No. 689.
Mr. King to Mr. Bayard .

No. 318.]

Sir: In connection with my dispatch, No. 286, of February 7, 1886, I have the honor to inclose a copy of the Porte’s reply to mine, No. 42, to the Porte.

It seems to me that they have replied to my No. 42 without rereading my former dispatch No. 32 (sent you with my dispatch, No. 257, October 19, 1886). At any rate I have considered it proper to insist upon the reasonableness of my request.

In the mean time, as I learn from Dr. Herrick, the governor-general is throwing serious obstacles in the way of Rev. M. Filian at Kastamouni, and in fact has ordered him to leave that city. As he is not an American citizen we can not protect him, and the efforts of our missionaries at that point will consequently, be seriously interfered with.

I have, etc.,

Pendleton King.
[Inclosure 1 in No. 318.]

The Sublime Porte to Mr. King .

Mr. Chargé d’affaires: I have had the honor to receive your dispatch of the 7th of February last, No. 42, by which, in pleading for the right of Dr. Herrick or [Page 1115] of any other American citizen to visit Kastamouni and hold quietly a religious service, you request that orders he forwarded to the authorities of that province prescribing them not to oppose any obstacles to it.

The sojourn of foreigners and the religious services of the different creeds having never been hindered in the Empire, I do not see, permit me to say to you, the necessity of similar instructions.

As regards the case of Dr. Herrick, I must refer to my preceding dispatch of the 26th of January. Accept, etc.,

[Inclosure 2 in No. 318.]

Mr. King to the Sublime Porte .

Excellency: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your dispatch of of April 7, touching Dr. Herrick and the holding of religious service at Kastamouni.

You are good enough to inform me that the sojourn of strangers and the holding of religious service have never been prevented in the Empire, and therefore you do not see the necessity of sending instructions to that city not to interfere with him or any other American missionary who may visit that city.

I am glad to say that interference with such service is rare, and I took occasion in my dispatch No. 32, of October 18, 1886, to compliment you on this state of affairs; but permit me to add that if you will examine that dispatch you will find that the religious service by Dr. Herrick was seriously interfered with, and for that very reason I asked that orders be given to the governor-general to prevent such interference in the future.

On again going over the circumstances as presented [in said dispatch No. 32 (but not in No. 42), I can not but consider my request a reasonable one.

Accept, etc.,

Pendleton King.