ملف رقم ١٢٩٠ لسنة ١٩٠٥ "بلاد الرافدين: وصية أيوديا" [ظ‎‎٩‎٢] (٢٦٠/١٨٩)

it might he a contemplated forward movement which would bring fresh
territory within the Turkish frontier and so do away with rebates on goods
consigned to some places at present in Persia.
8. We come now to what is undoubtedly, in the opinion of the very
numerous Persians domiciled in ’Iraq, by far the most important question of
the hour: a supposed design on the part of the local Turkish authorities of
suddenly curtailing their immunities as foreign subjects. The Persians
attribute the action of the Turks to the disturbed state of Persia, which
precludes all effectual protest by their Government. As the principal evidences
of this design they mention the registration of a number of Persians as liable
for service in the Turkish army, and the imposition upon Persians at all
places of a tax which is described as the ’Amalayah-i-Mukallafah or corvee.
I am disposed to think that in the latter case there is some confusion with the
* g e e x below Tamattu’ ^ or income-tax, which, as
explained in another place, * has recently
been ordered to he levied on foreigners of various nationalities besides Persians
in Turkey ; but, if so, there must be a wide-spread misunderstanding of the
nature of the new taxation at Karbala and Najaf.
At Baghdad a general census of Persians and their families has been in
progress for some time, but without any assigned object.
During the first week of November a large number of Persians at Kufah,
and possibly some at Najaf also, appear to have been registered for military
service. According to one account even the Persian Mujtahid Mulla Kazim
(Khurasani) and his son Mirza Mehdi at Najaf have been urged to show a good
example by giving up members of their own families to the Turkish army.
The Turkish authorities, apparently, contend that they have not knowingly
inscribed any Persian subjects for military service and admit that mistakes
may have occurred. At Kufah and Najaf there is a close intermingling of the
two races, and the Turkish explanations may therefore be correct; but the
Persians do not place the least faith in them, and they assert that in any case
the Turks are now claiming as Ottoman subjects all Persians who are either
permanently domiciled or possess landed property in the country.
On or about the 7th of November, it was understood at Karbala that the
Turkish authorities had resolved to collect the *Amalayah-i-Mukallafah from
all Persians, whether Turkish subjects or not, at the rate of 12 Gsp. per
head per annum, and to demand three years* arrears of the same. On the
8th, a proclamation to this effect was made through public criers, and those
liable were informed that they must pay within three days ; but no communica
tion on the subject was made to the Persian Consulate. The question of this
tax was discussed at Karbala on the 13th November by the Persian Consul and
t See paragraph 4 above. Ag* 13 ' Nur Ullah > already mentioned, f
m an assembly where the British Vice-
Consul was also present. It was agreed that its legality depended on a treatv
concluded by Mirza Muhsin Khan, a former Persian Ambassador at
Constantinople. No one present seemed to be aware of the exact terms of the
treaty; but it was argued by the Persian Consul that at the most it only
authorised the recovery from Persian subjects in Turkey of the taxes to which
Turkish subjects were liable at the time of signature, and that the
*Amalayah-i-Mukallafah was not one of them. It was also stated as a
generally accepted fact, that the Turks had lost their copy of the treaty in
question, and could not therefore produce proof of their claims if it were
required. On the same day the forcible collection of the tax from Persians at
Karbala was begun, with threats and heatings. On the 14th some 30 Persians
of the Tawairij neighbourhood arrived at Kart ala to protest against the
collection from them of the ’Amalayah-i-Makallafah ; but on the 17th they
weie told by the Mutasarrif that he could not receive any representations on
the subject, and that they must pay.
9. On or about the 1st November, the Mutasarrif of Karbala seems to
have received an order that all schools in his jurisdiction of which the existence
had not been authorised by the Turkish Central Government must be closed
at once, and that they must not be reopened without permission. This order