Page 426 - Gulf Precis(VIII)_Neat

was refused in the exercise of the discretionary powers vested in the Governor-
General in Council by the Arms Act, and not in virtue of any treaty with the
Chief of Bahrein.
8. In October, 1888, the following notification issued from the Home Depart-
ment:—
“Notwithstanding anything in rule 6 of the Indian Arms Act, XI of 1878—
(«) a license to export ammunition or military stores, or to export arms other
than cannon or than such rifles as come within the operation of rule 5 of
those rules, from the port of Calcutta, Madras, Bombay, Rangoon, Calicut,
Karachi, or Aden to any port in a Native State in India, or to any port in
foreign territory except a port on the coast of Arabia or Africa, may be
granted by the Secretary to the Government of India in the Foreign
I Department or by any officer specially empowered in this behalf by the
Governor General in Council; and
(£) a license to export ammunition or military stores, or to export arms other than
cannon or than such rifles as aforesaid, from the port of Aden to any port
on the coast of Arabia or Africa may, under the authority of the Govern­
ment of India certified to by the Secretary in the Foreign Department, be
granted by the Political Resident at Aden.
Suspected trade in Arms between Bander Abbas and the Frontier
States, 1888.

9. In November, 1888, it having been suggested that facilities existed for the
surreptitious importation of rifles at Gwadur and Bander Abbas for despatch to
Afghanistan and Independent Frontier States, Sir Robert Sandeman was asked
to make cautious enquiries on the subject.
In replying, Sir Robert Sandeman in January, 1889, expressed the opinion
that the trade in arms should be carefully watched and discouraged, and also that
there was no doubt that it existed to an even greater extent than was supposed,
and that under present conditions, once arms and ammunition were landed at
Gwadur, there was nothing to prevent their finding their way into Afghanistan.
10. As the result of further enquiries, it transpired that the traffic was very
Pro., October 1904, Nos. 136—146. unimportant. However, it was thought desir­
able not to lose sight of the subject, and
with this in view, the Agent to the Governor-General in Baluchistan was asked
to instruct the Political Agent in South-Eastern Baluchistan to make confidential
enquiries from time to time, and more especially during the winter tour along the
coast, and to report anything that 1^ might discover.

The Traffic in arms on the Mekran Coast, 1890.
11. In December, 1890, the Agent to the Governor-General in Baluchistan
D _ t , 0 KT reported that 21 cases containing rifles
^ 9’’ • sent by Messrs. Rude & Co., to Messrs.
Bushar Bundally & Co., other Khojah
merchants of Gwadur, had been stopped at Karachi, and that a few other cases
from Maskat had been stopped at Gwadur. Instructions.were asked for as to the
couKe to pursue and especially as to general instructions about the trade in fire­
arms along the coast. In discussing the subject it was observefl that in 1888 it
had been decided that there were no special reasons for restricting the trade jn
arms with Maskat and that Gwadur belonged to Maskat. In the same year in
the discussion about the new Commercial Treaty with Maskat, Colonel Ross*
opinion had been accepted that arms need not be referred to in the treaty, and
that “the matter might be left to be dealt with should occasion arise.*' In this
connection it was noted that importation of arms into Maskat itself and their
importation into the Maskat dependency of Gwadur were on somewhat different
footings as in the latter case we had an interest in preventing arms being sent
up to the Perso-Kalat border, where boundary quarrels might be troublesome.
This was pointed out to the Political Resident in the Persian Gulf,, who was asked f