'File 14/115 VII Annex (B 9) Abu Musa oxide: collected background material on the case' [‎69r] (148/1904)

intention of making further enqmries asked Sakar lor information about this lease, of
T!Z T ?" 1 reaChed , h ' m - th ™ ™pM. on the llth October.
' '-''V 1 " a ?^ e , I P eDt n ''" heen made between hira and Nakhoda Ali about the Island
of Sir, with which the present investigation is not concerned. He continues
... . Wi ' h . re ff d 40 Ab « Musa, my uncle, Sheikh Salim-bin-Sultau cultivates in that
isian , a,i .i ^ e j ed .j. in \\hich x went on the Hajj my aforesaid ulicle was acting as
my regent m onargah and he saw fit to lease the mines oFlthirMusH to flassan-hin-
fciamayie , a Bntisn subject; and ibdallah-Bih-Hassan and Esa-bin-AbduI Latif, and the
lease has remained up to now.
, j! u " ri0 ' J' mtexrea from this letter that Salim was acting only as regent. On
the contrary, the words, - With regard to Abu Musa, my uncle ... cultivates in that
^sana, con ,am a recognition that bakar has really nothing to do with the cultivation
ot Abu Musa, out that Salmi cultivates it, and presumably"has a right to do so.®
. V" 1 Vf S rt ^ enc } ^ mentioned, firstly, in Order tb "fix Ine'tTme. and, secfJiidfy, with a
J ieV Ii/ 0 • the political responsibility as well for the lease in question ;
for the ot the British resi de nt were evidentl y iT iconye nient to Sakar. This
^ ' SUi P u&in £ w-ien it is realised tliat tlie sheikh evidently has a wrong conception
ot the scope 01 a treaty concluded with the British Indian Government on the 7th.
March, 189^,. Wiien asked by the dragoman of the Imperial vice-consulate at
Bus e on the 2&ta November, 1907, "What harm is then* m having made a contract
^it the German firm ; Sheikh Sakar replied, " We have made treat ies with the
jiiig■ isij v, hicu prevent vs from_le asing an y ^ part of our' tenTto r y to foreign ers otKer
'i.-t- J- m i-pw-'it i'ii-r.% nr.>i.-ons a " f ii •
t^aty.a meaning whicn would be incompatible with the principle of the open door,
ihis conception of the treaty explains why Sakar, when Lieutenant-Colonel Kemball
asked him about leases of land m which a foreigner—the Persian, Nakhoda Ali—was
concerned, hastened to assure him that he had had no dealings with Nakhoda Ali, and
to explain that his uncle auring his regency, and not he, had concluded a lease agree
ment, ana thai' only with British subjects, so that, if the lease had been a violation of the
tne political responsibility would have fallen primarily on Salim and' not"
on bakar.
, -^e letter to Lieutenant-Colonel Kemball—which is, moreover, the only document
p;>>uuced^ iu this connection supplies no evidence that Salim was acting simplv as
regent when he concluded the lease agreement. On the other hand it is an important
indication of the manner in which Sakar at that time regarded the position of Salim
with respect to Abu Musa.
1 urther, it bakar now asserts (Annex 5 of British Memorandum) that he volun-
ijariJy assigned the rent of 250 French reals to Salim, in order to raise his income to the
amount previously promised or to a. little over that amount, that is an ex state
ment for which there is no proof,, and which is inconsistent with facts that will be
considered below (pp. 6 et seq.).
The circumstance that Sakar used to send his cattle to pasture on Abu Musa
would not be inconsistent with Salim's ownership of the island, for, as may be gathered
from Majoi uoxs account (Annex 6 of British Memorandum), this may very well be a
privilege of the reigning Sheikh of Shargeh, a kind of servitude to which the private
property in the island is subject.
In this connection mention may be made of another circumstance which has an
important bearing on the question of the ownership of Abu Musa. As stated above
the arrangement of 1889 was preceded by other agreements respecting the pecuniary-'
compensation to Salim, and in order to increase his pension, which had been reduced to
400 dollars the revenue of the Island of Sir Abu Nuair, estimated at 200 dollars, was
assigned to him. Now if the revenue or"an Island was to be given to Salim would it
hot have been ^natural to give him Hid 1 or the island ot. Abu Musa, which he could have
cnecked, and, it necessary, coiiected himself since he resided in the island ? Of course,
if Abu Musa was already Sahm's property this expedient could not be'adopted.
_ , Ike objections raised in the British Memorandum to Salim's ownership of the
.and or Abu Musa having thus been refuted, and attention having been called to certain
points which indirectly support the contention that he was the owner, reference will
, * ' f he sentence " the lease has remained up to now " is also important in another connection. It can
omy mean that the tease nas not yet expired. There is no mention here of a necessity for the recosrnition of
tne agreement by bakar or of a right of Sakar to terminate it; while in his letter of February 22 1908 he
says: ' 1 did not repudiate it ? and saw nothing- objectionable in it, and so I acquiesced in it," (Annex 5 of
.British Memorandum.) v * uj .
[2574 c—l] c