'SUMMARY OF THE PRINCIPAL EVENTS AND MEASURES OF THE VICEROYALTY OF HIS EXCELLENCY LORD CURZON OF KEDLESTON, VICEROY AND GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF INDIA IN THE FOREIGN DEPARTMENT. I. JANUARY 1899-APRIL 1904. II. DECEMBER 1904-NOVEMBER 1905. VOLUME IV. PERSIA AND THE PERSIAN GULF.' [‎79r] (162/386)

CHAPTER VII.
Anylo-Per&ian Commercial Convention (Tariff).
In Chapter III mention was made of the employment by the Persian Gov
ernment of Belgian Customs experts for the purpose of reforming its customs
administration. The full fiscal benefit of this measure would be incomplete so
Long as the 5 per cent, ad valorem tariff remained unchanged.^ Lp to lyiM
° 1 British goods entering Persia and Persian
Existing tarifl arrangements. exported to the British Empire paid
a duty of 5 per cent, ad valorem in aceordance with the most-favoured-nation
clause in the Anglo-Persian Treaty of 1851. This 5 per cent. ^ valorem
duty was fixed by the Treaty of Turkomanchai (182S) between Russia and Persia,
and could not therefore be increased by Persia without the consent ot the Russian
Government. After our war with Persia, when we concluded the treaty ot l axis,
in 1857, we did not insert a similar stipulation but were content with the mere
most-favoured*nation clause. The result of this omission was that when in
1901 the recklessness of the Shah decided the Persian Government, with
a view to obtaining further financial assistance, to increase ^ its revenue by
raisin" the Customs duties, they had only to deal with Russm and Turkey
and were legally free to impose upon our commerce any tariff which they
could get those two Powers to accept. We had no doubt, a moral r 1 ^
in view of our peculiar relations with Persia, and the volume of our trade
with her, to be consulted in the matter, and we were so eonsu ted to some
extent viz., so far as the Russian Government would allow it. And, as a
matter of fact, a reduction of the very high duty which the new tariff originally
contemplated and to which the Government of India took grave exception w^a
obS But it was obvious from the first that the Russian Government
It were the real masters of the situation, would only accept a re-arrangemen
of the duties such as was desired by Pema on “^^^Ifi interested and
favourable to those articles in which Russian trade was chiefly interested, ana
that the increased taxation should be furnished by imports from countries othe
1 an Russia such as silks, wines, and brandies, which come chiefly front
France, teas’and indigo from India and numerous classes of manutactuicd
articles produced chiefly in Germany and Austria.
2 In April 1900, the first whisper of the impending change was reported
^ ln 1 1 by Mr. Spring-Rice to the British Foreign
proposed change of tariff. Office who, after consulting the Board
nf Trade and the India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. , instructed him to maintain a very watchful
attitude in the matter, to obtain, if possible, an engagement from the 1 ersian
Government that the British Minister would be consulted before any change was
actually decided upon, and to insist, as far as possible, that the specific d
on cotton goods, tea, rice and indigo should not fall at an incidence gmater
than 5 per cent, ad valorem at a moderate tariff valuation and that they shou
he liable to periodical revision in accordance with the fluctuation of prices.
S Meanwhile the Government of India were consulted. It appeared from
the papers forwarded iu October 1900 that a plan was under preparation for a
new tariff on the basis of :— .
(а) Ad valorem duties on merchandise of a valuable kind. .
(б) Specific duties on merchandise of less valuable description.
(c) The imposition of a rahdari tax (toll or transit duty) on all articles
imported or exported.
{d) The abolition of all export duties except those on wheat and opium.
4. In their reply of February ^OJ^^oT^sugar ^to UiT^rtlcks
Opinion of the Government of India. specified in paragraph 2 above, pointing out
that the trade in that article though not of Indian origin was valuable to the
intermediaries 'engaged iu it in India whose interests should be protected. It