File 87/1926 Pt 2 'Arabia: Bin Saud: Relations with H.M.G. Revision of Treaty.' [‎229r] (145/840)

whom copies of both letters are being sent), it would be
consistent, and would seam not inlikely to prepare the way
for the inclusion of the suggested article in the new
Treaty, to make representations at once to the oultan of
Nejd against his subordinates violations of the under
taking given in 1916. The Secretary of State for India
therefore supports the Government of India's reconmendation
on this aspect of the matter, and on the issue of advice
to the Trucial Chiefs not to have direct dealings with
Najdi officials.
The actions of the 'inir of Hasa to which exception
could rigjitly be taken seem to be the hanging of a Hasani
refugee in Baraimi, and the notification to the Sheikhs of
Abu Dhabi and Dibai that the Mr of Hasa had taken the
Awanir and Oaru tribes under the Sultan of Nejd's protection
(paragraph 8 of Colonel Prideaux's despatch); the despatch
of the letter (enclosure D) to the Shaikh of Debai (para
graph 13): the despatch of police to Shargah (paragraph
14); and the Mr's intervention in judicial cases
(paragraph 16). The Secretary of State, as at present
advised, for the reasons indicated in my letter j.V’ 585,
doubts the expediency of protesting against the levy of
Zikat r objectionable though this may be.
Now does it seem advisable to ask the Sultan of
Nejd, as the Political Hesident reconraenda, to compel the
.Jmirt of Hasa "to observe the boundary accepted on 1922",
unless Colonel Prideaux is in possession of clear evidence
that the Baud did corrrciit himself either in his conversa
tions with Sir P. Cox, or subsequently, to definite
acceptance of the Salawah Say line ae the Eastern
Boundary of Nejd. With a view to the eventual detemina-
tion by Treaty of this boundaiy, as suggested in my
letter