BRITAIN’S MISSION IN THE EAST
Colonel Charles Henry Churchill――Sir Austen Henry Layard――“The
Key to the East”――European Consuls in Palestine――The _Hatti
Sheerif_ of Gulharch――Lord Palmerston’s Circular of April,
1841――Mr. James Finn.
THE theory of Great Britain’s mission in the East has been put forward
by representatives of different classes of English people in different
epochs and from various points of view. The idea existed in greater
or less degree wherever Englishmen thought seriously about the Eastern
problem; it was a flame which was never extinguished.
Colonel Charles Henry Churchill (1814‒1877), a grandson of the fifth
Duke of Marlborough (1766‒1840), was a staff officer in the British
Expedition to Syria, and wrote one of the best works in English
about _The Lebanon_ and its inhabitants. In the “Preface” to which he
writes:――
“The genius of England, which seems so peculiarly fitted to lead
and govern the populations of the East, has, by the happily-combined
influence of arms, commerce, and legislation, established in that
quarter of the globe, a dominion which no purely military conqueror
could ever have consolidated, much less upheld and sustained.”
“The development of the capabilities and resources of that
unparalleled empire in the East, over which England presides――and that
without a rival or compeer――has thus become essentially necessary to
her national prosperity, it may be to her national existence, and must
ever possess imperative, though not exclusive claims upon her national
feelings and sympathies.”
“I say not exclusive and advisedly; for the East, to an important
portion of which I now invite public attention,――the East, whose
shores are washed by the Mediterranean Sea,――the East of rock-hewn
cities and colossal tombs, of heavenly poesy and gigantic art, of
Jacob’s (2108‒2255 _a.m._) might and Ishmael’s (_b._ 2034 _a.m._)
wandering power, of David’s lyre and of Isaiah’s (_fl._ 3140
_a.m._) strain, of Abraham’s faith and Immanuel’s love,――where God’s
mysterious ways with man begun, and where in the fulness of time they
are to be accomplished,――this East, which may yet become the seat
and centre of the Universal Reign!――it also has claims on England’s
watchful vigilance and sympathizing care....”
After having so forcibly expounded the sentimental side, the author
strikes another note, in addition to that so eloquently struck by
Disraeli and others:――
“Whatever part England may take in the temporary complication of
affairs which will probably ensue on that mighty consummation, which
the timid dictates of diplomacy would defer, but which the urgent
demands of humanity and civilization would fain accelerate, it must,
for obvious reasons, be clear to every English mind, that if England’s
Oriental supremacy is to be upheld, Syria and Egypt must be made to
fall more or less under her sway or influence.”
He argues then as a military expert:――
“Napoleon declared Acre to be the key to the East, and most correctly
did his military genius appreciate the importance of that land into
which he vainly sought to enter, as a basis of operations against our
Indian Empire.... I call upon my countrymen, therefore, to adopt this
political doctrine, and nail it to the National Colours:――That when
Palestine ceases to be Turkish, it must either become English, or else
form part of a new independent State, which without the incentives
to territorial aggrandizement, or the means of military aggression,
shall yet be able to maintain its own honour and dignity, and more
especially to promote the great object for which it will be called
into existence, for which indeed, by its geographical position it will
be so eminently qualified; that of creating, developing and upholding
a commercial intercourse in the East, which shall draw together
and unite the hitherto divergent races of mankind in the humanizing
relations of fraternity and peace....”
“... the time is probably fast approaching when Syria, instead of
being merely the land of dreamy and luxurious travel,――of exhilarating
emotions, and fascinating though transient delights, will have
to become one of sound practical legislation, of resuscitating
institutions, of vigorous and comprehensive government;...”¹
¹ Mount Lebanon, a ten years’ residence, from 1842 to 1852....
By Colonel Churchill.... London, 1853 (vol. i., _pp._ v‒x).
At the back of an analysis of the historical and geographical
conditions of the country offered by the author is his conviction
that Palestine must become and will become the seat of a great,
peaceful and prosperous settlement, which must be ruled by England
or under English influence, or must have its independence and normal
development secured by England. He holds that this position will
strengthen England’s power; and he feels subconsciously that England
ought to be wherever the greatest interests of humanity are at stake.
Similarly he contends that with this object in view England must adopt
a very active policy in the East.
Another authority on Oriental politics, Sir Austen Henry Layard
(1817‒1894), whose discoveries and investigations in the East are the
pride of English Oriental science, expressed his opinion, in a speech
delivered in the House of Commons, in very similar words:――
“We should not forget that, although Egypt is _a_ high road to India,
Syria and the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates form _the_ high road,
and any power holding those countries would command India.”¹
¹ The Turkish Question. Speeches delivered in the House of
Commons, on Aug. 16, 1853, and Feb. 17, 1854, by Austin
Henry Layard, Esq., M.P. for Aylesbury. London:... 1854
(_p._ 10).
British diplomacy seems to have been influenced by all these
considerations.
Mr. W. Young was the first British Consul in _Jerusalem_, 1838. As
we know from Lord Shaftesbury’s Diaries, this appointment had been
made in consequence of his own representations and efforts. France
and Prussia followed suit in 1843, and Austria in 1849. A Sardinian
Consulate had been founded in 1843, but it was abolished in the year
in which the Austrian was established. A Spanish Consulate was founded
in 1854.
The two Protestant Consulates, those of England and Prussia, had no
share in the altercation about the Holy Places. Their relations with
the local government were restricted to protection of the property and
persons of their nationals. The Prussian Consulate had at that time
but few subjects and small affairs to look after; while the English
had its own subjects, both residents and travellers, besides Maltese,
Indians, Canadians and other British Colonists, with the Ionians as a
protected people, and also a number of protected Jews, together with
considerable property, including a church hospital, various schools,
and a cemetery, to watch over.
It is interesting to note how British protection for Palestinian Jews,
though not formally confirmed, was practically developing. This is the
only case in history of Jews enjoying the protection of a great Power
without being subjects of that Power. Let us see how this remarkable
development took place. In 1838 Lord Palmerston’s directions to his
first Consul in _Jerusalem_ were to “_afford protection to the Jews
generally_.”¹ The words were simply these, broad and liberal as under
the circumstances they had to be, leaving after events to work out
their own modification. The instruction, however, seemed to bear on
its face a recognition that the Jews there are a nation by themselves,
and that contingencies might possibly arise which might alter their
relations with the Mohammedans, though it was impossible to foresee
the shape that future negotiations would assume after the impending
expulsion of the Egyptians from Syria.
¹ Stirring Times, or Records from Jerusalem Consular
Chronicles, of 1853 to 1856. By the late James Finn,
M.R.A.S.... Vol. i.... London, 1878, _pp._ 106 _ff._
Then came the atrocities of the Passover of 1840 in Damascus,
inflicted on the Jews there during the Egyptian régime. A few months
later the bombardment of Acre and the restoration of Syria to the
Turks took place. The episode of the Egyptian hold upon Syria from
1832 to 1840 came to an end. The Turks were restored at the end of
1840, being then rather more liberal in disposition than they had been
before leaving the country, and in the following year the _Sultan_
promulgated the _Hatti ♦Sheerif_ of Gulharch, which conceded equality
in theory (but by no means in practice) to all classes of subjects.
♦ “Shereef of Gulgarch” replaced with “Sheerif of Gulharch”
for consistency
The British Government at once brought before the consideration of
the Porte the condition of the Jews “already settled, or who might
afterwards settle themselves in Palestine.” This was evidently a
direct encouragement towards the colonization of Palestine by the
Jews, made officially by the British Government. In April, 1841, Lord
Palmerston forwarded a circular to his agents in the Levant and Syria,
which began by stating that, as far as documents could avail, the law
of Turkey had by that time become as favourable as might reasonably
be expected to the Jews, but that there remained the difficulty of
enforcing an honest administration of that law. The Porte, however,
being at that time entirely under the beneficial influence of
British diplomacy, had declared its determination that the law should
be righteously administered, and had even promised Her Majesty’s
Ambassador that “it will attend to any representations which may be
made to it by the Embassy of any act of oppression practised against
Jews.” The Consul was therefore to investigate diligently all cases
of oppression of the Jews that might come to his knowledge, and report
to the Embassy, and although he might only act officially on behalf
of persons actually by right under British protection, he was on every
suitable occasion to make it known to the local authorities that “the
British Government felt an interest in the welfare of Jews in general,
and was anxious that they should be protected from oppression.” He
was also to make known the offer of the Porte to attend to cases of
persecution that might be reported to the Embassy.
In 1842 a bad case was represented as occurring at _Hebron_ through
acts of violence on the part of Shaiki Baddo and others. In 1847 again
it seemed probable that Christian fanatics were about to reproduce
the horrors which occurred at Rhodes and Damascus in 1840. The British
Consul, James Finn (1806‒1872), then interfered and protected the
Jews. In the same year he was again obliged to interfere on behalf
of the Jews. In consequence of various occurrences of this kind in
_Jerusalem_, another instruction was issued by the Foreign Office,
to the effect that whenever any Austrian, French, or other European
Jew was suffering from persecution or injustice, and was repudiated
by his own Consul, the English Consul might take up the case, unless
the repudiating Consul, when applied to, should assign some strong
and sufficient reason for his objection. The spirit underlying this
instruction, notwithstanding the establishment, since 1839, of other
European Consulates, was in conformity with the rule laid down in that
year, “to afford protection to Jews generally.”¹
¹ _Ibid._, _p._ 112.
One out of many tokens of gratitude from the people so benefited
will be found in an address in _Hebrew_ to Her Majesty Queen Victoria
(1819‒1901), received from _Jerusalem_ in July, 1849 (Appendix lxii).
There were, as usual, many cases in which the Palestinian Jews needed
the official aid of the British Consulate, and numerous documents
refer to the instances in which active official intervention with
the Turkish Government was exercised on their behalf. Notwithstanding
the just jealousy of the Turkish Government, says Finn,¹ there were
many individual ways of ameliorating the condition of Jewish Ottoman
subjects, as well as of the Jews under British protection.
¹ _Ibid._, vol. ii., _pp._ 55‒56.
During the first case mentioned above no other Consul took part in
the business, except that the Sardinian Consul assured Finn in private
conversation that there could be no doubt about Jews using Christian
blood in the Passover rites whenever they could get it, or, at any
rate, they did in the Middle Ages.