On the appointed day Veli-bey and Arslan-bey proceeded to the rendezvous accompanied by nearly all their beys and retinue; in all about 400 men. The kiosk was hidden from view by a turn in the road till they had almost reached it, and it was only on entering the space in front that they perceived the troops ranged in order of battle. A suspicion crossed the mind of Arslan-bey, who said to his companion in Eastern phrase, “We have eaten dirt!” Veli-bey replied, “It is the regular way of paying honor.” “At all events,” said Arslan-bey, with doubtful friendship, “let us change sides.” This was done, and Arslan-bey found himself screened from view by the imposing figure of Veli-bey and his horse. They had reached the centre of the line, when an order issued from the window of the kiosk, the soldiers raised their pieces, and a murderous fire was opened on the ranks of the Albanians, followed by a bayonet charge. Veli-bey and his horse fell pierced with nineteen balls, but Arslan-bey was unhurt. Followed by those who had escaped the first discharge, he turned his horse and took to flight; but a second fire reached their flank. Arslan-bey again miraculously escaped, and owing to the speed of his horse soon left the place of carnage at a distance. But his flight had been observed from the kiosk from which the Grand Vizir had directed the massacre, and he was pursued; but putting spurs to his horse, he urged it up the precipitous side of the hill, making for the summit with furious speed. The top was almost reached when a shower of balls brought down man and horse; and they rolled down the steep hillside to join the bodies of their fellow-victims below. Such were the last fatal blows aimed at the expiring feudal system; exile and confiscation did the rest.
The once powerful Beys, when thoroughly crushed and impoverished, were allowed a small income, and after many years of expatriation were finally permitted to return to their native districts. Their power is completely gone, although their personal influence is still considerable over the populations among whom they live, and in the local courts in which they sit. It is however of a mutinous nature, and seldom employed either in facilitating the introduction of the new measures attempted by the Government for the improvement of the administration, or in promoting the general welfare of the country.
Some beys in the interior still possess considerable landed property, but with few exceptions their estates are dilapidated and heavily mortgaged; while their owners are so deeply in debt to the Government that if called to a reckoning under a well-regulated administration they would be ruined men. A few, however, whose estates are in better condition are more enlightened, and take a real interest in the welfare of their country.
The country contains extensive areas of mirié kinds reclaimed from the waste, for which of late years there has been a great demand made by the peasants, who reclaim portions of them by paying a small fee of about 1s. an acre. They cultivate or build upon them, and after paying tithes for the space of twenty years get the Tapou, or title-deed, from the Porte constituting them legal owners. But although subjected to special laws and restrictions and under government supervision, it is a dangerous speculation, often involving litigation, and liable to usurpation.
Great abuses are occasioned by the corruption of the Tapou Memours, or inspectors, who within the last seven years have been intrusted with the supervision and legislation of such lands, and regulate them (irrespective of the rights of Christian or Turkish landholders) in favor of the highest bidder. The consequences are that many persons have been dispossessed of their property, others have had to pay high prices to retain it by obtaining Tapous, whilst many are daily being driven out of their lands. An example of this kind presented itself the other day in the local court of the town of L⸺. The claimant was a Turkish Hanoum; the disputants, Turkish and Christian peasants. The lady, a widow, had inherited an estate bordering on some waste land upon which these peasants had built a village. The Hanoum in the mean time married an influential person at Constantinople, through whose authority and assistance, she managed to obtain a Tapou, including the village of the settlers on the waste land within her own property. The villagers indignantly protested against this act of usurpation, and refused to acknowledge the authority of the lady, who, however, returned, furnished with powerful Emirnamés from the Porte to the town of L⸺ to enforce her claims. The complaints of the peasants were disregarded, and they themselves were seized as criminals and brought to the Konak, driven into it by blows that fractured the skull of one and occasioned severe injuries to others, and then imprisoned.
Disputed claims like this on commons, forests, etc., are innumerable. The estates sold by the crown also labor under the same disadvantages. Among many cases I may relate one in which the purchaser was an English gentleman who bought a large estate in Upper Macedonia, comprising one of the most beautiful lakes in the country. It was an ancient fief, sold for the sum of 2000l. The speculation promised to be a splendid one, and a fortune was expected to be realized. One day, however, as the owner was walking over his grounds, an old Turkish peasant presented himself, and with much natural eloquence, and perhaps some truth, explained to the English bey that the former owner had usurped part of his fields which were comprised in the estate. The proprietor, either convinced of the man’s rights, or out of kindness, ordered that the contested lands should be restored; but the one individual thus righted soon developed into a legion, all presenting equal claims. Subsequently the legion became a band of armed and menacing Albanians, who by their hostile attitude stopped all attempts at culture, and threatened to shoot the tenants and the steward, burn the crops, etc. A long litigation followed, and the affair terminated, after much loss of time and damages amounting to several thousand pounds, in the gentleman re-selling the estate for the amount he had paid for it.
Besides the above-mentioned drawbacks, the holders of mirié lands cannot sell, transfer, or mortgage them without a license from the authorities, nor can they make them Vakouf property without a special Firman from the Sultan.
3. The Memlouké or Mulk lands are the freehold property of their owner, who can do with them whatsoever pleaseth him well. They do not form a large proportion of the lands of Turkey, and a reason for this is the prejudice entertained against this form of tenure on account of the difficulties encountered in establishing titles. It is unfortunately no unusual thing in Turkey for title-deeds to be forged, substituted, destroyed, and otherwise interfered with.
The descent and division of Mirié and Vakouf lands are regulated by imperial firmans and the special ordinances of the Vakouf laws; but Memlouké land comes under the regulation of the Mehkemé or court of the town Kadi. The laws of Moslem inheritance are too complicated to be recorded here, and their complexity is aggravated by the mixture of Christians and the different ways of holding land. In the absence of heirs, mirié and memlouké lands revert to the state; vakouf, as already mentioned, to the administration of pious foundations.
Memlouké land is transferred legally by conveyance; vakouf and mirié by conveyance together with registration. The duty on the sale of memlouké land is five per cent, and the succession duty two and a half per cent; on mirié, five per cent on sale, and the same on succession; on vakouf land, five per cent on sale, and the same on succession. A difference, however, is made if the land is built over.