‘GAZETTEER OF PERSIA VOL. I Comprising the Provinces of ASTARÁBÁD, SHÁHRUD-BÚSTAN, KHÚRÁSÁN, AND SÍSTÁN’ [‎303v] (613/722)

ordered the wife of Hasbim Khan to be arrested. This trivial quarrel
might have 1 een settled, as Mr. Murray offered to discharge Hashina Khan
from the British service, provided the woman was restored to her husband.
But it was soon evident that the Persian government wished to create a
rupture, in order to seize Herat, whilst Great Britain was engaged in
the Crimean war. Mfrza Agha Khan declared, what subsequently turned
out to be an unfounded slander, that Mr. Murray and his predecessor had
retained Hashim Khan in the service of the mission on account of his
wife. The result was that, in December 1855, the British mission
left Tihran.
Meantime, whilst the Crimean war was at its height, Persia was actively
engaged in prosecuting claims to the eastward, and extending her intluence
in that direction. In January 1853, an agreement had been concluded
between the British minister at Tihran and the Persian prime minister,
under which the Shah engaged to send no troops to Herat, unless that prin
cipality were invaded by troops from Kabul or Kandahar, or from some
other foreign country. In January 1856, however, prince Sultan Murad,
the governor of Khurasan, marched an army against Herat. He captured
the fort of Ghurian; but for a long time failed to take Herat. At length
the capture was effected; but meantime the Russian war was brought to a
close, and in November 1856 the government of India declared war
against Persia.
In December 1856, the British expedition arrived in the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. ,
and occupied the island of Karak. In January 1857, Sir James Outram
took the command, and subsequently advanced from Bushahr; and on the
8th February defeated the Persian army at Khushab. On the 26th March,
Muhammarah was captured. Meantime, a treaty had been concluded at
Paris, under which the British forces were to withdraw from Persia; and
the Shah relinquished all claim to suzerainty in Herat and the countries
of Afghanistan, and engaged to abstain from all interference in their
internal affairs.
The following remarks on the present condition and probable future of
Persia are of interest :
if the soil is not exhausted, nor the people show any signs of a decaying
race, is Persia likely to develop any steady improvement by herself; or must
she seek help from Europe ? Perhaps it was not a bad thing that the con
cessions to Baron Reuter fell through. One example, such as Egypt, is
sufficient of the exploitation of an oriental country by European speculators.
Persia is fortunate in her remoteness from Europe. Her neighbour, Turkey,
may serve her as a warning of the consequences which attend the borrowing of
European money. As a military power, Persia is much wmaker than Turkey;
but, financially and politically, she is in a position incomparably better.
Persia has no public debt; and she is not engaged in a perpetual struggle
with the W estern powers, nor exposed to remonstrance or rebuke or dictation
in respect of matters of domestic administration. There is, indeed, no room
for interference. There are no Greek Christians in unwilling subjection; and
the Armenian community are contented with security of life and property.
Moreover, the country is at one with itself—free from internal intrigue and
disquieting rumours, no less than from actual revolt. The one thing wanted
is a better system of government. It seems to be admitted that the Shah
himself is the ablest man in the country, and that his intentions are good.
But he can only see with the eyes and hear with the ears of his officials; and