'Gazetteer of the Persian Gulf. Vol I. Historical. Part IA & IB. J G Lorimer. 1915' [‎1615] (1770/1782)

6U
Mi i
i
Hi
i
4,
. "»!«! ■
^ c
flinji
'■ ^Ki f .
roil'.
} . t ^ g,
P ro Ni<
"ffffii
? lvie * a f tlie ij,
hfm t
1
:
u' 1 . , :
T*»^l
•"""s Until.,
"***»*
'pJinfffient ajjt ..
««< ^ 1 ,i:; 1
wlaw"
11 tta.s . .
1 newinarcl'-lajj^
and tlioroiiffkfs r;
i be treated tkiai
1 am to eowi-i
ud of i®
ia, ras the»' .
fe*is BoiiiJiatei!^
laerigimlwikfflfj
1615
■ ■ v ••■■'■;. ;■ ■ ■ ' . ; ■„ , ■ ■ v - ■ ,«v.; —
■. ; ■ ■■' ■■■ '■■ ■ ■ . ■ ■ ■"
of he Bequest by the King of Oudh i n favour of the Mnjtahid, of of the
Karbala and Najaf. Consequently, in all that was done and ordered BeqnMt .
.n 1903 it was assumed that the Mujtahid recipients under the Bequest %£%***"
were^unfettered by 'ts tous in their disposal of the money, auAhat
the Goyeinment of India, under whose auspices they were selected and
maintained as beneficiaries, were not concerned with their conduct in
chsposing of it.
The reorganisation effected by Major Newmarch did not, apparently,
lesu m the distribution of the income of the Oudh Bequest in a
manner which could be described, from a charitable or philanthropic
standpoint, as better than before. Such, indeed, was not the object of
his scheme, which aimed only at bringing the administration 'of the
funds into accordance with the terms of the Agreement of 1825, as then
understood, and at abolishing abuses due to the intervention in the past
of British authorities. In both of these latter respects his action was
effective and successful. Protests against the new arrangements were
received in the shape of petitions to the King-Emperor, the Viceroy of
India, an.l other authorities ; but, in view of the number of personal
interests adversely affected by the change, such manifestations of feel-
ing were inevitable and possessed little significance.
Owing to the predominance of Persians—generally retaining their Political
Persian nationality among the Mujtahids of {Karbala and Najaf, and
to the influence then wielded in Persia by the more important among tion&of the
them, the radical reorganisation of the Oudh Bequest in 1902-03, had 1903-05'.
important political aspects to which no reference has yet been made.
Major New march was conscious of these ; he expected to acquire some
influence over the Mujtahids through the power vested in him of
selecting from among them the recipients of allowances under the Oudh
Bequest; and in June 1903, in an official letter, he remarked that Saiyid
Muhammad Baqir of Karbala and Saiyid Muhammad, Bahr-ul-'Ulum,
of Najaf were now on very friendly terms witli him and deferred to
his authority. A similar appreciation of the position had been arrived
at by Sir A. Hardinge, His Britanni# Majesty's Minister at Tehran, who
thought that the influence of the Mujtahids at Karbala, and Najaf
might be utilised, through the British Residency An office of the East India Company and, later, of the British Raj, established in the provinces and regions considered part of, or under the influence of, British India. at Baghdad, to pre
vent riots and disturbances in Persia and to frustrate Russian policy
in that country.
The cases of two or three Persians were recommended by Sir A.
Hardinge to Major Newmarch for favourable consideration ; and in a
couple of instances the latter was able, though he could not reconcile