Coll 29/56 'Duzdap: question of retention of vice consulates' [‎77r] (155/247)

- ft -
be suul« t for the payment of a purehaaa price for the lead
ae well ae of the ftaq-ue-3abt tax, or whether the authorities
tacitly
are in faoV"prepared to cede the lanu for nothing*
7# he X am in a on aider able doubt as to what
exactly the Oowernaent are now elaiaing, 1 as aodreaeing to
the Ministry for Forsign Affairs s not#, of which I enclose
e copy, asking for further details* Until I an in receipt
of their reply and of your observations on the various points
raised above, X oan obviously not deeide what course to
reoomend to Hie Majesty* e Government and the Government of
Xndla* Bat it t«ay be of assistance if X give you ay
tentative views based on the information at present
available! needless to say, X should much appreciate your
coanents thereon*
6* as you have pointed out in previous despatches
and ae X have mentioned above, the land now occupied by hie
mjesty’s Vice-Consulate was acquired in irregular fashion
during the war and buildings ware erected thereon for
military purposes* &lne* the war ws have continued to
occupy the property but we can produce no title deeds in
support of our ownership nor have we ever registered it with
the Iranian authorities* seeing that it has proved
necessary to register Consular property throughout the
country, where-© th' this has bean possible, and considering
in particular the speeial faotors applying in the present
ease, I can see no valid reason for escaping registration
and even oertaln positive advantages in securing recognition
of our title by the Imperial authorities* In the
circumstances, payment of a fee of approximately three
hundred end twenty six pounds seems to me, though high, to
be not exorbitant, providsd that it is clearly understood
that no further payment of registration fees will bs demanded
at a later date and that no purchase prise is payable on the