At this period, it must be borne in mind that the British expeditionary forces had already started, and the Ministry of Mr. Gladstone had now no desire to have the Turkish troops, for which they had previously professed so much anxiety. It was, however, necessary to keep up appearances, and to find from time to time plausible pretexts to prevent the Sultan from carrying out his determination.
In effecting the desired object Lord Dufferin, as will be seen, found means to throw such difficulties in the way as to prevent the despatch of a Turkish army to Egypt.
The views of Germany were also at the same time communicated to Lord Granville, and were stated to him as being that the Sultan had the first claim to exercise the proposed protection. In the event of his being unwilling or unable to do so, the Powers interested in the Canal would be justified in acting themselves. If those Powers had the intention of protecting their own interests in the Canal, Germany could not take upon herself any responsibility for the measures to be taken for this purpose. Finally Austria, Russia, and Italy adopted the same view as Germany.
On the 28th the adjourned debate on the vote of 9,410,000 francs for the despatch of French troops to Egypt for the protection of the Canal took place in the French Chamber of Deputies. The force, it was explained, was to be 8,000 men and two gunboats. The Ministers pointed out that all that was intended was to occupy one or two points of the Canal. France would be charged with the surveillance of the Canal between Port Saïd and Ismailia, and England of the part between Ismailia and Suez.
The vote was violently opposed, and in the end rejected by a majority of 341 against the Government. The debate was wound up by a remarkable speech from M. Clemenceau, who said,—"Messieurs, la conclusion de ce qui se passe en ce moment est celle-ci, l'Europe est couverte de soldats, tout le monde attend, toutes les Puissances se réservent leur liberté pour l'avenir; réservez la liberté d'action de la France."
Lord Granville, seeing that all hope of French co-operation was gone, intimated to M. de Freycinet that, although Her Majesty's Government accepted the co-operation of Turkey, it would nevertheless proceed with its own measures. "That then," said the French Minister, "is intervention à deux."
On the 1st August Lord Dufferin informed the Turkish Minister, in reply to his request that the British expedition should be countermanded, that it was useless for him to base any of his calculations on the supposition either that the troops would be countermanded, or that the British corps d'armée would leave Egypt until order had been completely re-established.
The Minister said with reference to the Proclamation against Arabi, that he thought it would be advisable to defer it until after the Turkish troops were landed.
Lord Dufferin answered that if the Proclamation was not previously issued, no Turkish troops would be allowed to land in Egypt. The Ambassador said, "If the Sultan desired to co-operate with England it was necessary he should first clearly define the attitude he intended to assume towards Arabi and the rebellious faction."
On the same day the Ottoman plenipotentiaries delivered to the other members of the Conference the reasons for the Porte not issuing the desired Proclamation declaring Arabi a rebel. The principal passage was as follows:—"It is, therefore, quite natural to suppose that a Proclamation which would accuse a subject of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan, who, at a moment when he showed fidelity and devotion to his sovereign, was the object of distinctions, would derive its force from the immediate presence of the material factor, the absence of which at the time of its publication would render its provisions barren."