Mr. Cox to Mr. Bayard .
Constantinople , November 14, 1885. (Received November 30.)
Sir: The most important dispatch which has been transmitted to me since my arrival is your No. 9, dated August 17, 1885. It inclosed a copy of an elaborate letter from the secretary of the Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions at Boston, Mass., and a copy of your reply.
It referred generally to the most important class of questions arising here. They concern teachers, missionaries, and their investments. They urge protection, security, and redress to our countrymen who abide in Turkey and “observe its laws.” They particularly refer to certain cases with which I am familiar.
I have obtained all the information I could about this class, and have persistently made request for the opening of the cases of Knapp, Reynolds, and Pflaum, with a view to a demand for pecuniary indemnity.
* * * * * * *
In your letter to Rev. N. G. Clark, secretary of the Board of Commissioners, you did not countenance such an ultimatum for “damages arising from the misconduct of agents acting out of the range not only of their real but of their apparent authority.” You regarded such a case as a “moral default,” for which reparation should be tendered to the injured party.
In the letter of Rev. N. G. Clark, secretary, reference was made, in no stinted language, (1) to the restrictions of the Turkish Government upon the distributions and sale of publications, &c.; (2) to the withholding of the usual permits for the erection of school buildings, &c,; (3) the lack of security for the lives and property of missionaries, and especially those of the interior, &c.
* * * * * * *
You left much to my discretion, besides giving me definite limitations upon that discretion. In the absence of any mode by which redress can be enforced, all that can be done is to persuade, remonstrate, and urge personally and by letter these various grievances upon the attention of the ministers of the Porte.
Another obstacle to an understanding of these matters is the entire change of the ministry since your dispatch No. 9 was received. As you desired to be informed from time to time of the progress made in [Page 880] these matters, so as to advise me in the premises, and as yon requested me to “ask such special instructions as I might think needful,” I have the honor to present an interlocutory report of the situation as it exists to-day, and to solicit your judgment as to what further urgency to make.
(1) As to the first—restriction against the sale of publications—I have the honor to observe that the question is not new. Particular cases have occurred frequently and remonstrances as frequent. The records of the Department show or should show this fact.
Under the advice of the agents of the Bible Society here, we postponed the presentation of special cases until the advent of the new minister of public instruction, Munif Pasha. He had achieved a reputation, when once before in this office, of liberality and intelligence toward our schools and missions. On his taking office I at once attempted to pay my respects to him. He was absent at the conference of the Ottoman ministers on the paramount question of East Roumelia. Last week he returned the call. We had quite a satisfactory interview, during which I referred to the magnitude and permanency of the educational and missionary operations of the American societies and our other chartered organizations in the Turkish Empire, with their 25,170 pupils, their 50,000 attendants upon religious service, their 150,000 average sale of Scriptures, religious books, tracts, &c.;. their manufactories of books, newspapers, &c., with an annual expenditure of $360,000, and having a capitalized investment at 3 per cent, of $12,000,000, and paying their taxes, and giving steady employment to natives and aliens, with a real and personal property of $1,000,000. Whether these facts tend to astonish or frighten the authorities here by the immensity of this benevolent American movement, they certainly demand in a corresponding degree great vigilance and protective care. They should not be the target for the aggressive fire of the Turkish Government.
Thrice this minister, Munif Pasha, had fixed upon a time to give us a decision as to the sale of books and the permits for and protection of the schools and colleges, but the matter was postponed. At last, on the 10th instant, our dragoman called to obtain some satisfaction on these points.
On the colporteur matter the minister said that he could not then dispose of it, as some instructions on that matter had been transmitted to him from the Sublime Porte, but he thought it would facilitate its solution if it were presented to the minister of foreign affairs in a formal way. What this meant I could not conjecture. Thereupon I addressed to his excellency Said Pasha, the foreign minister, the letter, a copy of which is inclosed. It is intended to ascertain from him what the obstacles contained in the instructions were, and what the law authorizing the inhibition of these sales, if any; and if no such law exists, then to request that the obstacles be at once removed and that the sales may go on as heretofore. I fear that we shall have little or no satisfaction in this regard, as other language used by the minister indicated that he believed that the colporteurs were propagandists of the Christian religion, and that as Turks only sell their books to Turks, and as they are in their own land, the same rule does not apply to these American publications.
If an answer to my letter is received before this dispatch goes, on Saturday, I will inclose a copy.
It may be said, however, in this connection that the suggestion of Rev. Mr. Clark in his letter above referred to, that other nationalities here have immunity in the sale of their publications, which is not accorded [Page 881] to our missionaries, is hardly borne out by the facts. Let me quote what he says:
Hence, restrictions have been laid upon us in many ways, and the protection and the privileges granted to other nationalities are no longer accorded to us as in former years.
A portion of this statement is not, so far as I can learn, exactly correct, as no other nationality is granted this protection and these privileges, among which is the sale of publications. This is my present belief.
(2) As to the permits for schools, colleges, &c. It may please you to recall the case at Harpoot, where the school was threatened with being closed, because of the lack of a permit. That school began a score and more of years ago—a long time before the law existed requiring a permit. It has run without objection. A permit was applied for when the law was made.
Correspondence ensued between the opposing local authorities and the central and controlling authority here as to the propriety of granting a permit. The local authority pretended to await action here, and vice versa. This is the case where I asked the British minister to request the British vice consul, then in the vicinity of Harpoot, to intervene to prevent the closing of the school. You will remember that the British minister did so; but the request came too late, as the vice-consul had left the vicinity of Harpoot. Still he wrote, promising what help he could give. In this emergency the missionaries here requested my action. This action was promptly taken.
The minister of public instruction has apparently done better than I expected or requested. He has agreed to forward a general order to all the places where such schools are in existence, directing the governors to refrain from closing American schools where a request for the regular permit has been made by the principal of these institutions. He also promises to take the necessary steps to furnish the permit to them as soon as possible. If this promise be kept, it will be a great gain in this direction, for it assures not only the continued existence of the schools now open, but a permit for the establishment of new schools.
(3) As to the outrages upon citizens, teachers, missionaries, &c. This is the troublesome question. General Wallace wrestled with it in the case of Knapp, Reynolds, and Pflaum. * * * *
Your dispatch on this matter was more imperative than any dispatch which General Wallace received. It was justly so. I could not fail but catch its spirit, and in presenting your points, or such of them as were proper to be sent to the foreign minister.
* * * * * * *
What called for additional indignation was a fresh and new outrage. It appeared in the unchallenged statement from Bitlis * * * that instead of punishing Moussa Bey, * * * he was made caimacam, or local governor of the sandjak or sub-province where the assault arid robbery were committed. This was made known to the authorities here and was recounted in my dispatch to you.
The new minister of foreign affairs has not yet replied to my letter, * * * I only asked in it the privilege of reopening the cases, and presenting them for pecuniary com pensation. I asked no other remedy. No other remedy will likely ever be given, and no other remedy will be of any avail to assure future protection to our people. However, I learn that this matter of Moussa Bey has been referred by the minister [Page 882] of foreign affairs to the legal adviser of that department to make a report.
This report, as is alleged, was delayed by not being translated ont of French into Turkish. The tenor of it, however, as near as I can gather, is, or may be, to advise a trial to bring Moussa Bey and his accomplices to justice. * * * I believe such a trial would not eventuate in the conviction of the malefactors, or in their being mulcted in a fine and imprisonment if convicted. * * * If the trial were ordered and took place, no advocates for the prosecution would really be there to scrutinize the proceedings. It is not certain that the aggrieved parties would be there to testify. One of them, Mr. Knapp, is now in America. We have no consul in Asia Minor to attend and see that the trial is fair, as was the case with the assailant of Colonel Everett, the British consul at Erzeroom, the other week, when the robber and assassin was convicted. No dragoman from our legation or consulate would be there, unless ordered to go from here or from Smyrna on the special mission.
There is only one adequate remedy and measure to assure future security, and that is pecuniary compensation, to which should be added a fair and speedy trial and punishment on conviction, superadded to the disgrace and dismissal from office of the chief offender.
In order to discriminate properly and justly as to the grievances of which complaint is made by the Rev. Mr. Clark in his memorial to the President, which you inclosed in your dispatch No. 9, I beg respectfully to say that his statement as to one point is to be accepted with much qualification. That statement is this:
Mr. Knapp, some twenty years ago, purchased of the Turkish Government a house in Bitlis, hut of late the order has been given, first through local courts and afterwards confirmed by the authorities at Constantinople, that he give up his house to one who comes forward as a claimant of the property, and not only give up the house with all the improvements made on it, but pay twenty years’ rent thereon. This is in a city in which the American name has been so discredited by failure to secure the proper punishment of Moussa Bey, the principal man involved in the outrage upon the persons of Messrs. Knapp and Reynolds.
I have no doubt that Mr. Clark’s complaint is right.
But what is the legation to do in the presence of a question as to real estate? Such a question comes under the protocol. * * * This protocol regarding real estate places foreigners under the Turkish jurisdiction, and the interference of the legation is, by virtue of its terms, promptly rejected by the Turkish authorities.
Still, it must be said that but for the energetic exertion of this legation Mr. Knapp’s house would long ago have been confiscated. Although the matter is not yet finished, there is a reasonable expectation that his house will be saved to him. As to the payment of twenty years’ rent, this question not being a real estate question, this legation will see that all possible assistance is granted him when he is called upon for payment.
A review of another case of atrocity may aid you to give me those special instructions which you desire me to ask. That other case was the robbery of Rev. J. F. Smith, of Marsovan, in the province of Sivas, while journeying with his little son of twelve years and Miss Wright, on the road to Mardin, in June last. They were attacked by four mounted Circassians and ruthlessly assaulted and robbed, and almost in the presence of the police. True, the arrests were made of the criminals, but the property was not and is not restored, nor are the criminais tried or punished. No answer has been given to our representations. The local authorities are waiting the orders from Constantinople to punish the robbers. My representation was, of course, to the minister of [Page 883] foreign affairs. He communicates to the minister of justice, while this officer likely communicates with the local authorities before he issues any orders.
In the case of Rev. Mr. Smith, I have taken the liberty of writing courteously again to the foreign minister. I respectfully requested from him a response to my former dispatch. I inclose a copy of this dispatch herein. In it I quote your own language. I can add nothing to it to give it more impress!veness. I have also referred briefly to an article in the London Times of November 4 to enforce my request.
* * * * * * *
In this dispatch I have also made a summary of the immense investments—monetary, mental, moral, and religious—which Americans have made within the Turkish dominions.
Since my presentation of these cases, Dr. Pflaum, who is an American, and now surgeon on an Egyptian vessel running to this port, has called to make anxious inquiries as to the indemnity in his case. It was an outrageous case. If the Porte should tender monetary compensation, I am satisfied it would not amount to what has been de-inanded; but this is in the distance, and the amount is not yet to be considered until some such tender is made.
This morning the consul-general, Mr. Heap, presents another case of unredressed outrage—that of an American citizen, Carapepari. He was raising a vessel at the Isle of Artaki, under contract, whereupon he was wrongfully accused of fishing with machinery for sponges, without license. In the most arbitrary way he was fined, and imprisoned twenty-three days. Finally his case comes here, and he with it. He, too, has had much trouble and no recompense. His case is in process of examination, as it is said, by the police here; but as to its settlement, judging by other cases, of what hope have we? None whatever, so long as such outrages as those referred to remain unredressed, and our American citizens are treated as without the pale, not only of this Government and society, but outside of the treaty stipulations made to protect them as such. * * *
These cases may give you an idea of the modes by which justice is vindicated here when Americans are the victims of injustice and violence.
You have said in your dispatch No. 9 of the 17th of August, that I should communicatefreely with the Department on these subjects, and, while giving my own views as the result of the practical knowledge I may be able to obtain on the spot, ask such special instructions as I may think needful.
You further ask me for suggestions as to the method, up to all proper limits, of protecting American rights and interests in Turkey. You ask me, further, not to disguise from the Porte your sense of disappointment at the inadequacies of the protection accorded to law-abiding citizens of the United States in Turkey, &c. You may be assured that, at the risk of being too undisguisedly frank, I have represented the keenness and mortification of our disappointment in this regard and the sympathy of the multitudes in America in the noble “life-work” of our missionaries.
* * * * * * *
These breaches of good faith and treaty are not justifiable because of any alleged propagandise by our sects or religionists whose societies are under Turkish dominion. The work which is impeded is philanthropic. It is not done for lucrative reward; no attempt is made to force the Christian Scriptures or tracts upon the reluctant.
[Page 884]The “work” has grown to be large, because it has been regarded as safe, by the same guarantees and privileges granted to other nationalities. After wearisome delay and iteration after iteration of the facts and principles involved, no damages are allowed and no reparation made.
It is true that these benevolent men preach Christianity to those who voluntarily come to hear. They sell books to those who please to buy. Their object is not, as they claim, to proselyte. They desire men to conform their lives to a better standard. In this they do not infringe upon the decrees of this Empire so frequently upheld where the Greek, Armenian, and other churches are involved. To the end that the American churches and schools should be self-supporting, they have for sixty years exercised great tact in avoiding to give offense to the susceptibilities of others in their midst, and they confidently assert that never has one specific charge against the American missionaries or their employés for illegal or offensive conduct been made, much less sustained. Their conduct, both at the Robert College and elsewhere, may have been im-pugned at first as dangerous to Turkish society and the Mohammedan religion, but as time tested it the highest and best men of the Turkish administration have testified to the ennobling results which have been achieved here for civilization by our countrymen.
I have, &c.,