It has been stated by American officials in 1895 and 1896 that the missionaries, having forced themselves into Turkey against the will of the government, had no legal rights there and no claim to protection. The officials who made these statements must have been wilfully ignoring the facts of recent history. The missionaries were supported and encouraged by the three sultans, Mahmud the strong, Abd-ul-Medjid the weak, and Abd-ul-Aziz the weaker. They stand on a firm basis of treaties, special enactments, and concessions,—a basis in which the present sultan, with all his acuteness and his hatred of mission work, could find no flaw. Had it been possible to argue with a shadow of plausibility that the mission was against the law, or that it was not guaranteed by enactments inviolable even by a sultan protected by the six Powers, the property would have been destroyed and the mission silenced. The attempt was made, but failed; and the action of officials who destroyed mission property at Kharput, etc., was ostensibly disowned.
Further, the action of strong, free American life in Turkey must always tend to strengthen the movement there towards that freer and more elastic order which belongs to all the English speaking peoples. But, though the mission work has, undoubtedly, exerted a great influence on the political situation in Turkey, the mission policy has studiously and consistently been non-political, and has zealously inculcated the doctrine of non-resistance and obedience to the existing government.
—Prof. W. M. Ramsay, D. C. L.
in Preface of “Impressions of Turkey.”
[Pg 241]
The right to exercise their functions as a class possessing special privileges had been granted to ecclesiastics of Christian nations by the voluntary extension of the Edict of Toleration of 1453 given by the Ottoman government after the fall of Constantinople. Turkish usage for nearly four hundred years was the warrant for the entrance of American missionaries into the country and their assurance of immunity from official molestation.
They entered without diplomatic negotiations between the United States and Turkey. Not, indeed, till ten years after American missionaries had begun work in Turkey was the first treaty between the United States and that country concluded. Previous to that time the missionaries were protected by England, which had treaties with the Ottoman government conceding extra-territorial rights to all British subjects. The Sublime Porte did not seem to recognize any difference between an English subject and an American citizen for all were “Frank Christians” to him, hence the protection afforded was ample.
It cannot be predicted as in the case of most countries how many and what ordinary international rights will be conceded to foreigners by the Ottoman government. Rights in Turkey are based not upon any principle of international law usually prevailing between Christian nations but upon special treaties which bear the name of “Capitulations” and “Concessions.” Intercourse of the Christian world with Mohammedan countries does not proceed according to the law of [Pg 242] nations. International law as practised by the civilized nations of Christendom is an outgrowth from the communion of ideas existing between them and rests upon a common conception of justice and right. Between the Mohammedans and the Christian nations of Europe and America there exists no such common idea or principle from which could result a true international law. Relations one with the other have, therefore, to be regulated by special “capitulation” or “concession” granted by the ruler of the Mohammedan country.
For this reason, even to the present time, the law of nations as known and practised throughout Christendom has not been applied in the relations existing between Turkey and the Christian Powers. But ever since the Sublime Porte, under stress of circumstances, began to abandon most reluctantly and by slow degrees its ancient usages towards other nations, and imperfectly to adopt those of Christendom, its rule of international conduct has gradually approached that of Europe.
A capitulation on the part of the Turkish empire is regarded by the sultan and his associates as a concession to foreigners, which they have a right at any time to annul or destroy if, in their judgment, such annulment or destruction is for their advantage. The sultan does not wish to consider a capitulation as imposing a perpetual obligation upon him or his officials. It is a privilege rendered foreign powers which can be withdrawn without notice and without explanation. Only in view of these facts can the treatment of missionaries and other foreigners by the officials of Turkey be understood.
The Porte has agreed at various times to exercise no preference towards any of the states with which it has treaties, but to make them all [Pg 243] share alike in the benefits of the provisions contained in the treaties it has entered into with each. In all its treaties of commerce since 1861, the expressed statement is, “That all the rights, privileges, or immunities which the Sublime Porte now grants or may hereafter grant to the subjects, vessels, commerce, or navigation of any other foreign power, the enjoyment of which it shall tolerate, shall be likewise accorded and the exercise of the enjoyment of the same shall be allowed, to the subjects, ships, commerce, and navigation of the other powers.”............