ملف رقم ١٥٠٨ لسنة ١٩٠٥، جزء ١ "البحرين: الوضع؛ الاضطرابات (١٩٠٤-١٩٠٥)؛ استسلام الشيخ علي؛ مسألة الإصلاحات الإدارية (الجمارك إلخ)" [ظ‎‎١‎٠‎١] (٥٣١/٢٠٧)

J
6 . Referring to paragraphs 7 and 8 of Foreign Department letter under
reply, it will 1 think now be clear to Government that the proposal regarding a
Vazier was made on the supposition that Sheikh Esa would be compelled to
accept him, and his appointment was not associated in any way with the question
of Customs control ; and I concur with Government in thinking that the Sheikh
would be no more likely to accept willingly a nominee of ours as his Vazier than
as the Superintendent of his Customs. The difference that the two projects
presented to my mind was, that having regard to the views of His Majesty’s
Secretary of State in the telegram above quoted, the appointment of an Arab
Vazier to keep order in Manamah had more close connection with Sheikh All’s
lawlessness and the inability of Sheikh Esa to control him, and lay the disinterest
edness of our motives open to less suspicion than did the assumption of British
supervision or control over the Bahrein Customs.
7. Before giving a final answer to the three questions
(a) How the Sheikh may be expected to regard the different proposals
for reform.
(b) How far he is likely to prove amenable to the authoritative advice
and influence of his Political Agent.
(c) In what manner pressure should, if necessary, be applied.
I would prefer to visit Bahrein again if possible. Unfortunately at present
the port is plague-infected and to go there means 9 days’ quarantine on return.
Meanwhile I shall communicate with Captain Prideaux and act on the in
structions conveyed to me in paragraphs (5) (d) and {c) and 9.
•32,
No. 250, dated Bushire, the 4th June 1905.
From— Major P. Z. Cox, C.I.E., Officiating Political Resident in the Persian
Gulf,
To—S. M. Fraser, Esq., C.I.E., Secretary to the Government of India in the
Foreign Department, Simla.
I have the honour to refer to my letter No. 180, dated 23rd April last, with
enclosures regarding Shiekh Ali bin Ahmed of Bahrein.
2. The reply given by Captain Prideaux to Sheikh Ali as directed in para
graph 2 of the aoove letter was given as from himself or me, and Sheikh Esa
and Shiekh Ali seem to expect a categorical answer from Government on the
subject, and are frequently pressing for it.
I am addressing two other communications to the Foreign Department this
„ „ , day regarding Bahrein Affairs which should
esi ency os. 244 an 249. reach your hands on 12th instant, and it
would be convenient if Government could, after considering the latter, let me have
a reply by telegram regarding Sheikh Ali, in time to write to Captain Prideaux
by the Bahrein boat on 14th.
3. I do not see what reply we can well give him other than what has already
been given, namely, that the British Government is great and merciful, but that
his preliminary surrender to a British Man-of-War is the only condition on which
we can discuss his future.
Telegram P., No. 2348-E.B., date the 17th June 1905.
From—The Secretary to the Government of India, Foreign Department, Simla,
To— Major P. Z. Cox, C.I.E., Officiating Political Resident in the Persian
Gulf, Bushire.
You are authorised to reply to Sheikh Esa in the sense of paragraph 3 of
your letter No. 250 of 4th June regarding Sheikh Ah of Bahrein.
You may add that the Government of India concur in the remarks contained
in part 3 of paragraph 3 of Captain Prideaux’s letter to Sheikh Esa, No. 120 of
1 ith April.
4 8
G- C. Press, Simla.—No. C*373 F. D—n-7-o5.—54..—R. S. W.