- 20 - in understanding the required changes (1). And it is no wonder, for the system referred to by our important phrase "foreign privileges" is a complex system altogether. One does not grasp its meaning except after much consideration and study. As for the error in understanding the intended meaning of the proposed changes, the evidence for it lies in the statements made from time to time. Their apparent meaning suggests that their authors believe that if these changes were accepted, they would necessarily lead to either the abolition of the mixed government, or the non-application of personal status laws to Europeans residing in Egypt, or that the criminal courts that would be established at that time would not gain people's trust in their judgments, or that Europeans would be left at the mercy of the national police. Ultimately, this would mean the annulment of the rights and privileges that Europeans now enjoy, without any compensation to guarantee them protection from government tyranny. Furthermore, it is truly noteworthy that if the reform that a person seeks is given a name that deters people from opposing it, then naming it would be one of the great misfortunes for that peace. This is because the words used are pleasing to the ear and encourage compliance, thus having a great impact on political discussions. Do you not see that Mr. Cecil Rhodes' project to establish his new government, which he called "From the Cape to Cairo," had a better reception among people? And I believe the reason for this is that this great man, who knew how to win hearts and stir minds, gave his project a name that sounded good and encouraged compliance, even if it was not entirely accurate (2). We, who share the desire to reform the legislative system currently in place in Egypt, have not been as fortunate as Mr. Rhodes, as people often describe our project as the one intended to "abolish foreign privileges," as described by the British Chamber of Commerce and the Mixed Chamber of Commerce. However, this description is incorrect and contradicts the intended meaning. The issue at hand is not the abolition of foreign privileges, but rather the preservation of all that preserves those privileges. (1) For example, a letter sent by the Italian Chamber of Commerce to the Minister of Foreign Affairs in Rome, published by the newspapers, contained some points that did not convey what I proposed, even to understanding. As for the statements they made, they are merely repetitions of others. (2) And as for my statement that it was not entirely accurate, it is because if I had not had contact with the railway companies in Alexandria and the city of Ras, it would not have been solely by the railway, but by it and the railway.