Page 61 - Records of Bahrain (4) (ii)_Neat

Regional relations, 1926-1931 363

Yasin oonourred and said that the word translated "may ho
granted" oould only apply to a grant at tho instance of the
person concerned.

0. Shoikh Yusouf Ya3ln explained that they could not
meet us over Article 6 for the reasons previously given

and recorded by Mr.Bird in paragraph 3 of his dospatoh no.
102 of June 29th 1928. I share Mr.Bird's viow that tho
retention oC the words "in the past" need not disturb us
seriously. I suggested to Sheikh Yussuf Yasin that speoial
cases miglit arise, e.g. tho case of Palestinians, but I do
not think that there is any need for apprehension, as the
cases I had in mind do not turn on the effect of naturalization
but on the possible effect of the attribution of different
nationalities to former Ottoman subjects as a result of tho
breaking up of the Ottoman Empire and the Treaty of
Lausanne e.g. n person of Palestinian origin in this country

might be claimed both as a Palestinian citizen and as a Hejazi
subject. I have not studied this subjeot. I understood the
Sheikh to say that the Hejazi Government were not disposed to
contest Palestinian and Trans-Jordan nationalities and this is
more or less confirmed by what my French colleague told me about
Syrians in the conversation reoorded in my despatch No.5 of
January 6th.

9. Sheikh Yussuf Yasin said that it was proposed to
meet us over Artiole 10 by amending it so as to provide that
residents in tho Hejaz would be considered Hejazis as from
the date of the 1926 law unless they could prove a foreign
nationality. I argued this closely as it is the most
important point of all. He admitted that it was not a
question of expecting all foreigners to submit proof of their
nationality as soon as the new low was promulgated. He
recognized that the proof mi$it bo tendered whenever the
question arose but said it must be proof that the person had i
had the foreign nationality on September 29th, 1926. I admitted

that/