File 1356/1912 Pt 1 'Turco-Persian Frontier:- negotiations at Constantinople.' [‎254r] (517/885)

To Sir Stratford
Canning, No. 148,5
September 13,
1844.
Sir Stratford
Canning, No. 239,
November 1,1844.
Sir Stratford
Canning, No. 240,
November 2,1844.
respectively for admission within the limits of
either territory.
It w r as in 1844 that the Emperor Nicholas I
visited England ; and Her Majesty’s Government
took advantage of the presence of Count Nessel
rode to communicate fully with his Excellency
on this question.
The Russian Vice-Chancellor, while agreeing
in many respects with Sir Stratford Canning’s
suggestions, in some particulars proposed modi
fications. He submitted that it would he prefer
able to leave Persia in possession of Mohammerah
and of the left hank of the Shatt-el-Arab, with the
right of free navigation of that river, “ which
in reality was the sole outlet for the exports of
Southern Persia.” In the existing state of un
certainty he considered that the principle of uti
possidetis should apply, and that that principle
militated strongly in favour of the maintenance
of the frontier of the Shatt-el-Arab. Persia, in
return, was to abandon her claim for indemnity
on account of the pillage of Mohammerah in
1837.
Sir Stratford Canning, while admiring the
simplicity of Count Nesselrode’s proposals, added
that unfortunately “the reason that was alleged
against the original propositions was equally
available for the rejection of the modifications;
for if the consent of Persia was not to be expected
in the one case, the refusal of the Porte might be
equally anticipated in the other.” This anticipa
tion of his Excellency was amply justified by the
subsequent attitude of Turkey ; however, with
regard to Mohammerah, he admitted that the
Turkish claim was too uncertain to be made good
against a continued occupation of eighty years
either by Persia herself, or by a tribe, whose
headquarters had been situated within the
Persian territory twice the length of that period.
The principle of uti possidetis might therefore, he
considered, he applied to that district without
injustice, though care should be taken to give it
no extension unwarranted by fact. The Persians,
he added, were not in possession of the left bank
of the Shatt-el-Arab higher than Mohammerah,
nor could they navigate any part of that river
without being liable to the duties levied on
shipping and merchandise by the Ottoman au
thorities.
Sir Stratford Canning subsequently ascertained
that Count Nesselrode’s views on the Mohammerah