File 1311/1905 ‘Persian Gulf: - Post Offices. (Parcel Post Convention)’ [‎117r] (242/434)

A- ^
[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty’s Governm Pn t. ]
/2 iCfoG ,
[February 19.]
PERSIA.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[5902]
Section
Mr. E. Grant Duff to Sir Edward Grey.—[Received February 19.)
Gfru (s^vuV*.
(No- 29 -) llyltkfll, M
Sir, Tehran, February 1 , 1906. ^
I HAVE the honour to inclose copy of a despatch from the Government of Indiay '
received by me in November 1905, regarding the British post-offices in the Persian
Gulf.
As I reported in my telegram No. 17, Lord Lansdowne’s despatch No. 85 of the
17th June, 1905, was, by Sir A. Hardinge’s instructions, handed by me in origiual
to M. Nans in July 1905, and since then, in spite of many applications, I have been
unable to get a definite reply from the Customs Department. Before leaving here in
October 1905, AI. Naus verbally informed me that he had been so heavily engaged
that he had had no time seriously to study the question, but he said that, personally, he
saw no objection to an agreement regarding the parcel post on the lines proposed by
Lord Lansdowne. He added that he would discuss the matter fully with me on his
return to Tehran in January.
I waited before sending you the inclosed despatch till I could receive a definite
answer, hut M. Naus shows no sign of returning to Persia. The Administrator of
Customs has now telegraphed to his Excellency, and has promised me an answer in a
few days.
On the 19th January the Government of India telegraphed for my views, and I
replied that I concurred in the opinion that, although the postal rights claimed for
our post-offices in the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. are somewhat anomalous when judged by the
rules of the Postal Union, these post-offices occupy a privileged position which ought
not to he judged by, or made to conform with, the rules observed by other nations.
I added that I thought the negotiations should be limited to an agreement in regard
to the parcel post.
M. Naus will attend the Postal Conference at Rome, and although he appeared
personally ready to come to an agreement, it is possible that the Persian Government,
who resent the fact that we have post-offices in the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. , may have given
him instructions to raise the question of their existence.
I understand that Lord Lansdowne’s instructions refer only to the parcel post,
and that no Postal Convention is contemplated by His Majesty’s Government.
I have, &c.
(Signed) EVELYN GRANT DUFF.
Inclosure in No. 1.
c
Government of India to Sir A. Hardmge. ‘
(Confidential.)
Simla, September 19, 1905.
I AM directed to invite attention to the correspondence ending with your
despatch dated the 19th May, 1905, regarding the British post-offices in the Persian
Gulf.
2. On the 8 th June, 1905, the Secretary of State for India telegraphed that you
were heini? authorized to conclude, in consultation with the Government of India, an
arrangement with the Persian Government on the lines of the procedure which is
observed at Constantinople in regard to parcel mails from the United Kingdom.
But in your despatch of the 19th May, 1905 (above quoted), it is stated that
M. Naus desires to conclude a Postal Convention with the Government of India, and
would like a representative of the Indian Post Office to be sent to negotiate or assist
in the negotiation of it.
3, Before coming to a decision on M. Naus’ suggestion, the Government ol India
desire that the following considerations be laid before vou:—
[1845 L-17]