"القرض الفارسي. برقيات، ٢٠ يناير - ١ أبريل." [و‎‎١‎٥‎٢] (٢٢/٥)

3
exclusively concerned with the defence of India. Nevertheless it con
tains m our opinion, the ger to of a valuable suggestion, and subject to one
condition it is a plan which we should be prepared to recommend your
Lordship to pursue. The condition is that no gap is left between the Kanin
river and what is very vaguely defined as Seistan and South Eastern Persia
Otherwise Russia would be left free to reach the sea anywhere through the
intervening territory, and to build railways to Bunder Abbas Bushire or
other ports. It is only on the condition that the proposed monopoly includes
the entire belt of Persia south of the line, Khanikin, Kermanshah
Ispahan, Yezd, Kerman, Seistan, that we consider that Indian revenues
should be used for advance to Persian Government. We should be willing
in return for such a monopoly to find a sum not exceeding 1,000,000/., in one
or more instalments, interest at 4 per cent, being payable thereon until the
amount due as interest is covered by net revenue from railways, roads, and
other works that may be constructed, the security being the entire customs and
excise revenue south of the proposed line, in so far as these are not already
pledged. Care would have to be taken to define accurately these revenues so
as to preclude taxes being raised or hypothecated in future for other and
unfriendly purposes ; also to prevent any third party being brought into the
monopolised area, should we be unwilling or unable to construct railways or
other public works there. Until, however, we know more of the situation,
we reserve our comments on these smaller points.
i5i-
From Secretary of State to Viceroy, 4/A March 1903.
P. —Scheme for Persian loan suggested in my telegram of 20th February
was the outcome of a general conference between Foreign Office, Treasury,
and India Office. A similar conference, having considered the scheme pro
posed in your telegram of 20th February, have arrived at conclusion that its
extent would be likely to cause Persia to reject it, and that it is desirable,
as India is, according to the proposal of His Majesty's Government, to bear
the whole expense, that our plan should be limited to area strictly required
for defence of India. Could you give me an idea of minimum area which
icould be sufficient for this purpose in opinion of your Government.
From Viceroy, 1th March 1903.
p.— Your telegram of 4>th March asking our views in regard to Persian
loan proposals. As far as defence of India is concerned, no one portion of
Southern Persia is, in our opinion, much more important than another.
A Russian port on the Gulf, connected with a Russian railway, involving the
Russification of the territory through which it passes, is the main danger to
be feared. We object to Russia having any Gulf port or any railway to it.
Our objection is not appreciably diminished by increased distance of such a
port from Baluchistan.
Consequently, we are not disposed to contract monopoly area recommended
bi) us on 26th; but, as a possible suggestion, if His Majesty's Government are
prepared to in terpret the promises, made by late Shah in autograph letter of
\6th September 1888, and confirmed by present Shah on 12th April 1900, as
conferring on Great Britain a monopoly in the country north of Shuster, then
our line might be from Ispahan to Shuster {thereby giving us claim to
Ahwazdam), instead of from Ispahan to Burnjird and Kermanshah.
The Shah's promises were as follows :—
( a \ priority to British for construction of railway from South to
Teheran. . , 7 A _ x ,
(b) That whenever a railway concession was given to others in the i\orth,
V we should receive the concession of a line from Teheran to Shuster
or a similar line. . n -
(c) T h a t without consultation with the British Government no foreign
company should be granted a concession for a line in the Soutn.
B
S. 19.