'SUMMARY OF THE PRINCIPAL EVENTS AND MEASURES OF THE VICEROYALTY OF HIS EXCELLENCY LORD CURZON OF KEDLESTON, VICEROY AND GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF INDIA IN THE FOREIGN DEPARTMENT. I. JANUARY 1899-APRIL 1904. II. DECEMBER 1904-NOVEMBER 1905. VOLUME IV. PERSIA AND THE PERSIAN GULF.' [‎104r] (212/386)

103
opinion at Tehran on 19th August 1872, and gave the Persian and Afghan
Commissioners each a copy, with “a map illustrating the country awarded by
the arbitral opinion.” Both Persia and Afghanistan appealed to the British
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs against the award, which was, however
confirmed in full by Lord Granville on 9th March 1873. The map given with
the copy of the award Avas said to be only “ illustrative of the country
awarded,” and there w r as no reference to it in the award as beino authori
tative as regards the boundary line. The map in no way pretended to be an
accurate map, but was merely a sketch map prepared chiefly from native
information ; various important points on the boundary line, notably Koh-i-
Malik Slab and the point where the line leaves the Helmand river northwards
were not visited at all by the survey officer, and the line drawn on the map was
drawn some months after General Goldsmid left Seistan from memory of a
country which he had very imperfect opportunities of studying.
28. It was necessary, therefore, to depend for a definition of the line on the
written arbitral opinion, the relevant portions of which were as follows : —
(1) “ Persia should not possess land on the right of the Helmand.”
* * * * * *
(i) c< The main bed of the Helmand, therefore, below Kohak should be
the eastern boundary of Persian Seistan.
(ii) “ And the line of frontier from Kohak to the hills south of the
Seistan desert should be so drawn as to include within the
Afghan limits all cultivation on both banks of the river from
the band upwards. The Malik Siah Koh on the chain of hills
separating the Seistan from the Kerman desert appears a fitting
point.
(iii) c( North of Seistan, the southern limit of the Naizar, should be the
frontier towards Lash Jowain. Persia should not cross the
Hamun in that direction. A line drawn from the Naizar to the
Koh Slab near Bandan would clearly define her possession.
(iv) Cf It is, moreover, to he well understood that no works are to he
carried out on either side calculated to interfere with the requi
site supply of water for irrigation on both banks of the Helmand.
On the representation of the Kabul Envoy to India, the Government of
India in 1873 asked for a definite ruling on the interpretation of this last clause,
and suggested that “ it cannot be understood as applying either to existing canals
or to such old and disused canals as the Afghan Government may wish to put
in proper repair, nor Avouid it interfere with the excavation of new canals,
provided the requisite supply of water for irrigation on the Persian side is
not diminished.^ This interpretation Avas accepted by Her Majesty’s Govern
ment and was communicated to the Amir.
29. Such were the terms of the Goldsmid award, hut the state of affairs
with regard to the Seistan boundary existing in 1902 was as follows :—
In the north the Persians were in occupation of Takht-i-Shah on the
Afghan side of General Goldsmid’s line. On the east the Helmand had
deserted the old bed in the Nad Ali channel and taken to the Rud i-Parian
channel, some 8 miles to the west. The Afghans claimed the river bed as the
boundary, and had occupied Deli-i-Dost Muhammad on the west of the Nad
Ali channel, until persuaded by Major Benn to withdraw. On the south
the Afghans had partially re-opened the old Tarakun canal, and, according
to Persian complaints, were opening up irrigation channels to Hauzdar and
Kuntdar across the Persian side of the Goldsmid line.
30. As to the state of feeling on both sides, the Persians had strongly
urged their claims to Takht i-Shah and the Tarakun tract in their appeal
against the Goldsmid award in 1873, and the same feelings animated them
regarding those tracts in 1902. On the other hand, no formal complaint had
ever been made by the Afghans against the occupation of Takht-i-Shah, and