Page 247 - Gulf Precis (III)_Neat

7*

)54*B- The Government of India to whom the matter was referred for
orders held (No. 1647, dated 6th September 1892):—
u3* In reply I am directed to inform you that the Governor General in Council agrees
with you in thinking that the view held by His Highness the Sultan regarding the particu­
lar case under reference is correct There is no doubt that the boy, by entering British
territory, became ipso facto a free man. Had he thereafter been forcibly retaken to
Muscat he might be said to have been “ imported " within the meaning of Article I of the
Treaty, and therefore entitled to freedom. But he returned voluntarily to Muscat, and
therefore must be held to have abandoned (as he has a right to do) the privileges he had
gained by entering British territory, and to have reverted to his original status as a slave.
This ruling covers all cases of perrons who have been lawfully slaves in Muscat, either by
importation before the date of the Treaty of 1873, or by birth before or after that
date. At the same time it appears to the Government of India that the words of the
treaty relied on by Dr. Jayakar would apply to all persons brought to Muscat otherwise
than by their own voluntary act for the first time after the date of the treaty, whether
they were brought for sale or as the private slaves of the importer.
4. It follows from the above ruling that the boy in question is not entitled to claim
to be free. As he has appealed to the Consulate for protection against cruelty, endeavours
may properly be made, as you propose, to obtain a guarantee that he will not be ill-treated
after ho is surrendered.
(iv) Question of giving protection to runaway slaves at Jask station, 1885.
155. In 1884 four runaway slaves took refuge at the telegraph village at
task, whom the Governor of the place,
External A., May 1685, Nos. i-ji.
Sheikh Abdul Nabi, claimed back.
Mr. Patten, Assistant Superintendent in charge Jask, agreed to send them back
if a written undertaking was given that they would not be illtreated, about which
they had complained. This was given, but the slaves, who had been ordered
to leave the neighbourhood of the telegraph village, escaped to H. M. S.
Dragon. The question of dealing with them now passed the naval authorities.

156. As regards allowing runaway slaves to take refuge at the telegraph
village at Jask, the following order was issued by Colonel Ross through Mr.
Ffinch to the Superintendent at Jask station (Mr. Ffinch to the Superintendent,
dated x 8th December 1S84) :—
“ Slaves at Jask are to be treated just as at Bushire, that is refused admission lo
telegraph or Government premises or places, over which we exercise any control. The
telegraph village is to be treated as if Government buildings. It is of course repugnant
to people's feelings to reject appeals for protection, but it must be firmly done, for if
runaway slaves think they can come in, they will come in great numbers, and we should
incur the hostility of the people and injury to the telegraph line.'1
157. On this subject the Government of India (Foreign Department letter
No. 517-E., dated nth April 1885) taking into consideration the extra-territorial
status of these stations and also the facility with which slaves could find
admission into them, were disposed to approve of these instructions, but they
wished to add to them the proviso that—
“ Exception should be made in cases where, owing to the slave being placed in
imminent danger or otherwise, considerations of humanity may dictate an opposite
course."
(v) Question of giving protection to fugitive slaves at the telegraph station at
Henjam, 1904.
158. While at Maskat in May 1904, Commander Kemp received a telegram
from Mr. Lobo, telegraph clerk at
Secret E., February 1905, Nos. 1*45.
Henjam, saying that a man from a
dhow lying at Henjam had asked protection on ihe ground of being kidnapped
from the Mekran coast. Commander Kemp instructed Mr. Lobo by telegram
to detain the dhow until his arrival. He arrived at Henjam on 9th May and
enquired into the matter.