Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress, With the Annual Message of the President, December 6, 1875, Volume II
No. 636.
Mr. Maynard to Mr. Fish.
Constantinople, September 27, 1875. (Received October 29.)
Sir: So far no information concerning the affair at Tripoli, Barbary, has reached me, either from the consul, Mr. Vidal, or from the Department of State. It has, however, been brought to my attention in various other ways. My dispatch No. 19, of August the 16th, and my telegram of the preceding day, explained the manner of its being presented to the legation by Safvet Pasha, the minister of foreign affairs. Sir Henry Elliott, Her Britannic Majesty’s ambassador, has alluded to it more than once.
The Daily Levant Herald—one-half English, one-half French—the only English publication here, in its issue of the 20th instant republished from the London Times a narrative of the affair, a copy of which l inclose.
Five days later the same paper appeared with another statement of the facts, professedly from a correspondent, and an editorial similar in temper to the statement, and altogether dissimilar to that from the London Times. These two articles were published in both the English [Page 1311] and the French parts of the paper. The belief has been expressed that ‘they were inspired by the Sublime Porte; but I know of no facts to warrant it, and I mention it only to indicate the interest felt in the; matter. Copies of the English and of the French will be inclosed.
Thus stood the case this morning. On coming to the legation I found rubric on my table a note from the minister of foreign affairs, styled in the “Vexatious proceedings committed by the titulary of the American consulate at Tripoli, Africa.”
I inclose copies of the original French and of the translation.
My reply to this note is also inclosed.
I do not at present perceive that I can take any further steps until I am possessed of a correct version of the affair and have pertinent instructions.
I am, &c.,
The United States consular difficulty at Tripoli.
We condense from a long and interesting account given by the Malta correspondent of the Times, and dated September 5, the following version of the origin and attendant circumstances of this affair:
The recent difficulty, which was settled on the 26th of August, was in reality the culminating point of a long series of quarrels between the several United States representatives and the officials at Tripoli, the first of which occurred upwards of thirty years ago. They say that the garden of the Hesperides was in the regency of Tripoli; but beyond doubt the mansion of the goddess Discord was, in times past as well as at present, in the city of Tripoli. There the consuls of foreign powers are known to be forever on bad terms with one another, or with the pasha. Mr. Porter, and his successor in the United States consulate, Mr. Vidal, spent whole years without making the acquaintance of half of their colleagues. Mr. Vidal, who was one of the first organizers of the republican party in Louisiana, a State which he subsequently represented in Congress, has been doing his best to put an end to the shameful traffic in negro slaves between the Soudan and Constantinople by way of Tripoli. But the greatest cause of the hostile feeling against Mr. Vidal was a dispatch of his, subsequently published by the United States Government, advising the latter to negotiate with the Porte for the purchase of a sea-port on the coast of the regency, to be used as a coaling station by the United States Navy. His dispatches published by the Washington Government, coupled with his journey on horseback along the coast of Cyrene and Marmarica, had made him an object of suspicion at Tripoli.
On the 24th day of June last, on the occasion of the anniversary of the Sultan’s accession to the throne, the consuls were invited by the pasha to pay him an official visit. When the United States consul presented himself in the hall of reception, the French consul-general was conversing in the Turkish language with the pasha; the latter got up to shake hands with Mr. Vidal, and, after inviting him to sit down, resumed his conversation with the French consul, and took no more notice of Mr. Vidal, who left, showing by his manner that he felt hurt at being slighted, and at the neglect of the common rules of etiquette on the part of the pasha.
On the 4th of August the consul’s family, who were occupying a villa belonging to his highness Mahmoud Nedim Pasha, grand vizier, a short distance from the town, were at dinner in a pavilion not far from the sea-shore. At this moment the waiting-maids saw on the threshold of the dining-room a sailor belonging to a’ party sent from one of the vessels of the Ottoman squadron to take fresh water from a well hard by. When the maids saw that the man must have passed through two or three rooms to reach the spot where he was standing, without knocking at any door, calling for any one, or making any kind of noise, they, alarmed, asked him what he wanted. He answered that he wanted a light for a cigarette he showed. They then ordered him to go away, but he did not stir, but impudently looked about the room. At that moment the consul got up from the sofa and took a step or two in the direction of the door. The sailor, on seeing him, took to his heels and ran away as fast as he could, [Page 1312] pursued by the consul. The fugitive passed by two petty officers who were standing by the well; the consul on approaching them asked where the sailor was, and was answered by one of the officers that the intruder had gone to his boat. The other officer then said to the consul, “What has that man done, after all? He went to your house to get fire, for we wanted to smoke.” The officers did not want lights, for they were smoking at the time, a fact to which the American called the attention of the Ottoman who had just spoken to him, the former putting his hand on the latter’s shoulder. He had no sooner done so when a sailor called for help, and a few minutes later the consul had to face about fifty sailors, many of whom were armed with sticks, and all of whom were looking at him in a very threatening manner.
On the following day, when the pasha was informed of what had occurred by the United States consul, who offered to go with his witnesses before the court-martial which was to try the guilty parties, he was surprised at being told by the pasha that he was expected to apologize to the admiral of the squadron. But that was not all; the pasha, on a mere statement of a sailor, wrote an insulting letter to the consul, and further, boldly sent him a summons to appear before a court composed of five inhabitants of the place, which is contrary to the treaties with Ottoman countries, where consuls enjoy the right of exterritoriality, which in Christian countries is accorded to foreign ministers only. At this stage the native inhabitants had had their religious fanaticism excited by the narration of the occurrences in the Ottoman version, and, as ultra fanatics are always found along the Barbary coast, these did their best to fan the flame, and mutterings of dislike to the hated giaours were rife, alarming the Christian portion of the community. The United States consul, therefore, sent his secretary to Malta to telegraph to Washington. A few days later the United States frigate Congress cast anchor before Tripoli, and on two of her officers landing, to communicate with their consul, they were insulted by a mob of natives, thus further complicating the already sufficiently-knotted difficulty. Negotiations now went on with the pasha for a settlement of their trouble, but he offered no satisfactory reparation. However, the United States frigate Hartford had also been ordered to Tripoli, and on her arrival the ruler of the place lost all assurance, and wrote a letter consenting to all the demands of the United States consul. In consequence, on the 26th of August, the pasha called at the United States consulate in full uniform, and there made an ample apology in the presence of the officers of the Congress and Hartford; he also withdrew the offensive letters, promised to have the sailor duly punished, and has given, the consul the choice of two members of the court, who are to be dismissed from office with the proviso that they can never more be employed by the government in an official capacity.
After the settlement of this matter, Mr. Vidal and his family appear to have taken a trip to Malta, where they arrived on board the United States frigate Congress on August 29. The difficulty had been arranged at Tripoli on the 26th.
The United States consular difficulty at Tripoli.
A summary appeared in these columns a few days ago of this affair, as related by the Malta correspondent of the Times. We are now enabled to publish another version of it, derived from an authentic source, and which not only differs from the former narrative, but supplies some essential particulars omitted therein.
Although Mr. Vidal’s office, as United States consul-general, is a complete sinecure, there not being a single American subject or interest to protect at Tripoli, that gentleman has, during his six years’ residence in that province, quarreled with every successive vali, and has at the same time estranged himself from the whole of the consular corps, and the society of the place, with one or two exceptions; and has rendered himself most unpopular with all classes of the inhabitants.
On the 4th of August, a boat’s crew from the Turkish flying squadron, which was then lying in the harbor of Tripoli, having landed at a spot about a mile from the town to take in water, one of the sailors, wishing, it is said, to get a light for his cigarette, walked up to the country-house temporarily occupied by Mr. Vidal. The man, seeing the consul rush out at him, took to his heels, and was pursued and pelted with stones by Mr. Vidal. The consul then went down to the sea-side, where some Turkish naval officers, who had accompanied the boat, were sitting, and questioned them as to the sailor who had entered his house. Ultimately Mr. Vidal seized one of the officers and shook him violently, tearing his clothes. A correspondence then ensued between the vail and Mr. Vidal, the former demanding reparation for the assault on the Turkish officer, and informing Mr. Vidal that he had directed that evidence of the assault [Page 1313] should be taken before the medjilisi temîz, one of the local tribunals; while Mr. Vidal, on the other hand, demanded the punishment of the sailor for violating his domicile. He further telegraphed, by way of Malta, to his Government; and on the 17th August the United States frigate Congress arrived, followed a few days after by the frigate Hartford. As soon as the first of these vessels had cast anchor, Mr. Vidal began by addressing a letter to the vali, demanding satisfaction for insults said to have been offered to officers of that ship by the crowd on their way from the landing-place to the American consular residence. It is declared by eye-witnesses that nothing of the kind took place. There thus remains a doubt whether the officers of the Congress may not have been mistaken on this head. However this may be, the vali, at Mr. Vidal’s demand, wrote a letter expressing his regret at the alleged occurrence, and stating his readiness to punish the culprits severely, if discovered. His excellency, in the meanwhile, sent the chief of the police, accompanied by the mayor of the town, to the United States consulate, to apologize to the consul in the presence of the American officers.
We now come to an important phase of the question, which is passed over in silence in the account furnished to the Times. Mr. Vidal had meanwhile demanded that the town should salute the American frigate with twenty-one guns, in conformity with the terms of some treaty “between the United States and Tripoli;” to which the vali replied that he was unable to comply with this demand, as being contrary to usage and existing regulations.
The consular corps, having at the same time received assurances from the captain of the Congress that the question between Mr. Vidal and the local authorities would not lead to any hostile act on the part of the frigates until “diplomatic action” had failed to arrange matters, Were led to conclude that it was intended to refer the pending questions to Constantinople. Mr. Vidal’s colleagues, therefore, did not think of availing themselves of the departure on the 21st August of the Ottoman mail-steamer for Malta in order to apply for ships of war to protect the lives and property of Europeans.
It soon became manifest that the “diplomatic action” alluded to had reference only to the representations of the United States consul to the local authorities; for, immediately after the departure of the steamer, Mr. Vidal gave out that the town would be bombarded if full satisfaction were not given for the insults offered to the American flag in his person. The frigates lowered their masts and cleared for action, while armed boats took soundings and parallels, and the most alarming rumors, emanating from the American consulate, were spread in the town. A panic ensued, the Christians and Jews apprehending, in addition to the effects of the bombardment, the further consequences of the fanatacism which would be aroused among the Mahommedans, inciting them to retaliate by the massacre of the rest of the population and the pillage of their property.
On the 23d instant Mr. Vidal addressed a letter to the vali, containing five separate demands for reparation for the alleged affronts, and giving twenty-four hours for a reply. These demands comprised the following points: 1. Withdrawal of the vali’s letters demanding the consul’s presence before the local tribunal, and apology for the alleged insulting language contained in those letters. 2. Severe punishment of the sailor who “surreptitiously and violently” entered the consul’s residence. 3. Dismissal from office of the members of the above-mentioned tribunal and their punishment for “violation of law, custom, and treaty.” 4. Guarantee from the pasha that the same courtesies and legal rights will be extended to the “representative of the United States and his attachés” as are enjoyed by those of other governments. 5. A “national” salute of twenty-one guns to be fired from the fort, with the United States ensign displayed, to be answered from the senior officer’s vessel, with the “flag of the country” flying. The hope was expressed, in conclusion, that “these mild demands” would be at once acceded to, in consideration of the entente cordiale which has so long existed “between the United States and Tripoli.”
The vali, alarmed at the nature of some of these demands, and the general aspect of matters, appealed to the English, French, and Italian consuls for their advice and good offices. These consuls, believing likewise that hostilities were imminent, addressed, it is said, a joint note to Captain English, of the Congress, pointing out the danger to which the European population, would be subjected by any hostile act, and stating in the most formal manner that in their view Tripoli was in no way an independent state, but an integral province of the Ottoman Empire.
To Mr. Vidal’s letter the vali replied, yielding on three out of the five points demanded, but declaring his inability to comply with the other two, namely, the dismissal en masse of all the members of the medjlisi temîz, and the matter of the salute, without special orders from the Sublime Porte.
Upon the receipt of these two communications the Americans showed themselves more accommodating, and ultimately agreed to be satisfied with the suspension from office of two members only of the tribunal, and with a visit in uniform from the vali in > lieu of the salute. The Netherlands consul-general acted as mediator in settling the terms of this compromise. It is to .be observed, however, that Mr. Vidal, in his letter [Page 1314] to the vali, accepting the above terms, expressly states that the question of the salute is reserved for the consideration of his Government.
The official visit of the vali of Tripoli to the United States consul-general having been made in the presence of the American commanders and officers, the frigates sailed, taking Mr. Vidal with them, and leaving the Dutch consul-general in charge of the American consulate.
In another column will be found an authentic account of the late dispute between the United States consul-general at Tripoli, in Barbary, Mr. Vidal, and the Ottoman authorities. Although the American consul, backed by two frigates, carried the day, the victory is one of which the United States will scarcely feel proud; indeed, the “rowdy” character of the proceedings warrant the belief that they will be promptly disavowed by the Government at Washington. Insignificant both as regards its origin and the points ostensibly at issue, the dispute nearly involved bombardment of a town, the seat of government of a Turkish province; but its chief importance lies in the fact that the American consul from first to last has taken his stand upon the fiction that Tripoli is still an independent state, and bound by the treaties entered into with the United States in former times, on the strength of which he exacts the observance of formalities which practically involve the non-recognition of the sovereign rights of the Porte over her Barbary pashalik. Ever since his arrival at Tripoli, six years ago, Consul-General Vidal appears to have been on bad terms with almost everybody in the place, including the whole of his colleagues, and especially each successive pasha who has held the post of vali of that province. In the peculiarity of Mr. Vidal’s temper, probably, resided the fons et origo malorum. Be this as it may, two or three years ago, in a correspondence since published in an American Blue Book, Mr. Vidal pointed out the desirability of the United States obtaining possession of the ports of Bomba and Tobrook, at the western extremity of the Tripoli coast, close adjoining that of Egypt. It can hardly be supposed that the United States Government could seriously have entertained so wild a project. At the same time, the impression which prevails at Tripoli that Mr. Vidal sought to involve the authorities in a quarrel with his Government evidently owes its origin to the belief that he desired to create an opportunity to put forward his curious scheme. The trivial nature of the incident which led to the late crisis bears out this view. A Turkish sailor, who professed to be in search of a light-for his cigarette, strayed into Mr. Vidal’s country residence, and, with the loutish curiosity common to his class, was looking about him, when, being espied and pursued by the infuriated consul, he took to his heels. This incident Mr. Vidal describes as “a surreptitious and violent entry” into his house. On the other hand, while the Times correspondent at Malta admits, whose version of the affair we recently published, that Mr. Vidal, on coming up to the naval officer to whose party the sailor belonged, put his hand on the officer’s shoulder, the account we to-day publish states that the consul “seized the officer and shook him violently,” Even taking the first of these accounts as the true one, the act described constitutes, in point of law, an assault; and it may be doubted whether men in any service in the world would have done less, if so little, as to come to the rescue of their assaulted commanding officer with a mere threatening demonstration, which is all that is complained of in the present instance.
The vali was undeniably out of order in summoning, or at least inviting, the consul to appear before the medjlisi temîz, or local court of arbitration, in connection with the cross demand for satisfaction arising out of the above incident. But the Times correspondent is not justified in asserting that the summons was based “on the mere statement of a sailor,” since it is evident that it was the officer who complained against Mr. Vidal, the sailor being, on the contrary, put on the defensive. Whether the vali’s communication was couched in insulting terms, or the summons in itself was considered as such by the consul, it is impossible to say in the absence of precise information, although Mr. Vidal’s manifest exaggeration of language in the instance above cited, coupled with the habitual courtesy of Ottoman officials, justifies a doubt as to the first supposition. It is unnecessary to dwell on the further episode of the alleged insults offered to the American officers on their arrival by the crowd, since that matter was satisfactorily disposed of; although, had there been anything in it, (which our informant, on the testimony of persons who were present, assures us was not the case, while the officers themselves can hardly have been competent to judge, if the insults were verbal,) there was evidenly a much better locus standi for a grievance in this incident than in the other just mentioned. That, in satisfaction for a grievance which was at least relatively insignificant, the town of Tripoli should have been threatened with a bombardment almost exceeds belief, and it cannot be doubted that the United States Government will recognize the false position in which it has been placed by a representative, the fiery ebullitions of whose arrogant temper were the mainspring of [Page 1315] his policy. The United States Government is not always as careful as it might be in the selection of its foreign representatives, and, although it has sent many men to this country who have done honor to their own in representing it, still, more than one instance occurs to us in which the prestige of the great transatlantic republic in the Levant has been injured by officers who, like Mr. Vidal, have prostituted their trust to the gratification of their own undisciplined passions.
Safvet Pasha to Mr. Maynard.
Vexatious proceedings committed by the titulary of the American consulate at Tripoli, Africa
Sir: It appears from information received at the imperial ministry of marine that a seaman named Ahmed, of the corvette “Edirné,” of the imperial squadron of evolution in the Mediterranean, recently arrived at Tripoli, Africa, had been sent on shore with a boat for water, and while asking fire to light his cigarette from a servant of the American consulate, which he was passing, the consul interposed and scolded his servant, because he allowed the seaman to enter his garden, and drove him away by throwing stones at him, after having overwhelmed him with abuse. Ahmed went back to his boat, but Hairy Effendi, engineer of the frigate “Moukkbiri Sourour,” and Moustapha Agha, another seaman of the “Edirné,” who were passing by at the moment, were also assaulted by Mr. Michel Vidal, who, giving way to violence, tore the collar of the former and beat the other.
These strange proceedings have been corroborated by means of investigations made on the spot by the local authorities, whose action the United States consul thought; proper to answer by controverting the facts and shifting the responsibility so as to present himself as the victim.
In having the honor, Mr. Minister Resident, to bring to your attention the conduct of that agent, I am persuaded that you will, with the equitable sentiments so well, known, ascertain the responsibility incurred by him in this affair, and give such orders as to let the mariners who have had to suffer by his conduct receive the satisfaction due them.
Accept, Mr. Minister Resident, the assurance of my very distinguished consideration.
Mr. Maynard to Safvet Pasha.
Your Excellency: I hasten to acknowledge your note, dated the 25th instants No. 41767–17, in relation to the recent difficulty at Tripoli, Africa. At present I have no information relative to it, either from Mr. Vidal, the consul, or from the Department of State at Washington. I shall lose no time in communicating the subject of your note to the Secretary of State, asking to be informed of the affair as it is understood by him, and also such instructions about it as will effect a speedy and honorable adjustment.
When I shall be so informed and instructed, your excellency’s well-known fairness and moderation give the highest assurance that exact and impartial justice will be done in a spirit creditable alike to the Sublime Porte and to the United States.
I cannot properly conclude, however, without calling your excellency’s attention to the fact stated in your second paragraph—in substance, that the consul had been held to answer by the local authorities—and to ask a reference to Article I of the treaty of February 25, 1862, between His Imperial Majesty the Sultan and the United States of America, and Article 25 of the treaty between the Ottoman Empire and Great Britain of September, 1675.
By the former, “all rights, privileges, and immunities granted or suffered to be enjoyed by the subjects* * * of any other foreign power shall be equally granted to and exercised and enjoyed by the citizens * * * of the United States of America.”
By the latter it is stipulated that “in all lawsuits or disputes in which they (the consuls) may be implicated, the Sublime Porte must be addressed, or their ambassadors will answer for them.”
[Page 1316]If it shall be found on inquiry that there has been a violation of these articles by the local authorities in proceeding against the American consul for an alleged misdemeanor, I submit to your excellency whether their conduct is not open to very grave censure.
I pray your excellency to accept the assurance of my very distinguished consideration.