Page 368 - Gulf Precis (III)_Neat

70
164. Major Talbot then reported in his
S-oret E., July 1892. Nos. 24-45.
lettt-r No. 167, dated 19th October ] 8'j2 :—
" It will be in the recollection of Government that in 1887, in consequenco of the
intrigues of certain Persian officials on the Arab Const, my prcdeco'sor thought it desirable
to obtain written assurances from tho Trucial Chiefs that they would not outer into any
agreement wiih another Power, nor permit a foreign agent to reside in their territories
without the assont of the British Government, while they also declared their adhesion to
previous engagements. These documents wore forwarded to Government with ’my predeces­
sor's letter No. 18, dated 12th January 1H88, but no reply seems to have been received, and
as they have not been ratified they may not bo technically binding agreements.
•• In any case, however, I would 6ugcost for consideration that it might be advisable to
amplify these assurances by the conclusion <f a fresh agreement embodying a provision
against the cession by the Chiefs of any portion of their terriories to anv Power but England.
In my letter No. 152, dated I5lh September 1*191, 1 referred to the mischievous activity of
M. Chapui and his partner, and I have aince heard from the Reridenov Agent at l.ingah that
the Chief of Umin-ul-Kawain has granted them a piece of land mar his own residence. This
report still awaits confirmation by the Agent at Shargah, but i9 not improbable as M. Chapui
appears to have ingratiated himself with the Sheikh.
" It may bo urged that M. Chapui is a mere adventurer, intriguing for his own ends, and
that bis actions, if overtly directed against us. would be promptly disavowed by tho Fieuch
Government; but 1 venture to think that it would be well to guard ugaiuet the chance of his
receiving nny enoouragemeut trom his own Government, to which lie will, doubtless, mis­
represent the extent of his influence on the Arab Coast and the advantages to be gained by
■ npporiing him. Apait. moreover, from the question as affected by tho actions of M. Chapui
and the Chief of Uuiui-ul-Kawaio, it would reem desirable in view of tho recent attitude of
the Porte with regard to Odeid to amicipite pretexts for any sort of interference by the
Ottoman Government in the territories of the Truci»l Chiefs. With the view I submit a
draft agreement, and I have included in it the substance of the one negotiated in 1887. for
even if valid as it stunds it only applies to the Chiefs then iu power and does uot bind their
successors."
165. The draft agreement proposed by Major Talbot was approved by the
Government of India with slight ernenda-
tions (Foreign Department letter No. 1-
C.C., dated 24th November 1891).
166. The proposed agreements were concluded with the Chiefs of Abu
Tbabi, Debai, Ejman, Shargah, Ltas-ul-I£hima, as also the Sheikh of Bahrein
on various dates in March 1892.
167. Under the new agreements the Chiefs bind themselves, their heirs
and successors to the following conditions : —
(1) On no account shall any agreement or correspondence be entered
into with any power other than the British Government.
(2) Without the assent of the British Government, they shall not con­
sent to the residence within their territories of the Agent of any
other Government.
(3) On no account shall they cede, sell, mortgage or otherwise give for
occupation any part of their territory save to the British Gov­
ernment.
Her Majesty’s Government approved of these proceedings (Secretary of
State’s despatch No. 27 (Secret), dated
Secret E., September 1892, Noi. 16-18.
8th July 1892).
(vi) SIGNING BY NEW CHIEFS OF AGREEMENTS ENTERED INTO BY THEIR
PREDECESSORS, 1000.
168. When in 1900 the present Sheikh of Ejman usurped the Chiefship,
he informed the Resident of bis accession
BoiuQMif' April 1901’ Nofc 91-98 and that he had signed the agreements of
his predecessors with the British Govern­
ment, promising at the same time to abide by them. The Resident wrote in
reply expres.sing his pleasure at learning of the Chief’s resolution.
169 There was no precedent for a proceeding like this, where a new
Chief signed agreements of his predeces­
Sec.. I E.. April 1901, Not. 91-98.
sors. It was considered, Colonel Kembal
reported, t hat a new Chief is bound at his accession by his predecessors