ملف رقم ١٢٩٠ لسنة ١٩٠٥ "بلاد الرافدين: وصية أيوديا" [و‎‎٧‎٤] (٢٦٠/١٥٢)

men of this type are said to be forthcoming in Karbala and Najaf at the
present moment, but they are not amongst the allowance holders, and
this fact lowers the present administration in the eyes of Shias.
5. As to the second point on which the Government of India
desire the opinion of the Lieutenant Governor, public opinion in Luck
now is unanimous in holding that the bequest was essentially a chari
table one. The money, it is said, is for charity to poor pilgrims and the
mujtahids are merely distributors. Without going into questions of
literal interpretation (and the conference had not the text of the origi
nal document before it) the Lucknow Shias ask what their king had to
do with Persian mujtahids. His object, they say, was to help poor
and deserving pilgrims from his own country. The words of the treaty—■
“ that His Majesty might thereby derive its benefits ” are held to streng
then this view. The spiritual benefit to the King would be derived
directly from charity to the poor, and not from intervention of mujtahids
as such. The mujtahid may, if poor, himself be a beneficiary or he may
be an agent of the distribution, but as offering prayers or performing
ceremonies he would be superfluous. In short, public opinion in Lucknow,
demands nothing less than the devotion to charity of the whole of the
income of the bequest.
6. There is moreover a general wish in Lucknow that some con
trol over the administration of the bequest should be exercised. It was
suggested that there should be a standing committee in Lucknow 7 which
should be consulted as to the selection and removal of allowance holders
and on other questions of importance, such for instance as the proposal
to establish a hospital for the benefit of Indian pilgrims. Mr. Lorimer’s
suggestion that he should himself visit Lucknow and consult with the
heads of the Shia community w^as very well received. Finally the meet
ing requested the Commissioner of Lucknow to express to Government
their thanks for the steps taken to protect the interests of the Indian
Shias.
7. The interpretation of the intention of the bequest, which is
favoured by the Shias of Lucknow, finds most convincing support in the
passage in the original engagement in Persian executed by the King of
Oudh, which is mentioned in the Government of India’s letter of No
vember last. This document, as is remarked in that letter, does not
appear to have been examined when the subject has previously been under
discussion. If Colonel Jarrett, on w 7 hose report the previous orders of
the Government of India were based, had seen this version, he could not,
the Lieutenant Governor thinks, have failed to notice a clause which puts
the intentions of the donor beyond reasonable doubt. The Lieutenant
Governor has taken advice in the matter from Mr. B. Lindsay, I.C.S.,
who was recently Legal Bemembrancer to this Government and is himself
an accomplished Persian scholar. The advice is to the effect that the
written contract between the Governor General and the King of Oudh
consists of two documents,—the original deed in Persian executed by the
King (no. 1 of the photographs) and the bilingual document signed by
the Governor General (no. 3 of the photographs).
The first differs from the second in two important points. The
words translated by Colonel Jarrett as “the supreme theological