Page 94 - Records of Bahrain (3) (i)_Neat

84 Records oj Bahrain

18
manner it was carried out, we havo not tho loast doubt that tho Shoikh was
not a free ngont when he wrote tho “ truo circumstances of tho caso.”
As regards the explanation submitted by tho British Residency Agent, it
stands equally condomnod with that of tho Shoikh. Besides tho documents
already forwarded to you, wo have many other letters from him, written to
us in tho courso of business, which will not only damago his character for
voracity, but will knock his argumonts into atoms. As wo aro, howevor,
advised by our lawyers that our claim for tho Bahrein seizures lios against tho
British Governmout, and must form tho subjeot of a law-suit, wo will not
troublo you with any further comments on tho Residency Agont’s lottor, nor
do we sco that it calls for any comments.
Now, with regard to the observations oontainod in yourlcttor under reply,
we bog to roply as follows:—
Paragraph 2.—Wo aro advised by our lawyers that our claim lios against
tho British Qovornmont, and wo cannot conscientiously apply to ypu for pro­
tection against the action of a person, who, wo find, has innocently carried out
tho instructions issued to him by duly-constituted British authority. If Her
/
Majesty’s Qovornment, howevor, thinks that tho Shoikh ought to bo hold res­
ponsible, that is a mattor between it and the Shoikh, but wo havo no locus
standi as complainants against him, in tho faco of tho statements mado in his
letter to us.
Paragraph 3.—Tho Chief issuod tho general prohibition in 1806, not bo-
oause he wished to stop the iudiscrimiuate introduction of arms and ammunition
into Bahrein and tho neighbouring coast, but bocauso “tho Chief oamo to know
that smuggling was still going on, and ho therefore thought it advisablo to
issue a notification prohibiting his own and foreign subjects, and imposing a
duty of 26 per cent, on all importations by British subjects, whilo Messrs.
Jb’racis Times & Co. am importing on tho strength of this concession” (Enclosuro
VII to our letter of 29th April 1889).
Paragraph 4.—Her Majesty’s Consulate must bo under a gravo misappre­
hension as to the extent of its powers and tho requirements of its duties towards
British merchants, if it imagines that it is within its competenco to forbid, at
any time and in any manner as may suit its fancy, trado in any particular
i article, and that, a casual letter written by tho “ First Assistant Resident at
Bushiro,” on his own responsibility, to any single morchant at Bushiro, can bo
regarded as a general notification to British morchauts and fulfils the require­
i ments of a Privy Council order, which alono can declare trado in any parti­
cular artiole contraband. “ Tho principal object of the appointment of British
Consular Officers, is tho protection aud promotion of tho commercial interests
of Her Majesty's subjects,” and wo fail to see how Her Majesty's Consulato
oan lay down a law as to what articlos shall, and what artioles shall not, form
the subject of lawful trado by British morohants. In tho absonco of a Privy
Council order, tho “ First Assistant to tho Rosidont at Bushiro” has no
more the right to forbid us to import arms at Bahrein than tho British Gov­
ernment has tho right to causo their seizure on tho ploa that wo “ were acting
against tho declared views of tho British authorities.”
With rcforcnco to tho letter No. 401 of 11th July 1896, referred to by you,
wo beg to state that wo novor asked tho First Assistant Resident ” to assist”
us “m opening up a trade dop6t at Bahrein ” for soiling arms. Wo had already
opened a trade on tho strength of the concession sold to us by Aglia Mohamod
Rahim Satfar, tho British Residency Agont, and tho salo of arms was ontiroly
in his bands. Wo merely asked for a letter of rccommondation to tho Shoikh
to acquire premises for the Agency of the Anglo-Arabian Steam Ship Company s
o.earners, and for tho purchase of shells, and it was a most unwarrantable
rnon-
abrogation of authority on tho part of Mr. Gaskin (wo mado o mistake in # .
Hoping Captain Ducat’s name, as tho letter is really signed by Mr. Gaskin) in
writing to us in reply, demanding an undertaking that wo should abstain from
dealing in arms in Bahrein, which was the more aggravating, because at tho
same time similar'letters wore readily granted to Mosers. Livinstono, Muir &
Co., and Messrs. A. and T. J. Malcolm, who wore our rivals in tho gun trado.
Were it not for tho fact that tho lotter in quostion was written while tho