Page 313 - Gulf Precis (VII)_Neat

169
Local embargo on a consignment of sheep by a British firm at Bushire, igog.
629 A. In August 1905 difficulties were placed by the local authorities at
Bushire in the way of shipment to South
Secret E., October 1905, No. 80.
Africa by Messrs. Cockbain Hemelryk and
Company of a consignment of sheep. It was suspected that the embargo was
placed with a view to compel payment of a bribe for its withdrawal in order to
enable shipment in time. Representations having been made to Tehran an order
was issued for the removal of the embargo. Sir A. Hardingc suggested to the
Foreign Office—
" I believe the only way of putting a stop to the system by which the local authorities
in this country put an embargo for the purposes of hlackmail would be to enact that no
such embargo shall be allowed to be operative until it has been approved as necessary by
the Ministry of Customs."
629B. Lord Lansdowne having approved this proposal, Mr. Grant Duff
addressed the Mushir-ed-Dowleh on the
Secret E., December 1905. No. 348.
•subject on 21st September 1905, and was
promised that the proposal would be placed before the Shah for orders ^8th
October 1905).
(xcii) Levy of excess export duties, 1882-87.
630. On 2nd May 1882 the Resident telegraphed to the British Minister
that the Custom House official at Bushire
Political A., June iS8a, Nos. 101-103.
insisted on exacting an additional 5 per
cent, export duty on British goods which had already paid the full 5 per cent,
at Bandar Mashur and Bandar Rig.
Mr. Rdnald Thomson telegraphed back on 12th May that the Persian Gov­
ernment had given orders for immediate repayment of the export duty illegally
exacted at Bushire and to prevent recurrence of such demands.
631. On 31st May 18S2 the Resident wired to the British Minister to say
that the Governor of Dilam stated that he
Political A., July 1882, Nos. 144-50.
had received orders not to grant receipts
for duty levied on British goods; that at the same time he insisted on levying
the 5 per cent, duty on exports, the result being that British merchants were
subjected to an additional duty of 5 per cent, at Bushire.
632. In 1884 we find again complaints made about an attempt of the Persian
authorities to levy dues on goods exported
A.. Political E., July 1884.N0S. 353*78. by British merchants in excess of the 5
., August 1884, Nos. 1 io-l 1.
[Set Precis in tbc latter collection.] per cent, customs duty stipulated by
treaty!
633. Colonel Ross telegraphed on 8th April 1884 to Her Majesty's
„ . 00 Minister at Tehran, complaining that
Vo. 10,.dated 8th April 1884. , 111 • , , r , i/l
orders had been issued oy the Khans
of the minor grain-exporting ports in the Persian Gulf to levy export duty
on grain under some other name, and to discontinue granting the receipts which
had hitherto been accepted in lieu of duty at Bushire. The gate-keeper at
Bushire had received similar orders, and had already acted upon them. The
orders came direct from Tehran, and were to the effect that the extra dues
were to be levied on the carriers of the goods and not on the merchants
themselves. Of course the buyers of the grain were bound in self-defence to
reimburse the carriers, who would otherwise have refused to convey their goods
in* future. Messrs. Muir & Co., British grain merchants, had presented
receipts for duty paid at the minor ports of Rig and Dilam, the recognition
of which had been refused by the Bushire customs authorities.
634. Mr. Thomson informed Colonel Ross by telegraph that the matter
had been referred to the Persian Foreign
nth April 1884.
Office for settlement.
635. Mr, Thomson wrote to Colonel Ross explaining that the attempt to
exact double duties arose from the lately-,
No. 8, dated 19th April 1884.
adopted system of farming the whole cus­
toms of Persia to one person, who claimed that all customs hitherto paid at the
minor ports of Rig and Dilam to the local chiefs should be paid to him. This
S640FD