File 523/1912 Pt 1 'Persia: Imperial Bank: mint contract' [‎155r] (305/386)

—
IThis Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty’s Gnvp.rnment. 1
O'
PERSIA.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[July 5.]
Section 2.
[30854]
No. 1 .
Imperial Bank of Persia to Foreign Office.—(Received July 5.)
Sir, 25, Abchurch Lane, London, July 4, 1913.
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 30th ultimo,
in referee ce to the Mint Agreement between the Persian Government and the bank
dated the 27th November, 1911.
The directors have consulted Mr. Wood, the chief manager of the bank in Tehran,
who is now in London. Mr. Wood was in Tehran at the time the contract was entered
into, and is cognisant of all the circumstances of the case, and I am requested to forward
herewith, for the information of the Secretary of State, a copy of Mr. Wood’s letter to
the London manager of the bank, dated the 3rd instant, which my directors think
replies to the points raised in your letter under acknowledgment, and, they venture to
think, completely vindicates the bank’s position in the matter.
I have, &c.
G. NEWELL, Manager.
Enclosure in No. 1.
Mr. Wood to Mr. Newell.
St. Ermin's Hotel, St. James’s Park, London,
Dear Mr. Newell, July 3, 1913.
WITH reference to the Foreign Office letter of the 30th June, which I now
return.
In article 1 of the Law of the 13th June, 1911, it is clearly stated that the Treasurer-
General is charged with the “ direct ” and effective control of all financial operations,
such as our Mint contract. Therefore, if he had to refer that operation to the Medjliss,
it would not be direct control.
In clause 3 of article 2 it is stated that the Treasurer-General shall establish an
office for all transactions of the Government with the bank (the State Bank) and
operations respecting the minting of bullion, &c. Under the circumstances, it would be
quite impracticable for every transaction between the Government and the bank to be
first vised by the Minister of Finance, in order that it may have the force of law.
Otherwise, we would come to a standstill, and defeat the very ends of the law which
gave the Treasurer-General power to exercise his own discretion in matters of this
nature. Article 6 therefore has no bearing on the subject, especially as the business^ of
minting has been carried out by the Imperial Bank of Persia to the entire satisfaction
of the Persian Government, who sought no “ improvement ” in that direction. Improve
ment ” was assured when the Medjliss closed the Mint to the public, and placed the
coinage entirely in the hands of the bank, and Shuster was only carrying out the policy
of the Medjhss when he gave us the Mint for ten years. Several members of the
Medjliss told me how pleased they were at what Shuster had done, and thus secured the
Mint on a sound basis. . ■ . ..
We rely entirely upon the Law of the 13th June, 1911, which the Bussian Minister
himself was eventually compelled to accept. In this connection J beg to cite the incident
of a cheque for some 300,000 roubles (30,000L) drawn by the Minister of Finance on the
Imperial Bank of Persia in favour of the Bussian Minister and in payment for ceitain
arms, &c., purchased from the Bussian Government. When that cheque was presented
the Imperial Bank of Persia, in view of the Law of the 13 th June, 1911, declined payment,
and the Bussian Minister was obliged to obtain a new order on the bank signed by
Mr. Shuster. With regard to the granting of a concession by the Medjhss to two
natives to import silver, the two natives in question were members of the^ Medjhss, and
represented a constituency of Tabriz, where they had sustained (so they said) consideiab e
loss during the disturbances at that place. Their claim on the Persian Government was
[2987 e —2]
/T \
2
1
8 auGIS:
* v)