'Précis of correspondence regarding the affairs of the Persian Gulf, 1801-1853' [‎73v] (146/344)

126
Part V-Chap. XXVIII.
the King of Persia as Kis/im : the question therefore is, whether we are to submit to the evils
formerly suffered irom the Joasmis, or to give offence to the Kiug of Persia. Judging the
question on its own merits the Hon'ble the Governor would not hesitate to decide against
permitting a renewal of piracy.
The effects of His Majesty's displeasure are very unlikely to lead to open war, and it is
understood to be the recorded opinion of Sir John Malcolm, the best authority on euch a sub
ject, that the possession of an island near the shore of Persia would be more likely to fix the
King in the British interests than to drive hitn into hostilities.
But this is perhaps a confined view of the case, and it may probably be the policy of His
Majesty's Ministers to avoid giving any umbrage to Persia in any case where it can possibly
be avoided, it will rest with His Excellency the Governor-General to decide that question,
and, in the meantime. General Smith should be requested to give his ojtinion whether any
place on the Arabian Coast would answer for checking piracy in the manner designed from
Kishm, without being exposed to the risk of attacks from the neighbouring Arabs, and with
out necessarily involving the British Government in the transactions of those tribes.
With regard to the charges against Captain Bruce, it is almost impossible to reply to
them without documents to refer to, but the following are the observations that occur to the
Hon'ble the Governor.
The object of the British Government was to preserve the peace of the Gulf, as it was
owing to the wars among the Powers who inhabit in its shores that the growth of piracy was
encouraged. It therefore applied its whole attention to bring about a reconciliation between
the Imam of Maakat and the Utubis of Bahrein ; at the same time it offered its mediation
to prevent hostilities against Bahrein on the part of the King of Persia, and even to procure
the latter a tribute rather than allow of war.
The proceedings were so far from inconsistent with each other that they sprang naturally
from the same source, a desire to preserve the peace of the Gulf: at all events, the mediation
between the Imam and the Utubis was the avowed act of the Government of Bombay From c. 1668-1858, the East India Company’s administration in the city of Bombay [Mumbai] and western India. From 1858-1947, a subdivision of the British Raj. It was responsible for British relations with the Gulf and Red Sea regions. , and is
in no respect imputable to Captain Bruce.
The capture of the Linga boats was the act of the officers of His Majesty's Navy, even
whom Captain Bruce had not the least control. Tue destruction of them was however the
consequence of their osvn imprudent intercourse with the Joasmis.
The Hon'ble the Governor thinks he formerly proposed that the people of Linga should
be indemnified for their losses and that orders were issued accordingly, if such was not the case
it would be advisable to ascertain where the discussion stopped.
The Hon'ble the Governor has no recollection of the affair of Charrack, but he does not
remember any transaction in which blame was imputable to Captain Bruce.
It is hoped that these facts and such additional ones as the records may furnish, will
enable Captain Willock to convince the King of Persia of Captain Bruce's perfect freedom
from all offence against His Majesty ; should His Majesty obstinately insist on his removal,
Captain Willock can inform this Government and await a further reply.
In such an event as is above alluded to, the Hon'ble the Governor would not hesitate to
recall Captain Bruce, as it is evident that nothing is more likely to prevent harmony and
confidence, than the employment of an obnoxious Agent; but Government would, in his
opinion, be bound to prevent that gentleman suffering the smallest loss, either of money or
credit by his recall. If he be permitted to be . . . . .in any respect
a loser, no British Agent will venture to assert the interests, or even obey the orders of his
own Government, when his doing so is likely to draw on himself the enmity of the Court to
which he is accredited.
The Hon'ble the Governor recommends that these remarks be communicated to the
Supreme Government, and Captain Willock, in the meantime, might be acquainted for the
purpose of informing the King of Persia, that His Majesty's message had been transmitted
to His Excellency the Most Noble the Governor-General in Council, who will not fail to
give the fullest consideration to any just claims of His Majesty.
Captain Willock will no doubt, with his usual zeal for all branches of the public interest,
seize every opportunity of impressing on the Court of Tehran the absolute necessity of a
station such as Kishm to keep down piracy and its perfect harmlessness in reference to the
dominions of Persia.
Action was taken by the Bombay Government accordingly.
%
<iv) ORIGIN OF MASKAT'S TITLE TO THE KISHM AND OIUIUZ ISLANDS AND
BUNDER ABBAS, ETC.
257. The following report, dated 14th August 1821, of Dr. Jukes, Political
Agent, Kishm, as to the origin of the
Volume 26-61 rage m. connection of the Imams of Maskat with
Kishm, Ormuz, Bunder Abbas, and other parts of the Persian Coast near that
place, will be read with interest:—
The Persian Ministers having expressed their dissatisfaction at the small detachment of
British troops being stationed on the Island of Kishm, and considering that it was likely to