Page 211 - Gulf Precis (VI)_Neat

Chapter X. 185
05. Meanwhile Sir Henry Elliot, in submitting Colonel Herbert's despatch
roliilcal A., December 1870. Nos. 208-9. above alluded to, had endorsed his argu­
Political A., December 1870, Nos.421-tA. ments strongly and pointed out that “ if
the present opportunity is lost for replacing the. rotten vessel by a sound one, it
is not lilccly to be recovered(Despatch No. 25, dated 21st May 1870.) The
Secretary of State held the same view (Despatch to the Government of India,
No. 69, dated 23rd June 1870.)*
GO. The Government of India still adhered to their views as expressed in
their Resolution, dated 23rd February
Political A, May 1871, Nos. 4SS-49-1.
1870, but decided in deference to the views
of the Secretary of State to replace the Comet by another vessel of similar size.
None of the vessels at the disposal of the Marine Department of the Gov­
ernment of India was found fitted for navigation of the rivers in Mesopotamia.
The Secretary of State was therefore requested to direct that tho necessary steps
might bo taken for the construction of a suitable new vessel, the cost of which
was estimated at Rs. 61,200, and the charge of maintenance at Rs. 3,039 per
•mensem.
. As the reasons for replacing the Comet affected rather the English than
Indian interests, it was suggested that the charges should be borne in equal
proportions by the Imperial and Indian revenues (Despatch to the Secretary of
State, No. 86, dated 23rd May 1871).
67. It was not till 1880 that the Secretary of State was pleased to take up
this question.
(viii) Opposition of the Porte to the proposed replacement of the
steamers of Messrs. Lynch & Co-—1874*75.
68. In IS74 Lynch and Compauy applied on behalf of the Euphrates and
Tigris Steam Navigation Company to
.roPlaco the, C.U'J of London Inch would
be turned into a store ship, by a new
steamer together with a steam launch. Immediate advantage was taken of this
request to revive tho old theory that tho British Government and the above-
mentioned Company were identical ; that only two steamers carrying the
British ting were allowed on the Tigris; and that, owing io the presence at ono
time of the Comet, tho City of London the Vejleh and a small steam launch, tho
authorized number had been exceeded, and that consequently compliance with
the Company’s application was out of the question.
69. Colonel Herbert, to whom this note from the Porte was referred for
verification, explained once more the real position of the Comet and disposed
of various other misstatements which tho note contained.
70. These explanations were accepted, and the status of the Comet was once
again clearly defined in Sir H. Elliott’s despatch dated 29th May, and in Safeit
Pasha’s nole dated 31st March 1S75. But, remarks Mr. Plowden in his
memorandum in Secret, May 1882, Nos. 221-242, the old mistake was repeated,
that the Euphrates and Tigris Steam Navigation Company ran their steamers ■
on the Tigris under a special firman granted to Messrs. Lynch and Co. which
limited the number of vessels to two steamers.
i
71. Tho note of Safeit Pasha dated 31st March 1S75 is quoted below :—
Date Sublime Porte, 31 Mars 1876.
De—Sapf.it,
A—M. l'Ambassadour.
Lc Minielcrc Imperial a rc?u en son temps la note quo V.E. a bicn voulu lui adresacr le
2 Juillet 1874, No. 112, relativemeut aux Mtcaux a vapour do Messrs. Lynch ct Cie. affutes
au service de la navigation au Tigro.
Conformcmcnt au d&nr cxpvimc par PAmb.vsadcdc S. M. Britanniquo la S. P. conscut a
co quo Vun ties deux bilteaux quo Messrs. Lynch ct Cie. omploiont en vertu d'uu Firman
Imperial pour le service des passagers ct des marchandisos sur U Tigic snit provisnirem*nt
remplacc par uu autre sans quo le uumbre des navires autorise par le susdit Firman puissc-ctro
augmcntc.
Messrs. Lynch pourront on outre employer un bfttcau mouchc dans des circonstances
cxccpliouollcs et en cas de haisso tlos enux du Tigro.
• It mint nUo lie iiolvillliul the lloiubuy Oovcnnmnt also •trou^ly protested ugainst the Ucaolulion of the Gov.
........ , . tiMvmitf, loro V«w . ernim-Ht of India. Alter reviewing the facta. tWy stated—
rollUeal A.. December 1*0. No,. I.l *-A. „ //if Kxce,ltncjf MitM „ta( ,1 icitl U difficult in the face or
pponMon oj Hit Turkish (laverumcnt, mid possihly of other powers, to restore to England her privileges of once
the o
surra inJered ou account if considerations of economy." '
[SO 16FD]