500.A14/715
The Minister in Persia (Hornibrook) to the Secretary of State
[Received November 28.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to the Department’s instruction No. 45 of August 28, 1934, regarding the activities of the Persian Minister in Washington in connection with the Arms Traffic Convention of 1925, and to report as follows:
Because of the Persepolis negotiations59a and the latitude which was given to me in Departmental instructions as to the opportune time in which to present the contents of the above-mentioned instruction, the matter was not presented until October 25th, and then presented informally to the Prime Minister following a conference on another subject.
[Page 485]On the above-mentioned occasion I informed the Prime Minister as to the salient facts in connection with the discourtesy of the Persian Minister to the American Secretary of State and of the note which had been transmitted by the latter informing him of his unwillingness to further discuss with the Minister the Arms Traffic Convention of 1925.
It was quite apparent from the Prime Minister’s reaction that he had not as yet been informed of this merited rebuke to his representative in Washington. He immediately launched out into a long and friendly discussion of the rights of Persia in the Gulf, the struggle to obtain the recognition of the same by other powers, and the injustice which would be perpetrated upon Persia by the terms of the Arms Traffic Convention of 1925, unless the rights of his country could be protected by a resolution similar to that which was passed by the United States Senate.
I informed the Minister that the question of sovereignty over the waters of the Persian Gulf was of course not involved in the incident which I had mentioned; that my Government had repeatedly assured the Persian Minister in Washington that it did not propose to concern itself with any dispute between Persia and another friendly power over such sovereignty; that the present unpleasant situation had been provoked in the first instance as a result of the political activities of Djalal in approaching members of the United States Senate in an effort to secure the passage of the Senate reservation, and pointed out in a friendly way that the Department of State quite naturally resented this breach of good form.
I reserved the contents of this instruction for the Prime Minister for the reason that Djalal was named by him to his present post, and thought it might perhaps fall on more fertile soil in the office of the Prime Minister than in that of the Foreign Office. If, as is generally believed, the Prime Minister and Djalal are still friendly, it is quite possible that the former may so arrange matters that Djalal will be transferred to an environment which is more congenial than that of Washington at the present moment.
Respectfully yours,
- Negotiations on behalf of the University of Chicago in connection with the restoration of the ancient city of Persepolis.↩