Coll 28/39(2) ‘Persia. Printed Correspondence, 1937–’ [‎40r] (79/320)

do not own their own barges. All the Agents are anxious about their responsibility
for cargo as they cannot obtain any valid receipts until the Customs Storekeeper
checks the cargo by the manifest on shore, which may be weeks after the cargo was
discharged from the ship.
12. The landing of cargo and clearance of goods, whether by foreign Agents
or by a monopoly company, cannot be an efficient business until the bottle neck of
the Customs is cleared, the complicated and expensive procedure of clearing goods
simplified and the general disorder in both offices and compounds is straightened.
It is not for me to say whether the Iranian Government would re-employ foreign
Customs Directors as in the past, but were it possible a great obstacle to foreign
trade would be removed. If the Iranian Government decided on such
a ’’retrogarde ” step, they might, too, agree to employing expert Port Officers to
form an efficient and remunerative Port Trust. I fear, however, that such is
beyond the bounds of possibility.
Enclosure III to Serial No. (54).
Copy to Mr. Baggallay No. 151/6/37. Reference Foreign Office Despatch
N o. 23 (E. 7885/735/34) of 16th January 1937.
No. 151/6/37.
20th February, 1937.
Your despatch No. 1 of the 7th January about navigation on the Karun.
2. We have heard from the Foreign Office that the Euphrates-Tigris Steam
Navigation Company (i.e., the owners of the old Shattrah and the Shirin, managed
by Mespers as agents for the Iran Transport Company) and Stricks are alarmed°by
further reports of measures contemplated by the Iranian Government to divert
traffic from the Karun to Bandar Shahpur and the railway, in particular by closing
once more the Customs house at Ahwaz. The British interests concerned are natur
ally perturbed by any threat to Khorramshahr and the Karun, since on the one
hand they would lose the river traffic to Ahwaz, and on the other British ships would
be greatly delayed if they used Bandar Shahpur, which is still hopelessly ill-equip-
ped. The horeign Office have therefore asked us for a report on the present posi
tion with regard to the diversion of traffic from Khorramshahr and the Karun to
Bandar Shahpur and the railway.
3. It appears that the present enquiries arose out of a meeting which took place
at Ahwaz early in September 1936, when a representative of Mespers, Mr. Wengo-
borski of the Hansa Line and certain forwarding agents were summoned by the
Governor-General to discuss the feasibility of bringing all Ahwaz through cargo
by rail from Bandar Shahpur instead of by river from Khorramshahr. Later on
the same day the Governor-General told Mr. Wengoborski that if his company
would book through cargo to Ahwaz by rail, traffic on the Karun would be stopped.
Mr. Wengoborski said that he must consult his head office in Bremen, and told
Mespers that he was definitely against the proposal, so long as conditions at Bandar
Shahpur remained as at present.
4. Y e do not appear to have heard before of this meeting at Ahwaz in Sep
tember, nor have we recently heard anything to suggest that the Ahwaz customs
house would shortly be closed, or that active measures would be taken to divert
traffic from Khorramshahr and the Karun to Bandar Shahpur and the railway.
On the other hand we have seen reports in the press of work on the quay at Khor
ramshahr to improve landing facilities there. It is certain that Bandar Shahpur
is quite incapable of dealing with the present volume of traffic, while we hear that
Khorramshahr is so busy that the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company had to help by un
loading and assembling heavy lorries at Abadan and by organizing unloadings
at Khorramshahr. As long as this state of things continues, it seems most un
likely that the Ahwaz customs will be closed.
5. We should be very grateful if you could let us have a report on the position
in an official despatch, and in particular could let us have :—
(i) any information about the possibility of the Ahwaz customs beirg
closed :
MC184EAD