"مذكرة تتعلق بالملاحة في نهري دجلة والفرات". [ظ‎‎١‎٠‎٠] (٢٨٤/٢٠١)

r; i
'
48
It was rumoured that the Porte intended to
establish a Turkish company at Bagdad, and buy
out the Euphrates and Tigris Steam Navigation
Company.
The Law Officers were asked whether any
communication should be made to the Porte on
account of this rumour, and they were also
asked for an opinion regarding Messrs. Lynch's
claim for damages (Appendix XXII).
The Law Officers replied on tiie I9th April
agreeing to the lines of the proposed reply to
the Porte, and stated that in view of the fuller
information, they thought that the position of
the British Government was somewhat stronger
than they had thought it in 1881, but that the
difficulties arising from the action of the em
bassy subsequent to 1846 still remained.
They suggested postponing any action for
enforcing the claim of the company for damages.
(See Appendix XXIII.)
Lord Dufferin reported that Assim had begged
for a little delay during which to overcome the
objections of the Pasha of Bagdad.
A note was addressed to Musurus Pasha
setting forth in detail the British claim, and
denying that the rights of the company rested
on the firmans of 1834 and 1841, and asserting
on the contrary that they were derived from the
agreement of 1840, and the confirmatory
vizierial letter of 1861. (See Appendix XXV.)
During tlu* course of a debate in the House of
Commons on the 8th August of this year the
Under-Secretary of State for Foreign AfTairs, in
reference to the company's rights, said:—
Even if it were conceded that the contracting
parties were not ad idem in respect of the agree
ments of 1846 and 1861, and that there was no
intention on the part of the Porte to grant to
British shipping in general the right of navi
gating the rivers, Her Majesty's Government
contended that the vizierial letter of 1861, having
been issued for the very purpose of enabling the
company to put their two steamers on the Tigris
and Euphrates, was intended to confer, and did
confer, that privilege upon them Her
Majesty's Government were not necessarily called
upon to invoke the general right of navigation
claimed by them on the Rivers Tigris and
Euphrates. Whatever might be the true con
struction of the agreement of 1846 as to the
1884— (cont.)
Lord Dufferin,
Nos. 53 aud 57,
Commercial,
March 15 and 17.
To Law Officers,
March 25.
Law Officers,
April 9.
Lord Dufferin,
No. 136, April 26.
To Musurus Pasha,
June 6.
Hansard's
Parliamentary
Debates,
vol. ccxcii, p. 307 i