Page 413 - Gulf Precis(VIII)_Neat

99
concession for pearl fishers in the Persian Gulf, which would interfere with the
prescriptive rights of protected tribes.
326. In the same year a Hindu trader residing at Maskat obtained the per­
mission of Sheikh Zaid-bin-Kalifah, Chief
Secict E., Pebiutrj 1901, Nos. 151-159.
of Abu Thabi, to dive for pearls on a bank
situated within the Sheikh's jurisdiction and engaged a member of the Beni Yas
tribe to conduct the party to the point. The venture was, however, a failure.
In connection with this case the Chief of Bahrein and other Trucial Chiefs
expressed the opinion that no Chief had the right to give any such permission
as the pearling banks were the common property of the Coast Arabs.
327. In 1902 a British Indian subject desired to lease the Abu Thabi cus­
toms and obtained a concession for pearl
Secret E., August 1903, Nos. 155*157.
fishing in Abu Thabi waters. The Assist­
ant Political Agent at Bahrein pointed out to this man that, since pearling
banks were regarded as the common property of the Arab divers, no Chief could
grant a concession to any individual to employ modern diving apparatus in
pearling operations off the Arabian Coast of the Gulf.
328. Early in 1903 Colonel Kemball reported that two Frenchmen named
Dumas and Castelin had arrived at Bahrein with the intention, it was suspected, of
prospecting the pearl banks round that island. The Chief however refused to
entertain any proposals on the subject. Subsequently Monsieur Dumas’ Assist­
ant proceeded to Marseilles. It was supposed that he had gone to engage a
diver. The last report received was to the effect that Mons. Dumas had left
Bahrein for Baghdad on account of the plague, but it was presumed that he would
return later on.
329. The Government of India entirely approved of the Sheikh’s action in the
matter and advised that in the event of‘either of these parties re-appearing
at Bahrein, the Chief should refuse to render the assistance of any description.
Colonel Kemball was to advice the other Chiefs also, who might be similarly
approached, to return a similar response (letter No. 778-E.-A., dated 9th
March 1904).
330. The following despatch (No. 63, dated 10th March 1904) was then
addressed to the Secretary of State:—
u In the course of our recent examinations of problems connected with the Persian Gulf,
the question of the pea'l-lishcries that have so long existed there has come under our
notice. Important questions,, both of policy and international law, are involved; and
although none of these has fortunately hitherto assumed an acute shape, it seems to us
desirable that the matter should be considered now, in order that we may know how to act
should any sudden or unexpected development occur. We therefore address you on the
subject.
2. The approximate limits of the pearling grounds in the neighbourhood of the Arab
littoral are indicated on the enclosed copy of a chart of the Gulf in addition to those
marked ; there are also shoals in the neighbourhood of Kharak Island and at other points
along the Persian Coast, which arc regularly exploited and frequently yield considerable
returns. We are immediately concerned, however, only with those lying on the Arabian
side of the Gulf. Along this coast lie the territories of the several Trucial Chiefs, the
peninsula of El Katr, the island of Bahrein, the Turkish province of El Hassa, and the
domains of the Sheikh of Kowcit. The pearl banks appear from time immemorial to have
been open, without distinction, to the Arabs of the entire littoral; and though there are
no definite inter-tribal limits, the external boundaries of the fisheries are well known. In
trusion is rescented; the principal Chiefs have in past expressed the view that the
fisheries are common property, and that no Chief has, therefore, the right to grant any con­
cession to outside parties ; and believing as they do that the shallower waters are depend­
ent on the deeper for their supply of shells, their objections relate not only to interference
on the shoals which are habitually fished by their dependents, but also to the exploitation
of the deeper waters beyond.
3. His Majesty's Government are aware of the close relations which exist between the
Arabs of this coast and the Indian Government. Since 1843 we have held from the
Trucial Chiefs agreements to rafrain from any breach of the peace at sea, and in 1892 the
Sheikhs concluded fresh compacts binding themselves not to enter into and agreement or
correspondence with any Power other than the British Government; not to consent, except
with the permissiou of the British Government, to the residence within their territories of