Page 53 - Gulf Precis(VIII)_Neat

PART II—CHAPTER XII.
35
CHAPTER XII.
Colonel Pelly’s Reports on the Trade of the Persian Gulf, 1870-71.*

The following is the second of the large reports on the trade of the Persian
Gulf between 1801 and 1872 submitted
Political A., August 1870, No*. w*<>S‘ Lieutenant-Colonel Pelly with his letter
No. 86—34, dated the 23rd April 1870, to the Bombay Government.
» It may be in the recollection of Government that seven years ago I had
the honor of submitting a few superficial observations concerning the tribes,
trade, and resources around the shore lines of the Persian Gulf.
2. About a year ago I had the honor of submitting another report sum-
marising the general position and prospects of commerce in these regions.
A. —Statement showing the value of trade between Calcutta * More recently, the oblig-
and the Persian Gulf Ports Irom i86o-6l to 1864-65, as com- . ” , , f
pa.edwth the year 1844 45 and >868 69. l"g trouble of the GommiS-
B. —Statement showing the annual trade between Bombay SlOncrS of Customs at Calcutta,
and tho Persian Gulf Ports, including Muscat, from 1800- D , 1 tr u u
61 to 1868-69, as contrasted with that of 1844-45.. Bombay, and ts-urrachee, has
C. —Statement of cxpo.ls and imports into the Province of Sind enabled me tO abstract in a
Irom the Persian Gulf Ports from 1861-62 to 1868 69 and
from 1847-48 to 1854-55. reliable statistical form the
D. —Statement showing quantity of lead exported from Bombay Commerce passing tO and from
to Persian Gulf Ports during December 1869 and January . ■ r , ^ u .
and February 1870. those ports and the Gulfs of
Oman and Persia.
4. His Excellency in Council will perceive that this commerce has developed
rapidly and largely. It appears, for instance, that in 1844-45 the trade with
Bombay showed a gross total of Rs. 79,24,609, that in 1860-61 it amounted
to Rs. 1,31,42,602, while in 1865-66 it amounted to Rs. 3,44,37,403. In other
words, that between the years 1845 and 1865 the trade quintupled itself, while
it nearly tribled itself during the five years between 1861 ar.d 1865.
5. From the Statement of Trade with the Port of Bombay concluding
with the year 1869 it will be seen that the trade, as compared with 1865-66,
being the highest year of the American war, had apparently fallen off ; but
this is accounted for by the fact that the cotton trade was abnormally large
down to the conclusion of the American struggle; while, on the other hand,
successive disturbances on the Arab coast between 1866 and 1869 have, of
course, been injurious to trade, so that it may fairly be assumed that, under
ordinary circumstances, the general trade would have continued to show a
steady increase.
6. As regards Calcutta, it will be observed that the increase, as between
the years 1864-65 and 1868-69, was as follows—Rs. 27,32,681.
I am unable to include the year 1844-45 in my comparison of this trade
since at that period it was not shown separately from the trade between Cal­
cutta and the Red Sea.
7. As regards Kurrachee, the increase, as between 1847 and 1867, has
been as follows—Rs. 8,33,731.
8. The appended Statement (E.) shows the most favourable total of trade
with the abovenamed three ports for any one year has been as follows—Rs.
4.05.55i79<5.
9. I have not enquired into the trade with Madras, because, although I
believe that trade to be considerable, 1 understand that a large portion of it
is indirect through Bombay, and this, were the Madras trade shown, it might
appear twice.. It has seemed to me preferable to be rather under the' mark
than run the risk of exaggerating in statistical statements.
10. But the trade with these principal British ports by no means repre­
sents the total of trade with the Gulf, although I am unaware that there are
any reliable statistics in regard to trade with other ports. But from the testi­
monies of numerous native merchants, I think I am safe in submitting that the
• The returns and statements referred to in these reports are printed in Appendix D.

I