It has been stated by American officials in 1895 and 1896
that the missionaries, having forced themselves into
Turkey against the will of the government, had no legal
rights there and no claim to protection. The officials who
made these statements must have been wilfully ignoring the
facts of recent history. The missionaries were supported
and encouraged by the three sultans, Mahmud the strong,
Abd-ul-Medjid the weak, and Abd-ul-Aziz the weaker. They
stand on a firm basis of treaties, special enactments, and
concessions,—a basis in which the present sultan, with
all his acuteness and his hatred of mission work, could
find no flaw. Had it been possible to argue with a shadow
of plausibility that the mission was against the law, or
that it was not guaranteed by enactments inviolable even
by a sultan protected by the six Powers, the property
would have been destroyed and the mission silenced. The
attempt was made, but failed; and the action of officials
who destroyed mission property at Kharput, etc., was
ostensibly disowned.
Further, the action of strong, free American life in
Turkey must always tend to strengthen the movement there
towards that freer and more elastic order which belongs
to all the English speaking peoples. But, though the
mission work has, undoubtedly, exerted a great influence
on the political situation in Turkey, the mission policy
has studiously and consistently been non-political, and
has zealously inculcated the doctrine of non-resistance
and obedience to the existing government.
—PROF. W. M. RAMSAY, D. C. L. in
Preface of “Impressions of Turkey.”
The right to exercise their functions as a class possessing special
privileges had been granted to ecclesiastics of Christian nations by
the voluntary extension of the Edict of Toleration of 1453 given by the
Ottoman government after the fall of Constantinople. Turkish usage for
nearly four hundred years was the warrant for the entrance of American
missionaries into the country and their assurance of immunity from
official molestation.
They entered without diplomatic negotiations between the United States
and Turkey. Not, indeed, till ten years after American missionaries had
begun work in Turkey was the first treaty between the United States and
that country concluded. Previous to that time the missionaries were
protected by England, which had treaties with the Ottoman government
conceding extra-territorial rights to all British subjects. The Sublime
Porte did not seem to recognize any difference between an English
subject and an American citizen for all were “Frank Christians” to him,
hence the protection afforded was ample.
It cannot be predicted as in the case of most countries how many and
what ordinary international rights will be conceded to foreigners
by the Ottoman government. Rights in Turkey are based not upon
any principle of international law usually prevailing between
Christian nations but upon special treaties which bear the name of
“Capitulations” and “Concessions.” Intercourse of the Christian world
with Mohammedan countries does not proceed according to the law of
nations. International law as practised by the civilized nations of
Christendom is an outgrowth from the communion of ideas existing
between them and rests upon a common conception of justice and right.
Between the Mohammedans and the Christian nations of Europe and America
there exists no such common idea or principle from which could result a
true international law. Relations one with the other have, therefore,
to be regulated by special “capitulation” or “concession” granted by
the ruler of the Mohammedan country.
For this reason, even to the present time, the law of nations as
known and practised throughout Christendom has not been applied in
the relations existing between Turkey and the Christian Powers. But
ever since the Sublime Porte, under stress of circumstances, began to
abandon most reluctantly and by slow degrees its ancient usages towards
other nations, and imperfectly to adopt those of Christendom, its rule
of international conduct has gradually approached that of Europe.
A capitulation on the part of the Turkish empire is regarded by the
sultan and his associates as a concession to foreigners, which they
have a right at any time to annul or destroy if, in their judgment,
such annulment or destruction is for their advantage. The sultan does
not wish to consider a capitulation as imposing a perpetual obligation
upon him or his officials. It is a privilege rendered foreign powers
which can be withdrawn without notice and without explanation. Only
in view of these facts can the treatment of missionaries and other
foreigners by the officials of Turkey be understood.
The Porte has agreed at various times to exercise no preference towards
any of the states with which it has treaties, but to make them all
share alike in the benefits of the provisions contained in the treaties
it has entered into with each. In all its treaties of commerce since
1861, the expressed statement is, “That all the rights, privileges, or
immunities which the Sublime Porte now grants or may hereafter grant
to the subjects, vessels, commerce, or navigation of any other foreign
power, the enjoyment of which it shall tolerate, shall be likewise
accorded and the exercise of the enjoyment of the same shall be
allowed, to the subjects, ships, commerce, and navigation of the other
powers.” It is evident from this quotation that every nation holding
treaty with Turkey has equal rights and privileges with those of any
nation treating with the Ottoman government.
Without dwelling at length upon the various treaties and the steps
which led to their formation, it will suffice to say that these
include, among many other things, the following privileges:
Permission to foreigners who come upon Moslem territory freely to
navigate the waters and enter the ports of the same, whether for
devotion and pilgrimage to the holy places, or for trading in the
exportation and importation of every kind of unprohibited goods.
Exception is made, however, with reference to the Hejaz Province in
which the two holy cities of Islam are located.
Freedom to follow on Moslem ground one’s own habits and customs, and
perform the rites and fulfil the duties of one’s own religion.
Right of foreigners to be judged by the ambassadors and consuls of
their respective governments in suits both civil and criminal, between
one another, and the obligation of the local authorities to render aid
to the consul in enforcing his decision and judgment concerning the
same.
Inviolability of foreigners’ domiciles and, in event of urgent
necessity for arresting a delinquent, obligation of government
officials not to enter the dwelling-place of a foreigner without having
previously notified the ambassador or consul, and unless accompanied by
him or his deputy.
These statements are sufficient to show that merchant, traveler, and
missionary in Turkey are there as foreigners, and as such they and
their domiciles are under foreign protection. They have the privilege
of holding property and of buying and selling the same. Mission Boards
and foreign companies, being foreign corporations, cannot hold property
in the empire. All property real and personal is held in the name of an
individual. Exception is made in the case of the schools which have a
firman (imperial irade) or which have obtained formal recognition from
the sultan, in which case the institution itself holds the property in
its own name, being a recognized chartered institution.
It is well that the missionary and merchant have been and still are
independent of the Turkish officials, for, with the ignorance of
those in the interior and their readiness to play into the hands of
every rival or persecuting agency, there would be constant liability
to arrest, imprisonment, and even deportation. In spite of the
extra-territorial laws, missionaries and merchants repeatedly have
been put under arrest for imaginary charges, and otherwise officially
annoyed. These difficulties have been met in quietness and overcome
without loss of position or prestige. In no instance has a missionary
been arrested for an actual crime or misdemeanor. The usual charge
against them is that they are plotting against the government, and
the officers make attempts to search their houses for documentary
evidence and for arms. These various evidences of hostility have not
seemed to strain the generally friendly relations existing between the
missionaries and the local governments.
Perhaps it should be stated here that all foreign capital invested
in the country is held in the same way and has the same foreign
protection. This is true of all Catholic institutions, Russian
churches, monasteries, and schools, German orphanages, and mercantile
warehouses, English residences, and stores,—everything that belongs to
foreigners representing foreign capital is under foreign protection.
At the same time it is recognized that the school, hospital, or church
which occupies one of these foreign buildings is a foreign institution
and as such has, according to the Turkish capitulations, special
immunities and privileges. All dealings with the Turkish government,
even to the present time, are based upon this supposition. This does
not seem strange or unnatural to the Turkish government, which permits
the English, German, French, Austrian, and other governments to have
their own post-offices at Constantinople, Smyrna, and other ports,
in which they sell only their own postage-stamps and conduct all the
postal business they can procure.
Under treaty rights above quoted, every concession or privilege granted
by the sultan to the schools, churches, hospitals, or institutions
belonging to England, France, Russia, or any other country, belongs by
right to American institutions. The fact that America was discriminated
against in this respect for many years, and that American institutions
were thus deprived of privileges and concessions which had been
conceded to similar institutions of several European powers, is well
known, both at Constantinople, and in the United States. Happily these
matters have now been adjusted.
After seven years of negotiations, in 1907 the sultan finally conceded
in a formal manner the same rights and privileges to American
institutions in his dominion which had already been granted to similar
institutions of France, Russia, Germany and other countries; but as yet
in most cases this concession exists largely in form, while the actual
enjoyment of the privileges is withheld. At the same time insuperable
obstacles are thrown in the way of the purchase of real estate by
Americans and they are even forbidden to improve property which they
have already acquired. It is only by eternal vigilance that American
interests in Turkey can be safeguarded.