"ملف رقم: E/3. قطر - الشيوخ جاسم و أحمد آل ثاني ووفاة الشيخ جاسم في ١٩١٣" [و‎‎٣‎٣] (٣٩٤/٧٧)

[ 15 ]
Telegram No. 4042.E. B., dated the SUtli November 1904.
From The Secretary to the Government of India in the Foreign Department, Calcutta,
To—M ajor P. Z. Cox., C.I.E., Officiating Political Resident in the Persian Gulf,
Bushire.
Will you kindly expedite a reply to Foreign Department letter
No. o305-B. B., dated the 3rd October 1904, regarding the proposed treaty
with the Sheikh of El Katr. If you have not already addressed Captain
Prideaux on the subject, you should consult him now.
Telegram, dated the 12th December 1904.
Irom—M ajob P. Z. Cox, C.I.E., Political Resident in the Persian Gulf, Bushire,
To—-The Secretary to the Government of India in the Foreign Department, Calcutta.
Regarding Foreign Department No. 3305-E. B., dated the 3rd October
1904,1 have consulted Captein Prideaux. We beg to express the foUowin-
views. The primary reason which Ahmed-bin-Thani has for desiring a pro
tective agreement with the British Government is in order that the public
knowledge that he is under our protection may strengthen his hands in helpino-
us to maintain order. Publicity would thus be necessary and difficult to
prevent.
Secondly, we consider that any agreement to which were attached the
precautions and reservations advocated by His Britannic Majesty's Ambassador
would defeat its own object and would seem to imply the recognition for the
first^ time of some Turkish rights in Katr. It might further preclude our
obtaining completely satisfactory agreement at a more opportune season.
Although there can be no question of the desirability of protectino- Sheikh
Katr, recent instructions regarding Koweit embolden me to indicate Ihe evil
effect which would be caused if an agreement were entered into now which
the policy of His Majesty's Government might require to be withdrawn a few
months hence under pressure from the Porte.
Might it not be more easy to dispose of possible Turkish objections if we
were to content ourselves for the present with getting Sheikh Ahmed to write
a letter to the Political Agent saying that, owing to the abdication of Sheikh
Jasim, the chiefship had devolved on himself and that he had decided to write
and inform us that he considered and accepted as binding the agreement con
cluded with us in 1868 by his predecessor ?
As a proof that the above-mentioned agreement has never lapsed^ we
could presumably quote the action mentioned in Volume 10, page 115, of
Aitchison. As possible disputes regarding succession may make' matters more
difficult later on, it is important that an agreement should be concluded before
the death of the aged Sheikh Jasim.
{Becened on 12th December 1904, with Political Secretary's letter No. 4S
dated 25th November 1904.)
PERSIA AND ARABIA . [JJoyember 14.1
CONFIDENTIAL . Section 2. "
No. 1.
3Ir. Towuley to the Marquess of Lansdovme.—( Received November 14 >
(No. 863.) " ;
My Lord, Constantinople, November 8, 1904.
With reference to Sir Nicholas 0'Conor's despatch No. 516, Secret, of
the 28th June, relative to the Mudirate of Wakra, I have the honour to transmit
herewith copy of a despatch which I have received from Mr. Acting Consul