'A Précis of the Relations of the British Government with the Tribes and Shaikhs of 'Arabistan By Lieutenant A T Wilson, Acting Consul for Arabistan' [‎33r] (70/143)

51
introduced by a Convention 1 which was concluded in August 1869 by which
1 urkey and Persia undertook thaft, pending settlement of the disputed
boundary, the status quo should be maintained and no new buildings should
be erected upon the debateable territory. The status quo therein prescribed
being differently appreciated by either litigant proved to be a varying
quantity of which each side endeavoured to appropriate the larger share.
these disputes, however, do not appear to have affected the ’Arabistan
portion of the frontier, in regard to which the arrangement come to (vide
supra) between the Turkish and Persian Commissioners for the maintenance
of the status quo was respected.
It would serve no useful purpose to detail here the prolonged and fruit
less negotiations extending from 1870 to the present day in regard to the
boundary line : it is sufficient to say that no boundary has yet been fixed by
the Persian and Turkish Governments, although in 1875 the Porte formally
recognised the zone referred to above as embodying the limits in which the
maps should be traced; this admission, it was added, would ipso facto lapse
if the Commission then fitting did not arrive at a definite settlement of the
frontier question.
It is stated by Mr. McDouall on the authority of MIrza Hamza, a
confidential agent of Shaikh Khaz’al, that about in 1880 a dispute occurred as
to the ownership of the gypsum which is found from Diaji to Manduwan
and that the present border was then fixed by representatives of the Basrah
and Mohammerah authorities allocating the gypsum to Persia.
It was not until 1893 that the question of the ’Arabistan boundary was
again raised. 2 In November of that year the Persian Government complained
that the Ottoman authorities in defiance of Article II of the Treaty of
Erzeroum, were levying customs in the Shatt-al-’Arab on goods going from
or to Mohammerah, and that the Governor of Basrah had been- instructed
that he was to regard Mohammerah and the left bank of the Shatt-aT’Arab
as Turkish territory.
A strong protest was made to the Porte by His Ma jesty’s Government in
regard to the action of the Ottoman authorities which it was held might
seriously affect British trade on the Karun.
The Russian Ambassador at Constantinople treated as ridiculous the
Turkish claim to the left bank of the Shatt-al-’Arab.
On the 18th November 1895, His Majesty’s Ambassador reported that
he considered the question of Mohammerah as settled, the Minister for
Foreign Affairs having informed him that the Turkish Government laid no
claim whatever to the place.
In November 1893, the Turkish Government informed the Persian Am
bassador that “ they had written to the Customs Agent at Basrah that
Mohammerah was a Persian possession and that imports to it were not to
be taxed.”
In 1896-97, the Turkish Government claimed the right to impose
quarantine restrictions on, and search all vessels entering, the Shatt-al-’Arab
at Fao. That quarantine and necessary searches should be carried out at
Basrah. It was tacitly admitted that British ships were entitled to proceed
direct to Mohammerah.
In consideration of the concession by the Turks our demand for the
recognition of a Consular Agent at Fao was withdrawn.
The agreement on the subject between the British and Turkish Govern
ment is recorded in the following Notes :—
Enclosure in despatch No. 170, Ambassador, Constantinople, to Foreign
Office, dated 15th March 1897.
Note Yerbale, No. 106, Sublime Porte, dated 20th December 1896.
En reponse aux Notes Verbales que TAmbassade de Sa Majeste
Britannique a voulu lui adresser le 8 juin dernier No. 58, le Ministre des
1 Aitchison's Treaties, Vol. XII, 4th Edition, Appendix 13. The English translation is faulty and
should be ignored.
5 Early in 1892, the Turkish authorities at Basrah had proposed to establish a quarantine station at Fao,
to prevent the evasion by travellers for Basrah of quarantine fees by landing at Mohammerah and proceeding
by land or river. The proposal was opposed by the British and Russian delegates on the Board of Health
at Constantinople and was eventually dropped.
H 2