Page 75 - Gulf Precis (VII)_Neat

59
.
(io). Charges against Mr. John Oas/cin of irregular conduct and opposition ta
his employing his own private servants.
ICO. The Karguzar brought also a complaint against Mr. John Gaskin,
tho Agont of Messrs. Lynch and Co. at
Socrct E., October 1889, No*. 2G1-2G3.
Ahwaz, about certain irregularities in his
conduct. Tho main allegations against him were that he wore a native garb
for objectionable purposes and that he led a looso life. That he at times wore a
nativo dress, there was no doubt, but this was a well known fact, the simple
reason for which was that his Europoan costumes too much soiled could not be
washed for use for want of washermen. There was absolutely no foundation for
tho charge that ho made use of this clothing for irregular purposes. Colonel
Ross had no doubt that the charges were fabricated by interested parties in order
to make things as unpleasant as possiblo for tho Lynch Company.
161. Air. Gaskin employed a Christian cook and wanted another servant to
fetch water, look after the horse, etc. This man the Persian officials insisted
on appointing themselves, but they employed him also on their own duties
and mulcted him of a sharo of his wages. Nobody would consent to stay with
Mr. Gaskin, though he tried to keep them by paying a higher salary. These
were some of tho petty vexations to which Mr. Gaskin was subjected.
162. “ The Persian officials” wrote Colonel Ross in his letter, dated 10th
September 1889 “ high and low in Ara-
Ibid No. 259.
bistan, seem to assume that tho district is
quite exceptional as regards English subjects, that they are admitted on suffer-
ence as a groat favour, but are not entitled to the full privileges and . freedom
from interference, which foreigners enjoy in other parts of Persia. Unless a
radical change is made and less narrow-minded officials employed, it will take
a long time to overcome these difficulties and a good deal of firm pressure.”
163. The only authority the Persian officials had for their interference in
the servants* question was Regulation No. 15, which requires that the Company
should employ porters for carrying cargo only such as are appointed by the
Persian officials. But this surely did not authorize their interforonco in the
case of domestic servants.
161. Nizam-es-Sultaneli does not appear to have taken any notice of tho
charges against Mr. Gaskin. It would have been of course quite undignified
for a Governor to take any action on such charges. But there is reason to
suspect that secretly he was in full accord with the obstructive tactics of his
subordinates.
105. It is interesting to note that the Karguzar went so far as to object
to Mr. Gaskin, on the ground, that ho was an European and that the Lynch Com­
pany had no right to appoint an European to Ahwaz. This impudence on the
part of the Persian official is hardly credible, but tho Persian Government
had found in him an ideal Persian obstructionist to work successfully in Persian
interests the regulations so generously conceived for their benefit and to tho
detriment of the foreigners* interests.
166. The Karguzar then fencod himself behind Regulation No. 2, which
provides against taking on board vessels
Secret E., Dccembor 1889, Noe. 1—4.
persons whose presence is detrimental to
order, etc. But there was absolutely no truth whatever in his charges against
Mr. Gaskin, which were evidently concocted, iu ordor to secure the removal of
a person, who would work in earnest in the interests of the Company and the
appointment of a native agent who would bo likely to play into Persian hands.
Tho Lynch Company was determined to stand their ground firmly and not
to comply with tho demand for Mr. Gaskin’s removal, inasmuch as the step
would be calculated to lower the British prestige and cncourge the Persians in
their obstructive tactics.
(v) Navigation on the TJpper Karun.
167. For the purposes of navigation on tho Upper Karun, wo have noticed,
the Persian boat Susa was utilized by tho Persian officials. But it could be