Gross own hand to the cancelling of my national allegiance that I should be made Nr. 10914. to appear to be a willing party to the severing of my connexion with the britannien. country of my birth." If this is sentiment, it is generous sentiment, which 19.okt. 189 1. seems to me to command sympathy, and which may be deferred to without, as it happens, any detriment to the public interest of the State. You might point out to President Krüger that the form of oath in use in the United States goes back to the days when this country still asserted the doctrine that British allegiance was indelible, and it was intended to checkmate the kind of man who was an American citizen on polling days or when there were vacancies in salaried offices to be filled, but re-asserted the status of a British subject when provost-marshals were "beating up" recruits and requisitioning transport, or when there was an United States blockade to be broken. Long before the present form of oath was adopted in the South African Republic, this country had abandoned its former doctrine, and therefore the reasons which may be assumed to have influenced the United States had at that time wholly ceased to operate; and there would therefore seem no reason why the South African Republic should adhere to a form of oath which, after all, is exceptional in its stringency, and differs from what is thought sufficient by this and many others of the leading countries of the world. The form of oath which is desired by the British subjects is usually spoken of as that in force in the Orange Free State. The form of oath and engagements in force in that State were elaborately dealt with in a judgment delivered in the Natal Newcastle Election Petition case on the 28th of November 1892. If the Judge in that case had before him all the documents material to his subject, it would seem to follow that the formality of an oath is only required from office-holders, and that private persons seeking the rights of burghership are merely required to give a written undertaking, which, however, is to the same. effect as the official oath-both being a simple engagement of fidelity to the State and obedience to its laws. I do not suggest that the engagement to be required by the South African Republic should be anything less solemn than an oath, but as regards its substance, you should represent that the adoption of a somewhat similar form of oath to that prevailing in the Orange Free State would be a graceful act on the part of the South African Republic, and you will not fail to point out that, simple as is the engagement required by the Free State, it was considered, in the case I have referred to, enough to convert a British subject who took it into a statutory alien. Nr. 10915. britannien. Die armenischen Unruhen 1895-1896*). Nr. 10915. GROSSBRITANNIEN. Der Minister des Auswärtigen an den Botschafter in Konstantinopel. Unterredung mit dem türkischen Botschafter über die armenische Angelegenheit. Foreign Office, March 28, 1895. Sir, || Rustem Pasha called upon me yesterday for the first time after his Gross- long illness, and spoke at some length concerning the Armenian question. 28. März 1895. He repeated to me what he had so often said before, that the difficulties respecting the Armenians were entirely caused by the action of revolutionary agents and Societies in this country by which they were encouraged. || I said that I could only repeat to his Excellency my opinion that, although there undoubtedly were some revolutionary agents at work, the causes were far more deepseated, and arose from the maladministration in Turkey itself. || His Excellency spoke with much bitterness of what he considered were the exaggerated and unfounded statements of the atrocities alleged to have been committed by the Turkish soldiers in the Sasun district. || I said that, without committing myself to a belief in the various statements which had appeared in the public press, I felt bound to tell him that information which had reached me, the authenticity of which I could not doubt, showed that there was only too much foundation for the belief that terrible atrocities had been perpetrated, and it was perfectly clear that it would be necessary when the inquiry was concluded that effective remedial measures should be introduced, and that security should be taken for the better administration of the country in future. | Rustem Pasha asked me upon what grounds we based our right to interfere in the internal affairs of Turkey. || I expressed some astonishment at this inquiry, as I said I thought he must be aware that, as *) Die folgenden Aktenstücke 10915-11058 sind entnommen den Blaubüchern Turkey 1 und 2 (1896), 7923 und 7926. Es sind vornehmlich die Verhandlungen der Grossmächte mit der Pforte und unter einander berücksichtigt, von den überaus zahlreichen Konsularberichten über die Vorgänge in Armenien sind nur die charakteristischsten aufgenommen. Red. Gross regards the Armenians, we had the most plain and undoubted right, based Nr. 10915. upon the Treaty of Berlin and the Cyprus Convention of 1878, and not only britannien. had we, in common with the other Powers, a right to interfere, but those 28. März 1895. Treaties laid upon us most serious obligations that we could not neglect. || I could not, I said, disguise from him that the state of affairs in Asia Minor was becoming more and more unsatisfactory. Reports reached us from our Consuls that increasing bitterness of feeling showed itself between the Christian and Mussulman populations; and I feared that, if this continued, it might give rise to serious events. Sir P. Currie had recently, under my instructions, brought before the Sultan the continued numerous arrests of Armenians in all parts of the country, their detention for long periods without trial, and, I regretted to say, in some cases, the cruel treatment to which they had been subjected in the prisons. || His Majesty had expressed his surprise at these statements, and, I was glad to say, had promised immediate inquiry into the grievances of the Armenians and the means of remedy. || I said I had also received with much satisfaction the announcement that the Armenian ecclesiastical prisoners, with the exception of those who had been guilty of murder or other grave offences, would be released, and I trusted that this indicated that the Sultan was becoming alive to the dangerous state of affairs. Kimberley. Nr. 10916. GROSSBRITANNIEN. - Der Botschafter in Konstantinopel an den Minister des Auswärtigen. Unterredung mit dem Sultan. Pera, March 27, 1895. Received April 1. Gross My Lord, On Thursday last, the 21st instant, I was invited to take Nr. 10916. "iftar" (the evening meal during Ramazan) at the Palace of Yildiz, and was britannien. subsequently received in private audience by the Sultan, who honoured me 27.Márz1895. with a long conversation of Armenian affairs. || His Imperial Majesty began by saying he had heard with much surprise that it was generally believed that large numbers of Armenians were in prison on political charges. As far as he knew, the only places where political disturbances had occurred and arrests been made were Yozgat, Caesarea and Tokat. He had, however, pardoned most of those implicated, and imagined that the present number of political prisoners was about 30, certainly not 700, as was represented. He was naturally inclined to clemency. He had pardoned men who had made attempts on his life, and had in the last few days issued orders for the release of all Armenian ecclesiastics imprisoned for political reasons. || I congratulated His Majesty on this wise measure, but said he was misinformed as to the number of Armenians in prison. The provincial authorities were in the habit of making wholesale arrests on utterly frivolous and baseless charges, and many persons remained in prison for long periods without knowing of what they were accused. The effect on public opinion was naturally deplorable. || His Majesty said he could not believe that such a state of things existed. Political arrests britannien. Nr. 10916. could only be made after political disturbances, and such disturbances, as he Gross- had already said, had only occurred in three towns. Neither could he believe 27. März 1895. that the authorities would allow Armenians to remain in prison without trial. Such a proceeding would be distinctly illegal. In spite of my reiterated statements that there was hardly a town in Asia Minor where the prison was not full of Armenians, His Majesty merely repeated that he wae lost in astonishment, and felt it was like a dream. || I then said I had that morning received an instruction from Her Majesty's Government to remonstrate against the arrests which were daily taking place, and handed to His Majesty a Turkish translation of an extract of your Lordship's despatch of the 16th March. " The Sultan read this document attentively, and again expressed his astonishment, saying that if such things occurred it was without his knowledge. He was convinced there was great exaggeration in the stories circulated by Armenians, and believed in England. He then asked what your Lordship meant by the expression "other offences". Naturally, Armenians must be punished for offences against common law. || I said that persons were often arrested for non-political offences on insufficient evidence, and detained in prison merely because they were Armenians. As an instance, I mentioned a case of which I had only heard that morning, though it had occurred a few years ago, in which the whole male population of an Armenian village in the Government of Van had been arrested because the bodies of two Kurds had been found in the neighbourhood. No evidence was ever produced against any of the men, yet they remained in prison for a long period, and some of them died there. His Majesty said that of course malefactors must be punished. The Turks could not sit with folded hands while the Armenians broke their heads, and the authorities must do their best to discover the guilty. He would, however, inquire into this case, and punish any official who should prove to have acted illegally. I then referred to the Armoudan prisoners, and specially to the case of Dr. Pashayan, which has recently been brought to my notice. I pointed out to His Imperial Majesty that these prisoners had been arrested two or three years ago: that they had been detained in prison without trial till December last, and that their case had not yet come before the Court of Cassation. The Sultan again expressed incredulity, but I assured him that reports of similar cases reached me almost daily from Her Majesty's Consular officers, who could have no object in making unfounded charges. In the face of these reports, it was impossible not to believe that the Armenians suffered from oppression and injustice. || His Majesty assured me that they had always been treated with clemency and justice by himself and his forefathers; but I replied that, while doing full justice to the humane intentions of the Ottoman Sovereigns, I feared that those intentions were not always executed by the provincial authorities. || The Sultan then said that of late years the Armenians had not behaved well, but that, unfortunately, the false or exaggerated state Gross ments they circulated met with full credence in England. He warned me that Nr. 10916. the present state of things would be fatal to the continuance of good relations britannien. between the two Powers. His Mussulman subjects could not remain indifferent 27. März1895, to the injuries they received at the hands of Armenians, encouraged and protected, as it seemed, by England. They were deeply affected by our hostility, and he himself, as a Mussulman, could not but resent the attitude of Her Majesty's Government. He desired me to let your Lordship know that it would be wel to contradict the false intelligence which appeared in the press, and to cease from protecting the Armenians. || I replied that public indignation in England had been aroused by these continual arrests of Armenians without cause. I believed that the release of the ecclesiastics would have a good effect, and I trusted that His Imperial Majesty would extend the measure to the other political prisoners. || The Sultan then recounted to me the recent incident at Tokat. According to his information, the Armenians began the disturbance in the bazaar: they then collected in the church and fired on the Moslems, twenty of whom were wounded, one Armenian being killed. Order had been restored with difficulty by the Military Commandant. He had commanded the Governor of Sivas to proceed to the spot, make an impartial inquiry, and punish the guilty. He then spoke at great length of his relations with the Armenian Patriarch, and of the complaints made by the latter. He had been urged not to confirm the election on account of the unwise utterances of the Patriarch when a Bishop, but had thought it better to forget the past, and had received his Beatitude in audience with every consideration, bidding him exhort his flock to loyalty to their Sovereign. Subsequently, he had sent to ask him what were the grievances of which the Armenians complained. || His Beatitude had replied that there were three:- || 1. That the Censor had tampered with the text of the Bible. || 2. That a chalice had been broken by soldiers. || 3. That some Armenians had been beaten in prison, though innocent of the crimes of which they were accused. || The Sultan said all good Moslems regarded the Bible as a sacred book, as well as the Koran, and it was highly improbable that any one would venture to alter the text; should he find any one had done so, he would "take him by the ear" and see he was properly punished.|| With regard to the desecration of the chalice, he said such vessels were generally kept in churches. How could soldiers get at them there? No doubt the sacred vessel had been broken by some drunken rascal. || If, however, there had been a disturbance in the church, and soldiers who had been called in to restore order had broken the chalice in the general confusion, the Armenians could not complain; such incidents were unavoidable. || As for the Armenians said to have been beaten in prison, His Majesty simply said the case was impossible. || "I am lenient as a Sovereign," he said, "and a humane man. I have abolished corporal punishment in my army, though it still exists in European countries. How is it possible that any one should be beaten in |