Page 62 - Records of Bahrain (4) (ii)_Neat
P. 62

I

                       364                       Records of Bahrain

                         that a person of original Hejazi nationality, v/ho had aoquirod
                         British nationality by naturalization after that dato oould not
                         claim the benefit of it in the Hejaz subsequently having
                         regard to the provisions of Artiolo 6.   I pointed out howover
                         that oases mi^it arise in which a person who had not been a
                         British subjeot on September 29th 1926 might legitimately
                          olaim it on supplying any necessary proof at a later date

                          e.g. a person not born before that date; a woman married to a
 I
                          British subjeot after that date; a person not of Hejazi
                          original naturalized British after that dato; or a person who
                          had become British through annexation of territory to the
                          British Empire. Tho Sheikh recognized that in such oases
                          proof of British nationality should be admissiblo, if the
                          person had acquired a legitimate title to it.   I particularly
                          emphasized the fact that we oould not admit loss of British
                          nationality by prolonged sojourn in this country unless
  ;
                          the person had clearly renounced it by a voluntary act. I
                          observed that in tho case of Osman Hakim we had been told that

                          the deceased had become a Ilejazi subject under the Law on
                          nationality but we had not been told by what prooess he had
                          acquired his alleged Hejazi nationality. I said enough
  •: *
                          under this head to affirm the principle that the man could not
                          be held even after fifty years in the llejaz to have become
  '
                          a Hejazi by mere lapse of time or loss of papers but I propose
  f                       to consider the particular case separately in due course.
                             10. I consider that Mr.Bird’s memorandum has had the effect
   i
   1                      of securing amendments sufficient to satisfy us on the points
  1                        of material importance and that we cannot hope for more, as we
                           oan neither draft the amended articles in accordance with
  i                        English standards of precision nor induce the Hejazi Government

                           to negotiate officially regarding the text of a last which they
                           claim the right to promulgate as a matter of sovereign
                           prerogative.  The new law may be issued in tho near future,   if
  i!                       therefore I have gone wrong at any point, I should be grateful

                          for telegraphic instructions.
                                                         I have, etc.,
                                                            (Sgd.) ANDREW RYAN,
    I \
   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67