W. MORGAN SHUSTER[1]

[Footnote 1: Reprinted in condensed form from the original narrative in

_Hearst's Magazine,_ by permission.]

As told in the preceding volume, Persia in the year 1905 began a

struggle for freedom from autocratic rule. This she finally achieved in

decisive fashion and set up a parliamentary government. Her career of

liberty seemed fairly assured. She had against her, however, an

irresistible force. England and Russia had long been encroaching upon

Persian territory. Russia, in especial, had snatched away province

after province in the north. Of course Persia's revival would mean that

these territorial seizures would be stopped. Hence Russia almost openly

opposed each step in Persia's progress. In 1907, Russia and England

entered into an agreement by which each, without consulting Persia,

recognized that the other held some sort of rights over a part of

Persian territory: a "sphere of Russian influence" was thus established

in the north, and of British in the southeast.

The climax to this antagonism against Persia came in 1911. The

desperate Persians appealed to the United States Government to send

them an honest administrator to guide them, and President Taft

recommended Mr. Shuster for the task. The work of Mr. Shuster soon won

him the enthusiastic confidence and devotion of the Persians

themselves. But in proportion as his reforms seemed more and more to

strengthen the parliamentary government and bring hope to Persia, he

found himself more and more opposed by the Russian officials. Finally

Russia made his mere presence in the land an excuse for sending her

armies to assault the Persians. Seldom has the murderous attack of a

strong country upon a weak one been so open, brazen, and void of all

moral justification. Thousands of Persians were slain by the Russian

troops, and many more have since been executed for "rebellion" against

the Russian authorities. The parliamentary government of Persia was

completely destroyed; it finally disappeared in tumult and dismay on

December 24, 1911.

The country was reduced to helpless submission to the Russian armies.

Mr. Shuster's own account of the tragedy follows. He called it "The

Strangling of Persia."

Of the many changing scenes during the eight months of my recent

experiences in Persia, two pictures stand out in such sharp contrast as

to deserve special mention.

The first is a small party of Americans, of which the writer was one,

seated with their families in ancient post-chaises rumbling along the

tiresome road from Enzeli, the Persian port on the Caspian Sea, toward

Teheran. It was in the early days of May, 1911, and from these medieval

vehicles, drawn by four ratlike ponies, in heat and dust, we gained our

first physical impressions of the land where we had come to live for

some years--to mend the broken finances of the descendants of Cyrus and

Darius. We were fired with the ambition to succeed in our work, and,

viewed through such eyes, the physical discomforts became unimportant.

Hope sang loud in our hearts as the carriages crawled on through two

hundred and twenty miles of alternate mountain and desert scenery.

The second picture is eight months later, almost to the day. On January

11, 1912, I stood in a circle of gloomy American and Persian friends in

front of the Atabak palace where we had been living, about to step into

the automobile that was to bear us back over the same road to Enzeli.

The mountains behind Teheran were white with snow, the sun shone

brightly in a clear blue sky, there was life-tonic in the air, but none

in our hearts, for our work in Persia, hardly begun, had come to a

sudden end.

Between the two dates some things had happened--things that may be

written down, but will probably never be undone--and the hopes of a

patient, long-exploited people of reclaiming their position in the

world had been stamped out ruthlessly and unjustly by the armies of a

so-called Christian and civilized nation.

Prior to 1906, the masses of the Persians had suffered in comparative

silence from the ever-growing tyranny and betrayal of successive

despots, the last of whom, Muhammad Ali Shah, a vice-sodden monster of

the most perverted type, openly avowed himself the tool of Russia. The

people, finally stung to a blind desperation and exhorted by their

priests, rose in the summer of 1906, and by purely passive

measures--such as taking sanctuary, or _bast_, in large numbers in

sacred places and in the grounds of the British Legation at

Teheran--succeeded in obtaining from Muzaffarn'd Din Shah, the father

of Muhammad Ali, a constitution which he granted some six months before

his death.

The pledge given in this document his son and successor swore to fulfil

and then violated a dozen or more times, until the long-suffering

constitutionalists, who called themselves "nationalists," finally

compelled him, despite the intrigues and armed resistance of Russian

agents and officers, to abdicate in favor of his young son, Sultan

Ahmad Shah, the present constitutional monarch. This was in July, 1909.

It was this constitutional government, recognized as sovereign by the

Powers, that had determined to set its house in order, and in practise

to replace absolute monarchy with something approaching democracy.

Whence the Persians, a strictly Oriental people, had derived their

strange confidence in the potency of a democratic form of government to

mitigate or cure their ills, no one can say. We might ask the Hindus of

India, or the "Young Turks," or to-day the "Young Chinese" the same

question. The fact is that the past ten years have witnessed a truly

marvelous transformation in the ideas of Oriental peoples, and the

East, in its capacity to assimilate Western theories of government, and

in its willingness to fight for them against everything that tradition

makes sacred, has of late years shown a phase heretofore almost

unknown.

Persia has given a most perfect example of this struggle toward

democracy, and, considering the odds against the nationalist element,

the results accomplished have been little short of amazing.

Filled with the desire to perform its task, the Medjlis, or national

parliament, had voted in the latter part of 1910 to obtain the services

of five American experts to undertake the work of reorganizing Persia's

finances. They applied to the American Government, and through the good

offices of our State Department, their legation at Washington was

placed in communication with men who were considered suitable for the

task. The intervention of the State Department went no further than

this, and the Persian Government, like the men finally selected, was

told that the nomination by the American Government of suitable

financial administrators indicated a mere friendly desire to aid and

was of no political significance whatsoever.

The Persians had already tried Belgian and French functionaries and had

seen them rapidly become mere Russian political agents or, at best,

seen them lapse into a state of _dolce far niente_. Poor Persia had

been sold out so many times in the framing of tariffs and tax laws, in

loan transactions and concessions of various kinds that the nationalist

government had grown desperate and certainly most distrustful of all

foreigners coming from nations within the sphere of European diplomacy.

What they sought was a practical administration of their finances in

the interest of the Persian people and nation.

In this way the writer found himself in Teheran on the 12th of May last

year, having agreed to serve as Treasurer-General of the Persian

Empire, and to reorganize and conduct its finances.

It is difficult to describe the Persian political situation existing at

that time without going too deeply into history. It is true that in a

moment of temporary weakness after her defeat by Japan, Russia had

signed a solemn convention with England whereby she engaged herself, as

did England, to respect the independence and integrity of Persia.

Later, by the stipulations of 1909, these two Powers solemnly agreed to

prevent the ex-Shah, Muhammad Ali, from any political agitation against

the constitutional government. But, as the world and Persia have seen,

a trifle like a treaty or a convention never balks Russia when she has

taken the pulse of her possible adversaries and found it weak. What is

more painful to Anglo-Saxons is that the British Government has been no

better nor more scrupulous of its pledges.

During the first half of July, we began to learn where some of the

money was supposed to come from, and we were just beginning to control

the government expenditures after a fashion when, on July 18th, late at

night, the telegraph brought the news that Muhammad Ali, the ex-Shah,

had landed with a small force at Gumesh-Teppeh, a small port on the

Caspian, very near the Russian frontier. It was the proverbial bolt

from the blue, for while rumors of such a possibility had been rife,

most persons believed that Russia would not dare to violate so openly

her solemn stipulation signed less than two years before.

The Great Events by Famous Historians, Volume 21 The Recent Days (1910-1914) · 第 88 / 142 题