Skip to item: of 357
Information about this record Back to top
Open in Universal viewer
Open in Mirador IIIF viewer

Coll 28/51 ‘Persia. Relations with H.M.G. Treaty negotiations: Article regarding private claims.’ [‎30r] (59/357)

The record is made up of 1 file (176 folios). It was created in 13 Apr 1932-28 Dec 1936. It was written in English and French. The original is part of the British Library: 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. Records and Private Papers Documents collected in a private capacity. .

Transcription

This transcription is created automatically. It may contain errors.

Apply page layout

17
^ '
if the Persian Government declined this responsibility he had yet to learn on
whom they considered it devolved; he would continue under the instructions o
his Government to hold the Persian Government responsible, and to press t em
to afford proper compensation to the victims of such robberies, especially in cases
where the property was not recovered. .
47. The matter appears first to have come under legal consideration here in
^ -1 .923, when the question of the form of tribunal before which our claims mig
oe brought arose, since the Persian Government had by this time declined any
responsibility beyond that of taking steps to trace robbers and reco\ti goo s
stolen. In view of this attitude Sir W. Malkin considered it could be but an
arbitral tribunal with a neutral umpire, and he thought that if o^r claims were
brought before such a tribunal we must face the fact that many of them, it not a ,
might be rejected, either because the liability of the Persian Government could
not be established in law, or because sufficient evidence in support of the claims
would not be forthcoming. Sir C. Hurst, however, feared that an arbitral
tribunal, presided over by a neutral, acting on strictly judicial lines, and on what
he considered a strict application of the legal principles involved, might lead to
the rejection of many claims, and he thought friendly discussion in the firs
instance preferable; in this event agreement reached on individual claims should
be accepted and extended to cover groups of claims; where agreements were not
reached, an issue or issues should be submitted to a claims tribunal; it this
procedure were adopted, it would be necessary for claimants to produce reason
able evidence that there were such circumstances of neglect or malpractice on the
part of the Persian authorities as to render the Persian Government habl^
48. The matter was then further discussed at a meeting in this office in
April 1924, at which Sir P. Loraine was present, when it was decided that the
interests of the claimants would be best served by a preliminary examination ot
the claims between representatives of the Persian Government and ot our
Legation at Tehran, any claims of Persians against His Majesty s Government
or British institutions being similarly referred to this preliminary commission;
decisions arrived at as to the validity of claims being accepted as final; while an
exchange of notes might serve to place on record that where the representatives
failed to reach agreement as to the validity of a claim or where the Persian
Government repudiated responsibility, the next step would be a reference of the
claim or claims to a Claims Commission with a neutral umpire.
49. The outcome of this preliminary consultation with the Persian Govern
ment is referred to in paragraph 60 below. It would seem however, from the
above that in Sir C. Hurst’s view the test of validity would depend upon the
claimant being in a position to produce reasonable evidence that there were such
circumstances of neglect or malpractice on the part of the Persian authorities as
to render the Persian Government liable. That there was neglect to safeguard
the public highways in Persia is, of course, evident; 'these robberies and outrages
were of constant, often daily, occurrence; had they taken place in any Western
country they would have undoubtedly led to the strongest representations and
large demands for damages from Governments whose nationals might have been
the victims of these attacks and spoliations; that such outrages and robberies
habitually took place in Persia cannot be denied—there is a large volume of
evidence to show it—and the onus seems rather to rest on the Persian Government
of justifying a neglect to maintain law and order and to safeguard life and
property in territories over which they claimed sovereignty and jurisdiction,
which is a duty that devolves upon every responsible Government. But if any
distinction is to be drawn between neglect and malpractice we must seemmgl\
rely on the former. There are, indeed, a few instances which might suggest
malpractice, as where it is alleged that the road guards quitted their duty or
that the gendarmerie in charge of the road saw nothing, or that premises robbed
were supposed to be guarded by Persian soldiers. But in general the statements
made by our consuls speak of the apathy and inactivity of the local officials, of
their failure to take any proper steps either to safeguard the roads or to trace
the thieves, of their neglect to guard localities close to towns or places where
robbers were rampant, of their evasion of responsibility by endeavouring to shift
it to others, or by alleging that the robbers came from another neighbouring
jurisdiction, and the like. It is assumed by all our consuls that it was the plain
duty of the Persian authorities to maintain the safety of the public highways
[11541]
D

About this item

Content

Correspondence and other papers relating to the drafting of an article for the Anglo-Persian Treaty, concerning private claims made against the British and Persian Governments. The correspondence concerns: the exclusion from the article of British Indian claims; an agreement by both parties to not pursue certain claims arising from the ‘exceptional circumstances obtaining during the [First] world war’ (f 155); general treaty instructions from 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. , sent to the British Legation in Tehran; details of an historic claim for approximately £900,000, made against the British Government by a Persian subject named Socrates Atychides, whose ship, the Kara Deniz , was detained and declared as prize at Bombay [Mumbai] in 1914; a printed copy of a general review of British claims against Persia, prepared by Hugh Ritchie, formerly of the Foreign Office. Ritchie’s review includes indexes to supplementary volumes (not included in the file) entitled Persia (Legation Claims) , Persia: Consulate Claims (Peace-Time), and Persia: Consulate Claims (War-Time) (ff 22-51). The indexes are lists of British claimants.

Principal correspondents in the file include: John Charles Walton and John Gilbert Laithwaite of 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. ; George William Rendel and Christopher Frederick Ashton Warner of the Foreign Office; W R L Trickett of HM’s Treasury.

The file contains a single paragraph of French text: a draft of the claims article submitted by the Government of Persia (f 168).

The file includes a divider, which gives a list of correspondence references contained in the file by year. This is placed at the back of the correspondence.

Extent and format
1 file (176 folios)
Arrangement

The papers are arranged in approximate chronological order from the rear to the front of the file.

Physical characteristics

Foliation: the foliation sequence (used for referencing) commences at the inside front cover with 1, and terminates at the last folio with 178; these numbers are written in pencil, are circled, and are located in the top right corner of the recto The front of a sheet of paper or leaf, often abbreviated to 'r'. side of each folio. A previous foliation sequence, which is also circled, has been superseded and therefore crossed out.

Written in
English and French in Latin script
View the complete information for this record

Use and share this item

Share this item
Cite this item in your research

Coll 28/51 ‘Persia. Relations with H.M.G. Treaty negotiations: Article regarding private claims.’ [‎30r] (59/357), British Library: India Office Records and Private Papers, IOR/L/PS/12/3456, in Qatar Digital Library <https://www.qdl.qa/archive/81055/vdc_100046162934.0x00003e> [accessed 28 March 2024]

Link to this item
Embed this item

Copy and paste the code below into your web page where you would like to embed the image.

<meta charset="utf-8"><a href="https://www.qdl.qa/en/archive/81055/vdc_100046162934.0x00003e">Coll 28/51 ‘Persia. Relations with H.M.G. Treaty negotiations: Article regarding private claims.’ [&lrm;30r] (59/357)</a>
<a href="https://www.qdl.qa/en/archive/81055/vdc_100046162934.0x00003e">
	<img src="https://iiif.qdl.qa/iiif/images/81055/vdc_100000000648.0x00000a/IOR_L_PS_12_3456_0062.jp2/full/!280,240/0/default.jpg" alt="" />
</a>
IIIF details

This record has a IIIF manifest available as follows. If you have a compatible viewer you can drag the icon to load it.https://www.qdl.qa/en/iiif/81055/vdc_100000000648.0x00000a/manifestOpen in Universal viewerOpen in Mirador viewerMore options for embedding images

Use and reuse
Download this image