!['P. 1 733/1904. Muscat Arbitration. (1904-08).' [‎274r] (554/778)](https://iiif.qdl.qa/iiif/images/81055/vdc_100000000365.0x0003de/IOR_L_PS_10_25_0554.jp2/full/!1200,1200/0/default.jpg "'P. 1 733/1904. Muscat Arbitration. (1904-08).' [‎274r] (554/778)")
'P. 1 733/1904. Muscat Arbitration. (1904-08).' [274r] (554/778)
The record is made up of 1 volume (385 folios). It was created in 1903-1906. It was written in English. The original is part of the British Library: 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. Records and Private Papers Documents collected in a private capacity. .
Transcription
This transcription is created automatically. It may contain errors.
ARGUMENT.
Law Officers,
August 4, 1898.
30 in 216, p. 257,
Indian view,
Article X LII,
Brussels Act,
saving.
Foreign Office,
August 4, 1898.
The facts above stated indicate the acts by
French officials which form the ground of com
plaint by the Sultan and the British Government.
It remains to consider their juridical quality.
The Sultan ol Muscat, like every other inde
pendent Sovereign, is entitled to police his own
wafers for the enforcement of his own laws and
to secure compliance with his Treaties with
foi eign Powers, and this sovereign right includes
that of enforcing Quarantine Regulations and
suppressing the Slave Irade ; and, in the absence
of special Conventions, no foreign Power is
entitled to exercise any police powers at all in
the Sultans waters ; and the Sultan is further,
as an independent Sovereign, entitled to exercise
full jurisdiction over all persons within his terri
tory, except so far as by Treaty, usage, or
sufferance he has conceded to a foreign State the
privilege of exterritoriality for its subjects or for
persons whom he recognizes as proteges of such
foreign Power.
Among Christian Powers the privilege of ex
territoriality is conceded only in favour of the
Heads of foreign States, persons of the Corps
Diplomatique, and the members of their family or
household, and foreign public vessels.
In the case of Oriental Powers in Asia and
Africa, capitulations and Treaties have been made
with Christian Powers, admitting within the ter
ritories of such Oriental Powers a special Con
sular jurisdiction over subjects of the Christian
Power there resident, and, de titre grncieux, over
subjects of other Christian Powers which have
no Consuls in the Oriental State, and also to
a qualified and varying extent over the subjects of
the Oriental Power in the service of subjects of
such Christian Power.
The history of the privileges of the latter class
has to a very great extent been a history of
their abuse, and in the Ottoman Empire—the
most considerable of the Mussulman States—
the rights of a Christian Power to take Otto
man subjects under its protection were narrowly
restricted by Regulations of 1863 and 1865,
fully accepted by Christian Powers as consti
tuting the reasonable limits for such protection ;
[1413] G
About this item
- Content
The volume discusses a dispute between the British and French Government’s over the use of French flags on Muscat dhows and individuals dhow A term adopted by British officials to refer to local sailing vessels in the western Indian Ocean. owners from Muscat claiming to be protégés of France owing to their vessels being registered as French.
The two governments agreed in October 1904 for the dispute to be taken to the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague, and the award, which was approved by the British Government in September 1905, was concluded primarily in favour of the British Government’s position. The complete award in English and French can be found at folios 135-141.The papers include reports and discussions on other matters linked to the arbitration case including the limits of Oman territory; the question of ownership of Gwadar; and the legal status and nationality of the Khoja peoples residing within Muscat and Oman. The principal correspondents in the volume include the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Henry Charles Keith Petty-Fitzmaurice, 5th Marquess of Lansdowne); the Secretary of State for India (William St John Fremantle Brodrick, 1st Earl of Middleton); the Secretary to the Government of India in the Foreign Department (Louis William Dane); the Viceroy of India (George Nathaniel Curxon, 1st Marquess Curzon of Kedleston); the Political Agent A mid-ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Agency. and Consul at Muscat (William George Grey); the French Consul at Muscat (Lucien-Ernest-Roger Laronce); the French Ambassador to the United Kingdom (Paul Cambon); and representatives of the Foreign Office and the 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. .
The volume is part 1 of 3. Each part includes a divider which gives the subject and part numbers, year the subject file was opened, subject heading, and list of correspondence references contained in that part by year. This is placed at the back of the correspondence.
- Extent and format
- 1 volume (385 folios)
- Arrangement
The papers are arranged in approximate chronological order from the rear to the front of the volume.
The subject 733 (Muscat Arbitration) consists of 3 volumes, IOR/L/PS/10/25-27. The volumes are divided into 6 parts with parts 1 and 2 comprising one volume each, and parts 4, 5, and 6, comprising the third volume.
- Physical characteristics
Foliation: the main foliation sequence (used for referencing) commences at the front cover with 1 and terminates at the back cover with 386; these numbers are written in pencil, are circled, and are located in the top right corner of the recto The front of a sheet of paper or leaf, often abbreviated to 'r'. side of each folio. An additional foliation sequence, which is also circled, has been superseded and therefore crossed out.
Condition: The spine has become detached from the volume and has been placed in a polyester sleeve at the back of the volume as folio 395. The sleeve may result in some loss of sharpness in the digitised image.
- Written in
- English in Latin script View the complete information for this record
Use and share this item
- Share this item
'P. 1 733/1904. Muscat Arbitration. (1904-08).' [274r] (554/778), British Library: India Office Records and Private Papers, IOR/L/PS/10/25, in Qatar Digital Library <https://www.qdl.qa/archive/81055/vdc_100026193161.0x00009b> [accessed 1 April 2025]
https://www.qdl.qa/en/archive/81055/vdc_100026193161.0x00009b
Copy and paste the code below into your web page where you would like to embed the image.
<meta charset="utf-8"><a href="https://www.qdl.qa/en/archive/81055/vdc_100026193161.0x00009b">'P. 1 733/1904. Muscat Arbitration. (1904-08).' [‎274r] (554/778)</a> <a href="https://www.qdl.qa/en/archive/81055/vdc_100026193161.0x00009b"> <img src="https://iiif.qdl.qa/iiif/images/81055/vdc_100000000365.0x0003de/IOR_L_PS_10_25_0554.jp2/full/!280,240/0/default.jpg" alt="" /> </a>
This record has a IIIF manifest available as follows. If you have a compatible viewer you can drag the icon to load it.https://www.qdl.qa/en/iiif/81055/vdc_100000000365.0x0003de/manifestOpen in Universal viewerOpen in Mirador viewerMore options for embedding images
Copyright: How to use this content
- Reference
- IOR/L/PS/10/25
- Title
- 'P. 1 733/1904. Muscat Arbitration. (1904-08).'
- Pages
- front, back, spine, edge, head, tail, front-i, 2r:9v, 10br:10bv, 10r:13v, 15r:28v, 30r:32r, 34r:41v, 42v:106v, 115r:121v, 135r:135v, 142r:163v, 165r:167r, 168r:170v, 172r:172v, 173v, 175r:194r, 195r:206v, 207v:218v, 220v:232r, 233r:240v, 243r:247v, 249r:298v, 301r:310r, 311r:312v, 314r:323v, 324v, 326r:327v, 333r:349v, 352r:359v, 367r:368v, 375r:376v, 383r:385v, back-i
- Author
- East India Company, the Board of Control, the India Office, or other British Government Department
- Usage terms
- Open Government Licence