enemy, dug the deep pit of measureless hate which separated and still separates Moslem and Christian in northwestern Africa. For nearly two hundred years 1600 to 1800 the entire diplomatic relations between European powers and the varying authorities which held the coast of Morocco and preserved a precarious sovereignty in the interior, were embraced in treaties which provided for the release of Christian captives held in slavery at the various ports of Morocco, as well as the other north African states. These various treaties, all on the same line, all providing for ransom, were fostered long after they were really needed, because it was the open and avowed policy of the maritime nations of the Mediterranean, led by England, to discourage any flag but their own by making the sea perilous to all other flags through the frank recognition of Moorish piracy. There are still, near Mequinez, whole villages inhabited by the descendants of Christian captives long since become Moslem. One who mixes much with the Moor in the market place with a knowledge of the language is perpetually coming across names in the cities which recall this origin. They have long since been lost in the population save for an occasional agnomen, for while the Spanish Christian visited the penalty of Moorish birth upon the convert to the third and fourth generation of those who believed and worshiped with him, the Mohammedan gives to all the rights of Moslem citizenship the newest convert.

Our own diplomacy a century ago and our own prowess, repeating under another flag the daring deeds of the blood of those who sailed with Drake when he fought forts with ships and burned vessels in the harbors of north Africa, accomplished a great change by which all the north African ports, including Morocco, surrendered piracy and guaranteed the safety of peaceful vessels. Yet even I in early boyhood sailed on an American clipper vessel provided with two little guns, the crew being called to quarters and trained in their use because of the possibility of being picked up during some calm by Riffian pirates off the coast of north Morocco, while there is probably more than one in

my audience who remember like myself meeting those on Cape Cod who had made their scanty contribution to ransom American sailors captive in Morocco.

With the treaties negotiated in the early part of the 19th century abolishing piracy there came the opening of the present and concluding chapter of diplomatic relations with Morocco, begun a century ago with the treaties which Mulai Soliman (1794-1822), a ruthless and powerful conqueror of the old type, negotiated with the different European powers. From Morocco Christian residents had been as completely excluded as from any central Asiatic khanates. A periodical trip under guard by a European ambassador to the Court of the Sultan was the only travel permitted to a European. The residence of foreign representatives was jealously restricted to Tangiers, and in the coast cities particularly at Mogador and Mazazan there was a little quarter on the water side walled and gated which precisely repeated conditions of the Hongs in Canton and elsewhere, through which Chinese trade was carried on in the 18th and the first half of the 19th centuries. But centuries of experience had made the Moorish administration familiar with the principles of exterritorialty as embraced in the capitulations. All the Jewish communities in Morocco, which began with the first dawn of Mohammedanism lived apart under their own laws. The site of the great mosque at Fez was bought from a Jew, following the example of the Prophet himself. The treaties with Europe continued therefore the principle of exterritoriality or accepted it as a part of the common law of foreign contact. This was the easier because there still existed and exists in Morocco that personal jurisdiction which in mediæval times was universal all over Europe and guided the trader from the little place on the Thames which still carries the name of the Hansiatic League in some of its streets to the Arab Khans in Chinese ports, preceding by centuries the later warehouses of European merchants.

Diplomatic relations began in the modern sense therefore with Morocco under the same general lines of international law which guided them in negotiation with the Sublime

Porte. Down to our own day these conditions have remained singularly unchanged. Exactly as Austria secured from Turkey the privilege of Austrian mails in 1794, so that all the Powers have their post offices in Turkey, the mails of Morocco are in foreign hands so far as any exist. Exactly as the foreign trader has the advantage of his own contracts and courts over the native in the Levant, he has had this also in the sheriffian empire. To one who had travelled in Turkey as a boy in the fifties, there was when travelling in Morocco something similar in the respect paid to the European before the recent revolts, which have practically ended European travel in Morocco for the last eight or ten years, to the respect shown for the European 50 years ago in outlying parts of Turkey. But Morocco, unlike Turkey, has never been able to organise a new administration, a disciplined army, or a successful sovereignty. The structure of the kingdom already described made this difficult, and Morocco, owing to the fiery wall of persecution which separated the two races and religions in the sixteenth century, never enjoyed that intermingling and interpenetration of European ideas which has existed in the Ottoman Empire, fortunate in never having to face the mercies of the Holy Inquisition, to embitter the relations of Moslem and Nazarene. For half a century, until in 1844 the Prince de Joinville bombarded Tangiers and Mogador, Morocco was as completely out of all European contact as it was in the 17th and 18th centuries. The French treaty of September 10, 1844, began the train of negotiations which ended in the European conference of Algeciras and the present diplomatic situations. For the first time a boundary between Morocco and its eastern neighbor Algeria was delimited; Morocco agreed to give France jurisdiction over certain tribes; and the treaty left a broad area uncharted with provisions in regard to wandering tribes and desert villages (kessour). These last provisions were the basis of the declaration of August 5, 1890, by which the British and French governments, Article Two, recognized the sphere of influence of France to the south of her Mediterranean possessions up to a line from Saye on the Niger and Barrava

on Lake Chad drawn in such a manner to comprise in the sphere of action of the English Niger Company all that fairly belonged to the kingdom of Sokoto and leave all above to France. These, joined to the early and ancient rights which France had in one of the very first of its colonies in Senegal, enclosed Morocco in the great curve of French territory which begins at the northern edge of Senegal and ends today in the occupation by France-temporary in name but permanent in character of Oudja. All enclosed by the right angle of which one side was Algeria and the other Senegal was Morocco. With the exception of the territory claimed by Spain on the Gold River (Rio Oro), latitude 23° 36" north, longitude 9° 49" west; at Angradecrintra, 23° 6′′ north, longitude 10° 01′′ west; and at Western Bay, latitude 20° 51′′, longitude 10° 56′′, as specified in the Spanish notification of January 29, 1885, accepted by England January 28, 1885, Ceuta, the solitary remnant of the expedition of Charles V, confirmed to Spain at the same time as Joinville treaty by Spanish treaties of October 7, 1844, and May 6, 1845. Between 1844 and 1890, in which the position of Morocco as enclosed in the enciante of French possessions had been accomplished, a period just short of half a century, a profound change had taken place in the character of the relations between Morocco and Europe. A succession of strong sovereigns had established a reasonable degree of peace and order in the interior of the empire up to an elevation of 1500 or 2000 feet, where the territory of the mountain tribes remained little controlled by the Sultan and unentered by Europeans, save as an occasional venturesome traveler crossed this unmarked boundary at his own risk. But in all the ports in the territory around them and in the trade of the interior cities, the possession of the European trader of protection, consular trial and the ability to enforce contracts through the ruthless Moorish governors by paying for it had destroyed the trade of the Moorish merchant. It had transferred to European hands very considerable areas of land and a still larger share of the productive agriculture in cattle and in grain. Any native who could secure a partner could afford to pay heavily for the

privilege if he had large properties, and there were plenty of Europeans living in the coast towns who derived a very fair support by simply lending their names as partners. Jewish traders took advantage of this with a celerity unpracticed by the Moor. The cheap manufactures of Europe destroyed bit by bit all local industry. Moslem families which had held their property and possessions untouched through an unbroken line, often of sacred descent, literally of a thousand years of known and recorded ancestry, found themselves reduced to beggary. A Spanish colony outnumbering the Moorish population appeared in Tangiers. Through all the coast of Morocco every new house and every sign of prosperous trade or farming represented some foreign partnership. Foreign diplomacy had for its chief task the collection of debts but too often fraudulent, the protection of contracts against the whole spirit and intent of the exterritorial jurisdiction, and the aid and comfort of imports under a low tariff created by treaty and incapable of revision, which destroyed all local industries, precisely similar to those which existed in the mountains of Portugal, which had the happier fortune of being protected by a high tariff until their final collapse has come in the last five or ten years, leading to the revolution now in progress. The village tribes protected themselves from all this by their prowess, their fighting power, and the swiftness with which they re-armed themselves-the Remington with its ounce ball being their favorite weapon, a circumstance aided by the steadiness with which some of our consular agents used their inviolable position to smuggle arms by day and by night into Morocco in violation of our treaties and in defiance of Moslem law. Once Spain, in 1859, made a vain effort to acquire conquest in northern Morocco. The treaty of Tetuan, April 26, 1860, ended this vain effort, whose failure was due to the same significant circumstance which brought to an ignominious end the hostilities in 1893 between Melilla and the Moors of the neighborhood, and the more recent "war" of two years ago. In each instance the returns of Spanish casualties, with their very large proportion of officers and their small proportion of privates, told their story to one

THE JOURNAL OF RACE DEVELOPMENT, VOL. 5, No. 2, 1914