"التحكيم في قضية مراكب الداو الشراعية في مسقط. محكمة التحكيم الدائمة في لاهاي. السماح برفع الأعلام الفرنسية على مراكب الداو الشراعية في مسقط. القضية بالنيابة عن الحكومة البريطانية". [و‎‎٥‎٧] (٢٠٨/١٢٤)

17
but we are a united family, and look upon it as a family
concern. Juma and I were both born and bred in Sur;
neither of us nor any of our family have ever lived m
Jibuti. As to the house, I have never lived in it, and
I cannot say I have seen it. Juma has not been to sea
for four or five years."
Yet Juma appears on the Prench list as an
owner, and is presumably registered as resident
in French territory.
If the rest of the Omanis on the Prench list
have no better claims to be on the li«t than those
disclosed in the five cases which have been above
discussed, what can be said for the value of that
document as affording any person named in it the
right to decline the jurisdiction of his natural
Sovereign, and what is to be said of the effect on
the authority of that Sultan of the belief that his
subjects resident in his dominions can acquire
immunity from his jurisdiction with the facility,
and on the flimsy grounds above disclosed ? The
manufacture of French subjects in Oman, if
conducted on the lines indicated by these five
cases, cannot but- be a menace to the independence
of Sultan Saiyid Peysal.
The summary in Appendix VIII of this Case
of the returns from 1900 to 1905 of Arab vessels
clearing under the French flag from Bombay for
Oman on examination will be found to show
that a number of vessels claiming the right to
use the French flag have visited Bombay which
do not appear in the French list. The in
ferences to be drawn from this summary are
either that the French list is incomplete and
needs revision, or that Arabs have at Bombay
claimed without authority the right to fly the
French flag. It must be added that on receipt
of a full copy of the French list from the British
Consul His Highness the Sultan sent a trusted
representative to verify its accuracy; but the
persons claiming French protection refused to
give any information and referred him to the
French Consul, a refusal which amounts to a
further assertion of their independence of the
Sultan and a further illustration of the difficulties
created for him by French action.
It was not until the 25th March, 1905, that
the French Consul in Muscat made an official
communication to His Highness the Sultan, in
closing a list of the boat owners who are under
French protection. The Sultan declined to accept
the list, claiming the persons thereon named as
f530] D 2