"الملف 35/85 IV A 11 التحكيم الخاص بمراكب الداو الشراعية في مسقط" [و‎‎١‎٢‎٢] (٤٩٢/٢٣٨)

in qutvtlon, but Mr* Morl«y doee not think it #f ttftftnti*!
importance to rooist tho Tronch propoMtl in this respect*
But ho is strongly of opinion that tho olaims in paragrapli
ik&t
8 of the French Memorandum t\e Omanis in the service of
f
French resident# in Maskat territory are entitled, under
the Treaty of 1844, to fly the French flag, should bo T%~
vdsted. The acceptance of this principle would make it
possible for the French Consul to issue the flag to any
person who could be colourably represented as tho enployo
of a French rosident; and thereby the settlement effected
by tho decision of the Arbitral Tribunal would loss its
fiMtlity« The questions of international law involfod by
this olaiA are, it is understood, under ths consideration
of ths Isgal Advisers to the Foreign Office.
3* Paragraphs 9 to 14 of the French Memorandum naks ss re
tain reservations as to
(X) the case of orimesi etc., committed by aa Onani
on tho high seas^ while sailing in a dhow flying ths
French flagj
„ (I) the case sf ths 6 dhow owners in Zanzibar covered
by the Agreement of ths 13th May 1904*
As regards the sssond of these oasss it is observsd that
ths Frsnsh Memorandum claims that thsss six parsons are
French prstsgss and as sueh entitled, under ths Frsnsh
Trsaty with Maslcat sf 1844, to ths bsnsfits on land sf