« PreviousContinue »
MS. Dom. Let. 285; Mr. Hill, Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Kouri,
The information given below is believed to be correct, yet it is not to be considered as official, as it relates to the laws and regulations of a foreign country.
“ The Turkish Government denies the right of a Turk to become a citizen of any other country without the authority of the Turkish Government. His naturalization is therefore regarded by Turkey as void with reference to himself and his children, and he is forbidden to return to Turkey.
The consent of the Turkish Government to the naturalization in another country of a former Turk is given only upon condition that the applicant shall stipulate either never to return, or, returning, to regard himself as a Turkish subject. Therefore, if a naturalized American citizen of Turkish origin returns to Turkey he may expect arrest and imprisonment or expulsion. “ Jews are prohibited from colonizing in Turkish dominions.” Circular Notice, Department of State, Washington, Jan. 22, 1901, For Rel.
Sec. of State, to the Turkish min., Jan. 7, 1899, MS. Notes to Turkish
(d) PENALTIES AND PETITIONS.
“I herewith inclose copies of letters from Mr. J. J. Arakelyan, of Boston, of the 16th and 29th ultimo, complaining that the Government of Turkey imposes taxes upon and exacts onerous duties of his relatives in the town of Arabkir, owing to his absence.
“Upon the receipt of Mr. Arakelyan's letter of the 16th, he was told that before any measures could be taken in the premises he must furnish proof of his naturalization. His letter of the 29th, therefore, inclosed a certified copy of such papers.
Taxation may no doubt be imposed, in conformity with the law of nations, by a sovereign on the property within his jurisdiction of a person who is domiciled in and owes allegiance to a foreign country. It is otherwise, however, as to a tax imposed, not on such property, but on the person of the party taxed when elsewhere domiciled and elsewhere a citizen. Such a decree is internationally void, and an attempt to execute it by penalties on the relatives of the party taxed gives the person as taxed a right to appeal for diplomatic intervention to the Government to which he owes allegiance. To sustain such a claim it is not necessary that the penalties should have been imposed originally and expressly on the person so excepted from jurisdiction. It is enough if it appears that the tax was levied in such a way as to reach him through his relatives.
“ It is desired, therefore, that you bring the complaint of Mr. Arakelyan, as cited in the inclosed copies of his letters, to the notice of the Ottoman Government, requesting that the sum received for any taxes imposed on his relatives on his account be refunded, that the value of the road services rendered by Mr. Arakelyan's brother be returned, and that no further taxes on account of Mr. Arakelyan be imposed on his family.”
Mr. Porter, Art. Sec. of State, to Mr. Emmet, chargé at Constantinople,
No. 293, June 8, 1885, For. Rel. 1885, 818. “ I have the honor to report that during an interview had with the minister of foreign affairs, on the 20th inst., the particulars of dispatch No. 293 were fully discussed, with the following result:
“ His excellency presupposes that at the time Mr. J. J. Arakelyan left his native town, Arabkir, some of his relatives entered into bonds, thereby enabling him to absent himself from home, and hence the exaction of taxes and labor on his behalf since his departure.
“ If Mr. Arakelyan will take the trouble to file a petition with the Turkish minister in America, setting forth the facts of his case, his reason for becoming naturalized, and exhibiting the proofs of his naturalization, the minister will forward a communication to the authorities of his former home, and have his name stricken from the records, thus relieving his parents from the burden of further taxation or labor on his account. As to the restitution of moneys already disbursed, or remuneration for labor performed, his excellency said there would be no hope for recovery. In his own words, “ We will forgive him for the future, and he must forgive the Turkish Government for the past.'
" The system of bonding would-be absentees is quite a general practice in Turkey, and will undoubtedly be found the origin of the above case.”
Mr. Emmet, chargé at ('onstantinople, to Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, No.
516, July 23, 1885, For. Rel. 1885, 854.
A Turk who has, since 1869, been naturalized abroad without having obtained an Imperial iradé consenting to his expatriation, is debarred from inheriting from Ottoman subjects, notwithstanding that the property may have been acquired through his thrift and industry; and, in case he purchases property in Turkey, he can bequeath it only to such subjects. As to the restitution of moneys already disbursed or remuneration for labor performed, the Turkish minis
ter of foreign affairs stated that there was no possibility of recovery on those accounts.
Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Arakelyan, Aug. 17, 1885, 156 MS. Dom.
Let. 554, citing dispatch from Mr. Emmet, chargé at Constantinople,
No. 516, July 23, 1885. “The facts, in brief, of my coming to the United States, and becoming
one of its citizens, are as follows: When I was a boy, and my father was residing at Erzeroom, away from his family, he sent for me to join him there, leaving Arabkir, where I was born. While I was at Erzeroom my father's business compelled him to go to Trebizond, leaving me alone for two years, in which time a few of my friends, with myself, became desirous to go to the United States. Accordingly, in 1866, five of us left Erzeroom for this country, but when we reached Trebizond, where my father still was, he at once objected to my plan, and my companions continued their journey without me. At length my father, seeing that I should never be satisfied till I reached America, embraced the opportunity to let me go in the spring of 1867 with an American family, Mr. M. P. Parmelee and family, who were at Trebizond as missionaries of the American Board
of Commissioners for Foreign Missions. “On reaching Constantinople we met a Mrs. Walker, whose husband had
died at Diarbekir, and she had come to Constantinople with her children to join other missionaries in returning to this country. I was then engaged to assist her in the care of her family from Constantinople to Boston, where we arrived July 15, 1867, going at once to her father's home at Auburndale, Mass., where I remained, studying, about one year. From there I went to Riverside Press, Cambridge, Mass., Messrs. H. 0. Houghton & Co., proprietors, with the
intention of learning the art of printing, and returning to Turkey. “But as time went on my plans changed. On the 4th of June, 1879, I
married an American lady at her home in Lancaster, Mass. In February, 1883, I left the Riverside Press, and opened a book and newspaper printing office at 226 Franklin street, Boston, where I still continue in business, residing at Cambridgeport, Mass., where I have been naturalized, as you already know, having in your posses
sion a certified copy of my naturalization paper. “ Please observe, in view of the above facts, that there have been no
obstacles to my coming to this country besides my father's unwillingness to part with his son, at first, and that no one has ever entered into bonds for me that I know of, nor did I ever hear of such a custom, as I must have done had any such arrangement been entered into for me, as the Turkish minister of foreign affairs pre
supposes. There is no need to state that the facts in the case do entitle me to the
protection and privileges of a citizen of the United States, and I feel sure that since you have so kindly and faithfully done so much already for me and for the right, you will eventually, with persistence, see wrongs righted and satisfaction gained.” (Mr. Arakel
yan to Mr. Bayard, Aug. 20, 1885, For. Rel. 1885, 861.) Where a Turk has been naturalized in the United States since 1869 without the consent of the Sultan, such consent can be obtained only by a petition to His Majesty sent through the Turkish minister at Washington. This petition should be duly sworn to, should set forth the circumstances under which the petitioner left his native land, and should be accompanied with the evidence of his naturalization. The Department of State can not predict the result of such a petition; but the Department, if furnished with a copy of the petition in duplicate, will instruct the American minister at Constantinople to render such aid as may be found proper.
Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Arakelyan, Aug. 17, 1885, 156 MS. Dom.
Let. 554; Mr. Porter, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Arakelyan, Feb. 13,
Jan. 26, 1901, 250 MS. Dom. Let. 413.
petitioner shall employ. He must use language and furnish evidence
Sec. of State, to Mr. Arakelyan, Feb. 25, 1886, 159 MS. Dom. Let. 160.) The cases referred to in the letters above cited related chiefly to the
imposition of taxes on relations of the naturalized citizens. In one case complaint was made of the exaction from a brother in Tur
key of a poll and military tax assessed against the complainant and his four brothers in the United States. (Mr. Olney to Mr. Ghiz,
supra.) In another case a person in Turkey was required to pay the personal
taxes of his brother and three cousins, who were in the United States,
IIill to the Michaelian Brothers, supra.)
Hill to the Messrs. Boghasian, supra.)
above set forth.
see Mr. Adee, Second Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Deoshamajian, Oct. 2, 1900, 248 MS. Dom. Let. 202 ; Mr. Hill, Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Kachadoorian, Jan. 4, 1901, 250 MS. Dom. Let. 83; Mr. Cridler, Third Assist. Sec. of State, to Mr. Shibley, Jan. 9, 1901, 250 MS. Dom. Let. 147.
Mr. Bayard stated, Aug. 3, 1886, that all efforts to have Mr. Arakelyan's American allegiance recognized by the Turkish Government
were without avail," except on condition that he should " obtain the Imperial iradé spoken of in the Turkish law.” Mr. Arakelyan accordingly presented a petition to the Turkish minister at Washton, and the American minister at Constantinople was instructed to support it.
Feb. 7, 1889, Mr. Straus, then American minister at that capital, transmitted to his Government the official act of the Turkish Government, recognizing Mr. Arakelyan's American citizenship.
Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Randall, Aug. 3, 1886, 161 MS. Dom.
Let. 138; Mr. Straus, min. to Turkey, to Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State,
Straus to Mr. Bayard, No. 171, Feb. 7, 1889, 48 MS. Desp. Turkey.
of obtaining it, amounting to $4.31. (Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to
Turkey, V. 19.)
State, to Mr. Eguiman, June 16, 1890, 178 MS. Dom. Let. 45.
exercise its good offices in behalf of the petition of Mr. Dikran
Turkey, V. 349.)
State had “ recent knowledge,” was that granted to Mr. Arakelyan.
“I have the honor to inform you that I have finally secured the promise of this Government to recognize Garabed Kevorkian, a naturalized Armenian, as a citizen of the United States. He was the subject of your dispatch No. 33 of August 8, 1893. He was naturalized without the consent of the Sultan, long after the Turkish law of 1869, but made his declaration of intention to become a citizen of the United States before that date.
“ The recognition by the Porte of his citizenship, as dating from the time when the declaration of intention’ was filed, has not been without difficulty; especially since in this case about ten years was permitted to elapse before naturalization. . This man's civil rights were not threatened. He had made a trade and wished himself described in the deed as a citizen of the United States."
Mr. Terrell, min. to Turkey, to Mr. Gresham, Sec. of State, Oct. 12, 1893,
For. Rel. 1893, 692.
“ The Department is in receipt of your letter of May 26th last in regard to the litigation concerning certain real property pending in Turkey between your step-brother and yourselves.
“ It appears from a report received from our legation at Constantinople that the laws of Turkey regard persons of Ottoman birth who changed their nationality before 1869, or with the consent of the Imperial Government, as foreigners, and such persons can claim the benefits of the law of January 18, 1867, conceding to foreigners the right of holding real estate in the Ottoman Empire, the special law relating to Ottoman subjects who had changed their nationality not having been enacted.