Coll 28/39(2) ‘Persia. Printed Correspondence, 1937–’ [‎37v] (74/320)

72
4. In this background of “ spite"’, lavck of esteem and “ disdain ” the political
events of the last few weeks could not but provoke a further tension of feelings.
The Coronation festivities could not have come off at a worse moment than the
present, when the whole of India was irritated and agitated by political movements, ^
strikes, which in certain provinces, like Bengal, had assumed alarming proportions,
and armed revolts, and when a new civil disobedience campaign was being
threatened.
5. Naturally, there had been proposals for boycotting the Coronation festi
vities in India, but the Congress leaders did not do anything : they wanted to
ignore the celebrations altogether. After quoting from an article in the Calcutta
“ Amrita Bazar Patrika ” criticising the Government invitation to the municipalities
to celebrate the Coronation with fireworks and illuminations, Signor Aponte said
that certain municipalities did not accept the invitation, while others decided to
use the money by distributing clothes and foodstuffs to the poor, by building
hospitals and leper settlements, which, together with schools, India needed most
of all.
6. The ec Stampa ” Jerusalem correspondent stated that the Arabs there
maintained a reserved attitude on the occasion of the Coronation festivities, dis
played no flags and took no part whatever in the ceremonies.
( 53 )
Letter from the British Legation, Tehran, to the Foreign Office, London,
No. 105/30/37, dated 19th June 1937.
We have got on the way out a consignment of corrugated iron roofing which is
being sent out by the Office of Works for the Consulate at Kermanshah, and which
has been addressed to the Consul. Normally such consignments in order to avoid
customs charges, are addressed to the Legation unless they are due to arrive within
the Consul’s period of nine months franchise. In this particular case, even though
the consignment won’t arrive within this period, no great loss will be sustained as,
on account of its weight, transport from Kermanshah to Tehran and ba ;k would
probably cost almost as much if not more than the actual duty.
2. We have however sounded the Protocol Department somewhat tentatively
about whether materials of this sort imported from abroad for a Consulate are
liable to duty or not. (They are not really covered by the list given in the law of
articles which are exempt.) The Protocol have replied by hinting at reciprocity.
We are not quite sure whether we want to press the point, which might possibly
give an awkward precedent as far as India was concerned, but before going further
we should be most grateful if you would be so good as to let us know what the
position would be in a similar case in the United Kingdom. At Kermanshah the
Consulate is owned by His Majesty’s Government and the roofing is required for
the actual structure.
Enclosure to Serial No. (53).
Letter from Foreign Office, London, to the British Legation, Tehran,
No. T.-l 0074/70/373, dated 16th July 1937.
Your letter 105/30/7 of the 19th June regarding a consignment of corrugated
iron roofing for the Consulate at Kermanshah.
Consignments of this nature intended for foreign Consulates in this country
would be admitted duty-free as “ official supplies ”, provided the material was
the property of the foreign government concerned at the time of importation.
So far as we are aware, the policy of the Government of India in these matters
is point-for-point reciprocity. You might perhaps tell the Iranians what the
practice is in the United Kingdom, and see how it works.
( 54 )
Letter from the British Legation, Tehran, to the Foreign Office, London,
No. 183, dated 25th May 1937.
With reference to my despatch No. 133 of April 9th .last, concerning the
closure of the Ahwaz customs and also the more general question of congestion at
the Gulf ports, I have the honour to transmit herewith a copy of an interesting