The Minister in Persia (Philip) to the Secretary of State
[Received December 27—4:22 p.m.]
70. Department’s 52, of December 18. I concur with Millspaugh in regarding representations of Persian Minister in Washington as possible result of audience which he had with Shah before he left for America and before present situation had arisen. His indirect censure of American Administrator appears absurd since the latter is now on better terms with the Minister of War than ever before. Millspaugh stated to me in respect of railways that he had himself been responsible for laying aside within a couple of years funds now amounting to over 7,000,000 tomans to be devoted to railway development.
Later the Minister for Foreign Affairs told me that Persian Minister in Washington had received no instructions from Teheran relating to Millspaugh mission.
Alaï has privately discussed legislation [situation?] with me. He told me the Shah has again intimated disapproval of American Administrator and expressed dislike for all foreign officials in presence of members of Cabinet and of Parliament. Alaï thinks Shah’s present attitude, as also private instructions from Court to Persian Minister in Washington, may have been prompted by machinations of foreigners and by Millspaugh’s rejection of contract with German specialist in smelting. Alaï also suggests it might do good if I obtain audience and ask Shah to explain these matters.
Except for Shah’s alleged dissatisfaction, which is disquieting, the position of the advisers appears to be better, although other interested countries may be growing jealous of recruiting of numerous American assistants. … It appears to me that the attitude of the Shah is the decisive element in the situation.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .