'Seistan arbitration case' [‎94r] (3/12)

3
the prelude to possession, and in 1857 Ali Khan, the Chief Ruler in Seistan, was
not only induced to go to Teheran, but to marry a Persian Princess and acknow
ledge allegiance to the Shah. Unfortunately for himself, this allegiance was
unpopular with his brother Chiefs and his own people, and on his return the
following year to his capital, he was cruelly murdered,
k t _ Seeing the aggressive spirit by which Persia
Mimster for Foreign Affairs to Teheran wag ac t ua ted Lord Malmsbury wrote in the
Mission. 27tli October 1852. n n • -i • -i i i J
following decided language,—-
“ Her Majesty’s Government most distinctly declare that they will not allow
sc any systematic attempt on the part of Persia to effect a change in the state of
“ possession in the countries lying between the Persian frontier and the British
“ territories in India.”
in his
with the
bassador
* c ‘A rticle 5.
“ His Majesty the Shah of Persia engages further to take immediate
“ measures for withdrawing from the territory and city of Herat, and
“ from every other part of Affghanistan, the Persian troops and autho-
“ rities now stationed therein ; such withdrawal to be effected within
“ three months from the date of the exchange of the ratifications of this
“ Treaty.
“Article 6.
“ His Majesty the Shah of Persia agrees to relinquish all claims to
“ sovereignty over the territory and city of Herat and the countries of
“ Affghanistan, and never to demand from the Chiefs of Herat, or of the
“ countries of Affghanistan, any marks of obedience, such as the coinage,
“ or 4 khootbeh,’ or tribute.
“ His Majesty further engages to abstain hereafter from all inter-
“ ference with the internal affairs of Affghanistan. His Majesty
“ promises to recognize the independence of Herat and of the whole of
“ Affghanistan, and never to attempt to interfere with the independence
“ of those States.
“ In case of differences arising between the Government of Persia and
“ the countries of Herat and Affghanistan, the Persian Government
“ engages to refer them for adjustment to the friendly offices of the
“ British Government, and not to take up arms unless these friendly
“ offices fail of effect.
“ The British Government, on their part, engage at all times to exert
“ their influence with the States of Affghanistan, to prevent any cause
“ of umbrage being given by them, or by any of them, to the Persian
“ Government; and the British Government, when appealed to by the
“ Persian Government, in the event of difficulties arising, will use their
“ best endeavours to compose such differences in a manner just and
“ honourable to Persia.
“Article 7.
“ In case of any violation of the Persian frontier by any of the States
“ referred to above, the Persian Government shall have the right, if due
“ satisfaction is not given, to undertake military operations for the
“ repression and punishment of the aggressors ; but it is distinctly
“ understood and agreed to that any military force of the Shah which
“ may cross the frontier for the above-mentioned purpose shall retire
“ within its own territory as soon as its object is accomplished, and that
“ the exercise of the above-mentioned right is not to be made a pretext
“ for the permanent occupation by Persia, or for the annexation to the
“ Persian dominions, of any town or portion of the said States.” ^ j n ^}jg f 0 ]
lowing language, which caused the abandonment of their design,—
“ The occupation of Seistan, which is a part
of Affghanistan, by Persian troops, would be
a direct violation of the Treaty of Paris.”
Although the Persian Ministers gave up sending troops to Seistan in deference
to our remonstrances they did not relinquish in writing their claim to the province,
for they said,—
“ The Persian Ministers have always considered, and do now con
sider, that Seistan antiqud has formed
an integral part of the Persian territory;
and it is at the present time in the
“ possession of the Persian Government, on whose part,
f Mr. Murray (to Sudr Azim, 15th May 1858) replied that,— ** 18 no ^
“ The British Cabinet cannot admit the correctness of this view, (t troops
“ which is indeed contradicted not only by the political history of “ should
“ Seistan, but also by its geographical position, which is represented in
“ every existing map possessing any claim to authority as forming part
“ of Affganistan.”
Matters at last came
to an open rupture
between Great Britain
and Persia, followed by
the war of 1856, the
siege of Herat by the
Persians, and the Treaty
of 1857. Lord Cowley,
conversations
Persian Am-
during the
negotiations, held the
same decided language
as before, viz., that Her
Majesty’s Government
were “ determined that
“ Persia should not
“ disturb the existing
“ state of the tribes on
“ her eastern frontiers.”
The general sense of
this language was em
bodied in Articles V„
VI., and VII. of the
Treaty of 4th March
1857,* and was prac
tically tested shortly
afterwards by an at
tempt of the Per
sians to send a small
body of troops into
Seistan, and the protest
of the British Minister
in
Mr. Murray
May 1858.
to the Sadr Azim, 5th u
The Sadr Azim
May 1858.
to Mr. Murray, 13th f (
therefore, it
necessary that
and soldiers
be sent, or
new occupa-
of the place
“ effected.”!
“ or a
“ tion
1852.
1857-58.