"مذكرة تتعلق بالملاحة في نهري دجلة والفرات". [و‎‎٥‎٩] (٢٨٤/١١٨)

101
Sir N. O'Conor.
No. 184,
April 19, 1902.
To Sir N. O'Conor,
No. 173,
May 21, 1902.
Euphrates and
Tigris Steam
Navigation
Company,
May 26,1902.
To Sir N, O'Conor,
No. 188,
June 10, 1902.
Tigris by Russian steamers connected with a
subsidised line running to the Persian Gulf, and
were desirous of obtaining privileges similar to
those enjoyed by the Euphrates and Tigris Steam
Navigation Company. When reporting this
information to the Foreign Office, Sir N. O'Conor
stated that he could discover nothing in the
" original firman "* giving the British Govern
ment exclusive right of navigation, and observed
that it was probable a similar demand to the
Russian would be made by the German Govern
ment in connection with the construction of the
Bagdad Railway. In reply to this .despatch,
Sir N\ O'Conor was told that His Majesty's
Government were not entitled to claim a
monopoly of the navigation of the Tigris for
the British company. It was contended, how
ever, by the company that the rights enjoyed
by them on the Tigris had been " in the nature
of exclusive rights so far as nations foreign to
Turkey were concerned," as for forty years their
steamers had navigated the river, and the British
flag had been the only foreign flag in those
waters. They considered that it would be unjust,
after having created the trade and called into
being the flourishing towns on the banks of the
Tigris, if, on the acjmission of another foieign
flag to the river, they were restricted to the use
of two steamers and barges ; and they held, in
such an event, that His Majesty's Government
would be justified in demanding that the river
should be thrown open as far as it was navigable
to the steamers of all nations. Sir N. O Conor
was subsequently instructed that the grant of
a concession to a single foreign company to
navigate an inland river can hardly be held to
justify a claim by other nations to similar con
cessions on the ground of being entitled to the
treatment of the most favoured nation, as the
concession was one of favour and convenience,
limited to the actual requirements of the case,
and not a matter of right." He was further
instructed that the admission of the steamers of
another foreign country to the Tigris would
afford ground for a contention that the naviga
tion of the river must be thrown open without
restriction to the vessels of all nations enjoying
most-favoured-nation treatment. Sir N. O'Conor
did not report what action, if any, was taken by
* Presumably he meant the firman of 1834.
[163—1] 2 D