File No. 381.81F47/4.

The American Minister to the Secretary of State.

No. 257.]

Sir: I have the honor herewith to enclose copies of the two letters from Mr. J. M. Macleod, the British Consul at Fez, with reference to the case of Mr. Joseph E. Cazes’ Semsar No. 7, Mohamed Ben Lehsen El Filaly, and also to enclose translation of the letter of thanks1 of the French Consul at Fez. While awaiting the reply of the Department to my cable of the 18th instant with regard to this subject, I deem it wise that the enclosed correspondence may be on its way for the Department’s information.

From my acquaintance with Mr. Macleod, I feel that our Government is most fortunate in this emergency in having the benefit of his years of experience and familiarity with conditions in the interior of Morocco, and of his very calm judgment of events there.

I have [etc.]

Fred W. Carpenter.
[Inclosures.]

The British Consul at Fez to the American Minister at Tangier.

[Summary of the two letters referred to.]

The British Consul, Mr. J. M. Macleod, writes on May 8, 1912, to Mr. Fred W. Carpenter, the American Minister at Tangier, an account of the participation of an American protégé in the fighting at Fez between the French and the Moorish mutineers. This American protégé is Sid El Hadj Mohammed Ben Lehsen El Filaly, who is the Semsar of Mr. Joseph Cazes. During an attack on the Kasbah Filala he and some twenty-five of his friends rescued five men of a French detachment, in the course of which five of Filaly’s friends were killed. The rescued French soldiers were taken by Filaly to the Kasbah Filala, where he housed and fed them. Filaly then went to the French Minister and reported the occurrence, and was warmly thanked by the Minister for his services. The same evening Filaly and his friends escorted the rescued soldiers to the quarter of the Consulates. At the request of the French Chief Intelligence Officer, Commandant de Lamothe, they also brought in the bodies of nine French soldiers, for which the Commandant thanked them.

Filaly has also been most generous in supplying food, bedding, etc., for the distressed Jews.

The British Consul reports these incidents feeling sure it will gratify the American Minister to learn of the brave and humane conduct of the American protégé.

[Page 988]

In the second letter, dated May 13 and 14, Mr. Macleod adds the following further particulars.

The French soldiers now say that, although it is true that they were sheltered at the Kasbah Filala, it was not till later that the American protégé, Filaly, assisted them; that at the beginning of the fight they were fired upon by the mutineers, who had been brought to the scene by the inhabitants of that very Kasbah Filala.

The American protégé denied this statement. Later, on May 11, he sent a message to the British Consul saying he had been arrested by the French authorities. The Consul sent Filaly’s certificate of American protection to the French Military Intelligence Bureau and a letter to the effect that the Bureau was probably not aware of Filaly’s being an American protégé.

The French officer in Charge replied that they could arrest and interrogate whomsoever they pleased, and threw back to the messenger the copy of the certificate.

However, Filaly later appeared at the British Consulate, to say that he had been released.

But on May 12 Filaly’s servant came in great alarm to say that his master was being thrashed by an officer at the French Bureau, and while he was talking Filaly himself appeared, in a most terrified state, saying that Lieutenant Arnaud of the Bureau had come to the Kasbah Filala and, cursing him, beat him over the head with his riding-whip.

The British Consul thereupon went with Filaly to M. Gaillard, the French Consul, who, although deprecating the beating, declared that Filaly was a French protégé. But M. Gaillard, after a visit to the Bureau, called for the protection-list, struck off Filaly’s name and sent him away. Filaly implored the British Consul to make sure that he would not be in further danger; whereupon the Consul called on the French Minister and related the whole affair, with special emphasis on the lieutenant’s conduct, saying that the Minister “would surely agree that curses and riding-whips were not mentioned amongst the powers which General Moinier, when proclaiming a ‘state of siege’ at Fez, had claimed the use of by the Military.” The Minister promised to call General Moinier’s attention to the lieutenant’s behavior.

After his return to the Consulate the French Vice Consul called to explain and apologize, and it was agreed that El Filaly should remain at the British Consulate, where he then was, until the conclusion of the inquiry into El Filaly’s affiliations and his acts during the attack on the Kasbah Filala. Later, Commandant de Lamothe informed the Consul that if this inquiry should implicate Filaly and a court martial should be ordered, an order would be issued for his arrest and the Consul would be asked to give him up. To this the Consul replied that, whatever the accusations against him, Filaly was an American-protected person, triable only by an American tribunal. Commandant de Lamothe answered “that as there was a state of war, and as a state of siege had been proclaimed, even though only on the 25th April—and the alleged offenses were committed on the 18th April—the French Court Martial alone had jurisdiction.”

“I answered (writes Mr. Macleod) that no foreign consul here had recognized such a right, and that even were such right established it would be beyond my competence to surrender any British subject or protégé without instructions from my superiors to that effect, and still more to surrender, of my own discretion, a foreign—in this case an American—protégé, American interests being, for the time, in my charge.”

Commandant de Lamothe replied that he did not anticipate any steps to arrest Filaly while in the British Consulate, which he understood was regarded as British soil, and added his warm acknowledgment of the courtesy Mr. Macleod had always shown the French authorities.

On May 14 Mr. Macleod called upon the French Minister, who said that the inquiry would show the Court Martial to have jurisdiction, but that he quite saw how the Consul could not surrender the accused without direction to that effect from the American Minister.

The letter ends as follows:

“I would beg, in conclusion, to point out how very serious the accusations are. Should a trial be ordered and the accused fail to clear himself he would be liable to be sentenced to death, and, obviously, recent events at Fez have not been of a nature to render a dispassionate trial by French Court Martial easy to carry out.

“Personally—from many years’ acquaintance with him—and from what I have always heard of him from others, it would take much more and weightier [Page 989] evidence that I have yet heard to convince me that Hadj Mohammed Lehsen was capable of such odious conduct as the Tirailleurs have imputed to him.

“You will have observed of course that the offences alleged were committed on Wednesday 18 April, about dawn, that since noon on the 17th the Consulates quarter had been isolated and was in a state of self-defence, owing to the outbreak of the revolt, and consequently there had been no opportunity to communicate any advice to protégés as to the attitude they should observe. My advice to our British people and others applying to me, was, as soon as I could send it, (and is still) to observe the most rigid neutrality, leaving the French and French authorities and the rebels to fight out their quarrel by themselves. Otherwise, whenever French or Moorish soldiers or the like, were at fault, they would be apt to seek to clear themselves by blaming somebody else. This advice, of course, was not to preclude their sheltering any foreigners—noncombatants or combatants—or Jews in distress, but only referred to the operations of the French and Moorish Authorities.

J. M. Macleod.
  1. Not printed.