Page 425 - Gulf Precis (VII)_Neat

77
101. In reply the Political Resident referred Commander Baker to previous
instructions and requested him to withdraw his party to the ships, which he
did.
192. The Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty conveyed to Coramandor
Baker through the Admiral an expression of their approval of his conduct
based entirely on his own report of his proceedings, without any reference to
tho Secretaries of State for Foreign Affairs and for India as to tho information
which may have reached them on the ciicuinstances.
In commenting upon these facts, Lord Salisbury considered the course
taken by tho Lords Commissioners as unusual and inconvenient.
His Lordship folt bound to express his opinion that, although Commander
Baker might have boon justified in landing a force at Galag considering tho
state of his information at tho time, his decision to march ou at once to Itapch
after receiving telegram from Commander Fraser pointing to delay required
further explanation, and that his subsequent advice to the Persian Commander
seemed scarcely defensible. Commander Baker’s statement that the naval
force was sent nominally to protect tho Persians was altogether erroneous. It i
was, Lord Salisbury stated, landed for the protection of the employes and lino
of the Indo-European telegraph, and this was in fact the justification for
resorting to such a proceeding as landing troops in tho territory of a friendly
State (Foreign Office to Admiralty, dated 12th May 1898.)

(V) Further operations against the insurgents and punishment of the murderers.
193. Apart from operations conducted by tho Persian force sent from
Bushire, tho Persian Government ordered
Sec. E, November 1898. Noa. 660—600.
Asaf-ud-Dowlah, Governor-General of
Kerman, to conduct in person operations from the north against the Baluchi
Chiefs, first against the rebel Chiefs in Eastern Baluchistan, and, secondly
against the Chiefs who had been concerned in the murder of Mr. Graves. Owing
to tho local failure of crops, their operations were unexpectedly prolonged, but
thoy finally proved successful. Tho eastern frontier was occupied by Persian
troops, and Sardar Husain Khan, the leader of the malcontents, fled to tho
Meehan hills with a small following. His son was made a prisoner, aud later
on Sardar Husain himself was captured.
191. The Kirwanis of the country in tho neighbourhood of Itapch river,
who were immediately concerned in the murder of Mr. Graves, seeing that
further opposition was useless, made, as we have seen, advances to the Persian
Commander, offering to take measures for the arrest of the murderers. Tho
four principal men concerned in the murder were brought to book in the follow­
ing manner:—
(1) Malik Ghind bin Shah Beg, who is said to have struck the fatal blow,
was hunted down and shot.
(2) Shall Mahomed bin Gulbeg, whose crime was brought home to the
satisfaction of the Persian Judges, was made prisoner and executed
publicly at Jask in the presence of the local headmen.
(3) Shukrulla Beg voluntarily surrendered himself and remained a
prisoner at Jask.
(4) Lulla bin Shah Beg was at large for a long time. But his 6on was
seized and held as a hostage.
.
(vi) Indemnity for the murder of Mr. Graves.
195. Her Majesty’s Government thought it fit to demand from the Persian
Government indemnity for the murder of
Scoret E., Novomber 1898, Nos. 660-000 (Nos.
670-673). Mr. Graves as a compensation for his
family to the amount of £5,000. The Persian Government objected to this
demand on the ground that Mr. Graves lost his life when discharging his duty
to the Government of India and that they should provide for his heirs. Mr.
Hardinge, the Ctoargd d*Affaires, however, pointed out tuat Mr. Graves* death