ملف ٢٩٠٨/١٩٠٧ الجزء ٣ "الخليج الفارسي: الحجر الصحي؛ شكوى ألمانية" [ظ‎‎١‎١‎٣] (٢٥٠/٢٢٦)

On the question of a staiion on Persian territory being controlled by
the Constantinople Board of Health, the India Office at first raised
serious objections, as being likely to give the Arab tribes the impress,on
that Turkey controlled the entire Gulf. They urged the desirability of
^nivot-.iinJnrr iw«in,n authoritv over tho station.- But the India Oince
the station. v But the India Office
at the same time stated that the
question was one to he settled
rather by the Foreign Office than
by them. The Foreign Office did
not apparently, share the apprehensions as to tho effect on the
of ffiviiur control of the Ormuz station to the Constantinople Bo ard of
maintaining Persian authority over
* Confidential Paper 7,109, No. 139.
Confidential Paper 7,370, 2s 0. 1, and
others.
It may be added that, if a station is to be established at Ormuz, there
seems to he no other body than the Constantinople Board of Health to
which its control could he entrusted. A proposal to put it under the
Teheran Board of Health need not seriously he considered, as that
Board has neither the funds nor the energy needed. A proposal to
establish a third body to control the Ormuz station would not probably
meet with approval, as a similar proposal has already been objected to
on the grounds that a new Board would multiply the troublesome
incidents already caused by those existing.
In 1898 the Indian Government proposed lending an Indian medical
officer as director of the station at the entrance of the Gulf, by agree
ment with the Constantinople Board of Health. Colonel Meade, acting
Polhical Resident in the Persian Gulf, stronsly approved; and thought,
if this could not be arranged, that His Majesty’s Government should
insist that; the head of the station should, at any rate, he an Englishman.
Hr. Dickson thought the Constantinople Board of Health would never
consent to an Indian Government officer as director, and urged that the
Indian Government, with the consent of Persia, should itself establish
and administer a lazaret, and then ask the Porte to name an Ottoman
delegate to be added to the staff.
C. Should an entirely new set of proposals he made, the following
considerations might he borne in mind :—
Great Britain still has the overwhelming preponderance in shipping
in the Gulf. In the six years 1896—1902 the proportion of British
shipping in the Turkish ports of the Gulf (Basra and Fao) varied from
70’8 to 77*3 per cent. Turkish shipping in the same period varied from
10'06 to 20'08 per cent. Shipping of all other European flags together
varied from P98 to 4T3 per cent. I have no exact information on the
proportion of British shipping in the Persian ports ; hut in official
correspondence on this subject in recent years, the proportion of British
shipping in all the Gulf ports has been repeatedly spoken of a^ exceeding
90 per cent, of the total. As it has increased rather than diminished in
the Turkish ports in the last six years, there is no reason to believe
that it has dimished in the Turkish and Persian ports together. It
would seem therefore justifiable to continue to state that British
shipping accounts for over 90 per cent, of the total shipping in the
Gulf.
With regard to the individual ports in the Gulf, it would be important
to hear in mind the following definite statements, contained in a
Despatch from Lord Salisburv to Sir N. It. 0 Conor, dated 5 th July
1899 :
“ • • • • it does not seem necessary or expedient that a Turkish
sanitary station should he permitted to be establised at El Katar, a port
which has never been formally admitted by His Majesty’s Government
to be under the sovereignty of Turkey ....
With regard to Aoweit, His Majesty’s Government cannot
countenance the theory of Turkish Protectorate.
It is considered by His Majesty’s Government that the presence in
the Persian Gull of Turkish war vessels should he deprecated.