THE ARMENIAN AGITATION: A REPLY TO

"PEO

MR. STEVENSON, M.P.

EOPLE in this country who abuse the Turkish nation, and accuse it of every vice under the sun, would do well to leave off writing pamphlets and travel a little in Anatolia. In many things, writers who call themselves Christians might well take a lesson from the Turks in Asia Minor." These words of the late Captain Fred Burnaby, as he left the gates of Angora on his memorable ride through Asia Minor, would not unnaturally occur to any unbiassed reader of Mr. F. S. Stevenson's article upon "The Armenian Church, its History, and its Wrongs," which appeared in the August number of the NEW REVIEW. Mr. Stevenson writes upon the so-called Armenian Question in his capacity of President of the Anglo-Armenian Association. To him every Armenian is a patriot and every Turk is a tyrant, and he thinks little of raising the whole Eastern Question, now happily dormant, and embroiling this country with other Powers, in order to satisfy the body over which he presides. But a careful study of his assertions and his arguments will convince any well-informed person that Mr. Stevenson's allegations upon the present condition of Asia Minor are by no means accurate. Many of his statements are of the vaguest kind : in only two cases does he think fit to quote his authorities by name, and in both of these cases the source of his accusations is neither very recent nor very reliable. Mr. Clifford Lloyd, upon whose consular reports he bases his account of what he calls the "existing lawlessness," and who died in January, 1891, has quite as much to say in favour of the Turks as against them, while Mrs. Bishop's book, which is cited as another authority, is generally regarded, by those who know Asia Minor, as one of the most remarkable works of fiction which have appeared on that subject since the days of Herodotus. A careful study of Mr. Clifford Lloyd's reports will, besides, convince any unbiassed person that in his opinion all Armenians were not saints neither were all Mussulmans sinners. Mr. Hampson, his successor, who after a few months' stay in Asia Minor found out the truth, wrote to Sir William White on the 23rd May, 1891, that "a comparison of the present state of things with the old reports in the consular archives shows a considerable improvement in the Turkish administration during recent years." The Ottoman officials at Erzeroum, he adds, exhibit a greater appreciation of the country's requirements and a determination to maintain order. Writing a few months later, in

September of the same year, he speaks of the "perfect tranquillity" at Erzeroum, the "complete restoration of public confidence," and says that "the country is in a better and more settled condition than it has been since the war." (Blue-book, April, 1892, pp. 56, 57.)

Mr. Stevenson makes four main accusations against the Turkish Government. He complains of the "unchecked raids and exactions of the Kurds," and he specially indicates as the scene of their misdeeds the "vilayets of Van, Bitlis, and Erzeroum." He speaks with much indignation of the "tyranny and exactions of the Turkish officials themselves," and of the "want of protection" given to subjects of the Sultan. We have just seen that Mr. Hampson's report disposes of these reproaches hurled at the head of the Turkish Government. Mr. Stevenson tells also a piteous tale of unheard-of atrocities which, he says, were committed upon Armenian prisoners-how "torture has been added to the other horrors of a Turkish gaol," and how "live insects were inserted under the skin" of one prisoner "in order to extort false evidence." And fourthly, he describes with much detail how "attacks" have been made upon "the Christian religious bodies" throughout the country. He concludes by telling us what are the demands of the Armenians and the duty of Great Britain, and winds up with a comparison between the " recent occurrences at Angora" and the "Bulgarian horrors" of 1876. We will examine how far these sweeping charges are substantiated by facts.

Whenever there is a disturbance in the Asiatic vilayets partly inhabited by Armenians, the Kurds are represented by the detractors of the Porte as being at the bottom of it. Whenever there is a quarrel in Asia Minor the Kurds are alleged to be at fault. But the Kurds, as we shall presently see, are not the lawless bands of "village ruffians" that they are depicted. Partly for military purposes, in order that the Porte might have an efficient body of cavalry in time of war, partly for purposes of discipline, these hardy mountaineers have been incorporated into the regular army. Higher commands are held by Turkish superior officers, who are working hard to bring the Kurds under stricter discipline, and undeniable progress has already been achieved. This policy has had an excellent effect, and the disturbances of which Mr. Stevenson complains are nothing more than a petty quarrel near Bitlis, which was at once suppressed. It must also be borne in mind that several times Armenian bandits have been discovered under Kurdish garments, which they had put on not only in hope of escaping detec

tion, but also for the purpose of accusing Kurds of having committed the very outrages of which these Armenians were subsequently proved to have been guilty. This is amply demonstrated by the Blue-books. This is not all, as Armenians masquerading like Kurds were agents of revolutionary committees abroad, and it has been proved that under the impulse of an implacable vendetta (one of the characteristics of the Armenian people in Asia Minor) one Armenian chief of an Asiatic village actually hired a powerful chief of a neighbouring Kurdish village to exterminate the family of another Armenian chief who was his opponent. (Blue-book, Turkey, No. i, January, 1890, pp. 1-4 and 7-22.) The vendetta is further exemplified through the attempted murder of an Armenian merchant, belonging to a more moderate secret committee, by the secretary of another Armenian committee which promoted intrigue and disturbances. The perpetrator of the crime escaped to Russia. (Blue-book, Turkey, No. 1, April, 1892, pp. 75, 76.) Even those who are in no way friendly to the Ottoman Government have admitted the great improvements which have taken place in the very three districts which Mr. Stevenson selects for his special censure.

Colonel Chermside, writing in August, 1889, states that the "peacefulness of the country and the security of the roads, compared with the state of things eight or ten years ago, is astonishing." He comments upon the diminution of crimes of great violence, ridicules the charges of deliberate attempts to massacre the Armenians and carry off their daughters to Turkish harems, and specially notices the growing infrequency of Kurdish outrages. In one case, where some Kurds had maltreated a body of Armenians, he narrates how the Sultan had despatched a battalion of troops against the marauders, with the result that the guilty persons were arrested and brought to justice. (Blue-book on Turkey, No. 1 (1890), correspondence respecting the condition of the populations in Asiatic Turkey, pp. 17-21.) If this improvement was so marked in 1889, how much more so must it be in 1893? A still more recent Blue-book, published in April, 1892, gives further confirmation of the substantial progress made in Asia Minor. Sir William White and the British Consuls call attention to the prompt measures taken by the Turkish authorities to detect and punish outrages upon life and property. Where herds of cattle had been raided they have been restored to their rightful owners in almost every case (pp. 14, 26, 30, 54, 66). Mr. Devey, British Consul at Van, after protesting against the false reports of Turkish misrule which had been circulated in Europe and published in

a leading London paper, ridicules the idea that the local authorities were coerced by the Kurds. According to him, the mere sound of a trumpet or the sight of a uniform is enough to send a Kurdish aggressor back to his hills. (Idem, pp. 10-12.)

I am bound to say that the British Consuls, and especially Colonel Chermside and Mr. Devey, are exceedingly severe in their opinion of Armenian papers, and of English journals which lend their support to such publications, an opinion which was shared and expressed by Sir William White himself. (Blue-book, February, 1890, p. 23. Blue-book, April, 1892, pp. 10 and 58.)

The tyranny of the Turks is even less substantiated than the alleged outrages of the Kurds. Our old friends the Bashi-Bazouks, who have done such good service to certain English orators in so many antiTurkish agitations, are once more trotted out for the delectation of the British public. We are informed that a "large body of police and Bashi-Bazouks was sent to arrest men who had committed all sorts of outrages and who were supposed to be in hiding at Everek." These outrages are said to have occurred last February. But Mr. Stevenson is evidently unaware of the fact that there has not been. a single Bashi-Bazouk throughout the length and breadth of the Turkish Empire since the close of the last Russo-Turkish war! At that time they were disbanded and totally suppressed. Really, before English members of Parliament make accusations of this kind it would be well for them to take the time-honoured advice of the old Oxford tutor and "verify their references." We do not for a moment doubt Mr. Stevenson's good faith, but this conspicuous mistake shows that his information is anything but accurate. We almost feel inclined to say ab uno disce omnes, but the serious nature of his other charges demands a separate refutation in each case.

The "tortures" of the Armenian prisoners have filled a considerable space in the Armenian agitation. Mr. Stevenson manifestly accepts them as gospel; but as a matter of fact they are as imaginary as his Bashi-Bazouks. He is no doubt ignorant of the fact that torture is as extinct in Turkey as it is in England, and that not only has it been abolished in the Sultan's dominions, but in the present instance its existence has been denied by the very prisoners themselves. Abeddin Pasha, the Governor-General of Angora, an official whose kindness is well known in Asia Minor, recently reported to his Government that the prisoners had told their fellow-prisoners and even their warders that the

alleged "tortures," to which they had been subjected, were inventions intended for English ears. The official statement of the three prison doctors on this subject is remarkably precise. These medical gentlemen, whose report has been published, found their charges in excellent health. The prisoners, who never at any time amounted to more than four hundred, or exactly one-fifth of Mr. Stevenson's estimate, were healthy and well. With the exception of one who died from heart disease, there was no mortality, among them, and but a few cases of illness-none of them contagious-had occurred. As for the alleged cases of torture by putting live insects under the skin," they are completely devoid of all substantiation. A Turkish prison is supposed by some imaginative writers to be synonymous with everything that is horrible. But a gentleman who has personally inspected the prisons of Asia Minor informs us that the gaols of the country compare favourably with those of Europe, not for organisation, but for comfort, and also as regards the treatment of prisoners. They are allowed, for instance, to get their bedding and their food from outside, and cook the latter inside the prison; they are permitted the relaxations of conversation and tobacco, and their lot is better than that of many a pauper in a British workhouse. Of the rack, the thumbscrew, and the pincers there is not a vestige to be seen. We are, therefore, justified in saying that the "crucified man "of the Bulgarian agitation, who turned out on examination to be nothing more terrible than an ordinary scarecrow, may be well compared with this latest Armenian atrocity.

Mr. Stevenson's last indictment against the Turks is that of religious intolerance. H.I.M. the Sultan, who is a most enlightened Sovereign, completely free from religious prejudice and bigotry, and, besides, one of the most hard-working rulers, devotes the whole of his time to the welfare of his subjects, and studiously directs his attention to the improvement of the condition of his empire in all the branches of its vast administration. He has shown untiring energy in putting Turkish finance and the credit of the Ottoman Empire on a sound footing. It is also under the present reign that railways have been pushed to the interior of the country, an improvement which has already had the result of increasing to a great extent the area of cultivated land, especially in Asia Minor and the vilayet of Angora itself. Sultan Abdul Hamid II. can point to the record of his public and private acts in proof of his broad-minded treatment of religions other than his own. It was he who welcomed the Jews when they were