Chapter IX: Part I: ; G. Charmes, L’avenir de la Turquie: le pan-islamisme

(Paris, 1883); A. J. Toynbee, _Nationality and the War_ (London,
1915), pp. 399–411, and _Turkey: a Past and a Future_ (New York,
1917); Tekin Alp, _Türkismus und Pantürkismus_ (Weimar, 1915); C.
Snouck Hurgronje, _The Holy War, “Made in Germany”_ (New York, 1917).
Regarding Abdul Hamid’s place in the Pan-Islamic movement _cf._
_Mohammedan History_, pp. 42–46.

[15] Great Britain, characteristically enough, took steps to protect
her interests by reviving the Arabian caliphate—_i.e._, by supporting
the claims of the Sherif of Mecca to the caliphate.

[16] _Infra_, pp. 127–128.

[17] Regarding British activities in Koweit, _cf. infra_, pp. 197–198.

[18] _Infra_, p. 149.

[19] _Infra_, pp. 155–157; Chéradame, _op. cit._, pp. 267 _et seq._;
K. Helfferich, _Die Vorgeschichte des Weltkrieges_ (Berlin, 1919),
pp. 124 _et seq._

[20] _The Times_, October 28, 1898

[21] _Annual Register_, 1899, pp. 289–291; _Parliamentary Debates,
House of Commons_, Volume 120 (1903), p. 1247, Volume 126 (1903), p.
108; W. von Hohenzollern, _My Memoirs, 1887–1918_, pp. 84–86, 101–103.

[22] _The Globe_, August 10, 1899. _Cf._, also, _The Morning Herald_,
August 10, 1899, and _The Westminster Gazette_, August 11, 1899.

[23] No attempt is made here to analyze the convention of March
18, 1902 (which had been preceded by a draft convention of January
8, 1902), as it was superseded by the convention of March 5, 1903.
_Cf. infra_, pp. 70–71, 77–84. The text of the convention of 1902
is to be found as an appendix to R. LeCoq, _Un chemin de fer en
Asie Mineure_ (Paris, 1907). George von Siemens (1839–1901) did not
live to see the consummation of his great plans for the development
of Turkish railways. After his death in 1901 his work was taken up
by his successor as Managing Director of the _Deutsche Bank_, Dr.
Arthur von Gwinner. For a short account of the life of von Siemens
see an obituary by Professor J. Riesser, in _Bank-Archiv_, No. 2,
November, 1901. The work of von Siemens in the development of German
economic enterprises in the Near East is told in a biography by his
son-in-law, Dr. Karl Helfferich; _Georg von Siemens_ (Leipzig, 1923).

[24] _The Times_, January 25, 1902.

[25] _Journal officiel, Débats parlementaires, Chambre des députés_,
1902, pp. 1468 et seq.

[26] _The Times_, January 25, 1902.

[27] _Parliamentary Debates, House of Commons_, Volume 101, pp. 129,
597, 628, 669, Volume 120 (1903), p. 1371.

[28] _Report of the Anatolian Railway Company_, 1901, p. 17; _The
Times_, January 25, 1902.

[29] _Annual Register_, 1902, pp. 290–291; _Report of the Bagdad
Railway Company_, 1904, p. 7.

[30] _La Société Impériale Ottomane du Chemin de Fer de
Bagdad-Firman, Convention, Cahier des Charges, Statuts_, in French
and Turkish (Constantinople, 1905); translated into English in
_Parliamentary Papers_, No. Cd. 5635, Volume CIII (1911), No.
1. Where references are here given to the convention itself, no
preceding identifying word will be given, the citation being merely,
_e.g._, _Article I_. The _Statuts_ will be referred to as “By-Laws”
and the _Cahier des Charges_ as “Specifications.”

[31] Turco-German control of the Board of Directors was not
inconsistent with the agreement of 1899 between the _Deutsche Bank_
and the Imperial Ottoman Bank, which assured French interests only
40% of the shares of the Bagdad Railway Company. For details of the
organization of the Company see the _Report of the Anatolian Railway
Company_, 1903, pp. 4–7; _By-Laws_, _passim_.

[32] _Articles 1–4, 7, 12, 37–39_; _Specifications_, Article 30.

[33] In this connection see Sir W. M. Ramsay, _The Historical
Geography of Asia Minor_ (London, 1890); D. G. Hogarth, _The Nearer
East_ (London, 1902); Jastrow, _op. cit._, Chapter II; Sir C. W.
Wilson, _Murray’s Handbook for Asia Minor_ (London, 1895 and 1900);
R. Fitzner, _Anatolien-Wirtschaftsgeographie_ (Berlin, 1902); F.
Dernburg, _Auf deutscher Bahn in Kleinasien_ (Berlin, 1892). Good
general accounts of the regions through which the Bagdad Railway
was to run are: Baron E. von der Goltz, _Reisebilder aus dem
griechisch-türkischen Orient_ (Halle, 1902); R. Oberhummer and H.
Zimmerer, _Durch Syrien und Kleinasien_ (Berlin, 1899); E. Banse,
_Die Türkei; eine moderne Geographie_ (Berlin, 1916); Sir Mark
Sykes, _The Caliph’s Last Heritage—A Short History of the Turkish
Empire_ (London, 1915), Part 2, Chapters II and IV. A well-informed
article describing the projected route of the Bagdad railway is one
by a member of the German technical commission, “Die anatolischen
Eisenbahnen und ihre Fortsetzung bis zum persischen Golf,” in _Archiv
für Eisenbahnwesen_, Volume 26 (1903), pp. 75–90.

[34] For a description of the line from Konia to Adana, including
an historical sketch of the principal towns served by the railway,
_cf._ Karl Baedeker, _Konstantinopel und das westliche Kleinasien_
(Leipzig, 1905), pp. 156–172, and _Konstantinopel, Balkanstaaten,
Kleinasien, Archipel, Cypern_ (second edition, Leipzig, 1914), pp.
270–306, generously supplied with excellent maps.

[35] A popular account of the engineering difficulties facing the
construction of the railway from Adana to Aleppo is to be found
in _The Scientific American_, supplement, Volume 51 (1901), pp.
21248–21249.

[36] _Cf._ W. H. Hall (of the Syrian Protestant College in Beirut),
_The Near East_ (New York, 1920), particularly an interesting map, p.
174. According to the convention of 1903, Article 1, Aleppo was to be
connected with the main line by a branch from Tel-Habesh, but in 1910
the route was changed, on petition of the inhabitants, to include
Aleppo as a station on the Bagdad line itself. _Report of the Bagdad
Railway Company_, 1910, p. 8. Statistics regarding the population of
Aleppo and other cities along the line are taken, unless otherwise
indicated, from the _Statesman’s Year Book_, 1903, _passim_.

[37] _Article 38_; “The Trade of the Mesopotamian Valley,” in
_Commerce Reports_, No. 280 (Washington, 1912), pp. 1050–1065, and
No. 256 (1913), pp. 350–358; Karl Baedeker, _Palestine and Syria,
with the chief routes through Mesopotamia and Babylonia_ (fourth
edition, Leipzig, 1906), pp. 351–411.

[38] Valentine Chirol, _The Middle Eastern Question, or Some
Political Problems of Indian Defence_ (New York, 1903), pp. 179–182.

[39] This is the distance by the Tigris and the Shatt-el-Arab; as the
crow flies, the distance is about 150 miles shorter.

[40] Regarding the Lynch Brothers see David Fraser, _The Short Cut to
India_ (London, 1909), pp. 42 _et seq._; _Mesopotamia_, p. 30; _The
Near East_, August 11, 1916, p. 358; _infra_, pp. 190–191.

[41] _Article 1_, which describes in detail the route of the Bagdad
Railway and its branches.

[42] Chirol, _op. cit._, p. 179; _Supplement to Daily Consular and
Trade Reports_, Annual Series (Washington, 1915).

[43] The distances on the Bagdad Railway may be estimated as follows:

Haidar Pasha to Ismid 91 kilometres
Ismid to Eski Shehr 174 ”
Eski Shehr to Konia 444 ”
Konia to Basra 2,264 ”
Branch lines, about 800 ”
——-
Total 3,773 kilometres,

or approximately 2,400 miles. This does not include the section of
the Anatolian Railway from Eski Shehr to Angora, a distance of 311
kilometres, or 194 miles additional. The Atchison, Topeka and Santa
Fé Railway from Chicago to Los Angeles is 2,246 miles in length.
The distance from Chicago to San Francisco _via_ the Chicago and
Northwestern-Union Pacific system is 2,261 miles. _Official Guide of
the Railways of the United States_ October, 1921, pp. 679, 825.

[44] _Cf., e.g._, T. W. Overlach, _Foreign Financial Control
in China_ (New York, 1919), _passim_; _La Gaceta Oficial_ of
the Republic of Cuba for the years 1911 and 1912, regarding the
_Ferrocarril de la Costa Norte de Cuba_; the _Statesman’s Year Book_,
1903, p. 1044.

[45] The average population per square mile in eastern Anatolia was
27, in northern Syria 31, in Mesopotamia 13.

[46] _Diplomatic and Consular Reports_, 1903, No. 3140, pp. 26–27;
Sir William Willcocks, _The Recreation of Chaldea_ (Cairo, 1903).

[47] This financial assistance was granted at the rate of 11,000
francs per kilometre, payable annually throughout the ninety-nine
years of the concession. The obligation was capitalized and met by
the issue of 4% bonds as here described.

[48] _Bagdad Railway Loan Contract_, March 5, 1903. M. Léon Berger,
President of the Ottoman Public Debt Administration, and a French
citizen, was one of the signatories of this document. The bonds of
the loan were issued in denominations of 500 francs, 408 marks, 20
pounds sterling, 22 pounds Turkish, and 245 Dutch florins, in order
to facilitate their sale in the international securities markets.
The _Deutsche Bank_ was made fiscal agent for all transactions in
connection with the loan, with the single qualification that it was
to appoint as its Paris agent the Imperial Ottoman Bank, representing
the French interests in the enterprise. The syndicate apparently made
a profit of over 2,500,000 francs on the transaction, as the bonds
were delivered to the concessionaires, under _Article 35_ of the
Convention, valued at 81–1/2% of par but were sold at 86.40.

[49] _Articles 35_ and _37_.

[50] _Articles 6, 10, 22, 27._

[51] _Cf._ W. A. Dunning, _Reconstruction, Political and Economic,
1865–1877_ (New York, 1907), pp. 145, 227; H. V. Poor, _Manual of the
Railroads of the United States_ (New York, 1869), pp. xlvi-xlvii.

[52] _Supra_, p. 11.

[53] _Articles 13, 24, 25, 33_; _Specifications_, Article 4.

[54] _Articles 9_ and _23_.

[55] _Infra_, pp. 190–191.

[56] _Articles 5, 18, 29, 34._

[57] _Article 29_; _Specifications_, Articles 21, 24, 25, 29, 30.

[58] _Articles 15, 26, 45_; _Specifications_, Article 26.

[59] _Articles 20_ and _21_. Another sop to Turkish pride was
_Article 46_, which required the Company to contribute annually to
the Constantinople Poorhouse the sum of £500.

[60] _The Times_, March 14, 1903, contained a report of this secret
appendix. A denial was issued by the Berlin _National Zeitung_ of
March 18, 1903, but the existence of the supplementary agreement was
confirmed by Dr. von Gwinner in 1909 (_op. cit._, p. 1092). Djavid
Bey, in a memorandum to the author, has stated that the Ottoman
Government considered this appendix of the utmost importance.

[61] A proviso of the concession of 1903 was that the _Deutsche Bank_
was to float an Ottoman Four Per Cent Loan of March, 1903, to an
amount of about $10,000,000. _Parliamentary Papers_, 1920, No. Cmd.
964, pp. 57–58.