'Report and Proceedings of the Standing Sub-Committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence on the Persian Gulf' [‎28r] (60/94)

“2. La Sublime Porte demande si, d’apres la
redaction dune autre partie du memeArticle ou
il s’agit de tribus veritablement dependantes
de la Perse, mais qui pourraient etre divisees,
une moitie se trouvant etablie sur les terres
Ottomanes et Lautre moitie sur le territoire
Persan, il faut que la partie qui se trouve en
Turquie devienne aussi sujette de la Perse, que,
par consequent, les terres quelle possede soient
aussi abandonnees a la Perse, et si jamais a une
epoque quelconque la Perse pourra disputer a
la Porte le droit de possession de ces terres,
“ Ad 2 dum - Que sous aucun pretext e quel
conque la Perse ne pourra elever des preten
tions relativement aux pays situes sur la rive
droite du Schatt-el-Arab, ni aux terres sur la
rive gauche qui appartiennent a la Turquie,
meme dans les cas oil des tribus Persanes en
partie ou en totalite seraient etablies sur la
dite rive ou sur les dites terres.
(Signd) “ Titow.
“ Cowley.”
Ihe explanatory note has obviously no bearing upon the ancient Treaties nor
upon the territorial claims of the Porte, except in so far as Mohammerah and the
adjoining district are concerned. Yet the Porte, foisting upon this document some
arbitrary or fanciful interpretation, has continually based upon the explanatory note its
claim to revert to ancient ireaties, and to fix the boundary according to local tradition,
not only at Mohammerah, but apparently also elsewhere.
The instructions furnished to the British and Russian Commissioners who were to
be associated with Turkish and Persian Commissioners for the delimitation of the
frontier under this Treaty were, for all practical purposes, identical. Colonel Williams
was again appointed British Commissioner and Lieutenant Glascott, B.N., British
Surveyor.
The following extracts from a despatch addressed to Colonel Williams by Her
Majesty’s Ambassador in December 1848, indicate the nature of these instructions:—
The British and Russian Commissioners are not principals in the delimitation of the
frontier. Their office, both jointly and separately, is auxiliary to that of the Turkish and
Persian Commissioners. It has mainly in view the settlement of differences between them, a
steady adherence to the terms of Treaty stipulation, and the employment of sound scientific
principles in the executio/i of an arduous work
“ The great length of frontier between Turkey and Persia, extending from Mount Ararat
to the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. , might well suggest the hope that only such parts of the line as have
been settled in principle by the last Treaty of Erzeroum (1847) would require to be surveyed
on the present occasion. These, as you know, are Mohammerah, Zohab, and perhaps,
Suliemanieh, to which might be added some few places in dispute in the north, brought
forward in the course of negotiation, but not comprehended expressly in the Treaty. Whatever
may be our impressions on this subject, the Courts of Turkey and Persia must naturally have
the ultimate decision of the question, though it is to be expected that they will not shrink
from the obligation of leaving no part of their common boundary liable to dispute for the
future, and that they will gladly avail themselves of the present concurrence, founded as it
is upon the terms of the Treaty, to extend the blessings of certainty in that respect to the
whole frontier population.
“Be that as it may, the same principles of operation will apply to the whole as to any
portions of the line, with this single exception, that the regulation of those parts which are not
expressly named in the last Treaty must be derived from the anterior, but not abrogated, Treaties
to which reference is made in its concluding article. Of the Treaties, in so far as they concern
the boundary, a more distinct idea is given in the accompanying Memorandum, to which 1 refer
you.” (See No. 8793, Library, of the 6th December, 1906 )
The Commission did not assemble at Bagdad until the middle of the year 1849,
the death of the Shah of Persia in the one case, and, in the other, the necessity pleaded
by the Porte of acquiring information respecting the frontier near Van (for which
purpose their Commissioner would make a detour in that direction), having retarded
the advent of the Persian and Turkish members.
The Commission was detained for some time at Bagdad by the complications which
arose from the proceedings of the Ottoman Commissioner in advancing, at the time of
[1054] O
Sir A. Kemball,
Memorandum
dated April 2,
1875, No. 2585,
p. 77.
In Sir H. Elliot’s
No. 375,
July 22, 1875.
Sir A. Kemball,
March 30, 1875.
Sir S. Canning,
No. 221,
December 27,
1848.
Sir S. Canning,
No. 216,
December 19,
1848.
Sir A. Kemball.
(Extract, vide
supra.)
Kotur.