Page 273 - Gulf Precis (VI)_Neat

Chapter XIII- 213
323. Her Majesty’s Consul at Basrah roported tho foots to Her Majesty’s
Ambassador at Constantinople and obtain­
Ibid (No. 170). ed tho necessary permission for Captain
Boldcro to visit the fort at Fao, which ho did on 22nd March 1880. Ho found
then that tho embrasures had not been completed, that no shields were in
position nor was thero any mounting for guns.
324/. Meanwhile strong representations had boon made to tho Porte, and
after some prevaricating, tho Turkish
flaerat E., Juno 1890, Noa. 962.111 (No. 109).
Ambassador called at llio Foreign Office on
10th April 1890, informed Lord Salisbury that tho Commadant of the Fort at
Fao, who was responsible for tho firing on Captain Boldcro and his party, was
dismissed from his post and condemned to six months’ imprisonment.
325. Tho fortifications were, however,
8ecret E , August 1890, Noa. 208-274. 6till pushed on. It was also reported that
ficcrot E., July lb'Jl, Noa. 373089.
three guns had been lauded at Fao.
326. Tho works progressed actively in
Secret E., Jane 1892, Noi. 05-102. 1892, and on 29th August 1893, Coionel
Score! IS., September 18'JU, Nei 6-C1.
Mockler iuformed tbo Foreign Office by
telegram :
“ Hor Majesty’s Consul at Dasrah roports that 80 men under engineor ofliccrs are said to
be at work on Fao Fort, also 800 Turkish pounds
Socrot E., Juno 1891, Noa. 70-72 (76). havo been sanctioned for construction of three mili­
tary posts on right bank of river for protection of navigation and prevention of smuggling.”
327. On these repeated reports about the progress of the works at the Fao
Fort, Sir A. Nicolson, under instructions
Secret B., Juno 1894, Nos. 70-72 (No. 84).
from Lord Rosebury, called on the Porte’s
Foreign Minister on 7th August 1893 and left with him a Pro-Memoria in which
Her Majesty’s Embassy expressed a hope that the Porto would givo orders for
the prompt discontinuance of the work in question, for should tho fort be com­
pleted and steps taken towards arming it, Her Majesty’s Government would
regard such action as one of hostile preparation which thoy would bo entitled
to resent, and which would justify them in taking necessary measures for
counteracting.
328. As the works wero being still continued, tho British Embassy again in
November 1893 pressed for tbo issue of orders for stopping the works. The
Embassy received assurance that ordors would be issued to that effect. As a
matter of fact, the works wore not abandoned till May 1894.
329. From the Political Resident’s Diary for the week ending 20th April
1895, it appears that no work was going on
8eoret E., July 1896, No. 18.
at the fort about that time.
330. In April 1896 there was an increase of Turkish soldiers at Fao, but
the Turkish Mudir -was apparently very
iecret E., 1897, No*. 6-11.
friendly towards the British residents
(letter of British Consular Agent at Fao, dated 9th April 1897).
331. It must be noticed that throughout .the controversy the Persian Gov­
ernment showed the utmost indifference possible, and left tbo whole burden of
fighting for the rights of Persia on the Shat-el-Arab to the British Government.
332. The supremacy of oue nation over a channel which divided two States,
and which is the sole outlet of navigable rivers partly in one state and partly in
another, would be as incompatible with the sovereign right of the other state
as it would be a menace to the commerce of other nations over these water­
ways. From this point of view alone, if not from Treaty rights, tho British Gov­
ernment would bo fully justified in thwarting the Turkish intrigues on the
Shat-el-Arab.
Military posts on the Shat-el-Arab.
333. It might be mentioned bore that while building the Fort at Fao, the
Basrah Coneul’e Dlariae—e ndiog 32mi July 1807, Turks also established three military
36th Octobor 1893, and 29tb January 1894. guard posts on the river, vis
Secret E, J auo 1894, Nci. 70-178 (Noa. 86, 102. Zain—opposite Faliah.
161).

: