'File 39/2 (1 B/8) Effect of abrogation of APOC concession by Persian Government on oil market in Bahrain' [‎11r] (21/80)

3
5
of the Persian Government the Concession is no longer
fair to it. The Persian Government further alleges
that the Company has taken no practical steps to protect
the interests of Persia. Even if this statement were well-
founded, it would not justify the action of the Persian
« Government in cancelling the Concession as the Con-
C cession contains no clause entitling the Persian Govern
ment to cancel it in any such event, and, moreover, does
not impose upon the Company any obligation such as
that suggested by the Persian Government.
In order that you may form your own conclusion as
to the correctness of the Persian Government’s conten
tions, the following information is furnished :—
The D’Arcy Concession was granted to the late
Mr. D’Arcy in the year 1901 in due proper and legal
form by the then Persian Government, the Concession
being signed and sealed by His Imperial Majesty the
Shah of Persia and by his Prime Minister, and counter-
sealed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister
of Mines, the signature of His Imperial Majesty being
certified by the British Vice-Consul at Tehran.
As is well known, Mr. D’Arcy and his associates
spent some seven years prospecting the territory covered
by the Concession and expended thereon some hundreds
of thousands of pounds before the existence of oil in
commercial quantities was proved. It was only by virtue
of his persistence and energy and the capital that he
provided, or persuaded other persons to provide, that the
oil resources of the Persian Empire were eventually
proved. The Persian Government was not asked to take,
and, in fact, did not take any part of the risk involved