'File II. IRAQ (3) Vol. 1 Shaikh of Kuwait's Date Gardens on the Shatt-al Arab. (Kuwait's relations with Turkish Govt. and Turkish demand that Kuwaitis should take out Turkish Nationality Certificates)' [‎61r] (125/636)

[Confidential!]
No. 288, dated Busliire, the 30th January (received 8th February) 1910.
From— Major A. P. Trevor, LA., First Assistant Resident in charge of
Residency An office of the East India Company and, later, of the British Raj, established in the provinces and regions considered part of, or under the influence of, British India. ,
To—The Secretary to the Government of India in the Foreign Department.^,- j-
With reference to Foreign Department endorsement No. 1594-E.A., dated
7th October 1909, I have the honour to forward, for the information of the
Government of India, a copv of the
No. C..7, dated the i8th January 1910 . mar ginally-noted letter on the subject of
Sheikh Mubarak’s Fadhagiya property, which I have received from the Political
Agent, Koweit. ^ >r v j
No. C.-7, dated Koweit, the 18th January 1910 (Confidential).
From— Captain W. H. I. Shakespear, I.A., Political Agent A mid-ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Agency. , Koweit,
To—The lirst Assistant Resident in charge of the Residency An office of the East India Company and, later, of the British Raj, established in the provinces and regions considered part of, or under the influence of, British India. , Bushire.
I have the honour to invite a reference to the correspondence ending with
your Second Assistant’s endorsement No. 2667, dated the 24th October 1909,
regarding the claim advanced by the Turkish authorities for the registration of
Sheikh Mubarak as an Ottoman subject as a proceeding necessary to the legal
transfer of landed property purchased by him.
2. In my letter No. 444, dated the 7th August 1909, I reported that the
Sheikh was inclined to leave matters in status quo and that the new Wali, an
Arab by name Sayid Arif Bey, was not hostile, -whilst the question of Sheikh
Mubarak’s registration as a Turkish subject had not been pressed.
3. I would now cast back to the purchase in February 1909 by Sheikh
Mubarak of what is known as the Fadbagiya property of the az-Zuhair family,
and would observe that this letter deals with the registration question arising
out of the purchase of that property alone and not with the Sheikh’s Fao
estates. In recent conversations the Sheikh mentioned tba^ the Turkish
officials were not as complacent as formerly towards him and his properties and
eventually he furnished me with copies (I have not seen the originals) of the
sale-deeds of the Fadhagiya property, and it will suffice if the following points
from them are noted:—
(a) That the Fadhagiya property was shared by various members of the
az-Zuhair family and therefore four separate sale-deeds became
necessary.
(b) That the purchase by Sheikh Mubarak was completed on the 21st
Mohurrum 1327 (=14th February 1909), part of the price being
paid on the spot in cash and part by drafts due at various dates,
which the Sheikh informs me have all since been cashed.
(c) That one Abdul Wahab al-Kirtas acted in all except one case as the
attorney of the vendors.
(d) That in each sale-deed is contained a condition that the vendor or
his attorney, Abdul Wahab, shall arrange for the necessary
transfers in the registers of the Land Revenue Office (the Tapu
Office) of the Basrah Vilayet.
{e) That Sheikh Mubarak entered into possession from the date of the
purchase.
4. ‘It appears that immediately after the sale, which took place in the time
of Mahrum Effendi as Wali, Abdul Wahab al-Kirtas applied for the necessary
transfer in the Land Registers to be made to Sheikh Mubarak’s name. The
transfer was refused by the Superintendent of the Tapu Office and Abdul
Wahab accordingly on the 9th Shabat 1324 (22nd February 1909) complained
by letter to the Wali of his subordinate’s dilatoriness. From a copy (which the