File 87/1926 Pt 2 'Arabia: Bin Saud: Relations with H.M.G. Revision of Treaty.' [‎300r] (287/840)

con side ratal e importance to a provision of this kind which
he would consider gave him some tangible recognition of
his independence, and also that the provision was
innocuous.The Conference agreed that, subject to the views
of the Government of India, the first two paragraphs of this
Article should be retained, but that, in the second
paragraph, the words "at Jeddah or elsewhere" should be
inserted after the word "consulate".
The Conference felt that some difficulty would
arise in the interpretation of the words "habitually resident
in the last paragraph of this Article and in the last
paragraph of Article 6 , and it was agreed that these two
paragraphs should be omitted, a new Article being added
which should provide that nothing should be done under
Articles 4, 5 and 6 which might be contrary to His Majesty’s
Government’s policy of non-interference in the Holy Places.
Article 5 . The Conference agreed that the qualifying
clause;- "as defined in Article 4 ,, should be added after
the word"person 8 ". The Conference did not feel that it
would be possible to accept the view of the Government of
India that this Article and Article 6 should be reduced
to some general provision, since it was important to
safeguard the position of British subjects in the Pejaz,
since Kis Majesty’s Government have never auraitted the
abolition of capitulations in that part of the Ottoman Empire
which became detached therefrom during the war. Moreover
His Majesty’s Government were bound to take into
consideration the views of Foreign Powers who were anxious
to retain these rights. The Conference agreed, however,
to