'File 14/115 VII Annex (B 9) Abu Musa oxide: collected background material on the case' [‎163r] (336/1904)

Can seldom, if ever, have been brought forward in
a case where the title to land was in question,
and His Majesty's Government can only express
their surprise that the German Government
should decline to accept such evidence. The
objections suggested to such evidence seem to be
as follows:—
1. The statements were made by interested
parties.
2. They were made while the case was in pro
gress and steps were being taken to collect
evidence.
3. Major Cox was at Shargah at the time when
they were made.
4. They are out of harmony with the former
attitude of the two sheikhs.
1. It may be conceded that the statement of
Sheikh Sagar (the date of which should obviously
be, as suggested in the Second German Memo
randum, 1908 instead of 1898) is open to the
objection which may be taken to the evidence
given by any claimant in support of his own case.
But how it can be suggested that Sheikh Salim
is " interested" in disproving his alleged title to
the island His Majesty's Government are entirely
unable to understand. The effect of the cancella
tion of the contract by Sheikh Sagar has been
that Sheikh Salim has lost a considerable portion
of his income, and the suggestion that the latter
would be ready to give false evidence in support
of the contention that Sagar had a right to take
the step which has had such unfortunate results
for Salim is one which cannot be maintained for
a moment. The statement of Sheikh Salim's (to
which he still absolutely adheres) is a declaration
entirely against his interest, and is conclusive.
2. His Majesty's Government agree that these
statements were made after the question of the
ownership of the island had been raised, and when
evidence on the point was being collected. His
Majesty's Government do not attach much weight
to this objection, which would apply with at least
equal force to much of the evidence contained in
the annexes to the Second German Memorandum ;
they would remark that there would obviously be
no reason for making such statements (especially
that of Sheikh Salim) before the question of title
had arisen.
3. If any meaning can be attached to this
objection it can only be that His Britannic
[926] C