LVIII.

DISRAELI AND THE PURCHASE OF THE SUEZ CANAL SHARES

THE story of the purchase of the Suez Canal shares by Lord Beaconsfield has been told many times, but Mr. [afterwards Sir] Henry Lucy, in “Sixty Years in the Wilderness,” throws fresh light on the subject.

“On a certain Sunday night in the spring of 1875 he¹ chanced to be dining in Bruton Street with Henry Oppenheim, one of the original proprietors of the _Daily News_. During a residence in Paris and Egypt that gentleman, just settling down in London, was brought into close connection with Egyptian financial affairs. On the previous day he heard of the intention of the impecunious Khedive to sell _en bloc_ his holding in the capital of the Suez Canal. Greenwood instantly saw the opportunity for a great stroke of State. On leaving Bruton Street he went direct to the private residence of the Foreign Secretary (Lord Derby) and told him of the rare chance. Lord Derby informed the Prime Minister, whose Oriental mind glowed at the prospect of so stupendous a deal. Inquiry secretly made at Cairo disclosed the fact that the Khedive would ‘part’ for a sum of four millions sterling. But it must be money down.

¹ Frederick Greenwood, one of the ablest journalists of his day.

“It was, Greenwood told me, on Lord Beaconsfield’s personal suggestion that the difficulty, at the moment apparently insuperable, was overcome. The consent of Parliament was necessary to confirmation of the deal. That involved both delay and publicity, either fatal to success. Late on the Thursday night following the Bruton Street dinner, the Premier sent his private secretary, Monty Corry,¹ to call upon Baron Rothschild, the Sidonia of ‘Coningsby, ’ at the time head of the great financial house. Even a Rothschild did not happen to have about him at the moment a trifle of four million sterling. Nor was it possible, in accordance with the traditions of the house, that such a transaction should be entered upon without having been considered in family council. Corry accordingly returned to the Premier without definite reply. It came promptly on the following morning, the terms being that the money would be advanced on a commission of 2½ per cent.

¹ Afterwards Lord Rowton.

“These terms were pretty stiff, involving a payment of £100,000. The City heard of them with envy, and they were discussed with much severity when the matter came before the House of Commons. The Rothschilds and their friends defended them on the ground that the colossal transaction involved a certain measure of risk. There was absolutely no security beyond the influence of the Premier, still master of a majority in the House of Commons, and pledged to invoke its aid in order to obtain Parliamentary sanction. The whole thing happened between two Sundays. On the first Greenwood dined at Bruton Street; on the second, calling on Lord Derby, he learned that the transaction had been successfully carried through, and was invited to say what form his personal recompense should take. He declined to specify a request, protesting he had done nothing but his duty, and was content that its accomplishment should be his reward....”¹

¹ Cornhill, January, 1912, _pp._ 64‒65.