Haifa; or, Life in modern PalestineOliphant, Laurence
History
Haifa; or, Life in modern Palestine
Oliphant, Laurence
Palestine -- Description and travel
Three fourths of the population of Haifa are either Roman or Greek
Catholics; in other words, they are under the protection of the French
Consul when religious questions are concerned; and the policy of the
French government in Syria has been to extend its religious protectorate
into political and secular matters, to a degree which is constantly
giving rise to awkward questions and complications not devoid of danger.
A great part of the house property in the town of Haifa is owned by the
monks of Mount Carmel, who consider the whole of Carmel, from the
monastery at the western extremity of the mountain, to their chapel at
the Place of Elijah's Sacrifice at the other end, as a sort of private
preserve, and push their religious pretensions to such an extreme that
they look with the utmost jealousy upon any foreigner who attempts to
buy land in the mountain, and oppose any such proceeding with all their
energy.
The policy of the Turkish government, on the other hand, is to prevent
any foreigners buying land there, or, indeed, anywhere else in
Palestine, although they are entitled to do so by treaty; and in pursuit
of this policy the local authorities are instructed to throw every
obstacle in the way of foreign enterprise of all descriptions, but
especially to render it impossible for persons not subjects of Turkey to
acquire landed property. They have, on these grounds, used their utmost
endeavors to ruin the Jewish colony of Zimmarin, which is also in the
neighborhood of Haifa, by prohibiting the colonists from building houses
for themselves, on the ground that they have no right to the land. They
have based this claim on the allegation that the proprietor of the
property, who was an Austrian Jew, in whose name it was bought for the
colonists, died childless, and, according to Turkish law, landed
property reverts to the Turkish government under these circumstances;
and the government therefore claimed the property. It so happened,
however, that the owner did not die childless. Indeed, I know his son
myself, but the government refused to admit the evidence of any but
Moslems as to whether he had a son or not, a demand which, as the
deceased proprietor did not live in Turkey, it was naturally impossible
to comply with. The question has therefore been pending between Baron
Rothschild, who took over the property on the death of its nominal
proprietor, and the Turkish government for nearly two years; but I
understand that permission has at last been obtained for the erection of
houses by the colonists, and the affair has been arranged.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account