‘Persia – especially Seistan’ [‎150r] (298/949)

MEMORANDUM.
The paper specified in the margin
Persia.
The Seistan water question.
Letter from Colonel A. H. McMehon, C.S.I.,
C.I E., British C.-mnusaioncr, Seistan Arbitration
Commission, No. 2 + 07 , dated the 2oth September
1904 .
was transmitted to the Secretary, Political
Department, 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. , London, for the
information of His Majesty’s Secretary of
State for India, under cover of the Foreign
Secretary’s letter No. 41 M., dated the
13 th October 1904 .
3
Telegram, No. 812, dated Seistan, the 10th (despatched from Robat on 14th) October 1904.
From— Colonel A. H. McMahon, C.S.I., C.I.E., British Commissioner, Seistan
Arbitration Commission,
To—The Foreign Secretary, Simla.
Following from Tehran :— Begins. Your telegram, 1st September. Persian
Government have again complained of band which Afghans are building.
Could not work be stopped pending settlement of water question, as they
attach importance to matter ? Message ends.
I have replied to-day as follows:— Begins. Your telegram, 5 th October.
Afghans have not touched small band referred to since last August. The river
in its annual winter rise has already breached and overtopped it, so there is no
justification whatever for Persian complaint. Ends.
4
Extract from the diary of Colonel A. H. McMahon, C.S.I., C.I.E., British
Commissioner, Seistan Arbitration Commission, for the period ending
the 24 th September 1904 ,
*******
19 th September 1904 , Camp Kuhak,
*******
The Akhundzada returned from Nad Ali to his camp at Khwabgah. He
is exercised in mind about rumours of a big canal Sartip Mir Masum Khan
has begun at Chah Nima from the Pud-i-Seistan. He thinks this will cross
the boundary line southwards, and wants me to prohibit it. I think this inci
dent can be turned to useful account.
20 th September, Camp Kohak. —I sent Khan Bahadur Mir Shams Shah to
see the Akhundzada, with instructions what to say if the Chah Nima business is
mentioned. Naturally enough it was, and the Akhundzada wants to know
whether the Sartip’s canal is being extended across the boundary line. He
feared that, if it did, the Persians would claim a rectification of the line to meet
the case of actual occupation. Mir Shams Shah said the question was one of
perfect indifference to me, and that I had declined to take any steps in the matter
short of final demarcation with permanent boundary pillars, and, if this be
deferred, goodness knows wuat changes may not take place in the extent of
effective occupation by the Persians. The Akhundzada then suggested that I
should demarcate the straight line to Koh-i-Malik Siah as agreed upon last
week. Mir Suams Shah replied that I was now doubtful of the wisdom of
doing this, as it would appear to admit obligation to defer demarcation
elsewhere. Why not begin first on the line northwards ? This puzzled the
old gentleman a bit, and he finally begged that I would begin where I liked,
and demarcate where I liked, only for goodness sake, not finish up the whole
line, and tell him that it is a fait accompli before he gets the necessary
authority from Kabul to co-operate. This is one more step gained; but Mir
Shams Shah said he had no authority from me to promise anything.
21 st September, Camp Kohak. —The Akhundzada came and paid me a
long visit. He brought a large party with him; no business was discussed. I