Mss Eur F126/33, ff 49-56

Neat copy of the letter submitting remarks on the Bokhara [Bukhara] Territory.

The remarks include assertions by the son of Shah Rookh [Shah Rukh] over his father's title of Sahib-i-Ikhtyar and position of influence with the Ameer [Amir] of Bokhara and local intelligence that he had never held a title there, but had been known in that title ten years earlier in Kerman but that the title had since lapsed. The remarks also include the generally accepted opinion that the Ameer of Bokhara was absolute ruler of his territory.

Pelly also comments on a further claim made by Suleyman Khan, son of Shah Rook, of a secret friendship between Hussein Ali Khan, Minister at Herat, and his father for ambitious purposes, and stating that Hussein Ali Khan had often spoken to Pelly in a frank manner regarding Shah Rookh, who was a former trade associate of his, leaving Pelly to suspect that the claims had been distorted. Pelly also notes that Hussein Ali Khan had stated he did not believe his friend to hold any influence or permanent official position in the Bokhara state.

The letter goes on to discuss Shah Rookh's apparent lack of knowledge of civil administration; his past military capabilities and also noting that his ambitions could only be realised following the demise of the present Ameer, but that he had a grown up son who was expected to succeed his father some day, and that even if this did not occur the Bokhara people would not permit a Persian Sheeah [Shia] such as Shah Rook Khan to rule.

The letter also gives details of Bokhara's military resources; and the risk to Bokhara from Dost Mahomed Khan and the hopes that the British Government's advice to him will induce him to leave Bokhara alone.

The letter also reports on the Ameer of Bokhara's liberal ideas on commerce, including detailing how customs duties are levied; the additional taxes on foreign merchants; trade with the Russian Frontier; the difficulties in importing goods from Persia and the Gulf owing to the unsafe nature of the routes; the trade in tea from Bombay and Kurrachee [Karāchi], and the poor reputation of the tea from Kurrachee which Pelly believes may be owing to soldiers tea being redried and sold there.

Also referred to in the letter are the Ameer's attitudes towards foreigners; his poor relations with Khiva; his refusal of a proposal to establish a Russian consulate in Bokhara.

The letter concludes with reference to events in the region which were seen to have 'disgraced' the British Government, including the deaths of British envoys at Bokhara and how their reputation will have to be built up slowly to counteract this notoreity.

A postscript to the letter reports on revelations that Shah Rookh had been disgraced by the Ameer of Bokhara and had then been found to be in a treasonous correspondence with the Government of the Shah of Persia in which he had made a similar offer to the one received by the British Government and advising that the British Indian Government have nothing to do with him.