Page 120 - Historical Summaries (Persian Gulf) 1907-1953

11 A

APPENDIX (II;.

Persian Undertakings respecting British Railway Construction in Persia.
BY the Russo-Porsian Agreement of the 11th Novcmltoi, 1890, the Persian Government enguged
that no railways should Iw constructed in Persia for ten years, on the termination of which i>eriod
“ the renewal of the Arrangement sliull lw immediately discussed lie tween the two parlies." The tenn
of this engagement is understood to have been sinco prolonged up to 1910, lmt the Persian Grand
Vizier informed the British Churgd d’Affuircs in 1902 that ho had intimated to Count Lumsdorff that
“Persia would not agree to a further renewal of the Railway Agreement with Russia, which would
terminate in 1910."
On tho lGth Soptomber, 1888, tho then Shah (Nasir-ud-din), in un autograph rescript to the
Minister for Foreign Affairs, gavo assurances os to British preferential rights iu regard to railway
construction in Southern Persia in tho following terms:—
“ Convey these commands to his Excellency tho [British] Minister Plenipotentiary. Even give
him this very autograph in ordor that lie may keep it and 1m; satisfied that our former proiuiso with
regard to tho priority of the English Government over others in the construction of a southern
railway to Tehran continues to hold good; and certainly, whenever Railway Concessions in the
north, &c., aro given to others immediately a Concession for a railway from Tehran to Shuster or such
a one will be given to the English Company ; and, of course, then the clauses ami conditions will also
be examined in order that it be to our advantage ami interest and for the benefit of tho commerce of
both parties; and positively no southern railway without consultation with tho English Government
will lie granted to any foreign country.
“ P.S.—And it is clear that in Persia nobody will bo granted permission to construct railway*,
except it lx; solely commercial ones. We say so now that they may know it.”
On the 4th April, 1900, tho British Charge d’Affaires ul Tehran was instructed to remind the
Persian Government of this engagement, ami to “mako sure that the Shah, Nasir-ud-diu'*
successor, the into Muzaffir-ud-diu Shah,” was aware of its “ existence.” Mr. Spring-Rice accordingly
communicated a copy of tho rescript of 1888 in an official note to the Persian Minister for Foreign
Affair*, requesting that it might be laid before the Shah. Both the Grand Vizier, to whom a second
copy of the communication was given; and tho Minister of Foreign Affuirs promised that this should
be done at once, and Mr. Spring-lficc subsequently learnt from the Shah's doctor that the matter had
been explained to His Mujesiy, and that tho latter hud seen tho document. On the 11th April, 1900,
the British Chai-gd d’Affaires, at a furewcll interview with the Shah, who was about to start for
Europe, thought it best not to mention the subject; but, on withdrawing, ho was informed orally by
the Grand Vizier that the rescript hod been laid Ixsforo tho Sliuh, “ who regarded it as of binding
force." The Grand Vizier added that for the next ten years tho question of concessions would not
arise owing to the Russian Railway Ajpecment, but that if the Russians raised it, tho Shah would
produce his father’s promise to Great Britain. The Minister for Foreign Affairs told Mr. Spring-Rieo
that this was the answer to his otlicial note.
The Government of India, on the 2nd September, 1907, raised tho question of whether the pledges
given in 1888 frero affected by the recently concluded Anglo-Russian Agreement. This question
appears to lxi still under the consideration of His Majesty’s Government.