Page 461 - Gulf Precis(VIII)_Neat

37
hibitcd, must be handed over to the Persian Government when they have been
seized by British vessels or vessels trading in the Persian Gulf, whether within or
beyond Maskat territorial waters, and whether belonging to British, Persian, or
Maskat subjects. The Persian Government might conceivably take advantage
of the loose wording of this agreement to enforce embarrassing claims. Sugges­
tions for revising this agreement, in which a clause similar to clause (5) above,
were therefore made.
67. Two further questions were also submitted for the Secretary of State’s
instructions. The first question was whether the issue of a general notification
by the Sultan of Maskat to the effect that “all persons wising to export arms
by sea from one part of Maskat territory to another must provide themselves with
passes for such arms,” could be described as restriction of export inconsistent
with treaty obligations. Having regard to the terms of Article 11 of the French
Treaty with Maskat of 1844, and to the view expressed in Secretary of State’s
telegram, dated the 17th December 1897, the Government of India were disposed
to think that such a notification would, under present conditions, be inadvisable.
It was thought, however, that no objection could be raised to the Sultan’s issu­
ing a warning to his subjects to the effect that any vessel conveying arms and
ammunition from one part of Maskat territory to another, or from Maskat to any
port on the Arab coast, was liable to search by British or Persian men-of-war on
the suspicion of the arms being intended for Persian ports, and that the masters of
such vessels should, therefore, provide themselves with passes from the Sultan
covering the export of such arms and ammunition.
The second question was whether, in the absence of any special agreement
with the Persian Government, British vessels were at liberty, in virtue of our
agreements with Persia and Maskat, to search vessels bearing the Turkish flag
which might be suspected of carrying arms destined for Persian or Indian ports,
whether in Maskat, Persian or Indian territorial waters.
The Government of India in submitting these questions remarked that owing
to a recent decision in the Court of Appeal, the position of affairs in relation to
the arms traffic in the Persian Gulf had been somewhat altered, and that, there­
fore, it might possibly not be convenient to Her Majesty’s Government to issue
any general instructions with a view to strengthening the legal position of our
local officers in regard to the prohibition of that traffic, until the judgment of the
Court of Appeal had been referred to a higher tribunal.
The difficulties experienced by local officers were, however, serious,- and it
was considered that no effectual check could be secured, unless and until Her
Majesty’s Government were in a position not only to pass an Imperial Act pro­
hibiting the traffic in arms with ports on the Gulf of Oman and in the Persian
Gulf, but also to induce the Governments of other powers to take similar
measures.
68. In replying* to this despatch, the Secretary of State on the 9th
November 1900, in commenting on the five
* Secret E., February 1901, Pro. No.
172. stipulations proposed to be embodied in
a revised agreement with the Sultan of
Maskat, stated that it was desirable to await the judgment of the House of Lords
in the case of Fracis, Times & Co., v. Captain Carr, R. N., before taking any
steps in the direction of revision. Apart from this it was considered a preferable
arrangement that arms seized by the British authorities under powers derived
from the Government of Maskat should be handed over to the Government on
whose behalf and within whose jurisdiction they were seized.
The Secretary of State was of opinion that it would be necessary to come to
an arrangement with the Turkish Government before British vessels could search
ships carrying the Turkish flag, and that at present there did not seem to be any
pressing necessity for taking action in that direction.
The case of the seizure of the S. S. “ Hathor” referred to legal
opinion.
69. In connection with the seizure by the Belgian customs officials of a
consignment of arms found on board the
Secret E., March 1 go i, Nos. x—43. British steamer “ Hathor” at Bushire, in
C927FD