Coll 28/95 ‘Persia. Relations with H.M.G. Private claims against H.M.G.: case of the S.S. “Kara Deniz”.’ [‎101v] (202/691)

36
the loss of tolls thus occasioned. For the destruction of the toll-house
7,827-35 krans was claimed, according to a detailed account, and for the loss of
tolls between 1908 and 1910 a further 60,924 krans. Messrs. Lynch were entitled
under their road concessions to set up toll-houses and collect tolls, and their
endeavour to do so at Kasr-i-Dokhtar met with the full support of the Persian
Government, who were, however, powerless to enforce their repeated injunctions
to the local authority, in the face of a determined local opposition, with the result
that the building was wrecked by a mob, and the collection of tolls for the time
being brought to an end. Here, again, we are furnished only with statements
and no depositions, and if the claims are to be pursued it will seemingly be
necessary for Messrs. Lynch to supply all requisite evidence in support. There
is also reason to think that they waived their claim on this head at the time their
concession was renewed in 1914 or thereabouts.
Claim No. 10.—Messrs. Lynch claimed £15 155. for damage to a “ level ”
used by their road engineers, which was injured in a fracas in January 1907
between Cossacks in the employment of the Persian Government and the staff of
their toll-house at Menzerieh. The Cossacks were severely punished by their
commanding officer for their misconduct, but no compensation seems to have been
obtained for the damage done to the “ level,” and it is not altogether clear
whether the claim of £15 155. was actually presented to the Persian Government.
At any rate, Messrs. Lynch will have to furnish documentary evidence to justify
the claim. There is none here.
Claim No. 11 .—The Persian Transport Company claimed some 300 krans
for a post-wagon robbery in April 1909. Due representations were made by our
Legation to the Persian Government, but no documentary evidence is available
concerning the loss, and this remains to be furnished by the Persian Transport
Company.
Claim No. 12 .—The Persian Transport Company claimed 180 krans for the
forcible closing of their tea-house at Keraz Bridge in December 1910 by one
Hasan Khan, a local dignitary, who appears to have acted in a violent and illegal
manner in doing so. Representations were made by our Legation to the Persian
Government, but the amount claimed is apparently still outstanding, and there is
nothing in the way of precise documentary evidence to support it. Probably the
Persian Transport Company, if they still maintain the claim, can from their
records provide evidence.
Claims Nos. 13, 21 and 22.—Messrs. Lynch in 1910 furnished our Legation
with a list of goods robbed from caravans by one Naib Hussein, who in October
of that year had with his followers broken out in revolt against the Persian
Government and had captured and occupied the town of Kashan. Our Legation
were at the time doubtful whether a claim would be justified in the circum
stances; other Legations at Tehran were not entering claims; and they referred
the matter home, observing, however, that in any case the line between insurgents
and robbers in Persia was so fine that it might form an inconvenient precedent
to put no claim in the present case. In reply we instructed the Legation that,
having regard to the special circumstances, the proposal to present a claim for
the sworn value of the goods was approved. This was minuted by our Legation
to the effect that the sworn value of the goods should be ascertained, and that a
claim would then be preferred against the Persian Government.
As a result it now appears from the schedule of claims sent home that (after
some twenty-four years) the claim has not yet been formulated by Messrs. Lynch,
but may be submitted by the insurance company. Except in the case of two
minor items (which form Claims Nos. 21 and 22 ), we have therefore no further
information concerning these claims. These two items are as follows :—
. Claim No. 21.—Merely an extract from the Legation register, which shows
that Messrs. Lynch compromised with one Mashallah Khan, who had asked that
his goods should be insured against loss (which was not, however, done) by paying
him £100 for the loss of his goods. This seems rather a doubtful claim in the
circumstances, as the fault appears to have been due to the neglect of Lynch’s
agent to insure the goods against robbery.
Claim No. 22.—Again merely an extract from the Legation register
concerning Messrs. Lynch’s claim for 6,612-95 krans for nineteen cases of
provisions shipped from London on Lynch’s account for subsequent sale to
Jemshid Shahrian.