File 3516/1914 Pt 3 'German War: Persian neutrality; German money for Persia' [‎242v] (491/708)

1
I®
V A
The firm of Ziegler and Company are doing all that we can require of
them They are sending an Englishman to Tehran to take charge of their
important office there and have offered to let me assume control over it for
the time being.
Repeated to Major Trevor and Colonel Sir P. Cox.
TRieeram No.758 a. is in Manuscript. Please see page 10.
l eiegrani Telegram P., No. 765 S., dated the 2nd August 1915.
From—The Secretary to the Government of India in the Foreign and Political
Department, Simla,
To—His Britannic Majesty's Minister, Tehran.
It is reported by the Government of Bombay From c. 1668-1858, the East India Company’s administration in the city of Bombay [Mumbai] and western India. From 1858-1947, a subdivision of the British Raj. It was responsible for British relations with the Gulf and Red Sea regions. that recent transactions
tend to show that Ittihadi is receiving funds from sources other than Haji
Abdur Rahman Shirazi. Is it possible to have enquiries made on the point ?
Papers are being posted to you.
No. 1-304) W., dated Simla, the 3rd August 1915 (Confidential).
From—The Deputy Secretary to the Government of India in the Foreign and
Political Department,
To— Major W. F. T. O'Connor, C.I.E., His Britannic Majesty’s Consul, Shiraz.
I am directed to acknowledge the receipt of your letter No. 105, dated
the 24th June 1915, requesting that the restrictions placed on the account of
Baji Abdur Rahman Shirazi & Son in Bombay may be relaxed.
2. In reply I am to explain the circumstances attending the detention
of two sums of Rs. 1,50,000 and Rs. 1,00,000, which make up a total of
Rs. 2,50,000, which the firm has been required to place on deposit in the Bank
of Bombay. These funds are not in their entirety the property of the firm,
They represent sums remitted for the credit of Ictihadi, against which the latter
has not drawn.
The sum of one lakh One lakh is equal to one hundred thousand rupees and-a*half was remitted by the (chartered Bank in
London to its Bombay branch for credit to the account of Shirazi, who had
himself received from Ittihadi advice that the money should, on receipt, be
passed to his credit. The second remittance of a lakh One lakh is equal to one hundred thousand rupees of rupees Indian silver coin also widely used in the Persian Gulf. was made to
its Bombay branch by the Eastern Bank from London. In this ease Shirazi
received advice from Ittihadi that he was to expect a remittance of Rs. If
lakhs One lakh is equal to one hundred thousand rupees on his account. Both sums were intercepted by the Government of
Bombay and were similarly treated, being placed on fixed deposit for three
months in the Bank of Bombay on condition that they be withdrawn only on
the joint order of the Secretary to the Government of Bombay From c. 1668-1858, the East India Company’s administration in the city of Bombay [Mumbai] and western India. From 1858-1947, a subdivision of the British Raj. It was responsible for British relations with the Gulf and Red Sea regions. in the Political
Department and of the firm of Abdur Rahman Shirazi & Son. The deposit
was made in one case on the 1st June and in the other on the 21st June 1915.
3. On the showing of the Bombay representative of Haji Abdur Rahman
Ittihadi’s total overdraft on them is no more than something between
R-s. 40,000 and 60,000 and granted the accuracy of this account, and the
claim of Shirazi to be reimbursed this overdraft, he has no claim to the balance
of the sums deposited, more specially as he has now ceased trading with Ittihadi,
4. The Government of Bombay From c. 1668-1858, the East India Company’s administration in the city of Bombay [Mumbai] and western India. From 1858-1947, a subdivision of the British Raj. It was responsible for British relations with the Gulf and Red Sea regions. propose accordingly that, on expiry of
the first deposit, the amount of Ittihadi’s overdraft on Haji Rahman Shirazi
& Son together with the interest accrued on it should he banded over to the
firm’s agent in Bombay and that the balance of the first deposit together with
the second deposit should be held by Government pending the appearance of
a rightful claimant to whom the money can be paid without endangering
the public interest.
5. I am now to request that Haji Ahdur Rahman Shirazi may be
informed that, in the circumstances, the Government of India regret t)iat they
are unable to issue any orders m regard to the payment of any other sum than
the sum ol Rs. 40,000 to 50,000 which is shown to be due to him.
6. Einally, I am to say that, while commercial cables from and to Ahdur
Rahman Shirazi & Son are carefully scrutinized in Bombay and explanation^
are asked of any doubtful transactions, every effort is made to avoid unneeeg*
$ary interference with legitimate business.