Coll 28/95 ‘Persia. Relations with H.M.G. Private claims against H.M.G.: case of the S.S. “Kara Deniz”.’ [‎97v] (194/691)

Sykes, J. S., Manchester—
Peace : (Nil). War : £47,000.
(Claim made on behalf of unnamed underwriters.)
Times Dharwar and Co., London—
Peace : 2,365 krans and £120 17s. \\d. War : (Nil).
Weir, A., and Co., London—
Peace: 47,500 krans. War: (Nil).
Ziegler and Co.. Manchester—
Peace : 539,800 krans and £231 12s. Od. War : 1,748,927 krans and
£3.497 13s. tid.
(There are large additions of interest in a number of these claims.)
H. RITCHIE.
December 31, 1934.
Appendix 1.
Sir R. Hoare to Sir John Simon.
(No. 69.)
Sir, Tehran, February 18, 1933.
AS arranged in private correspondence with your Department (see my letter
of the 31st December, 1932, to Mr. Rendel), I have the honour to transmit
herewith lists of the various British claims outstanding against the Persian
Government. It will be remembered that in 1923 a previous list of claims was
transmitted to your Department under cover of Sir P. Loraine’s despatch No. 308
of the 11th July of that year.
2. The claims dossiers themselves will be packed in a box, which will be
taken to Bagdad by the ordinary fortnightly courier. His Majesty’s Embassy
have been requested to arrange onward transmission across the desert to Beirut
and thence to London. The box will be addressed to the Librarian, the
Foreign Office.
3. A copy of this despatch accompanies the claims, and to each bundle or
section is attached a copy of the covering list.
4. Some explanation is perhaps needed of the method that has been adopted
in arranging the claims now transmitted. The claims are in two main classes,
(a) “ consulate ” claims, (b) “ Tehran ” claims.
5. As regards the former, it will suffice if I draw attention to the circular( A )
addressed to all His Majesty’s consular officers in Persia in 1924. This circular
explains the method followed at almost all consular posts, the only exceptions
being noted and explained in Annex II to this despatch.
6. The claims on the “ Tehran ” list were, however, not dealt with in the
same manner. The “ consulate ” claims are in almost every case provided with
the necessary affidavits and declarations, but, owing to pressure of work and the
large number of claims involved, it proved impossible to follow the same method
in regard to the Tehran claims. In 1925-26, however, Mr. J. P. G. Finch, at
that time probationer vice-consul at the Legation, went through the archives of
the Legation and laboriously collected from the enormous number of dossiers
under review (many of them unindexed volumes containing masses of unrelated
papers) all possible documents bearing on the claims. These documents he
arranged in separate dossiers, one for each claim. These dossiers have now been
examined by Mr. Busk and Mr. Gamble; all unnecessary papers have been
removed from them, and in many cases additional papers have been added from
later archives. Moreover, various new claims have been added to the 1924 list,
originally compiled by Mr. Humphreys. The labour thus involved was consider
able, but the task of arranging the Tehran claims in dossiers would have been
quite impracticable with the available staff had it not been for the invaluable
work performed by Mr. Finch, whose labours in this connexion are deserving of
the highest praise. Mr. Busk and Mr. Gamble have, in addition, prepared the
covering lists to the “consulate ’’ claims, Shiraz having been the only post to
supply one, and checked the dossiers, and I am greatly indebted to them for the
time and trouble they have taken.
7. It is thus clear that, while the “ consulate ’’ claims are in most cases
fully supported by affidavits, the “ Tehran ’’ claims are not. Each “ Tehran ”
(*) No. 30 of July 29, 1924 : a copy formed Annex 1 to the despatch ; not printed.