'Précis of the Affairs of the Persian Coast and Islands, 1854-1905 By J A Saldanha, BA LL B' [‎64r] (127/212)

ii5
the eastern parts of the world, European persons trading under the shelter and protection
of those establishments are conceived to take their national character from that association
under which they live and carry on their commerce."
It is a rule of the law of nations applying particularly to those countries, and is different
from what prevails ordinarily in Europe and the western parts of the world, in which men
take their national character from the general character of the country in which they are
resident, and this distinction arises from the nature and habit of the countries. In the
western parts of the world alien merchants mix in the society of the natives; access and
intermixture are permitted, and they become incorporated to almost the full extent. But
in the east, from the oldest times, an immiscible character has been kept up. Foreigners
are not admitted into the general body and mass of the society of the nation; they
continue strangers and sojourners as all their fathers were.
" Dorsi amara suam non intermiscit tendam."
Not requiring any national character under the general sovereignty of the country,
and not trading under any recognized authority of their own original country, they have
been held to derive their present character from that of the association or factory An East India Company trading post. under
whose protection they live and carry on their trade.
These authorities establish the position that, in the absence of Treaty, local usage in
Mahomedan countries m the east, has engrafted an exception to the general territorial
jurisdiction in favour of Christians, by giving them the ■protection of their own factories
and Consuls ; but that this exception would not extend to Mahomedans, who might be
living, for the time beina, in Mahomedan countries. This being the state of the law and
usage in the absence of Treaty, it seems most unlikely that the Persian Government
intended to allow Persians, who may be Persian subjects as also British subjects to be
exempted from the operation of their territorial law.
390. The Government of India in endorsing this opinion desired that the
Resident's interposition on behalf of such persons should be restricted to affording
his good offices as in the case of ordinary Persian subjects (Mr. Aitchison's
letter, dated 5th September 1874).
391. In 1876 Her Majesty's Minister at Tehran reported to the Foreign
, „ ^ „ Office that the Persian Government had
ecret, eptem er i 7 , os. 90 9. v granted a Persian subject Agha Mehedi,
born in India of Persian parents, the right of trading on payment of the 5 per cent,
duty established by treaty for British merchants, but that they had given notice
that they would in future consider and treat such persons as Persian subjects
within Persian territory. The Foreign Office (Lord Derby) after consulting the
Law Officers held (Foreign Office to Mr. Taylour Thompson), No. 49, dated
24th July 1876) :—
Assuming the law of Persia applicable to the cases which you expect may arise, to he
correctly staled by the Persian Minister, Her Majesty's Government consider that a man
born of Persian parents in Her Majesty's dominions cannot in Persia claim or be
entitled to the privileges of a British subject, but is in Persia subject to all the obliga
tions which the law of Persia imposes upon its own subjects.
392. The British Minister at Tehran accordingly gave the Persian Govern
ment to understand that such persons would
Political A., October 1877, N03. 121-129. ^ , , j d V i . i •,
not be taken under Dntish protection while
residing in Persia.
393. It was not intended that this view would affect persons like Mahomed
Agha Mehedi whose position as British proteges had long been recognized. Bat
the Persian Government declined to treat them as such and when Mahomed Agha
Mehedi was charged the rates levied in Persian subjects and the British Minister
mad erepresentations, the Persian Government contended that while only 5 per cent,
was to be levied from him, the British Legation ought not to interfere in his favour
even if charges in excess of 5 p. c. were exacted from him and that he should
address his representation direct to the Persian authorities.
394. In 1883 one Abbas Agha Hassan, who was born in Mauritius, complained
to tne Governor there that, on applying to
E*ternal A., September .884, No,. 2.3-2.9. the Resident on the p ersian Gulf, he had
been refused a pass and permission to trade as a British subject in Persia.
This led to Sir John Pope Hennessy to represent the matter to Colonel
Ross, who in reply pointed out that, although born in Mauritius, Abbas Agha
Hassan was of Persian parentage and the fact of birth in a British dominion did