File 1356/1912 Pt 1 'Turco-Persian Frontier:- negotiations at Constantinople.' [‎262v] (534/885)

basis of all subsequent discussions, and Lord Crewe
sees no reason for going behind it, or for permitting
the Turks to go behind it, to an earlier map, which their
own ill-judged action had caused to be superseded. It
might further be pointed out to the Turkish Govern
ment, if necessary, that by their rejection of the line
proposed in 1850 they have allowed a situation to grow
for sixty years in which mid-channel has, without
challenge, been accepted by local usage as the
boundary, and that this is consequently the status quo
on the observance of which His Majesty’s Government
must insist.
As regards the approaches to the Shatt-el-Arab, as
distinct from the channel, there may be presumed to
be no question but that Turkish and Persian rights
are regulated by general considerations of international
law, instead of exceptional treaty stipulations. Subject,
therefore, to any observations of Secretary Sir E. Grey,
Lord Crewe does not consider that, as between Turkey
and Persia, the case presents any special difficulty. . . .*
With the last paragraph of the above extract
this memorandum is not primarily concerned.
I propose to deal firstly with the question of
the point where the boundary should leave the
river, and secondly with the question of whether,
while following the course of the river, it should
he traced in mid-channel or on the Persian
hank.
It will be noticed that 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. admits,
in the above letter, that it is somewhat incon
venient that Turkey is in possession of a copy of
the map of 1850, and also that Great Britain and
Ilussia urged her to accept the Mediating Com
missioners’ line. But the arguments advanced
are, first, that the Mediating Commissioners’ line
of 1850 was cancelled and superseded by the com
munication made some twenty years or so later
that the boundary would be found somewhere
within the limits of a certain zone about
40 miles in width ; and, second, that His Majesty’s
Government might, if necessary, point out to
Turkey that a different boundary to that pro
posed in 1850 had, as a matter of fact, been
locally observed without challenge for sixty years,
and that this consequently is the status quo on
the observance of which His Majesty's Govern
ment must now insist.
* 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. letter was written before the proposal
for a reference of the Turco-Persian frontier dispute to The
Hague Tribunal had been finally adopted. My memorandum
refers to the questions involved not so much from the point of
diplomatic negotiation as from what seems likely to be the
purely legal standpoint.—A. P