"القرض الفارسي. برقيات، ٢٠ يناير - ١ أبريل." [و‎‎١‎٥‎٥] (٢٢/١١)

6
to w»ck f rc ,h political Si cr«.1si 1, ““;
control. From the first our loan projects havr feiM from h^rT 31
ambitious, and as you have j’skerl fm- rmr nrm x being too
think this is its weik point; ^ 1
as I receive definite instructions to do so. ' P 4 on
(Repeated to Viceroy.)
From Marquess of Lansdotone to Sir A. Hardinqe
l%th March 1903.
(No. 26.) Tour telegram No. 55.
I do not understand how we could make a loan through Bank of Persia as
lender in view ot objections raised in November 1901 to our proposed advance
through Bank. On what do you base your statement that the Russians
admit that they cannot object to it ?
As to scheme described in Viceroy’s telegram, do you believe that Persian
(jovei nment can accept from any source other than Russian financial assist
ance which carries with it payment of interest over a number of years, and
if you do, what form would you suggest that it should take?
hrom Sir A. Hardinge to the Marquess of Lansdowne*
19^ March 1903.
(No. 36.) Your telegram of yesterday.
Russian objection [in] 1901 was to direct advance by His Majesty’s
Government: whether it was made or not through Imperial Bank of Persia
was not before Russians, but if avowed lender was British Government, they
would doubtless have objected whatever the agency. So lorur, however, as
Imperial Bank of Persia is nominal principal they cannot object as they
have grudgingly admitted to Grand Vizier Persia’s right to borrow from that
institution, and she has, in fact, done so since loan contract of 1900 up to
240.000J., and would have borrowed more if Bank’s capital had allowed it.
Thus Grand Vizier asked me in the autumn of 1901 to obtain for him
300,000/. from Bank, and directors at first told your Lordship that they
could provide it, but afterwards failed to do so. Had they succeeded, and
had Russia asked questions as to how, with a capital of 650,000/., Bank
could lend Persia 200,000/. in spring and 300,000/. in autumn, Grand Vizier
would have replied that he did not know. He might suspect that we had
helped either by purchasing shares or guaranteeing loan to Bank from other
financiers, but, unless he had official knowledge of this, it would be no
concern of his.
He cannot deal direct with us or with a foreign Syndicate; he can with
Imperial Bank of Persia, and he is not obliged to know or ask what is
behind it. If, therefore, we could utilise our Bank as the Russians have
done theirs, finance it, and if it is desired to [group omitted] its permanent
British character, buy shares as suggested by me in it, I believe we could
neutralize Russian loan monopoly, besides saving the Bank itself from
succumbing to Russians, which would be a great blow to our position
here. # . . .
"With regard to your Lordship s second question Persia could, I imagine,
borrow from Indo-European Telegraph Department (as she has done from
Indo-European Company! in the form of discount on future receipts with,
perhaps, other guarantees as collateral security; and the same applies to
Darcy’s Oil Company. As regards fresh loans it does not matter who the
real provider of the funds is, so long as nominal lender is not foieign
Government or financier.