Coll 30/111 'British Naval Stations in: Establishments at Khor Quwai and Bahrain. Evacuation of Henjam and Basidu.' [‎549v] (1105/1154)

*** •
o .nnlinff station, had leased of the Imam of Muscat a certain site for
tl’Tsmtion He "ailed to mind the engagement we had entered into in 1862 not
to trench on the independence of the Imam of Muscat and reminded me also of the
arrangement into which Muscat had entered m the time of Louis Pmlippe to allow
0 Fienchmen to hold land, or receive leases or alienations of and in the territory
(\tl %nhnn He apprehended that the action of the Irench Government m taking
a coaHng station was within their powers. 1 said that the matter had been in the
hands of the Indian Government, and 1 was not absolutely certain of the position
in which it stood but I would enquire. But it appeared to me, upon his own
Imminent of it that France had gone somewhat beyond her treaty rights. If a
statement of it, that trance naa ^ ^ d
^ State accepts the lease of the territory of another potentate it practically interferes
in the independence of that potentate and the integrity of his dominions. We have
avamnips to illustrate that proposition recently. According to my
epenclence Oi inai poieuune c, nave
had sundry examples to illustrate that proposition recently. According to my
i the en°aeminent ol 1862, it is not competent for hiance, as a State, to
^ ^ T c ti/ r i -C— . •
reading of ttie engagemem m aou^, it - —' —— Y7^’^7™- .
accept a lease from the Imam of Muscat, because so far as that lease extends it is
interference with the independence of a sovereign. She can no more accept a lease
than she can accept an alienation. This view, of course, would not apply to a lease
t given to a French citizen in his private capacity. I would, however, enquire into
The matter, which I did not think was of very great importance, but my impression
is that a coaling station leased by the French Government from the Imam of
VvJ. c cai 1 . 1 . vy v_/j u ■ 1AA t 7 - 1 - 1 J- 1 Jg-I VyOkJlVyii.
is Liiau a cuamifs ^ French Government from the Imam of
Muscat would be an infraction of the Declaration of 1862.
F.O. to
Paris, 58,
22.2.99,
P. 1781/99.
34. On 22nd February, a week after the public cancellation olf the French
concession bv the Sultan, M. Gambon was again received by Lord Salisbury. “ He
complained very earnestly of the excessive action which he thought the Admiral
had pursued towards the Imam of Muscat and of the publicity which had been
given to this affair, which induced the newspapers to adopt a very disagreeable
tone towards the French Government. ... I replied to him that I had examined
into the matter since he spoke to me last time and I was compelled to adhere to tbe
view which I had laid before him. It seemed to me that the Treaty of 1862, whicb
bound both France and England to respect the independence of the Imam of Muscat,
was seriously threatened if either Power, acting as a sovereign State, could take
from the Imam a lease of any portion of his territory. If it could be done for a
small piece of ground, it could be done over a large piece ; and after what bad
taken place in China it was impossible to say that the practical independence of
the Imam would not, in regard to such portions of territory, be impaired.
“His Excellency declined entirely to admit my interpretation of the Treaty but,
setting that question aside, he thought that our view on that subject, which was
certainly open to discussion, need not have been asserted by a threat of
bombardment.
“ 1 mentioned, and I reiterated the opinion in order that he might be under no
doubt with respect to it, that France had so far violated the Treaty by taking a
lease of a portion of the territory of the Imam. I quite admitted that the affair had
not been conducted as quietly as I think it well might have been. ... I admitted
that in the matter of sentiment he had a grievance, though in the matter of
substance our action was entirely right. I also told him that we had for a great
number of years special engagements with the Imam which involved some payments
of money on our side and a very rigid prohibition of the alienation of his own
territory on his side. The existence of these stipulations must be taken into account,
if the action ol onr authorities had seemed to be rather summary, and they had
undoubtedly been actuated by the fear lest the lease which France had obtained
should only be a step on the road to the obtaining of a portion of the Imam s ,
littoral in permanent possession.
His Excellency assured me that any such designs were very far from the
contemplation of his Government and he was quite willing to make any declaration
w nch was necessary to place the innocent intentions of his Government beyond
oou it. But he asked me whether it would not be possible, after such declarations
ac. men made, to provide in some manner for the establishment of a coaling
s ation, which was really a matter of great necessity to France. He said that a
suggestion which I had made on a previous occasion, and repeated again, that it
1 . )e 7 l ^ eri name °f a French citizen, was made difficult on the present
ceasion ecause the English newspapers had appeared to dictate such a course in
a somewhat threatening manner, and he thought that the same end might he arrived
lance ormally disclaimed any inference from her possession of a coal depo
if Bonde
St His Ex
til to be abl
gaUisli a coa
lerance. Bi
itlis bad b<
lilmam migb
I After 1
1 Governm
iM in July
lie Sultan)
I coaling pu
; lie grant n
lions as i
i should b
ications.
i in the c
m entitled
Britain,
.iege whicl
m of the d
II. The
nr
as
of
Tn
of
an
vie
H.
In
ex
Fr
Hr,
ofi
an
Q(
flan
tr
F
tl
a
e: