Page 288 - Gulf Precis(VIII)_Neat

34
foreign power it shall be lawful for Her Majesty by proclamation, or Order in Council, to
direct that any vessel belonging to the Indian Marine, and the officers and men from time
to time serving thereon, shall be subject to the command of the Senior Naval Officer, and
whilst under such command shall be regarded as belonging to the Royal Navy. In
obedience to the above the Lawrence was disarmed.
75. In 1896 there were troubles at Bahrein in connection with which the Senior
Naval Officer enquired whether he could use the Lawrence, but the decision was that he
could not.
76. In 1903 Lord Curzon’s Government represented to the Secretary of
State the advisability of seeking permis­
Secret E., September 1903, Ncs. 69 70.
sion from the Admiralty for temporary
commissioning, under a special Hag for service in the Persian Gulf, for tho sup­
pression of illicit traffic in arms of precision of the R. I. M. S. Lawrence.
77. The reply of the Secretary of State (No. 88-Mily., dated 26th June
1903) shows the objections to the course proposed :—
After due consiJcration in Council of Your Excellency’s Marine Despatch No. 7,
dated 9th October 1902, in which you reure-
* »* *'!c advisability of seeking permission from
the Admiralty for the temporary commissioning,
under a special flag, for service in the Persian Gulf, for the suppression of illicit traffic
in arms of precision, of the Royal Indian Ma ine Steamship •* Lawrence," J caused a
reference on the subject to be made to the Admiralty.
2. The Lords Commissioners referred to the Solicitor to His Majesty's Treasury as
to the legal aspects of the question. His opinion i ;, and the Lords Commissioners concur
in his opinion that the course proposed by your Government can only be adopted in the
event of a war with a foreign power, and that legislation on the lines of the Colonial Naval
Defence Act of 1865 is necessary in order to enable the vessels of the Royal Indian
Marine to be placed at the disposal of the Admiralty “from time to time as occasion
requires.”
3. Being desirous, however, if possible, of discovering a method of utilising the
ices of ihe “ Lawrence" in the manner proposed, the Lords Commissioners again
referred to the Solicitor to the Treasury as to the extent of the power* conferred by the
Indian Marine Service Act of 1884 as regards the arming of ves els of that service at times
other than when a state of war exists. In conference with Ihe Lc^al Adviser of this
Office ihe Solicitor to His Majesty's Treasury expressed the opinion that, provided
nothing is done to militate against the well recognised understanding that the Royal
Indian Marine is a non*comhatant service required mainly for transport and communica­
tions, there are no legal objections to the arming of a vessel of the establishment when
considered necessary for Ihe express purpose of performing the duties which come within
the scope of the Act of 1884 ; that it is not necessary lor the officer in command of the
vessel to hold a commission from the Admiralty in order to enable him to be placed under
the orders of the Senior Naval Officer in so far as regards the employment of his vessel
upon those duties ; but that it is doubtful whether the prevention of smuggling is one of
the duties contemplated by the Act.
4. Apart from the legal question.-I do not consider that the necessity for legislation
on the lines of the Colonial Naval Defence Act of 1065 has in the present case been shown.
1 am prepared to agree with Your Excellency’s Government that it is desirable that our
powers of patrol in the Persian Gulf should be increased, though no formal representation
on the subject his yet been addressed tome, but I am not satisfied that the best means
of attaining this object is by the employment'of the “ Lawrence." The occasions on which
the Political Resident will require the use of a despatch-boat are likely to become more
frequent, and it appears to me undesirable to take any steps which would lend to deprive
that official of the exclusive claim to the service of the •'* Lawrence." Conversely, it might
well happen, should any scheme be sanctioned whereby the u Lawrence ” could be placed
under the orders of the Senior Naval Officer, that at a time when the Naval Officer was
counting on the co-operation of the ve.s-el for .police purposes, she might be urgently
required for the use of the Politico* Redden'.
5. Moreover, the work of maritime pob’ce control i3 of a special character requiring
expert handling. Experience ha** shown that legal diflicullr- are apt to arise in the case
of a seizure of arms at sea, and theje difficulties m .y develop into delicate international
questions, should vessels flying foreign flags be found to be implicated in the illicit traffic
in arms. I doubt whether the officers o'. the Royal Iudi..n Marine should be called on to
discharge duties involving so peculiar a responsibility without some previous course of
special training, and. as at present advised, I am of opinion that the patrol of the Gulf
for police purposes should continue to be entrusted to vessels of the Royal Navy under the
exclusive control of the Naval Commander-in-Chief.
6. I am the more disposed to adhere to this decision owing to a recent proposal of
the Admiralty to employ vessels of smaller draught in the Persian Gulf, which forms the
subject of a separate despatch. 1 anticipate that this course will considerably assist your
Government in the employment of police patrols and that the illicit traffic in arms of pre­
cision will be effectually dealt with by ordinary recognised means.