"مسقط" [ظ‎‎٢‎٠] (٤٠/٣٨)

8
Pol.
2195 1900.
684/1900.
2245 1900.
2247/1900.
Pol. 780/
1900.
841, 58 of
1900.
1299/1900.
899 1900.
2345/1900.
1032/1900.
1060/1900.
Meanwhile the French Government had taken exception to the Sultan's
action in this matter, of which they had received an account which differed from
that furnished to Her Majesty's Government by the Britisli Consul. On the
25th June, M. Camhon stated to Lord Salisbury that the dispute was one
between the Sultan and the French Government, who would have to insist upon
restitution of the papers, and, if necessary, an apology. He subsequently (26th
June) requested Her Majesty's Government to instruct their Agent to advise
the Sultan to comply. Lord Salisbury declined to commit himself in the
absence of full information, and pressed the invalidity of the French claim
to grant their protection to the subjects of another Power. M. Cambon
stated that the practice would be discontinued for the future, and that
existing papers would be examined. Lord Salisbury promised all due
respect for French rights and susceptibilities, and suggested the removal
of M. Ottavi, who had shown a partisan spirit and caused irritation.
On the <oth July the India Office suggested that M. Cambon should be
informed that Her Majesty's Government would advise the Sultan to await
an examination of the French papers already issued to his subjects before
repudiating them, and to arrive at no decision regarding them pending
further reference to the Governments of France and Great Britain. The
Foreign Office (17th July) preferred not to again raise the question with the
French Government, who would probably decline to admit our right to take
part in the examination of doubtful cases promised by M. Cambon, but they
approved generally the proposed advice to the Sultan. The Viceroy was
instructed accordingly (20th July). On the 17th July M. Cambon
announced that the French Government were sending a ship partly to
establish their new coal depot at Muscat, and partly to enquire into the
question whether any dhows flying the French flag were implicated in slave
trading.
On the 11th August the India Oifice, in forwarding further papers
received from India, suggested that the 32nd Article of the Brussels Act
might have some application to the probable objection of the French Govern
ment to our assistance at, the examination of papers; and on the 24th
August and 6th September, Lord George Hamilton proposed that the
attention of the French Government should be drawn to certain definite
cases of slave trading under their flag reported by Captain Cox, and to
admissions of irregularities under the Brussels Act by the Commander of the
" Drome/'
Meanwhile on the 18th August, the R. F. " Drorrie," arrived at Muscat,
and the French authorities at once assumed a threatening attitude
towards the Sultan, demanding the return to Sur by the "Drome," of the
surrendered papers, and the reception of Abdul Aziz as French intermediary.
The Sultan firmly refused. In conversation with Captain Cox the
Commander of the "Drome" stated that their demand as to return of the
papers was in accordance with an understanding with Lord Salisbury, but
Captain Cox rejoined that this was not in accordance with his information.
On the 26th August the Viceroy reported that he had instructed Captain
Cox that the Sultan's attitude seemed correct, but that His Highness should
not refuse to discuss doubtful or disputed cases, and in the case of disagree
ment should demand a written statement of the French case. These
instructions were 'approved by Her Majesty's Government on the ord
September. In the meantime two of the Suris who had actually surrendered
their papers to the Sultan (the receipt of which from Uis Highness had been
refused by M. Ottavi) arrived in Muscat and personally returned their papers
to M. Ottavi, who accepted them. Other Suri dhows, whose owners had
signed the solemn undertaking to the Sultan, were intercepted by the
" Drome " on their way to Busrah and induced to come to Muscat flying the
French flag. When appealed to by the Sultan to fulfil their promise, they
pleaded that they dared not do so in the presence of the " Drome," but
would do so later. Finally, they were furnished by the French Consul with
fresh " crew lists," and proceeded on their voyage. On the 28th August the
Sultan asked for a statement of the French claims in writing. This
M. Ottavi declined to give. On the 30th the flag question was dropped, but
M. Ottavi insisted on the reception of Abdul Aziz. This, also, the Sultan
declined, not (Captain Cox reports) through any personal objection, but
through fear of displeasing the British Government.