"تعرفة مسقط" [و‎‎١‎٩‎٦] (٤٢٢/٤٠٠)

P.-6148-N. [Serial No. (4)], second paragraph of Acheson's letter to
Barrett of 24th September F. 334-N.-29 (File No. 334-N.). On receipt
of Resident's reply please let me have your considered views. Not only
would Sultan expect an allowance if he abdicated but arms Traffic subsidy
ceases as matters stand with tenure of power by him. Effect would
clearly be very serious on Muscat linauces even should increase in tariff
go thro^sh and pressure to postpone abdication may have to be considered.
(4)
Letter from the India Office , No. P. 6148, dated the 28th November
1929.
I am directed by the Secretary of State for India to refer to your
letter of the 4:th September 1929, No. F. 225-N. [Serial No. (2)], and to
his telegram No. 3674, dated 26th November [Serial No. (3)].
2. Copy is enclosed of a letter which has been addressed to the Foreign
Office. As the question of Muscat finances may become an urgent one if
the present Sultan abdicates (especially if in that event the existing Arms
Traffic subsidy were discontinued), the Secretary of State would suggest
that it might be worthwhile to examine the question of increasing the
tariff except in respect of those goods which are covered by the provisions
of the treaties with the United States of America, France and the
Netherlands If it should appear that the desired increase in the cus
toms revenue could be obtained while preserving the existing treaty rights
of those three countries, and if the practical difficulties of differentiation
could be surmounted, it might become desirable to impose the increased
duties on other goods (which presumably at present constitute the vast
bulk of the imports), without waiting for the conclusion of negotiations
which are likely to occupy a considerable time with France and the United
States of America.
3. The Secretary of State would be glad to learn whether the Govern
ment of India are satisfied that the increase in the tariff which they suggest
would not be neutralised by a diversion of trade to Debai and Sur, or by
an increase in smuggling. He would also be glad of the views of the Grov-
ernment of India as to the practicability of establishing the Sultan's
authority, and an efficient customs control, at Sur.
(4-A.)
{Received ou 22'vid Decetuhev 1929 with Political Secvetury s letter No. 49,
dated the 5th December 1929.)
Letter from the India Office , No, P. 6567, dated the 2/ th November
1929.
With reference to the correspondence noted below, of which copies
have already been sent to the Foreign Office, I am directed by the Secretary
of State for India to forward, for the information of the Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs, copy of a letter dated the 4th September from tiie
(rovernment of India [Serial No. .(27)^], on the question of an inciease in
the Muscat tariff :—
Telegram from Viceroy, No. 304-S., dated 22nd January 1929
[Serial No. (74) in File No. 248].
Telegram from Political Resident, No. 60, dated 24th January 1929.
Letter from Political Resident, to Secretary of State for India,
No. 95-S., dated 2nd April 1929, with enclosures.
2. On the general position of His Majesty's Government in Muscat
and on French American and Dutch interests in that country since 1908,
reference may conveniently be made to paragraphs 53-59 and 76-78 of
the India Office memorandum on Muscat, reprinted m 1. G. 13. bo far