Page 437 - Gulf Precis (VII)_Neat

89

217. In liia letter No. 57-25, dated 23rd April 1870, forwarded by the
Bombay Government in No. 168, dated 12tli May, Colonel Belly roportod a
conversation between liimaolf and Abdul Aziz, and said :—
'• I did not prolong the conversation regarding Gwadur, because I was sensible that it |
might load to questions on the Syud's part presenting sumo logical difficulties. For instance
tho solo right which Syud Nuescor has to Gwadur, consists in his having orossed the sea from
Maskat and occupied the place. IVc havo tacitly allowed iho fact, although wc should have
prevented Syud Nus-ccr, had wc found him at tea. Suppose then, what in the sequel is probable,
that Syud Azan, or some of his feudatories, should in like manner slip accioss tho Oman Gulf
and expel Syud Nussccr, wc should by parity of argument have oithcr to acknowledge the new
intrudor, or else to expel him from a portion of what ho deemed his territory.
“ Again, if wc should persist in declaring that Gwadur had ceased to belong to Maskat
tho question a9 to whom it does belong might assume an inconvenient political aspect. For if
Gwadur, Charbar, and the Alekran Districts in general, hitherto dependant on Maskat, do not
belong to Maskat, to what State do they belong? Khclat claimed them of old ; Syud Nussecr
holds them since last year; Persia, pretends to them apparently under the erroneous impres­
sion that the de jure Empire of the present £>hah is contrrmiuous with that of Na>tir.
“ If once wo assent to Persia's eastward encroachments, based on such pretentions, or if
once we consent to disturb a long acknowledged political statue in favour of 6ome distribution
of territory which may have existed between the fall of Nadir's Umpire and the consolidation
of our, I apprehend reiterated, political ohauge would follow, and that wo might eventually
find Persia, or those for whose ultimate interests 6hc acts, claiming a frouticr contiguous with
that of tho Indus Valley.
“ My respectful counsel to Government would be to attempt an amicable solution of the i
Gwadur question, whereby Gwadur and the other heretofore Mekran possessions of Maskat
should contiuue to be considered an integral portion of the Ala-kat Stato, and the Governors
of those places, whosoever they may he, to be considered subordinate to the recognised Sultan
of Maskat, whosoever he may be.
lt A solution of this character would in my opinion be comparatively easy, immediate and
likely to endure, whereas, to acknowledge a Sultan of Maskat, and to inform him that that
acknowledgment did not include the Mekran Districts, would, in my deferential opinion,
irritate tho Ruler acknowledge'! ; would not he understood by the tribes of Oman, or indeed
by the Native in general; would probably result in an attempt on the part of Maskat to
recover their dependencies by surprise ; might render our Telegraph Stations on the Mekran
Coast liable to inconvcnionce; would afford Persia an opportunity for fresh intrigue ; and would,
in tho sequel, perhaps result in the Maskat Sultan recovering, without our consent, that which
in my deferential opinion, many reasons, whciher of expediency, policy, or equity, now point
towards our conceding with a good grace."
218. The views of the Government of India in tho matter were expressed
in Secret despatch No. 31, dated 27th May 1870:—
“ It only now remains that in fulfilment of the promise made in paragraph 16 of our
despatch of 2-nd February, we should communicate to Your Grace our views regarding the
claim of Azan bin Ghias to the occupation of Gwadur, and other places on the Mekran Coast.
“ In writing to Colonel Pelly on the 16th of December last, Azan bin Ghias made the
following remarks : ' Wo have territories (abroad) belonging to ourselves and the Arabs, but
we cannot put our hands on them and we do not understand what is your object in regard
thereto. If the rules laid down for the Arabs, the same on which our predecessors acted, are
still in force, then we can go (by sea) to any of our territories we may wish. If the prohibi­
tion (to move by sea) i6 to be with our consent we will neither consent nor act up to it. But
if it is to be compulsory, and not according to rules and justice, then of course we cannot help
it, and will leave it to God. But we do not think that a great and powerful Government as
the English will enforce such prohibition without just cause. "
“ Colonel Pelly assumes that the complaint relates to ‘ the territories of Gwadur, Charbar,
etc., on the Mekran Coast.’ These territories,
Colonel Goldsmid’s Precis oa Baluckutan,
page 61. adds the Resideut, have hitherto been acknow­
ledged by us as being included in the dominions
subject to the Sultan of Muscat. To the best of our knowledge no territory, or territories on
the Alekran Coast, beyond the limits of the two ports of Gwadur, and Charbar, has ever in
recent times been held or claimed by Maskat.
“ Gwadur, we would observe, wa6 granted towards the close of the last century to Syud
8ultao, who usurped the throne of Afaskat in 1797. He had fled after an unsuccessful attempt
to overthrow ihe power of his brother, Saeed bin Ahraod, to Khelat, the Khan of which
State made over Gwadur, then a fishing village of no importance, for his support. He aud
his successors have, despite various efforts of the Baluchis to regain it, uevor lost their
hold on the place, and from time to time fortifications have been added, which have increased
in strength. In the time of the 6amo Syud Sultan, Charbar was taken by surprise from the
Baluchis, and has ever since been retained by the Arabs. In virtue of the extension of
the Persian dominions under Nadir Shah, which included the whole of the Alekran Coast
the Shah's Government has never ceased to lay claim to those two towns. Colonel Goldsmidt