File 2626/1905 ‘Persia:- Military Attaché at Meshed’ [‎20r] (44/532)

Go\eminent, viz., one half the pay of the officer, is a fair payment for
the benefits received by them, and that if their contribution were to be
extended to the contingent and other expenses, they would be paying
more than they could legitimately be required to do. ’ *
I am to request that you will submit these considerations to Viscount
Morley, adding that Sir E. Grey finds himself unable to apply to the
Treasury for sanction to make any contribution over and above that
already authorised ; but that he is prepared to support an application
that the post should be maintained for a further period.
the receipt of your letter of the 12th instant, No. 32,081, on the subject of
the Military Attache at Meshed, and to say that he learns with satis
faction that the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs is prepared to
support an application for the further maintenance of the appointment.
As regards the incidence of cost, while recognising the force of the
reference that Sir E. Grey makes to the opinion expressed by the Army
Council in 1908, Viscount Morley desires to call especial attention to the
statement made in paragraph 3 of the Government of India’s letter
No. 67, of 7th July 1910 (which was one of the enclosures in Mr. Camp
bell’s letter of 2nd September), that “ the Chief of the Imperial General
“ Staff has recently addressed the Commander-in-Chief with a view to
“ the General Staff in India assuming entire responsibility for intelli-
“ gence work in Russian Turkestan, a proposition which His Excellency
“ could only accept on the supposition that the services of a Military
“ Attache at Meshed will be permanently retained.” In Lord Morley’s
opinion this fact greatly strengthens the Indian claim that half the total
expenditure on the appointment should be borne by Imperial funds,
since a direct responsibility is now laid upon the Government of India,
a responsibility, moreover, which even the permanent appointment of a
Military Attache will not enable them to discharge unless the organi
sation, without which the officer is useless, be sanctioned as well.
I am to suggest that the views of the Army Council should be
invited on this aspect of the question, and to express the hope that after
consultation with them Sir Edward Grey will find himself able to accept
the proposal made in Air. Campbell’s letter above quoted.
As the period for which the appointment was tempoiaiily sanctioned
expires on the 20th instant, I am to ask for the favour of an eaily
The Under Secretary of State
for India.
1 am, &c.,
Louis AIallet.
Enclosure No. 3.
India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. to Foreign Office.
Sir,
India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. ,
18th October 1910.
I am directed by the Secretary of State for India to acknowledge
reply.
I have, &c.,
The Under Secretary of State,
Foreign Office.
R. Ritchie.