§ 11. Sir HERBERT NIELDasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has further considered the question raised concerning the treatment inflicted on certain British officials in the Egyptian State Railways and postal administration to which his attention was called during the months of April and June last; whether he is aware that the grievances still remain, and that the officials in question resent the manner in which the Egyptian Government has offered to meet the legitimate claims on them by offering as a gift sums less than one-sixth of the lawful claims of such officials, and of the means adopted by them to compel the acceptance of such proposal; and whether he is aware that one of the officials concerned has been altogether deprived of the enjoyment of the small benefit accruing from the offer?
§ Mr. PONSONBYThe reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Having regard to the danger of creating an embarrassing precedent, the decision of the Egyptian Government to accord the officials in question practically three 490 years' expatriation pay, to which they were not technically entitled, hardly seems open to criticism. It is understood that the official referred to in the last part of the question, by refusing his re-grading and by opting to retire with compensation, rendered himself ineligible for the benefit of the above decision.
§ Sir H. NIELDWould the hon. Gentleman tell us whether His Majesty's Government are indifferent to the rights of Englishmen?
§ Mr. PONSONBYCertainly not.
§ Lieut.-Colonel JAMESWas this decision arrived at by the English Government on the advice and with the concurrence of the High Commissioner in Egypt?
§ Mr. BUCHANANBefore the hon. Gentleman replies, may I ask what is the "English" Government?
§ Mr. PONSONBYIn reply to the hon. and gallant Member for Bromley (Lieut.-Colonel James), the decision is with the Egyptian Government.
§ Mr. BUCHANANI must protest against Scotland being insulted in this fashion.