tion treaty the person of William M. Tweed, the notorious politician of New York, who fled to Lisbon when his rascalities were discovered. He sought an asylum in Portugal, knowing that there was no extradition treaty between that government and the United States, but when his presence there was discovered, he was arrested and the authorities offered no objection to his removal to this country.

CHAPTER XVIII.

RELATIONS WITH EASTERN AND MEDITERRANEAN POWERS.

Turkey.

DURING the early years of this century American commerce in the Eastern Mediterranean was under the protection of what was known as the English Levant Company and no attempt was made to arrange commercial relations with Turkey on a treaty basis until 1817. From that time until 1830 various propositions were suggested for a treaty between the United States and the Ottoman Porte, but without success. In 1830, however, President Jackson appointed a commission for that purpose. This commission consisted of Commodore Biddle, who was stationed in the Mediterranean, David Offley, the consul at Smyrna, and Charles Rhind, who was directly from the United States. In order to keep the negotiations secret, Rhind proceeded alone to Constantinople, and drew up a treaty. When this had been done, his colleagues joined him.

This treaty gave privileges of trade equal to those of the most favored nations, allowed American ships passage through the Dardanelles, and agreed upon the establishment of consulates in both countries.

In addition to these provisions, the original draft, prepared by Rhind, contained a separate and secret article, which provided for the purchase of timber by Turkey in the United

States and for the building of ships in this country by the former. Biddle and Offley, on arriving at Constantinople, disapproved of this secret article, but they signed the treaty and forwarded it, with their reasons

for ratifying, to the secretary of state. The Senate ratified the treaty, but rejected the separate

article.

The original draft of the treaty was in

Turkish and, as the commissioners were ignorant of the language, complications arose as to its real contents and stipulations. There

were four different

translations sent to America; and it was found that the one considered in the Senate, and subsequently ratified by that body, was not that signed by the commission.

The Turkish government complained to David Porter, who had been sent to exchange the ratifications at Constantinople, that the original translation was not the one acted upon by the Senate. Porter thereupon signed a paper, which was in Turkish, pledging that the United States would abide by the stipulations of the Turkish original, should complications arise.

However, no trouble occurred until 1868, when Turkish officers arrested and imprisoned two American citizens

for alleged offenses against that government. The United States complained that such actions were directly contrary to the provisions of the fourth article of the treaty of 1830; the last part of which reads, in the Senate version : "Citizens of the United States of America, when they may have committed some offense, shall not be arrested and put in prison by the local authorities, but shall be tried by their ministers or consuls and punished according to their offenses, following, in this respect, the usage observed toward other Franks."

The Turkish minister for foreign affairs replied to our minister that this clause was incorrect and did not occur in the original Turkish document. The American minister then requested several officers in the Russian and French legations to make translations from the original draft, and none of these new translations contained any phrase corresponding to that in the copy sent to the Senate.

The discussion, in regard to the true meaning of the Turkish text, raised at that time, is still unsettled; but this one clause seems to be the only discrepancy between the two versions.

Six years before the case referred to occurred, a new treaty of commerce was negotiated, which, however, did not abrogate that of 1830, but only changed some of its minor provisions and said nothing concerning the extraterritorial jurisdiction of American consuls.

The treaty of 1862 was to be valid for twenty-eight years, subject to termination by a notice to be given one year before the expiration of fourteen or twenty-one years.

In 1874 the United States was informed that the Turkish government intended to terminate the treaty. The reply was made that this government could not receive, in advance of more than one year, notice of such a desire. When the proper time arrived for the notice to the government, Turkey neglected to send it.

The matter was left in abeyance and the treaty held until March 12, 1883, when notice was again given that Turkey desired to abrogate the existing convention the following year.

The United States replied that such a notice would not be in order until June 5, 1883. The Turkish government acted again as it had done in 1874, and the proper time passed without any further action being taken. According to the stipulation of the treaty, if notice was not given one year in advance of the expiration of the twenty-first year, the treaty was to be binding until the twenty-eighth year.

Turkey refused to agree with the United States that a proper notice had not been given and has considered the treaty of 1862 as abrogated ever since June 5, 1884.

To show, however, the good feeling of that government toward the United States, she has given a standing invitation to negotiate a new treaty, but as yet the offer has not been accepted. Nevertheless, American commerce has ever been treated most favorably by the Turkish government and the cordial relations between the two powers are proverbial.

Persia.

Mohammed, the father of the present shah of Persia, Nasr-ed-Din, was a prince possessing enlightened views, and he desired to improve the condition of his country. England and Russia, now so opposed in their Eastern policy, concurred in securing him the throne, and England exerted a strong influence over his policy throughout his whole reign from 1834 to 1848. Once, in the war with Afghanistan (1836-38), he proceeded contrary to the wishes of the British government, but in this campaign, and particularly in the siege of Herat, the Persians were totally unsuccessful. From the end of this war until the shah's death, England and France attempted to negotiate commercial treaties. England succeeded in doing so, but the French mission was for a long time unsuccessful.