The Hawera Star. THURSDAY. MAY 3, 1928. WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN EGYPT ?

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 3 May 1928, Page 4

The Hawera Star.

THURSDAY. MAY 3, 1928. WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN EGYPT ?

Delivered every evening by f> o'olook In Hawera. Manair.. Normanby, Okaiawa, Eltham. Jlangatoki. Kaponga, Alton, Iturleyville Patea. Waverley, Mokoia, Whakamara, Ohangai, Meremere. Frasei Road, and Ararata.

The uncompromising attitude of Britain as represented by the statement issued by Sir Austen Chamberlain, following • upon Egypt’s refusal to drop /the Assemblies Bill, will have the effect- of turning the eyes of the world upon Egypt as the centre of the next controversy of international importance. This Bill, which the Egyptian. Government proposes to place upon its Statute Book, is regarded by British authorities as a deliberate attempt by the Egyptian Nationalists to free themselves from British suzerainty and Cabinet has taken up the ■challenge. Whatever opinion observers may hold regarding Britain ’s rights to a voice in Egyptian affairs, there can be no difference of opinion in regard to tho present, attitude of the Egyptian Government. The Nationalists, whose party is in power, have not adopted any subtle method of throwing down the gauntlet to Britain. The. Bill aTound which centres the present discussion, aims at the removal of the restrictions at present placed upon the assembly of persons at meetings. That in itself may appear to European eyes to be an innocuous and even desirable measure, but .those who have had long association with the af-

Hair® of that country realise that the object of the Nationalists is by. no means as innocent as it may appear. The meetings which take place in Egypt’s political centres have in the past led to some troublous scenes and even to bloodshed', as witness the riots of 1921, when foreigners were attacked with fatal results for some of their number. The assassination of a High Commissioner is a matter of such recent history that it is not yet forgotten by Britain and the world that the Egyptians are capable of political plotting of a more harmful character than that which accompanies the mootings of agitators in the British Empire, where liberty of speech is a. highly prized possession and a safety valve. But the Nationalists' Assemblies Bill not only seeks to remove restrictions; it. actually seeks to impose a sterner penalty upon those officers of the law who break up meetings than upon conspirators and others who may be responsible for disorders occurring at a meeting. The provision made in the Bill for the dispersal of a meeting are so slender as to make the sincerity of those responsible for the measure a matter of grave doubt. Article Five, of the Bill states that an officer may dissolve a meeting only if a written demand to that effect is made by those who organised the meeting, or if serious disorders occur. There is also a further provision that if order is restored 1 the meeting may be resumed! It is obvious that the Nationalists desire to remove the existing power of the Administration to quell anything which may lead to a breach of the peace or interfere with the good government of the country from a foreigner’s point of view, and it is not, a matter for surprise that Britain should at once issue its stern ultimatum to the Egyptian Government. If Egypt were a self-administered principality, there would be no cause for dissatisfaction with this piece of proposed legislation; indeed, in that event, neither Britain nor any other Power would be interested in anything which aimed at the granting of fuller powers for the | hatching of conspiracies and the infiatn- ' ing of hot-hegded political malcontents, j but Egypt, is not in that happy position. • Britain contributed largely to the cost j of .building the Suez Canal and in 187 G she consolidated her claim to a voice in ! the control of that important waterway ,by purchasing the Khedive’s shares. The Suez is, of course, the gateway to India and is of importance to Britain in relation-to others of her overseas possessions; it. is not remarkable therefore that she has not been able to contemplate with equanimity the demands which have arisen from time to time for Egyptian independence. However, Britain lias not contented herself with standing guard’ over the Canal; she has played a generous- part in assisting in the development of the country, and by her money, her enterprise and' her administration of the responsibilities which have fallen to her in Egypt, she has, as Lord Birkenhead claimed in a speech earlier this week, been the saviour of the country. What the future holds in regard to British occupation of Egyptian, territory cannot bo foretold. In the proposed Treaty, which was rejected ;by the Egyptian GovernIment. this- year, Britain offered, at the j end of ten years, to submit the vexed question of British occupation to the League of Nations and abide by its finding. Sonic British Imperialists- hold the opinion that, it would be better to have a friendly and independent Egypt in alliance with Britain- than a hostile and .suspicious' country harbouring a sense of grievance and anxious to throw off all vestige of tutelage at the earliest possible moment. No less an. organ than the London "Spectator” thinks along these lines, with, of course, an important reservation regarding the protection of the Canal. Now that the Egyptian ' challenge has been accepted we may see this question reopened.