Page 246 - Gulf Precis (III)_Neat

70
, Slaves who take refuge at the British Residency at Bushire, or at other British Con-
suiates and Agencies in Persian territory, are given manumission certificates under the
of. lh? Convention between Great Britain and Persia concluded in
No. XXV, Aitchison’s Treaties, Volume X, page 95.
The practice of manumitting slaves hitherto observed in Maskat is as fellows
When a slave applies for freedom at this Consulate, his statement is taken down in
writing. He is then sent to the Sultan with the Agency Muushi for the purpose of verifying
his statement made at this Consulate for His Highness' consent to his freedom.
The Sultan, after questioning the slavo, cither informs the Munshi that the slave may
be freed when he finds him to be of recent importation or of date subsequent to the treaty
of >873, or in doubtful cases, ».<?., when the date of the slave’s importation cannotbe
clearly ascertained, His Highness requests that the slave may be detained for a short time,
to to 15 days, pending the arrival of his master to claim him. If one comes and cannot
produce belore the Consul satisfactory evidence that the man was imported before the
treaty, or if no one comes within the period mentioned, the slave is given freedom with the
consent of the Sultan.
In recent years, cases of slaves imported before the treaty seeking freedom at this
Consulate have been rare. To such freedom is denied, or rather the Sultan is not asked to
give his consent unless cruelty or inhuman treatment is proved, in which case freedom is
given with the consent of the Sultan ; otherwise, when slaves not entitled to freedom under
treaty appear to be well fed and clothed, and in good condition, they arc told they are not
entitled to freedom, and are returned to their masters by the Sultan, who makes the masters
sign a bond, by which they undertake to treat the slaves thus returned with kindness.
Since 1897 Commander Baker, H.M.S. Sphinx, inaugurated the practice of granting
freedom papers to slaves taking refuge on board H. M. ship under his command within
Maskat waters without reference to the Consul or to the Sultan, but the latter has objected
to this procedure. I have consulted Commander Philliops, who is at present in command
of H. M. S. Sphinx, and that officer agrees with me in thinking it undesirable to continue
Commander Baker’s practice, and the former practice of sending slaves (who have taken
refuge on Her Majesty's vessels within Maskat water?) to this Consulate will in future be
adhered to.
153. From the Secretary of State’s despatch No. 32-Secret, dated 7th July
1S99, it was understood that His Lordship
Secret E., September 1899, Nos. 2*4.
did not intend that there should be any
disturbance of the existing practice so long as the Sultan continued to act on the
advice of the Consul and did not unreasonably refuse his consent to manumission,
when the Consul recommended that course. At the same time attention was
drawn to sections 99 to 101 of the Instructions to naval officers, providing an
alternative procedure which might prove useful on occasion (Government of India
to the Resident, No. 1229-E. A., dated 16th August 1899).

154. It should be mentioned here also that the Government of India autho­
rized the Resident to inform the various
Secret &., May 1899, Nos. 116-128.
Sheikhs in his political charge, at such
time and in such manner as he might see fit, that the British Government would
welcome the extension of a system favourable to the liberation of slaves (No.
1427-E. A., dated 13th October 1898).
(iii) Question of interpretation of article I of the anti-slave treaty of 1873 with the
Sultan of Maskat, 1892.
154-A. In 1892 a question was raised about the interpretation of the con-
eluding words of article I of the slave-trade
Ezternal A., September 189a, No«. 231*336.
treaty of 1873 concluded with the Sultan of
Maskat in connection with an African boy who sought protection at the British
Consulate at Maskat against cruel treatment by his mistress and claimed his
freedom. The boy was born at Arbak near Maskat of parents who had been
imported as slaves to Maskat territory before the treaty of 1873. Both the
boy and his father went more than once to Calcutta in recent years, and volun­
tarily returned to Maskat. His Highness the Sultan was of opinion that the boy
must be regarded as a slave whose status is not affected by the treaty. On the
other hand, the officer in charge of the Political Agency and Consulate at
Maskat (Surgeon-Lieutenant-Colonel Jayakar) contended that the boy was entitled
to his freedom under Article I of the Treaty as a person who had entered His
Highness the Sultan’s territories since the date of the treaty.