‏"ملخص الأحداث والتدابير الرئيسية التي اتخذها سمو نائب الملك اللورد كرزون من كيدلستون، نائب الملك والحاكم العام للهند في إدارة الخارجية. ‏I‏. يناير ١٨٩٩-أبريل ١٩٠٤. ‏II‏. ديسمبر ١٩٠٤-نوفمبر ١٩٠٥. المجلد IV. بلاد فارس والخليج الفارسي." [ظ‎‎١‎٠‎٤] (٣٨٦/٢١٣)

it was presumed that they were not much exercised about it, partly owing
to the ignorance of the Kabul authorities regarding that region, and partly
because the Takht-i-Shah tract in time of inundation was more difficult of access
to the Afghans than to the Persians. In the case of the eastern border,
however, both sides were greatly excited, the Persians, because they depended
on canals to the west of the Nad Ali channel for the cultivation of the laklit-
i-Shah tract, and because the tract between the Nad Ali and the Rud-i-
Parian channels (called Mian Kangi) comprised very valuable lands; the
Afghans, because the drying up of the Nad Ali channel had thrown their lands
towards Cbakansur out of cultivation.
31. Briefly stated the Persians contended that General Goldsmid’s award
map was no authority, and they even denied ever having seen a copy of it.
They claimed that the boundary as defined in his award ran as follows. Prom
Koh-i-Malik Slab it ran, not in a straight line to Band-i-Kohak, but in such a
manner as to include in Persian territory the Tarakun tract and all the country
on the west of the Helmand, leaving only the small narrow fringe of Afghan
cultivation then in existence on the left bank of that river in Afghan teiritory.
Prom Kohak it followed the Helmand and the Nad Ali Sikhsar channel, and
thence northwards through the old Naizar to the northern edge of the Hamun,
and thence in a straight line to Slab Kob.
32. The Amir claimed a line from Koh-i-Malik Siah to Band-i-Kohak
including Ramrud in Afghan territory. (The Afghan Commissioner claimed
possession also of Hauzdar and Kuntdar). Prom Band-i-Kohak their line
followed the Helmand and Nad Ali channel to a point about one and a half
miles from Nad Ali near Burj-i-As and Deh Ido. It was contended that this
was the point at which, on General Goldsmid’s map, the boundary line left the
river and that therefore the Afghan boundary should run from here in a straight
line to Siah Koh. It will thus be seen that the Persians based their claims on
their own interpretation of the Goldsmid award and professed ignorance of his
map while the Afghans had never seen the award and insisted on a strict
adherence to the map.
33. Colonel McMahon’s general instructions were to adhere strictly
to the Goldsmid arbitral award as illustrated in his map, in order to
prevent the opening of new and wide questions. Both Persians and Afghans
were to be held strictly to this and consistently informed that the question
admitted of no further discussion. With regard to the clause of the
Goldsmid arbitral opinion dealing with old and new irrigation works,
the interpretation accepted by Her Majesty’s Government in 1873 was to be
regarded as finally settling this question, and it was to be understood that the
j'estrictions of General Goldsmid’s award on this point only applied to that
portion of the Helmand with which he was dealing, viz., the part which forms
the boundary.
34. The efforts of Russia to interfere with the mission continued both in
London and Tehran. Exaggerated rumours of the strength of Major
McMahon’s escort were utilized for further enquiries in both places, and in De
cember 1002 the Russian Embassy formally stated to Lord Lansdowne that
the Russian Government hoped that His Majesty’s Government would reduce
the escort and might even decide upon abandoning the Commission, in view
of the then abundance of water in Seistan. An interchange of views took place
between the Russian Ambassador and the Foreign Office, which was ended by
Lord Lansdowne in March 1903 reminding Count Benckendorff that the
Russian Government, while professing their continued adhesion to the principle
of maintaining the integrity of Persia, had contended that the delimitation of
the frontier between Persia and Russia was a matter for Russia and Persia
-alone, in which they would not recognise a right of interposition on the part
of any other Power, and the Russian Ambassador was informed that His
Majesty’s Government considered that they were entitled to maintain, with
regard to frontier questions concerning Persia and Afghanistan, an attitude
corresponding to that assumed by the Russian Government in regard to the
Russo-Persian frontier. Similarly at Tehran the Persian Government were
instigated to complain of the size of the escort, and tried to get the mission