“About noon (on the 26th of August, 1896) a band of Armenians, most of them from Russia, entered the Ottoman Bank, with arms and dynamite, took the employees prisoners and barricaded themselves in the building, with threat that, unless the ambassadors secure a pledge from the sultan of certain reforms, they would blow up the bank with dynamite. To finish with this part of the story, soldiers soon surrounded the bank, and negotiations began with the captors which in the evening resulted in their being permitted to leave the bank, go on board the yacht of the chief manager and leave the country unmolested.“Who originated this plot I do not know, but it is certain that the Turkish government knew all about it, many days before, even to the exact time when the bank was to be entered, and the minister of police had made elaborate arrangements,not to arrest these men or prevent the attack on the bank, but to facilitate it and make it the occasion of a massacre of the Armenian population of the city. This was to be the crown of all the massacres of the year, one worthy of the capital and the seat of the sultan, a final defiance to the Christian world. Not many minutes after the attack on the bank, the band of Turks, who had been organized by the minister of police in Stamboul and Galata, commenced the work of killing every Armenian they couldfind. They were protected by large bodies of troops, who in some cases took part in the slaughter. Through Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and Thursday night the massacre went on unchecked. An open telegram was sent by the ambassadors to the sultan Thursday night, which perhaps influenced him to give orders to stop the massacre, and not many were murdered on Friday. I do not care to enter at all into the horrible details of this massacre of someten thousandArmenians.“The massacre of the Armenians came to an end on Friday, ... but the persecution of them which went on for months was worse than the massacre. The business was destroyed, they plundered and blackmailed without mercy, they were hunted like wild beasts, they were imprisoned, tortured, killed, deported, fled the country, until the Armenian population of the city was reduced by someseventy-five thousands, mostly men, including those massacred.... The poverty and distress of those left alive in Constantinople was often heartrending, and many women and children died of slow starvation.“Sir Michael Herbert, the Britishcharge d’affaires, and some of the ambassadors did what they could to stop the massacre of the Armenians, ... but the ‘concert of Europe’ did nothing. It accepted the situation. The Emperor of Germany went farther. He sent a special embassy to present to the sultan a portrait of his family as a token of his esteem.”[148]
“About noon (on the 26th of August, 1896) a band of Armenians, most of them from Russia, entered the Ottoman Bank, with arms and dynamite, took the employees prisoners and barricaded themselves in the building, with threat that, unless the ambassadors secure a pledge from the sultan of certain reforms, they would blow up the bank with dynamite. To finish with this part of the story, soldiers soon surrounded the bank, and negotiations began with the captors which in the evening resulted in their being permitted to leave the bank, go on board the yacht of the chief manager and leave the country unmolested.
“Who originated this plot I do not know, but it is certain that the Turkish government knew all about it, many days before, even to the exact time when the bank was to be entered, and the minister of police had made elaborate arrangements,not to arrest these men or prevent the attack on the bank, but to facilitate it and make it the occasion of a massacre of the Armenian population of the city. This was to be the crown of all the massacres of the year, one worthy of the capital and the seat of the sultan, a final defiance to the Christian world. Not many minutes after the attack on the bank, the band of Turks, who had been organized by the minister of police in Stamboul and Galata, commenced the work of killing every Armenian they couldfind. They were protected by large bodies of troops, who in some cases took part in the slaughter. Through Wednesday, Wednesday night, Thursday, and Thursday night the massacre went on unchecked. An open telegram was sent by the ambassadors to the sultan Thursday night, which perhaps influenced him to give orders to stop the massacre, and not many were murdered on Friday. I do not care to enter at all into the horrible details of this massacre of someten thousandArmenians.
“The massacre of the Armenians came to an end on Friday, ... but the persecution of them which went on for months was worse than the massacre. The business was destroyed, they plundered and blackmailed without mercy, they were hunted like wild beasts, they were imprisoned, tortured, killed, deported, fled the country, until the Armenian population of the city was reduced by someseventy-five thousands, mostly men, including those massacred.... The poverty and distress of those left alive in Constantinople was often heartrending, and many women and children died of slow starvation.
“Sir Michael Herbert, the Britishcharge d’affaires, and some of the ambassadors did what they could to stop the massacre of the Armenians, ... but the ‘concert of Europe’ did nothing. It accepted the situation. The Emperor of Germany went farther. He sent a special embassy to present to the sultan a portrait of his family as a token of his esteem.”[148]
We would have thought it would have been better to give Sultan Hamid enough time to wash his hands of the blood of the Armenians before giving him the portrait of the imperial family. But the King of Prussia thought that Abdul Hamid needed a friend then more than any other time, and the world alsomay know that Emperor William II of Germany was the friend of the great assassin. We wonder whether congeniality is a condition of friendship among rulers as it is among individuals.
In his Guildhall speech, November 9, 1896, Lord Salisbury was heard again. He declared that England would adhere to the European concert, yet the veto of any one power, meant that the concert could not act, he also admitted that to act separately from the concert would bring about a war; England was not prepared for this, because her strength consisted in her navy, and no fleet in the world could “get over the mountains of Taurus to protect the Armenians.” Thus the European Powers agreed to disagree to force the sultan to be truthful and fulfill his promises of reform, or even to stop his cruel work of extermination of a nation. The result of this disagreement to coerce the sultan to act humanely, and the Powers hiding themselves behind the European concert, was to leave Abdul Hamid to do as he pleased. And he pleased thus: From Constantinople to Van, from the shores of the Black Sea to the shores of the Mediterranean, “with inexpressible cruelty 150,000 men, women, and children were killed, burned or buried alive, and yet Europe seemed powerless.”[149]Why was (or seemed) Europe powerless? Because the veto of any one power meant that theConcertcould not act. What power or powers did the vetoing? We have no desire to incriminate any power, for allare guilty. But the evidence, judging by the events past and present, strongly points to the power which has been in desperate love with the modern Jezebel, the only Mohammedan power, for a political wedlock. This political matrimony has been consummated in the autumn of 1914. But let us look back to the time of the courtship.
In 1888 German financiers secured concession from the sultan for a railroad in Asia Minor. And German colonists and expansionists “dreamed of linking the Baltic Sea with the Persian gulf and carrying the Teutonic empire across Asia.” Since then “the government had sedulously cultivated its influence over Turkey.” And shortly after the massacre of ten thousand Armenians in Constantinople, the kaiser, by a special embassy presented to the sultan the Imperial Family Portrait as a “token of esteem.”
FOOTNOTES:[141]Lepsius, “Armenia and Europe.” SeeThe New Armeniaof June 15, 1916, New York.[142]The Public Ledger(Philadelphia), Feb. 17, 1896, had the following editorial comment on a local Turkish official report: “What purports to be an official list of Turkish outrages in the Province of Harpoot and some of the neighboring villages, prepared by a local Turkish authority, is published. The total number killed is given as 39,234, and the number of destitute as 94,770. The account is somewhat mysterious, as it does not show for what purpose it was made, nor does the report state how a matter, usually so jealously guarded, came to be made public, but it isauthoritative, and the details are more sickening than the bare aggregate, as they show the number of persons burned to death; the number who perished from hunger and cold; the number of women outraged; the number of forcible conversions to Islam; the number forcibly married to Moslems, etc. It is a chapter more worthy of the Dark Ages than modern civilization, but modern civilization does not seem able to prevent its repetition at the pleasure of the Turk.”[143]Bliss, “Turkey and the Armenian Atrocities,” pp. 553-4.[144]Greene, “Leavening the Levant,” p. 36.[145]Report of Vice-Consul Fitzmaurice, Turkey, No. V., 1896.[146]Greene, “Leavening the Levant,” pp. 177-8.[147]Bryce, “Transcaucasia and Ararat,” p. 520, 4th edition.[148]Washburn, “Fifty Years in Constantinople,” pp. 245-9.[149]Andrews, “A History of All Nations,” Vol. XX, p. 341. Published by Lea Brothers and Co., Philadelphia.
[141]Lepsius, “Armenia and Europe.” SeeThe New Armeniaof June 15, 1916, New York.
[141]Lepsius, “Armenia and Europe.” SeeThe New Armeniaof June 15, 1916, New York.
[142]The Public Ledger(Philadelphia), Feb. 17, 1896, had the following editorial comment on a local Turkish official report: “What purports to be an official list of Turkish outrages in the Province of Harpoot and some of the neighboring villages, prepared by a local Turkish authority, is published. The total number killed is given as 39,234, and the number of destitute as 94,770. The account is somewhat mysterious, as it does not show for what purpose it was made, nor does the report state how a matter, usually so jealously guarded, came to be made public, but it isauthoritative, and the details are more sickening than the bare aggregate, as they show the number of persons burned to death; the number who perished from hunger and cold; the number of women outraged; the number of forcible conversions to Islam; the number forcibly married to Moslems, etc. It is a chapter more worthy of the Dark Ages than modern civilization, but modern civilization does not seem able to prevent its repetition at the pleasure of the Turk.”
[142]The Public Ledger(Philadelphia), Feb. 17, 1896, had the following editorial comment on a local Turkish official report: “What purports to be an official list of Turkish outrages in the Province of Harpoot and some of the neighboring villages, prepared by a local Turkish authority, is published. The total number killed is given as 39,234, and the number of destitute as 94,770. The account is somewhat mysterious, as it does not show for what purpose it was made, nor does the report state how a matter, usually so jealously guarded, came to be made public, but it isauthoritative, and the details are more sickening than the bare aggregate, as they show the number of persons burned to death; the number who perished from hunger and cold; the number of women outraged; the number of forcible conversions to Islam; the number forcibly married to Moslems, etc. It is a chapter more worthy of the Dark Ages than modern civilization, but modern civilization does not seem able to prevent its repetition at the pleasure of the Turk.”
[143]Bliss, “Turkey and the Armenian Atrocities,” pp. 553-4.
[143]Bliss, “Turkey and the Armenian Atrocities,” pp. 553-4.
[144]Greene, “Leavening the Levant,” p. 36.
[144]Greene, “Leavening the Levant,” p. 36.
[145]Report of Vice-Consul Fitzmaurice, Turkey, No. V., 1896.
[145]Report of Vice-Consul Fitzmaurice, Turkey, No. V., 1896.
[146]Greene, “Leavening the Levant,” pp. 177-8.
[146]Greene, “Leavening the Levant,” pp. 177-8.
[147]Bryce, “Transcaucasia and Ararat,” p. 520, 4th edition.
[147]Bryce, “Transcaucasia and Ararat,” p. 520, 4th edition.
[148]Washburn, “Fifty Years in Constantinople,” pp. 245-9.
[148]Washburn, “Fifty Years in Constantinople,” pp. 245-9.
[149]Andrews, “A History of All Nations,” Vol. XX, p. 341. Published by Lea Brothers and Co., Philadelphia.
[149]Andrews, “A History of All Nations,” Vol. XX, p. 341. Published by Lea Brothers and Co., Philadelphia.