Page 90 - The Arabian Gulf States_Neat
P. 90

28   THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE ARABIAN GULF STATES

                        terms which, they said, were very lenient. They advocated instead
                        the imposition of more strenuous conditions on the ‘pacificatcd’ Arab
                        Shaikhs. In their opinion, the guilty Shaikhs ‘should have been re­
                        moved from possession of authority and those who had actually
                        fallen in the hands of the British expedition should have been detained
                        in custody’. In addition, they criticised the provisions of the treaty  on
                        the grounds that
                        the treaty ought to have interdicted the fitting out of armed vessels at ports
                        hitherto piratical; to have limited the size of the vessels employed in com­
                        mcrce; to have stipulated for powers of search by the British authorities in
                        order to enforce these conditions; to have provided for a restriction of the
                        export of timber from India; and to have forbidden the construction of
                        fortifications in certain circumstances, at the same time empowering the
                        British Government to enter on and destroy any that might be built in
                        disregard of the prohibition.
                        Further, objection was taken to the treaty because it ‘afforded no
                        guarantee against the renewal of piracy’. Article 5, they said, did not
                        give such a guarantee since it ‘was so drafted that breach of its condi­
                        tions would not render the culprits liable to any punishment’.1
                          In reply to these ‘strictures’ Major-General Grant Keir assured the
                        Government that he was satisfied with the practicability of his treaty
                        and that the ‘minor stipulations’ suggested by the Government might
                        be
                        enforced at any time when necessity for them should arise for they would
                        be in harmony with the general spirit and objects of the treaty, which were
                        perfectly understood by the Arabs.2

                        (b) The interpretation of the Treaty
                        In 1823, the British Resident in the Gulf asked for the decision of
                        Government on a number of questions relating to th i interpretation
                        of the treaty of 1820. These were: (1) Whether the British authorities
                        had the right to inquire into the building of new vessels in the piratical
                        ports and to destroy them if the explanation given was unsatisfactory?
                        (2) Whether the authorities could detain the vessels of signatory states
                        ‘if not possessed of the papers or flying the flag required by Articles 3
                        and 5 of the Treaty?’ The Government’s decision on both questions
                        was in the negative. The Government was also asked to say: (1)
                        Whether, according to the terms of the treaty, the British authorities
                        could forbid the building or rebuilding of fortifications by the Shaikhs ?
                        (2) What was the scope of Article 9 relating to the slave trade? (3)
                       To what extent the British Government was under obligation, accord­
                        ing to Article 10, to protect the ‘pacificated’ Arabs against the attacks
                        of non-signatory Arabs?
                             1 Lorimer, pp. 672-3; Saldanha, Precis, op. cit.  2 Ibid.
   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95