File 2626/1905 ‘Persia:- Military Attaché at Meshed’ [‎19r] (42/532)

j
ENCLOSURES.
Enclosure No. 1.
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. to Foreign Office.
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. ,
Si r > 2nd September 1910.
I am directed by the Secretary of State for India to address you,
with reference to the correspondence ending with your letter No. 34,836
of 30th September 1909, on the subject of the permanent appointment
of an intelligence officer at Meshed.
The proposal was fully discussed in Sir A. Godley’s letter of
8th July 1908, and in Sir F. A. Campbell’s letter of 21st September 1908,
the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury were informed that “ Sir E.
“ Grey considers that there can be no question of objecting to the charge
“ on Imperial funds of one-half of the expense involved.” After some
further correspondence their Lordships agreed to the appointment “ for
“ a period of two years on the understanding that the question of its
“ continuance will be considered at the end of that period.” (Sir G.
Murray’s letter of 11th November 1908.)
The period in question expires on 20th October next, and Viscount
Morley trusts that Sir E. Grey will now be willing to press the Lords
Commissioners of the Treasury to agree to place the appointment upon
a permanent footing. I am to enclose copy of a letter that has been
received from the Government of India on the subject (Secret, No. 67
of 7th July 1910), and to say that His Lordship concurs in the views
therein expressed. He is strongly of opinion that in the absence of any
British Consular officer throughout the whole of Central Asia, it is
impracticable, on Imperial no less than on Indian grounds, to dispense
with the one trustworthy source of information as to what is taking
place in a vast area which is, moreover, not open to the unrestricted
movements of foreigners.
Turning to the question of expenditure, I am to enclose copy of
correspondence with the Government of India dealing with the points
raised in your letter of 30th September 1909. Lord Morley agrees
generally with the remarks of the Government of India as to the desig
nation and duties of the intelligence officer at Meshed, who would, in his
opinion, be better so described than by the somewhat misleading title
of Military Attache. The question whether the expenditure is excessive
should therefore, he thinks, be considered on its merits, without reference
to that incurred on dissimilar appointments elsewhere.
According to the information now furnished, the expenditure up to
21st October 1908 was as follows :—
1904- 05 -
1905- 06
1906- 07
1907- 08
1st April to 21st October 1908
Rs. £
14,550 = 970
10,771 - 718
31,155 = 2,077
29,229 = 1,949
20,001 - 1,333
This expenditure has not, up to the present, been included in the
annual statements of diplomatic and consular expenditure in Persia {vide
Notes on Meshed in Enclosure 2 of the letter from this Office of 17th
March 1909 and 19th March 1910); and, owing to a misapprehension,
the Imperial Exchequer has been invited, and has undertaken, to share
the pay only (varying from 574L 8s. to 927L 4s. per annum) of the
officer holding the appointment.
10387. B