Coll 15/3(1) 'Egypt. Abolition of Capitulations in Montreux Conference and Convention 1937' [‎598v] (1201/1220)

After some discussion Hafez Afifi reserved his own personal opinion n th
matter. His point was not taken up by his colleagues and may reason a b? h!
considered as abandoned. ^ be
&
III .—Unilateral Egyptian Denunciation of Capitulations if Conference fa'l
Question of Support by His Majesty's Government.
Afifi Pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders. also asked whether His Majesty's Government would now tell th
Egyptian Government that, should the conference fail, they would support th 6
Egyptian Government in unilateral abolition of the Capitulations. In makin 6
this enquiry he was not contemplating unilateral abolition of the Mixed Courts’
Mr. Beckett answered that it was impossible for His Majesty’s Government
to give any such undertaking. His Majesty's Government were confident that
the conference would succeed if the proposals made to the Powers were reasonable
and moderate, and the meeting was being held for the purpose of reaching between
His Majesty's Government and the Egyptian Government an agreed "moderate
proposal which should have really good prospects of acceptance. The Egyptian
Government must trust His Majesty's Government as their allies in this ^matter
The Egyptian representatives expressed general readiness to do so, but repeated
that they would much like some assurance of the kind, though they realised that
they were asking His Majesty's Government to give an undertaking in respect of
a hypothetical situation and that His Majesty’s Government were always
reluctant to do this.
IV .—Length of the Transition Regime for the Mixed Courts.
This subject was then discussed.
Mr. Beckett explained that His Majesty's Government had not proposed
twenty years for this period because it might have been falsely associated in the
public mind with the period of twenty years mentioned in article 16 of the Treaty
of Alliance. They had, therefore, taken eighteen years.
7 he Egyptian Representatives stated that Nahas Pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders. was entirely opposed
to the period being one of more than eight or, at the very most, ten years.
Makram Pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders. explained that in Nahas Pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders. 's view, and in that of other
members of the Government, any longer period w T ouid break the treaty. To the
man in the street the Capitulations meant the Mixed Courts. The Egyptian
public would simply not understand that as a result of a treaty which stipulated
the abolition of the Capitulations the detested Mixed Courts should continue for
longer than eight or ten years. This period could be explained as necessary for
the preparation of new r codes and other necessary adjustments; anything more
could not. Nahas Pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders. was extremely strong on the point.
tu P e ?k e tt pointed out that the real grievance of Egypt in this matter was
e legislative functions of the Mixed Courts, and the fact that foreigners did
not pay the ordinary taxes. These would disappear in about a year.
. akram Pasha An Ottoman title used after the names of certain provincial governors, high-ranking officials and military commanders. said that, on the contrary, the Mixed Courts as such were the
Far f t nevanc ? J ;! 16 in the street. He gave the instance of usurers, even
ur 0 I )eai1 men s l ra w in order to get claims in respect of loans
p n .* e ^ lxec ^ Courts. The result often was that on a judgment of the
loans onruri ? i ? Pf asant I° un d himself called upon to pay 8 or 9 per cent, on
proceedino-s^n at” 1 ' P ercenta ge was increased by the great expense of
which had W 6 r^\ X ^ Courts. He referred to Iraq and iudicial regime
men had been applied m that country.
import r ® m mded the Egyptian representatives that the comparative
countries The Hi f01 ' eign “"ities in Egypt was far greater than in other
them and thej wouflSrt infl ° f ^ ^ W0U ' d be a grGat ^ i?
General consent tn tha v ^ . m ^ uence °n their Governments. It was necessary, if
^ene.al consent to the abolition of the Capitulations was to be secured m January,