"دليل الخليج. مجلد I. القسم التاريخي. الجزء II. ج. ج. لوريمر. ١٩١٥" [‎٢‎٤‎٨‎٦] (١٢٦٢/١٠٠٣)

2486
and he further pointed out the practical uselessness of stringent action
upon one stretch of coast so long as the rest of the Gulf littoral
remained opened to the slave traffic. In answer to this reference the
Bombay Government ruled that the article referred to the carriage by
sea of raided slaves only^ inasmuch as the mere transportation of pur
chased slaves from one place to another could not^ except by an abuse
of language^ be described as " plunder and piracy." The principle
thus laid down was strictly observed in practice^ and no action against
slave dealers has ever, it is believed^ been taken under the article ; but
the meaning continued to be debated so late as 1841^ when the Govern
ment of India held that, having remained a dead-letter for twenty years^
the article could not in justice or prudence be enforced suddenly and
without warning in the wider interpretation. By the conclusion of
the Engagements of 1847, relating to Trucial ''Oman and Bahrain, the
question was deprived of its practical importance.
Reception of The question of the reception of fugitive slaves on board British
fugitive vessels, especially in territorial waters, and of their subsequent emanci-
slaves on pation was a delicate one of which a solution was not reached without
board pub lie difficulty ; its settlement depended not on the agreements with local
1 "is^- P owers ^ none of which dealt with the subject, but on considerations of
X884. S ' international law and usage.
1856. 1856 a slave, not of recent importation, took refuge on board
H. M.S. a Clive, ^ at the time lying off Bahrain^ and was restored by
Lieutenant Disbrowe, Assistant Political Eesident, who happened to
be on board, at the request of the owner; and the Assistant Residents
action was held by the higher authorities to have been correct.
1871-73- In 1872 two slaves made their way on board H.M.S. "Magpie"
while at anchor in the inner roads of Bushehr, and their surrender was
claimed from Colonel Pelly, the Political Eesident,—in one case by the
Persian Slave Commissioner at Bushehr^ and in the other by a British
protected subject; Colonel Pelly, on the ground that the incident had
taken place in Persian territorial waters, handed over the slave de*
manded by the Slave Commissioner, but in the other case, as the
claimant was not a Persian subject and did not appear to be the actual
owner, he liberated the slave. In August 1872 a somewhat similar
case happened on the B.M.S. " Hugh again in Persian terri
torial waters; but in this instance Colonel Pelly refused to give up the
slaves, though claimed by their masters, and caused them to be sent to
Bombay. On the night of the 31st August 1873 a more important
case than either of the preceding occurred, through the swimming off
of a slave to the B.M.S. a May Frere near the uninhabited island
of Zirko, from a fleet of 7 3 pearl boats anchored in the vicinity; the
slave sought and received protection with the result that all the pearl
boats near weighed and prepared to leave, lest their slaves should desert
and be freed.
1876. This case led to a preference to Her Majesty^s Government, and a
discussion followed which resulted, though not until August 1876, in
the issue by the admiralty of definite instructions as to the reception
The