"سكة حديد بغداد" [و‎‎٣‎٧] (١٢٩/٧٣)

ports constituting the “ Banddir District ” administered by the Governor of Bushire,
which extends from Bunder Rig on the west to a point just west of Jask on the east, but
does not include Mohammerah in Arabistan, or Jask, Charbar, or Gwetter in Persian
Baluchistan. Or it may be held to comprise all the Customs division administered by
the “Direction Generale ” of the Persian Gulf at Bushire, which at present excludes
Mohammerah, but takes in the ports of Persian Baluchistan. A still wider definition
would include besides the stations within the limits of this division, Mohammerah (with
its dependencies Shuster and Ahwaz) which, whilst not for administrative purposes a
part of the Provinces of Pars or Ben&dir (Bushire) or for Customs purposes under the
Director-General of Bushire, is nevertheless a “port of the Persian Gulf” though the
Russians, I believe, argue that Mohammerah, being 60 miles up the Shat-el-Arab,°is not
a Gulf port in the strict sense of the term.
When the first Russian loan was negotiated in 1900, the Persians intimated, I
believe, to Russia that they had promised us not to place their southern customs under
foreign control, and as Russian control was a contingent condition of the loan, their
exclusion had to be provided for. The term “Customs of Pars and of the Ports of
the Persian Gulf” was accordingly adopted in the contract, and the Persian negoliators,
who are never precise, w^ere satisfied with it, as expressing all the custom-houses con
trolled from Bushire, with which those of Jask, Chabar, and Gwetter, were in process of
amalgamation. Mohammerah, and its dependent customs, Ahwaz and Shuster, were at
that time outside'this division, their administration being still in the hands of Sheikh
Khazal, and they were only united to it in the autumn of last year, to be again
separated from it (no doubt at Russian instigation) a few months ago, and constituted as
a separate division under the title of “ Direction Generate de 1’Arabistan.”
It must be noted in this connection, and whether we like it or not, it is undoubtedly
a weak point in our case, that at the time when the Russian loan contract was first
published, on the 30th January, 1900, with the clause excluding only the customs of
bars and the Persian Gulf, His Majesty’s Government made no formal reservation or
piotest with regard to this particular point, either to Russia or Persia, on the strength
of the engagement of 189 f. They had official knowledge from the communique in the
St. Petersburgh “ Pravitelstvenny Viestnik,” which reproduced the substance, but not
the actual articles, of the Agreement, that all the customs of Persia, except those of
“ l <ars an d ihe Gulf, ’ were pledged to and w r ere liable to contingent control by Russia,
but they did not even demand to be furnished with a text of the loan Agreement, in
order to ascertain how far it affected the engagement of 1897. Sir Charles Scott,
indeed, spontaneously reminded M. de Witte of that engagment verbally, in the course
of conversation, but without calling attention to the distinction between “ Southern
Peisia and bars and the Persian Gulf.” Two months later, in connection with the
proposal to place Mohammerah under the Belgian Customs, Lord Salisbury telegraphed
to Mr. Spring Rice to inform the Persian Government that no change in the administra
tion of the customs there should be made without our consent, and to remind it of the
engagement of 1897, ascertaining at the same time whether or not the Customs of
Mohammerah were included in the guarantee of the Russian loan. The result of the
discussions which followed this instruction, and which I need not recapitulate at length,
was that the Persian Minister for Foreign Affairs stated verbally that if Mohammerah
was included (as he personally believed it to be) in the expression “ Pars and the Gulf
o ^ars it was excluded from the Russian guarantee, and that if control ever became
necessary the Persian Government would decide to what ports the control should apply.
His Excellency, however, deprecated a written discussion, and asked that Mr. Sprino-
Rice s note inclosing Lord Salisbury’s telegram might be regarded as a verbal com
munication only (Mr. Spring Rice’s telegram Ho. 50 of the 4th April).
So matters remained, we claiming in the abstract that the* term “ Ears and the
ports of the Persian Gulf” must, in view of the engagement of 1897, include
Mohammerah, but without saying how much more it included, and the Persian Govern
ment evading an official expression of opinion on the point till when the second loan was
cone uc ed on the same lines as the first, I obtained your Lordship’s permission to place
on formal lecoid that no pledge in either of the Russian loan contracts could affect the
earhei piomise made to us by the Persian Government, that the customs not merely of
Fars and the Gulf, but of “Southern Persia,” would never be placed under foreign
control, and I did so in my note to his Highness of the 10th May, 1902. That note the
Persian Government have never answered. In June 1902 I mentioned this fact to the
Atabeg at Carlsbad, but as he professed ignorance, or rather an inaccurate recollection
of the text of the engagement, and talked generally of discussing all current questions
m Lonuon, i tnought it better not to press the point, since I did not feel quite certain
[2018 p — 4] r