File 1377/1905 Pt 1 'Perso-Baluch Frontier: Frontier Demarcation' [‎158r] (87/188)

As regards the first of them, the Governorship of Seistan I impressed on you the
imnortance which His Majesty’s Government has long attached to the maintenance
Hhat office of the Hashmat-ul-Mulk, both because his local influence appeared to
them a guarantee for the tranquillity of a frontier district m which India lias special
interests^and because his removal, threatened by the Russian Consulate owing to ^
action taken bv him to suppress the anti-British disturbances of the summer of 1902
“ be Interpreted by the ignorant local population as implying an unfriendly
feelino- on the part of the Persian Government towards ourselves
Your Highness assured me, and I lost no time in transmitting this assurance to
Lord Lansdowne, that any such interpretation of the action of the Persian Go\ i *
ment in the matter of the Hashmat-ul-Mulk was entirely mistaken. Lou added
that His Maiesty the Shah was contemplating certain new arrangements foi
ministration of Seistan which would prove entirely satisfactory to Bntis
interests hut that there were certain objections to the continued government o
that province bv the Hashmat-ul-Mulk, whose capacities were not regarded as
ejualto such a position. On my suggesting that a solution might possibly be
found bv bestowing on the Hashmat-ul-Mulk the goveinmen
foreign political rivalries were less acute, and thus showing that intereri^vou
t 0 punish him for the assistance rendered at a critical moment to B - - "
observed that it was contemplated to separate both Earn and beistan lro m Khorassan
and to place them under a Governor in direct dependence on "L Q f
brother of the late Shaukat-ul-Mulk as Deputy Governor of B ^ nd ’ “ d d tl ^ e S °^ 0 “ f
the Hashmat-ul-Mulk as Deputy Governor at Nasratabaffi 7°“ to
ever, that another Governorship would be bestowed on the Hashmat-ul-Mulk so as
remove all idea that he had been deprived of his late post because ®“rl “ te d
to the British Consulate, and that if he was not given Seistan he ^uld be appointed
to Tabas, which has long been held by members of his family. I migln, you sai ,
regard it as a promise that lie would get either iaoas or Seistan.
Lord Lansdowne to whom I telegraphed these assuran^s, and who is as your
Highness is aware, deeply desirous of meeting as far us possible the view^^^^
of the Persian Government, has now authorized me to state that he wl l^or Hie
present desist from further intervention in the matter of the Governorship oi Seistan.
The representations which I was directed to make to you on this sublet were largely
dictated by concern for the tranquillity of this important province, which apart from
its proximity to India, borders on Afghanistan, and m which any ^ ew theTate
with the Afghans may involve us under Article VI of the treaty of Ibo? with
Shah. It must therefore be clearly understood by the Persian Government yh c
has decided, notwithstanding our friendly representations, to introduce impor a
administrative changes in Seistan, that the entire responsibility must rest with it lor
any untoward consequences which may result from these new arrangements, and that
no share in it can be assumed by His Majesty’s Government. , ,,
With respect to the Mirjawar boundary, it may perhaps he useful thac Is u
recapitulate as briefly as possible the main facts, with which your Highness told me at
onr interview that you were unfamiliar, dating back, as they do, to a period antenor
t0 ^TheHrontier between Persia and India was fixed in 1896 by an Agreement, of
which, for convenience, 1 append a copy herewith. In 1901, Persian Customs pos s
were established at various points along that line, and M. Cesari an officer ot the
Customs Department, was sent to open one at Mirjawar. I he British district o e
on onr side of the frontier contended that the spot selected by M. Cesan was within
Indian, not Persian territory, on the ground that the latter had mistaken the streams,
or rather nullahs, called the Talab and Mirjawar Bivers, and on the strength of this
contention, proceeded to occupy the point in dispute himself. His action was
unauthorized by the Government of India, and in deference to complaints made to me
here by the Persian Government, he was ordered to withdraw to the opposite side ot
the stream, which was maimed by Persia as the boundary, until such time as an
investigation on the spot should have shown whether his interpretation ot the Boundary
Agreement was in conformity, as he contended it to be, with the intentions ol the
Commission by which the boundary was settled in 1896, and it was subsequently
agreed that the question should he examined after the conclusion or his beistan
Arbitration by Colonel Macmahon and a Persian Bepresentative, who would proceed
for the purpose to Mirjawar. Meanwhile, the Persian Government have established a
Customs post on the disposed ground without waiting for the inquiry agreed upon.
[1979 q—8] B 2