Page 161 - Gulf Precis(II)_Neat

Part V-Chap. XXXII. 139

CHAPTER XXXII.

(I) QUESTION OF REMOVAL OF THE DETACHMENT FROM
KISHM DISCUSSED; (II) RUPTURE WITH PERSIA
IMMINENT; (III) DETERMINATION TO SEND REIN­
FORCEMENTS TO K1S1IM ; (IV) REMOVAL FROM KISHM
DETERMINED.

27G. Tho question of withdrawing our detachment from Kishmsoon forced
Bombay Government to the Government of itself Upon Government. It WUS found
India, dated 9th March 1822, No. 469, Vol. 91 from despatches received from Ei8 Majes-
<f 1822, page 93. ty’s Charg6 d’Affaires at Teheran that after
every argument in favour of our retaining Kishm had been urged on the
Porsian Government with tho utmost foroo and ability, the King of Persia
struck to his resolution not to acquiesce in tho moasuro. He had, however,
made a reference to England and was determined to wait the result. In these
circumstances the Bombay Government presented the following considerations
for orders of the Government of India. All tho officers who had boon in tho
Gulf and consulted by tho Bombay Government agreed that a station there
was absolutely' necessary to prevent the revival of piracy. The Superintendent
of Marino considered it possible to protect our trade by means of a sufficient
number of cruizcrs oven if there were pirates in existence, but as this had
not yet been tried, no success could bo counted on. It might therefore be
calculated on that if we withdrew from the Qulph, we shall at the end of a
few years be obliged to send another expedition.
277. But however desirable it might be to retain Kishm, we could not
overlook considerations of justice and policy towards Persia: the King of
Persia had not yet shown any proof of his title whatever to Kishm except its
alleged authority, on which ground lie had also claimed Maskat and tho whole
province of Oman. Even the argument mentioned by His Majesty’s Chargd
d’Affaires do not establish the claims of Persia. Sir John Malcolm on his first
mission solicited a grant of Kishm from Persia, which was refused. If it had
since appeared that Persia had no title to the territory so solicited, what
should prevent our applying to the right owner. Still less did a casual expression
of one of the Imam’s officers destroy his master’s right if he ever had one.
The Governor of Bombay in Council was not acquainted with the nature of
the Imam’s rights either to Bunder Abass or Kishm, but supposing them equal
there seemed abundant reason why he should waive his claim to Bunder Abass,
an integral part of Persia and within reach of Agha Mahomed Khan’s army ;
and retain it to Kishm, which was probably beyond the reach of that monarch’s
powor. A claim, however, to which His Majesty’s Minister at Teheran attached
importance ought not to be hastily set aside, and supposing the King of Persia
to possess any reasonable ground of pretension to the island, it would be un­
friendly, at least, to oppose it by military occupation. It seemed incumbent on
us to avoid giving the Shah this ground of disquiet, if we could do so without a
very serious sacrifice of our own interests. It may bo a question whether this
alarm would ever gradually be removed without leaving any bad impressions.
The Bonibay Government, however, inferred that His Majesty’s Charge
d’Affaires was of opinion that it would not; and the Governor in Council
certainly thought the experiment ought not to be tried.
278. On balancing therefore the possible loss and expense by allowing
piracy to revive against the cortainty of giving umbrage and alarm to Persia,
the Governor in Counoil was induced to attach most importance to the latter
evil as affecting our general politics; while the other was more partial in its
operation. As far as regards ourselves tho Governor in Council was of opinion
that it was expedient to withdraw the station. He does not advert to the uses