Page 438 - Gulf Precis (VII)_Neat

00
who is intimately acquainted with 'ho history o£ Baluchistan, has, after a careful investiga­
tion of previous correspondence, declared his conviction that tiro Shall has no claim to
cithor ono <>r the othor. The Imam's lonua* of Charbar is uckimwlodgod by the local Chief’s,
who receive from him a portion of the revenues in order to protoot Iho port from attacks oE
tribes in the interior. The Baluchis deny the free gift of Gwadur to Maskat, and say that
half only of the revenues wcie assigned. But at all events the Imam monopolized the whole
and has retained them, 1 n 186-i-liG iho Governor of Kerman admitted to Colonel Goldsmid
that he had nothing to say to Gwadur, and that ho had little power on the sea coast. In
tho Telegraphic Convention of April 186 ■<, the territorial rights of Persia in Mel;ran were
purposely lef; undefined. Article II merely grants a subsidy for leave to lay down a lino
of Telegraph ‘on those parts of coasts and places winch are under the sovereignty of Persia.
To judge by his remarks at pages 21 and 22 of his precis, Colonel Goldsmid, whilst excluding
Gwadur, would include Charbar as matter of expediency within Persian limits, if the
boundary question ever really came under settlement. Tho uninterrupted tenure of both ports
by the State of Maskat. however, constitutes, in our opinion, strong argument against enter­
taining any absolute claims which might be raised by Porsia or Kholat. Were we once to
admit that the former might if she could recover what she possessed in Nadir Shah’s time,
or the latter what Nuseer Khan held, th-r* would be tho strongest inducement, to encroach­
ments, which w«uld certainly end in insecurity, and probably in war. As regards Baluchistan
and Afghanistan, wo have consistently aimed at maintaining the status quo, and to depart from
this endeavour at tho present juncture would be, in our opinion, to inaugurate a most disastrous
policy. It will be in Your Grace’s recollection that, in the Telegraphic Convention of 1865,
we distinctly admitted that tnore were places in Mekran -ubject to the sovereignty of Syud
Thoweynee. Again, in February of last year, after Azan bin Ghes had establi>hed himself in
Maskat, and at the time when the Governor of Charbar had actually been summoned by him
to his side, we sanctioned the grant to Miskat of Its. I,o00 a year for concessions at
Gwadur and Charbar on account of our laud line « f Telegraph; and when the Minister of Azan
bin Ghes enquired from our Political Agmit at Maskat concerning our doings at Charbar, he
received for answer that wc were acting in pursuance of a formal agreemout witli the Maskat
State."
Tho conclusion of the Government of India was as follows :—
*« Having thus repeatedly recognised the ports of Charbar and Gwadur as integral parts
of the Maskat dominions, we should not hesitate, in the event of the formal recognition o£
Azan bin Ghes, to use our good offices to procure their restoration to him from his relative)
Nuseer bin Thoweynpe.’’
219. The Bombay Government had not at first expressed an opinion in
the matter, but did so in their letter
Political A., December 1S70. Nos. 2:9—221.
No. 192, dated 3rd June 1870, concurring
■with Colonel Pelly’s counsel, and saying:—
*' As to our futur-* policy with regard to Gwadur, whenever a firm rule is established
in Maskat, and bus bevn nek now led god by us, His Excellency in Council is of opinion that our
recognition should be complete and should extend not only to the possessions in Oman, but
to the possessions in Mekran, which have undoubtedly of late years belonged to Maskai. If
the pres nt state of affaiis continues there, it is highly probable that tt«e claim of Persia may
be acknowledged or enfoiced. His Excellency iu Council thinks she would hesitate to quarrel
with the acknowledged Ruler of Maskat.’’
The Government of Bombay added that Abdul Aziz was a weak young man
who, having pretentions of his own, and thinking that, if Seyyid Turki succeed­
ed, he would be eclipsed, would deprecate Seyyid Turki’s prospect of success.
220. This letter was sent to the Secretary of State in continuation (No. 118,
dated 24th June 1870), and the Bombay Government was told that the ques­
tion of the policy of the British Government as regards Gwadur had been
referred to the Secretary of State.
(Hi) Seyyid Turki’s rights to Gwadur and Charbar. 1871-72.
221. "When Seyyid Turki succeeded recovering Maskat in the spring of
1871, Abdul Aziz crossed over to that place, was offered the Governorship of
Sohar, i.e.y the prospective Governorship, for it had yet to be recovered, declined
the offer and took* himself to Gwadur,
* Political A., October 1871, Nos. 530- >32.
Nasir bin Thowcnee having already taken
. . ship for Zanzibar.
Major Ross, the Political Assistant at Gwadur, when sending this intelli­
gence, said lie believed the inhabitants of Gwadur and Charbar would readily
accept the Government of Seyyid Turki.
Major Way, tho Political Agent at Maskat, to whom this report was
adurcs.vcd, said it was expected in Maskat that Abdul Aziz would hand over
Gwadur to bevy id Turki peaceably.