"ملف رقم ٣٠٤٧ لسنة ١٩٠٩ "السكك الحديدية: تركيا الآسيوية؛ إنشاء سكة حديدية في آسيا الصغرى" [و‎‎٩‎٥] (٣٦٨/١٩٤)

[This Document is the Property of His Britannic Majesty's Government.]
discussed with me at an interview I had with you last week.
The replies in effect are as follows :—
1 . That the Minister of Public Works has no knowledge of the existence of any
combination between the Glascow and Chester interests.
2. That the Minister supports the Chester scheme as being the most favourable
presented hitherto.
3. That the Minister states that official assurances have been received from the
Government of the United States as to the financial stability of the Chester group.
4. That Chester has never mentioned Mr. D’Arcy’s name at Constantinople.
5. That Sir G. Lowther considers that the chances of the Chester scheme are at
present remote.
In regard to 1, 2, and 4, I beg to explain that Mr. D’Arcy’s reasons for supposing
that Glascow and Chester are working in combination, and that Mr. D’Arcy’s name has
been used in connection with this scheme, are :—
1 . That in an interview between Mr. D’Arcy’s representatives and the Minister
on the 28th January, at which date Chester was in Constantinople and Glascow in
London, the latter said :—
“ I am quite sure, and I have proof in hand, that Chester has immense capital at his
disposal and is backed by high standing financiers.”
Immediately afterwards he remarked :—
“ I have received a telegram from Glascow announcing that he has found the
necessary capital,”
and then went on to discuss these proposals as if he regarded them as one.
2. That Prince Ibrahim, who is working in conjunction with Glascow, had during
the past couple of months been making strenuous endeavours to induce Mr. D’Arcy to
support his scheme, and has been indicating that the other financial support he was
hoping to get was dependent upon Mr. D’Arcy agreeing to join in the scheme.
This is merely by way of explanation. But, whether Glascow and Chester are
working for the same or different interests, the Anatolian Railway concession as at
present formulated, i.e., in combination with the petroleum rights for 10 or 20 kilom. on
each side of the proposed railway, would, Mr. D Arcy considers, be an encroachment upon
his claims to the oil concession for the provinces of Mosul and Bagdad, and consequently
he would feel much obliged if His Majesty s Minister can be requested to represent
this view of the matter to the Turkish Minister of Public W orks before his negotiations
in regard to the railway concession are carried any further.
This is the more desirable inasmuch as the Chester proposals are being favourably
considered by the Minister of Public M orks, and will, unless a protest is made at the
present stage, presumably be placed before the Ottoman Parliament as soon as the Bill
to which you refer becomes law.
_ -» i 1 * A I a ■W-WT yvywlT- fl /"'l T - /“'V
Mr Nichols, to whom vou granted an interview last week has returned to
Constantinople, and will on his arrived represent Mr. D’Arcy’s views as above to the
ASIATIC TURKEY AND ARABIA.
CONFIDENTIAL.
[7528]
No. 1 .
Anglo-Persian Oil Company to Foreign Office.—(Received March 4.)
Winchester House, Old Broad Street, London,
March 2, 1910.
Sir,
I HAVE the honour to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 25th ultimo,
advising the replies received from His Majesty’s Ambassador at Constantinople to the
telegram which he kindly sent at the instance of Mr. D’Arcy, and which replies you
embassy.
I am, &c.
C. GREENWAY, Managing Director.
[2679 d—1]