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.’ [‎31r] (61/357)

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

19
« r
so simple. There appear to be two classes of cases—those due to the advance of
enemy forces invading Persia and those due to local uprisings, fostered it ma\ be
by enemy agents working on the minds of tribes over whom the Persian Lkrv em
inent seem to have exercised but a scanty control. In the first, the argument ma\
perhaps be that when Turkish forces invaded Persia, ostensibly on the ground
that there were already some Russian troops there, it was the business of the
✓-Persian Government to keep them out, and that, as they failed to do so, losses
oUstained by British officials and subjects who were forced to depart in the face
of this enemy invasion were losses for which the Persian Government are liable.
There is obviously some contentious matter here. In the second, it seems clearei
that the local populations, even if misled by enemy intriguers, were the actual
offenders, even though it may be doubtful if the Persian Government had the
means to control them. As regards (3), the claims of the Imperial Bank of Persia
and its staff have already been referred to in paragraphs 29 and 30 above; while,
as regards ( 4 ), highway robberies and other outrages were, of course, more
frequent during the war period than in others, owing to the disorganised state of
the country.
54. As regards our claims for war losses there seems little doubt that it
these are advanced before an arbitral tribunal, the Persian Government will, on
their part, advance counter-claims against us for Persian losses during this
period. There are several references in the Legation correspondence to their
intention to advance claims of this nature against the belligerent Powers who
carried on operations in Persia; in that relating to Legation claim No. 29, £.g.,
they said they hoped, when the questions of the war were decided, to obtain
considerable compensation for damage to Persia and its inhabitants from the
operations of the belligerent Powers. It seems unlikely that they will obtain
much in this way from either Russia or Turkey—and there seems no evidence
that they have tried to do so—but they may hope to obtain some from us, more
especially when the opportunity is afforded them of setting off their claims against
ours; while their assessment of any damage they can lay at our doors is not likely
to err on the side of moderation. We have already had indication of one large
claim—that of one Atychides for a ship condemned by our prize court at Bombay,
in which a figure of some £900,000 is mentioned—and research will doubtless
provide them with further opportunities in this direction. A despatch of
Sir R. Clive’s of the 4th May, 1929, said that they were engaged in drawing up
a list of counter-claims for damage done during the occupation of Persia by
foreign armies in the period 1914—21; and in a further despatch of the
15th June, 1929, he gave his impression that their intention was to resist any
possibility’ of a cash payment to us by presenting counter-claims arising out of
the occupation of Persia by British forces during the war. In this event the total
of their claims would probably far exceed ours, and this consideration—coupled
with doubts as to the fate before an arbitral tribunal of our own war-time claims,
when the conditions to which Persia, which early in the war declared its
neutrality, was exposed at the hands of the contending belligerent Powers, came
under review before that tribunal—has led us recently to the proposal that the
terms of any agreement, which might be ultimately reached for the settlement of
claims should exclude losses of a non-contractual kind incurred between the
4th August, 1914, and the 22nd February, 1921, the date when the last British
troops left’Persia. If this proposal should be eventually adopted it will
materially reduce the total of our outstanding claims against Persia, as shown
in the approximate figures given in paragraph 39 above.
56. Questions of damage done by British troops m Persia arose in 1919,
when, as supplementary to the agreement of the 9th August, 1919, between His
Majesty’s Government 1 and the Persian Government, notes were exchanged on
the 9 th- 10 th August, 1919, between Sir P. Cox and Vossug-ed-Dowleh lor the
waiver of claims on the respective sides for the cost of maintenance of those
troops and any damage done by them in Persia, but leaving the claims of
individuals and private institutions to be dealt with independently. The latter
clause was doubtless meant to safeguard our own claims, but it leaves the door
open to Persian claims also. These notes are shown on pp. 167-8 of our printed
correspondence respecting the affairs of Persia, 1919^ (Confidential 11601). The'
agreement mentioned and its annexes provided by their terms neither for ratifica
tion nor denunciation, and must be assumed therefore to have possessed validity
as from the date of their signature. The correspondence, however, shows that the
[11541] D 2

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.’ [‎31r] (61/357), British Library: India Office Records and Private Papers, IOR/L/PS/12/3456, in Qatar Digital Library <https://www.qdl.qa/archive/81055/vdc_100046162934.0x000040> [accessed 29 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_100046162934.0x000040">Coll 28/51 ‘Persia. Relations with H.M.G. Treaty negotiations: Article regarding private claims.’ [&lrm;31r] (61/357)</a>
<a href="https://www.qdl.qa/en/archive/81055/vdc_100046162934.0x000040">
	<img src="https://iiif.qdl.qa/iiif/images/81055/vdc_100000000648.0x00000a/IOR_L_PS_12_3456_0064.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