686 



TURKEY. 



Pacha. The standing army is composed of, 

 first, the active force (nizam), each corps of 

 which is made up as follows : Infantry, 12,000 ; 

 cavalry, 2, 880; artillery, 1,536; pioneers, 1,500; 

 sappers and miners, 500. These last two are 

 taken from the surplus force of the Imperial 

 Guard. The sum total of all these corps brings 

 the active force up to 100,496 men. Second, 

 the reserve (redif\ containing the same num- 

 ber of men. Third, auxiliary troops from 

 Egypt and other provinces, 100,000 men. 

 Fourth, forces detached in Tripoli, Crete, etc., 1 

 and in garrisons, 21,200 effective men. Irreg- 

 ular troops, bashi-bazouks, Tartars of the Do- 

 broutcha, etc., 90,000. Total available force, 

 442,192 ; which could be swelled in case of a 

 popular war to a half or even three-quarters 

 of a million. Thus, in the present exigency, 

 the Pacha of Egypt, whose contingent included 

 in the above amount is only 20,000, has already 

 placed 50,000 troops and all his fleet at the 

 disposal of the Porte. 



The fleet, without counting that of the prov- 

 inces, consists of 185 vessels, among which are 

 several heavy iron-clads, carrying 2,370 guns. 

 The fleet is manned by 40,000 men, including 

 4,000 marines, and is in a high state of disci- 

 pline and effectiveness. 



The financial affairs of Turkey, under the 

 present administration, are in a satisfactory 

 state. Hitherto the rule has been an annual 

 deficit of from one to fourteen millions. The 

 result has been a national debt, which, at the 

 commencement of 1867, since which it has 

 been slightly diminished, was as follows : 

 Foreign debt, $167,448,508.80 ; domestic debt, 

 $167,199,978. Total, $334,648,486.80, or $7.95 

 per capita. The annual expenses of the Gov- 

 ernment, by the latest budget, were 3,266,931 

 purses, or $63,247,784.16, being $1.51 per 

 capita. 



In the beginning of 1869, the difficulties 

 between Turkey and Greece, on account of the 

 insurrection in Crete, had assumed so threat- 

 ening an appearance, that the great powers 

 hastened to settle it by a conference. This 

 conference met in Paris, for the first time, on 

 January 9th. Turkey had asked for a postpone- 

 ment of nine days, but, in consequence of com- 

 munications received from the French Govern- 

 ment, the Porte consented to waive objections. 

 The conference met under the presidency of 

 the Marquis de la Valette, the members con- 

 stituting it being the ambassadors and ministers 

 plenipotentiary of England, Prussia, Russia, 

 Austria, Italy, Turkey, and Greece. The points 

 agreed on as the bases of discussion were 1. 

 The Ottoman ultimatum. 2. The limitation of 

 the debates to the special difference between 

 Turkey and Greece. The plenipotentiaries 

 agreed on one point, that, if they could not 

 come to a settlement, the courts they represent 

 would engage to observe the strictest neutrality 

 between Turkey and Greece ; so that, should 

 war take place between those powers, Europe 

 would be simply a spectator. 



General Ignatieff asked the Porte to recall 

 Hobart Pacha from Syra, but his demand was 

 rejected on the ground that Hobart Pacha was 

 only blockading the Enosis, and not the port 

 of Syra. As the result of their deliberations, 

 all the plenipotentiaries, Turkey included, 

 agreed to a protocol, which was sent to Greece 

 through the president, the Marquis de la Va- 

 lette. Turkey agreed to withdraw her ulti- 

 matum if Greece would accept the conditions 

 proposed. With no single power to support 

 Greece, no other course seemed open to her 

 but to accept the settlement proposed, as she 

 would have had no chance in a war against 

 Turkey. The declaration of the Conference 

 (see GREECE) was delivered to the Government 

 at Athens, on January 28th, by Count Wa- 

 le w ski, who was also the bearer of an auto- 

 graph letter from the Emperor Napoleon to 

 King George, recommending a conciliatory 

 policy as the wisest course for Greece to 

 adopt. 



Under the pressure of the concerted action 

 of all the great powers in favor of Turkey, the 

 Cretan revolution died away. All the insur- 

 gent chiefs submitted, in February, to the 

 Turkish authority, and the island became tran- 

 quil. The Greek Patriarch addressed a pas- 

 toral to the Christians in Crete, urging them 

 to return to peaceful pursuits. In March, the 

 Porte reopened all the ports of Crete. 



A dispute arising between Turkey and Persia 

 about the frontier question, began to look 

 threatening. Midhat Pacha, one of the ablest 

 and most energetic of the Turkish governors, 

 was dispatched to Bagdad with full powers 

 and instructions to settle the difficulty by force 

 of arms, if necessary. Numerous reenforce- 

 ments of troops and artillery were sent to the 

 frontier. 



The approaching opening of the Suez Canal 

 gave rise to animosity between the Sultan and 

 the Viceroy of Egypt, the latter having sent 

 invitations on his own account to the Euro- 

 pean sovereigns. In June, the Porte sent 

 instructions to its ministers abroad, to protest 

 against those invitations by the Viceroy, saying 

 that such invitations should emanate from the 

 Sultan, as the suzerain of the Viceroy. The 

 Sultan, at the same time, declined, through his 

 Grand- Vizier, to be present at the opening of 

 the Suez Canal. Mustapha Fazil Pacha, the 

 Viceroy's brother and bitter enemy, was ap- 

 pointed to the ministry, and two refugee pachas 

 from Egypt were made members of the Grand 

 Council of the Sultan. The Sultan addressed 

 a letter to the Viceroy. Its tone was decidedly 

 dictatorial, and the Viceroy was very sharply 

 and peremptorily reminded of his powers and 

 functions. The Khedive returned a most con- 

 ciliatory and satisfactory reply. 



On August 31st, the Sultan's reply was sent 

 from Constantinople. It was conciliatory, and 

 reciprocated the sentiments expressed by the 

 Khedive, but, while giving full credit to the 

 latter's assurances of loyalty, it reiterates that 



