'Précis of correspondence regarding the affairs of the Persian Gulf, 1801-1853' [‎80v] (160/344)

140
Part V-Chap. XXXII.
of such a station in the event of disputes with Persia or disturbances in that
country, because in such an event we could at once occupy any island we chose
in the Gulph.
279. It remained to be considered how far our withdrawing would affect
the Imam, to whose interests his zeal and fidelity to the alliance required that
we should pay every attention. His great anxiety that we should remain
sufficiently evinces the danger he apprehended from an opposite measure; but
it would only be from the revival of the piratical tribes that he entertained
apprehensions; against them we should still be obliged to afford him occasional
assistance, and he could scarcely complain of the inconvenience arising from the
long intervals at which that aid would be afforded, when he saw that our own
interests suffered almost as much as his from the necessity of such a course of
action: our retreat would probably contribute to remove any dissatisfaction
between him and Persia, which State it seemed likely that he would conciliate
by a removal of the confederacy against Bahrein, which formerly dropt at our
interposition. His doing so would no doubt hasten the commencement of the
disorders that might be expected in the Gulph ; but we should not be entitled,
when we had withdrawn our own support to require of the Imam any
measure that might injure him with the most powerful State in his immediate
neighbourhood.
279-A. The (iovernment of Bombay's opinion was therefore that we should
ultimately retire from Kishm; if we were to retire we should, however, they
thought, take advantage of the time allowed by the King of Persia's own
proposal, and in the interim apprise the Imam of the probability of our with
drawing from the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. .
To Persia we might say that the time the Shah had allowed for a refer
ence to England would probably be sufficient for purpose as our occupation
was only to be temporary ; and that at all events the decision of His Majesty's
Government would of course be binding on the authorities in India; but in
this and in all other communications, the utmost care should b9 taken to avoid
pronouncing an opinion on any claim which the Imam of Maskat might
possess to Kishm.
Whenever the troops should be withdrawn, it seemed necessary that it
should be to India, a* our stationing them on the continent either of Persia or
Arabia could not fail sooner or later to involve us in the politics of those
countries.
The Government of India approved of the views of the Bombay Gov
ernment (letter dated 4th May 1892).
280. Prom news however that soon after reached Bushire, it appeared that
Captain Willock, His Majesty's Charge d*Affaires at Teheran, apprehended
the necessity of quitting the Persian Court, and that in all probability war
with that Government would ensue. There were rumours also that the King
of Persia had communicated to the Imam of Maskat that he required
12,000 Tomans 10,000 Persian dinars, or a gold coin of that value. as rent for the Island of Kishm with the Town of Bunder
Abbas, Menow, Kumir and some other places, but that the Imam would not
pay more than the present rent, which was 4,000 Tomans 10,000 Persian dinars, or a gold coin of that value. .
A large force was also said to have assembled near Bunder Abbass, to
enforce the King of Persia's demand or resume his territory and there was
also a report that the Imam was daily expected at Kishm.
281. The news from Persia were yet indistinct. Captain Willock had
Bombay Government letter dated 20th May I'GCGivcd letters flOm Loid -Londoildery
1823 with Government of India, Vol. 91 of 1822, discouraging the Persian Mission to Great
P a 9 e u6 ' Britain till the accomplishment of which
the Persians had agreed to suspend their proceedings regarding Kishm. It was
also understood from private accounts that groat offence had been given to
Persia by our Minister's refusal to pay the arrears of subsidy in consequence of
the conduct of Persia towards the Porte. On th* 21st of March the Charge
d'Affaires had no expectation of a rupture, and on the 29th he found it necessary
to demand his passports. Further, two cossids charged with dispatches had
returned from within two stages of Teheran in consequence of orders sent by
the Charge d'Affaire^