the defence of the country, they said to him, 'You are the person responsible for these proceedings'; but when he revealed this at the trial, and showed clearly that he had been deceived and led astray, his words were not listened to, but were cast to the winds. For the English exhibited a conduct that was not becoming, by bringing people from England to defend him; insomuch that the people said, 'See how the English people are on Arabi's side and are anxious to assist him; for if there was not an understanding between him and them, they would not have undertaken his defence.' And what confirmed the people in this impression (an impression which gained ground also with the Europeans) was the following fact :-After the trial a day was appointed for the reading and hearing of the sentence, on which an immense number of natives and foreigners assembled; and the sentence was read, proving the opposition and resistance of Arabi and his associates to the Khedive and the interests of the country. when, in spite of the lawyers for the defence, it appeared that according to justice and in conformity with the law, sentence of death was pronounced; in less than a couple of minutes a high order from the Khedive arrived and was read, granting pardon to Arabi to the extent of changing the sentence of death into one of perpetual banishment. The following is a copy of the order:

'WE, THE KHEDIVE OF EGYPT,

But

'Whereas sentence has been pronounced against Ahmed Arabi Pasha according to what has been proved against him by the Military Tribunal on the 22 Moharram, 1300 (3rd December, 1882), in conformity with article 96 of the Ottoman Military Regulations, and section 59 of the Criminal Code. And whereas we have the power of extending pardon to the said Ahmed Arabi; we therefore order as follows:-1st. The sentence which has been issued against Ahmed Arabi requiring his punishment shall be changed into sentence of perpetual banishment from the province of Egypt and its dependencies. 2nd. This pardon shall become of no effect, and the sentence of capital punishment shall be carried out should he return to Egypt or any of its dependencies. 3rd. The Minister of the Interior and the Minister of War and Marine are charged with the execution of this our order, in so far as it concerns them respectively. Given at the Palace of Abidin, 22 Moharram, 1300 (3rd December, 1882). 'By Order of His Highness, the Khedive,

The rumour got abroad that this pardon was granted by the Khedive against his will at the instance of the English; and it was well known among the Europeans that the thing was at variance with all custom, and everybody wondered at it. People said, 'How could the Khedive pardon Arabi, after he had said of him and his associates, at the time they assembled with guns and troops in the square of Abidin, that they would certainly be hanged; and after Arabi had mocked the Khedive on several occasions and before many people, saying to his face that he was still a boy and knew nothing of government?' People wondered also that the pardon was submitted to and confirmed by Sherif Pasha and Riaz Pasha, although they had been Arabi's bitterest enemies: for Riaz had been forced to withdraw from the Ministry on the demand of Arabi, who had said, 'It is necessary that Riaz Pasha, the deceiver, should resign.' In short it came to be believed that the pardon was issued on the demand of the English; and this was the actual fact as we personally found out for ourselves. Thereupon the Europeans took to making sport of the English, asserting that there was collusion between them and Arabi at Tell-el-Kebir; and some of his followers even said that he and those with him received a cheque on the Bank of London, and many other things to the same effect, based upon the double dealing displayed by the English. Certain of the newspapers even published an account of the battle of Tell-el-Kebir, calling it Tell-el-dhahab (‘Hill of Gold'). In fact the pardon of Arabi and his associates was another blot on the name of the English; for it was a disgrace in the circumstances, and made them a laughing-stock to people of every nationality. It would have been much better that sentence of death had been executed against him and his associates, and all who were accomplices with him in his evil deeds; for in that case the minds of the Egyptians and others would have been impressed, and the terror of the English Government would have fallen upon them, and the consequence would have been peace and safety. But the contrary took place, for evil increased in the province, corrupt deeds abounded, and safety no longer existed and peace was at an end. For the evil doer said in his heart, 'If Arabi with all his offences has been

spared, how much more shall I;' and we have heard his case made a justification of murder, plunder and avarice, and have seen how it was the occasion of the atrocities of the Soudanese. For certain of Arabi's party went into the Soudan and stirred up a spirit of waywardness and of evil in the hearts of the Soudanese, who, as soon as they learned how affairs had gone in Egypt, had their confidence raised and their opposition to their Governors and the Government increased, and this was to a great extent the cause of their rising into rebellion. And, worse than that, was the resistance to the English troops on the part of the inhabitants of the cities in Egypt, who invited the soldiers into their houses and murdered them. Which when the English authorities became aware of, they did not even punish the offenders, but left them to do as they liked, contenting themselves with ordering the English soldiers not to go out at night, and laying other restrictions upon their movements to keep them out of danger. And there were many other things which caused disturbances of the peace, into which we cannot here enter at length. Then on the 7th December, 1882, pardon was issued in favour of Toulbah Pasha Asmat, and Abd-el-'Al Pasha Halimi, and Mahmud Pasha Sami, and Ali Pasha Fehmi; who were all banished from Egypt and its dependencies on the same terms as Arabi. But this was too much for the Minister of the Interior, his Excellency Riaz Pasha, who represented to the Khedive that the pardon of these men would incite others to hostile deeds, and that probably some other man would arise like Arabi and repeat his conduct, and therefore it was unwise to pardon them. To which the Khedive replied that what his Excellency said was very true, and he himself agreed with him; but what was to be done, since the English wished it so. After much talk, Riaz Pasha insisted that the will of the Egyptian Government ought to be free, and that the English should not interfere with its operation, since they were ignorant of the condition of the country. The Khedive replied, 'I cannot do otherwise;' and Riaz Pasha, seeing that the power of administration was to be controlled by the English, and that in fact some of them were placed in administrative positions, tendered his resignation, saying, There can in these circumstances be no internal peace in the

6

country.' It is probable that the English had ulterior designs in this matter; for the English Consul-General asked him to withdraw his resignation. But Riaz Pasha said 'It is possible for me to withdraw my resignation, provided the English do not interfere in internal affairs; for I am Minister of the Interior, and bound to administer affairs according to my knowledge, which is superior to yours.' The Consul, however, declined to hand over to him the power he demanded, saying that it was necessary that the English should exercise control over internal affairs. Riaz, perceiving this, said, 'Let Egypt be ruined by other hands than mine, I am clear of all consequences that may happen to the country doomed to unrest and general disquiet.' As he persisted in offering his resignation, it was accepted; and he has never taken office up to the present time. In his place was appointed Ismail Eyûb Pasha, after others had been offered the office and declined it; the order for his appointment being issued on the 10th December 1882. On the same day also was issued an order, changing the sentence of death against Mahmûd Fehmi Pasha and Ya'kûb Pasha Sami into sentence of perpetual banishment on the same terms as that of Arabi.

On the 14th December 1882, appeared an order that all property and effects belonging to Ahmed Arabi and Toulbah 'Asmat, and Abd-el Al Halimi, and Mahmûd Sami, and Ali Fehmi, and Mahmûd Fehmi, and Ya'kûb Sami should be taken possession of by the Government and sold; the proceeds to go the indemnification of those who had suffered by the rebellion.

to

On the 21st December was issued an order to the effect that Ahmed Arabi, and Toulbah 'Asmat, and all the others were divested of all titles and ranks and distinctions which had been conferred upon them, and their names for ever effaced from the list of officers in the Egyptian army.

Finally on the 24th December sentence was pronounced on the Notables who had been implicated in the rebellion. Many of them were sentenced to pay sums of money as guarantee of their behaviour and to remain in distant seclusion outside the capital, and in their native places, without going beyond them in any direction; and many others were sentenced to fixed periods of

banishment from the country. Some of them accordingly went to Syria, some to Sawākin, some to Massowah, some to Constantinople, and so on.

CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE.

Job and Solomon or The Wisdom of the Old Testament. By T. K. CHEYNE, D.D. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, & Co., 1887.

As a piece of careful and reverent criticism this latest of Dr. Cheyne's works deserves the highest praise. Its statements are clear and incisive, but its inferences are characterised by extreme caution. From beginning to end it will be difficult to find a word to which the most susceptibly orthodox can reasonably object. On those who still adhere to the traditional opinion in respect to the origin and authorship of the books of Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, its perusal can scarcely fail to have a decided influence. Students will read the volume with pleasure; and few persons of intelligence will rise from its pages without feelings of admiration both for the skill and learning of its author, and for the spirit of reverence and sincere loyalty to the truth by which it is throughout inspired. Many of the results it contains have been given to the world already. Others of them have not. But like the rest of Dr. Cheyne's writings it bears ample evidence of independent and substantial work. The foremost place is given to the book Job, the best, though not the oldest of the monuments of Hebrew wisdom. A critical analysis of the book written in plain prose' but extremely readable and effective, and occasionally illustrated by a citation from Dante or the Paradise Regained, is followed by a series of short chapters dealing with its date, authorship, history, and topics of a kindred nature, all of which chapters are remarkably well done, though here and there they are probably a little over-cautious and undecided or hesitating. The title 'The Book of the Trial of the Righteous Man and the Justification of God' has the advantage of indicating at once the original idea of the author of the poem, and the intention with which he or his interpolators made their subsequent additions. With Ewald and others Dr. Cheyne adopts the now apparently necessary opinion that the poem is based upon a traditional story. His hesitation to adopt the theory that the Prologue is not by the author of the Colloquies is justifiable, but it is doubtful whether so much can be said of his indecision in respect to chapters xxviii., xxxviii.-xl. 14, xlii. 1-6, xl. 15-24, xl. and the Epilogue. That these are later insertions is admitted, but the question of their authorship is set