OTTOMAN EMPIRE, THE

after an existence lasting well-nigh six centuries and a half the empire founded by osman (1288-1326) expired on oct. 29 1923 when the great national assembly at angora by an unanimous vote constituted the turkish republic. since the death of suleiman the mag- nificent in 1566 the ottoman empire had been gradually decay- ing, and throughout the roth century its demise from time to time had been almost hourly expected. successive wars had shorn it of its outlying provinces, especially in europe, and from being an empire that extended in the 16th century from budapest to the sudan and from oran to the caspian sea it was left by the treaty of sevres (g.v.) with an area of no more than 175,000 sq. m. and a population of barely 8,000,000. contrary to expectations, it received its coup de grace not from one of the great christian powers but from a section of 1138 its own subjects. it fell before the democratic movement inaugurated at angora in rorg by mustafa kemal pasha (q.v.), and in the following year the parliament at constantinople held its last meeting. two years later mehmed vi., last sultan of the house of osman, fled from constantinople on board a british ship of war. in consequence the great national assembly at angora decreed his deposition both as sultan and caliph in a fefva passed on nov. 19 1922. as caliph the assembly elected abdul mejid effendi, a son of the late sultan aziz; but in less than two years even the caliphate was swept away and the house of osman finally banished (march 2 1924) from the lands over which it had for so long held sway. (see catt- phate; turkey.) see lord eversley’s the turkish empire (2nd ed., 1923), prob- ably the best general survey of the history of the empire. see also w. miller, the ottoman empire, 1801-1913 (1913). ouse (see 20.380)—the question of the navigation of the english river, the great ouse, between bedford and king’s lynn was raised in 1913 at bedford and a committce was formed to inquire into the subject, but no further steps were taken until the land drainage act of 1918 made it possible to deal with the problem. the ouse is a long and difficult river, largely artificial, and in 1913 the locks were decayed and unworkable between bedford and st. ives. parts of the stream had never been ade- quately cleared and the cutting called the new bedford river, which carries one arm of the river to the sea, was suffering from a long period of neglect. in 1920 an act was passed superseding various minor authorities and placing the drainage of the ouse in the hands of a board. the decision to rate the owners and occupiers of land adjoining the river in the upper reaches above earith, where it enters the fen country, as well as the fen dwellers, for the purpose of making drainage and tidal channels in the fen area, aroused opposition from the first. the “ up- landers ” considered that their assistance should be confined to the portion of the river above earith, and the comparatively small area of land adjoining it. the ministry of agriculture, as the result of an inquiry held in 1924, decided that it was impos- sible to relieve them of their liabilities under the act, unless the government undertook comprehensive works on the tidal por- tion of the river. a suggested grant of about {1,500,000 was refused as insufficient and a long dispute followed between the drainage board and the upland farmers, who refused to pay the rate levied for administrative purposes. distraints were carried out in jan. 1925 and the goods sold at cambridge. protests from the upland riparian owners and occupiers’ association and continued refusals of payment led to further negotiations with the ministry of agriculture, which resulted in the passing of a temporary suspension order in april, with the proviso that no fresh rate should be levied or drainage work done in the “‘ upland ” area (except by consent of a sub-commit- tee of the board consisting of representatives of that area) until the end of 1926; that the ouse district should be surveyed; and that a commission should be appointed to investigate the whole problem. the upland riparian owners’ association adopted a fighting policy, stating that they did not require a drainage com- mission in their area; and that the river could be surveyed for obstacles and these removed, if necessary, by the national farm- ers’ union. they also put forward the suggestion that ‘with co- operation between the millers and the county surveyors the flood waters could be passed through more rapidly. efforts were being made later in the year to induce the “ uplanders ”’ to pay their arrears of rates. a new bridge over the old bedford river was begun in 1925, but difficulties were caused by the floods. it was decided to approach the county authorities with a view to their taking responsibility for the bridges, many of which were inade- quate for the traffic.