Page 293 - Gulf Precis(II)_Neat

Port VII-Cbap. LXII. 271

CHAPTER EXII.
THE CASE OF THE VESSEL CALLED “COLONEL NEWALL”,
1838.
517. The Resident at Bushire in his letter No. 71, dated 31st August 1838,
requested tlio instructions of the Governor in Council, with reference to tho
following circumstances. In 1838, a vessel called tho Colonel Ncwall
nominally tho property of a Mogul merchant residing in Bombay named Haji
Mirza Shotli, and carrying a British pass and oolours, brought up a cargo to
Bushire. During her stay in the port, a
Particulars.
negotiation was opened between Sheikh
Nasir (tho then Governor) and Mullah Mahomed (a native of the place), the
Nakhoda or Commander, for the purchase of half the vessel in question, which
half was very generally believed to belong to himself. How far the bargain
was concluded, there was no means of ascertaining, but the sum of 16,000
Sahib Heruns was paid into the hands of Mullah Mahomed by the Sheikh,
and taken down on board tho Colonel Kewull to Bombay. Upon tho return
of this vessel to tho Gulf a few months after, a claim was made by Mirza
Abbas Ali, the then Governor of Bushire, on bohalf of the Shiraz authorities,
upon Mullah Mahomed, for either half of the barquo, or the 15,000 Heruns
received from the Sheikh Nasir, upon the plea that the latter personage had
fled from Bushire, carrying with him a large portion of the revenues of tho
place. Mullah Mahomed upon this denied having had any intention of
disposing of part of the Colonel cwall, but that at the request of Shoikh
Nasir, he carried the money down to Haji Mahomed Sheili tho owner, and
lodged it in his hands, leaving it to the Haji whether he would accept the
offor made or not. Mullah Mahomed, however, was a person whose word could
never bo relied upon and there was no doubt he did bargain with the Sheikh
for the sale of half the vessel.
The Colonel Netcall was now at Basrah, but there was no doubt that if she
instructions requested mb to how for tho returned to Bushire and Mullah Mahomed
Nakhoda was entitled to our protection. landed, that an attempt would be made by
the authorities there to seize and detain him until he either gave up half his
vessel or paid over the 15,000 Heruns received from Sheikh Nasir. Under
these circumBtances, tho question was as to what degree of protection Mullah
Mahomed could claim from the Residency, as it was obvious that had he
not embarked in what appeared an illegal, or at least irregular transaction, in
receiving a sum of money from a foreigner for tho secret purchase of part of
a vessel ostensibly belonging to a British port and carrying British colours, he
would never have been involved in the predicament in which he now stood.
Had the Commander and crew of the Colonel Neioall been English subjects,
the case would have been much more simple, but unfortunately both one and
the other were natives of Bushire, and it was doubtful whether there was a
single British subject on board the vessel; the consequence of this was that
although Mullah Mahomed by remaining on board might be safe in his own
person, yet the families and connections of both himself and crew were quite
at the mercy of the Persian authorities.
The points on which the Resident wished to be instructed upon were,
Particular points upon whioh inotructiona firstly, whether Mullah Mahomed was
voro requested, entitled to the same protection as a British
subject commanding a British vessel, secondly, whether he was legally liable to
bo called upon by the local authorities for a sum of money received by him
from Sheikh Nasir, while that person was Ruler of Bushire, upon the bare
assertion of the Persian Government that be bad made away with a portion
of its revenues; and thirdly, whether in the event of its being decided that
he was to be protected against this claim, whether the same protection was
to be extended to his family and relations who by tho barbarous practice of
tbo country were all liable to bo seized, punished, and stripped off everything
in tho absence of the offending party.
618. The Government however were of opinion that the best course would
be to advise the owner of tbo vessels of the risk he would incur by bringing it to
Bushire, while the claim ou question was hanging over him (letter No. 1832,
dated 25th September 1838).