Page 329 - Gulf Precis (VII)_Neat

>85
Captain Trevor suggested to Her Majesty’s Chargd d'Affaires that Mons.
Waffalacrt’s lamentable ignorance of conventions and regulations should be
brought to the notice of Mons. Naus.
701. M. Waffalacrt proceeded to Lingah and made some sort of enquiry,
but refused to listen to the arguments of the Residency Agent and to alter his
decision. The fine was ultimately paid by the nakhoda.
(cv) Levy of customs on goods imported into Bushire on Government service
or for the Resident's personal use, 1903.
702. In 1902 Colonel Kemball raised the question, which he expected would
probably arise at an early date, as to
Secret E.. June 1903, Nos. 223-225.
whether the Persian Government would be
entitled to impose duties on goods imported into Persia for the use of his estab­
lishment and of Government, apart from his personal use.
A similar question had come up before the Government of India in May
1902 in connection with Toshakhana pre­
Frontier A., November 1502, Nos. 1-2.
sents received at the Consulate-General at
Meshed. The British Minister instructed the Consul-General that they were for
his personal use, as otherwise the Persian Government were likely to demur to
granting exemption of duty. The Government of India, however, informed the
Consul-General that a general exemption from Customs duties had long been
enjoyed by the Persian Consul-General at Bombay, and that the Tehran Legation
might be asked to claim for the Resident a similar privilege which would cover
Toshakhana articles. The Government of India did not approve of the sugges­
tion to describe these articles as for the Consul-General’s personal use (telegram
dated 2nd June 1902).
703. In the case of Bushire, the Government of India likewise informed the
Resident that the Persian Consul-General
Secret E., June 1503, 01. 223-225.
had long enjoyed a general exemption from
Customs duties on articles imported whether officially or for his personal use.
Accordingly, in the event of the Persian authorities pressing the claim referred
to, he was told to ask the British Minister to claim for him a similar exemption
(No. 5(39-E., dated 23rd March 1903).
(evi) Levy of customs duties on provisions of His Majesty’s ships at Bushire,
1901-05.
704. In December 1901 the Customs authorities at Bushire began to levy
export duty at the rate of 5 per cent, on all goods despatched from the shore to
British men-of-war in harbour.
This had never been the practice before.
Most of these goods had already been subjected to an import duty of 5
per cent, on entry into Persia. After vainly endeavouring to settle the matter
with the local Director of Customs, Colonel Kemball, in his letter No. 175,
dated the 27th December 1901, made a reference to His Majesty's Minister at
Tehran.
705. In reply Mr. Alban Young, on the 8th February 1902, forwarded a
copy of a despatch on the subject addressed by Sir Arthur Hardinge to His
Majesty’s Secretary of State.
706. In his No. 50, dated 21st March 1902, Colonel Kemball reported to
His Majesty's Minister that .having received a complaint from our Naval Con­
tractor, Mr. Goolzad, to the effect that he had been made to pay export duty at 10
per cent, on certain provisions sent by him to the “ Lawrence” on which he had
already paid 5 per cent, import duty, thus making a total of 15 per cent, ad
valorem, he had made enquiries from the Director-General of Customs, who, in
confirming the charge, said that he had made a certain arrangement with the
Naval Contractor. This arrangement, said Colonel Kemball, 44 must prove
extremely inconvenient and is moreover unnecessarily exacting.”
Si?40FD