Page 21 - Records of Bahrain (2)(ii)_Neat

Persian and Turkish claims to Bahrain, 1870-1874 347
15

ns to (he reply which should be returned to this
, communication, when the Duke of Argyll staled
that, although he was of opinion that the line of policy
which had hitherto been pursued—of regarding the
Sheikh of Bahrein as an independent Sovereign,
and of refusing to recognize the right of sovereignty
advanced by Persia (ns had been done in 1825, in
1848, and in 1860)—could not now he abandoned,
without very serious risk of endangering the peace
of the Gulf, yet that “ he was not blind to the
' expediency of avoiding all causes of unnecessary
irritation at the Court of Teheran, and that lie was
willing, therefore, should Lord Clarendon desire it,
as a mutter of courtesy to the Persian Government, to
issue instructions to the Government of India to
direct the Resident in the Persian Gulf (whenever
ho might on any future occasion, under orders
from India, be about to call the Chief of Bahrein to
account, for any breach of his engagements to the
/ British Government), to notify the fact lo the
British Minister at Teheran, for the information of
the Shah’s Government; although instances might
arise in which the British Resident in the Gulf
might be called upon, in the interests of peace and
order, to act. promptly on his own responsibility ; ”
and his Grace added that “ he was not willing in
such cases to waive what he considered as not only
a right pertaining to, but a duty incumbent upon,
the British Government.”
To Cicnoral Molisin Khan, Lord Clarendon concurred in this view of the
Apiil 29, 18G9. ease, and a reply, couched in those terms, was
returned to the Persian Chnrgd d’Affaires.
General Mohsiu Khan, May 8, On receipt of this letter, however, the Persian
18G9. Charge d’Affaires requested that certain modi­
fications might be made in it, in order to make it
To India Office, May 11, 18G9. more agreeable to the Shah; and the India Office
Indin Office, May 19, 18G9. having been again, consulted, the Duke of Argyll
To Indir. Office, May 24, 18G9. replied that he 6aw no objection to an admission on
the. part of t\io British Government that the
Government of the. Shah had protested against the
Persian right- of: Sovereignty over Bahrein being
ignored by/the British; authorities, and that that
protest had received due consideration ; but that he
could not consent to debar the officers of the British
Government, to whom the superintendence of the
police of the Persian Gulf was entrusted, from the
exercise , of. the/right Of punishing, by prompt