ملف ١٩١٦/٣٨٣٩ جزء ١ "بلاد فارس: - مقدار النفقات - مسألة مراجعة اتفاقية سنة ١٩٠٠" [ظ‎‎٤‎٢‎٩] (٨٨٠/٨٧٧)

r 0 Avfrag 0 e ffi e C xpenditure in Persia in 1809-1900 and 1900-01
shown in Annex 3, Enclosure 14, Political Despa ch to
India ]So. 14, (>th
* Appendix 7 to this note. February 1903' : ‘
(omitting expenditure on Karan subsidy) . ~-n . ~
Add net expenditure m Turkish Arabia shown in koieign
Office Estimates for 1899-1900 and 1900-01 (see
Estimates for 1900-01, pages 437, 449
21,816
102
21,918
(an increase of 93L).
No credit in respect of this relatively increased outlay was given to
India in the settlement of 1900. . 1 1 i T j • n ^
Thus in addition to the 6,530L + 400t. mentioned above | India was left
to bear unaided a further sum oi
1 Pt « e 10 - ti,645i. (6,7381. - 931.) or, in all, 13,5751.
Owing to causes which are somewhat obscure, this original disparity was
subsequently reduced, in the course of the early adjustments to about
10 0001 In 1907-08 as stated in the Memorandum attached to the present
draft letter to the Foreign Office, it was 9,5681. The details given m that
Memorandum show that our expenditure in Turkish Arabia came to b,,)Jlt.,
while that of the Foreign Office was only 1751. net. Accordingly, it seems
quite reasonable to say that, in effect, the whole of the expenditure m
Turkish Arabia is borne by India.
F. W. Newmarch.
8 th February 1911.
8. Note by Political Secretary, dated 11th February 1911 (Political 2891).
Sir R. Ritchie, „
(1) I thought it best to refer to the Financial Department your Minute ot
31st January 1911 and append their reply, dated 8 th February 1911.}
Shortly, the answer to your query
+ Flagged. i s that the Welby Commission did take
into account the incidence of Bagdad, but that the figures supplied to them
(1) were inaccurate owing to an oversight of the Financial Secretary,§
( 2 ) had become out-of-date by the time
§ Sir H. Waterfield. agreement on their Report w T as
arrived at. . . . .
The Financial Department Note proves, I think, that the view m me
Memorandum can be maintained.
2 . I agree as to the alterations in the draft letter.
A. Hirtzel
9. Note by Financial Department, India Office (Political 4213).
Political Secretary,
I attach a copy of an unofficial letter jj from this Department to the
Treasury and dated 11th January. The matter was subsequently discussed
by Mr. Robinson of this Department
'* * ' and Mr. Behrens of the Treasury. It
was pointed out on behalf of this Office that the proposal which we had made
would not involve any alteration in the agreement of 1900 : that we had no
wish to be let off the annual payment of 4087£. 10s. (to which that of 6,000Z,