مجموعة ٣٠/٩٠ "المطالبة الفارسية بجزيرة البحرين" [ظ‎‎٤‎١‎٥] (١٠٦٢/٨٤٣)

F.O. to I.O.
1.2.1869.
From Gen.
M olisin
Khan,
11.2.1869.
To Gen,
Mob sin
Khan,
5.3.1869.
Gen. Mohsin
Khan to
Duke of
Argyll,
13.1.1869.
22
ae Governor over .to to »e°i
g* ftS&JiWS tfSsS “ "P ” to British
SheAh to fi 11 ",, 18 eedin g 8 had taken place at a time
“■hen ’‘ Sheikh Md. bin Khalifah, the Governor of Bahrein,
was openly avowing his ^"““Xed bS to be
SpS^Sn^roof of which the Persian flag was
flying over his fort. .
82 Her Maiesty’s Minister at Tehran was instructed
to communicate a" suitable explanatory statement to the
PersTan Government. The Foreign Office suggested, how
ever that it might be advisable, m the event ol sum a
proceedings again becoming necessary,
diould be had with that Government. Winle tins question
wririll under consideration a formal protest a|^“ st th ^
Resident’s action was received (11th February 18bJ) fio
the Persian Charge d’Affaires in London, who complained,
titer alia that the Resident had sunk three ships belonging
to the Governor of Bahrein and fired on his palace on which
the Persian flag flew, and requested that the British Govern
ment would give orders for the repair of the damage caused.
Re was informed in reply that “the Sheikh of Bahrein was
an independent chief with whom the British Government
had treaty engagements and whom they must hold strictly
to the performance of those engagements.
This contention the Persian representative disputed,
and in support of his view he forwarded letters addressed
“ from 1858 to 1869 by the Sheikh of Bahrein to His Imperial
Majesty the Shah and the Prince The
translations of these letters are dated 9th Apnl and 1-th
April 1869 respectively. From internal evidence it seems
probable that they were, however, written m I860 on the
occasion of the visit to Bahrein of the Persian envoy, Mirza
Mehdi Khan (paragraph 67 above). They acknowledge the
receipt of a Firman from the Mirza (apparently recognising
Sheikh Md. as Sheikh and accompanying a Firman and a
Sword of Honour for Sheikh Ali). They state emphatically
that-Bahrein forms part of Persia, and has always done so
They refer to an agreement reached for the future payment
of tribute; remark that “the slight neglect which was
lately shown on our part towards Your Imperial Majesty s
Government was because they had not for a while superin
tended and protected us, but as now the Government of W
Imperial Majesty has intended by sending over Mirza Mehdy
to enquire into and manage the affairs lieie, I, with in}
brother and all the inhabitants, feel quite ready to declare
at once that we are most willing to render any services
required from us towards Your Majesty’s Government, being
already aware that Bahrein (Persian Gulf) is part of Persia,”
and add “ . . . I will hasten to hoist the flag on my residence
bearing the Lion and the Sun which are the signs of the
Persian Standard.”
British Note o! 29th April 1869.
84. The question of the reply to be given to this further
protest was carefully considered between the India Office
and the Foreign Office. The Duke of Argyll, then Secretary
LO. to F.O., ^ g tate f or India, remarked that although he was of opinion
21.4.1869, t p at t p e Rne of policy which had hitherto been pursued
0 f re oar ding the Sheikh of Bahrein as an independent
sovereign, and of refusing to recognise the right of
sovereignty advanced by Persia, as had been done in 1845,
1848 and 1860, could not now be abandoned without very
serious risk of endangering the peace of the Gulf, yet that
“ he was not blind to the expediency of aymdmg all causes
of unnecessary irritation at the Court of Tehian and that