'Abdication of Sultan Taimur bin Faisal and accession of Sultan Saiyid Said ibn Taimur' [‎137r] (287/354)

| ^ \!U ^ /
W * A.» ' i'
Mieir telef rnm ^o # 66■} of the 1st March 1952 of the ?l«w
that he had perhape €xar re rated the l>iiltan»e deelre to
safeguard the dignity of hie atate. I am to explain that
the remarke in that telegram were Intended to euggeei that
In the opinion of the Government xt India the Political
Bee idea t had perhaps exargerated the object lone to the
grant ol most-favoured-natlon treatment to the United States
oi '^erica in reepect of pereonal statue for their subjects
and not that he had made an overstatement of facts which
were within his knowledge#
S # . The Government of India have also read with
interest the diecuESions held by the Political Resident A senior ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul General) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Residency. with
Hie Highness the Sultan regarding the possibility of
denunciation by the Muscat &tate of her Treaties with
Foreign Powers. They had already given this question their
careful consideration and had arrived at the following
provisional conclusions. While ths Muscat Treaties both
with France and America are drawn sub specie, aeternitatls*
the authorities agree tbat all treaties are to be under? tood
as having a tacit condition that they remain only valid
gjo fetantibuB. Until the Great War it could not be
said that there has been any material variation in the
position which would Justify denunciation of her treaties
by Muscat. Since the Great War there has been a tendency
in all countries to raise tariff rates and it mi^ht lie held
that in respect of the relevant Articles of these two
Treaties things had now changed so much that denunciation
y^o
at those Article b would !>• joetlf led» But^ are apparently
an y where on record In whteh denunciation has not
bean preceded either hy internal revolution or a one
▼ioleat