File 756/1917 Pt 2-3 ‘ARAB BULLETIN Nos 66-114’ [‎254v] (517/834)

— 314 —
sovereignty, and is, in a country where Mohammedans number
only one-third of the total population, of considerably less
importance than in Libya, where the population is entirely
Moslem. So far as the rest of the agreement is concerned the
difference is considerable. The Turkish Government explicitly
recognised the complete sovereignty of Austria-Hungary over
Bosnia-Herzegovina, 5 which she was never willing to do, so far
as Italy was concerned, over Libya. There are no traces there
fore in the Turco-Austrian Treaty of those manifestations of
Ottoman sovereignty which were accepted in the Treaty of
Lausanne. There is no question of the despatch of a Naib-ul-
Sultan, nor of a Kadi, and, therefore, no interference in the
legal or Wakf administration of Herzegovina. In the Bosniac
organisation there is a faint trace of a Reis ul-Ulema, but in
this case he has an entirely religious function and is head of a
commission of ulema or doctors, instituted to supervise the
religion and practice of Islam. This individual is appointed
by the Emperor of Austria from three candidates proposed by
a Bosniac commission of Austrian subjects. The commission,
after the appointment on the part of the Emperor, requests a
certificate of investiture for the new official from the Sheikh
ul-Islam at Constantinople. The candidate must be an Austro-
Hungarian subject and can be removed by the Emperor. It
is apparent, therefore, that there is no similarity between the
Bosniac Reis ui-Ulema and the Libyan Kadi.
At the Treaty of Lausanne the Ottoman plenipotentiaries
succeeded in distorting, to the advantage of their own country,
certain ambiguous and innocent formulae of the Turco-Austrian
protocol of 1909. In Article 4 we read : “ Les droits des
fondations pieuses (wakf) seront respectes, comme par le passe,
et aucune entrave ne sera apportee aux rapports des musulmans
avec leurs chefs spirituels qui dependront comme toujours du
Cheik-ul-Islamat a Constantinople lequel donnera Finvestiture
au Beis-ul-Ulema.'’ But the protocol in no place explains
what these chefs spirituels are. Since, however, with the
exception of the above-mentioned formal investiture of the
Reis-ul-Ulema, there are no traces of any relations between
Moslem officials and Constantinople, and since the Ulema, to
whom alone the title of spiritual heads could be applied, are
private savants (see above), it is perfectly clear that the Austro-
Hungarian Government made no concessions, with the exception
of some phrases devoid of meaning. This was possible for two
reasons. The Young Turks, who had only recently come into
power, were imbued with superficial western ideas and almost
incredibly ignorant of Moslem affairs. Again, one of the two
Ottoman delegates who signed the agreements, was the Christian