Mr. Tyler to Mr.
Gresham.
Legation of the United States,
Teheran, Persia, August
23, 1894.
No. 122.]
(Received September 27.)
Sir: In continuation of No. 116,1 diplomatic series of the 6th
instant, relating to the religious persecutions in Hamadan by the
fanatic, Akhund Mullah Abdullah, and the danger to the lives and
property of American citizens and their dependents by his reckless,
cruel, and wanton proceedings, I have the honor to transmit copies of
further local correspondence on this subject.
* * * * * * *
I have inclosed the whole of the correspondence up to date, so that the
Department might be put into possession of all the material facts. At
one time it appeared as if the situation was becoming grave, and that
the missionaries were in real danger. I had, however, the satisfaction
of knowing that they would do nothing to complicate matters or infuse a
bad spirit into the disputes.
The immunity from severe punishment which members of the priestly class
enjoy always makes them insolent and reckless, and they can generally
depend upon the support of the lowest and most dangerous part of the
population. They are not generally liked by intelligent and independent
people, and very uncomplimentary terms are used of them, but, on account
of their great numbers and their wide influence, outward deference and
respect are observed toward them.
[Page 498]
It is satisfactory to find that Mullah Abdullah has not altogether
allowed his fanaticism to outrun his discretion, and I hope that he will
in the future be kept effectually in check by the Government.
I have, etc.,
[Inclosure 1 in No.
122.]
Mr. Tyler to
Mr. Holmes.
Legation of the United States,
Teheran, August 7, 1894.
Dear Sir: I beg to acknowledge the receipt
of your and Mr. Hawkes’s letters of the 26th ultimo, which reached
the legation on the evening of the 1st instant.
From your detailed, though unimpassioned, account of the general
unsatisfactory state of affairs in Hamadan, and of the cruel and
oppressive conduct of the Akhund Mullah Abdullah and his bribed and
irresponsible minions in particular, I think the time had come, nay,
more than come, for the central Government to be put into possession
of the facts of the case, and an opportunity afforded them of
exercising their authority, in the interests of peace, order, and
good government.
I have reason to believe that the executive authorities, both here
and in Hamadan, are averse to the Akhund and all his proceedings;
and if he had been a lay instead of an ecclesiastical offender he
would have suffered the full penalty of his misdeeds. But you, as
well or even better than I, have observed that within the last four
or five years the priestly class has assumed pretentions and
authority probably never before aimed at since the days of the
caliphate. Mullah Abdullah would never, after his recent visit to
Teheran, have been permitted to return to Hamadan but for the
intervention (I won’t say intercession) of the religious dignitaries
of this city.
* * * * * * *
There is evidently in Persia at the present time a progressive and a
reactionary party, but neither appears as yet to have imbibed the
genuine spirit of patriotism, but on the contrary the ideas of both,
I am afraid, are sadly adulterated with selfishness. If the ruling
authorities felt confident of their position and strength, and could
compel the obedience and good behavior of all classes, I believe
they have intelligence enough to discern and prudence to foresee
that the work in which you are engaged, if extended a hundred times,
would be the best guaranty and safeguard of the liberty of the
subject and the permanence of the Kingdom. The party of reaction
sees, as it always has and I suppose always will see, that the
elevation and enlightenment of the masses mean not only the
curtailment of power but of emolument as well.
This is a state of affairs which we are obliged to contemplate every
day, and these two sets of opinions are freely expressed at every
private and social meeting. It is a question of supreme importance
to Persia at the present time, and one that the Government will have
to face, as to whether they shall control the destinies of the
country on their own responsibility and by their own methods, or
whether they shall subordinate their views and policy to the
dictation of others.
* * * * * * *
It would possibly at the present stage be rather early to assume
[Page 499]
that the movement in
Hamadan has anything more than a local significance. * * *
I have, in my letter to the Sadr Azem, which was sent from here
shortly after midday the day after yours arrived, used the word
missionaries advisedly, so that in case of discussion it may be
conducted on clear and unmistakable issues.
The Shah is now away on an excursion, in Mazenderan, and I hardly
think in connection with a telegraph line, so I am afraid we must be
prepared for a litle delay. I hope, nevertheless, that you will not
be kept long in suspense.
Rest assured that I shall not let the matter drop, but I hope that no
further communication will be necessary.
I remain, etc.,
[Inclosure 2 in No.
122.]
Mr Hawkes to
Mr. Tyler.
Hamadan, Persia, August 3, 1894.
Dear Mr. Tyler: Since last week, when Dr.
Holmes and I wrote to you how Mullah Abdullah had disturbed the
peace here and bastinadoed Mirza Salazar Faraj, we have had lively
times here, but fortunately for us the brunt of it all did not fall
upon us.
It seems that a certain Abdullah, known as Kusaj, a servant or
dependent of Hadji Mirza Mehdi, mentioned in former letters as a
co-worker with Mullah Abdullah, has been talking loudly and badly
against Aga Mohammed, one of the acting Mushtaheds of the city, and
went so far as to strike Hadji Sadr, a prominent man. The “Agayans”
(priests), a strong part of Sayeds, with the Imaum-i-Jumah (high
priest) at their head—also known as Kabadians from the name of their
quarter in the city—took up the matter and sent a request to Hadji
Mirza Mehdi to curb in said Abdullah. He replied: “He is my man and
it is proper for him to do so.” Upon hearing this the Agayans sent a
mob of their adherents with a number of Sayeds at their head, to
fight it out with Hadji Mirza Mehdi and his party. When they arrived
at his house they found the door shut and no one prepared to meet
them. The party of Hadji Mirza Mehdi and Mullah Abdullah had the
shops of the bazaar closed, for they are mostly shopkeepers, and
came to look on, but not prepared to fight. Somehow a little
skirmish took place and some on each side were hurt. One man on
Hadji Merza Mendi’s side came to Dr. Holmes to have his hand
dressed, which had been badly cut.
In the meantime the ferash bashi at the head of a number of
Government ferashes arrived to restore peace. And at the same time
Hadji Mirza Hassan, a brother of Hadji Mirza Mehdi, who is on the
side of the “Agayans,” arrived and publicly cursed his brother for
espousing the cause of a good-for-nothing Burujerdi, the Akhund.
“Oh, that my father had not given existence to such an unworthy
son,” etc. He also cursed the governor and the ferash bashi for not
keeping the peace, etc. He then tried to turn back the “Agayan”
crowd, but they refused to go without word from the Imaum-i-Jumah.
He obtained their writing and, showing it, prevailed upon the crowd
to return to their own quarters. All this occurred on Tuesday, and
for the rest of the day and the next both parties were in conclave
as to the next move. Wednesday afternoon the prince governor
prevailed on some one (I
[Page 500]
have not his name just now) to make peace between the contending
parties. He succeeded to the extent that there have since been no
hostilities. But no one believes that the peace is permanent.
The Akhund’s party alienated the “Sheikhees” (a sect) by putting one
of their young men out of a school under most humiliating
circumstances, thus renewing the quarrel of 1892. Thereupon the
“Sheikhees” petitioned the Shah for the Akhund’s removal from the
city. I also understand they telegraphed the Shah about the
bastinadoing of Mirza Salazar Faraj, mentioned last week. And I also
hear that the Akhund is interfering with the collecting of the
revenue. He sent word to Faraj Ullah Khan, Sarteeb, “Why do you
commit this oppression?” The Sarteeb replied: “It is none of your
business.” Then the Akhund appealed to the prince governor to take
away the sword of said Sarteeb. He replied, “I did not give the
sword to the ‘Sarteeb’ that I should take it away; that is no
business of mine.”
This whole matter has been reported to Teheran by telegraph and
doubtless there are petitions going up from all sides to-day. I have
given you the brief facts as I have been able to gather them, in the
hopes that you will be able to use them in your efforts to obtain
redress for us. It seems to us and all the natives we see that only
the wisest and most summary action on the part of the Government
will be of any use to restore peace and quiet. We hope that you will
put forth the most strenuous efforts in this direction.
Very truly yours,
[Inclosure 3 in No.
122.]
Mr. Tyler to
the Mushir-el-Mulk.
Legation of the United States,
Teheran, August 11, 1894.
Sir: On the 2d of this month I had the
honor to forward through your excellency a letter addressed to the
Sadr Azem with reference to the state of lawlessness prevailing in
the city of Hamadan. As the state of the city is becoming worse
every day, and no reply having been received to my communication,
our citizens residing in the midst of these proceedings are becoming
anxious.
I have therefore to request that you will inform me of the views of
the Persian Government on the situation and of the measures that
have been adopted for putting a stop to these proceedings.
I avail, etc.,
[Inclosure 4 in No.
122.—Translation.]
The Mushir-el-Mulk to
Mr. Tyler.
Sir: In reply to your letter just received
regarding events in Hamadan, I beg to inform you that stringent
orders have been issued and will be telegraphed to the authorities
in Hamadan to-day.
A formal reply to your previous letter on this subject will be sent
later on.
I take this opportunity, etc.
Dated the 9th of Safar,
1312. (11th of August, 1894).
[Seal of Mushir-el-Mulk].
[Page 501]
[Inclosure 5 in No.
122.—Translation.]
The Sadr Azem to Mr.
Tyler.
Sir: I beg to inform yon that the contents
of your letter, dated the 29th of Muharram (corresponding to the 2d
of August, 1894), relative to events that had taken place in the
city of Hamadan, have been understood.
Stringent orders have been sent to the authorities of Hamadan with
strict injunctions to have them put into execution. Orders have also
been sent for a thorough investigation to be made into the affair,
and measures to be taken for the tranquillity of American
citizens.
These matters are set forth for your information.
I take this opportunity, etc.
[Seal of the Sadr Azem.]
Dated 18th of Safar, A. H. 1312 (20th August,
1894).
[Inclosure 6 in No.
122.]
Mr. Hatches to
Mr. Tyler.
Hamadan, August 13,
1894.
Dear Sir: I trust you received my letter of
last week giving you particulars of the state of affairs here. There
has been no change in the situation since then and all is quiet. I
learn that Mullah Abdullah had a message proclaimed in the bazaars
to the effect that no one must beat or hurt the Jews. If any are
found without the “vasleh” (patch), they are to be brought before
him, but without violence. We are awaiting a reply from our former
letters to you, but trust that no further efforts need be put
forth.
* * * * * * *
Yours, etc.,
[Inclosure 7 in No.
122.]
Mr. Tyler to
the Sadr Azem.
Legation of the United States,
Teheran, August 20, 1894.
Your Highness: On the 2d instant I had the
honor to address a letter to you on the subject of the
unsatisfactory state of affairs in Hamadan, and the danger to the
lives and property of United States citizens, and those connected
with them in that town, through the lawless and unjustifiable
proceedings of the Akhund, Mullah Abdullah, and a set of dangerous
and irresponsible characters whom he employs to execute his orders.
At the same time I most respectfully requested that your highness
would take prompt and efficient measures to restore order and afford
effective protection to our peaceful and law-abiding citizens and
their dependents in Hamadan. As I have not yet received from your
highness any reply to my communication, I beg to be informed as
early as possible what steps have been taken to secure those
objects.
I take this opportunity, etc.,
[Page 502]
[Inclosure 8 in No.
122.]
Mr. Tyler to
the Sadr Azem.
Legation of the United States,
Teheran, August 21, 1894.
Your Highness: I have the honor to
acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 18th of Safar, A. H.
1312 (corresponding to the 20th of August), informing me that
stringent orders had been sent to the authorities of Hamadan to
preserve the peace of the town and to afford all protection to the
lives and property of American citizens.
I beg to tender on the part of the U. S. Government and the
missionaries their sincere thanks for this action of your highness,
which I trust will have the effect of curbing the turbulent elements
and of permitting the missionaries to carry on their work of charity
in the future, free from anxiety and annoyance.
I take this opportunity, etc.,
