'SUMMARY OF THE PRINCIPAL EVENTS AND MEASURES OF THE VICEROYALTY OF HIS EXCELLENCY LORD CURZON OF KEDLESTON, VICEROY AND GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF INDIA IN THE FOREIGN DEPARTMENT. I. JANUARY 1899-APRIL 1904. II. DECEMBER 1904-NOVEMBER 1905. VOLUME IV. PERSIA AND THE PERSIAN GULF.' [‎121v] (247/386)

138
37. For this expansion of trade and influence in St istan, the British Consul
there (Major Trend)) reported when leav-
Hashmat-ui-Muik. ing Seistan in March 1V)01 that we were
in no small measure indebted to the friendly attitude ot Ali Akbar Khan,
better known as the Hnshmat-ul-Mulk, Governor of Seistan, who had given
encouragement and support to the Consul’s efforts to advertise the commercial
advantages of the Quetta-Seistan trade route and had thrown in his lot
with the British. As recognition for his loyalty he suggested a decoration
for the Hashmat, hut the Government of India were of opinion that it would best
serve the Hashmat’s interests if the Minister would use his influence when oppor
tunity offered to counteract misrepresentations already set on foot by M. Miller
against the Hashmat. The Legation was addressed accordingly.
38. On the 9th May 1901 Sir A. Hardinge reported .that there was a
proposal to sell the crown lands to the Hashmat who, however, was unable to
purchase them and the latter suggested that we should help him to buy them.
On 31st May 1901 Lord Curzon deprecated to the Secretary of State a proposal
which had been made to advance the money to the Hashmat-ul-Mulk, as a
secret arrangement with him would give us no control in Seistan ; what
we required was a recognition by the Persian Government of our predominant
interest in that Country. At the same time, His Excellency held that we
might, if necessary, so far befriend the Hashmat-ul-Mulk as to intimate that
his removal from the Governorship would be viewed by us with most serious
disfavour.
39. In the following month, on 26th June 1901, Lord Lansdowne.instruct-
„ . . ^ . , . . „ , . ed the British Minister at Tehran to speak
British interests m Seistan. . o i • A i j n
to the Sadr- 1 -Azam and dwell on the
importance of our commercial interests in Seistan w T hich we could not afford to
negleot, adding that we strongly deprecated any action on tho part of the
Persian Government which might occasion disturbances in Seistan, and
thereby compel us to take measures for the protection of those interests.
In communicating this message to the Grand Vizier, Sir A. Hardinge took the
opportunity to advert to the predominant interest of Great Britain in Seistan,
and, bearing in mind Lord Curzon’s telegram of 31st May, he pointed out
that, whilst repudiating all intention of interference in the internal admin
istration of the country, Lord Lansdowne could not be indifferent to the
interpretation which might be placed on the attitude of the Persian Govern
ment, in connection with those interests, towards the local authorities or Chiefs.
The Russian Vice-Consul had given out that the Hashmat-ul-Mulk was being
summoned to Tehran and had got into trouble, because he had cultivated good
relations with Major Trench and Major Benn, and absurd though such a story
might be, it might nevertheless have a regrettable effect in Seistan, if its circul
ation coincided with any symptoms of diminished confidence in the Hashmat on
the part of the Central Government. This warning was delivered at the right
moment, and the order which had issued, summoning the Hashmat-ul-Mulk to
Tehran,—the expected signal for his fall,—was suspended for the time being.
40. Sir A. Hardinge’s verbal communication to the Grand Vizier was fol
lowed up in July 1901 by a despatch from Lord Lansdowne, which formulated
in an unmistakeable manner the views of His Majesty’s Government in respect
to Seistan. His Lordship wrote that in the course of the past few months
rumours had reached His Majesty’s Government from various quarters of pro
jects to introduce the influence and authority of a Eoreign Power in Seistan,
and he thought it desirable to place on record their views with regard to their
interests in Seistan, in order that the Persian Government might clearly
understand the serious light in which they would regard any proposal to change
the existing situation in that country.
The Persian Government must be well aware of the political and commer
cial importance which attached to Seistan from its proximity to the frontiers
of India and of the desire which His Majesty’s Government had always shown
for the maintenance of an exclusively Persian authority in that district. The
interest of India in the country had, indeed, been recognised by the Persian