File 345/1908 Pt 2 'Mohammerah: situation. Sheikh's dispute with the Vali of Basra. decoration for Sheikh. renewed assurances to Sheikh.' [‎150v] (305/566)

8
unexpectedly, and naturally, particularly as the Sheikh was away, the handing
over of these persons was delayed. A fourth was subsequent^ obtained. They ''
were handed over on 31st May. They were all Arabs from Basrah and uncom
nected with Mohammerah.
Chelmeran, Turkish landowner, killed on his
lands by his own labourers dose to Basrah. Mur
derers said to have fled to Mohammerah, and not
to have been given up. (Mr. Crow’s Despatch
No. 22, dated 22nd April 1910.)
The Sheikh replies that the Wah wrote to him on this subject, and that
he had promised to do his best, though no
proof was offered that the murderer was in
his lands. He has had search made every
where with no result. The Basrah police
in the first place made no serious effort to
catch the man, and the story that he has fled to Mohammerah was, he says,
probably invented by them to explain their own remissness. Chelmeran was an
old friend of the Sheikh and of his house, and he looked on him as an adherent.
Were even Persia and Turkey at war, the Sheikh says he would hand over his.
murderer to the Turks. The latter have not given him the slightest indication
of their reasons for saying that he has fled to Mohammerah, and m any case,
they only suggested it some time after the murder.
5. The Sheikh says this is untrue.
Many criminals, fugitives from justice, are re
ported to be in Mohammerah, and when Sheikh is
asked to hand them over he refuses to do so (Mr.
Crow’s Despatch No. 22, dated 22nd April ipl 0 -)
Mishri, a Turkish landowner, applied to the
Turkish authorities in the usual way to remove
certain cultivators from his lands at Dawasir, but
without success, and trespassers were supported by
Muhammad Chanan, an adherent of the Sheikh.
(Mr. Crow’s Despatch No. 22, of 22nd April
1910 ) N. B .—This is a complaint against Muham-
med Chanan, not against the Sheikh,
He asks who “ reports ” them to be
in Mohammerah ? If the Turks want
individuals from him they have only to
name them, specify their offence, and
satisfy him that the accused are Turkish
subjects. He has frequently handed over even Persian subjects in a friendly way.
Let the Turks produce a list, and give their reasons for making such sweeping
statements. He absolutely denies the receipt of any list, such as that referred to
in Mr. Crow’s letter No. 46, of 27th April, to me, and Mr. Crow himself now say$
he has no confirmation whatever of the statement that the list was sent.
This, the Sheikh says, is simply a repetition of the reply the police in Basrah
make to every succeeding Wali, when taken to task for their remissness, thus
creating bad blood between Mohammerah and Basrah authorities.
6. The Sheikh’s position in this case is best shown by the following extract
from Mr. McDouall’s Despatch No. 55 of
Sheikh lefused or prevaricated over surrender „ .fU Anril T onn •
of persons concerned in Mr. Glanville’s murder in April IQUy .
1906, (Maghi 1 cise). (Mr. Crow’s Despatcn 17, of
10th March 1909, and No. 22, of 22nd April 1910.)
“ As to the Maghil case, I do not agree with Mr. Crow’s opinion that the
Sheikh did not assist. My opinion was that he did, but it is always
very difficult to arrest men of the marsh Arabs, who are protected
by their friends: as to the two men, there was reason to suspect
that they were wanted by the Turks for other reasons ”.
Mr. McDouall’s 18 years’ experience of Mohammerah entitles him to speak
on the subject with authority. See also Mr. Crow’s Despatch No. 25 of 7^
May 1910. When the alleged murderer was brought to Basrah, he was allowed
to escape a few days alter. The Turks’ record in the Maghil case is so bad that
they cannot throw stones at the Sheikh, and the above complaint is, as a matter
of fact, that of Mr. Crow, not of the Wali.
7 . The Sheikh replies that the t( trespassers,” whom Mishri tried to have
removed in the “usual way,” were sub
jects of his own, and belonged to the
Persian tribe of Haji Faisal. Mishri was
trying to cheat the cultivators referred to
out of their legal rights. The Sheikh did
his best for some time before the matter
came to a head to settle things amicably
between Mishri and the cultivators, but without success. Mishti then proposed to
replace them with other Arabs, of the tribe of Muhammad Chanan, but the latter
tribal chief refused to let any men of his tribe replace Haji Faisal’s_ men, as this
would give rise to a blood-feud, or at least to much bitterness. Mishri was very
angry at this, and made a big case of it. He told lies to the Wali, and to the