'Papers Respecting the Slave Trade on the East Coast of Africa and the System Pursued for its Suppression' [‎57r] (53/72)

53
No. 51.
Mr. Hammond to Mr. Grant Buff.
Foreign Office, May 5, 1869.
ir ' WITH reference to your letter of the 21st ultimo, and to former correspondence, I
am directed by the Earl of Clarendon to transmit to you, to be laid before the Secretary
of State for India in Council, a copy of a despatch forwarded to this office by Her
Majesty's Agent and Consul at Zanzibar, and addressed by that officer to tV Bombay
Government, on the subject of the Mission of the Zanzibar Envoy to England, and of its
results ; and referring more especially to the payment of the Zanzibar subsidy to Muscat,
and to the relations of the two States towards each other.
I am, &c.
(Signed) E. HAMMOND.
No. 56.
Mr. Merivale to Mr. Hammond.—(Received May 11.)
«. India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. , May 10, 1869.
' WITH reference to your letter of the 5th instant, I am directed by the Duke of
Arevll to forward, for the information of Lord Clarendon, draft of a despatch relating to
the suhsidv paid by the Sultan of Zanzibar to the Sultan of Muscat, which his Grace
proposes to address to the Government of India; and I am to request that you will move
his Lordship to favour this officer with any opinions he may have to express upon the
question to which the draft refers, The letter, with inclosures, from the Government of
India, to which the proposed despatch is a reply, was forwaraed to the Foreign Ulhce with
my letter of the 21st ultimo.
J I am, &c.
(Signed) HERMAN MERIVALE.
Inclosure 1 in No. 56.
The Gov erTior-General of India in Council to the Duke of Argyll,
Itfy Lord Duke, 20, 1869.
WE have the honour, in continuation of the telegram despatched on the 17th instant,
to reply to your Grace's despatch of the 6th of January last, regarding the subsidy which,
under an arrangement effected by Lord Canning in 1861, is paid by the Ruler of Zanzibar
to the Ruler of Muscat. , ,
2 As your Grace is aware, we awaited the views ot 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. on
this important subject, before replying to the despatch in question ; and we have now the
honour of forwarding a copv of a letter from that Government of the 10th instant, in
which the whole case, as between the two States, is argued at some length, and with great
3^ We adopt, in their entirety, the arguments set forth in the letter in question, and
we only desire to add a few remarks of our own. .. r j . i i\/r 4. f
4 We can have no doubt whatever, from an attentive consideration of the Minute or
Lord Canning of the 26th of March, 1861, and from the letter which, on the 2nd of April
following, he caused to be addressed to 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. , an extract of which is
quoted in the margin,* that it was that Statesman's intention to create a real right in the
State of Muscat to the subsidy as well as a real obligation on the part of the ^ta'e of
Zanzibar to pay it. In using the word " inheritances/' Lord Canning, it seems probable
to us, merely meant to indicate that the then disputant parties claimed to succeed by
* Enclosure 5 of Political Despatch No. 165 of 1861 :— • ^ j
"5. The annual payment of 40,000 crowns is not to be understood as a recognition of any dependence of
Zanzibar upon Muscat, neither is it to be considered as merely personal between Syud Thowanee and by d
Maiid but as a permanent arrangement, compensath'.g the Ruler of Muscat for the abandonmen o G
upon Zanzibar, and adjusting the inequalities between the two inheritaiaees, which are to be henceforward
separate. ^ Governor . General in Council offers no opinion about the rule of succession in Zanzibar. To do so
would he considers, be travelling beyond the bounds of the question submitted for arbitration,
' [341] P