"14/196 معاقبة شيخ الفجيرة. الشيخ حمد بن عبد الله الشرقي." [و‎‎٦‎٧] (٥٣٠/١٤٣)

J « *1 A. OOULCb CTHC tA^«^LrC*X/
° decjollshed or left alone/It wa a „ Shaikh/S a Id to Shaikh MUhamJ
that hcpould demolish the god own but the latter Shalkh/ro "l would not
R d9,a9llSh U " am ra&tt9ra — undecided at this stage. This is the
. yOU* ' U
ease ■ *••1 o seems it has .been misreproserted to ( I cannot oppose the High
■ Government which rules the Oriental and Occidental nations and all are
P humiUated by its rule. On the other hand; we are helpless and on the.
I 0th ' r La "’ 1 Shalkh Sal <i ^ misrepresenting matters so that the Government
I 7,111 ha 9nrag8d ana t0 demolish out towns and annihiliate ourselves.
1 1 rSqU ! St you t0 kiml y s ©**i a Qadi on your [email protected] to settle
tli© offiss© o©two©n us 3 n eioqot***}
m. a^oraanc© with Goals law and His Apostle's and
. then whatever is proved against me in accordance with God’s and His
Apostle’s laws I will obey and do as it is right. 1 request that the
Government should hot hold me responsible but. for things which are in
accordance with God's and His Prophet’s laws and not to listen to
Interested people.
Shaikh Muhammad bi Saleh Shehhi also called on us some time ago '
•4i* shehhi
with a fe# of his/ follow©r 8 .-f a ^eri^ene taken up and an agree-
|si©nt was arrived at between me and Shaikh Said througllthe medium of the [
Shenhia and a covenant was reached between us as stated above and w©
left the meeting all agreeable to what have been arrived at as stated.
How it is necessary that you shoulc^Qazi to Kalbah and one man 01 ^
lyonr behalf so that they may look into the dispute and whatever is then [
proved against me I will agree to same.
| Translation of letter No 359 dated SStli Rabia* ul Awal /y$
1 from the Residency Agent Shargala to Shaikh Hamad bin Abdullah chief of
l Fujairah. *
| A.C., ■ - l|jg
I have received your letter. You have made mention about the dispute^
[ existing between, you and Shaikh Said bin Hamad Jaserai ©f Kalbah saying
| that whatever he lias reported to hav© been done by you are not committed I
I by you in point of fact. I have now to- mention that the purport of your |
I letter shows that you 'have buried the well because it has not been in his I
| terrtorial limits but that it has been withwthe boundries of someone
J else. It is some years since people are taking water from that wafir'Vou ll
■ have never made any protest against it until now only. The godown is also ll
*witlii n | that Shaikh's terrtory and all bear evidence to this fact.
SSSmI