and a
widespread delusion. Similar delusions have before now led astray
the foreign policy of this country. At one time it was ‘the balance
of power’: that has passed away. At another time it was ‘the
integrity of the Ottoman Empire’: that has tumbled into an
abandoned and forgotten grave; and now we have ‘the high-road to
India’ will-o’-the-wisp, which in time will vanish too. Egypt is
not the high-road to India. The Suez Canal is a commercial route to
India, and a good route, too, in time of peace; but it never was,
and never could be, a military route for Great Britain in time of
war. In time of war there are no well-marked high-roads to and fro
across the British Empire. The path of Britain is upon the ocean,
her ways lie upon the deep, and you should avoid as your greatest
danger any reliance on transcontinental communication, where, at
any time, you may have to encounter gigantic military hosts.
(Edinburgh, December 18, 1883.)
The second speech dealt with the question of the extension of the
franchise, and must be considered in its place. The third foreshadowed
the advent of the Home Rule struggle:--
[Sidenote: 1884 ÆT. 35]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account