this new Constitution removes from that body the
ecclesiastical jurisdiction it has exercised heretofore over
the Church in Great Britain, Holland, the United States,
Canada, and some other countries, thus taking them out of the
Roman category of missionary lands.
PAPACY: A. D. 1908.
The situation of the Church in France.
No Organization that can hold Property.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1908.
PAPACY: A. D. 1909.
Increased Participation by Catholics in the Italian Elections.
Their Gain of Seats in Parliament.
See (in this Volume)
ITALY: A. D. 1909 (MARCH).
PAPACY: A. D. 1909.
Church Movement of Agricultural Labor Organization.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: ITALY.
PAPACY: A. D. 1909.
Demonstration against the Religious Orders in Portugal.
See (in this Volume)
PORTUGAL: A. D. 1909.
PAPACY: A. D. 1909 (April).
The Beatification of Joan of Arc.
The ceremony of the Beatification of Joan of Arc was performed
at St. Peter’s, in Rome, on the 18th of April, 1909.
Proceedings which began about ten years before were brought by
this ceremony to the end of their first stage, beyond which
they must still be continued for possibly many years, before
the Canonization of "the Maid" as a Saint becomes complete.
The question of the Beatification had been under consideration
in the Congregation of Rites for several years. The grounds on
which that question is decided, in every case, were explained
by _The Catholic Union and Times_, in connection with its
account of the ceremony now referred to, as follows: The
Congregation of Rites "may decide that the life of the person
was a very worthy and very holy one, but they require much
more than that. It must be proved to their satisfaction that
‘miracles’ have been performed. The Congregation of Rites
requires evidence of not fewer than three miracles. In the
case of ‘miraculous cures’ it must be shown that doctors have
pronounced the cases hopeless, or that diseases have been
cured which doctors call incurable. Usually the report
contains particulars of a number of ‘miracles,’ from which the
Congregation of Rites may make a selection. The three chosen
among those attributed to Joan of Arc relate to the curing of
nuns belonging to different communities, who are said to have
obtained relief from their diseases by her intercession. One
of these nuns had suffered for years from cancer and was on
the point of death when, it was claimed, she was instantly
cured by a prayer of Joan of Arc. When the Congregation of
Rites has been satisfied as to the authenticity of three
miracles they prepare their report, which is submitted to the
Pope, who considers it. There is then a gathering at the
Vatican, to which the public is admitted. Cardinals and
bishops are present, and a lawyer of the papal court reads out
the decision. After this, the ceremony of beatification
generally takes place within a few months."
In January, 1910, it was announced in Paris that the
ecclesiastical process for the Canonization would begin on
February 9.
PAPACY: A. D. 1909 (May).
Vote in British House of Commons for removal of remaining
Catholic Disabilities.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D). 1909 (MAY).
----------PAPACY: End--------
PAPER TRUST.
See (in this Volume)
COMBINATIONS, INDUSTRIAL: UNITED STATES:
A. D. 1901-1906, and 1909.
PARAGUAY: A. D. 1901-1906.
Participation in Second and Third International
Conferences of American Republics.
See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
PARAGUAY: A. D. 1902.
A nearly bloodless Revolution.
Deposition of President Aceval.
Elevation of the Vice-President.
The following, translated from the Montevideo (Uruguay)
_Dia_, of January 10, 1902, appears in the annual report
of "Papers relating to the Foreign Relations of the United
States," 1902, as transmitted by the United States Minister to
Uruguay, and is probably an authentic account of the
revolution described:
"Yesterday, at 10 o'clock in the morning, a revolutionary
movement occurred in Asuncion del Paraguay, without bloodshed,
without noise of arms, which immediately resulted in the
imprisonment of the President of the Republic, Dr. Emilio
Aceval, in the artillery barracks. A strange case—the chief
magistrate of Paraguay has fallen, at least for the moment, on
account of a revolution, inspired and carried into practice by
two of his own ministers, Colonel Juan Antonio Escurra and
Señor Fulgencio Moreno, who, although belonging to the same
Colorado party as the President, differ in opinion at present,
the former considering that a radical policy should be adopted
against the liberals or civic accordists, Dr. Aceval not
sharing this opinion, but being in favor of conciliatory
measures, although this did not win for him the help of his
traditional adversaries, who looked unfavorably on him, as is
usually the way with those belonging to an opposite party."
In his note transmitting Montevideo newspaper reports,
Minister Finch wrote of the occurrence: "It was, as will be
seen, a bloodless affair; but out of it grew a discussion in
the Paraguay Congress which was followed by shooting, one
person being killed and several wounded."
PARAGUAY: A. D. 1904.
Successful Revolution.
The beginning of a successful revolution was reported to
Washington by the American Consul at Asuncion, in a despatch
dated August 11, 1904, as follows: "I beg to confirm my
telegram of to-day, stating that a revolution has broken out
in this republic. … Revolutionary forces on the river and
those of the Government have fought. … The Government forces
were defeated, the Minister of the Interior, who led the
forces, being taken prisoner. The state of siege as declared …
places the entire country under military laws, and the
Government, is amassing a large number of troops to suppress
the revolution. It is impossible at present to say whether it
will be of long or short duration. The revolutionary forces
are proceeding up the river in boats, and the Government has
placed or erected defenses along the river near the capital.
{478}
"Upon inquiries as to the cause of this revolution I am
informed that the opposition to the Government is that the
party in power is endeavoring to exclude entirely the liberal
element from participation in the administration of affairs,
assigning that said party, which is in power, which is
denominated ‘Colorados,’ have not sufficient persons prepared
for the administration of the Government. On the other hand,
the ‘Colorados’ assign that the revolution is due to ambitious
persons who form an opposition and are classed under the name
‘Azul,’ colorados meaning ‘reds’ and azul ‘blues.’"
It was not until four months later that the Consul could
announce the return of peace, secured by the triumph of the
revolution. The president, Colonel Ezcurra, was compelled to
resign, and Señor Juan Gauna was elected in his place; the
army was reorganized; a general amnesty was proclaimed.
PARDO, PRESIDENT JOSE.
See (in this Volume)
PERU.
PARKER, Alton B.:
Nominated for President of the United States.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904 (MARCH-NOVEMBER).
PARKER, Edward Wheeler:
On the Anthracite Coal Strike Arbitration Commission.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1902-1903.
PAROLE SYSTEM.
See (in this Volume)
CRIME AND CRIMINOLOGY.
PARSONS, CHARLES A.
See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION, RECENT: TURBINE ENGINE.
PARTIES:
Agrarian Socialists.
See (in this Volume)
FINLAND: A. D. 1908-1909.
PARTIES:
Anti-Revolutionnaire.
See (in this Volume)
NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1905-1909.
PARTIES:
Azul.
See (in this Volume)
PARAGUAY: A. D. 1904.
PARTIES:
Blues (Conservatives).
See (in this Volume)
COLOMBIA: A. D. 1898-1902.
PARTIES:
Boshin Club.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1909.
PARTIES:
Cadets.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1905-1907.
PARTIES:
Catholic Peoples’ Party.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: A. D. 1904.
PARTIES:
Center, or Centrum.
See
GERMANY: A. D. 1906-1907.
PARTIES:
Centro Catolico.
SEE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1907.
PARTIES:
Christian Workmen.
See (in this Volume)
FINLAND: A. D. 1908-1909.
PARTIES:
Christlijk.
See (in this Volume)
NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1905-1909.
PARTIES:
Civilistas.
See (in this Volume)
PERU.
PARTIES:
Clerical.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1903, and 1906;
BELGIUM: A. D. 1904;
GERMANY: A. D. 1906, and 1908-1909.
PARTIES:
Colorados.
See (in this Volume)
PARAGUAY: A. D. 1902, and 1904.
PARTIES:
Confederates.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1909 (January-May).
PARTIES:
Conservatives.
See (in this Volume)
GERMANY: A. D. 1906, and 1908-1909.
PARTIES:
Conservative-Unionist.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1905-1906, 1909 (April-December), and 1910.
PARTIES:
Continental.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904 (MARCH-NOVEMBER),
AND 1908 (MARCH-NOVEMBER).
PARTIES:
Constitutional Democrats.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1905-1907.
PARTIES:
Daido Club.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1909.
PARTIES:
Democratas.
See (in this Volume)
PERU.
PARTIES:
Democratic.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES; A. D. 1904 (MAY-NOVEMBER),
and 1908 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).
PARTIES:
Democristiana.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: ITALY.
PARTIES:
Democratique and Gauche Democratique.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1906.
PARTIES:
Doshi-shukai.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1903 (JUNE).
PARTIES:
Fabian Society.
See (in this Volume)
SOCIALISM: ENGLAND: A. D. 1909.
PARTIES:
Fedakiarans.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1909 (JANUARY-MAY).
PARTIES:
Federal Party, Filipino.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1901, and 1907.
PARTIES:
Free Traders.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1905-1906.
PARTIES:
Independents.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1907.
PARTIES:
Independent Labor.
See (in this Volume)
ENGLAND: A. D. 1905-1906.
PARTIES:
Independistas.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1907.
PARTIES:
Inmediatistas.
See (in this Volume)
Philippine Islands: A. D. 1907.
PARTIES:
Intransigentes.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1907.
PARTIES:
Kossuth Party, or Independence Party.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRIA HUNGARY: A. D. 1902-1903.
PARTIES:
Labor Party.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1903-1904, and after;
ENGLAND: A. D. 1903, and 1905-1906; also
SOCIALISM: ENGLAND.
PARTIES:
League of Liberation.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1905-1907.
PARTIES:
Liberal-Conservative Separatist.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY: A. D. 1904.
PARTIES:
Liberals.
See (in this Volume)
CUBA: A. D. 1906, and after;
ENGLAND: A. D. 1905-1906, 1909 (APRIL-DECEMBER), and 1910;
TURKEY: A. D. 1909 (January-May).
PARTIES:
Miguelistas.
See (in this Volume)
CUBA: A. D. 1906-1909.
PARTIES:
Moderates.
See (in this Volume)
LONDON: A. D. 1909 (March);
DENMARK: A. D. 1901, and
CUBA: A. D. 1906, and after.
PARTIES:
Moderate Republicans.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1909 (JANUARY).
PARTIES:
Nacionalistas.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1907.
PARTIES:
National Liberty.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904 (MARCH-NOVEMBER ).
PARTIES:
Nationalists.
See (in this Volume)
France: A. D. 1906.
PARTIES:
Octobrists.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1904-1905.
PARTIES:
Old Finns.
See (in this Volume)
FINLAND: A. D. 1908-1909.
PARTIES:
Peoples, or Populist.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904 (MARCH-NOVEMBER),
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1908 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).
PARTIES:
Progresistas.
See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1907,
PORTUGAL: A. D. 1906-1909.
PARTIES:
Progressists.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1906;
JAPAN: A. D. 1909.
PARTIES:
Progressives.
See (in this Volume)
LONDON: A. D. 1909 (MARCH);
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1902-1904.
PARTIES:
Prohibition.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904 (MARCH-NOVEMBER),
and 1908 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).
PARTIES:
Protectionists.
See (in this Volume)
AUSTRALIA: A.D. 1903-1904, and after.
PARTIES:
Radicals and Radical Socialists.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1906.
PARTIES:
Ralliés.
See (in this Volume)
RALLIÉS.
PARTIES:
Regeneradors.
See (in this Volume)
PORTUGAL: A. D. 1906-1909.
PARTIES:
Republican.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904 (MAY-NOVEMBER),
and 1908 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).
PARTIES:
Rikken Seiyu-kai, or Seiyu-kai.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1902 (AUGUST); 1903 (JUNE), and 1909;
See in Volume VI.,
JAPAN: A. D. 1900.
PARTIES:
Sinn Fein.
See (in this Volume)
IRELAND: A. D 1905.
{479}
PARTIES:
Social Democrats.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA A. D. 1905-1907;
GERMANY: A. D. 1903;
DENMARK: A. D. 1906;
SOCIALISM: GERMANY,
SOCIALISM: FRANCE,
SOCIALISM: ENGLAND.
PARTIES:
Social Revolutionists.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1905-1907.
PARTIES:
Socialist, and Socialist Labor.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1904 (MARCH-NOVEMBER),
and 1908 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).
PARTIES:
Socialists, Radical.
Socialists, Independent.
Socialists Unified.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1906.
PARTIES:
Sons of Liberal Ottomans.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1909 (JANUARY-MAY).
PARTIES:
Union Republicaine.
See (in this Volume)
France: A. D. 1906.
PARTIES:
Yellows (Liberals).
See (in this Volume)
COLOMBIA: A. D. 1898-1902.
PARTIES:
Young Egypt.
See (in this Volume)
EGYPT: A. D. 1909 (SEPTEMBER).
PARTIES:
Young Finns.
See (in this Volume)
FINLAND: A. D. 1908-1909.
PARTIES:
Young Turks.
See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1908 (JULY-DECEMBER).
PARTIES:
Yushin-kai.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1909.
PARTIES:
Zayistas.
See (in this Volume)
CUBA: A. D. 1906-1909.
PARTY REFORMS, Political.
See (in this Volume)
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: UNITED STATES.
PASSAY, FREDERIC.
See (in this Volume)
NOBEL PRIZES.
PASSIONISTS:
Forbidden to Teach in France.
See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1903.
"PASSIVE RESISTANCE," OF ENGLISH NONCONFORMISTS TO THE
EDUCATION ACT OF 1902.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: ENGLAND: A. D. 1902, AND 1909 (MAY).
PASTEUR, Louis:
Pronounced by Popular Vote to be the Greatest Frenchman
of the Nineteenth Century.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907-1908.
PATENTS OF INVENTION: GREAT BRITAIN: A. D. 1907.
Patents and Designs Act.
A requirement of the manufacture of patented articles in the
United Kingdom, introduced in an Act of the British Parliament
passed and approved in August, 1907, which came into force
August 28, 1908, seriously changed the operation of patents
issued to foreigners. It is contained in the following
sections:
"27.—(1) At any time not less than four years after the date
of a patent and not less than one year after the passing of
this Act, any person may apply to the comptroller for the
revocation of the patent on the ground that the patented
article or process is manufactured or carried on exclusively
or mainly outside the United Kingdom.
"(2) The comptroller shall consider the application, and, if
after enquiry he is satisfied that the allegations contained
therein are correct, then, subject to the provisions of this
section, and unless the patentee proves that the patented
article or process is manufactured or carried on to an
adequate extent in the United Kingdom, or gives satisfactory
reasons why the article or process is not so manufactured or
carried on, the comptroller may make an order revoking the
patent either—(a) forthwith; or (b) after such reasonable
interval as may be specified in the order, unless in the
meantime it is shown to his satisfaction that the patented
article or process is manufactured or carried on within the
United Kingdom to an adequate extent: Provided that no such
order shall be made which is at variance with any treaty,
convention, arrangement, or engagement with any foreign
country or British possession.
"(3) If within the time limited in the order the patented
article or process is not manufactured or carried on within
the United Kingdom to an adequate extent, but the patentee
gives satisfactory reasons why it is not so manufactured or
carried on, the comptroller may extend the period mentioned in
the previous order for such period not exceeding twelve months
as may be specified in the subsequent order.
"(4) Any decision of the comptroller under this section shall
be subject to appeal to the court, and on any such appeal the
law officer or such other counsel as he may appoint shall be
entitled to appear and be heard."
Twelve months after the Act became effective the London
_Times_ gave the following account of its working:
"During the year which has elapsed since Section 27 came into
force, 69 applications for revocation of foreign patents have
been made to the Comptroller-General. In 10 cases only were
patents revoked by that official. In four of these cases the
patentees appealed to the High Court, and in two cases
relating to improvements in electric arc lamps, the decision
of the Comptroller-General was reversed, evidence having been
adduced which was not placed before the Comptroller-General,
the effect of which was to show that the patented process was
being adequately carried on in this country. The two other
appeals to the High Court were unsuccessful, so that the
number of patents finally revoked was eight. Those revoked
related to the following articles or processes:—Artificial
stone slabs and tiles (two patents), sewing-machines,
umbrellas, adhesive stays or fastening straps used in
box-making, the lubrication of gig-mills, a steam motor-car,
and locks. In another case, that of a patent connected with
the manufacture of china clay, the Comptroller-General made a
conditional order of revocation.
"It is too early, as yet, to say whether this new power of
revocation conferred by the Act of 1907 is likely to have any
appreciable effect in reducing the number of foreign patents
taken out in this country. In the first seven months of this
year there were 17,869 such patents applied for—an increase of
1566 as compared with the corresponding period of 1908, though
only an increase of 319 upon the larger figures for the first
seven months of 1907. Sixteen fewer patents were taken out in
1909 by American subjects than in 1908, and 331 fewer than in
1907. The decrease in German patents has been consistent—2000
in 1907, 1822 in 1908, and 1735 in 1909, and the same may be
said of Austrian patents—253, 234, and 192 respectively.
French patents, which were 620 in 1907 and 670 in 1908,
decreased to 560 in 1909.
PATENTS:
Pan-American Convention.
See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
PAULHAN, M.
See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION, RECENT: AERONAUTICS.
PAUPERISM.
See (in this Volume)
POVERTY.
PAWLOW, Ivan PETROVIE.
See (in this Volume)
NOBEL PRIZES.
PAYNE, HENRY C.:
Postmaster-General.
See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1901-1905.
{480}
PAYNE-ALDRICH TARIFF.
See (in this Volume)
TARIFFS: UNITED STATES.
PEACE.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST.
PEACE, International:
Awards for the Promotion of.
See (in this Volume)
NOBEL PRIZES.
PEACE CONFERENCE AT THE HAGUE, The Second International.
See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1907.
PEACE TREATY, BOER-BRITISH.
See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1901-1902.
PEACE TREATY OF PORTSMOUTH.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1905 (JUNE-OCTOBER).
PEARY, Robert E.:
Exploration and Discovery of the North Pole.
See (in this Volume)
POLAR EXPLORATION: ARCTIC.
PEASANT INSURRECTION IN THE BALTIC PROVINCES.
See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1905 (FEBRUARY-NOVEMBER).
PEASANTRY, CONDITION OF RUSSIAN.
See (in this Volume)
Russia: A. D. 1901-1904, 1902, 1904-1905, 1905, and 1906.
PECANHA, Nilo:
President of Brazil.
See (in this Volume)
BRAZIL: A. D. 1909 (JUNE).
PEKING: A. D. 1902.
Return of the Imperial Court.
See (in this Volume)
CHINA: A. D. 1902.
PEKING-KALGAN RAILWAY.
See (in this Volume)
RAILWAYS: CHINA.
PELLAGRA.
See (in this Volume)
PUBLIC HEALTH: PELLAGRA.
PENNA, DR. ALFONSO MOREIRA:
President of Brazil.
See (in this Volume )
BRAZIL: A. D. 1906.
PENNA, DR. ALFONSO MOREIRA:
Sudden death.
See (in this Volume)
BRAZIL: A. D. 1909 (JUNE).
PENNSYLVANIA: A. D. 1906.
Reform Legislation.
The popular revolt of 1905 in Philadelphia against the
intolerable rottenness of municipal government under the
dominant party "machine" had prompt effects in the State.
See (in this Volume)
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT.
"When the election, last November, and still more the reports
made by working politicians in the best organized and informed
machine in the land, showed that these classes wanted a
change, the machine and its leaders changed instantly. A
pliant governor was as prompt to call the Legislature in extra
session as he had been to find reasons for the vilest excess
of the political plunderers of the State. The same Legislature
as before met, and in a brief session passed every measure for
which reformers had been asking in vain for twenty-five
years,—two of them in more drastic form than any one had yet
proposed. Save that the Corrupt Practices Act is more precise
and severe than any yet passed, except in Connecticut, and the
separation and protection of the civil service of Philadelphia
more complete than has yet been enacted for an American city,
the new legislation follows the general trend of such measures
in other States."
_Review of Reviews,
April, 1906_.
PENNSYLVANIA: A. D. 1906-1908.
Frauds in the Construction of the new State Capitol.
On the 4th of October, 1906, the new State House at Harrisburg
was dedicated with imposing ceremonies, honored by the
President of the United States as the principal speaker of the
occasion. The State of Pennsylvania was then indulging more
pride in the supposed honesty and economy with which it had
been built than in the splendor it displayed; for announcement
was made that the Commission charged with the work had saved
about 10 per cent of the $4,000,000 appropriated for it. Very
quickly, however, there came an humiliation of that honorable
pride. Complete accountings showed that, while the naked
structure of the building had cost but $3,600,000, a monstrous
expenditure of more than $9,000,000 for alleged decoration and
furnishing had been added to that sum, by the most audacious
"graft," perhaps, that is recorded, even in the national
history which included the exploits of the Tweed Ring. The
arts of sculpture and painting in the decoration were dealt
with most frugally; but royal emoluments went to gas-fitters
and cabinet makers and their kind,—$2,000,000 for example, for
the equipment of the building with chandeliers. For woodwork
in one suite of rooms, which cost the contractor $16,089 the
State had paid $94,208. For another, he had received $62,486,
on an expenditure by himself of but $6,145.
The investigation of these monstrous frauds, in the fruits of
which many people must have shared, resulted in the arrest of
fourteen men. The arrests were made in September, 1907, and
the accused were released on bail. In the following March four
were convicted of defrauding the State, namely J. H.
Sanderson, a contractor, W. P. Snyder, former Auditor-General
of the State, W. L. Mathues, former State Treasurer, and J. M.
Shumaker, former Superintendent of Public Grounds and
Buildings. The execution of the sentence was suspended pending
an appeal.
Sanderson and Mathues died (of nervous breakdown, it was
said), while the appeal was pending. The conviction of Snyder
and Shumaker was confirmed finally on the 7th of March, 1910,
and their sentence to two years of imprisonment went into
effect. At the same time suits were instituted by the State
against all parties connected with the frauds, to recover some
$5,000,000, estimated to be the amount of plunder taken.
Meantime, seven in all of the alleged participants in the
conspiracy of fraud had died.
PENOLOGY.
See (in this Volume)
CRIME.
PENSIONS, FOR OLD AGE AND INFIRMITY.
See (in this Volume)
POVERTY, PROBLEMS OF.
PENSIONS:
Military.
See (in this Volume)
GERMANY: A. D. 1902.
PENSIONS:
United States: For Teachers.
See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1905-1908.
PENSIONS:
For Railway Employees.
See (in this Volume)
LABOR REMUNERATION: PENSIONS.
PEONAGE:
In the United States.
The following extracts are from three reports of an official
investigation of practices of peonage, conducted by the
Assistant Attorney-General of the United States, Mr. Charles
W. Russell, in 1906-1907:
"Under the criminal law as now in force the offense of peonage
may be defined as causing compulsory service to be rendered by
one man to another on the pretext of having him work out the
amount of a debt, real or claimed. That is Mexican peonage
proper, as defined by our highest court in the Clyatt case
(197 U. S., p. 207). But, as fully explained in my report of
October, 1907, and January, 1908, where there is no
indebtedness either real or claimed, a _conspiracy_ to
cause compulsory service of _citizens_ of the United
States is punishable; and so, also, according to the only
court that has directly passed upon the question, is the
carrying or enticing any person from one place to another in
order that he may be held in compulsory service.
{481}
"I use the words ‘compulsory service’ as equivalent to the
constitutional phrase ‘involuntary servitude’ because the
Supreme Court so treats them in the Clyatt case, and I say
that a mere claim of debt is sufficient because several
inferior courts have so decided, and because in the Clyatt
case the indictment, to which no objection seems to have been
made, alleged a mere claim of indebtedness."
For an illustration of peonage, Mr. Russell cites the
following from evidence produced at the trial of a case
occurring in Alabama which he took part in:
"It was proven that Harlan, the manager, had headquarters at
Lockhart, where the mill was; that in his back yard were kept
what were called bloodhounds—man-trailing dogs; that the
object of keeping these was to send after escaping men; that
they were so used, and men chased and brought back, one of
them tied on the hind part of a buggy; that one of the men,
the Bulgarian Jordmans, was unmercifully kicked and beaten by
Gallagher for wandering off a few yards, his sore shins being
exhibited to the jury as part of the evidence; that by means
of telegraph, railroad, and telephone, a justice of the peace,
and a deputy sheriff, the force of men were hemmed in so that
escape was almost impossible; that the foremen constantly
carried pistols and often made threats; that a rope was placed
around the neck of one foreigner and thrown over a beam as an
object-lesson to others and to frighten him, and that all this
went on systematically'. …
"I have no doubt, from my investigations and experiences, that
the chief support of peonage is the peculiar system of State
laws prevailing in the South, intended evidently to compel
service on the part of the workingman.
"It is hoped that an enlightened self-interest and the demand
for labor made necessary by the expansion of old industries
and the introduction of new will lead to the amendment or
repeal of the State laws which are the chief support of
peonage practices.
"These State laws take various forms and are used in various
ways to uphold peonage and other kinds of involuntary
servitude. Some of them are vagrancy laws, some contract labor
or employment laws, some fraudulent pretense or false promise
laws, and there are divers others. Some few of those in
question, such as absconding debtor laws, labor enticing, and
board-bill laws, were not originally passed to enslave
workmen; but in view of the use to which they are put, need
amendment in order that they cannot be so abused.
"These laws are used to threaten workmen who, having been
defrauded into going to an employer by false reports as to the
conditions of employment and the surroundings, naturally
become dissatisfied as soon as they find how they have been
defrauded. They are used before juries and the local public to
hold the peons up as law-breakers and dishonest persons
seeking to avoid their ‘just obligations’ and to convince
patriotic juries that the defendants accused of peonage should
not be convicted for enforcing, still less for threatening to
enforce, the laws of their State.
"Until we began our work in October, 1906, the chief supply of
peons came from the slums—i. e., foreign quarters of New
York, and from Ellis Island, through the operations of
licensed labor agents of New York. These were reaping a rich
harvest from the price per head for laborers supplied to
employers at a distance, and the temptations to fill all
orders and outdo rival agents by a total disregard of truth
and honesty in dealing with both laborer and employer was too
great for a number of these brokers."
PEPPER, CHARLES M.:
Delegate to Second International Conference of American
Republics.
See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
PERDICARIS, ION:
Ransomed from a Moorish Brigand.
See (in this Volume)
MOROCCO: A. D. 1904-1909.
PEREIRA, JOSE HYGINO DUARTE:
Vice-President of Second International Conference
of American Republics.
See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.
PERRY, COMMODORE MATTHEW CALBRAITH:
Monument in Japan to commemorate his Advent there in 1853.
See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1901 (JULY).
----------PERSIA: Start--------
PERSIA: A. D. 1905-1907.
Beginnings of the Revolutionary Movement,
in the Life of Shah Muzaffer-ed-Din.
The Taking of "Bast," and its effect.
he Extortion of a Constitution and Election of
a Representative Assembly.
Death of the Shah.
The following account of conditions and events which opened,
attended and followed the late constitutional revolution in
Persia have been derived, partly from official correspondence
of the period, between the British Legation at Teheran (or
Tehran) and the Foreign Office at London, as published in Blue
Book Cd. 4581, 1909, and partly from letters and despatches to
the leading journals of London and New York.
The Shah, Muzaffer-ed-Din, who came to the throne in 1896, on
the assassination of his father, Nâsr-ed-Din (see, in Volume
VI. of this work, PERSIA), was credited with a desire to
reform the government of his kingdom, and made considerable
effort to that end in the early years of his reign; but the
adverse forces controlling his court were too strong for him,
and he seems to have yielded to them completely at last. He
was surrounded by a corrupt ring which lived on the spoils of
government, and piled debt upon debt. Under the last of the
Grand Viziers (Atabegs, or Atabeks) who ruled Persia in his
name before the outbreak of revolution, "governments were put
up for sale, grain was hoarded and sold at extortionate
prices, the Government domains were stolen or sold for the
benefit of the conspirators, rich men were summoned to Teheran
(or Tehran) and forced to disgorge large sums of money,
oppression of every sort was countenanced for a consideration;
the property, and even the lives, of all Persian subjects were
at their mercy.
{482}
Finally, there was every reason to believe that a conspiracy
was on foot to dethrone the foolish and impotent Shah and to
oust the Valiahd [heir to the throne]. In their place was to
be put the Shooa-es-Sultaneh, the Shah’s younger son, who was
a by-word even in Persia for extortion and injustice. The
policy of the Atabeg and his friends had thus aroused the
opposition of all classes in Persia: of the few more or less
patriotic statesmen, who knew to what a goal the country was
being led; of the priests, who felt that their old power and
independence would perish with that of their country; and of
the great mass of the population and the mercantile classes,
who were the daily victims of the tyranny of their oppressors.
In December [1905] the storm broke. The Governor of Tehran,
without any just cause, ordered an aged Seyed to be cruelly
beaten. A large number of the prominent Mujteheds took ‘bast’
[refuge] in the shrine of Shah Abdul Azim, near the capital."
The "taking of ‘bast,’" or refuge, in some sanctuary or other
place of protection, is an old Persian mode of political
protest or demonstration, to command attention to public
discontents. In 1848 the chief persons of the Empire had taken
refuge with the English and Russian Legations in order to
obtain the exile of a tyrannical Minister, Mirza Aghassi, and
since then it had been the custom of persons who had
grievances against their own Government to take refuge under
the shelter of a foreign Legation. The "Mujteheds" mentioned
in the above quotation as having resorted to this expedient in
December, are the higher and more influential of the
Mohammedan priests in Persia, distinguished from the Mullahs
or common priests, whose ranks are open to any believer who
can read the Koran and who assumes to interpret its laws.
The Government used vain endeavors of bribery and intimidation
to break up the "bast" at the shrine of Shah Abdul Azim. The
refugees had stirred up the whole country by a published
statement of grievances, appealing to the patriotism of the
people, and the Shah surrendered to the effect produced. He
made promises of a grant of popular representation, and of
administrative reforms. By the end of January a promising
state of affairs seemed to have been brought about. "The
refugees were brought back to Tehran in the Shah’s own
carriages, escorted by an enthusiastic crowd." But dissensions
between the popular leaders and the Mujteheds soon arose. "No
definite step was taken to give effect to the Shah’s promises,
except a vague letter promising Courts of Justice and a new
Code, and the appointment of a Council to consider the whole
question of reforms. In this Council it soon became evident
that the Government could control the leaders of the reform
movement, and that the sympathies of the great Mujteheds were
not heartily with the popular movement. All was outwardly
quiet in Tehran, but in the provinces the people of Shiraz and
Resht had taken violent measures to prevent the reappointment
of the Shah’s sons as their Governors, and the movement in
both cases was successful. In the capital itself the streets
and the bazaars were quiet, but every day sermons were
preached in the mosques, in which, as one of the popular party
said, ‘What we hardly dared to think a year ago was openly
spoken.’ The best-known preacher of Tehran, a Prince of the
Imperial house, preached every Friday against the tyrannies
and corruption of the Government. An order for his expulsion
was issued. The chief Mujteheds, incited by the people,
pressed the Government to withdraw the measure, and the
Government had to yield."
In the middle of May the Shah had a paralytic stroke and was
removed to the country. For some weeks there was a lull in the
popular agitation. Then, early in July, the principal
Mujteheds were roused by the conduct of the Grand Vizier to a
fresh preaching of revolt. On the 11th the Vizier ordered the
arrest of one of the preachers; a crowd of people attempted to
rescue him, and was fired on by the troops. General rioting in
the capital ensued, with victory, for a time, on the side of
the people; but in the end the Government appeared to have won
the day. "The town was in the hands of the troops. The popular
leaders had fled. The Shah was in the hands of their
opponents. For the popular party the outlook was a grave one."
In these circumstances the leaders had recourse again to the
"bast," and this time in a Foreign Legation.
"On the evening of the 9th fifty Mullahs and merchants
appeared at the Legation and took up their quarters for the
night. Their numbers soon increased, and on the 2nd September
there were about 14,000 persons in the Legation garden. Their
conduct was most orderly. The crowd of refugees was organized
by the heads of the guilds, who took measures to prevent any
unauthorized person from entering the Legation grounds. Tents
were put up and regular feeding places and times of feeding
were provided for. The expense was borne by the principal
merchants. No damage of a wilful character was done to the
garden, although, of course, every semblance of a bed was
trampled out of existence, and the trees still bear pious
inscriptions cut in the bark. Colonel Douglas, the Military
Attache, kept watch over the Legation buildings, but no watch
was needed. Discipline and order were maintained by the
refugees themselves.
"The Government sent answers to the popular demands, which
they requested Mr. Grant Duff to read to the people. The
Government communications were received with derision. At last
there appeared to be no other resource than a personal appeal
to the Shah. The people stated firmly that unless their
demands were granted they would remain in the Legation, as it
was their only place of safety, and they maintained that until
the Shah knew what was the real situation their requests would
never receive due consideration. Mr. Grant Duff obtained the
consent of His Majesty’s Government, and announced to the
Minister for Foreign Affairs that he demanded an audience. An
audience was fixed for the 30th July. The audience, however,
never took place. The Commander of several of the Tehran
regiments, on whom the Minister of the Court and the Grand
Vizier chiefly depended, made the fatal announcement that his
troops would not serve against the people, and that they were
on the point of themselves taking refuge in the British
Legation. The Court party yielded. The Sadr Azam [Grand
Vizier] resigned, and the Azad-ul-Mulk, head of the Kajar
tribe [the tribe of the imperial dynasty], proceeded to Kum in
order to inform the refugee Mullahs that the Shah had granted
their demands for a National Assembly and for Courts of
Justice.
{483}
"The chief difficulty which then confronted Mr. Grant Dull was
that the people had entirely lost confidence in their own
Government, and declined to treat with them except through the
British Representative. When the Government made the
announcement of the projected reforms, the people answered
that they would not accept the promise of the Government
unless it was confirmed and guaranteed by the Government of
the King of England. This was naturally impossible. Acting
under instructions, Mr. Grant Duff informed the refugees that
he could do no more for them, and entirely declined to
guarantee the execution of the Shah’s Decrees. The Government
then attempted to come to an arrangement direct. It failed.
The popular leaders rejected the Shah’s Decrees as vague or
inadequate, and where posted up in the city they were torn
down and trampled on. In this extremity the Government again
appealed to Mr. Grant Duff and begged him for his assistance.
At his suggestion a meeting took place at the residence of the
new Grand Vizier, the late Minister for Foreign Affairs,
between the Government and the popular leaders. After a long
discussion, at which Mr. Grant Duff took no part except when
questioned, an agreement was arrived at, and an amended
Rescript published which definitely promised a National
Representative assembly [in the Persian language a Mejlis or
Medjliss] with legislative powers. The Rescript was read out
in the British Legation to the assembled refugees and was
received with enthusiasm. … On the night of the 16th the
Mujteheds returned amid popular plaudits, and on the 18th a
grand meeting was held in the Palace precincts as a sort of
earnest of the National Assembly."
The Court party, however, had only suffered an appearance of
defeat. It spent the next week "in gradually paring down all
the Shah’s promises, and in the production of a Rescript in
which the original project of the Constitution was hardly
recognizable. The late Grand Vizier, who had lingered in the
neighborhood, suddenly returned to his country seat near the
Shah’s residence, and the Shah absolutely refused to sign the
Regulations for the Assembly. The popular excitement was
intense. Notice was served on Mr. Grant Duff that the people
would again take refuge in the Legation, if necessary, by
force. About twenty-five of the leaders actually did take up
their quarters there. It seemed as if the disturbances were
about to break out anew." But now the Russian Minister came
into cooperation with Mr. Grant Duff, in representations to
the Shah that overcame the evil influences by which he was
swayed. Regulations for the election of delegates to the
Assembly were now signed; but fresh difficulties arose from
the refusal of provincial governors to carry them out. These
in turn were overcome and the elections were held. "Meanwhile
it had been decided, in order to avoid delay, that the Tehran
Members of the Council should meet at once, without waiting
for the provincial Delegates, and the first session of the new
Assembly was opened [October 7, 1906] by the Shah himself, in
the presence of the priests, the Court, and the foreign
representatives. … The provincial Members arrived one by one
as they were elected, and as yet there are many vacant places,
the provinces not showing much alacrity in electing their
Members. The Assembly soon showed its power. It refused
absolutely to consent to the Anglo-Russian advance [of a
preferred loan] on the ground that the public revenues ought
not to be pledged to foreigners. It announced its intention of
instituting reforms, especially in the finances of the
country, and of providing itself the necessary funds for
carrying on the Government by founding and endowing a National
Bank. But, before taking any steps of this nature, it insisted
on having a signed Constitution. A Committee was nominated to
consider the terms of the Constitution, and, in consultation
with a Committee named by the Government, a Constitution was
drawn up and submitted to the Chamber." It did not satisfy the
popular demand and scenes of confusion followed; but in the
end it was amended and approved, and, on the 1st of January,
1907, the important instrument, ratified by the Shah and by
the Valiahd—the heir to the crown—was delivered to the
Assembly and received with joy. One week later, on the 8th of
January, the Shah died.
The text of the Constitution, as translated for communication
to the British Government, is given in this Volume under the
heading—CONSTITUTION OF PERSIA.
PERSIA: A. D. 1907 (January-September).
The new Shah, Mohammed Ali.
His evil surroundings.
Hostility between him and the Assembly.
Prime Ministry of Atabeg-i-Azam.
The Government without money.
Inaction of the Assembly.
Discouragement of the Atabeg.
His assassination.
The new Shah, who assumed the crown under the name or title of
Mohammed Ali Shah, professed acquiescence in the
constitutional change which the nation had forced his father
to accept; but those who knew him appear to have expected that
he would act a perfidious part. That improved conditions in
the country were far from settled became apparent very soon.
As early as the 30th of January, Sir C. Spring-Rice, who had
succeeded Mr. Grant Duff as the diplomatic representative of
Great Britain, wrote to his Government: "I regret to state
that the prospects of a good understanding between the Shah
and the popular party are still remote. The _entourage_
of the Shah, especially his father-in-law, the
Naib-es-Sultaneh, is personally interested in the continuance
of the existing abuses; and their influence has certainly made
itself felt to a regrettable extent, and has led to increasing
agitation against the Shah himself. On the other hand the
action of the popular Assembly has not been such as to lead to
conciliation."
The precariousness of the situation in the country, the
paralysis of government and the prevalence of disorder during
a number of months following, may be indicated sufficiently by
a few passages from the despatches of Sir C. Spring-Rice and
Mr. Charles M. Marling, Charge d’Affaires to the British
Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Sir Edward Grey:
{484}
_February 27, 1907._
"It is clear that a national movement of a semi-political and
semi-religious character does exist and is spreading. The
great Mujteheds of Kerbela are now entering on the scene, and
delegates are being sent out from the capital to the provinces
to preach the principles of liberty. Patriotism, of a
distinctive Persian type, has always been the characteristic
of the Shiite believers. The present Shah of Persia has no
religious status, and, in the view of the religious leaders,
no fundamental right to the allegiance of the Persians, whose
real chief is no living King, but the twelfth Imam, the coming
Messiah, even now present on the earth, though unseen. The
patriotism of the Shiite does not therefore centre in the
person of the Kaliph, but is, or can be, of a highly
revolutionary character."
_May 23._
An "important question has arisen in relation to an addition
to the Constitution, guaranteeing equal treatment for all
Persian subjects, irrespective of their creed. The mullahs
protested. Of the three great Mujteheds, only one—Seyid
Mohamed—declared in favour of it. The others, supported by a
large body of the clergy, maintain that Mussulman law must be
enforced in a Mussulman country. The clerical world is divided
on the subject. A large number of the priests, headed by Seyid
Mohamed and the popular preacher Sheikh Jamal-ed-Din, declare
openly that the law of Mahommed is a law of liberty and
equality, and that those who say otherwise are traitors to
their country and unworthy of their religion. The
representative of the Parsees informs me that he has great
hopes that a decision will be taken favourable to toleration;
but the matter is still in suspense."
"The Atabeg-i-Azam [about whom something will be told below]
arrived at Tehran the 26th April, and was formally appointed
President of the Council of Ministers and Minister of the
Interior on the 2nd May. He proceeded to the National Assembly
on the 4th May, accompanied by his whole Cabinet, and made a
statement of policy."
"The tone of the local press is getting more and more
democratic, and new papers are constantly appearing. There are
at present nearly thirty papers published in Tehran alone,
including several dailies. Papers are also published in nearly
all the provinces, and a Persian paper of a very anti-dynastic
tone is published at Baku and widely circulated in Persia.
Anonymous pamphlets are also widely spread in Tehran as
before. A number of them are printed at Baku, and are
remarkable for their inflammatory character. The Tehran
pamphlets are chiefly directed against the Atabeg-i-Azam and
the Government."
_June 18._
"The financial condition of the Government is, if possible,
worse than ever. The police of the capital are on strike; it
has been found almost impossible to scrape together money
enough to induce the Tehran troops to leave for the scene of
the rebellion."
"The Government would, if it dared, borrow abroad to meet its
present liabilities. But, in view of the popular sentiment, it
does not resort to a foreign loan. It appeals to the Assembly
for help, in the form of subscriptions to the proposed
National Bank. The answer it receives is that the people will
subscribe as soon as the rich nobles, who are known to have
large sums of money, show the way. This the rich refuse to do.
As to raising money by taxation, the Assembly appears to be
convinced that as soon as the Government has any money in hand
it will use it for the destruction of the Medjliss. Any
effective control of expenditure is regarded as quite out of
the question. The exasperation against the Shah is rapidly
increasing."
"There is a considerable difference between the north and the
south. In the south the popular movement has an almost
farcical character; it turns on personal or pecuniary
questions. In the north there appears to be a more or less
definite political aim and a keen sense of patriotism. So far
there is no sign of an anti-foreign outbreak."
_July 19._
"The general condition of the whole country is undoubtedly
bad, and is probably slightly worse than last month. The
disturbances at Tehran have been chiefly brought about by
artificial means to serve the purposes of the reactionaries.
There seems, however, no reason to regard it as dangerous,
though the Government has every appearance of being bankrupt,
and artificial demonstrations are of daily occurrence. There
is so far no reason to fear an outbreak and consequent danger
to foreign lives or property."
_August 15._
"The Assembly still continues to sit, and it celebrated the
anniversary of the grant of the Constitution amid great scenes
of popular enthusiasm. But it has done, and is doing, nothing
of practical value. Its proceedings are disorderly, and it
comes to no decision. The covert opposition of the Shah and
his friends is conducted with considerable skill through a
section of the priestly party, who are heavily subsidized.
They have obtained some measure of success, and the
reactionary forces show a considerable amount of vigour. But
the popular leaders are not seriously afraid of these enemies,
and confidently maintain that the restoration of autocracy in
Persia is now impossible. The chief enemies of the Assembly
are its own members."
"The Atabeg is in a state of great depression, is afraid for
his life, distrustful of the Shah, and professes that he is
anxious to resign. He is useful as a man holding a middle
position between Shah and people, and possessing great
experience and knowledge of the country, but he is quite
incapable of organizing or administering a Government or of
carrying out any thorough-going reform."
_September 13._
"On the evening of the 30th ultimo the Atabeg called on me and
talked at length on the political situation. The general tenor
of his observations was that the Shah would withdraw his
opposition, the Medjliss would work with the Government, and
that very shortly the Government would be able to put an end
to the disorder which reigned in the country. I never saw him
in better spirits.
"The next day [August 31] the Atabeg and the Ministers
repaired to the Palace and requested the Shah to accept their
resignations unless he would solemnly pledge himself to
cooperate with the Government and the Medjliss. They obtained
the promise in writing, and repaired in a body to the
Assembly. The proceedings of the Assembly on that day were on
the whole harmonious and satisfactory. The Atabeg read the
Shah’s statement, and explained that the Government and the
Assembly would now be able to proceed to the serious work of
reform. There was some opposition, but it was overruled. The
majority of the Members showed their sympathy with the
Government.
{485}
"The Atabeg left the Assembly accompanied by the principal
Mujtehed, Seyed Abdullah. They reached the outer door of the
Palace inclosure, and had just parted when the Atabeg was shot
and killed. One of his assailants was captured, but wounded
his captor and escaped; another, finding himself surrounded,
shot himself. …
"For some time lately rumours have been spread abroad through
the local press and by word of mouth to the effect that the
Atabeg was in secret collusion with the Shah, for the
overthrow of the Assembly and the sale of the country to
Russia. Statements to this effect reached me from Members of
the Assembly. There can be no doubt as to the genuineness and
intensity of the feeling against the Atabeg. A French doctor,
who attended one of the assassins some time before the murder,
assured Mr. Churchill that he and his friends were quiet and
respectable persons of the middle class, imbued with the
strongest feeling of patriotism, and ready to devote their
lives to the service of their country. The attacks on the
Atabeg had lately gained in virulence, and had attracted
universal attention. … Popular sentiment approved the murder,
and the assassins were regarded as saviours of their country.
The streets of Tabreez were illuminated. The result of the
Atabeg’s murder is for the time to disorganize the whole
system of government."
In a recent book on Persia, by W. P. Cresson, the writer, an
American, who had visited the country during the final
Ministry of the Atabeg Azam, and had talked with him,
describes him with admiration, having been especially
impressed with his liberality of views and his knowledge of
European and American affairs. In his periods of exile from
Persia (which occurred several times in the course of his
public life) he had visited both Europe and America and
studied them well.
PERSIA: A. D. 1907 (August).
Convention between Great Britain and Russia relative to Persia.
See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1907 (AUGUST).
PERSIA: A. D. 1907-1908 (September-June).
A series of Political Overturnings.
The Shah deserted.
Temporary Supremacy of the Assembly.
Nasr-ul-Mulk Premier.
Addition to the Constitution.
The Shah’s attempted Coup d’État and failure.
Attempted Assassination of the Shah.
His successful second Coup d’Etat.
The Assembly dispersed and its dissolution proclaimed.
New Elections promised.
The assassination of the Atabeg Azam was followed soon by a
strange series of overturnings in the political situation,
outlined, and but slightly explained in the following excerpts
from despatches of the British Legation at Tehran:
_September 13, 1907._
"A deputation recently called on the Mushir-ed-Dowleh [former
Grand Vizier] and asked him to take office. He refused unless
he was provided with money. He said that he would not take the
dangerous responsibility of accepting a foreign loan, and that
unless the Persian people supplied the funds necessary to
carry on the Government, or consented to the Government
finding funds elsewhere, all government would be shortly
impossible."
_October 2._
"Shah has been solemnly informed by a Committee composed of
Princes, high military and civil officials, and great
landlords, and including all the reactionaries of prominence,
that, unless he maintains the Constitution and works with the
Medjliss their support will be withdrawn from the throne. The
usual reassuring answer was returned by His Majesty. The
Minister for Foreign Affairs, whose position is very
precarious owing to the strike in his own Department, is
opposed to them, but the head of the new Government has
promised them support. The members of the Committee yesterday
took a solemn oath of fidelity to the Constitution in the
Assembly, where they had repaired for the purpose. Excepting
support of the Minister for Foreign Affairs the Shah is now
practically isolated, though he is supposed still to entertain
reactionary views."
_October 3._
"Saad-ed-Dowleh has been dismissed from post of Minister for
Foreign Affairs."
_October 10._
"The Mushir-ed-Dowleh died very suddenly on the evening of
the 13th September.
"On the 27th September the Princes and civil and military
officials of note, who had up till then formed the reactionary
party, presented an ultimatum to the Shah declaring their
adhesion to the Constitution and the National Assembly, and
threatening to sever all connection with the throne should His
Majesty not cooperate with the National party. … There was
little on the surface to indicate the sudden _volte-face_
of the reactionaries. The chief cause must undoubtedly be
reckoned to be fear. The murder of the Atabeg … and the
suspicion that the sudden death of Mushir-ed-Dowleh was not
due to natural causes, had unquestionably produced a very deep
effect. …
"The result of the first year’s work of the Assembly has been
on the whole rather negative, but at least it has succeeded in
asserting its will against the influence of the Shah and
clergy, and has now a reasonable prospect of being able to
start on the path of reconstruction."
_October 25._
"New Ministry has been formed under presidency of
Nasr-ul-Mulk, reappointed Minister of Finance. Most important
members are Mushir-ed-Dowleh, son of the late
Mushir-ed-Dowleh, Foreign Affairs; Sanied-Dowleh, Interior;
Mukhber-es-Sultaneh, Justice."
_November 27._
"I have the honor to transmit to you herewith a full
translation of the text of the Constitutional Law as passed by
the National Assembly and signed by the Shah on the 8th of
October.
[This addition of articles to the Constitution signed by the
Shah on the 30th of December, 1906, will be found, in this
Volume, appended to that instrument, under CONSTITUTION OF
PERSIA.]
The Law reduces the Sovereign to practical impotence, but by
far its most important part is that defining the powers of the
Tribunals. Articles 71 and the succeeding Articles, though
ambiguously worded, intentionally so, will, if carried into
execution, deal a deadly blow at the judicial powers of the
Mollahs."
{486}
_December 15._
"Disorders are threatening here. Violent speeches, denouncing
the Shah and demanding the exile of the Shah’s Chief Adviser
and Agent, Saad-ed-Dowleh and Amir Bahadur Jang, were made
yesterday at a popular meeting at the principal mosque. The
Ministry has resigned, but the Shah refuses to accept
resignation. This morning an excited crowd gathered outside
the Assembly, but was dispersed by armed men sent by the
Shah."
_December 15._
"Ala-ed-Dowleh, who was sent to the Palace by the Assembly
with a message, and another brother of President of Assembly
were arrested by the Shah at 3 o’clock this afternoon. Shah
sent for Prime Minister at 5 p. m., put chains on him, and
threatened to kill him five hours after sunset. I have sent to
demand assurances for Nasr-ul-Mulk’s safety from the Palace,
and am requesting co-operation of Russian Minister."
_December 16._
"Nasr-ul-Mulk is exiled, and leaves for Resht to-day. As he
fears Shah will attempt his life on the way, he begged me to
send a member of the Legation with him, as was done when the
late Atabeg was sent to Kum in 1897. This, I said, I was for
the moment unable to do. I am, however, sending two gholams.
On his arrest the Assembly dispersed, and the Anjumans, on
which its real power rested, remained inactive. The other
Ministers have all resigned. They were summoned to the Palace
and were practically under arrest there till they also left
the Palace when Nasr-ul-Mulk was released by my demand on his
behalf. … Armed partisans of Shah have occupied principal
square since midday yesterday. For the present his coup d’état
seems to be successful. The Committees are collecting armed
round the Assembly this morning. There is no sign of danger to
Europeans, and there has been as yet no fighting."
_December 17._
"More armed ruffians are being brought into the town and are
congregating in Cannon Square, supported by troops and guns. …
Round the Medjliss building the Anjumans [popular
associations] are again assembling armed."
_December 18._
"No Government has been formed. The popular party is acting
strictly on the defensive, and the Committees are still
guarding the Assembly. The Shah last night conceded the
Assembly’s demands, which are moderate."
_December 22._
"Russian Minister and I have just come back from the Palace.
He laid the situation before the Shah with the utmost
frankness, and the strongest assurances that he would respect
and uphold the Constitution were given us by His Majesty.
Steps are now being taken by us to let the Constitutionalists
understand that it is incumbent upon the two Legations to see
that the Shah observes the pledges he has given us."
_December 31._
"Meantime [after the interview, above reported, with the
Shah], the general situation had become more threatening. The
Tabreez Anjuman [local assembly or Committee] had succeeded in
circulating throughout Persia the threat of deposing the Shah,
and the larger cities, where the idea of constitutional
government has taken root, appeared to be greatly excited.
Telegrams promising armed support against the Shah had been
received from Shiraz, Ispahan, Resht, Kazvin, Kerman, and
Meshed, and signs of sympathy had come in from other quarters.
In Tehran itself, despite unmistakable signs that the Shah
must yield, as he did late in the afternoon, the excitement
against His Majesty was, if anything, more marked."
"It has been difficult to find a method of conveying the
Shah’s guarantee in a manner agreeable to the susceptibilities
of the Assembly. However, on Friday Mushir-ed-Dowleh furnished
M. de Hartwig with a rough draft of a declaration which we
might each communicate to the President of the Assembly, and
taking this as the basis we prepared a letter in French."
_January 2, 1908_.
"Although Tehran is now relatively quiet, and the provinces
have been much less affected than might reasonably have been
apprehended by the knowledge of what was happening at the
capital, I fear that relief is only temporary, and that Persia
is drifting nearer and nearer to complete anarchy. The
struggle between the Shah and his people has resulted in a
complete victory for the latter, but I am not sanguine that
the prospects of the establishment of constitutional
government on a durable basis have been much improved thereby.
For the moment, indeed, the Shah has been completely cowed,
and is now retired into the Anderoon [harem]."
_January 29._
"In the early days of the month, though externally the town
was quiet enough, it seemed as though another crisis might
occur. The Shah, after a few days’ comparative inactivity,
recommenced his campaign against the Assembly."
_February 28._
"The Shah, who had not been out of the Palace since he paid
his state visit to the National Assembly on the 12th November,
1907, was proceeding at 3 p. m. to his country seat at
Dochantapeh when a determined attempt was made on his life.
The procession was formed of a motor-car in front and a
carriage behind, with the usual escort of horsemen and running
footmen. A little way past the house of the Manager of the
Imperial Bank, and before reaching that of the Zil-es-Sultan,
a fusillade was opened on the motor-car, in which it was
supposed the Shah rode, by some persons from the adjoining
roofs, who evidently could not see into the vehicles from
their elevated position. Two bombs were then thrown at the
motor-car completely shattering it, and killing two persons
and wounding about seven others. The Shah, who was seated in
the carriage behind the motor-car, immediately emerged and
took refuge in a neighboring house."
_April 24._
"While … the general condition of Persia has been more
tranquil, at the capital all the indications show but too
clearly that the struggle between the Shah and the Enjumens
[Committees or Associations] has lost none of its bitterness.
I say advisedly the Enjumens, for in the last trial of
strength, in which the Shah was again worsted, the Assembly
played a very small part indeed."
_May 21._
"The condition of the country is going from bad to worse, and
the feeble Government is absolutely unable to do anything to
restore a decent degree of order, and even if money were
forthcoming, it is in the last degree improbable that without
foreign assistance any serious measure of reform can be
undertaken."
{487}
_June 8._
"On Saturday morning, the 6th June, an apparent reconciliation
between the Shah and the popular party took place, but the
next morning it was reported to His Majesty that a telegram
had been sent to Zil-es-Sultan [one of the royal princes, and
an aspirant to the throne] at Shiraz by the Eujumens asking
him to come to Tehran and assume the Regency. The same evening
the Zil’s eldest son, also Serdar Mansur, Ala-ed-Dowleh, and
Azad-ul-Mulk, the Head of the Kajar tribe [the imperial tribe]
who took part in the agitation last week, were arrested by the
Shah."
_June 23._
"About 6 o’clock this morning twenty Cossacks were sent by the
Shah to arrest eight persons who were in the mosque adjoining
the Assembly House. The demand for the surrender of these
persons met with a refusal, and a shot was fired from the
mosque. Fighting then started, and is still continuing. The
number of people killed is said to be large. Guns are being
used by the Shah’s troops."
_June 23._
"The Assembly building and the mosque have been cleared by the
Shah’s forces, and the meeting-place of the Azerbaijan Enjumen
has been destroyed. The Shah has arrested the Chief Mujtehed,
Seyyid Abdullah, the Sheikh-ul-Reis, and some ten other
alleged leaders of popular party. The Cossack Brigade has lost
forty men. The loss on the other side is said to be very
small, but the exact number is unknown. A state of siege has
been proclaimed and the Enjumens have dispersed. Some shops
and houses, including that of the Zil-es-Sultan, and the
Assembly building, have been pillaged."
_June 25._
"The first shot was undoubtedly fired by the people in the
mosque and Assembly, among whom some Deputies were included. I
believe that every preparation had been made to clear the
mosque by force if this proved necessary. In any case, the
Shah had reasonable ground for taking strong measures, as the
attack was made by the popular party on the troops. …
"Efforts are being made to catch Deputies, and several,
including the President of the Assembly, have already been
arrested. The Enjumens seem to be cowed; their supporters are
falling away, and the Shah has complete mastery. Yesterday
morning two prisoners were strangled at the Shah’s camp, and
there are about thirty persons, other than Deputies, under
arrest. There are now in the Legation fifty refugees.
"There has been fighting in Tabreez between the popular party
and the Shah’s partisans. There is no sign from the other
provinces, and the Zil-es-Sultan is trying to dissociate
himself from the agitation."
_June 26._
"A Proclamation stating that the present Assembly is dissolved
has been issued by the Shah. Proclamation announces that new
elections will be held in three months, and a Senate will be
formed."
PERSIA: A. D. 1908-1909.
Final Hostilities between the Shah and the Supporters
of the Constitution.
Tabriz the Center of a Revolutionary Movement.
Entrance of the Bakhtiari into the Struggle.
Siege of Tabriz and its Relief by the Russians.
Capture of Teheran by the Nationalists and Bakhtiari.
Deposition of the Shah.
A child enthroned.
The occurrences of June, narrated above, were at the beginning
of the final outbreak of hostilities between the partisans of
the Shah and the supporters of the Constitution, which soon
ran into actual civil war.
When the Shah had established his authority at Teheran, Tabriz
became the center of popular opinion on the side of the
Constitutionalists, or Nationalists, and the main seat of
their strength. Fighting began there on the 23d of June,
simultaneously with the conflict at Teheran, and continued
intermittently and indecisively throughout July and August, at
the end of which time the Nationalists were said to be 10,000
strong. On the 24th of September the Royalists began a
bombardment of the town, with five guns, to which the
Nationalists responded vigorously with four. October 10th the
Nationalists assumed the offensive, attacking the camp of the
besiegers, routing their cavalry, and securing possession of a
desirable bridge.
On the 24th of September, under pressure from the
representatives of Great Britain and Russia, the Shah decreed
that a Mejlis (National Assembly) "composed of religious and
proper persons, will, by the help of God and the favor of the
12th Imam, be convoked by us for the 19th Shavval"—that is,
November 14—and that a law of elections should be made known
by October 27. The latter date passed without producing the
promised election law and no elections followed in November;
but on the 8th of the latter month the Shah’s partisans
organized a "demonstration" at Teheran against the
Constitution, on the strength of which the mendacious
sovereign replied to British and Russian remonstrances against
his faithlessness by saying that "a large section of the
population regarded a constitutional regime as contrary to
their religion." Presently, on the 22d of November, he issued
a rescript proclaiming that the Ulema had declared such an
institution as a Parliament to be contrary to Islam and
therefore he would not convoke it.
Early in 1909 the revolt first organized at Tabriz became rife
in many parts of the nominal Empire of the Shah, both north
and south. On the 25th of January _The Times of India_,
published at Bombay, where commercial and political interests
in Persian affairs are equally keen, described the situation
then existing as follows: The "news from Persia is extremely
grave, because it indicates the collapse of the Shah’s
authority from north to south. The Anjumans [Enjumens—a term
which seems to be applied to local assemblies and to all
political associations alike] of Astrabad and Lahidjan have
repudiated the present regime. This means that the Caspian
littoral is being lost to the Shah. What is of even greater
consequence is that the spread of the revolt to Lahidjan may
mean the cutting off of the trade with Teheran via Resht,
which is now the principal route open to traffic. Then in the
far south, almost on the Gulf littoral, the Nationalists of
Laristan have thrown off all semblance of the Shah’s
authority. Recently it was stated that the Bakhtiaris had
risen in revolt, and had looted Isfahan. It was not to be
expected that the Lars, of which the Bakhtiaris are an
offshoot and who enjoy a modified independence, would remain
quiescent under these conditions. Reuter is however in error
in stating that these tribal fights ‘are interrupting’
communications between Bushire and Shiraz.
{488}
These have been interrupted for many months, and as we stated
on Friday, the muleteers who usually ply between Bushire and
Shiraz some time ago removed their animals to the
Resht-Teheran road. The insecurity of this route is
illustrated by the fact that the Derya Begi, the fount of
Persian dignity at Bushire, was held up and robbed on his way
from Teheran to his charge on the coast. All these straws
point to the rapidity with which anarchy is spreading."
The Bakhtiari referred to in this account of affairs, and who
now began to bear an important part in the Persian
revolutionary conflict, are a semi-independent and nomadic
tribe, occupying the region of the mountains which bear the
same name, in western Persia, within the provinces of Luristan
and Khuzistan. They claim, it is said, by descent from the
Bactrians of remote antiquity, to represent the purest blood
of ancient Iran. In connection with recent disturbances, they
began to be mentioned in June, 1907. The head of one faction
among them, Semsam-es-Sultaneh, had then been removed by the
Persian provincial governor from the post of Ilkhani (a title
surviving from the Mongol conquest of the 13th century,—see
PERSIA: A. D. 1258-1393, in Volume IV. of this work), and his
supporters were reported to be "out in every direction
attacking caravans." The only mention of them in the following
months was as pestilent bandits in the Ispahan quarter,
holding the roads and breaking up commerce and travel; but
they came at last into Persian history as allies of the
Nationalists in the struggle for Constitutional Government.
Press reports from Tabriz in February were to the effect that
the Shah’s forces, estimated at 12,000 in number, had closely
invested the town; that the besieged Nationalists were
provisioned for two months, and were making sorties daily.
Also that Resht was full of armed Caucasian revolutionaries.
At the middle of March a correspondent of the London
_Times_ made his way from Teheran to Resht, and found
that the revolutionary movement there was entirely "exotic."
"If the Caucasian element was removed," he wrote, "nothing
would remain. One can estimate fairly accurately that there
are about 600 men under arms in the town and on the road. It
is said that 5 per cent. of these are Persians. This morning I
watched the departure of a contingent of men for the front.
Greeks, Kurds, Armenians, Tartars, Russians—all the Caucasian
peoples were represented, but not a single man of the race for
the advancement of whose cause these men have taken arms."
This correspondent was led to suspect, as others have done,
that the religious movement in Persia known as "Babism" (see,
in Volume I. of this work, under BAB) had much to do, in a
secret way, with the existing revolutionary undertaking.
"Those who are in a position to judge." he said, "estimate the
present proportion of Babis in the population of Persia at
from 10 to 30 per cent. I have, indeed, heard the Persians
estimate it as high as 50 per cent."
Before the end of March the Nationalists were in control of
the ports of Bender Abbas and Bushire on the Persian Gulf. On
the 30th of March the following went to the London
_Times_ from Teheran: "In spite of numerous defections to
the Nationalist side during the last fortnight, the situation
at Teheran remains practically unaltered. The Cossack Brigade
is still the premier factor, and there seems no reason to
doubt either its allegiance to the Shah or its ability to deal
with any element of disturbance likely to arise in the
capital. The bazaars remain partially closed, but the business
of the town proceeds without interruption.
"From outside there is nothing to apprehend for the present.
The Bakhtiari have made no sign, though their position has
been rendered materially more secure by the recent espousal of
Nationalism by the most notable family at Shiraz. From Resht
the revolutionaries continue to launch remonstrance, warning,
and anathema at the Shah, but they are too wise to march on
the capital without a lead from elsewhere.
"To-day’s news from Tabriz indicates that the situation of the
town is extremely grave. A section of the Nationalists
advocate negotiating with the besiegers, but Satar Khan has
decided to continue his resistance. The stores of food are to
be appropriated for the fighting men, and when the stock
remaining is exhausted the inhabitants will have no
alternative but to leave the town and run the gauntlet of the
Shah’s lambs."
The Cossack Brigade referred to in the despatch above was a
body of Persian Cossacks which had been for some time past in
the service of the Shah, under the command of a Russian
officer, Colonel Liakhoff. In the House of Commons, on the
24th of March, the British Secretary for Foreign Affairs was
sharply questioned as to this employment of a Russian officer,
and the alleged employment of others, in the Shah’s service,
and asked whether they were serving the Shah or the Tsar. In
reply he said: "It may be that in the events of the
summer—what is called the coup d’État—Colonel Liakhoff, the
Russian officer in command of the Persian Cossacks, who had
been lent to the Shah for the purpose, I understand, of
disciplining that body of Persian Cossacks, to provide a
bodyguard for the Shah, and in case of need to preserve order
in Teheran—it may be that he exceeded the limit of those
purposes. If he did so I am convinced that it was not by the
instructions, on the authority, or with the approval of the
Russian Government; and since the coup d’Etat there has been
no question, according to reports which we have received, that
the Russian officers who remained in the service of the Shah
have kept within the limits of the purposes for which they
were lent to the service of the Shah, and have not taken part
in anything that could be called political encounters in
Persia. If Colonel Liakhoff exceeded the limits in Teheran, he
acted directly under the Government of the Shah, and the
question whether the Russian Government approve or disapprove
his action is one between himself and them, and is not a
matter on which we are called upon to express an opinion."
On the 5th of April it was reported that the sufferings of
Tabriz "are increasing daily, and it is undoubted that a great
tragedy is approaching. If Tabriz holds out, thousands must
die of starvation, while, if it falls, probably tens of
thousands will be massacred." A fortnight later, on the 20th.
the Shah yielded to the insistence of the British and Russian
Legations that he should allow an armistice at Tabriz of six
days and the importation into the town of sufficient food for
that period.
{489}
Meantime a detachment of Russian Cossacks, under General
Snarsky, had crossed the frontier into Persia, and was
marching to Tabriz with supplies. This Russian relief
expedition, approved by the British Government, reached the
beleaguered city without resistance on the 30th, and its
presence brought the conflict at that point to an end. A
correspondent of _The Times_, who had been in Tabriz
throughout the siege, taking some leadership in the defence
(in company with a teacher attached to the American Mission’s
high school, Mr. Baskerville, who met death in the fighting)
and who gave, two months later, a graphic narrative of the
experience, said in concluding it:
"Tabriz was ultimately saved by the coming of the Russians.
Their entry into the town was the direct cause of the opening
of the roads, the dispersal of the disappointed armies of the
Shah, the promulgation of the Constitution, and the
appointment of a Constitutionalist Ministry. It saved Tabriz
from a surrender which could not otherwise have been delayed
for three days longer, and thereby it averted the complete
collapse of the Constitutional movement."
With victory at Tabriz snatched from him, the Shah ostensibly
threw up his hands. On the 5th of May it was announced that he
had "signed an Imperial rescript acknowledging that the
disorderly condition of the country imposed the necessity of
taking measures to reorganize the administration. The rescript
recognizes that this can only be secured through the
constitutional principle, and his Majesty fixes July 19 for
the election of a representative Assembly, for the formation
of which electoral laws will soon be promulgated."
This revival of promises failed, however, to arrest the
revolutionary movement. On the 7th of May the Nationalists
expelled a royal force from Kazvin—less than a hundred miles
from Teheran—and declared their intention to march on Teheran.
"They are well-armed and well-mounted," said a correspondent
who came from Kazvin, "and possessed of plenty of money. Their
commander, a Sipahdar, and his second in command, an Afghan,
are now at Kazvin, and everything points to the possibility of
early action. The Bakhtiari, who have assembled at Ispahan and
number 3,000, also declare their intention of marching on
Teheran."
Of the Sipahdar, who now becomes the fighting leader of the
Nationalists, a writer in the New York _Evening Post_
relates that "when a merchant in Tabriz, he offered the
government his services in wiping out the brigands who scoured
the provinces, and, selecting a picked band, went out to fight
fire with fire, by the same methods of terrorizing that the
robbers had employed. As a result, he made the provinces safe,
at least."
Pressed by the Russian Legation to withdraw from Kazvin,
pending the fulfilment of the Shah’s promises, the Sipahdar,
commanding there, declared that he could not control his men.
The situation was complicated by the presence of the Russians
at Tabriz. As _The Times_ correspondent wrote: "The
perfectly unambiguous declaration by Russia that her troops
will be withdrawn from Tabriz the moment order is restored and
danger to Europeans is past is valueless in the eyes of
Persians while the troops are there."
The framing of a new electoral law, to the satisfaction of an
electoral committee of the Nationalists, was finished on the
6th of June, and the Shah’s signature to it was expected in a
few days. High hopes were placed on the coming of
Nasr-ul-Mulk, the exiled statesman at Paris, who had been
solicited to accept the Prime Ministry, and who seemed slow to
take the proffered honor. But the wrecked structure of
constitutional government could not so easily be set in
motion. The revolutionaries at Kazvin became threatening
again, and were in motion toward Teheran before the end of
June, while the Bakhtiari began a simultaneous advance. On the
29th of June the Russian Government issued orders "to assemble
a considerable force at Baku, to be held in readiness in case
of a _coup de main_ against the Persian capital."
Meantime the new electoral law had been signed, but not
promulgated, "owing to the prevailing excitement," it was
said.
On the 3d of July the Russian Government addressed a Circular
Note on the situation in Persia to the Governments of foreign
Powers, saying, in part:
"The Imperial Government, on consideration of the position of
affairs, has come to the conclusion that the principle of
absolute non-interference in the internal affairs of Persia
and in the conflict between the Shah and the Persian people
must remain, now as formerly, the basis of its policy in
Persia. In this connexion we could not leave out of sight the
fact that in the event of the Bakhtiari and revolutionaries
entering Teheran the Russian and other European Legations and
European institutions and subjects, as well as our road from
Enzeli (on the Caspian Sea) to Teheran, might find themselves
in an extremely dangerous position, and the more so because,
according to information which has reached us, the only
Regular troops at the Shah’s disposal consist of the Persian
Cossack Brigade, which is at present so weakened that it is
scarcely in a condition to maintain order in Teheran.
"This circumstance imposes upon the Imperial Government the
moral obligation to take all measures in order that, in case
of necessity, it may be possible to render effective aid to
the above-mentioned (European) establishments and subjects and
to ensure unrestricted traffic between Teheran and Enzeli in
all circumstances. It has, therefore, been decided to send a
force from Baku to Enzeli consisting of one regiment of
Cossacks, one battalion of Russian infantry, and one battery
of artillery. The force will not advance beyond Kazvin (86
miles from Teheran), and will ensure communication between
Kazvin and the Caspian Sea.
"The further advance of a portion of the force depends upon
the course of events. It can only ensue upon the demand of the
Imperial Legation in Teheran in the event of the dangerous
situation aforesaid arising."
{490}
The Russian and British Legations attempted mediation between
the Sipahdar and the Shah, to check the former’s advance, but
his demands made their intervention hopeless. The Shah’s
forces pushed out to intercept the on-coming revolutionaries,
encountered them on the 11th, 18 miles west of Teheran, and
fighting went on at a distance from the city for two days; but
forces which slipped between the defensive lines made their
way into the capital on the morning of July 13th, and there
was fighting in the streets until the 16th. The Shah then
sought refuge at the Russian Legation, and the Russian
officers of the Persian Cossacks, besieged in their barracks,
made terms with the Nationalist leaders.
Four days later the Persian situation was stated to the
British House of Commons by the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs, Sir Edward Grey, as follows: