---
Title: Persia and England (1854)
Description: Leading article of the New-York Daily Tribune on how Palmerston, from 1830 to 1841, handed the British influence in Persia over to Russia.
Author: Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels
Date: 1854-01-02
URL: https://marxismo.school/archivo/marx-engels/originales/1854%20Persia%20and%20England
---


*Published unsigned as a leading article in the* New-York Daily Tribune*, No. 3966, January 2, 1854, p. 4, under the heading “Persia and England” (reprinted in the issue of January 3, p. 4); MEGA² (I/12) prints it in its appendix among the texts of doubtful attribution (Dubiosa), without deciding between Marx and Engels. The newspaper’s misprint “onsecutive” is corrected. Text from the original newspaper (Library of Congress, Chronicling America). [Traducción al español](https://marxismo.school/archivo/marx-engels/1854%20Persia%20e%20Inglaterra).*

In announcing the declaration of war by the Shah of Persia against the Turkish Sultan, we copied from *The London Times* a statement that Persia has fallen entirely under “Russian control;” but since our London cotemporary fails to explain how that country has become estranged from the influence of Great Britain, we will supply the deficiency. It includes some singular historical facts.

In 1811, England bound herself, by the treaty of Teheran, negotiated with Persia by Sir Harford Jones Brydges, to maintain Persia on her then footing of independence, against Russia and all other powers. Persia, on her side, stipulated that she would not enter into any relations with European nations, or with any power whatever, to the detriment or prejudice of the British Indian Empire. The stipulations of that treaty were faithfully kept by Persia. England violated them at first in 1826, when she allowed Russia to extend her territory to the frontier of the Araxes. And Lord Palmerston, from 1830—1841, did all in his power to supplant the British influence in the Persian councils by Russian influence, as we proceed to show.

At the time when the noble lord came into office, the Russians were so detested in Persia that they were scarcely able to find a footing for their Consuls or agents in any part of the kingdom. In Hamadan, for instance, permission to reside was secured to them only upon the application and remonstrances of the British Envoy. So complete was the British ascendancy in Persia at that time, so complete the distrust and suspicion of Russian designs. In 1831 the menaces of Lord Palmerston prevented Persia from succouring the insurrection in Poland, disgusted the mind of Abbas Mirza, the Crown Prince, whose march to the Russian frontier he had intercepted, and thus disposed him and his house to look less unfavorably towards their former enemy, Russia, than towards Great Britain, their unfaithful ally. On the death of the Crown Prince, Russia, with the aid of Palmerston, set aside the next heir to the crown of Persia, who, according to the usage of that country, was the eldest surviving son of the reigning Shah, and replaced him by the son of Abbas Mirza, the Governor of Azerbijan, a province bordering on the Russian territory, this Prince having already agreed to exchange the English for the Russian alliance. This transaction deeply compromised the independence of Persia, and had the effect of giving to the Czar a direct voice in the alteration and new arrangement of the succession to the Persian monarchy. Aided by British forces, the Russian nominee was enabled to vanquish and put to death his competitor, the lawful heir, and place himself on the throne of Persia.

This was in the year 1834; and subsequently the noble Lord made it his system to leave the British Envoys at Teheran entirely without instructions; or so to instruct them as to leave them entirely unprovided to meet any foreseen or unforeseen emergency. They had, moreover, one standing direction given them, which was this: that they were in all cases to act in conjunction with the Russian Envoy. Dispatch after dispatch—some times as many as twenty consecutive dispatches—were received in Downing-st. from the British Envoys in Persia, beseeching information and advice, and the necessary powers to proceed. But the answer of Lord Palmerston—when it came—was, invariably: “I approve of what you have done, and I shall wait for further information from you before I send you further instructions.” In the meantime they are directed by him to continue to act upon the instructions already received. But these were that they must act in conjunction with the Russian Legation—that is, concur in the measures which Russia might think fit to take. Thus it appeared to Persia that Russia alone was active, that England did nothing, except to concur with Russia, and that accordingly it behoved Persia to secure a favorable position with Russia alone. In Central Asia it is therefore said to this day that Russia and England are united on the terms of sovereignty and vassalage: the Czar of Russia being said to be the suzerain and the Queen of Great Britain to be the vassal. The Russian Envoy, Count Simonich, actually advised and headed an expedition of the Persian army against Herat, with the avowed object of making that the first step toward the conquest of Candahar, of Cabul, and finally of Delhi itself. The first intimation to Lord Palmerston of the design to attack Herat was conveyed in a dispatch from Mr. Ellis, in November, 1835. And notwithstanding the earnest and frequent entreaties of Mr. Ellis and Sir John McNeill for instructions to lodge with the Czar a protest against the expedition, the date of the noble Lord’s first instructions is July 27, 1838, when the Herat expedition had already been brought to an ignominious end. This proves conclusively the coöperation of the late British Minister in the work of Russian aggrandizement.