THE KHEDIVE AND THE CAIRO RIOTS.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1646, 30 May 1879, Page 3

THE KHEDIVE AND THE CAIRO RIOTS.

['•Pall Mall Budget."]

When we first heard of the riots at Cairo, we were inclined to think them of small importance. Subsequent reports, ho wever, and a little reflection thereon, somewhat modify our views. What id the probability that a military £meute should break out in Cairo, without some understanding that it would bo rather agreeable than otherwise to the Khedive himself, the lord of nil things Egyptian ? Rioting in tho streets of Alexandria, an outcry from the mixod population of that city, would have been comprehensible enough without deep inquiry. Bit a military riot in Cairo is quite another matter ; and if it is suspected that the rioters believed with more or less reason that the Khedivo would smile upon their proceedings, his Highness's general conduct and character certainly do not discountenancs the suspicion. Nor do these reports of the Khedive's sallying"' out to disperse the mob do away with the suspicion by any means ; while as for his declaration in the Council of Ministers that "he would not be answerable for the public safety," or, as another report has it, that "he could not guarantee tho continued tranquility of the Arab population," if Nubar Pasha remained in office, it is so ridiculous a figment as to place his whole conduct in the worst possible light. It is not only an absurdity but a threat j and a threat of extreme audacity. What it comes to is, that it is quite easy for him, to whom every man in Egypt pays unquestionable obedience, to cast oil upon this little insurrectionary flame, and yet not allow his hand to be seen; and that rioting may certainly be expected to spread unless he has his own way in the Council. Of course it is to the last degree absurd to talk of a spontaneous rising against Nubar Pasha; and the absurdity of it makes the Khedive's language so significant. But whether he will be allowed to introduce into Egypt the South American manner of influencing tho conduct of affairs may be doubted. For ourselves, we are inclined to say positively that he will not be permitted to do so. If the Khedive had reason to be dissatisfied with Nubar Pasha—good reason, wo mean—there could not have been much difficulty in displacing him in a regular and orderly way. The presumption is that there could have been no reason, or the Khedive would not have resorted to the extremely rough insinuation that if Nubar did not go he would abstain from using his own absolute authority in quelling a riot; abstinence being plain encouragement under the circumstances. It seemo to us impossible but that this little episode should be sharply examined by the Governments of England and France. Those Governments can hardly insist, under any cirenmstances, upon tho restoration of Nubar Pasha to office ; but what they will insist upon without doubt is, that their own efforts to remedy the mischiefs of the Khedive's rule shall not be undone in this violent manner. And it seems only reasonable to anticipate that tho Sultan may have something to say to his vassil on the subject. It is rather too absurd for tho Porte to be calling out to the Governments of England and France for Commissioners to assist in settling its financial difficulties, while in Egypt similar officials are being terrorized by a mob which evidently supposes that its conduct pleases, and perhaps serves, the Khedive.