File 600/1905 Pt 6 'Aden Hinterland: Upper Yaffai; treaties with Sultan Kahtan and other Chiefs' [‎63r] (121/212)

Confidential.
Accompaniment to lettev No. 7818, dated the \Qth Decembev 1901,
to the Government of India, Foreign Department.
Letter No. 197, dated the 19 th November 1904.
From—Major-General H. M. Mason, Political Resident A senior ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul General) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Residency. , Aden;
To—C. H. A. Hill, Esq., C.I.E., Acting Secretary to the Government ofjBombay,
Political Department.
I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter No. 4989,
dated the 11th August 1904, calling for the report required by the Government
of 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. Despatch No. 30 (Secret), dated the 15tli July 1904, wherein His
Majesty’s Secretary of State for India has indicated the need for a clear under
standing as to the intentions and limitations of the protectorate agreements
entered into with the Arab tribes in the Aden Hinterland, and desires to be
favoured with the views of the Indian Government as to the extent of their
obligations to the tribes and their means of executing them.
2. In reply, I have the honour to state that the Secretary of State’s remarks
do not apparently have reference to the increased responsibilities devolving
upon the British Government in consequence of the demarcation of the frontier.
These have been already discussed in the correspondence regarding the proposal
for a frontier levy and the new treaty with the Amir of Dthala. I am now
called upon to define precisely the obligations imposed upon us by the existing
protectorate treaties. What these liabilities are seems to me to be clearly
understood as will appear from Bombay Government letter to the Government
of India, No. 5151, dated the 14th July 1902, and my predecessor’s letters
Nos. 144 and 167, dated respectively the 28th April and 7th June 1903.
3 . I may, however, again point out that though under the earlier agree
ments we only made peace and friendship wiih the tribes, and they undertook
to keep open the trade routes and protect travellers on them, the later protec
torate treaties invariably provide for the following stipulations as succinctly
summarized in paragraph 5 of General Maitland’s confidential letter No. 76,
dated the 2nd April 1904 :— ,
(I) Peace and friendship and freedom of intercourse, that is to say, the
subjects of each shall be free to come and go in the territories of the other,
and shall mutually be accorded protection and respect.
(II) Then come the protectorate clauses—
(&) The gracious favour and protection of His Majesty the King-
Emperor is accorded to the territory of the Chief and its depen
dencies.
(6) The Chief binds himself and his successors and his tribe to refrain
from entering into any correspondence or treaty with any other
nation or power; and also promises to give immediate notice of any
attempt at interference.
(c) The Chief binds himself and his successors not to cede, or otherwise
dispose of, any part of his territories to any power other than the
British Government.
(III) The Chief promises, on behalf of himself, his successors and his
tribe, to keep open the roads in his territory and to protect persons usin^-
them for the purposes of trade whether going towards Aden or comin"
therefrom. °
4. The first of these stipulations does not impose any obligation except
that when the Arab Chiefs and their followers come to Aden they are to be
afforded protection and treated with respect. The word “ respect ” is in the
minds of the tribesmen ordinarily synonymous with entertainment in the guest-
CON 1845