for American teachers and pastors no less latitude in their intercourse with native Christians than is enjoyed by like teachers and pastors of the most-favored nation. Mr. Gresham, Sec. of State, to Mr. Terrell, min. to Turkey, No. 254, Oct. 26, 1894, For. Rel. 1894, 781. This instruction related to a request of the British ambassador at Constantinople for the cooperation of the American minister to secure greater freedom of worship for native Protestants in Turkey. It was observed in the instruction that the claim of most-favored-nation treatment in all things might indirectly advance the purposes of the British ambassador, but the extent to which this could be hopefully" done was left to the "wise discretion" of the American minister. (Ibid.) 9. ARMENIAN DIFFICULTIES. $ 874. "I have received a copy of the following resolution of the Senate, passed on the 3d instant: "Resolved, That the President be requested, if in his judgment it be not incompatible with the public interest, to communicate to the Senate any information he may have received in regard to alleged cruelties committed upon Armenians in Turkey, and especially whether any such cruelties have been committed upon citizens who have declared their intention to become naturalized in this country, or upon persons because of being Christians. “And, further, to inform the Senate whether any expostulations have been addressed by this government to the government of Turkey in regard to such matters, or any proposals made by or to this government to act in concert with other Christian powers regarding the same.' "In response to said resolution, I beg leave to inform the Senate. that I have no information concerning cruelties committed upon Armenians in Turkey or upon persons because of their being Christians, except such information as has been derived from newspaper reports and statements emanating from the Turkish government denying such cruelties and two telegraphic reports from our minister at Constantinople. "One of these reports, dated November 28, 1894, is in answer to an inquiry by the State Department touching reports in the press alleging the killing of Armenians, and is as follows: Reports in American papers of Turkish atrocities at Sassoun are sensational and exaggerated. The killing was in a conflict between armed Armenians and Turkish soldiers. The grand vizier says it was necessary to suppress insurrection and that about fifty H. Doc. 551-vol 5—53 Turks were killed. Between three and four hundred Armenian guns were picked up after the fight, and reports that about that number of Armenians were killed. I give credit to his statement.' "The other dispatch referred to is dated December 2, 1894, and is as follows: “Information from British ambassador indicates far more loss of lives in Armenia, attended with atrocities, than stated in my telegram of 28th.' "I have received absolutely no information concerning any cruelties committed upon citizens who have declared their intention to become naturalized in this country' or upon any persons who had a right to claim or have claimed for any reason the protection of the United States government. "In the absence of such authentic detailed knowledge on the subject as would justify our interference, no expostulations have been addressed by this government to the government of Turkey in regard to such matters.' The last inquiry contained in the resolution of the Senate touching these alleged cruelties seeks information concerning any proposals made by or to this Government to act in concert with other Christian powers regarding the same.' "The first proposal of the kind referred to was made by the Turkish government, through our minister, on the 30th day of November, when the Sultan expressed a desire that a consul of the United States be sent with a Turkish commission to investigate these alleged atrocities on Armenians. This was construed as an invitation on the part of the Turkish government to actually take part with a Turkish commission in an investigation of these affairs and any report to be made thereon, and the proposition came before our minister's second dispatch was received, and at a time when the best information in the possession of our government was derived from its first report, indicating that the statements made in the press were sensational and exaggerated, and that the atrocities alleged really did not exist. This condition very much weakened any motive for an interference based on considerations of humanity, and permitted us, without embarrassment, to pursue a course plainly marked out by other controlling incidents. "By a treaty entered into at Berlin in the year 1878, between Turkey and various other governments, Turkey undertook to guarantee protection to the Armenians, and agreed that it would 'periodically make known the steps taken to this effect to the powers, who wil! superintend their application.' “Our government was not a party to this treaty, and it is entirely obvious that, in the face of the provisions of such treaty above recited, our interference in the proposed investigation, especially without the invitation of any of the powers which had assumed by treaty obligations to secure the protection of these Armenians, might have been exceedingly embarrassing, if not entirely beyond the limits of justification or propriety. "The Turkish invitation to join the investigation set on foot by that government was, therefore, on the 2d day of December, declined. On the same day, and after this declination had been sent, our minister at Constantinople forwarded his second dispatch, tending to modify his former report as to the extent and character of Armenian slaughter. At the same time the request of the Sultan for our participation in the investigation was repeated, and Great Britain, one of the powers which joined in the treaty of Berlin, made a like request. "In view of changed conditions, and upon reconsideration of the subject, it was determined to send Mr. Jewett, our consul at Sivas, to the scene of the alleged outrages, not for the purpose of joining with any other government in an investigation and report, but to the end that he might be able to inform this government as to the exact truth. "Instructions to this effect were sent to Mr. Jewett, and it is supposed he has already entered upon the duty assigned him." President Cleveland, message to the Senate, Dec. 11, 1894, S. Ex. Doc. 11, Aft. LXI. of the Treaty of Berlin, referred to in the message, provides: The Turkish government, when advised of the intention of the United States to send Mr. Jewett as an independent investigator, and not as a member of the Turkish commission objected on the ground that if this privilege should be granted to the United States it would be claimed by the parties to the treaty of Berlin, and the investigation would thus assume a European character. Permission to Mr. Jewett to go in an independent capacity having been refused, it was decided not to press the matter further. For. Rel. 1894, 723, 725. December 19, 1895, President Cleveland communicated to the Senate, with a special message, a report of Mr. Olney, Secretary of State, on the condition of affairs in Asiatic Turkey. He referred to the failure, mentioned in his annual message of December 3, 1895, of the proposal of the United States for an independent investigation on its part of the occurrences at Sassoun in August, 1894. The facts in regard to the recent outbreaks at Constantinople, Sivas, and Trebizond had, he said, been communicated by official representatives of the United States, and the conditions at Harpoot and Marash were expected to be elicited in connection with the American claims for the destruction of property. As to the recent disturbances in other parts of Asia Minor, the Department of State was dependent on hearsay and the statements of individuals not officially dependent upon it. President Cleveland referred to the political aspirations of the Armenians and to the race hatred between them and the Koords. President Cleveland, special message, Dec. 19, 1895, S. Doc. 33, 54 Cong. As to the Armenian riot at Constantinople on September 30, 1895, see As to the aims and methods of the Huntchaguists, see For. Rel. 1895, II. As to the treatment of naturalized citizens of the United States of As to American missionary claims for destruction of property at Marash, By the diplomatic and consular appropriation act of March 2, 1895, provision was made for new United States consulates at Erzerum and Harpoot. Vice-consular commissions were issued in June to two experienced employees of the Department of State. They reached Constantinople in July, and, after waiting more than two months for exequaturs, which were refused by the Porte on the ground that there was no commerce with either town, were directed Sept. 11, 1895, to proceed to their posts without them. They got as far as Trebizond, the nearest Black Sea port, where, owing to obstacles then existing to the journey to the mountainous interior, they remained from October 5 to November 10, 1895. After the riots at Trebizond, one of them was recalled for other employment, while the other, not having received his teskeré and military escort, returned to Constantinople. It appears that at Harpoot no foreign consular representation then existed. At Erzerum, consulates were maintained by Great Britain, Persia, and Russia, and vice-consulates by France and Italy. Reports of Mr. Olney, Sec. of State, to the President, Dec. 19, 1895, and See Mr. Terrell, min. to Turkey, to Mr. Olney, Sec. of State, Jan. 20, 1896, (President "Our recently appointed consul to Erzerum is at his post and discharging "Obtained Sultan's iradé granting exequatur for consul at Erzerum." 10. VARIOUS TOPICS. § 875. "It is not the desire or intention of this government to assail the Sovereignty or seek to weaken the authority of the Porte in any of its recognized dependencies. On the contrary, we concede to that government, as we demand for ourselves, the right to manage its own affairs in its own way, assuming always that such control will conform to the spirit of the age, and shall not interfere with the rights of our own government or people, or conflict with obligations which may have been entered into between the United States and other countries and peoples." Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Maynard, min. to Turkey, No. 23, Oct. 8, 1875, MS. Inst. Turkey, III. 140. This instruction related to certain expostulatory statements by officers of the Turkish government to the effect that the United States treated "Tunis and Tripoli as independent states, and not as provinces of the Ottoman Empire." Mr. Fish went on to say that the relations of the United States with Tripoli and Tunis were regulated by treaties, in which the Porte had acquiesced without dissent; that the United States had never been at war with Turkey, but had had a severe war with Tripoli, which was ended by a treaty of peace that was still in force; that Tripoli had at one time even maintained an ambassador at London. In conclusion Mr. Fish expressed the desire of the United States to “recognize the authority of the Porte in the several dependencies of the Ottoman government where it shall not be in conflict with long established usage and solemn treaty obligations." For Mr. Eugene Schuyler's report on the Bulgarian outrages, see special With reference to Turkish matters, see the following documents: May 31, 1876, II. Ex. Doc. 170, 44 Cong. 1 sess. The Ottoman Capitu |