Mr. Hirsch to Mr Blaine.

No. 431.]

Sir: In my No. 407 of March 18, 1892, I informed the Department of the seizure of American property and closing of schools at the villages of Tenderiah, etc.

I have now received from the Rev. Mr. Easson his statement of the case, copy of which I have the honor to inclose. It will be noticed that an attempt at pretended legal proceedings was made in the ease of the Tenderiah property, but I doubt if the Sublime Porte even will claim them to be such legal proceedings as are by the law and the treaties contemplated.

I have not yet received any reply from the Porte to the note above-mentioned, but shall urge the matter immediately after the Barian festival.

I have, etc.,

Solomon Hirsch.
[Page 559]
[Inclosure in No. 431.]

Mr. Easson to Mr. Hirsch.

I have the honor to inform you that on the 24th of February, 1892, I sent you, through Dr. Dwight, a brief statement of the seizure of the American property in the village of Tenderiah, on October 13, 1891, and the attempt to seize the American property in the village of Aldainey, on November 2, 1891.

After failing to gain redress in the vilayet at Beirut, the case was referred by his excellency the Vali to the Sublime Porte, and Consul Bissinger requested me to lay the whole case before the legation; but, not having time to do this in fall by last mail, I will now try to do so.

  • First. The village of Tenderiah is situated about two and one-half hours or 8 miles northeast of Latakia. It is a Nuscairia village.
  • Second. The American mission established a school in this village in the year 1885. This school was continued without interruption until 1886, when our schools were all closed by order of the local government, and it was reopened after the agreement between our legation and the Sublime Porte, and continued open until closed by the present governor in November, 1890, and has been practically closed ever since, although our consul secured an order from the Vali for its reopening.
  • Third. As I wrote you through Dr. Dwight, the school was at first held in a native house rented by the mission; afterwards the people of the village gave us a house free of rent for the use of the teacher and school, and then in the year 1299, or 1883, we bought an old house in the edge of the village. The house was all in ruin, the owners, the Harbile brothers, three young men, having fled from the village for several reasons, one of which was fear of being taken into the Turkish army, as their names were not written on the Government books; hence, because they could not come to the city to give us the regular deed “Tabha.” we bought the ruined house, as is usual in country places, by private sale, the owners giving us a paper written by the Moslem Aga, for whom they were farming at the time. This paper bears the name of four witnesses, two of whom were the civil chiefs or Muhtars of the village of Tenderiah. This paper is called. (No. 1 is a copy of this). We took possession and built three rooms. The property was sold to me and two of my associates. We have occupied this place for the past eight or nine years without any complaint being made either by the former owners or the Government.
  • Fourth. About September 1, 1891, I was informed that steps were being taken to get the former owners to bring in a complaint against us for taking their property in their absence and building upon it and asking for a restoration of their property. I did not pay any attention to this, for we felt sure that when the charge was made we could prove that we had bought the property and paid for it; also we thought the men could not dare to come to the city for the reason we have given above.
  • Fifth. The Governor Zea Bey opened the way for them, for he not only promised them a restoration of their property but freedom from soldier duty if they would come and make the charge.
  • Sixth. They came and put in their complaint as above stated and demanded restoration of their property. The mutessarif sent the charge to the court and commanded that it be granted, and as not a member of the court dared to disobey him the case passed the court and the order was given October 13 to the chief of the village to take the key from his brother, who was our teacher and had charge of the property. This was done, and on October 14 the property was given to the Harbile brothers, and they took possession of the mission buildings, and there they are still. During all this robbery we were never notified of the complaint nor asked to come and defend our rights.
  • Seventh. We felt that as it was the mutessarif and his court that had taken our property from us and given it to the others, an appeal to them would be of no use, and so I immediately sent a telegram to his excellency the vali of Beirut, charging the mutessarif Zea Bey with arbitrary abuse of power, and ask for an order for the immediate restoration of our property (see paper No. 2). This I did on October 15, 1891, and on the 16th I wrote his excellency a fuller statement of the case (see paper No. 3).

Our Consul Bissinger took up the case unofficially and rendered us all the assistance in his power, but he could not get the vali to send the order for the restoration of our property, but because of the pressure from the consul he sent a commissioner to Latakia to investigate the matter and report.

This commissioner came to Latakia, sent for one of the Harbile brothers, asked him a few questions, stayed a few days, and returned to Beirut. He completely ignored our side of the question. After considering this report “the administrative council” at Beirut rendered the following decision:

“As the report of the commissioner shows that there is another claimant to the property in question, the respective rights of the two claimants can only be decided in court.”

[Page 560]

By this they meant to bring your charge against the former owners in the court at Latakia and let that court decide to whom the property belongs. This we refuse to do, we say as we have been in possession of the property for nearly nine years the property must first be restored to us, as the Government had no right to take it from us without trial, and then we are ready to meet any complaint the former owners see fit to make against us, and if the case is gained by them, not in Latakia, but in the highest court of the empire, we will withdraw our claim to the property.

I hope your honor understands our position, for we feel this is the only correct and just view to take of the ease.

We wish an immediate and unconditional surrender of our property.

Our second case is as follows:

It may be called an attempt to seize the American property in the village of Aldainey; this village is the Kai-ma-kamizet of Sahysum, in the district of the Mahailbey.

The school at Aldainey was established in the year of 1868 by the American mission. The land was bought in 1870, and two rooms built for the teacher and school. It was bought and held at first in the name of one of our native teachers, Yakah Juranlini, but after the acceptance of the protocol by our Government the title was transferred to the names of the resident missionaries, a large room was added in. 1875, and the deed or “tabbo “was taken out in 1293 or 1877, an upper room and stable was added in 1884 for the personal use of the missionaries.

Oar overseer of schools, a licentiate, lives here, also his eldest son, who is teacher of the school.

Our building here has been the lodging place of the Kai-ma-kams, and in fact of all the officials of the district where business called them to the place, so you see the building was not put up in secret nor the school carried on in an underhand way, but by the knowledge and approval of many of the local governors; yet, on November 2, 1891, the recording scribe of the mutessarif went to Aldainey with an order from the mutessarif to put our teachers out of the house and send them away from the village, and restore or give the house and lot to the Haifa family, the original owners of the land.

This scribe finding so large a family gave them ten days to leave the place.

On November 5 a second complaint was sent by me to his excellency the vali, by telegram (see paper No. 4), I also sent a copy to Consul Bissinger. The energetic protests of our consul brought a telegram from the vali to the mutessarif stopping the execution of this order, but I understand the governor has not dropped the case, for I have been told by good authority that the mutessarif has since had two papers prepared and sent to the Kai-ma-kam of Sahyoun, demanding that one of these papers be signed and sealed by the civil chiefs of Aldainey and the other by the Haifa family, the original owners of the land purchased by him.

The substance of the first paper is as follows:

“We the undersigned, civil chiefs of Aldainey, do testify that the Americans never bought the land upon which their buildings stand from the Haifa family, but took it by force, that their teacher is a seditious fellow, and is doing all in his power to lead our children away from the true Moslem religion,” etc.

The chiefs, especially one, a young man, at first refused to sign the paper. He said it was not true, for he knew that the Americans did buy the land, for his father’s name and seal were on the original papers in their possession, adding, “How can I put my seal against that of my dead father?” But, under threats, he, with the others, signed and sealed the document.

The second paper was about as follows:

“We, the owners of the land upon which the Americans have built our village, do declare that we never sold them the land, but that they came and took our land and built upon it. At that time there was no one to look after our rights, but now, seeing we have a governor who cares for us and will help us, we ask that these teachers be sent away from our village and our property restored to us,” etc. (Signed) Haifa family.

This family did not wish to put their names to this paper, and said, “Suppose we say we did not sell the land, we can not claim that we put up those buildings, and perhaps the Americans will demand the price of them from us, we have nothing to pay,” etc. Still, they were compelled to sign and seal this document.

Where these false papers are, and what Zea Bey intends to do with them, I do not know.

I send you this to show that these claims to our property do not come from these poor people with the promptings and, we may say, force the government here. This will also show you to what lies Zea Bey will stoop in order to get possession of our property.

As I wrote to our consul I write to you, this is not a case of a Turkish subject interfering with our rights, but the local Turkish government itself breaking the agreement made in the protocol with our Government. Our Government made an [Page 561] agreement with the Turkish Government, and the Turkish Government is not living up to its part of the agreement, hence I think that although this is a case of property, yet, under the circumstances, an official interference could be made by our consul and also by our legation.

I hope you will see the importance of this case, for we feel that if immediate and full restoration is not made of the property in Jendairia, the plans for taking the property at Aldainey will be carried out, and then Bahamra, and so on to the end.

We hardly feel that restoration will be sufficient now; we think that this mutessarif Zea Bey should be punished in some way for this arbitrary abuse of power, so that we may have peace in the future. His order, sent to Nucairia chiefs of Aldainey, is full of insulting words stirring up the people against us. He has also given orders to the chiefs of Jandairia and other villages that we are not to be allowed to enter the village.

We hope you will not only be able to secure us our property rights, but our rights to go about our work unmolested. We think at the very least you ought to require the removal of this mutessarif.

Please come to our aid.

I am, etc.,

Henry Eason,
American Missionary, Latakia, Syria.