Page 337 - Gulf Precis (VII)_Neat

-

193
last the Resident has been obliged to comply with the demand of the Customs
authorities under protest pending final settlement.
747. The difficulty in the case of these officers, it was suggested, might be
obviated by notifying the appointment as Vice-Consul of the Residency Surgeon
[it has been separately proposed to confer Vice-Consular powers on this officer
and the First Assistant Resident—see
Secret E., September 1905, Nos. 15M64.
Despatch to the Secretary of State, No.
125, dated 6th July 1904], and the appointment of the Extra Assistant, Mr.
Siqueira as Secretary to the Consul-General for Fars,. etc., in accordance with
the terms of the Rbglcment.
748. The Government of India, in their letter No. 3396-E.A., dated 6th Sep­
tember 1905, approved the Resident's action in complying only under protest with
the demand of the Customs authorities for Customs duty on ppstal parcels of the
Residency officials in question. As regards the question of Customs duty gene­
rally, the case stood, in their opinion, on a different footing, and they felt unable
to claim Jor their officers a position of special privilege.
It seemed to them,' however, clear from the terms of article 27 of the
Rfcglcment that the First Assistant and Residency Surgeon would be exempt
from duty as soon as their appointments as Vice-Consuls de carridre have been
officially notified to the Persian Government. In the case of the Extra Assistant
Resident, it would probably suffice for His Majesty’s Minister to notify to the
Persian Government that Mr. Siqueira' has been appointed " Secretary to His
Majesty's Consul-General for Fars,” etc.
Enquiries should be made on the subject of Sir A. Hfardinge, and if he con­
curred, the notification might be made by7 liim simultaneously with that of
Captains Trevor and Condon as Vice-Consuls. A similar course, if the Minister
saw no objection, might be followed hereafter in regard to the Second Assistant
Resident, should His Majesty’s Government approve the proposal which has
been made for the appointment of this
General B., June 1905, Nos. 35>-363.
additional official.
The Government further saw no objection to the principal ministerial officer
at each of the British Consulates in the Gulf being styled Dragoman, or to this
appellation being extended at Bushire to the two senior officers of this class.
(cxi) Question of sample post packages.
749. The British Postal authorities regarding bond fide samples as of no sale­
able value, and in order to promote trade,
Secret E., November 1905, Nos. 13-38 (No. 13).
have been in the habit of despatching small
articles in the same mail bags as the ordinary letters. Mons. Waffalaert took,
however, exception to the practice in December 1904, on the ground of the
possible abuses which might be committed by the despatch by sample post of
parcels containing valuable article, and demanded that sample packets be enclos­
ed with other parcels in separate bags. Major Cox refused to comply with the
demand pending an authoritative'arrangement.
750. Article 27 (8) of the R6glement Douanier expressly secures to the
ibid No 18 Customs authorities the right to examine
samples imported into Persia. The pro­
posal therefore appeared to the Government of India to amount to a request that
effect should be given to this provision. On the other hand, by the practice of
the Postal Union, bond fide samples of merchandise possessing no saleable value
are transmitted as part of the letter mail. The request of the Persian Customs
authorities therefore seemed to involve a departure from the Union practice, and
for no adequate cause. The Indian Postal Administration knew of no reason for
thinking that the sample post was being abused for the evasion of the customs
duty ; nor had any similar request been made by the Turkish Government in
relation to the Post Offices at Basrah and Baghdad. For these reasons the Gov­
ernment of India thought it probable that the request was only being made as a

fa