File 930/1912 'Mohammerah - Khoremabad Railway' [‎158v] (323/396)

<■>'>
wished to arrange simultaneously the question of
an external Persian loan. t hey proposed that the
Julfa-Mohammerah line should be joined with
Tehran, and, further, that Tehran should be linked
up with Resht and Enzeli. The necessity of
constructing a line from Askhabad to Meshed had
also to be considered. In order to preserve Russian
commercial interests in the north, it would pro
bably be necessary to examine the question of
freight rates on the Mohammerah line. As a basis
for an interchange of views, a copy was annexed
to the Memorandum of a confidential letter from
Sir H. D. Wolff to M. de Staal, dated London, the
the 20th January 1900. in which the former had
advocated as part of an entente between Great
Britain and Russia a line from Enzeli to Moham
merah, with certain transit dues, levied at each end,
as security for a loan to be guaranteed by Russia,
Great Britain, and Persia.
25. The views of 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. on the Russian
aide-mcnwrre were asked for in a letter from the
Foreign Office dated the 17th September 1908. In
reply it was explained that, in Lord Morley s
opinion, the paramount difficulty was that of finance,
and that the Indian Exchequer would be unable to
provide funds for any scheme of railway construction
in Persia. The letter concluded in the following
Views of 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. on foregoing.
Letter of 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,
28th September 1908.
(P. 411.)
(Pol. 3874/08.)
way :—
“7. There is the further difficulty to be cou-
“ sidered in connection with the railway question
“ that it has not yet been ascertained for certain
“ that the construction of the proposed line (i.e.,
“ Mohammerah-Julfa) is practicable from the
“ engineering point of view. The evidence taken
“ by the Sub-Committee of the Committee of
“ Imperial Defence showed that not only have no
“ surveys been made, but that there has not been
a even such an examination of the country through
“ which the line would run as to enable even the
“ roughest forecast, either of the cost or of the
“ alignment to be followed, to be made ; nor have
“ we, so far as Lord Morley is aware, any infor-
“ mation as to the cost of the lines proposed in the
“ Russian sphere.
“ 8. Lord Morley’s view on the general question,
“ as at present advised, is that it is impracticable
“ to take into consideration the question of iinme-
“ diate construction. The most that could be
“ contemplated would, in his opinion, be to obtain
“ jointly with Russia pledges from the Persian
“ Government, which would make it impossible for
“ any third Power to obtain concessions for railways.
“ But it would have to be clearly stipulated that
“ His Majesty’s Government are not pledged to
“ actual construction till the development of Persia
“ makes it possible for the scheme to be financed on
“ sound lines.
“ 9. I am to draw Sir E. Grey’s attention to the
“ bad effect that would be produced on public