'Muscat Dhows Arbitration. In the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague. Grant of the French Flag to Muscat Dhows. The case on behalf of the Government of His Britannic Majesty.' [‎16r] (40/208)

j
See Wheaton and
Atlay. 1904,
p. 171, citing
R. v. Anderson,
L. R. K. C. R. 161,
and R. «. Dadlej,
14 Q. B. D., 273.
jt-
J 7
■ f
f '^v >
£
27
The terms of the second paragraph of Article
XXXII of the Act are inconsistent with the prac
tice of granting permits at Trench Consulates in
foreign States because the proof of possession of
immeubles there referred to clearly relates to
immeubles within the territory and jurisdiction of
the French authority granting the permits which
cannot exisc in foreign States in which the French
only have Consulate?.
Assuming, for the purposes of the present case,
that by the grant of French papers to the Omani
owner of an Arab dhow A term adopted by British officials to refer to local sailing vessels in the western Indian Ocean. the vessel and the
recipient of the papers acquire privileges and incur
obligations within French waters and on the high
seas, those rights depend solely on French
municipal law, and so soon as the vessel and its
owner and crew return within the territorial
waters of Muscat there is nothing in the recognised
rules of international law or in Treaties already
quoted which renders the vessel, its owner or crew,
entitled to privileges as a French vessel. Where
the title of the Omani owner to fly the French
flag is questioned by his Sultan, it is not enough
for a French official to assert that the man is a
prot^g^, or to show th^t he or his ship is
registered at the Consulate or has French papers.
The claim to privilege must be warranted by the
facts and brought within the relevant Treaty.
The papers of many of these vessels contain a
clause permitting the vessel to be manned by
foreigners, which has the effect of displacing any
presumption which might otherwise have arisen
that the crew of such a vessel under the French
flag were Frenchmen, and of making it necessary
in each case to show that members of the Crew
were, iudependently of the titre, either French
men or natives of French Colonies or Protectorates,
or in the service of Frenchmen.
Great respect is, of course, due to the declara
tion of a responsible officer of France with respect
to persons claimed at French protegds.
But subjects of Oman who claim such a privilege
or exemption must prove that they are entitled to
it under some Treaty, and when the facts of their
birth, nationality, residence, and occupation are
perfectly well established, it is impossible that
such facts can be countervailed by a declaration
that they are registered in the French Consulate
or have obtained French papers while outside
Oman.
The only result of such a declaration is to