"F 80 ملف 82/34 I امتياز أ.ب.و.ك" [و‎‎٤‎١] (٤٣٦/٨٠)

THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT
PERSIA.
i%$\
.41
December 20, 1932.
A#<
CONFIDENTIAL. ^ | ^ >u | ^'S j S ection 3.
EflOim
[E 6746/3880/34] No. 1.
Mr. Hoare to Sir John Simon.—(Received December 20.)
(No. 505.)
Sir, Tehran, November 30, 1932.
WITH reference to my telegram No. 191 of the 28th November, reporting
the receipt by the resident director of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company on the
27th November of a formal letter from the Minister of Finance cancelling the
D'Arcy Concession, I have the honour to transmit herewith a translation of that
document.
2. For some days previously there had been an intensive press campaign
advocating this step, but as the Minister of Finance had informed Mr. Jacks that
he was on the point of submitting to the company proposals for establishing
relations on a new basis, I did not attach to the press campaign the importance I
should otherwise have done, but regarded it rather as a demonstration intended
to strengthen the position of the Persian Government when it came to actual
negotiations.
3. The Minister for Foreign Affairs had just returned from his visit to
Geneva and Ankara, and I had already asked for an interview which took place
yesterday (the 29th November).
4. After the usual exchange of courtesies, I told his Highness that I did not
propose to discuss in detail the action taken by the Persian Government, as I
regarded the matter as too serious to do so until I had received your instructions.
I wished, however, to know who was responsible. Feroughi replied that he
thought that the company was mainly responsible, having, over a considerable
period of time, shown no disposition to meet the legitimate wishes and aspirations
of the Persian Government. I told his Highness that I was convinced that, if he
would examine recent discussions between representatives of the Government and
the company, he would inevitably realise that there was no sort of justification
for his statement. I begged him to go into the matter carefully in order that,
when I received my instructions, he might be in a position to discuss the matter
with me. I invited his particular attention to the fact that it was less than ten
days ago that the Minister of Finance had definitely informed Mr. Jacks that he
was on the point of making formal proposals. His Highness suggested, in reply,
that, as the Persian Government had signified their readiness to conclude a fresh
concession, the situation was not really so serious as I represented it to be. I
replied that that argument could be used in defending the footpad who demanded
with threats of force the surrender of a man's pocket-book, but said that, when
it had been handed over, he would be prepared to discuss with his victim what
proportion of its contents he would restore.
5. I then asked his Highness again who was responsible for the decision
and when it was taken. He replied that it was taken by the Government and
shortly before his return. I reminded his Highness that, at the audience when I
presented my credentials. His Majesty had expressed very clearly his desire that
Anglo-Persian relations should be established on a firm basis of friendship.
Throughout my time here I had acted on the belief that this was a genuine desire,
and in this belief I had exerted myself to the utmost to induce His Majesty's
Government to continue friendly negotiations in spite of the demand for which
there was no justification on the subject of Hen jam, the only result being that
within a day or two of the return of the Minister for Foreign Affairs from abroad
the Persian Government had taken a decision for which there was no justifica
tion, either from the legal or moral aspect. Was I expected to believe that, in the
opinion of the Persian Government, the matter had no bearing on our relations,
or had his Department, in fact, been consulted? Feroughi indicated that he did
not know. He went on to express regret that an agreement had not been reached
(it was not clear whether he meant in respect of the general treaty negotiations
or of the affairs of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company), and he went on to say it was
[663 u—3]