"ملف 39/2 (1 B/8) تأثير إلغاء الحكومة الفارسية لامتياز شركة النفط الأنجلو-فارسية على سوق النفط في البحرين" [و‎‎٧] (٨٠/١٣)

( 2 )
cancelling Anglo-Persian Oil Company concession, Eden read
text of note handed Persian foreign minister second December
by British Minister Tehran which described Persian Governments
action as inadmissible breach of terms of concession stated
British government took most serious view of Persian Govern
ments conduct and demanded immediate withdrawal of notification
issued to Company, Hope was expressed that Persian Govt,
would be at pains to reach amicable settlement in direct
negotiation with Company but British Government would not
hesitate if necessity arose to take all legitimate measures
to protect their just and indisputable interests. Note added
British Government would not tolerate any damage to Company* s
interests or interference with their premises or business
interests in Persia, Persian Governments reply dated third
December maintained Persian government was within its rights
in cancelling concession, failed to agree to withdraw
notification of cancellation, stated Persian Government had
not refused direct discussions with Company with view to
negotiating new concession and declared Persian Government
did not regard itself as responsible for any damage accruing
to Company, As British Government regarded this reply as
wholly unsatisfactory British Minister Tehran under their
instructions today delivered further note text of which
was also read to House, Note stated British Government were
unable to admit validity of unilateral cancellation of
concession* Such cancellation was confiscatory measure and
clear breach of international law committed against British
company and British Government felt obliged to take matters
up in exercise of their rights to protect interests of their
nationals. From outset British Government had been anxious
that amicable settlement should br reached between Persian
Government and Company but could not regard Persian reply
as offering any satisfactory basis for such settlement.
Note proceeds ’’Should Persian government be unwilling to
withdraw their notification of cancellation of concession
within one week from date of present note that is thursday
IJth December His Ma'esty*s government will have no alternative
to referring dispute which ^ias arisen between them and Persian
Government in regard to legality of Persian governments action
to permanent court of international justice at Hague as matter
of urgency under optional clause. In so doing His Majesty's
government would request court to indicate under article
fortyone of statute provisional measures which ought to be
taken to preserve their rights.” Note concludes "His
Majesty's government will hold Persian government directly
responsible for any damage to Company* s interests any
interference with their premises or business activities in
Persian or any failure to afford Company adequate protection
and in event of any such damage occurring His Majesty's
government may demand for Company's protection.”
12th Deer. 1932
Further particulars regarding Anglo-Persian Oil Company*
D'Arcy concession were given in response to Commons question
by undersecretary foreign affairs Anthony Eden. He said
concession was granted by Persian Government for sixty years
from May 1901 and contained no provision which would now
allow cancellation by either side. Only power of cancellation
in concession was provision that if within two years concession
aree should not have formed first company to operate it
concession should become null and void. That clause never
came into operation since first exploitation Company was
duly formed within prescribed period. Concession provided
for annual payment to Persian Government of sixteen percent
of annual nett profits of any companies formed to operate
concession. Total sum paid to Persian Government in Royalties
up to 31st December 1931 amounted to £.11,265,000. Present
’ > inn—wiir^, 'ii