CHAPTER XI

MY THIRD MISSION TO TURKEY

A surgical operation delays my departure--Roosevelt in Africa

delighted with my return to Turkey under Taft

Administration--Received by another Sultan--A royal weakling--The

invisible power of the new regime--Foreign concessions and

political intrigues--Turkish funeral customs--The Mohammedan

indifference to death--Roosevelt urges me to meet him in Cairo--We

visit Salonica and Athens--Received by King George of Greece

--Roosevelt's arrival at Cairo--The Kaiser's invitation--Roosevelt

condemns assassination of Premier despite warning to avoid subject

in his address--Roosevelt declines an audience with the Pope--At

tea with Prince and Princess Eitel Friedrich--A distinguished Arab

on international relations--Rumblings in the Balkans--The brilliant

Venizelos--My objections to "dollar diplomacy"--Former

Vice-President and Mrs. Fairbanks visit us--Other distinguished

Americans visit the Embassy--We visit the King and Queen of

Roumania--How the Queen adopted the pen-name "Carmen Sylva"--The

cell-like study of the Queen--Vienna and London--Two Rothschilds

express their views of the Triple Entente--"The greatest pleasure

of going abroad is returning home"--Reflections of the rift between

the Roosevelt policies and the Taft Administration.

My return to private life in 1909 did not prove a disturbing transition

for me, notwithstanding the fact that, on entering the Cabinet in 1906,

I had terminated all of my professional and business interests, I had no

plans for the future. I had always entered public office not without

some trepidation, and had always retired from such an office with a

certain sense of relief and satisfaction. But my past training and

natural disposition had by no means prepared me to be content with a

life of "elegant leisure," I soon found much to occupy my energies, and

again took part in numerous semi-public activities, and my cooperation

seemed all the more welcome because of my experience in office both at

home and abroad.

Soon after my return to New York, I was formally welcomed at a banquet

at the Hotel Astor, under the auspices of a number of prominent

citizens, led by William McCarroll, who had succeeded me as president of

the New York Board of Trade when I had left for Washington. It was, of

course, gratifying to me to receive this attention from my fellow

citizens, irrespective of party, among whom I expected to pass my

remaining years. Among the speakers were John Mitchel, St. Clair

McKelway, Richard Watson Gilder, poet and editor of the "Century

Magazine"; the Reverend Leander Chamberlain, and Dr. Lyman Abbott. Dr.

Abbott, one of America's foremost intellectual and spiritual leaders, is

the only surviving member of this group, and I am happy to be able to

record that he is still in good health, with his pen, which has lost

nothing of its charm and vigor, ever inspiring.

I quite dismissed from my mind any idea of holding office in the Taft

Administration, especially after Taft had reconsidered his statement or

promise to Roosevelt to retain me in the Cabinet. Shortly after my

return from Washington, however, on March 13, 1909, President Taft wrote

me that he would be glad to have me accept the embassy at

Constantinople, and that in time he would transfer me to some other post

that might be more acceptable. He concluded: "I hope this will meet your

view, because I should like to have you in my administration."

My personal relations with Mr. Taft had of course always been most

cordial and agreeable. I wrote him that, naturally, I had no desire to

return to a post which I had occupied twice before, unless extraordinary

conditions developed which particularly required my past experience

there and made it imperative that I accept as a public duty, and even

then I should accept only for a short time.

The President wrote me that he would be glad to have me accept the post

at Constantinople (which had been raised to an embassy since my last

mission), and that in time he would transfer me either to Japan or to

some acceptable post in Europe, and I soon received the following letter

from the State Department:

_April 29, 1909_

MY DEAR MR. STRAUS:

The President now desires me to make to you the formal offer of the

post of Ambassador to Turkey. The epoch-making events now occurring

in the Turkish Empire bring with them difficulties and

opportunities which make that post take on even greater importance,

and the President feels that your past service and keen knowledge

of the Near East make you peculiarly qualified to take charge at

this time of the important Embassy at Constantinople.

Adverting to your previous conversations with the President and

with me, relative to your disinclination to accept a post which you

have previously held, I would add that the President would be glad

to consider your transfer from Constantinople to some other post if

an opportune time should arrive when this was practicable and when

you wished to relinquish the important mission which is now

tendered to you.

I am, my dear Mr. Straus,

Very sincerely yours

P. C. KNOX

In June, while I was getting ready for my departure, I was compelled to

undergo an operation for appendicitis. I therefore wrote the President

asking him to relieve me of my appointment, as my illness would delay me

for another month or more. The President promptly advised me not to be

disturbed by the delay, that he would be glad to wait until my health

was entirely restored before having me start, and that it was not

possible, because of the troubled conditions in Turkey, at that time to

find any one to replace me.

At this time I received a letter from Roosevelt, addressed from the

heart of British East Africa, expressing pleasure at my again going to

Turkey:

SAIGO SOI, LAKE NAIVASHA

_16th July, 1909_

MY DEAR MR. AMBASSADOR:

Your letter gave me real pleasure. Mrs. Roosevelt had written of

you, and your dear wife, and two beautiful daughters, coming out to

see her; and she told me how much she enjoyed your visit. As for

the address at the dedication of the memorial window, my dear

fellow, you said the very things that I would most like to have

said about me, especially coming from a man whom I so much respect

and who is my close personal friend.

I am delighted that you have accepted the Turkish Embassy. The

situation was wholly changed by the revolution, and at this moment

I think that Constantinople is the most important and most

interesting diplomatic post in the world.

I shan't try to write to you at any length, for I find it simply

impossible to keep up with correspondence here in camp, and am able

to write my letters at all at the moment only because a friend has

turned up with a typewriter.

I can't say how I look forward to seeing you. I know nothing

whatever of American politics at the present moment. We have had a

very successful and enjoyable trip.

With love to Mrs. Straus and with hearty congratulations not to you

but to our country for your having gone to Turkey, I am

Faithfully yours

THEODORE ROOSEVELT

The first paragraph refers to an address I had made in May. The Reverend

J. Wesley Hill, of the Metropolitan Temple, had one of the windows of

his church dedicated to the Roosevelt Administration and I was asked to

deliver the principal address. I took for my subject "The Spirit of the

Roosevelt Administration," and reviewed the leading progressive acts of

the Administration and pointed out how they were all aimed to secure

the rights and enlarge the opportunities of the plain people. I had in

mind counteracting the influence then current to belittle the work of

the Roosevelt Administration. For with the beginning of the Taft

Administration, the reactionaries in and out of Congress had become more

bitter and outspoken in their opposition to the Roosevelt policies; it

seems that they were encouraged by the report that a break had taken

place between Roosevelt and Taft, and by the fact that certain Senators

and members of the House who had fallen out with Roosevelt seemed to be

specially welcomed at the White House. My address was therefore widely

quoted in the press and subsequently circulated in pamphlet form. I

quote one of its salient paragraphs:

All the Roosevelt measures and policies were based not only upon

moral convictions, but upon a statesman's forethought for the

welfare of the country. That he would encounter the powerful

opposition of the offending corporate interests was to be foreseen

and expected. All reforms and reformers no less in our country than

in others have encountered the reactionaries of privilege and

power, who persuaded themselves that their so-called vested

interests, however acquired and however administered, were their

vested rights. These trespassing reactionaries when not checked and

made obedient to the legitimate needs and righteous demands of the

many produced a spirit of revenge which broke out into revolution

at the extreme opposite end of the social system.

On August 18th Mrs. Straus and I left New York on the S.S. Prinz

Friedrich Wilhelm for Cherbourg. A week later we were in Paris, where we

met Mrs. Roosevelt with three of her children, Ethel, Archie, and

Quentin. During the fortnight of our stay we saw a great deal of them

and several times we went to the theater or sight-seeing together. Mrs.

Roosevelt told me that her husband had solicitously inquired about us

in several of his letters and suggested that I write him.

When we reached Constantinople on September 18th, the month of Ramazan

had begun, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Rifaat Pasha, informed

me that the Sultan, now Mohammed V, brother of Abdul Hamid, would

probably delay receiving me for a week or ten days, until the middle of

Ramazan, and not at the end, as was customary with the former Sultan.

Accordingly I was received on Monday, October 4th.

The residence of the new Sultan was in the Palace of Dolma Bagtche. As

my rank now was that of ambassador, this audience was a more ceremonious

one than those of my former missions. Eight royal carriages came from

the Palace to conduct me and my staff to the residence of His Royal

Majesty. The first of these, in which I rode, was a most gorgeous

affair, with outriders and two postilions in uniforms of brilliant

colors standing on a platform in the rear of the carriage. The streets

of Pera were crowded with spectators as these dazzling equipages went

by, in spite of a light rain that was falling. As we entered the Palace,

a large troop of soldiers arranged along each side of the main gate

presented arms. I was met by the Chief Introducer of Ambassadors and

several other officials, who conducted me to the audience chamber above.

With my dragoman, Mr. Gargiulo, I then proceeded with the Chief

Introducer of Ambassadors into the presence of the Sultan while the rest

of my staff were detained in an anteroom.

The Sultan was a man of about sixty-five, short and very thick-set. He

was dressed in military uniform, but appeared physically inert and

clumsy. During the whole thirty-three years' reign of his brother, Abdul

Hamid, he had been imprisoned in a palace on the Bosphorus and kept

under constant guard. He grew up in ignorance and his appearance clearly

indicated mental backwardness. His eyes were dull and his appearance

almost that of an imbecile, except when an occasional spark of animation

was noticeable. Withal he seemed kind and good-natured.

When I made my address, I felt as though I were speaking to an image

rather than a human being, and I went through it as quickly as possible,

omitting some parts for the sake of brevity, realizing that it was

simply a form and that the Introducer of Ambassadors would presently

read the whole of it in Turkish. The Sultan was then handed the Turkish

reply to read, which he did haltingly, even consulting the Introducer at

times to decipher a word. That being over, the doors to the anteroom

were thrown open and my staff entered, also the consul-general and his

staff, and each man was presented to the Sultan. We were then conducted

back to the anteroom and served with cigarettes and coffee, even though

it was Ramazan, when Mohammedans do not drink or smoke until after

sundown. In a few minutes more we were conducted back to our carriages.

The whole function was more in the nature of mimicry on the stage than a

serious diplomatic performance.

With my dragoman I paid my official calls upon the Grand Vizier and the

Minister of Foreign Affairs at the Porte, both of whom received me in

full-dress uniform and immediately returned the calls.

The Government of Turkey under the new regime, with a Sultan who was

merely a figurehead, was in the hands of the ministry, and the ministers

in turn were appointed and controlled by the Young Turks, or so-called

party of "Union and Progress" which had brought on the revolution of

1908 and deposed the late Sultan in April, 1909. It required no great

insight to see that a government thus controlled by an invisible power

without official responsibility could not be one of either liberty or

progress; yet the leading ministers were men of ability and some of them

men of considerable experience. Rifaat Pasha, for instance, was formerly

ambassador to London, an intelligent and thoroughly enlightened

statesman. Hussein Hilmi Pasha, the Grand Vizier, was the former member

of a joint committee charged with the government of Macedonia. Talaat

Bey, the Minister of the Interior, had previously held an inferior

position. He was one of the leading representatives of the Young Turk

Party and was believed to be the one mainly responsible for the terrible

slaughter and martyrdom of Armenians during the World War. After that

war he fled to Berlin, where, in 1920, he was assassinated by a young

Armenian. Djavid Bey, Minister of Finance, was a remarkably brilliant

young man, about thirty-four years old, from Salonica. It was said he

was a Donmeh; that is, a member of a sect of apostate Jews also known as

Sabbatians from the name of its Messiah or prophet, Sabbatai Zevi, who

gave the sect its romantic origin in the middle of the seventeenth

century. Professor Graetz gives a full and interesting description of

this whole movement in his "History of the Jews."

Among my colleagues were Gerard Lowther, who represented Great Britain;

Marquis Imperiali, Italy; and Baron Marschall von Bieberstein, Germany.

Because of the lack of general society in Constantinople, the members of

the diplomatic corps became very intimate with one another, and this was

so with my colleagues generally and especially between the German

ambassador and myself, for we were also fellow members of the Hague

Tribunal, and in 1907 he was chairman of the German delegation at the

Conferences. He was by far the ablest and most forceful diplomat in

Constantinople at this period. During his term of office there, German

influence in the Ottoman Empire entirely overshadowed the British. This

influence started its ascendancy following the visit of the Emperor in

1898, when he obtained the promise of the concession for the building of

the Bagdad Railway.

When first the Ottoman Government granted this concession, the

financiers of Great Britain, France, and Germany had come to a tentative

agreement for the joint construction of the road. The Germans then

wanted more than an equal control in the enterprise, and the

negotiations fell through. Had the interests of Great Britain and

Germany been united in the Near East, there probably would have been

quite a different alignment of Powers on the chessboard of Europe, and

perhaps the World War would have been prevented. The Bagdad Railway, if

jointly constructed, would have contributed to a better understanding

between Great Britain and Germany instead of accentuating more and more

their differences as the road proceeded toward the Persian Gulf.

I could plainly see evidences, both in social life in the Turkish

capital and in the unmistakable trend of diplomatic alignments, of a

rapidly developing entente between Great Britain, France, and Russia.

Since the Russo-Japanese War, and with the coming of the new regime in

Turkey, Russia had changed her attitude toward Turkey and had become

extremely friendly. Italy maintained a neutral attitude as between Great

Britain and Germany. Austria, as always, if not controlled by, was in

close sympathy with, Germany.

Abdul Hamid had developed into the most autocratic ruler of modern

times. With the overthrow of his regime and its colossal system of

secret agents, there was hope for a gradual development of a

parliamentary government, especially as some of the officials in the

Turkish ministry were forward-looking men, of considerable ability and

honesty of purpose. However, just as the jealousy between the Great

Powers had prevented the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire for a

hundred years or more, so the same jealousy prevented rehabilitation.

Great Britain favored the building up of Turkey; the policy of Russia,

Germany, and Austria was to keep Turkey weak and disorganized.

With the establishment of the new regime Germany, England, France, and

Italy sought concessions from the Government for the development of

mines and the building of railroads, docks, and other public utilities.

The country was rich and undeveloped, and the Turks themselves had

neither the capacity nor the money for such undertakings. But the effect

of these concessions was undermining the sovereignty and was

foreshadowing conflict.

With the passing of the old regime and the beginning of the new, an

appalling massacre of Armenians had taken place in Cilicia; and it was

believed that this massacre, which cost the lives of twenty thousand or

more victims, was engineered by the old regime to discredit the new.

The first fall of the new ministry was brought about by what was known

as the Lynch affair, which concerned a steamship monopoly of an English

company on the Tigris and Euphrates. The Lynch Company had a perpetual

concession to navigate two steamers from the Persian Gulf to Bassora,

and from there to Bagdad on the Tigris and as far as navigable on the

Euphrates. There was also a Turkish company with a similar concession,

and the English company undertook negotiations with the Grand Vizier for

the consolidation of the two companies, by which the Lynch Company was

to pay the Ottoman Government L160,000 in cash. The new company was to

have a grant for seventy-two years, with the right given to the Ottoman

Government to buy it all out at the end of thirty-six years on a basis

to be agreed upon. The new company was to have the monopoly of the

navigation, and it was to have an English president with a board of

directors composed half of Englishmen and half of Turkish subjects.

The arrangements were made on behalf of the ministry by the Grand

Vizier, Hilmi Pasha, and the matter was then brought up under

interpellation in the Parliament. The first vote taken was against

confirmation of the transaction. This amounted to an expression of lack

of confidence in the ministry, whereupon the Grand Vizier stated that

unless the transaction was confirmed, he and his colleagues would

resign. Two days later, on motion of Djavid Bey, the eloquent Minister

of Finance, the whole matter was reconsidered and an equally large vote

cast confirming the transaction. Aside from registering confidence or

the lack of it in the ministry, the vote against confirmation would also

have been interpreted as an act of hostility toward England. For the

time being the problem was settled.

Shortly thereafter, however, there arose in the Bagdad vilayet such

opposition to this transaction that the deputies from that province

threatened to withdraw from Parliament. The negotiations were regarded

as a victory for England in the strengthening of her influence along the

Persian Gulf, and a defeat for the Germans, whose railway terminus would

be at Bassora, at the junction of the two rivers. The Persian Gulf, on

the other hand, was of strategic interest to Great Britain because it is

the corridor to India. German influence proved the stronger with the

Young Turks, and the consolidation of the Lynch Company with the Turkish

company was not confirmed.

This vote resulted in the fall of the ministry, for a month later the

Young Turks forced the resignation of the Grand Vizier. In giving his

resignation to the Sultan, the Grand Vizier stated his reason as poor

health, but that was merely for public consumption. Talaat Bey and

Djavid Bey were known to be prominent members of the Young Turks, and

the Grand Vizier, who had been Minister of the Interior and then Grand

Vizier under the former Sultan, was not fully trusted as being in accord

with the regime of the Young Turks. To bridge over this ministerial

crisis the Young Turks offered to Hakki Pasha, ambassador at Rome, the

grand viziership, which he accepted.

* * * * *

Early in the year 1910 the diplomatic circle in Constantinople was

thrown, if not into gloom, at least into official mourning. The Grand

Duke Nicolaiovich, uncle of Czar Nicholas of Russia, and King Leopold of

Belgium, died. At Constantinople, more than at any capital in the world,

ceremonies of any kind were exaggerated to make an impression upon the

Turkish mind. And so in both these instances elaborate funeral services

were held which the diplomatic representatives attended in full uniform,

loaded with all decorations. The service for the Grand Duke lasted about

two hours, although no one apparently listened to any part but the

singing, and there was a general sigh of relief when it was over. The

service for the Belgian king was of a similar nature, with the addition

of a huge catafalque, surmounted by a crown, erected in the center of

the church, which was so cold that most of us kept on our overcoats.

Shortly thereafter I attended a third funeral, this time a Turkish one.

Hamdy Bey, director and organizer of the Imperial Museum, had died on

February 24, 1910, at about sixty-eight years of age. I had known him

for twenty years; he had always been courteous and obliging to American

visitors, and had shown many special favors to me, notably in regard to

the permit for the Babylonian excavations. The services took place at

eleven in the morning in front of the entrance to the Sophia Mosque. The

funeral cortege consisted of about a dozen dervishes clad in long black

robes with high conical head-coverings made of rough yellowish-gray

woolen material, and about three times the height of an ordinary fez.

They chanted in plaintive tones, "Allah! Allah! Allah!" Next came the

coffin-bearers, six in number. As is the custom among the Mohammedans,

the coffin was of plain boards, covered with shawls, over which was

draped a black covering with some phrases from the Koran worked into it.

On top of the coffin was the red fez or head-covering of the deceased.

Behind the coffin walked many of the leading officials of the Government

and other prominent people. The entire ministry was present. I joined

the procession shortly before reaching the mosque and was asked to walk

beside Rifaat Pasha, the Minister of Foreign Affairs. I was the only

representative of a foreign power present, and my attendance was warmly

appreciated by the Turkish officials and by the relatives of the

deceased.

When the procession reached the mosque, the coffin was placed upon the

pediment of a Greek column near the entrance, an appropriate place for

it to rest, I thought. All the mourners having gathered round, one of

the imans or priests standing by the coffin recited a prayer of about

six minutes' duration, in the midst of which he put the following

questions in Turkish to the bystanders:

"You all knew Hamdy Bey; what kind of a man was he?"

And the audience replied "Eyi," meaning "good."

"If he has done any wrong to you, do you forgive him?"

Their reply in Turkish signified, "We do."

The body was then borne on the shoulders of the carriers to the museum

enclosure which was near by, in front of the Chinili Kiosque. Djavid Bey

then mounted the marble portico and from there delivered a funeral

oration lasting about twelve minutes, in which he referred to the

excellent work accomplished by the deceased under the most trying

circumstances during the reign of corruption and oppression, and pointed

to the buildings surrounding the enclosure as the most fitting and

lasting memorial.

A funeral among the Mohammedans is not regarded as a cause for mourning.

Death is looked upon as a matter of course. Every respect is shown the

memory of the deceased, but there is neither sanctimony nor suppressed

sorrow at the funeral service. This is doubtless due to the spirit of

fatalism deeply embedded in their religion, and which colors so deeply

the life and philosophy of a Mohammedan.

The attitude of prayer on the part of the bystanders during this

ceremony was one I had never observed at the ordinary services in the

mosques. They all stood erect, arms horizontally extended forward from

the elbow, palms turned upward. The simplicity of the whole service

impressed me very much. The entire dramatic scene, in its picturesque

surroundings, was unforgettable. The day was bright and beautiful, and

the Bosphorus wore its most attractive coloring. Turkish functions,

whether official or ceremonial, are always arranged with quiet dignity

and precision.

Among the pleasant things during this sojourn in Constantinople was a

trip to Cairo to meet Roosevelt. On New Year's Day, 1910, I received a

note from him scribbled off in pencil, asking that I meet him if

possible about March 22d at Cairo; he would wire me later from the upper

Nile a more exact date. He could not come to Constantinople because he

had to include Christiania in his itinerary, which made it a little

difficult to carry out his plans.

In due time I received a telegram from him from Gondokoro, on the lower

Nile, to meet him on March 23d. Accordingly Mrs. Straus and I started

from Constantinople on March 7th in the embassy dispatch boat, Scorpion,

a ship of about seven hundred and fifty tons, manned by a crew of

seventy-five or eighty bluejackets. We left a little early in order to

be able to make stops at several ports on the way, notably Salonica,

which in many respects was the most advanced city of the empire. It had

about 135,000 inhabitants, of whom some 20,000 were Greek, 15,000

Bulgarian and other Balkan peoples, and the rest chiefly Jews. The

ancestors of many of the latter had settled there centuries before as

refugees from Spain at the time of the Inquisition. As was the case with

many of the other Jews of Turkey their language was Ladino, a Spanish

dialect.

We stayed at Salonica three days and visited the principal institutions

of the city, and the Jewish hospitals and schools, all of which I found

superior to any I had seen in Turkey proper. They were conducted on

modern scientific lines. The leaders of finance and industry were the

Jews and the Greeks, while at the same time the hewers of wood and the

drawers of water, those who loaded the ships and did the hauling, were

also principally Jews.

Next we stopped at Athens, where we met my brother Isidor and his wife,

who were making a tour of the Orient. Our six-days' stay in Athens was

made delightful for us by the courtesies of our minister, George H.

Moses, now and for some years past United States Senator from New

Hampshire. We visited the Boule, or Greek Chamber, one afternoon. What

mainly impressed one was the lack of decorum and dignity. The Minister

of War, who also represented the military league, was the dominating

power. I thought then how unfortunate it was for a country to be ruled

by the sabered politician. Then truly does the army become a curse to

the Government, as well as inefficient for the protection it is supposed

to give. When the army enters politics, then politics also enters the

army, a double calamity for any state. But that seemed to be the

lamentable condition of Greece as I saw it at that time.

We were received in audience by King George, who spoke perfect English.

I had met him before, on my visit to Athens in 1888. He conversed freely

and with the objectiveness of an outsider about the disturbed political

conditions of Greece, which was at the time dominated by a military

league, a secret organization of army officers. Referring to this

league, the King said that outsiders probably regarded him as weak in

giving way to its demands, but that they did not appreciate conditions;

he did it to prevent a revolution, and he hoped that unity among the

people might be promoted by the approaching meeting of the Assembly for

the revision of the constitution.

He seemed remarkably well informed regarding our system of government

and American affairs generally. He said that Greece needed a council of

state with cooerdinate legislative power, rather than a senate. He

appeared to favor a small appointed body rather than an elective

senate. He said he had been in Greece for fifty years; he had come there

when he was eighteen and was educated for the navy. He added drily that

it might have been better if he had stuck to the profession of his

training.

He knew I was on my way to Egypt to meet Roosevelt for whom he expressed

the greatest admiration. He said he had read several of Roosevelt's

books and had always had a desire to meet him.

We went on to Alexandria by the Roumanian boat. The sea seemed rough, so

we thought best to send the Scorpion on ahead so that we might make the

trip leisurely, and on March 21st we arrived in Cairo, where

Consul-General Iddings had reserved rooms for us at the Shepheard Hotel,

adjoining the suite reserved for the Roosevelts.

The Roosevelt party arrived from Luxor at about nine o'clock on the

morning of March 24th. We went to the station to meet the train, and

there was quite a gathering, including the consul-general and his wife,

an aide of the Khedive, an aide of the Sirdar, a number of American

missionaries, and several others. Cairo was astir. American flags were

flying on many buildings, and at the hotel a great crowd cheered as

Roosevelt entered.

After breakfast the first morning, Roosevelt wanted me to read several

letters he had dictated, among others a reply to the invitation that had

been extended by the Kaiser asking Roosevelt to be his guest in the

palace in Berlin. The invitation did not include Mrs. Roosevelt, and

this he resented. He therefore dictated a letter to Ambassador David J.

Hill saying he would be pleased to call on the Emperor on the day

designated, but could not accept the invitation to be his guest, as he

did not purpose to separate from Mrs. Roosevelt. He asked Ambassador

Hill to be sure to submit the message to the Emperor's chamberlain in

such a way that it could not be construed as a hint for an invitation

for Mrs. Roosevelt. I advised against sending this letter and asked him

to let me handle the matter. This I did, and Ambassador Hill soon

discovered, what I had suspected, that the Emperor was not aware at the

time the invitation was sent that Mrs. Roosevelt was with her husband.

The omission was immediately corrected.

Roosevelt was, of course, anxious for news from home. He spoke again of

Taft's having told him he would retain Garfield and myself, and said

Taft was aware that he (Roosevelt) was specially attached to us both. I

showed him an article in a current "North American Review," entitled

"The First Year of Taft's Administration," which plainly showed that

much ground had been lost.

Roosevelt was to deliver an address before the Egyptian National

University. He handed me the draft of it and asked me to criticize it

freely. I suggested a number of changes, which he promptly adopted. He

had been asked not to refer to the recent assassination of the Premier

of Egypt, Budros Pasha--a deed that had probably been inspired by the

Nationalists, a party composed chiefly of young students, half-educated

theorists, and a few others whose shibboleth was "Egypt for the

Egyptians." Roosevelt considered that it would be cowardly and evasive

to avoid this subject, and that usually the subjects one is asked not to

refer to are the ones uppermost in the minds of the people. Besides, if

he did not openly condemn such an act, his silence might be interpreted

as an approval. In view of all the circumstances I fully agreed with

him. The speech was delivered in a large hall filled to capacity; the

consular body and many Egyptian ministers were present. About one third

of the audience understood English, and the address was

enthusiastically received, and had an excellent effect, as I afterward

learned, upon law and order in Egypt.

Roosevelt gave a luncheon at the hotel to Sir Gaston Maspero and

Professor Sayce, the eminent Egyptologists, which we attended. There

were about fifteen people present, among them Mr. Lawrence F. Abbott, of

"The Outlook," who had joined the Roosevelt party at Khartum. It was a

delightful occasion and reminded us of the old days at the White House.

Roosevelt always had the faculty of surrounding himself with people who,

whether from prominent or humble walks of life, were worth while. There

were so many facets to his nature that he could make interesting

contacts with all sorts of folk, those of the forest as well as those of

the closet.

From Gondokoro, Roosevelt had written Ambassador Leishman at Rome saying

he would be glad of the honor of presentation to His Holiness Pope Pius

X. At Cairo he received the following cable reply from Ambassador

Leishman:

The Rector of the American Catholic College, Monsignor Kennedy, in

reply to inquiry which I caused to be made, requests that the

following communication be transmitted to you: "The Holy Father

will be delighted to grant audience to Mr. Roosevelt on April 5,

and hopes nothing will arise to prevent it, such as the

much-regretted incident which made the reception of Mr. Fairbanks

impossible."

I merely transmit this communication without having committed you

in any way to accept the conditions imposed, as the form appears

objectionable, clearly indicating that an audience would be

canceled in case you should take any action while here that might

be construed as countenancing the Methodist mission work here....

Mr. Fairbanks, it may be remembered, was granted an audience with His

Holiness, but on the same day accepted an invitation to lecture before

the Methodist body in Rome whose propaganda was inimical to the Vatican.

This displeased His Holiness and the audience was thereupon canceled.

Roosevelt answered Leishman's cable to the effect that while he fully

recognized the right of the Holy Father to receive or not to receive

whomsoever he chose, he could not submit to conditions which would in

any way limit his freedom of conduct. But the Vatican stood firm on the

conditions set forth:

His Holiness will be much pleased to grant an audience to Mr.

Roosevelt, for whom he entertains great esteem, both personally and

as President of the United States. His Holiness quite recognizes

Mr. Roosevelt's entire right to freedom of conduct. On the other

hand, in view of the circumstances, for which neither His Holiness

nor Mr. Roosevelt is responsible, an audience could not occur

except on the understanding expressed in the former message.

Consequently, while Roosevelt did not go to the Vatican, he was received

with great cordiality at the Quirinal by King Victor Emmanuel III. In

order not to have the Vatican incident misunderstood at home, Roosevelt

sent a message regarding it to the American people, through the pages of

"The Outlook" of April 9, 1910. Mr. Abbott makes detailed mention of the

episode in his "Impressions of Theodore Roosevelt."

* * * * *

Mrs. Straus and I were invited to luncheon with Sir Eldon and Lady

Gorst, British consul-general at Cairo, where we met Professor Oscar

Browning, of Cambridge, among others. Sir Eldon was the successor of

Lord Cromer, and had had many years of experience in Egypt in official

capacities. He spoke of the unrest among the natives, especially those

who had lived abroad as university students. These were in fact the

leaders of the Nationalist Party, a movement stimulated by the

establishment of the new regime in Turkey and the parliamentary form of

government in Persia. Some of the Arabic papers were encouraging, if not

actually inciting, opposition to the British protectorate. He said the

British policy was to grant by degrees an always larger share of local

self-government, but it was feared that if the national spirit was too

much encouraged there would be a reversion to conditions that prevailed

prior to the British occupation of the country. He explained that Lord

Cromer's administration covered the period of national improvements,

such as the reform of taxes, and the building of railways and irrigation

works; and that now had come the desire for political changes.

I have referred to that part of Roosevelt's speech at the National

University in which he condemned the assassination of the premier. Sir

Eldon said he had been consulted in regard to the speech before its

delivery, and that if he had expressed any objection he was sure Mr.

Roosevelt would either have omitted that part of the address or declined

to speak altogether, for he knew Mr. Roosevelt would not do anything to

embarrass British interests. He had had no objection, and made this

clear to Mr. Iddings, who made the inquiry.

We were all invited to a tea at the German Diplomatic Agency, to meet

the Prince and Princess Eitel Friedrich, who were on a visit to Egypt.

Eitel Friedrich is the second son of William II of Germany. I had little

opportunity to speak with him because he and Roosevelt were engaged

almost the entire time in an animated conversation, during which both

remained standing. My impression of the Prince was that he seemed

tremendously impressed with his own importance. I had a pleasant chat

with the Princess, whom I found very charming. She seemed to me of a

type more Austrian than German.

On March 30th we left Cairo, going with the Roosevelt party as far as

Alexandria, where they boarded a ship for Naples, and we went aboard the

Scorpion. Our little ship was dressed in its complimentary flags, the

band was playing, and the commander had drawn up the bluejackets on the

main deck to present arms, so that the Roosevelt party was being saluted

with all the form, splendor, and dignity that our ship could muster. The

sea was much calmer than when we came, and we reached Constantinople in

a little less than three days. I had intended stopping at several other

ports to confer with our consuls, and to visit Jerusalem, Beirut, and

Smyrna; but as my instructions were to hasten my return I did so.

* * * * *

During my third mission in Turkey I saw quite a good deal of Mahmoud

Chevket Pasha, the generalissimo of the Turkish army, who was at the

same time Minister of War. He was fifty-two years old, of spare frame,

medium height, with a full beard that was turning gray. He was an Arab,

born in Bagdad. He told me that, when he was a younger man and a major

in the army, he spent ten years in Germany studying the German military

system and training. It was evident to every observer that under his

generalship the Turkish army had vastly improved both in appearance and

in discipline.

I found him a well-educated, modern man. At that time he enjoyed a

world-wide reputation as the most important and dominating official in

the empire, because, as general of the Third Army Corps, stationed at

Salonica, he had marched his men to Constantinople, dethroned the late

Sultan, and established the new regime. Within a few months he had made

visits to Austria, France, and Germany, and was received with great

honors. In the leading cities of these countries he made addresses that

were statesmanlike and internationally tactful. Throughout he

represented his country with admirable tact and judgment.

During one of our conversations the generalissimo told me that the only

cloud on the horizon was the effort of the Greeks to make the Island of

Crete a part of their country. He thought the general conditions in

Turkey were good and that there was no danger of internal troubles,

because the Government had things well in hand. Should Greece make any

hostile move, he knew Turkey could easily defeat her. He did not think

that any of the Balkan Powers would join Greece, since they could not do

so without drawing in some of the big Powers, and the latter would not,

as a matter of self-interest, allow the Balkan States to join Greece in

a war.

We were speaking rather frankly, and I asked him whether he thought

Russia desired the advancement of Turkey and its steady growth under the

new regime. He realized that Russia was then entirely friendly, but said

it was not because she favored a progressive Turkey, but because since

her war with Japan she was in no position to take advantage of the

misfortunes of Turkey. I asked him what he thought of the real attitude

of Germany. He answered that he thought Germany entirely friendly; that

her desire was, of course, to advance her commercial interests in the

Ottoman Empire, but that in this respect she was perhaps not different

from other nations who regarded Turkey as a good field for commercial

operations.

Shortly thereafter the political atmosphere was considerably disturbed

by the Crete affair, just as Chevket Pasha had foreseen. The Greek army

had entered politics and dominated the Government. It caused several

changes of ministers and forced the King to consent to the summoning of

a National Assembly consisting of twice as many delegates as there were

members in Parliament. Crete also insisted upon sending delegates, which

would have been tantamount to incorporating itself as part of Greece

politically.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs frankly told the ambassadors of all the

leading Powers, as well as the Greek minister, that if the Greek

National Assembly admitted delegates from Crete, Turkey would regard

that as a _casus belli_. There was a rumor at the same time that

Bulgaria was preparing to take advantage of the crisis to make war on

Turkey, either by uniting with Greece or in conjunction with some of the

other Balkan States. The Minister of Foreign Affairs had managed well,

and the four big Powers, England, Russia, France, and Italy, bestirred

themselves and the situation was allayed for the time.

Greece had purchased from Italy a man-of-war of about ten thousand tons,

which was being fitted and armored for delivery within six months. To

offset this augmentation of the Greek navy, already stronger than the

Turkish, Turkey wanted to purchase a man-of-war of sufficient size to

outclass the one being fitted for Greece. The Minister of Foreign

Affairs called on me with a memorandum of the size of the ship and the

strength of the armament desired, together with a statement that the

object of the Ottoman Government in the purchase of it was not to make

war, but to safeguard the peace of Turkey and possibly of Europe. It was

thought that the moral effect upon Greece of such a purchase would

prevent her from taking any action that would cause war.

I cabled this proposal in detail to Secretary Knox, and requested a

reply by cable. I knew that we had several ships that would probably

answer the requirements of Turkey, and I thought that, aside from the

moral effect this might have in preventing a war between Turkey and

Greece, it would enable us to substitute a new ship of our own for an

old one. It was not a question of price, as Turkey had put aside

sufficient money to pay for such a ship.

A few days later Chevket Pasha also called on me, and again assured me

that the purchase was designed to have an immediate effect upon the

maintenance of peace, and that the people of Turkey would be forever

grateful to the United States if we should sell them the ship.

But after the lapse of a week or more, I finally received a negative

answer from the State Department, saying that such a sale could not be

made without the authority of Congress. This, of course, I knew; but

since the transaction would have given us the opportunity to add a new

ship to replace the other, I thought such legislation might readily have

been obtained. The Turkish Government then made application to Germany,

and that country seized the opportunity further to cement its friendly

relations with the Ottoman Empire, which later had such an important

bearing in the World War.

About a year after this Crete affair, Chevket Pasha was assassinated as

he was coming out of the Sublime Porte. No greater loss could have

befallen Turkey than the removal at that time of her greatest general

and most enlightened statesman. He was the best-informed Turkish

statesman I have ever known, with a clear and correct view of the entire

European situation. What the conspiracy was behind this shooting was

never brought to light.

The affairs of Crete at that time were in the hands of the energetic

and brilliant leader who has since come to be regarded as one of the

foremost statesmen of all Europe, Eleutherios Venizelos. At the Paris

Peace Conference his recognition was complete. The Greeks, however, have

always shown themselves to be a fickle and ungrateful people, and from

the time of Socrates have turned against their foremost philosophers and

statesmen, and their attitude toward Venizelos is the most recent

illustration of those traits. Venizelos is practically a refugee from

his own country and at this writing is visiting our country to study

American institutions.

* * * * *

The main reason I accepted the post at Turkey for the third time was to

secure the legal status and rights of American institutions under

definite laws in the new regime. The Turks had promulgated a law, known

as the "Law of Associations," under the ingenious restrictions of which

they sought to place all foreign institutions. That would have given the

Ottoman authorities, both civil and judicial, the power so to impede the

work of these institutions as to prevent them from functioning. I

pointed out to the Grand Vizier that the Law of Associations was

contrary to the acquired rights of the institutions, which had been

legally recognized for many years, and taking section by section I

showed him the inapplicability of it to these institutions. After months

of negotiations, as usual in Turkey, I succeeded in getting a decision

from the Council of Ministers exempting foreign institutions of a

religious, educational, or benevolent character.

There were three or four other matters that I succeeded in bringing to a

successful close. Contrary to the real-property laws of 1868, our

institutions were being denied the right to hold in their names real

property necessary for their operation, and this right I was able to

secure for them. Among other things I obtained a charter for the Syrian

Protestant College at Beirut, and I got an irade or permit for the

construction of new buildings for Robert College. The American College

for Girls, at Scutari on the Asiatic side of the Bosphorus, wanted to

transfer the institution over to Arnaoutkeui on the European side, its

present location, and I secured permission for this transfer and for the

construction of its buildings.

While these various negotiations were in progress, I received an

instruction from Secretary Knox at which I took umbrage. It contained

the following paragraph: "If I am correct in understanding that American

educational and missionary interests in Turkey are in fact receiving

treatment in substance entirely satisfactory, I conclude that the chief

influence should at present be centered upon a substantial advancement

of our prestige and commerce."

This had no other meaning than that instead of vigorous effort for the

protection of American colleges, schools, and hospitals, whose rights

under the new regime were being seriously threatened by new laws and

regulations, I was to transfer my efforts to securing shipbuilding and

railway concessions. I promptly advised the Department that this

understanding was not correct, that the interests of our institutions

were being seriously threatened, and that the proper protection of these

interests in no way conflicted with the advancement of our commercial

interests.

I continued to push the negotiations on behalf of our institutions, for

I knew that a let-up at that time would, instead of benefiting our

commercial interests, convey the impression of weakness on the part of

our Government in looking out for American interests. In several

dispatches I pointed out to the Department that to exert official

pressure for railway concessions in Turkey would likewise require the

protection of such concessions, when obtained, by strenuous official

action which might at some time even involve the use of force, and could

not fail to enmesh us in the intricate political problems of the Near

East. I asked the Department to weigh carefully the possible advantage

of concessions to a few American exploiters, against the serious

disadvantages that the protection of these concessions would impose. I

pointed out that invariably the Turkish Government, of its own accord or

through outside pressure, failed to live up to its contracts if not

compelled to do so, and that the situation would be further complicated

by the conflicting interests of the other Powers whose commercial

dealings were subordinate to their political strategy. To ordinary

commercial transactions, such as export and import, these risks did not,

of course, apply; but they were particularly troublesome with regard to

the building and running of railways on Turkish territory.

* * * * *

Among our distinguished visitors during this mission were former

Vice-President and Mrs. Fairbanks, who were on their tour round the

world. They were our guests for a week, and we gave a series of dinners

to have them meet the leading diplomatic and Turkish officials. Among

the latter was Ahmed Riza Bey, president of the Chamber of Deputies, who

had for twenty years been a refugee in Paris, where he edited a Turkish

paper. He spoke French fluently. He was said to be practically the head

of the Young Turks Party. He was blue-eyed, handsome, and thoroughly

modern. His father was one of the chamberlains of Sultan Abdul Aziz, and

his mother, an Austrian, once told Mrs. Straus that she had almost

forgotten the German language because she had not used it in so long a

time, for she was only seventeen when she was married.

Riza Bey was very much interested to learn from Mr. Fairbanks the rules

of parliamentary procedure. The Chamber of Deputies had not as yet

adopted any such rules and its proceedings lacked system and order.

A few days later, while the president of the Chamber was calling on me,

the palace of the Chamber of Deputies, Tcheragan on the Bosphorus,

burned to the ground,--an unfortunate occurrence not only because of the

material loss, but because it was looked upon by the populace as a

visitation from God against the new regime.

Judge and Mrs. Alton B. Parker and the widow of Daniel Manning,

Secretary of the Treasury in Cleveland's second Cabinet, also gave us

the pleasure of a visit. And a little later Cleveland H. Dodge arrived

in his yacht. He was heartily welcomed by all the missionaries, for he

was prominently connected with Robert College and was chairman of the

board of trustees of the College at Beirut. In his party was Mrs. Grover

Cleveland.

After we had moved to our summer quarters at Yenikeui, Kermit Roosevelt

and his classmate, John Heard, came to spend about ten days with us. My

son Roger, then a student at Princeton, was spending his vacation with

us and was glad to have the company of two young men of about his own

age.

At this time we saw much of Sir William Willcocks, the eminent British

engineer, who had just returned from Bagdad where he was employed by the

Turkish Government in the construction and supervision of irrigation

works in Mesopotamia. It was he who projected and designed the Assuan

Dam across the Nile. He told me he was born to his work, as his father,

Captain W. Willcocks, was engaged in it in India.

In June I wrote the Department of State requesting a leave of absence

toward the end of September or beginning of October, with permission to

return home. In answer I received a cable from the assistant secretary

to the effect that the railway concessions of the Ottoman American

Development Company were to come up in Parliament in November, and

asking if it would be convenient for me to take my leave earlier so as

to be back in Turkey by November 1st. I replied in a confidential letter

that it was my intention, upon my return to America, to confer with the

President and the Secretary of State regarding my release from this

post, in accordance with my understanding when I accepted the

appointment. I decided to wait until the arrival of the new secretary of

the embassy, Mr. Hoffman Philip, and before leaving I took pains to make

him thoroughly familiar with the work of the embassy so that no ground

might be lost pending my resignation.

* * * * *

On leaving Constantinople we desired a few days' rest in the mountains.

At the suggestion, therefore, of our minister to Roumania, J. Ridgely

Carter, we planned to go to Sinaia, the Roumanian summer capital, which

he thought we should find agreeable in every way, so on September 3d we

left Turkey for Roumania.

Sinaia we found not only very beautiful, but most enjoyable. We were

invited to the Palace a number of times. The Court being in mourning,

all entertaining was informal and more intimate. The King reminded me of

the late Edmund Clarence Stedman in general appearance. The Queen, known

to all the world as "Carmen Sylva," was a striking personality, tall,

rather heavily built, with silver gray hair and a high complexion,

strong, mobile features, and a very spiritual expression. She spoke

English, French, and German with equal fluency, so that it was difficult

to tell which was the most natural to her.

The Queen told me how she happened to choose Carmen Sylva for a

pen-name: The woods always appealed to her; their stillness and beauty

inspired her. When she began to publish her work, at the age of

thirty-five, she asked a certain German writer to tell her the Latin

word for "woods"; that gave her "sylva." Next she asked the Latin word

for "bird," but that did not suit her. Then the word for "song"

suggested itself, "carmen." The combination appealed to her poetic

sense, and she adopted it.

At luncheon one day our conversation drifted to poetry and American

poets. The Queen seemed to know all our bards, even the minor ones,

several of whom I had not heard of myself. I happened to quote, as near

as I could recall it, a couplet from a little poem that Joaquin Miller

wrote when Peter Cooper died:

All one can hold in his cold right hand

Is what he has given away.

She was most enthusiastic about that sentiment and said she considered

it real poetry. She repeated it several times so as to remember it.

"Whenever any one gives me a beautiful thought, I never forget him," she

said, turning to me in her unaffected manner. I appreciated her delicate

compliment.

After luncheon she invited me to the floor above to see her study. She

explained that she did her best work in a little cell-like room in the

monastery below the hill near the Palace, which we had visited the day

before. There she was most free from disturbance of any kind. Her study

in the Palace was comfortable and attractively furnished; not large, but

cozy. Looking out of the windows, one saw the terraced Italian gardens

and the wooded peaks of the Carpathian Mountains beyond. The low

bookcases which lined the four walls contained English, French, and

German books in exquisite bindings. At her desk were three typewriters,

respectively from England, France, and Germany, for use in writing the

languages of those countries. She used them herself, according to the

language in which the inspiration of the moment had come. She presented

me with a volume of poems and one of essays, both in German, "Meine

Ruhe" and "Mein Penatenwinkel," which she inscribed for me.

We went through the Palace that afternoon. It is modern and very

beautiful, furnished in excellent taste, and not cold and uncomfortable,

sacrificed to grandeur, as most palaces seem to be. Then the King and

Queen invited us to return the next morning at eleven, to a musicale and

luncheon.

Next day after luncheon the King left the other guests and took me into

a small adjoining room where we smoked and had coffee. Knowing that I

had been Secretary of Commerce and Labor, he led the conversation to

economic questions, which he said interested him most. He expressed

surprise that we had not come to state ownership of railways, which he

believed was the only way to regulate them. I explained our method of

regulating them, but he thought that method more socialistic and

arbitrary than in his own country. We talked of the Roosevelt policies

and their general aim at social justice. He said he regretted very much

that Roosevelt had not visited Roumania, for he had the greatest

admiration for him, both as man and as statesman.

Our conversation ran on to the Jewish question, and the King spoke most

sympathetically of the Jews, saying that they were patriotic subjects

and good soldiers, that there was no religious prejudice against them,

and that the Jewish question in Roumania was purely economic. The Jews

who came in from Russia and Poland constituted separate communities in

the country, with foreign methods of living, foreign language, and

foreign views. I told him that in the most enlightened countries there

was an absence of the Jewish problem because no problem was created by

treating the Jews as separate groups with restricted rights. He saw that

point, but explained that Roumania was right next to Russia where the

Jews were most oppressed. If, therefore, Roumania accorded them full

rights, there would be a flood of immigration much larger than they were

then getting. I pointed out that it would be much better to restrict

immigration than to restrict the natural rights of the Jews of Roumania.

That thought impressed him, and he said he realized that, under the

system they then had, much injustice was done which brought disgrace to

the kingdom, but he hoped a remedy would be worked out.

We spoke of the United States Postal Savings legislation, of which he

requested an outline, and thought it could be adopted by Roumania with

advantage.

A few days later we again lunched with the King and Queen. The Queen

mentioned the bit of poetry I had given her a few days before and asked

whether I could give her another. Something had been said about Hay's

Roumanian note that brought to mind the last stanza of Hay's hymn:

Wherever man oppresses man,

Beneath the setting sun,

O Lord, be there, thine arm make bare,

Thy righteous will be done.

The Queen admired these lines and begged me to write them out, which I

did on the back of one of my visiting-cards. She put the card in her

reticule, saying that the lines would inspire a poem some day, and that

she would then send it to me.

Referring to her work generally, she spoke of her indebtedness to

Professor Michael Bernays, the distinguished Jewish scholar, who was a

frequent and welcome visitor at the home of her parents. She said he was

the most modest and intellectual person she had ever known, and his

conversations and teachings had greatly influenced her intellectual and

spiritual life. She asked me to read her estimate of this wonderful man

in her book of essays that she had given me. I have since read it

several times, and it would surprise many to read such a eulogy and

vindication of the Jews and Judaism by the Queen of a country where the

Jews were so sorely oppressed by drastic discrimination.

Before we left Sinaia, the Queen sent me a large photograph of herself,

inscribed: "Never mind deep waters, there are pearls to be found.

Elizabeth. Sinaia, September, 1910."

In Vienna, we were guests at a tea given by Dr. Sigmund Muenz, of "Die

Neue Freie Presse." Among those present was Baroness Bertha von Suttner,

the great peace advocate and authoress of "Down With Your Arms," who had

received the Nobel Peace Prize the previous year. I had met her before

in the United States, where we spoke from the same platform during the

sessions of the Interparliamentary Union and the International Peace

Societies.

Next we went to London, where we enjoyed the pleasant hospitalities of

our ambassador, Whitelaw Reid. At one of the luncheons at the embassy I

was pleased to make the acquaintance of Dr. Luis M. Drago, the Argentine

international jurist and author of the Drago Doctrine, who had just

returned from the Anglo-American Fisheries Arbitration at The Hague.

We dined one evening with the Right Honorable Sir Ernest Cassel at his

charming home, Brooke House, and afterward went with him to the theater.

Sir Ernest, one of England's leading financiers, was constantly being

referred to in the press in connection with the negotiations pending in

Paris for a new loan to the Turks. He told us that these international

financial negotiations, because of their international importance, did

not appeal to him, for he had no ambition to be in the limelight or to

become a conspicuous international personage. He preferred quiet and

obscurity, for constant publicity disturbed his peace of mind. This

attitude was not one of assumed modesty; he really said what he meant

and felt.

On another evening we dined with Postmaster-General Herbert Samuel and

his wife. Mr. Samuel was only thirty-nine years old and gave every

promise of the distinction which he has since attained in the service of

his country. At this writing he is British High Commissioner in

Palestine.

Lord Rothschild had written me to call on him when in London; and I went

to the banking house to see him. In speaking of the Triple Entente of

Great Britain, France, and Russia, I told him I thought that, from a

British point of view, it was unwise. He, on the other hand, regarded it

as good because it offered the best security for peace. A few days

thereafter I mentioned the subject to his brother, Alfred. The latter

said that he and his brother usually agreed, but in this matter they

took opposite views. Alfred considered it a great mistake, from the

point of view of civilization, for England to be aligned with Russia,

and beyond that he considered it detrimental to the relationship between

England and Germany, which was none too friendly. In the light of all

that has since taken place, it is interesting to note how the

international alignment of 1910 was reflected in the minds of these big

international financiers.

On September 8th we boarded the Lusitania at Liverpool, reaching New

York on the 13th. My brother Isidor and our children met us, and we were

made to appreciate the real truth of the bull that "the greatest

pleasure in going abroad is returning home."

Soon afterward I went to Washington. First I called at the State

Department and had an informal talk with Secretary Knox. I told him I

did not wish to return to Turkey. The important negotiations had been

brought to a favorable conclusion, and I felt that I had spent enough of

my time there. He referred to the understanding with which I had

accepted the post, that when I desired to be relieved, another post that

might be available and acceptable to me would be tendered me. However, I

purposely did not comment on this understanding. I simply said that I

did not wish to cause the Administration any embarrassment, and was

content to stay at home. He said he would have a talk with the President

and confer with me later.

When I called on the President, I told him that since all the questions

for which I went to Turkey had been adjusted, I did not wish to return.

Subsequently I received a very cordial and complimentary letter from

him, but, as it contained no intimation of his earlier promise to

transfer me to a post more to my liking, I did not refer to it. The rift

between the Roosevelt policies and the Taft Administration had by this

time grown considerably, and I was known to be in thorough accord with

Roosevelt and his policies.

Under Four Administrations, from Cleveland to Taft Recollections of Oscar S. Straus ... · 第 11 / 17 章