"ملخص لعلاقات الحكومة البريطانية مع قبائل وشيوخ عربستان. بقلم الملازم أ. ت. ويلسون، القائم بأعمال القنصل في عربستان" [و‎‎٣‎٢] (١٤٣/٦٨)

49
H
reason we Hunk it proper that the lands east of Mohammerah should remain Persian,
in order to form a homogeneous body with that of the Persian Empire itself, and in
order to protect the mouth of the Karun, there should be left to Persia a distance of
about one hour along the eastern bank of the Shatt-al-’Arab, that is to sav, abandoning
to Persia so far as the canal which is situated south of the fort of FailiyeH.
+1 • i^i. ^• e i P 0lt w ^ e . re pl a ced commands navigation towards Basrah 1 we
think it right that this place as also the territories to the north of the said canal should
remain to turkey, for just as the possession of Mohammerah and the mouth of the
Aarun should be ensured to Persia, it is likely to ensure to Turkey the navigation of the
Shatt-al-’Arab towards Basrah. * * 5
Taking the opening of the canal into the Shatt-al-’Arab as the line of departure of
e frontier line we will defer detailing the sinuosities and the prolongation of this
me m the direction of Hawizeh until our engineers have made their investigation of
tins line in the abovementioned spots.
ln f( f wardin g the handsketch (Appendix B of Mr. Alwyn Parker’s
Memorandum) appended to this compilation to Sir Stratford Canning, His
Majesty s Ambassador at Constantinople, under his despatch, No. 3 of 4th
February 1850, Colonel Williams wrote :—
Beginning from the mouths of the Shatt-al-’Arab the proposed line runs along the
western bank of the island of Khidhar, crosses the mouth of Haffar canal and then up
o the Shatt-al- Arab to the mouth of the Abu Jidiyeh canal, a distance of a geographi-
cal league from the Haffar, and there in a line as straight as circumstances will admit
ot to the town and district of Hawizeh passing through the town named by Darvish
Iccsha. thus we offer to Persia a free entrance to and security in the port of Moham
merah at the same time reserving to Turkey the navigation of the Shatt-al-’Arab by the
destruction of a fort built by Shaikh Jabir during the conference of Erzeroum.
His Majesty’s Government pronounced in favour of the line selected by
the mediating Commissioners. By this decision the debateable lands were
pretty evenly divided between the litigants and the security of Basrah and
Mohammerah w r as insured both politically and commercially to their respec
tive States. r
Meanwhile the Persian Government while disposed to forego their own
pretensions, maintained that the line proposed by the mediating Commis
sioners ought to be drawn at a place four to six miles to the west of Failiyeh,
near a place called Tamar, 2 the argument being that a portion of the Ka’ab
tribe was in actual possession of the land up to the above spot, if not bevond
Colonel Sheil (His Majesty’s Minister at Tehran) considered that while
t.ie arguments of the Persian Government were well founded in the main,
the advantage and justice of the decision of the mediating Commissioners
was so obvious, that he had no hesitation in pressing its acceptance on the
Persian Government, who eventually accepted the delimitation of the frontier
according to the views of the mediating Commissioners.
There is thus no doubt whatever as to the geographical position of the
boundary line as laid down by the mediating Commissioners, concurred in
by the British and Russian Governments and accepted by the Persian Gov
ernment apd had it been accepted by the Turkish Government it would in
all probability have been adopted in practice. But this was not to be.
The Ottoman Commissioner not only rejected the decision of the Com
missioners and declined to abate one iota of his pretensions, he further com
plicated the issue by demands of an exorbitant character, involving imme
diate satisfaction and a change in the status quo and by intrigues among the
tribes which led in due course to serious disturbances.
At Constantinople the efforts of the Ambassadors to induce the Porte
to accept the line recommended by the mediating Commissioners remained
without effect.
The Porte persisted in its interpretation of the “ Explanatory Note ”
as justifying the line laid down by its Commissioner.
The actual “ status quo ” at Mohammerah was ultimately provisionally
accepted by the Ottoman and Persian Commissioners under assurances in
writing conveyed by each to the mediating Commissioners, to leave aside
past reclamations and to renounce any change or innovation in respect to
1 There was a question of the palace at Failiveh being demolished, but it appears that the fortific itions alone
were razed, an indispensable measure in the opiaio.i of the mediating Commissioners.
5 This place cannot now be identified.