'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.' [‎123r] (250/386)

141
47 During tbeaulumn of 1003 tlie Hashmat-ul-Mulk was told that, unless
° he paid tlie Government share of the
gram to the Russian Bank. produce at a higher rate than that at
which it had hitherto been accepted, the whole quantity would be sold 1°
Russian Hank. Widesp r ead rumours of his impending deposition weakened his
authority while the demands made on him for double pesh-kush, in consequence
of the change of Governors-General in Meshed, drove him to enforce severer
revenue exactions in his province, which in turn aroused opposition against
him Finally, the institution of numerous authorities, having direct communi
cation with Tehran, left the Hashmat-ul-Mulk a cypher, where, but a lew
years before, he had wielded semi-independent authority.
48 Early in November 1903, Mr. Grant Duff at Tehran was confidentially
informed by the Mushir-ed-Dowleh that
British support of the Hashmat. p ers j an Government proposed ^ to
deprive the Hashmat-ui-Mulk of the Governorship of Snstan after the with
drawal of Colonel McMahon's Commission. IV hen news of this reached India,
Lord Curzon, in addressing tbo Secretary of State, held strongly the view t ia
the Hashmat’s dismissal, directly following the departure of the mission, would
be regarded as a Russian victory and a symptom of reaction and Mr. Grant
Huff was instructed by the Foreign Office to represent to the Muslnr ed-Douleh
that IIis Maiestv’s Government had recently gone to great expense to arrange
the Persian difficulties with the Afghans in Seistan, and were entitled to special
consideration in that district, in view of a position which was shared by no
other Power. His Maj stv s Government would not acquiesce m the dismissal of
the Hashmat-ul- M ulk, and would find it difficult to withdraw the Commission
until an assurance ivas giveji that the status quo would be maintained.
49 The Mushir-ed-Howleh replied that he could not give a verbal message
to this effect to the Shah, and that, if His Majesty's Government insisted on
their views coming to His Majesty’s knowledge, a formal note must be addressed
to him. The Shah was already suspicious of the movements of the DnMfh 1
Seistan, and such a communication would confirm his suspicions. If h
Hashmat-ul-Mulk were retained against the Shahs wishes, His Majesty
would be suspicious of his loyalty and would deprive him of power by support
ing subordinate officials in Seistan.
50 On receipt of this reply, Lord Curzon concurred with Sir A Hardinge
(who was at that time with the Viceroy in the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. ) that the representa
tions of His Majesty’s Government should certainly he put m writing am
formally communicated to the Persian Government. Instructions accordingly
were issued by the Foreign Office to Mr. Grant Duff, who on 3rd December
1903 , reported the answer of the Muslnr-ed-Dowleh, "hici vas o ie e
that His 1 Maiesty had expressed his surprise and regret that the British Go
ernmlnt should concern themselves in the question of the G wemorsh.p of
o oo it was clear that the Persian Government would take the requisite
sfcns^o 3 preserve 0 their own interests and to keep order in that provmco
A chanae^if Governors in the opinion of the Persian Government <J‘ ( "O
con cerr?foreign politicians, and if any steps were required for the piotectio
of Ssh interests, application should be made to the Persian Government,
who in view of the friendship between the two Governments would take neces
sary action. Further, the Persian Government ^considered that m conformi y
with courtesy, the British Government should not have made such a represent
tation.
51 To this Mr. Grant Duff, on instructions from Lord Lansclowne, replied
disclaiming any lack of courtesy in the communication to the Persian Govern
ment, which was framed in Persia’s best interests to Py m of e P eac ®^ d b ° e rd t ”
on the frontier, and he ended his note with the ;ntim^n tl,at it nould be the
dutvof His Maiestv’s Government to consider carefully what steps wouiu
become necessary for the protection of British interests m Seistan, havm 0
regard to the unfriendlv character of the message of the Minister ot loreign
Affairs The reminder"of the Persian Government, reported by Mr Grant
Duff on 26th December 1903, expressed their surpuse at learning that t io