File 600/1905 Pt 5 'Aden Hinterland: Treaty with Sultan of Balahaf' [‎131r] (45/152)

35
sharers, nor what the shares in the revenue should he, nor how Sultan Saleh hin
Abdulla will satisfy Sultan Ghalib of Shehr and Mokalla as regards the
negotiation which he will now be unable to carry to conclusion.
No. 2952, dated Aden Residency An office of the East India Company and, later, of the British Raj, established in the provinces and regions considered part of, or under the influence of, British India. , the 21st May 1905.
From—M a joe-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—The Secretary to the Government of Bombay From c. 1668-1858, the East India Company’s administration in the city of Bombay [Mumbai] and western India. From 1858-1947, a subdivision of the British Raj. It was responsible for British relations with the Gulf and Red Sea regions. , Political Department.
In continuation of my letter No. 2211, dated the 16th April 1905, and
with reference to your telegram, dated the 17th May 1905, regarding Balahaf
affairs I have the honour to forward herewith copy of a memorandum submit
ted to me by Capt lin F. de B. Hancock, my First Assistant, whom I deputed
on the 7th May to proceed to Balahaf in the It. I. M. S. “ Elphinstoneand
make local enquiries on the points which Government in their letter No. 1806,
dated the 18th March 1905, required to be further elucidated.
2. Captain Hancock has taken considerable pains to go minutely into the
whole question and the result of his enquiries has been to confirm my own
views that Mohsin bin Saleh is the only man capable of being the Saltan of the
Wahidi of Balahaf. At the two interviews I have had with the principal
Sheikhs and Sayids of the tribe on the 15th and 19th instant, notes of w hich
are herein enclosed, they have been unanimous in their support of Mohsin as
the titular Sultan and at the second of the interviews have signed a document,
herewith forwarded, signifying, their desire that Saleh bin Abdulla should be for
mally deposed in favour of Mohsin bin Saleh whom they select for the chiefship,
and expressing their consent to abide loyally by their selection if the same
receives the sanction of Government.
3. As to the nature of the revenues of Balahaf also the memorandum
confirms my views. They consist merely of the customs receipts of the port,
inclusive of certain transit dues, wdiich it transpires that formally Mohsin col
lected at Al Hauta but are now amalgamated with the Balahaf dues. No ter
ritorial or other rights are included beyond the right of obtaining fuel and water
for Balahaf from the village of Jala’a and the rights of salvage of any wrecks
that may occur on the strip of shore in the vicinity.
4. All the Sultans of Balahaf however have, irrespective of their shares
in the revenues of the port of Balahaf, certaiu territorial rights in the interior
of the country ; and from the deeds of sale passed to the Kayti it w’ould appear
that Sultan Saleh bin Abdull t has endeavoured to part, nor only with his share
in the revenues of the port of Balahaf, but also with some such territorial rights,
For in the documents reference is made to the “ famous and well-known half
of the port of Balauaf and of the port Kisat Jala’a together with all rights of
administration and suzerainty on the coast and inland on all sides of the port.”
The acquisition of such territorial lights must presumably have been in the
mind of Sultan Ghalib when negotiating for the purchase of Sultan Saleh
Abdulla’s share in tbe Balahaf revenues. Such alienation of territorial rights
without the previous consent of Government is an open violation of Sultan
Saleh bin Abdulla’s treaty obligations, while, on the other hand, the extension of
territory of the Kayti implied on the above alienation was a matter of which
Sultan Ghalib should, it seems to me, in view of the opinion expressed by the
Government of India in paragraph 2 tof Foreign Department letter No. 1094-
E. A., dated the 5th July 1897, to which I have already drawn attention in
paragraph 2 of my letter No. 260, dated the 23th January 1905, have duly ap
prised this Residency An office of the East India Company and, later, of the British Raj, established in the provinces and regions considered part of, or under the influence of, British India. beforehand. Moreover, the vehemence with which the
Wahidi tribesmen of Balahaf repudiate the very idea of alienation of any
portion of their territory to the Sultan of Shehr and Mokalla, whose policy of
territorial extension they seem to view with alarm, leads me to believe that there
will be trouble in the event of the sale of Sultan Saleh’s share being actually
given effect to. I therefore reiterate my opinion that the transaction should
not be confirmed by Government. Even were it otherwise, that no alienation
of territory was involved and Sultan Saleh simply parted with his share in the