were delivered, and every feasible step was taken to prove that the feelings of Christian England were outraged at the merciless slaughter of so many thousand Armenians. Surely, no greater or more influential and representative meeting was ever held than that which took place at the St. James's Hall last year in May! Yet, after the lapse of fifteen months, over five thousand Christians are butchered by orders of the Sultan within a stone's-throw of his fastness, Yildiz, and actually within sight of some representatives of the European Powers. Can history furnish a greater outrage upon the honour of the civilised human community?

With regard to the St. James's Hall meeting, I venture here to state briefly that it is my firm conviction that (1) had the speakers refrained from attacking the Muhammadan faith; (2) had they expressed the desire for the introduction of general reform in Turkey (both to Christians and non-Christians alike); (3) had a formal resolution been passed appealing to the other Powers to support Great Britain in taking immediate measures to compel the Sultan to carry out those reforms-long ere now the desired end would have been attained. This would have contributed, in a great measure, to lubricate much of that friction which has since existed between Great Britain and the Powers over the Turkish Question. It would have helped to allay the discontent of the Muhammadans and brought about peace and contentment throughout Turkish dominion. That meeting, with all its subsequent appendages, had a baneful effect! It increased the madness and fury of the bloodthirsty Sultan, roused the suspicion of foreign politicians, and augmented the hostility of Russian statesmen to this country.

The question of imminent importance at present is to consider the manner in which this complex problem can be solved. Affairs have now reached so acute a stage that unless some speedy solution be found a disastrous European war is inevitable. It must be evident to all that the persecuted suffering subjects of the Sultan are determined to maintain their present attitude, and will not rest until they get the much-needed reforms. The voice of the leaders of the reform movement has had a telling effect. Committees have sprung up in every part of the Turkish Empire. Some of these are absolutely revolutionary, as has been proved; but their action was independent of the leaders of the Central Committee at Paris. The power of the latter has grown to enormous dimensions, and I have the best authority for stating that these have the support of the bulk of the Turkish Army officers. Indeed, with the exception of a small minority (who surround the Sultan), every inhabitant of the Empire secretly supports the league of reform.

The only solution of the difficulty-the only means of checking the flow of bloodshed in perturbed Turkey-is the immediate deposition of Abdul Hamid! In this idea the Press and public of this

country are unanimous. On the other hand, no practical suggestion has been offered as to the manner of procedure. It is true some have advocated that England should, single-handed if needs be, effect the dethronement. Such a step without some understanding with Russia would be fraught with danger. I do not mean that this country in reality need fear any active opposition on the part of Russia or of the other European Powers. The Government of the Tzar knows right well that, by supporting Abdul Hamid actively against the will of the whole nation, Russia would defeat her own ends and jeopardise her policy in appearing as the champion of Turkey. The danger would really emanate from the people of the country themselves-I refer to the Muhammadan population. Thesealthough they have been equally the victims of misrule, and are in reality anxious to terminate the existing régime-would resent the active intervention of England, which they would regard as made on behalf of the Armenians and Christians alone. Unless these doubts be dissipated they would resort to arms, and—though powerless to withstand the power of Great Britain-they would avenge themselves upon the hapless Christians. I repeat what I have often said before, that it is much to be regretted that this country should have so strenuously striven to obtain redress for the Armenian sufferers, with such total disregard of the condition of the non-Christians of Turkey. But this may yet be amended. I rejoice at the fact that Mr. Gladstone has latterly in one of his letters stated that it is not the Muhammadans who are to blame, but the Sultan. It would be beneficial if his lead were to be followed by others who have waged an incessant war against the creed of Islam.

The time has arrived when the Young Turkey party should be fully recognised by the European Powers. Without their support, direct or indirect, nothing can be effectually or peaceably done. They, on the other hand, should have some countenance from one or more of the European Powers, so that when the hour arrives for them (especially those at Constantinople) to openly proclaim themselves opponents of the present régime, they may do so securely and effectively. They would, moreover, take the necessary means to ensure the fulfilment of reforms by Abdul Hamid's successor.

The deposition of Abdul Hamid could be effected in a single night without the shedding of one drop of blood; for should it be felt that Europe would even only stand neutral the whole nation would openly rise, and the Sheikh-ul-Islam, the chief Turkish Muhammadan dignitary, himself would be at their head and readily grant the necessary fetwah for his deposition. In this connection I may add that, according to Muhammadan law, the edict of a few priests of Islam is all that is needed to dethrone the Kaliph and appoint a successor. Such was the case with the four former Sovereigns of Turkey who have been deposed during this century.

It is somewhat strange that in all that has been said regarding the deposition of the Sultan no mention has been made of his possible successor, and no reference made to the possible condition of the country after the event. Does this not show a heedless disregard of the future-with all its possible complications? Does it not show the irresponsible ignorance of those who would at any cost have their country plunged in a hazardous situation?

It is both amusing and painful to reflect upon the conduct of a person who, while labouring under mortal fear and in imminent danger, seeks to dispel from his mind the inevitable evil by thinking of some fantastic good. Such has been the case with some of the leading men in this country over the Eastern Question.' At the time of the appearance in this Review of my article in May 1895, the editors of two leading London morning papers expostulated with me for having so strongly shown the real condition of Turkey, intimating 'that such exposures may lead to the re-opening of the Eastern Question, which is most undesirable at present.' This wilful blindness is almost incomprehensible, and I even venture to say that its consequences are as disastrous as those of the conduct of people who imagine they see what does not exist. The conduct alike of those who ignore a fact and of those who exaggerate it is reprehensible.

I trust that I may be pardoned for referring to my past writings in this Review, but it may somewhat serve to emphasise what I feel it my duty now to say. As far back as May 1895 I declared that the persecuted suffering subjects of Turkey have at last realised that they must no longer hope for succour from Europe, and that they are determined to endure their sufferings no longer; that they were resolved by themselves, unaided, to fight for liberty or die in the struggle. And this statement has since been fully realised. Macedonia, Crete, Mount Lebanon, and again the Armenians, have risen in arms, and many thousands in truth have died in the struggle.

The British nation and its Government have repeatedly been accused of seeking self-benefit at whatever sacrifice it may entail to others, and that self-considerations alone for the purposes of national aggrandisement sway the mind of public men in this country. There may be some amount of truth in the indictment. On the other hand, can the other Christian nations of Europe plead guiltless of the crime of aiding and abetting the shedding of the blood of thousands upon thousands of innocent lives in Turkey at the close of the nineteenth century? Should not France, once the mighty champion of Christendom, with all its historic chivalry, bow its head in shame for helping to support a cold-blooded tyrant upon his throne? And how can Russia-the avowed enemy, until within a year or so ago, of Turkey and of all oppressors of Christians-reconcile her former attitude with her present conduct in giving encouragement to that worthless

craven who has during his reign caused more suffering to his subjects than all his predecessors put together.

In conclusion I will briefly summarise the opinions of one of the most influential leaders of the Young Turkey Party and the chief editor of La Jeune Turquie, of Paris, as expressed to me in a conversation a few days ago. He said:

Present affairs in Turkey are replete with danger-not only as regards that Empire, but as threatening the peace of the world. The danger does not arise so much from the disturbances in the country as from the attitude of the Powers in connection therewith. Their apathy and contentment with diplomatic remonstrances (instead of taking decisive steps) have made affairs much worse than they would have been. It was thought that the matter would blow over. Mere protests and threats had no effect upon the Sultan, who has become well acquainted with 'European representations.' But things now have gone beyond all the arts of diplomacy. Further disturbance and massacres are inevitable! These sparks in Turkey will cause a European conflagration, the result of which God alone knows. The Muhammadans are wrongly accused of fanaticism. The idea is erroneous. They likewise cry out for reforms and are sick of the present Sultan. Moreover Muhammadans are always ready to submit to superior power, as is the case in India, Algeria, Egypt, and other places.

As to the Sultan, he is possessed of intelligence, but he is in reality insane-and who would not be so after twenty years' imprisonment at his palace, surrounded by adventurers and liars, knowing only what he is told? There is only one way to save Turkey, and save Europe thereby from a fruitless war; and that is by the deposition of Abdul Hamid. Why should not Queen Victoria, for instance, ask the Tzar, as a humane act, to agree to the deposition, for the sake of saving the heartless massacre of thousands of innocent helpless people? Such a step would be hailed with acclamation throughout the civilised world, no less than by the people throughout Turkey.

The above is, with some reserve, what was said. I can only add, from my intimate knowledge of the forces at the disposal of and employed by awakened Turkey,' that nothing but the speedy deposition of Abdul Hamid can possibly remove the danger which now threatens all the subjects of Turkey with destruction and Europe with a disastrous war.

H. ANTHONY SALMONÉ.

V

BY THE RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE

THE foregoing articles, with which I have become acquainted through the kindness of the Editor, appear to me likely to attract the public attention, not only by ability and integrity, but by the remarkable diversity in the points of view from which the several authors approach the discussion, and the not less remarkable decision with which they arrive at a common conclusion: that conclusion being, that the situation' in the East is intolerable, and that action with a view to a remedy has become indispensable, and ought not to be delayed.

It may be worth while to remark that that situation, besides being intolerable, is unexampled. It is not without example that the Great Assassin, now Sultan of Turkey, should have defied all Europe: but on two occasions when he made the attempt, in 1876-7, and in 1880, it cost him the severance of fourteen millions of people from his Empire, whereas his daring has now effected this defiance, up to the present point, with absolute impunity, and with triumphant success. In a witty and pungent sarcasm, Dean Swift set forth that, when ten men well armed enter into conflict with one man in his shirt, the man in the shirt is nearly sure to be beaten. In the present case, not indeed ten but six men well armed have fought with one man in his shirt, and that a very ragged one, but the man in the shirt has thus far been victorious, and has exhibited his consciousness of victory by the periodical repetition of his crimes now blazoned throughout the world.

Nor (to do the six men justice) has this been because they were insensible to the enormity of the offences. On the contrary, though we do not know all, yet it has become known even to us on the outside of all charmed circles, through channels which if accidental are authentic, that a remedy the strongest and most direct of all has been deliberately proposed and variously advanced in their deliberations, and has only failed to take effect through certain reciprocal jealousies, independent of the merits of this particular controversy before us. Now it may be laid down as a general rule that the failure