The Cossack and the Turk: a popular Account of the present Crisis in the affairs of the Ottoman Empire; with the facts and documents relating thereto, from official sources

Front matter

THE ENGLISH AND FRENCH FLEETS IN THE SKA OF MARMOHA. HaYAKII, 90, in, 18. Sane, U. Mooadok, 16. NAI'OLKOJs, 90. FlBBBBAKD, I'. | 0, 120. 3, 16, Henri IV, 100. Cauaduc, 2. Valmy, 120, 0. A. Jacquinot. Vii.le-de-Pahis, 120, V. A. Ilfirnclin. Sampson, 16, Britannia, 120, V. A. Dundas. Thai-ai.c-ais, 120. Rodney, 90. VsNOBAiroa, 84, IiK-rninuTioN, 28. An -ion, 90. Ill i.i.KkOi'HON, 78. \, 50. I'll *.i*i.i:\i m;\k, SO. Magellan, 14. THE COSSACK AND THE TURK: A POPULAR ACCOUNT OF THE PRESENT CRISIS IN THE AFFAIRS OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE. WITH THE FACTS AND DOCUMENTS RELATING THERETO, FROM OFFICAL SOTJBCES. By Arthur J. Joyce. LONDON : HENRY VIZETELLY, GOUGH SQUARE, FLEET STREET. 1853. LONDON : HENRY YIZETELLY, PRINTER AND ENGRAYER, GOTJGH SQUARE, FLEET STREET.

Preface

. For six months the " Turkish question" has nearly absorbed public interest throughout Europe; and in England, especially, has led to many consequences equally practical and injurious. It has diverted attention from home topics ; has compromised the reputa tion, if not the stability, of a ministry ; has thrown serious perplexities across the path of our industrial progress ; has enhanced prices, shaken the funds, paralysed manufacture, and checked trade in many quarters. In the history of Europe, even if it should go no further, the controversy has deserved serious commemoration. And yet, hitherto, its only events have been manifestos. The embroilment has lasted long, and grown hot ; but all that has been inter changed between the disputants themselves, or those surrounding Powers who have so eagerly interposed in the affair, because their present and future destinies are also compromised in the result, consists of a copious series of pieces justicatives, in which the principals on

PREFACE.

. either side endeavour to " show their quarrel just" in the eyes of Europe ; or the several mediators seek to establish the justice or prudence of closing it upon a certain basis. At a moment when the dispute appears upon the eve of passing before a new tribunal — when from Constan tinople there reaches us a proclamation of war with Russia ; and in London we hear that the Four Powers have exhausted their last effort at mediation in the shape of an ultimate " note " to the Czar — it maybe opportune to present to the English public, in a col lected form, the documents by means of which this great Chancery suit of nations has heretofore been carried on. The question rests at present entirely upon the facts and arguments, the claims and admissions, recapi tulated in these official missives. If hostilities actually arise, new elements will rapidly become involved in the dispute.

From the clauses of old treaties, the appeal will lie to the results of modern battles ; or the mediators, whose intervention has been limited to despatches written with diplomatic politeness and obscurity, may interfere more effectually and intelli gibly with an unsheathed sword in their hand. But meanwhile, before the fighting begins, it is only from the various state papers contained in the following pages, that any just idea can be formed of what the combatants on either side are really fighting about. The collection, we must add, is in one respect in complete. Contrary to all d priori expectations, it is

PREFACE.

. 5 only the constitutional government, out of all the parties concerned, which has kept its actions secret. The British share in the controversy, is still a mystery. While the manifestos and despatches of despotic or semi-barbarous Powers have immediately transpired, a single paper, brought to light accidentally and surrep titiously, is all that we are able to include on the part of the English ministry. Some future " blue book " will doubtless supply the deficiency. But this may not see the light until long after the " Turkish question " has reached its denouement, and lost much of its interest. CONTENTS.

Chapter I. Status Quo Ante

The amhition of Russia, as developed on its southern and Turkish frontier, has heen, for a century past, the " great fact " in the history of Eastern Europe. Begin ning at the very dawn of strength and civilisation, in the Great Moscovite Empire, the giant passion for hecoming one day masters of Constantinople has grown with the growth of power in the Czars — has formed their ruling principle of policy, has given them an ohject, which they steadily pursued amidst all the convulsions that have from time to time threatened to disturb the " balance " of the Western Powers ; and pointed out a prize, to wards which they seized every opportunity and culti vated every means of gradually winning their way. Peter the Great, the first autocrat of " all the Russias," left in his will an injunction to his successors, to add B THE COSSACK AND THE TUEK.

Byzantium to the magnificent inheritance which he had created for them. Catherine the Second did much to follow this injunction, and designed more. Alexander, even while continental Europe, according to our English apprehension, was on the verge of succumbing to one imperial master, whose rescripts would be dated from the Tuileries, forgot all other dangers or duties, in his yearnings for the possession of Constantinople. There is a page just exhumed from the records of the Napoleonic dicta at St. Helena, in which the ex-Emperor prophesies that, in a few years, " Russia will have Constantinople, part of Turkey (i.e., the European and Christian pro vinces), and all Greece." But the prophecy, after all, was only a reminiscence. Napoleon recollected the " cajoling and flattering " lavished upon himself by the Russian Emperor, with the undisguised object of obtain ing his consent to such a series of conquests ; and assumed, with much probability, that the desire would continue on one side, while, on the other, the power or the principle of resistance might one day become weak.

Nor were these ambitious designs developed only in direct attempts. Distant enterprises were undertaken, and circuitous influences set to work, with a view to the same final result. Armies were sent into the far East, whose ultimate destination was the shores of the Bos phorus. The Russian captor of Chusan, inscribed upon its gate, which looked to the south, " The road to Constantinople." But it was chiefly by appealing to the religious sentiment, and working their way, step by step, into a protectorate of the Christian population of Turkey, that successive Czars have sought to prepare the way for future dominion in that country. The tone of various treaties, dating back for a considerable period, will show with what pertinacity they have sought, and with what dexterity they have obtained, some title to be called the heads and patrons of the Greek community, even when ranked among the subjects of the Sublime Porte.

To commence with the treaty of Kainardji — which has been so constantly referred to in the recent manifestoes on both sides — concluded in 1774, Russia then obtained a right of simple " intercession " on behalf of the Christian inhabitants of Moldavia and Wallachia. In 1826, the treaty of Ackerman was concluded, in which the privilege of intercession was elevated to that of " representation." By the next treaty, called the treaty of Adrianople (1829), an important step was secured for Russia, who then obtained a right of " guarantee." And, finally, in 1834, when an organic settlement was effected, determining the constitution of the two Principalities, the Czar became entitled to a right of " protectorate" over the Greek Christians that dwelt in them. This protectorate, under a more formal sanction, and embodied in a more practical form, it is now the object of the Russian Emperor to extend over all the Greek subjects of the Sublime Porte.

Among the Greeks themselves, there is abundant proof that a vivid spirit of sympathy and partisanship in these Russian projects has long existed. It was indeed natural that such should' De the case. So far as a race, crushed by tyranny into degradation, could know the events or estimate the changes passing in the world around them, the Greeks in Turkey built hopes of help and b deliverance from the interposition of the powerful nation who shared their faith, and whose sovereign claimed to be the head of their church. As the Russian power became developed — as its frontier was pushed nearer, and its interference in Turkish affairs grew more active and daring — the Russo-mania among his Greek subjects sprung up more alarmingly to the Sultan. Out of many weak points which Turkey presents to the aggressor, this has been the weakest.

Nothing else could have reduced a sovereign ruling over thirty-five million subjects, tolerably civilised, and cherishing still the tradition of military prowess and conquest, to such absolute dependence upon the caprice or the convenience of foreigners. The fact that in its European moiety, Turkey retained at least nine million Christian subjects under heavy bondage to about three million Mahometans, could never be overlooked either by its enemies or its friends. Here was an element of disorganisation ready to be developed at a touch. In all treaties, accordingly, the Powers who had taken upon them to preserve the integrity of the Ottoman Empire, felt bound to shield it from the approach of hostility, fearing that it would fall to pieces at the first blow ; while the spoliator abstained only from some exterior compulsion,- because he found the occasion not ripe for seizing the prey.

Thus, Lord Castlereagh, thirty years ago, warned the Emperor of Russia that " Turkey was a necessary evil in the European system ;" and Nesselrode, in 1830, shortly after the treaty of Adrianople, assigned as the reason for his Emperor's self-denying abstinence, at that era, the conviction " that Turkey, in its present condition, utterly unable to exist except under the protection of Russia, and incap able of acting except as Russia desires, is better suited to our political and commercial interests than any new combination which would lead us to form, in place of the Ottoman Empire, another state which might soon com pete with us in power, civilisation, and wealth." Why the Emperor Nicholas should have seized the present moment to renew his aggressions upon Turkey, and should persist in them with such pertinacity, against the combined remonstrances of Western Europe, is a question which much ingenuity has been wasted in an swering.

It has been remarked, for example, that other Powers had lately shown the example of insult and interference towards the Porte ; that the then Sir Stratford Canning, on taking leave of the embassy in Constantinople, indulged in a humiliating criticism upon the domestic policy of the Sultan, and the corruptions of his government ; that Austria had commissioned Count Leiningen to interfere in an unwarrantable manner respecting the rebellion in Montenegro ; and that the French Emperor had sent M. Lavalette with a peremp tory demand for enhanced privileges to the Latin con gregation at the Holy Sepulchre. There is, however, more plausibility than truth in these suppositions. The event grew out of the long-standing policy of Russia, and its occurrence was altogether a question of time. Nicholas did not want foreign example to interfere in Turkish affairs ; nor require teaching by the experi ence of others that Turkey was weak, and could be bearded with impunity.

Accident, probably, rather than any pre-arranged purpose, has brought the protectorial claim of Russia to the surface during the past months, and induced the Russian Emperor to formularise that claim in an ultimatum, and push it to the verge of a war. But the excuse, if not the impulse, of these transactions was doubtless the mission so successfully executed by M. Lavalette, in the affair of the Holy Shrines. The important results which have grown out of that controversy render it necessary for us to trace from their beginnings the questions which it involved. It is no doubt a dull and disgusting story, trivial in its incidents, and comtemptible in its agents, who consisted chiefly of hordes of Syrian monks, remarkable only for their vice, their ignorance, and their fanaticism. By the side of such " Christians"— whether Latin or Greek — it must be confessed that the Mussulmans themselves ap pear truly pious and enlightened.

Chapter II. The Question Of The

H0LV PLACES. From the era when the two churches were separated, the places of worship in the cradle of Christianity of have been objects of contention between the sects. The Latins, upon the plea of first possession, tried to maintain themselves as exclusive guardians of these sanctuaries. The Greeks, upon becoming subjects of the Ottoman, disputed this claim from a strong vantage ground. Finding that the latter, from their subject condition, were more favoured by the government, of the country, the Latins, who were all foreigners, sought for foreign support. This they found, from the very beginning, most liberally given by France. When Francis I. concluded with Solyman the Great, that first treaty, which is even yet the basis of all political and commercial relationships with Turkey, he procured the insertion in it of a clause relating to the privileges of the Latin church in Jerusalem.

This clause secured to the Latins the possession of all those sanctuaries in the Holy City, which had been in their hands ab antiquo — but without specifying them by name. Another treaty, concluded in 1740, repeated, textually, the clause in the former con. vention, and ratified it anew. Still, however, there was no specification of the shrines which were to appertain to the Latins. Such was the beginning and the extent of the French "protection " of the Christians in Jerusalem. As neither treaty, however, declared whether this Latin possession of the shrines was to be an exclusive one, as against other Christian sects, or whether all were to enjoy the privilege in common, perpetual dis putes arose among them. These differences not seldom took the shape of suits, which were carried before the local tribunals ; and, occasionally, referred to Constantinople for decision.

Firmans were in this manner obtained in favour sometimes of one rite, sometimes of the other — but more frequently favourable to the Greeks, who were able, as subjects of the Porte, to plead their cause more advantageously against their foreign rivals. In Turke}-, at the accession of every Sultan, it is customary to renew all firmans issued by his predecessors respecting individual or corporate privileges. The Greeks happen thus to be the recipients of the last firman granted by the reigning Sultan, confirming their possessions in Jerusalem. This is the sole origin of the special privileges and immunities of the Greeks, on which so much stress has been laid in all the Russian diplomatic notes. France began to treat the controversy as an affair of diplomacy, many years since. Curiously enough, it was in the first Republic, under an atheistic govern ment, that the interests of the Latin church found defenders quite as earnest as the most Christian kino*s. These republicans, who proscribed not only priests but faith itself in France, interposed in favour of the Jesuits, and the Holy Shrines in Palestine.

It was, indeed, a cause which France has not been able to abandon, seeing that it does not concern her merely on her own account, but as the depositary of the rights of others. Louis Napoleon was often charged with taking up this question, when President of the Republic, merely to gain favour with the clergy and Catholic party in France. He may, doubtless, have endeavoured to turn the opportunity to account ; but it must be admitted that he did not originate the question. It came to him as an inherit ance from the reign of Louis Philippe, and it was a Protestant minister, M. Guizot, who first re-commenced the negotiations on this subject. The dispute, as it now exists, began in the disappearance of the famous star in the church of the Holy Nativity. In that church there are two spots equally venerated — one where Christ is said to have been born ; the other where the manger was found which formed His cradle.

The former of these is in the keeping of the Greeks ; the latter in that of the Latins. A silver star, bearing a Latin inscription, had been suspended from time immemorial above the spot of the nativity ; and the presence of this star on a site which they had claimed as their own, almost consoled the Latins for the loss of the shrine itself. Great, accordingly, was their indignation when the symbol suddenly and unaccountably vanished. They considered it not simply a theft, but a usurpation by the Greek monks ; and, after demanding the protection of France as being the trustee of their privileges, opened a controversy, not only respecting this single transaction, but upon the general question. If at that moment Latins and Greeks had consented to the compromise which has since been effected, and allowed the Porte to replace the abstracted star by a similar one, the whole dispute would have been closed.

But the jealousies and fanaticism of the monks on both sides, prevented such a happy conclusion. The Latins accused the Greeks of having committed the theft for the purpose of securing their usurpation of the shrine. The Greeks retorted the charge, alleging that their rivals had themselves stolen the precious symbol, and would by no means consent to its being replaced. When France was appealed to by the Latin monks, she demanded, by her ambassador at the Porte, not simply the reparation of this offence, but also the resti tution of all the sanctuaries assigned under the old treaties to the Christians of her communion. She in sisted, at the same time, that the Latins should be per mitted to repair the cupola over the Holy Sepulchre. This being the chief shrine of all, was the object of most strenuous rivalry between the sects.

In past ages the Latins had often performed the requisite repairs. Seventy years ago the Greeks had repaired it for the last time, after a conflagration by which it had been injured. Once again dilapidations were apparent, which the Greeks were accused of increasing purposely, in order to render immediate repair necessary, trust ing to the last precedent, and a firman of many years' standing, to secure the privilege of accomplishing that work to themselves. The Latins formally resisted this pretension. They demanded to have the repairs committed exclusively to their hands ; as also to be allowed to restore all the Latin inscriptions which existed before the conflagration, and to efface everything that the Greeks had added afterwards. The Porte then suggested, as a pacific medium, that neither sect should interfere in the matter, offering to execute the repairs itself at its own expense.

This proposal the French referees denounced as a profanation; and the Greek monks equally disliked it as depriving them of a chance of strengthening their exclusive claims. It was not until the quarrel had lasted long, and passions had become inflamed, that the compromise was accepted, so far as the repairs went. The consent of France was not given until after the revolution of 1848. Both sides, moreover, kept the dispute alive, even when it turned only upon the question whether the recent Greek inscriptions should be retained or effaced. There remained, besides, the controversy respecting the star ; and the still more complicated question of the " usurped " shrines. This word alarmed the Greeks exceedingly, who complained that under pretence of restitution, all their rights and possessions in the Holy Places would be wrested from them and transferred to the Latins.

The Porte very early became aware of the complications which must arise from the continued agitation of these questions. Nor did it fail to impress upon the French government the expediency of refraining from a course which led to so much hazard. These representations were, however, neglected, and the con troversy had already gone too far to be silenced before France discovered how much the peace, not of Turkey alone, but of Europe itself, was imperiled by her persistency. The Mussulmans had always interpreted toleration in a wider sense than the Christians with whom they had come in contact. Their constant effort had been, since the time when they conquered Palestine, to preserve a perfect equality and community of privileges among the different Christian sects in relation to all the shrines of the Holy Land.

Their chief object, accordingly, was to preserve the status quo. The monks of either sect, on the other hand, were not content with equality. Nothing would suffice for their intolerance but superiority and monopoly ; and as they endeavoured to secure their ob jects by incessant art and chicanery, it has happened that at different times the members of each rite had obtained advantages, or became possessed of exclusive rights, to the disparagement of their rivals. These diverse claims, accumulating with time and conflicting in character, "were now urged alike by Greeks and Latins, both equally obstinate, and both convinced of their own indefeasible titleto the award. No foreign Power had, however, as yet interposed, or been appealed to, as arbitrator in this strife, except France. That function appertained to the French rulers, whoever they might happen to be, as a consequence of the treaties of Francis I. and of 1740.

Stimulated by the remonstrances of the Latin priests, therefore, the Republic, or rather the President Louis Napoleon, interposed once more in the controversy in the year 1850. The first step was to commission General Aupick, the French Envoy Extraordinary at the Porte, to draw up a report on the subject. He examined the details accordingly, and looking upon the subject with the eyes of a soldier rather than those of a diplomatist, still less of an ecclesiastic, wrote word to his government that the matter was of very easy solution. The President then insisted upon the resumption of the old negotiations left in abeyance by Louis Philippe. As a commencement, he required a categorical reply on this point — Whether Turkey recognised the treaty of 1740 1 An affirmative, no doubt, would lay the foundation for inconvenient conclusions ; yet the Porte could not refuse it.

Having obtained this reply, the French ambassador demanded the appointment of a "mixed commission" to consider the dispute. From this commission all the subsequent and still existing difficulties have naturally arisen. Its appointment involved the immediate inference that Turkey was no longer the sole administrator of her own affairs, or supreme judge over her own subjects. Foreign interposition thus found extrance, under the guise of watching over the interests of " foreign" — i. _-., Latin — monks and pilgrims. It was the point of the wedge, whose sub stance was speedily to follow. It is needless for us to follow all the pleas and claims discussed by the mixed commission. The chief point at issue referred to the exclusive possession of twelve " places " on the part of the Latins. Of these the four principal were — the Great Cupola of the Holy Sepulchre, the Tomb of the Virgin, the Great Church at Bethlehem, and part of the Garden of Gethsemane.

Their title was thus made out : — Firmans dating about fifty years before the treaty of 1740, conferred the possession of these " places " by name to the Latins : the treaty afterwards passed, confirmed to them the rifht of holding everything they already possessed. Other firmans were produced, on their side, by the Greeks, wherein the same "places" were named, and an exclusive right to them assigned to members of the Greek rite. But of these grants, one set were dated before the Latin firmans ; another after the treaty of 1740. The French negotiators denied the validity of either : — of the former, because the treaty annulled all previous dispositions; of the latter, because no arrangements secured by treaty can be altered without the con sent of all the contracting parties. These reasons appeared so irrefragible to the commission, that an adverse decision became inevitable.

Then it was that Russia first interposed on behalf of the Greeks. Her interference, moreover, assumed from the beginning a grave aspect. It was not by reasoning with the commission, or remonstrating through an am bassador, but by an autograph letter of complaint addressed by the Czar to the Sultan. Russia had em ployed this medium — so contrary to the usages of con stitutional governments — several times before in her communications with the Porte. Upon the nomination of Prince Alexander in Servia ; in negotiating the treaty of Balta Liman in 1849 ; and in demanding the extradition of the Polish refugees in 1850 ; a personal correspon dence had been employed by the Emperor as the readiest means to secure his ends. The device had doubtless its conveniences ; this among the rest, that it rendered a negative reply exceedingly improbable. ' 23 In this letter the Czar represented in forcible terms, the justice of preserving to the Greeks all their religious privileges in Jerusalem ; and condemned the ministers of the Sultan for having exhumed an obsolete treaty for the purpose of inducing their Sovereign to alter the status quo.

It had been easy to reply to this note, that the treaty of 1740 was not obsolete, seeing that it constituted the basis of all the international relationships between France and Turkey — or to remark upon the inconsistency of one Power, who held no treaty, interposing to complain of the interposition of another who had one. Prudential considerations forbade this course. Russia was now friendly and powerful ; the Greek population of Turkey were formidable and much irritated. The Sultan therefore returned a diplomatic answer, and temporised. By way of escaping from the difficulty, the Porte dissolved the " mixed" commission, and appointed a new one composed exclusively of ulemahs and Ottoman functionaries. The step looked impartial and independent ; but in reality it was a concession to Russia, little palatable to the Latins or their French patrons.

The same defer ence to Russian power was shown also in another way. While condemning the Turkish ministry in the auto graph letter, the Emperor had specially directed his reproaches to Reschid Pacha, the grand vizier, Ali Pacha, minister of foreign affairs, and Fuad Effendi, the Grand Vizier's chief-counsellor. Neither of these functionaries would assist at the deliberations of the new commission, pleading that they were parties concerned, and leaving the inferior members full liberty of action. THE COSSACK AND THE TURK. Russia at this time took another step of some signifi cance. Overtures were made by the Emperor to the French President, proposing that the question of the Shrines should be discussed and settled between themselves, and Turkey left simply to execute their decision. Nicholas hoped by this means to obtain from France, if nothing else, an admission of his right to interfere, and a recog nition of his pretensions, which he has since urged so strenuously, to be the protector of the Greeks in the East.

Louis Napoleon, however, was not so entrapped. He recognised no other parties to the question than France and the Porte, and sent word to the latter of the Em peror's injurious proposition. While the new commission opened its sessions, the Sultan made a last effort to contrive an amicable ad justment. This he proposed to base upon a principle of absolute community among members of both sects in all the rights and privileges possessed by either. The endeavour w,,*. fruitless. France consented to waive only a portion of her exclusive pretensions on behalf of the Latins. The Greeks would not listen to the proposal at all. The commission, after a laborious inquiry, concluded their labours and presented their report. They decided that the great cupola of the Holy Sepulchre should be possessed in common, that the smaller cupola should remain in statu quo, that is to say, exclusively Greek ; and that the Latins should be admitted to the Tomb of the Virgin, from which they had hitherto been ex cluded.

As to the church of Bethlehem, whose form showed it was built by Latin architects, but which had been held in exclusive possession for centuries by the Greeks, it was judged right that the Latins should have a key of their own to the portals. Hitherto they had obtained possession, as a sort of favour, from the Greek priests. Henceforth they were to let themselves in. This change, the commission contended, could not in any way affect the status quo. The ministers, in giving official sanction to this report, added another concession to the Greeks, by granting them admission to the sanctuary of the Ascension, where only the Latins had previously officiated, as a counterpoise to the privilege accorded to the latter in the Tomb of the Virgin. The arrangement was finally communicated to the French ambassador by an official note.

He was toll} also of the reasons and apprehensions upon which the various details had been founded ; and a species of apology made for any clauses whereof the Latin congrega tions could complain, by pleading the difficulties that sur rounded the Porte from its own subjects and from Russia. France accepted this note with frankness, registering a protest as a bare matter of form, to reserve all Latin rights heretofore held or claimed in case the question should be again opened. To the Czar, while communi cating the terms of the decision, the Sultan wrote an autograph letter. In this missive a reply was given to the former note of the Emperor Nicholas. The Sultan exculpated his ministers, and justified the policy of Turkey in regard to the negotiations with France, as being only the fulfilment of recognised and long-standing treaties. c THE COSSACK AND THE TURK.

Russia thus gained a part of its object ; obtaining, what it had never had before— a semi-official recogni tion of its self-asserted function, as chief and patron of the Greeks universally. The Emperor did not allow the opportunity to pass of securing another step. He demanded the publication of a firman which should set forth the new arrangement, and proclaim it at the same time a confirmation of the status quo. To this demand the Porte imprudently yielded. The firman was issued, and orders given for its being proclaimed in fit places through the Turkish dominions. Muck umbrage was taken at this step by the French government. It was argued, not unreasonably, that this new firman would be assumed by the Greeks to su persede previous grants of privileges to the Latins. It also vitiated and annulled the protest already made by France, in their behalf, and so wounded her dignity.