Letters and Papers Concerning the Trans-Persian Railway and Other Railways in Persia [‎203r] (405/442)

491
The Trans-Persian liailioaij. [ 15 July
1912] The Trans-Persian Railway. 492
this particular project. We recognise as
fully as he could the various objections
which may be raised on different grounds
to the construction of this particular line.
But we do await frotn him any statement
that he may wish to make of what alterna
tive action he would have taken, what
policy he would have pursued in the
circumstances differently from our own ;
and I trust that he will be willing to admit
that we have done nothing which ought
to be treated as detrimental to the interests
either of India or of this country in the steps
which we have taken so far, or in not vetoing
the constitution of this Societe d’Etudes.
*Earl CURZON or KEDLESTON: My
Lords, I will, with the greatest pleasure,
answer the challenge which has been
directed to me both by the noble Viscount |
and by the noble Marquess. Both noble 1
Lords said to me, “ Had the proposals ,
made by the Societe d’Etudes come
before you, what would you have done in I
the circumstances ? Would you have met j
them with a point-blank refusal ? ” It is I
almost impossible for me to give a direct
answer to the question, because, of course,
I do not know the form in which the pro
posal first came before His Majesty’s
Government. I have no idea who started
it. It has been assumed more than once I
that the influence of the Russian Govern
ment is behind it. Whether the first
proposal came to His Majesty’s Govern
ment through a group of independent
financiers or through the Russian Govern- !
ment I do not know. The noble Viscount,
Lord Morley, more than once hinted, ^
although in somewhat obscure terms that
serious consequences might have ensued
if the British Government had taken any
other line. He hinted at pressure, diplo
matic or otherwise, that might have been
put on, either in this country or in Persia
or in India.
Viscount MORLEY: I never used any
word that carried pressure with it. I said
that combinations might naturally and
easily develop—arrangements which would
be more disadvantageous than any that
are now proposed.
♦Earl CURZOJST op KEDLESTON:
Exactly; but I am no wiser than I was
before. The noble Viscount indulged in
language of obscurity in his first speech
which I am bound to say he has not in
the least degree removed by his subsequent
explanation. I cannot say, therefore,
what I would have done in the circum- I
stances. But I think I may say what I
| " ou kl not have done. The noble Marquess
seemed to think just now that the action
i of His Majesty’s Government had been
confined to not placing a veto—I think
those were his words—upon the scheme,
burely they have gone a great deal further
than that. What I would not have done
would have been to say what the Secre
tary of State said in the House of Commons.
He distinctly stated that, given the satis-
| factory An East India Company trading post. conditions required by the Govern-
i ment, the Government were “ in principle ”
favourable to the scheme. That has never
| been said before by a British Government.
It was not the view of the Government of
my day, either in England or in India.
They were in principle unfavourable to
the scheme. Really if you have a Secretary
of State making this pronouncement
deliberately on behalf of his Government
in the House of Commons you cannot be
surprised if the result is what it has been—
namely, that your friends think that
you have given to the proposal a support
perhaps in excess of that which you have
actually done. Certainly that impression
exists, as you have admitted, in your own
| newspapers. It exists in both Houses of
Parliament, and I am not certain that a
lingering element of it does not exist in
my own mind still. To give a concrete
example. I think the noble Marquess
somewhat dissented from the idea that any
active steps had been taken in pursuance
of these plans by the Government of India.
I would point out that it is notorious that
an engineeer has been sent out—I know
his name and all about him—by the Govern
ment of India from Karachi to investigate
the country lying between Karachi and
the Persian border. If the Government
are merely not imposing a veto on the
scheme, why should they take this active
step and associate themselves with it ?
I am bound to say for my own part that
if there has been any misinterpretation of
the Government’s attitude they have only
themselves to thank.
The noble Marquess was kind enough to
give us some information with regard to
the opinions that have reached him from
the authorities, military and otherwise.
He told us that the Committee of Imperial
Defence have not yet been consulted.
If these plans take a shape later on that
will require them to be placed before that
Committee I do most earnestly hope that
we shall be favoured with their opinion.