Page 447 - Gulf Precis(VIII)_Neat

23
I venture, therefore, to suggest that the arms should be handed back to the firm, on
the condition that they remove them from the Gulf, and do not attempt to sell them there,
or, if it is considered that the firm arc not entitled to have them back, that we should bring
them to Bushirc or remove them to British India.
In offering this opinion, I would point out that, although Mr. Fracis was wel /
aware of the conditions in the concession, and though the firm appear to have carried
on the traffic as a speculation pure and simple for their own profit, without any regard for
the wishes of the Sheikh or consideration of the danger to which they were exposing him
and his family, as well as the inhabitants of Bahrein, by selling indiscriminately, the cir­
cumstances under which the traffic was started render it. doubtful, if we should permit
the entire confiscation of the property of British firm by a Ruler like the Sheikh of
Bahrein.
M. J. Meade.

The Sultan of Maskat’s claim for compensation discussed and
negatived, 1899.
48. Early in 1899 the Sultan of Maskat put in a claim for compensation for
loss he stated he had sustained in conse­
Secret E.
Pro. Nos. 309—310, July 1899. quence of his co-operation with Her Majes­
ty’s Government in the suppression of the
arms traffic and more especially in the case of the seizure of the S. S. “ Balu­
chistan.”
The claim was based upon the fact that a short time previously the Sultan
had farmed the customs for §140,000; then thinking that the customs would
derive benefit from the policy of the British Government, he took the action of
re-selling the contract during its period of currency for §170,000, in order to get
the expected profit himself. Subsequently the British Government, in pursuance
of the same policy, seized the cargo of the “Baluchistan” in Maskat waters.
Thereupon, the custom’s farmer, being disappointed in his expectation, induced
the Sultan to take §145,000 or §25,000 less than the price of the re-sale, and
agreed that the duty on further consignments of arms arriving by other ships
after the “ Baluchistan " should be taken by the Sultan.
The view taken by the Government of India was that, having regard to the
finding of the local court of enquiry, and to Article 6 of the Treaty of 1891, it
was very doubtful whether the Sultan or the customs contractor could have
claimed customs dues upon the arms in the “ Baluchistan,” even had they not
been seized, as the goods were in transit. Further, that not only did the Sultan
apparently suffer no loss by the confiscation of arms which were intended for
Persia, but, on the contrary, had gained §5,000 by the action of the British
Government. Also that the Sultan could, under the revised contract, take duty
on consignments of arms in any ships arriving after the “ Baluchistan,” and in
addition there was the chance of his getting a moiety of the value of the con­
fiscated cargo. Under these circumstances, the Government of India were
unable to admit that a claim for compensation had been established, and the
Sultan was informed accordingly.

Arrival at Maskat of Monsieur Goguyer, 1899.
49. Writing on the 10th April, 1899, Major Fagan reported further parti­
culars regarding the recent arrival at
Secret E., July 1899, Nos. 370—457. Maskat of the two French subjects—Mon­
sieur Antouin Goguyer and his assistant.
It transpired that Monsieur Goguyer had visited the principal British Indian
traders in the place and had endeavoured to persuade them to give him orders
for arms and ammunition of any description they might require. He had pointed
out that by placing their orders with him, they would escape all the risks at
present attending the arms traffic in consequence of the action of the British
authorities, and he undertook to accept all risks of seizure and to send the arms
in dhows flying the French flag to any port in the Persian Gulf, asking in return
that any trader placing an order with him should at the same time deposit one
per cent, of the purchase money in advance and should undertake to give him
2h per cent, of the profits.