File 948/1909 'Persia: Situation in the South; Condition of the Roads. Attack on Mr Bill. Road Guard Scheme.' [‎251r] (506/744)

V *
[Th is Document is^he Piaierty of His Britannic Majesty’s G ovemmeiit]
». C< ^ > \lT ! . 'S In j
■ r, ;-\n RJlO
PERSIA.
CONFIDENTIAL.
,v-■/
"<0L
[February 24.]
Section 2.
[5355]
No. 1.
Foreign Office to Board of Trade.
gj r Foreign Office, February 24, 1910.
I AM dir6cted by Secretary Sir Edward Grey to acknowledge tbe receipt of your
letter of tbe l M4th instant, on the subject of the provision of guards for the protection
of trade on the roads of Southern Persia.
I am to observe that Sir E. Grey regards the scheme suggested by the British
acting consul at Shiraz, to which reference is made in the second paragraph of your
j \ letter, as superseded by the proposals contained in the telegram from His Majesty’s
lof>i Minister at Tehran, Nof t 772 of the 6th November last, communicated to you in
Sir F. Campbell’s letter of the 16th November, which, as you will have observed, are,
in the opinion of Sir G. Barclay himself, and also in that of His Majesty’s consul-
general at Bushire, and of the local representative of the Indo-European Telegraph
Department, less open to objection than Mr. Bill’s project.
The annual cost of working the later scheme is calculated at about 15,00(P.,
and the figures in Sir E. Grey’s possession show, as already stated, that the imposition
of a surtax of 10 per cent, at Bushire alone would not produce a sum sufficient to
defray this expense. 1 ^ „ ...
In this connection I am to refer you to the letter of the 13th October last iiom this
Office, enclosing copy of a despatch from Sir G Barclay, which gives a comparative
>A statement of the customs receipts from the Southern Persian ports for the financial
^ 'years 1907-8 and 1908-9, and for the first six months of the financial year 1909-10
^ (the 21st March-21st September, 1909).
It will be seen that for the financial year 1908-9 the total customs receipts irom
all these ports amounted to 8,231,563*55 krans (about 164,631/.) and those from
Bushire alone to 5,094,019*85 krans (about 101,880/.) If these figures be taken as
the basis of calculation, the surtax on the customs at all the ports would suflice to
meet the estimated cost of the scheme of protection, while that at Bushire alone
W0Ul The°figures for the first six months of 1909-10, however, show a considerable
decrease from those realised in former years, and if they are used as a 110 evei ^
the yield of the surtax at all the ports would meet the object with which it is propose
It would not, in Sir E. Grey’s opinion, be safe to assume that, m the continued
absence of any system of protection for trade, this decrease will be checked, and it is
indeed more likely to be increased. If, however, such a system is promptly put in
working order, a sufficient degree of improvement may be expecte o mam es i se
to allow the expense involved to be met by the surtax if applied a a P 01
I am to state that Sir E. Grey would he glad to be furnished with the statistics
which have led to the conclusion reached by the Board on tins sueject, m order that
it may be possible to explain the discrepancy between them and le gures m
possession.
1 am, &c.
LOUIS MALLET.
[2629 ««—2]