AFTER THE MUTINY. 311 Mr. Broadley, two barristers sent out from England, by private subscription, for the defence of Arabi, should have full access to their client, and should conduct his case in court. Moreover, the British Government further insisted that Sir Charles Wilson/ who, in later years, played a conspicuous part ij the abortive campaign for the rescue of General Gordon, should be present at the trial, as a sort of amicus curicB to see that justice was done as betweei the court and the prisoners. A far less quick-witted people than the Egyptians would, from these facts, I have come to the conclusion that the British Government did not desire the conviction of the mutineers ; | and the moment the existence of this desire was ( realized, the virtual acquittal of the prisoners became a foregone conclusion. Mr. Broadley, as a man of less legal repute than Mr. Napier, was willing to take a line of defence which his leader might have hesitated in employing. Even in an English court of law a counsel would hardly have been allowed to defend Arabi on the ground that the Khedive and the Sultan were indirectly responsible for the outrages committed during the mutiny, and that the mutiny was in reality a patriotic movement.

The prisoners, five in number — Arabi, Toulba. Mahmoud Sami, Mahmoud Fehmi, and Ali Fehmi, — were charged in -the indictment ** with having excited the Egyptians to arm against the Government of the Khedive, with having incited the people to civil war, and with having committed acts of destruction i