'File 14/115 VII Annex (B 9) Abu Musa oxide: collected background material on the case' [‎14r] (38/1904)

21
' ^verv"l,<-^Won ^ ^ ^ ^ Xl ^ e ^ Hasan, and a purchase of oxide on de-
' us, yet their conduct towards the Shaikh has shown him clearly
how readily a very different complexion is introduced into the transaction. " 7
Thus—
(i)On 13th October 1907 Messrs. Wonckhaus wrote to Shaikh Sagar
" We consid-er the mines and the concession for them as a security for the
advances paid. If you force Haji Hassan bin Ali Somayah and Co
to withdraw their coolies A term used to describe labourers from a number of Asian countries, now considered derogatory. and representative, we shall have to
send over some men ourselves to protect our property
(Consul Bunder Abbas to Government of India, No. C-47, dated 25th Octo-
ber 1907).
(ii) On 28th October 1907, Lieutenant Gabriel, Assistant Resident, Bunder
Abbas, reported
^ The local representative of Wonckhaus, Mr. Brown, and about 26 men left
lor the island on October 22nd.
A German flag which he intended to place on the accumulation of oxido
was also taken
(Consul Bunder Abbas to Government of India, Telegram No. , dated
the 28th October 1907).
{in) On 19th November 1907 addressing Shaikh Sagar direct, the German
Vice-Consul, Bushire, threatened the Shaikh with a claim of a lakh One lakh is equal to one hundred thousand rupees of
rupees Indian silver coin also widely used in the Persian Gulf. , and claimed for Messrs. Wonckhaus the right of direct entry
(or concern) in the working of the mines.
( 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. telegram No, 735 to India and Tehran, dated 13th December
(iv) On 16th March 1909 Hasan Samaiyeh, no doubt under adviee from his
German supporters, wrote a threatening letter to Shaikh Sagar in which
he said:—
" All the oxide mines which are on the Abu Musa belong to us and our
Syndicate and are under our control and in our possession
( 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. Letter No. 1559, dated 4th July 1909, to India).
As regards the apparent differentiation between British subjects and other
foreigners, I would explain:—
The British Government are as anxious to protect these unsophisticated Arab
Shaikhs against unfair exploitation by B subjects just as much as other
foreigners, but from the Shaikhs' point of view it is very natural that they should
regard British subjects in a different light to other foreigners. They know that
British subjects, if not subject to theirown jmisdiction, are subject to that of the
British Political authorities with whom they are united by close ties of treaty
and obligation. They trust to the British Government to keep their own subjects
in hand and give the Shaikhs immunity from worry or imposition. They have no
such guarantee in the case of other foreigners, nether under the complete control'
of themselves nor of the protecting Power.
Even Hasan Samaiyeh, until it suited his book to change his ideas, had strong
views on that point and at one time was all against the admission into the concern
of any foreigners.
(Vide Annex 41 and following item).
(69)**. {The Company) was only doing
legitimate interests, when it endeavoured to Company,
exercise a direct influence on the fortunes of —Apart from what we have ah
ready maintained, namely that the concession had already ceased to exist for eight
months, when Brown went through a form of purchase of Sh.ikh Sagar's share;
and the evident fact (vide enclosure 11 of First German Memorandum and other
papers) that when he went into that transaction he had full knowledge of the
previous cancellation of the Concession. We now have the text of the deed of
p2u5 JT)