Coll 29/86 'Diplomatic and consular expenditure: incidence; revision; general' [‎223r] (445/561)

M
J
c,
- r
^ S’
/ f / 7J
7*
k' LW~<
5 / O
r
60 «-o
C ia— j ^ 4^V-
^ **"*- A 4 ^-rxO 'Q-^LAu^r ^ £ f .
f 3 ) r
‘/•3
Hevision of incidence of Diplomatic
and Consular•expenditure in'Persia.
As a result of the recommendations of the
Weiby Commission (1900) the cost of Diplomatic
and Consular services.in Persia has, for the last
_ x
xme Wei by Commission twenty-five years, been shared in. roudily,
; recommended equal . I , ~ > > ^ ,
I division: the financialmoieties by Indian and Imperial Revenues. The
arrangements made to
give effect to this Legation at Tehran and the Consular posts in
recommendation took
; into account I T or them and Western Persia are maintained and paid
(adjustment of various
I other payments from for in the first instance b r the Foreign Office,
land to Imperial
[Revenues and resulted those in East and South Persia by the Indian
|m the constant
Ipayment by India in Political Department. The two annual hills are
^respect of diplomatic
;dnd consular services adjusted subsequently so that of their combined
totals a half (actually £1712 less) is paid by the
Foreign Office and a half (actually £1712 more)
by India. A feature of the arrangement is that
neither party may incur new expenditure of more than
£100 per annum without the consent of the other:
causes much
otherwise avoidable correspondence, delay and
admi ni str ativ e inconv e nience.
in Persia of £3424
)per annum more than
[is paid by Foreign
■Office. ‘ .
this, though a necessary reservation,
The principle of division in moieties
between Indian and Imperial Revenues originally
applied only to the cost of representation, but was
by analogy extended to other ’’political expenditure”
in Persia, which, before the war, comprised
mainly loans to the Persian Government, and during
the War, unsecured advances of hr ;e sums for
various purposes, some of which did not meet with
—