123 P 53/260
The Minister in Persia (Philip) to the Secretary of State
[Received March 11, 1926.]
Sir: I have the honor to advert to my despatch No. 4 of January 12, 1926,1 in which I reported to the Department the presentation to His Majesty the Shah of my credentials as Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to Persia.
I had been interested to learn on my arrival at Teheran that, apart from the newly appointed Ambassador of the Soviet Government, no other diplomatic representatives had as yet presented new Letters of Credence since the accession of Reza Shah Pahlavi.
It appeared probable, therefore, that my seniority in the diplomatic corps would be established in the customary manner, and that I would accordingly be ranked, officially, above my colleagues, the other Foreign Ministers Plenipotentiary who had all, with the exception of the newly appointed Afghan Minister, presented Letters of Credence to the Kajar regime.
I believed the Department would not attach any particular importance to the matter, and I did not mention it to the Persian officials. But I understood, privately, that the Ministry for Foreign Affairs entertained the opinion as stated above.
A somewhat amusing situation developed soon after, for I learned from several of my colleagues that at the suggestion of the British Minister prior to my arrival they had agreed that each should retain under the new regime the same degree of seniority as had been established by the presentation of their old credentials regardless of the date of presentation of the new letters, yet to be received from their Governments.
The Soviet and Turkish representatives are vested with ambassadorial rank, therefore the question of precedence among the Ministers did not affect theirs.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[Page 876]The occasion of the first official gathering of the diplomatic corps after my arrival at Teheran was the banquet and reception given to celebrate the inauguration of the Son of the new Shah as Crown Prince.
Before this event, I became aware that the question of my precedence was the subject of considerable discussion among my colleagues, one of whom informed me that the British Minister had been particularly active in his insistence that the old order of precedence was the correct one. I represented my position to them as one of friendly interest only, and signified my willingness to abide tentatively by the opinion of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. At the same time, I stated that the matter being one which involved my official position I desired in the interest of my Government, to have any rights which might be involved to be clearly defined.
Subsequently, I had a talk with Mr. Ala’ (Hussein Alai), who had been requested by the Foreign Office to approach me in the matter. Mr. Ala’ had consulted several works on international law and usage and had come to the conclusion that the foreign diplomatic representatives who remained as such, without interruption, during the period of transition from one governmental regime to another retained their seniority, irrespective of the date of presentation of their new Letters of Credence. A precedent for such a course was cited as having been created in France on the initiation of the Second Empire, etc.
I was also visited by Mr. Anonchiravan, the new “Chef de Protocol” of the Foreign Office, who expressed the embarrassment of the Government which was of the opinion, in the first instance, that my rank had been established by the date of presentation of my credentials. He said that additional information had been acquired, however, which established the fact that a similar situation had recently arisen in Egypt at the time of the change of Government there. The Foreign Office had learned that a discussion had then taken place among the chief diplomatic representatives at Cairo, with the result that it had been decided to maintain the seniority of the representatives as it had existed prior to the change, and irrespective of the dates of presentation of new Letters of Credence. The fact also was mentioned that all of the Chiefs of Mission now resident in Teheran had been officially received by the Shah at the time of his accession, which was considered tantamount to an official recognition of the continuation of their status, as well as their seniority. The Department will recall that upon that occasion the British Minister acted as Dean of the Corps owing to the absence of the former Turkish Ambassador. At that time the Soviet had not raised the rank of its representative to that of Ambassador.
[Page 877]I informed Mr. Anonchiravan that I placed myself in the hands of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs with regard to the present solution of this question; that, as it appeared to have assumed a certain importance, I felt under the necessity of submitting the opinion of the Foreign Office to my Government for its consideration and for its approval of my action.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I have [etc.]
- Not printed.↩