Page 138 - Gulf Precis(II)_Neat

116 Port V—Chap, XXVII.
it is probably therefore of little cousequenoe in such a case, during what existing treaty such
an act may bo oommittcd ns the punishment of the loss of life nud goods mentioned in the
gonoral treaty might with every justico bo inflictod, nud this appears to bo the highest punish­
ment thnt could bo stipulated for in any treaty.
(22) Tho Govornor in Counoil further conceivos that it would also bo expedient
particularly in tho ovont of the consent of tho piratical Chiefs being procured to limit tho
size and crews of their vessels. As I have been led to believe that tho mischiof to bo
npprohended from those vessels is not to be estimated in proportion to their size, 1 am doubt­
ful whether this stipulation would bo productive of a good offcct.
(23) Tho Governor-General in Council is desirous of further explanation of the prohi­
bition in somo ensos, against the Chiefs sending boats to sea, which ho observes is not nppliod
to Ilassan bin Itachmn and Ilassan bin Ali, although the moat likely to employ their boats
iu disturbing tho tranquillity of tho Gulf. It will bo obsoived that tho preliminary treaties
in which this articlo is inserted were all concluded at Rassulkhima, tho object of this artiolo
being inserted was to securo to us any vessels that might sail from tho piratical forts and tako
shelter olsowhore before we bad visited them. This stipulation was not in force after wo
lmd visited tho different places, and destroyed or taken away the vessels givon up. It may bo
right to observo that I am not aware of any vessel having attempted to got away, It was
not necessary to interdict tho sailing of Ilassan bin Ilaohma aud Ilassan bin Ali's vessels, as
they had not at that time any in their possession ; such as belonged to tho former were
captured in Rassulkhima, but tboro were not any found in Kamz belonging to the latter.
(21) The Ilonoumblo the Govornor in Council’s cordial approval of the iusortion
in tho goneral treaty of the article respecting the renunciation of tho slavo trade by the Arab
tribes induces mo to mention an idea which prevails, that a traffic of this nature to a consider­
able extent is carried on by the subjects of His Highness the Iiuaum of Maskat,
231 The Bombay Government (995, dated 7th June 1820) made the
following observations on Major K.eir*s reply :—
(2) On tho 2nd and 6th paragraphs of your letter, I am instructed to remark that our
power to destroy the first symptoms of any return
Page 227 of Volume 31-47 of 1820-1821.
to piracy is limited by our troaty ; 6inoe nothing
short of an infraction of one of its articles would justify our using it, aud the Governor
in Council cannot but consider such a limitation as a diminution of our actual strength
as applicable to tho suppression of piracy.
(3) It may bo inferred from the 7th paragraph of your letter that you conooive us still
to reiaiu tho right of attacking any Chiefs who may be oquipping vcssols for war, or construct
in fortifications boyond what may be absolutely necessary for their protection against their
neighbours, but this opiniou is not supported by the tenor of our engagements ; beyond
which we could not cxorciso any power without subjeotiag ourselves to the imputation of a
breach of faith.
(4) On the 8th paragraph of your letter I am dirooted to romavk that the Governor
in Council cannot assent to the position that it is bettor an article should never bo enforced
than it should occasionally be evaded.
(5) The number of boats given up and the forts destroyed under the preliminary treaty
to which you reour in the 10th paragraph as considerations that have not been mentioned, as
principal advantages gained by the present treaty, have been acknowledged as advantages
acquired by the expedition independent of all treaties.
(0) The arguments stated in the 11th, 12th, 13th and 14th paragraphs against deposing
or imprisoning the piratical leaders and making over their forts to other Chiefs drawn from
your inability to soize the Chiefs and the imp >ssibility of finding suitable persons willing to
accept the forts, are admitted in all cases when they apply, but the Honourable the Governor
in Council still retains bis omnion as to the solidity of tho principle by whioh that course of
proceeding was recommeuded.
(7) I am directed to observe that as the original sources of the piratical habits of some
of the Arabs arising from the civil and religious state of their tribes are far boyond our reaoh
or control, there remain to the British Government no other means of romoving the evil, but
by punishing the perpetrators wheresoever it has an opportunity. Wo appear at first sight
to possess another resouroe in encouraging commerce as an oocupation for those formerly
supported by piracy, but as we have no new sourco of trade to open, and as no restrictions
that we can remove have ever existed to the commerce of tho Gulf except what are occasioned
by piracy itself, it follows that the punishment of pirates is the only means we possess
bv DiraCV itEelf. it follows that, thft nnniqVimpnfc of niraf.pn ta flip nnlv moans Wfl D0SS6B8 of
diminishing the prevalence of their crimes. In this point of view the Honourable Governor
in Council cannot but consider every circumstance that diminished the force of the example
afforded by the late expedition as so far unfortunate*
(8) The release of Hassan bin AU’s military followers under the very unexpected and
peculiar circumstanees detailed in paragraph 15 was indispensably required by humanity.
(9) On the power which you consider us to retain (paragraph 10) to prohibit the fitting
_______________________ - directed to repeat the
out of armed vessels at the ports accustomed to praotice piraoy, I am 1
remark that no suoh right is stipulated for in the treaty aud the conclusion of such an ins­
trument shuts out all the undefined rights which might have beeu oxeroiaed previous to its
conclusion.