-unless we utterly mistake the temper of the country -be no bounds to the contempt with which a Ministry would be visited that thus set its sails to the gusty sentiment of the passing hour.'

This is the doctrine which the Pall Mall Gazette has preached, with great ability and consistency, all through the controversy on the Eastern Question. And I have no doubt that the Pall Mall Gazette represents, on this subject, an influential section of educated English opinion. Yet it is hard to believe that any considerable number of Englishmen and I fear I must add of English women-have realised the hideous immorality of the policy which they advocate. Translated into plain language, it means either that crime ceases to be crime when it subserves the interests of the British Empire, or that the British Government is justified in committing crimes the most monstrous in its irrepressible struggle for empire.' I say justified in committing, for qui facit per alium facit per se. In some cases to permit is to commit. But the policy recommended by the Pall Mall Gazette-that is, by a powerful section of English society-is not merely a policy of permitting wrong, but of upholding it. The case is this. It is frankly admitted, as a fact always known, that the Turks are abominably cruel in war, and corrupt in ways most revolting to Western civilisation.' The Bulgarian atrocities therefore, it is argued, brutal beyond conception' as they were, ought not to have taken us by surprise. Well-informed people always knew that these brutalities beyond conception' are quite in keeping with the character of the Turk and with the traditions of the Turkish Government. But considerations like these are, it seems, altogether irrelevant. It is of course very unfortunate that the Turk

6

is such a brute. Nevertheless, brute as he is, England must uphold the integrity and independence of his 'revolting' rule rather than risk any damage in the 'irrepressible struggle for empire.'

But if this doctrine is tenable, where are we to draw the line? It appears to me that, logically considered, the doctrine of the irrepressible struggle for empire' forbids us to draw any line at all. If, for the sake of selfish gain, we are bound to uphold a political system of which one of the ordinary characteristics is to indulge in brutality beyond conception,' we are clearly justified in indulging in these brutalities ourselves, whenever the alternative is the jeopardy of our interests in the 'irrepressible struggle for empire.' But if England would be justified in defending her interests, in the last resort, by brutalities like those of Batak, why not Turkey? Let it be granted that Midhat Pasha, who planned and ordered the Bulgarian atrocities, believed that he was thereby serving the interests of Turkey, and his conduct is triumphantly vindicated by the political logic of the Pall Mall Gazette.

Stripped of all disguise, this is the dismal conclusion in which we are landed by the advocates of British interests at any cost. I, for one, however, refuse to believe that it can ever be the interest of a great nation in the long run to uphold iniquity. But there is no need to discuss that question here, since it can easily be shown that in helping to liberate the Christian subjects of the Porte from their cruel bondage England will at the same time be strengthening the British Empire at the very point where it is supposed to be most vulnerable. There never was a case where philanthropy and policy had better reason for co-operating. This will appear as we proceed. But let us, first of all, endea

vour to take a sort of bird's eye view of the Turkish Empire as it is—its territory, and its various races and religions.

Territorial Divisions of Turkey.

The territorial possessions of Turkey are divided among the three continents of the Old World, and extend over an area of about 30,000 geographical square miles, lying between 48°-30° north latitude and 13° 30'-45° east longitude. This gives a coast line of 1,200 leagues bathed by seven seas: the Adriatic, the Mediterranean, the Archipelago, the Sea of Marmora, the Black Sea, the Red Sea, and the Persian Gulf.

The whole of European Turkey is called by the Turks Roumelia, or the country of the Romans, a name given in the middle ages to the Greeks of the Lower Empire. It is divided into a number of Vilayets or governments-general, as follows:

1. Adrianople, the ancient Thrace, which came into possession of the Turks in the year 1364, and became their second capital in Europe; the first being Gallipoli, taken in 1357.

2. The Vilayet of the Danube, corresponding to the ancient kingdom of Bulgaria, which was conquered by Sultan Bajazet I. in 1393. It was formed into a Vilayet of the Danube in 1864, having previously consisted of the three Eyalets of Silistria, Vidin, and Nish.

3. The Vilayet of Bosnia, including Bosnia and Turkish Croatia.

4. Herzegovina, which formed part of the Vilayet of Bosnia up to the end of 1875, when it was erected into a separate Vilayet.

5. Salonica.

6. Yanina (Epirus).

7. Monastir.

8. Scutari.

9. Djizaïr (the Isles), comprising all the islands of the Ottoman Archipelago from Samothracia to Rhodes, except Samos and Candia.

10. Crete, or Candia, which received in 1867 a separate constitution, which I believe has proved in practice to be little better than a sham.

self.

Constantinople forms a separate government of it

Turkey in Asia comprehends four great divisions. On the West Asia Minor, called by the Turks Anatolia, forms a vast peninsula, equal in extent to France, bounded on the north by the Black Sea, on the west by the Archipelago, on the south by the Mediterranean and part of the chain of the Taurus, and on the east by an imaginary line drawn from Trebizond to the Gulf of Alexandretta. This territory was gradually acquired by the Ottomans between the commencement of the 14th century and the conclusion of the 15th century, during which time they annexed successively the numerous principalities which had arisen on the ruins of the Seldjucidian empire.1

Turkey in Asia is divided into sixteen Vilayets, of which the following may deserve a passing mention for the sake of old associations:

Khondâvendkiar; comprising part of Bithynia, Phrygia, and Mysia, and having for its capital Broussa, the ancient Prusium. Conquered in 1326 by the Ottomans, it became their capital and the cradle of their power.

1 État Présent de l'Empire Ottoman. Par MM. A. Ubicini et Pavet de Courteille, p. 12. An excellent manual of reference.

Aidin; formed out of a part of Isauria, Lydia, Ionia, Caria, and Pisidia, and conquered by Mahomed II. in 1426.

Adana (Cilicia Petræa); subject for two centuries to the Turkoman dynasty of the Ramazan Oghli, it fell under the Ottoman yoke under Bajazet II. in 1481.

Konieh (Iconium); containing part of Isauria, Syria, Pamphylia, Silicia, Lycaonia, and Cappadocia. Till within the last few years this district was called Karamania, from Karaman, who obtained possession of it in the middle of the 13th century, and from whose descendants it was wrested in 1475 by Mahomed II.

The Vilayets of Angora and Sivas; formed of the ancient principality of Romhaneddin, which consisted of parts of Galatia and Cappadocia.

Trebizond; formed of the ancient provinces of Pontus and Colchis, and wrested in 1420 from David Comnenus by Mahomed II.

The Eastern division of Asiatic Turkey, comprising Turkish Armenia and Kurdistan, extends to the frontiers of Persia and Russia. Armenia, which fell with the Greek Empire of Trebizond under Ottoman rule, has been formed into the Vilayet of Ezroum. Kurdistan (now formed into the Vilayet of Diarbekir) is a mountainous district, peopled by nomadic and warlike tribes, nominally under the dominion of the Porte, but practically independent till 1837, when they were partially subdued by Hafiz Pasha, and more completely ten years later by the submission of their two Beys.

The third division of Asiatic Turkey is Syria, or Cham as it is called in the East. It extends from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf, and comprehendswith the Lebanon, which was erected in 1864 into a separate government-the Vilayets of Damascus (i.e.