'Précis of correspondence regarding the affairs of the Persian Gulf, 1801-1853' [‎91r] (181/344)

Part V—Chap. XXXVI.
161
but the Imaum may perhaps consent, and Rama bin Jaii1>ir tosrstVier with tn© SliGikh of
Bushire will always be r..ady to co-operate. If the expedition should actually be undertaken
it will inevitably lead to a renewal of disorders to a certain extent.
58. The proviiion respecting slaves is the only remaining article of the treaty on which it
is necessary to reports and it is with much hesitation t^at I ventuie upon this subject. .Chat
the traffic continues to a considerable (ie^ree cannot be doubted, since there is jjn open slave
market both at Mas-cat and at Bahrein, and also I believe in the Persian ports, but I was deterred
from holdinu any personal communication with the Chiefs on this point by a doubt that has
occurred to me in regard to the precise meaning of the article of the treaty, which I cannot find
expiaining' in any instructions from Government.
57. The words are the " carrying off of slaves, men, women and children, from the coast
of Africa or elsewhere, and the tran>porting them in vessels, is plunder and piracy, and the
friendly Arabs shall do nothing of this nature," Now it strikes me that this sentence may be
understood to forbid only the carrying off of men, women and children as slaves, and the trans
porting them in vessels when *o carried off, although the words will also bear the more com
prehensive sense of forbidding the carrying off of slaves and also the transporting of slaves,
however procured, in vessels ; but even this most extended acc^ftation cannot be construed in
the forbidding the purchase of slaves and the transport of them over-land unless indeed the
last clause, which provides that the friendly Arabs shall do nothing of this nature, embraces
everything.
58. I am informed that the Arabic sentence bears the same meaning as the English one,
and may be interpreted to forbid only the making of slaves and the transporting in vessels of
slaves so made, not the purchase or the transport of them if purchased; but that it will also
bear the more extended si gnification.
59. I am unable positively to say in what sen^e the words are understood by the parties
to this treaty, and my uncertainty of the views of Government prevented me from putting the
question diiectly; but when I consider the practice of all Mahomedan nations, the positive
refusal of the Tmautn of Muscat to relinquish their traffic, and particularly the tenor of Captain
Morseby's negotiations with His Highness, I cannot suppose that the Arab Chiefs hold them
selves bound by the treaty not to purclia-e slaves in the market at Mascat or any other place,
and to carry to sell them to their neighbours where they see that our ally the Imaum continues
to pursue the traffic in spite of our recuonstrances and probably brings them for sale to these
ports.
60. But in whatever sense the words of the treaty may be understood by the other party, I
am convinced that our utmost endeavours to abolish the slave trade amongst the parties to the
treaty will be ineffectual, as long as the other powers of the Gulf persist in it. We may
perhaps put a stop to the carrying off of slaves, but their purchase and transport we never can
prevent. The slaves will be disguised and concealed in a thousand ways, so that it will be
impossible for us to detect them, and I doubt whether more harm than good might not be done
to the cause of humanity, by st >ppini; boats and searching them for slaves, because it would
in all cases occasion such disgust and offence as would involve a great risk of renewal of
hostilities.
61. I do not believe that any of the parties to the treaty do carry off slaves, all those thev
possess being purchased at Mascat and other places, but at all events . it would be difficult
even in the former case to detect them, in the latter next to impossible, and with all our efforts
we shall Hnd it impossible to put a stop to a traffic which is sanctioned by their religion and by
immemorable custom, unless it were relinquished by the co:muon consent of the whole of the
Chiefs of the Gulf.
62. Convinced as I am of the ineffic icy of this article of the treaty, which has not yefc
been acted upon, and cf the dansrer of attempting to carry it into effect, I am compelled with
much reluctance to recommend that it should not be enforced except in very glaring cases, or
at least that its sense should b« considered as confined to the carrying off of slaves, and uot
including their purchase or transport.
63. It is gratifying to humanity to know that slaves are not only extremely well treated
and protected by their Arab masters, but that they even enjoy a very considerable degree
of power and influence; I remarked that they were everywhere the stoutest and well fed men,
and that they seemed happy and comfortable. I must not however omit to mention an
exception which occurred at Bahrein, where two slaves sought refuge on board the Sernatt
from the cruelty, as they said, of their masters ; they were not however received, and we had
no means of ascertaining the merits of the cas- 1 . Much as it is to be desired that this horrid
traffic should be abandoned throughout the world, we must I fear confess that the cruel treatment
of slaves has been the reproach rather of English than of Eastern nations.
tf4. I am not prepared to offer any further suggestions on the execution of the other
articles of the treaty, beyond those submitted in my letter of the 10th Januarv. It will be
hardly possible to get the Chiefs to be very regular with their papers, but when the'first Registry
has been completed, I do not anticipate much difficulty. There is however one point on which
I beg leave to solicit the instructions of Government, which is the extent to which we are to
interfere to prevent aggression by Chiefs who are not parties to the treaty, on vessels hearing
9ur Registers. You will perceive from the 17th paragraph of my letter that Sultan bin Sugguf
construes the latter part of the X article of the Treaty into an engagement of protectlou