'Seistan and Mekran arbitration' [‎99v] (2/10)

•2
Seeing the aggressive spirit by which Persia was
actuated in regard to Herat and Seistan, Lord
Malmesbury wrote in the following language,—
“ Her Majesty’s Government most
“ distinctly declare that they will not
“ allow 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.”
Matters at last came to an open
rupture between Great Britain and
Persia, followed by the siege of
Herat by the Persians, the war of
1856, and the Treaty of 1857. Lord
Cowley, in his conversations with the
Persian Ambassador during the nego
tiations, held the same language as
before, viz., that Her Majesty’s Go
vernment were “ determined that
“ Persia should not disturb the
“ existing state of the tribes on her
“ eastern frontier.”
The general sense of this language
was embodied in Articles V., VI., and
VII. of the Treaty* of 4th March 1857.
Lord Canning, then Governor Ge
neral of India, in a letter to Dost
dated 23rd April 1857, promised to
send His Highness a copy of an autho
rized Persian version of this Treaty,
and further, on 6th June 1858, His
Excellency forwarded f an English
version, promising again to transmit
at a later date the formal authorized
version in Persian.
On every occasion on which Persia
put forward claims to Seistan, the
British Government steadily con
tended that the Shah had no right in
that province, and the British Minister
at Teheran stated even that its oc
cupation by Persian troops would be
considered a direct and open infringe
ment J of the Treaty of Paris.
But in 1859, Mr. Eastwick (then Assistant Secre
tary, Political Department, 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. ) drew up a
memorandum,§ tending to show that Persia was not
so entirely in the wrong as had been hitherto held
in the assertion of her claim to Seistan.
This led to a less decided || tone on the part of
the British Government in regard to controversies
with the Persian Government respecting the sove
reignty of Seistan.
So matters remained till 1862, when Dost Ma
homed prepared to march against Herat, and
threatened an occupation of Seistan. The Shah of
Persia claimed the intervention of the British Go
vernment^ under the terms of the Treaty of Paris.
The 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 whom the matter was re-
Minister for Foreign Affairs to Teheran Mission, 27th
Oct. 1852.
* “ Article 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 ‘khootbeh,’ or tribute.
“ His Majesty further engages to abstain hereafter from all inter
ference with the internal affairs of Afighanistan. 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.”
f Enclosure to Secret Letters from India. 23rd July 1858, p. 634.
J “ The occupation of Seistan, which is a part of Affghanistan, by
“ Persian troops, would be a direct violation of the Treaty of Paris.”
Mr. Murray to Sadr Azim, 5th May 1858. Precis enclosed in Secret
Letter from India, No. 41 of 1870, p. 21. (Copy sent to Foreign Office
10th August 1870.)
§ Page 23, Precis as above.
| Lord Stanley to Minister at Teheran, No. 15,
dated March 1859. Page 25, Precis as above.
f Letter from Foreign Office, 19th September 1862.
** Letter to Foreign Office, 24th September 1862.