MR. DANBY SEYMOURsaid, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the 1724 Treasury, Whether he can give any information as to the statement which has appeared in the newspapers, that the Pasha of Egypt has enabled the Suez Canal Company to be constituted, by taking up shares to the amount of 95,000,000 f. (upwards of £3,500,000) which it had been found impossible to place, and thereby prevented the dissolution of the Company? He also wished to ask, whether any negotiations are pending in relation to the Suez Canal, and whether Mr. Cobden has any instructions to negotiate in Paris upon that subject. He further would ask the noble Lord whether the Pasha of Egypt, before contracting the late loan through Messrs. Lafitte, of Paris, has had the sanction of the Porte; and, if not, whether it be not an infraction of the Treaty of Settlement effected at the close of the Syrian War in 1840?
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONIt is quite true, Sir, as my hon. Friend has said, that the Pasha of Egypt has been induced to take a large number of shares in the Suez Canal Company. That Company is, as I have often said, one of the greatest and most remarkable attempts at delusion that has been practised in modern times. It is a complete fallacy from beginning to end. A great many persons in France—small people—have been induced to take small shares under the notion that the concern would be a profitable matter. The progress of the works in Egypt, however, has been such as to show that, if not impracticable, it will require an expenditure of money, time, and labour quite beyond the reach of any private company. The projector of the scheme, M. Lesseps, found that a house at Trieste had repudiated a large number of shares which they had been induced to take, and he then thought that the Pasha of Egypt was a good person upon whom to fix the responsibility of accepting them. He accordingly induced the unfortunate Pasha to take 64,000 shares, amounting to about 32,000,000 f. M. Lesseps afterwards wished him to take a larger number of shares, but the unfortunate Pasha, who had been once hoodwinked, had now his eyes open; he refused to accept any more. M. Lesseps, however, wishing in his benevolence to do the Pasha a service which the Pasha himself was not sensible of, without the consent of the Pasha placed to his credit a large additional number of shares, amounting in value to about the sum mentioned by my hon. Friend. When the Pasha is 1725 called on for his money, I can only hope for his own sake that it will not he forthcoming. As to the other question, I have to say that the Pasha has contracted a loan with a house at Marseilles, hut the loan has been contracted by him in his private capacity. In fulfilment of his engagement with the Suez Canal Company he has mortgaged all his private property in Egypt to this house at Marseilles. That has not been done with the consent of the Turkish Government, and that consent was not necessary. There is nothing in the Convention to which my hon. Friend refers which militates against the right of the Pasha to deal with what he deems to be his private property. I am not aware of any negotiations that are going on upon this subject. There have been negotiations between the British and French Governments, and we have all along expressed our opinions upon this subject. The French Government has said that they will take no part in the affair. The French agents, who are not always sustained by their Government, have, I believe, locally taken an active part. There is no particular negotiation going on at present, and Mr. Cobdeti has received no instructions bearing upon this subject.
§ MR. SPOONERIs Mr. Cobden our Minister at Paris, as well as Earl Cowley?
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONMr. Cobden is authorized, as Commissioner, in conjunction with Earl Cowley, to negotiate the points which remain to be settled in relation to the Commercial Treaty.
§ Afterwards—
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, he had just received a letter which somewhat modified the answer he had given to his hon. Friend (Mr. D. Seymour) on the subject of the Egyptian loan. It appeared from a despatch received from Alexandria that an agent had left Alexandria for Paris with a deed of loan for 28,000,000f., contracted not at Marseilles, but through Messrs Lafitte. The loan was to be secured on the Customs' duties of Alexandria. The Treaty of 1841 did not preclude the Egyptian Government from entering into such a Treaty, but at the same time it was proper to state that there was a previous loan by the Turkish Government which would have a prior claim upon the revenue of Egypt.