Page 108 - Gulf Precis (III)_Neat

92
estimate. But wo think it right to point out that since the Til res de Navigation, which
form the sole title of the Suri dhow-owners to French protection, do not confer rights of
naturalisation but simply entitle the holders to Jig the French fag in the Indian Ocean and
adjoining seas, nnd ninco these documents nre not permanent in their effects, but nre renew­
able every year the French Government can hardly claim that the Sultan would bo acting
boyond lus rights, or in a manner which can legitimately bo regarded ns provocative or dis­
respectful to the French nation, if he should doeline to recogniso tho possession of Buch papers,
at whatovor date they may hnvo been granted, as entitling their holdors to the status of Frenoli-
protected persons within bis own territory or territorial waters, and should forbid any of bis
subjects, under penalty, to fly tho French flag within that area. We venture, therefore, to
express the h"po that, in view of the important interests at stake, nnd ns a mark of our apprecia-
• ride rm-losnro .No. 1 to our Secret dcip*tob tiou of the friendly and consistent atlitudo of tho
No. 69 (Kitcrual), dated ttio 9th May 1901. Sultan, wo may now bo permitted to encourogo His
! Highness t>» take tho course suggested by Captain Cox in bis lottor* No. 142, dated the 6th
April 1901, or, if this still bo considered inadvisable, that at least wo may be permitted to give
him the nssuranco suggested in the Viceroy's telegram of 30th Juno.
43G. On tho India Oflico referring this proposal to thoForoign Onico, Lord
Lnnsdowne drew tho attention of tho India OlDco to tho claim put forward
by tho French to oxerciso the police control ovor their vessels in Zanzibar
waters. Tho Franco-Maskat Treaty of 1846 or any other treaty does not
surrender tho Sultan’s right of police over his waters, but Franco had in practice
oxerciscd the police over their own vossols in Zanzibar waters, being disinclined
toeutrusttho exercise to a semi-civilized Power. When however tho British
Protectorate was proclaimed over Zanzibar, there was no reason, from a British
point of view, to the continuance of tho French exorcise of polico as before
in Zanzibar waters. The question then is what has been the usage at Maskat.
437. Further, in the Foreign Office letter dated 17th July 1900, the
India Office was informed that the Sultan of Maskat’s notification was not to
have retrospective elfcot, except to such of his subjects as had obtained French
papers without having a proper claim to them. The second notification
proposed to he issued by the Sultan would, however, in Lord Lansdowne’a
opinion, give a retrospective elfcot to the notification of June 1900. Moreover,
it is doubtful whether tho issue of a decree by the Sultan of Maskat, and even
i by tho Sultan of Turkey, forbidding to his subjects, who are under tho protec­
tion of a European State, the use of the flag of that state in his territorial
waters would he aocoptcd by tho European Powers. Such a deoree would
only raiso a fresh serios of sharp disputes and load to no beneficial result. In
these ciroumstances Lord Lansdowne suggested that tho preferable course would
be for the Sultan to request the French Consul to supply him with a list of the
dhow-holders, who are considered entitled to fly the French flag, accompanied
i by a statement of the grounds on which the claim is allowed (Foreign Office
letters to tho India Office dated 5th August 1901 and 22nd September 1901).

(v) Complaints of the French Government against Captain Cox’s and tho Sultan’s
proceedings, 1901.
438. It was, however, suggested by Lord Lansdowne to defer a decision
upon this point until report was received on a communication made by the
French Ambassador M. Cambon on 14th August 1901, embodying in a memo­
randum, tho French version of the proceedings of tho Sultan at Sur in Juno 1900,
with allegations that the Sultan had visited Sur in company with Captain Cox,
recourse to throats in enforcing the undertaking from the Suri French flag-holders
to return them, that the Sultan had again in 1901 visited Sur in company with
Captain Cox. The memorandum further stated that the allegations made constant­
ly that dhows flying French flags wero engaged in slave trade were unfounded,
that strict investigations had been made with a view to revising the list of flag-
holders, that the Sultan’s Minister was in the pay of the British Government,
that the subsidy was made use of by the British Consul to exercise influenco
over tho Sultan in the flag question, that tho British Consul acted as it were in
behalf of tho Sultan, etc.
439. As regards tho revision of tho lists of flag-holders, Captain Cox
Captain Cox'* letter No. 1, dated 2nd Jaonaij pointed cut that tho enquiries were
190:', to Colonol Kemboll. ex parte, the only communication made to
6ecr«t E., April 1002, Nee. 78-120 (No. 87).
the Sultan being threats to use force in
case he adhered to his present attitude in the French flag question.^ The enqui­
ries made by the French as to the slave traffic carried on by the French autho­
rities were of a porfunctory oharaotor ; inasmuch as only interested Mahome