No. 689.
Mr. King
to Mr. Bayard.
Legation of
the United States,
Constantinople, May 6, 1887.
(Received May 24.)
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.,
[Inclosure 1 in No. 318.]
The Sublime Porte to Mr.
King.
Sublime
Porte, Ministry of Foreign
Affairs,
April 7,
1887.
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.
Legation of the United States,
Constantinople, May 6,
1887.
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.,
