"التحكيم في قضية مراكب الداو الشراعية في مسقط. محكمة التحكيم الدائمة في لاهاي. السماح برفع الأعلام الفرنسية على مراكب الداو الشراعية في مسقط. القضية بالنيابة عن الحكومة البريطانية". [و‎‎٢‎٧] (٢٠٨/٦٢)

15
THE QUESTIONS OF FACT INVOLVED.
The facts relating to the present controversy
are not numerous or complicated.
No attempt is made by France to deny the
accuracy of the British account of the incident of
the quarantine-breakers, or to suggest that any one
of these men was on a vessel under the French
flag when sent to quarantine, or when he
escaped or when he was recaptured. Under
these circumstances Consular jurisdiction over
the men seems to have been claimed under the
Treaty of 1844; at least no other ground is
suggested. Nor again is any attempt made to
contradict the substance of the British account
British Case,p. 21. of the incidents of Suweik and Debai. The former
case was a claim to deal with the succession to
Salim-bin-Mahommed which must have been a
question of purely Mahommedan law affecting
d native of Suweik. The second related to the
use of the French flag by the son of the above
Salim. If new papers had been given to the son
after the death of the father in 1902, there would
have been a breach of M. Cambon's undertaking
of the 26th June, 1900.
Appendix 3, p. 43. Since the delivery of the British Counter-Case
a report has been received from Zanzibar that an
Arab, who seems to be the Ali-bin-Salem (No. 17
on the revised French list), has come under
suspicion of slave-trading, and has been deprived
of his French papers by M. Ottavi, the French
Consul at Zanzibar.
The references in the French <£ Contre-
Memoire " to the Debai incident (pp. 68-69) make
it expedient- to restate that incident in somewhat
greater detail. Debai is on the Pirate Coast, and
is not part of the dominions of the Sultan of
Muscat, and its Chief is one of the Trucial Chiefs
referred to in the British Counter-Case, p. 21.
The representations made by the French Consul
to the Sultan of Muscat seem to have "been
made in the belief that the Chief of Debai
was a dependent or feudatory of the Sultan
of Muscat, which is not the case. The
French Consul, also, on the 24th March, 1904,
wrote direct to the Chief of Debai the letter of
Appendix 2, p. 43. which a copy is annexed. The action of the British
Consul at Muscat, with reference to the Debai
[733] D