Page 198 - Gulf Precis(II)_Neat

170 Port VI—Chap.XLl.

CHAPTER AM

BRITISH POLICY 1\ REGARD TO MAM OP MASKAT, 182G-l8ffl»
312. In 1820, the Imam of Maskat, alarmed at some actual or expected
alteration in our policy towards him
Volume 42—960 of 1826. p. 120.
asked, through his Vakil, permission to
como to Bombay to interview Sir Monstunrt Elphinstonc for the purpose of
clearing possible misunderstanding. The Governor tried to satisfy the Imam
by assurance* of friendship, but His Highness was not satisfied. Hi* main
grounds of complaint were tho assistance we gave to his enemies in Mooibassn,
and ho laid a claim to our assistance against all his cnomies and especially
to the exertion of our influence for tho purpose of putting an entira stop to
maritime wor in the Gulf of Persia. On thoso points tho Resident ut Bushiro
addressed letters to the Bombay Government, dated 11th December 1825 and
12th January 1826. •
313. Tho following letter No. 196, dated 11th February 1826, was then
Volume 213 of 1826. addressod to the Resident at Bushiro :__
I am. directed to acknowledge tho receipt of your letter of 11,th December and of January
tbo 1st and 4th on the subject of the Imam's complaints of tho conduet of the British Agents
on the coast of Africa and of the olaim advanced by the Imam of Muscat to our assistance
against all his enemies and especially to the exertion of our influence for the purpose of put­
ting an entire stop to maritime war in the Gulf of Persia. 1
2. On the first of these 6ubjecti I am directed t) refer you to tho communication from
His Majesty's Ministers to the Hon'ble tho Court of Directors transmitted in my separate
letter of this date.
3. The information containod in that despatch will probably ’ satisfy the Imam that ho
has nothing to apprehead from any further operatious of our officers on that coast and he may
also be assured that no exertion will be omitted by this Government in representing to the
authorities in England the strong claims which His Highness possesses both from his
alliance and his personal conduct to every mark of friendship and regard from all branches of
the British Government.
4. On the second point I am directed to observe that tho Governor in Council is not
prepared to admit the existence of an alliance to the extent supposed by the Imam. The
only argument by which 6uch a supposition would bo defended is tho expression in the
Coulnaraeh, or written assurance, given by the late Imam, in the 1st Article of which it ia
declared that the friends and enemies of the one State 6hall be the friends and enemies of the
other.
But this expression appeared never to have been intended to convey any thiny beyond a
general notion of strict friendship ; for the other provisions of the treaty so far from fixing-
the mode of co-operation and mutual assistance [as might be expected in an offensive and
defensive alliances) are strictly confined to the specific object of excluding the French from
any settlement in Oman and of allowing the British Government to establish a factory at
Gombroon.
5. By the conferences that took place at the time of tho negociation these appears to have
been the only objects which the British Government had in view; while those of the Imam
were to be allowed the 6ame commercial advantages which ho had enjoyed before the whole-
of the western coast of India fell into our hands.
6. That bO loose an expression of general alliance should have been made use of, is to be
accounted for by the fact that the engagement was drawn up by tho Imam in his own name
and only contains promhes on his part and that it was accepted by a Persian probably as little
attentive to the precise meaning of the expressions it contained at the Imam himself.
7. The best proof of the sense put on it by the parties is afforded by the fact that the
Imam at the very moment of the conclusion of the treaty objected to certain concessions
which he said were likely to involve him in a war with the French with whom we were actually
at war at the time and with whom if the words of the treaty were to be acted on he must have
been at war also. His Highness's cla*m to neutrality was so fully admitted by the British
Government that a Frenoh vessel having afterwards been captured by a ship belonging to

• A similar question arose in 1813 (we paragraphs 133—137 of this prlcii above).