مجموعة ٣٠/٨٧(٢) الجزء I "قطر: الامتياز النفطي." [و‎‎٥‎٠] (١٣١٠/١٢٢)

,*1 'ti
rr r , < ;•
kJ
- 2
/ S<? J
the Coiapany stopping their operations,,, M regards your
reference to what I said in tsy letter of 26th Jaraad ul
rhani 1361 (11-7-42), it does not, in any way, convey
the meaning you au gest. I assure you that what I wrote
in letters of 26th Jamd ul rhani and 8th Shaban 1361
is exactly what I mean, and 1 wrote those letters with
sincerity and good faith. If you refer to my letters in
question, from which you quoted extracts that suited you,
you will find thut my meaning .^^not as you have now
explained, but you have misinterpreted what I wrote.
In my letter of 26th Jamad ul Thani 1361, at the beginning
of the paragraph from \fr ich you quoted, I said f, You observed
during our conversation in this connection, when you read
Article lb of the Agreement, that there was no provision
in that Agreement relating to this matter. Yut you directed
my attention to the point of view of His Majesty’s lovern-
ment in this matter”. If you read the following phrase,
it will be clear to you what I really meant, a meaning
which cannot escape you. ”And I found some justification
in what you said”, and later, taking into consideration
existing conditions, 1 said {t There is no ambiguity in it”.
I meant that I agree to your wishes and those of your
Government only. 0* Political Agent, how do you want me
now to change the meaning of what I have said and agree to
the view point of the Company about the stoppage of their
operations ? If what I said in ay letters to you satisfies
you and the Company, well and good. Please refer to the
second paragraph of the same letter where you will find
that I said f, Ir I reply to Your Honour’s request on the
point mentioned above my reply will be restricted to one
matter only”. This paragraph is clear and every one can
understand its meaning and to what it refers. I wonder
O’ Political /gent how this paragraph which is contained
In the same letter escapes you, and you quote certain words
the meaning of which is clear whep they are connected with
the preceding ones* 1 am sure that a person of your quali
ties fully understands what I really mean* The last sen
tence of ay letter dated 26th JifliSfl ul Thanl 1361 (11-7-42)
is, however, connected with the preceding one in which I
said,' ”1 explained everything to you during get conversation
and made the matter fully clear to you. xf you can assure
me that all that I have said - and it is an unambiguous
right - will be carried out, it ean then be said that there
is justification for what you told me verbally.” 1 still
affirm what I said previously. < hat I said to you is clear
and what you said to me verbally is what I have explained,
namely, you only expressed your wish and that of the 'Govern
ment, whereas I said that as far as the Company were con
cerned there was no real justification for them to stop
their operations* If, however, what I said to you is
carried out, then it can be said that thei'e is justification
takin into consideration your point of view and wish.
Youare not the same as the Company* How do you wish me to
agree to the paragraph which has been framed in the state
ment in this connection ? I am sura that if you will tninx
over the matter you will realise that I was justified In
what I have said.
Usual Gnding. \
mm