"١/١ المجلد II العلاقات الكويتية السعودية" [و‎‎٧‎١] (٥٣٤/١٥٠)

Ӵ is count Mor ley is not aware on what grounds the opinion
expressed by the Marquess of Lansdowne in his memorandum
of 21st March 1902 is based, but he observes that the language
used is very tentative, and, so far as he knows, the subject
was never pursued along the lines suggested by His Lordship,
except in the case of the attack on the immediate neighbourhood
of Koweit threatened by Ibn Rashid in the autumn of 1902.
It will be seen from the Oxovernment of India’s telegram of
6 April that this incident does not affect their opinion that
our general obligations extend, to the limits of Koweit
territory as described in Vol.II pp.1059-1051 of Lorinerts
(Gazetteer of the Persian Gulf, copy of which is in your
possession. In this Lord Mor ley concurs: that is to say he
thinks that in the event of unprovoked aggression by the Turks
or by Arab tribes under Turkish control, upon those limits,
H.M.G. could not abstain from using their "good offices 5 ’ in
the Sheikh’s favour. But the term ’’good offices” is a very
vague one, which H.M.G. are at liberty to interpret at their
discretion, and which they would doubtless interpret with
more or less strictness according to the nature and locality
of the aggression, and all the circumstances of the case.
It would, however, in His Lordship’s opinion, be very
impolitic to attempt, in dealing with the Sheikh, to writtie
down the extent of our obligations, since such a course would
fill his mind with suspicions and could not fail to affect
*' o ur
unfavourably/prestige in the Persian Gulf...."
11. The P.O.replied on 9 May 1911 that Sir n.Grey
concurred ”in the view of the Government of India, snared by
Viscount Morlev, that these obligations extend to tne whole
territory of the Sheikh as described in the passage of
Lorimer’s Gazetteer of the Persian Gulf to which your letter