Egypt -- History -- Mohammed Ali, 1805-1849; Syria -- History; Turkey -- History -- 1829-1878
What the Ambassador says of the preparations Mehemet Ali was making for
resistance is incorrect. I was at Alexandria at the time, and I saw no
new preparations; there were a few men completing his unfinished works,
which were so ill constructed that if not attended to they would have
crumbled to pieces. He was certainly reorganizing his army, after the
retreat, which was absolutely necessary; but even had he been preparing
for resistance could he be blamed? The Firman that was sent to him was
so perfectly absurd that no man in his senses, with an army of 50,000 or
60,000 man, and upwards of 10,000 cavalry, would have accepted such
terms from a weak master; and no set of men, possessed of common
understanding, and knowing the relative position of the Porte and
Mehemet Ali, would have counselled such a Firman. The Ambassador
finishes by recommending the Porte to do nothing till they have heard
from Great Britain.
Baron Stürmer was a wiser man, and he recommended the Porte to seek some
means of acceding to the entreaties of Mehemet Ali without compromising
the dignity of the Sultan[114]. Baron Königsmark and M. Titow declined
giving an opinion till they received further instructions[115].
On the 29th of March Rechid Pacha and Ahmed Fethi Pachi were displaced,
and succeeded by Rifat Bey, as Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Tahir
Pacha, as Capudan Pacha.
On the 31st March Prince Metternich, seeing no end to this question,
instructed Baron Stürmer to inform the Divan, that if they did not adopt
the modifications to the Firman recommended by the Conference of London,
the Emperor of Austria would withdraw altogether from the alliance.
Prince Metternich writes most strongly; he observes, “The contents of
your despatch of the 17th of March attract our most serious attention,
because they prove the existence of a position without precedent in the
annals of diplomacy. What, for example, has been the result of the very
precise instructions of the 30th of January? What attention have the
Divan, and the agents of the Four Courts, paid to the opinion expressed
in that document? On the one hand we see the Porte undecided as to the
course which it will have to take on the subject of the representations
of Mehemet Ali against certain articles of the Firman; and on the other,
the Representatives of the Four Powers ignorant how to counsel from the
very clear words of the Collective Note above mentioned; in truth, M. le
Baron, it is impossible to make it out.” This is pretty strong language,
which he follows up by saying, “The instructions I sent you on the 26th
of March have replied, by anticipation, to your scruples, and I flatter
myself you will have considered those instructions as anticipating the
orders which each of you have applied for, and not have hesitated to
offer the advice they contain.
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