Coll 28/51 ‘Persia. Relations with H.M.G. Treaty negotiations: Article regarding private claims.’ [‎24r] (47/357)

7. In Annex V the Legation assess the total value of the Legation or Tehran
claims at 4,746,364 Rrans, £483,458, 70,417 rupees Indian silver coin also widely used in the Persian Gulf. , and 6,962-40 dollars. The
investigation made here, as shown above, makes the total 5,447,415-20 krans,
£345,413 3s. 9fi?., 70,41710 rupees Indian silver coin also widely used in the Persian Gulf. , and 6,962-40 dollars. Some of this difference
may be accounted for by the fact that many claimants claim in krans, with a
sterling equivalent; some by the inclusion or non-inclusion of interest; and some
Ly the elimination of a few claims that are unsound. In either case the amount
■s large, but the figures are necessarily provisional. In some instances interest
at a high rate is claimed; in others at a less rate; in others not at all. Precise
documentary evidence of the losses alleged to have been sustained is not furnished,
except in certain cases of outrages during the war and in the claim of
Mr. T. Casey. One claim (No. 13 in the Legation schedule) for extensive high
way robberies in 1910 is not valued, the claimants, it is said, not having yet
formulated their claims, which may yet be presented by underwriters; while in
another (No. 31 in the Legation schedule), the Legation surmise that part may
have been paid out of Rushire surplus customs revenues during the British
occupation of that port.
8 . Of the claims, as classified in paragraph 6 above—
( 1 ) Highway robberies are dealt with more fully hereafter in
paragraphs 45-50.
(2) and (3) War claims in paragraphs 51-56.
(4) Investigation shows to be somewhat weak on principles underlying
international law.
(5) There is no precise evidence of Mrs. Rizzo’s losses.
( 6 ) The largest is more than doubtful, and has been characterised here in
the past as somewhat absurd.
(7) While committed on Persian territory, depends to an extent whether
Turks or Persians committed the outrage.
( 8 ) There seems ground for thinking this claim was extinguished in
1913-14.
(9) Sir W. Haig afterwards offered to take £2,500.
( 10 ) and ( 11 ) These are obscure cases in which there is no sufficient evidence
furnished to show Persian liability.
(12), (13) and (14) These are more important claims concerning which there
is correspondence here.
9. It will be seen, therefore, that the Legation claims, as detailed at length
in the separate volume Legation Claims, are in some instances open to question,
and are in most cases unaccompanied by any precise documentary evidence of the
losses alleged to have been incurred. In the circumstances it would be difficult to
frame any estimate of their intrinsic values, and, consequently, of the total of such
values. The figures given above can but represent the total of the various amounts
claimed, and these, so far as one can judge, are sometimes based on generous
estimates. This lack of documentary evidence is commented on later in
paragraphs 31-36.
10. Of claims marked in the Legation schedule as settled, it is noted that—
One case (Mr. Hubbard) for wounding, was settled in 1917 by a payment
of £2,000 from the Seistan Grain Account.
Three cases (one for murder in 1915, and two for highway robberies in
1921-22) were settled by the Indo-European Telegraph Department by pay
ments of in all 290,770-75 krans from their Terminal Rate and Traffic
Accounts; to which the Persian Government seemingly assented.
Three cases (for cotton appropriated by Germans in 1915, for robbery
and wounding in 1918, and a part payment for Shiraz outrages in 1915) were
settled by payments of 98,954 krans out of Sir P. Sykes’s Fines Account.
Nine cases (mainly for loss of life and wounding at Shiraz, Bushire and
Isfahan in 1915) were settled by payments of £21,064 11s. and 387,500 krans
out of Bushire revenues during British occupation, while it is said (under
Claim No. 31), that others may have been.
It appears, therefore, that some important claims (noted in the volume
Legation Claims), were either compulsorily settled by us during the war period
out of Persian funds; or otherwise, with the apparent assent of the Persian