Page 314 - Gulf Precis (VI)_Neat

282 Part IV.
11, Thera nroBomc minor arguments which might ho u?c»l in favour of lotting things lio
as thoy me. Worolho Nnwab lkhal-ud-Dowla's proposals and Sir A. Komball’a roconimond-
alions to beenrried out, tho British Government would undoubtedly be loading itself to tho
promotion of tho interests of tho Mahoniodnn religion among tho natives of India— a oourse
directly opposed to all its recent policy ;—and it would lie encouraging tho emigration of its
subjects to Turkish Arabia—an object which politically cannot ho regarded as expedient.
Secondly, the fact that in tho Kiiglish counterpart of t ho Persian deed of engagement tho words
11 or persons who have its charge ” do occur by way of explanation, can hardly ho overlooked
so easily as Sir A. K cm ball imagines ; those words show what at the time was the real meaning
of tho two parties to tho contract, and it would be unjustifiable in the British Government now
suddenly to ignore that plain intention. Lastly, even if the deed contained no such explanatory
sentence, a similar meaning might he easily deduced from the language used bv t he King in
endowing, under tho samo instillment, an Imumlmrah at Lucknow, called tho Imamharah-i-
Nujjuff Ashruff, built on the model of the shrine in Turkish Arabia after which it is named.
Immediately preceding the provision niado for Nawab Mobarile Mahal, there is a clause in
favour of this I mamba rah to the following purport :—*• To the persons attached to the new
Imnmbarah, oalled Imambaraec Nujjuff Ashruff, according to a separate detail, Rupees one
thousand one hundred and thirty-seven ten annas and oight pies (Rupees 1,137-10-8). This
6ura will be paid for ever to the perron who wiil bo appointed to the charge of tho Imambarali
through the King, and its Aiulali or officers "ill he kept or discharged at the pleasure of tho
Superintendent.” There can he little doubt that tho arrangement contemplated by the King
for the great shrines in Turkish Arabia was the samo as that which ho laid down, with greater
detail of language, for tho miuiat uro shrine raised by himself at Lucknow, viz., p iymentof the
endowment to the Superintendent, and discretion ioft to tJio Superintendent to dispose of the
nmonnt according to tho wishes of the founder. This is tho arrangement actually iu force at
Lucknow with regard to this Imambarali; a Superintendent has boon appointed, the money is
regularly paid to him, and how ho spends it is a question In which tho Government takes no
concern.
10, Tho Seoretary of State replied :—
No. 109, Jilted 23rd November 1817.
From—The Secrotary of Sl&to for Indin,
To—Tho Government of India.
I have considered in Council tho letter of Your Excellency's Government in the Foreign
Department, No. 131 of the 7th August 1867, conveying your opinion on the proposals of the
Nawab Ikbal-ud-Dowla, modified by Sir Arnold Kemball, respecting the improper distribution
of King Ghazee-ud-Din Ilyder's assignments in favour of the SliecaU Shrines of Kurbullah
in Turkish Arabia.
2. I concur with you that, with reference to the terras of the deed of 1825, it is not
incumbent on the British Government to do more than pay tho money regularly to the recipi­
ents specified in thaldced, namely, the high priests in charge of the shrines ; that such payment
is a good and sufficient payment ; and that the Government has not undertaken, and cannot
now undertake, to control tho ultimate distribution of tbc money by the Chief priest among
the devotees who may frequent, or reside at, the places of pilgrimage in question.
11. Tho above opinion was upheld in 187G (Secretary of State’s Despatch
General A., March 1877, No. 17 No. 124, dated 9tll November 187(5), and
{jjjjjjj} l"noJt6teiolKwotmc on ^tcr occasi°ns when tho Itesidont made
Internal A.!September ]890.°N<’«,*00.G*2, proposals for supervising and Otherwise
internal a., September 1890, n«i. 117*120. interfering in tho distribution of tho
bequest, the orders of 1867 were again upheld.
12. But in 1890 several petitions poured in through the India Office com­
plaining bitterly of the whole-sale diversion of tho original trust for the
aggrandizement of a few individuals.
Internal A., May 1891, Nos. 179-11)0.
"VVe find also Mr. (now Lord) Curzon in­
teresting himself in the matter. The Government of India then had to change
their attitude and thought themselves bound to givo cifect in a reasonable
manner to the trust reposed in it and to take steps for the proper administra­
tion of the endowment. A correct version of the agreement of 1885 was obtained
and a translation made by Colonel I£. S. Jarret, Secretary to the Board of
Examiners. From this it appears that in the original Persian text of tlie
Article V of the agreement, the bequest is made payable to “ JLlujlahidan-i-
Mujawiran ” of the shrines of ICarbala and Najaf and not to tho Mujtahidan-
• " Doctor* of ecclcfiaitical Law " aa Mr. Curxon o-Mujawiran. Tho former means “ Sup-
put it.
feme theological* doctors who are cotUinu*
out residents near the holy shrines.