‘Consular jurisdiction in Persia.’ [‎10v] (20/36)

20
The first point, involving the general question of the position of the
Government of India towards the subjects of Native States resident in
foreign countries, was known to be regarded by that Government as
one of great importance. On several occasions they had stated their
view of the position which was, broadly, that as the paramount power
in India, they had the right to exercise the same jurisdiction over the
subjects of Native States resident in foreign countries as by treaty
or usage they might exercise over their own subjects resident in
such countries, but that this right, not having been afiirmed by the
Imperial legislature, was liable to be disputed either by the persons
concerned, or foreign Governments, or our own Courts. To obviate
possible inconvenience from this state
•Secret Letter, 16th June 1873, of things, they suggested* in 1873 the
;N0, o8 ' introduction into the Imperial Parlia
ment of a Bill, of which the second clause should run as follows :—
2. And whereas, under treaties and arrangements between the British Government and
the several Princes and States in India in alliance with Her Majesty, such Princes and
States are bound to have no connexions or engagements, or communications with foreign
powers, and have in fact no such connections or engagements, or communications. And
whereas the subjects of such Princes and States are, when residing or being in places
without and beyond India, entitled to the protection of the British Government, and do,
in fact, receive such protection equally with the Native Indian subjects of Her Majesty.
It is hereby enacted as follows,—
The Governor General of India in Council shall also have power, at meetings for the
purpose of making laws and regulations, to make laws and regulations for all such subjects
of such Princes and States residing or being in places without or beyond India.
And the Governor General of India in Council may exercise over such subjects, equally
with the Native Indian subjects of Her Majesty, all Such powers and jurisdictions as
by treaty, capitulation, agreement, grant, usage, sufferance, or other lawful means, the
Governor General of India in Council has or can exercise in any such place.
This suggestion was made with special reference to measures for the
more effectual suppression of the slave trade, but it had not been
acted upon. As to whether the subjects of Native States should be
specifically provided for in the proposed Convention with Persia, much
difference of opinion had been expressed here. Exception had been
taken to the proposal by some authorities, on the ground that the
existing usage was sufficient, that it would be as well not to put forward
more new claims than were necessary, and that affirmation of the usage
in a Convention might give rise to pretensions on the part of Russia
to corresponding privileges in Persia in regard to subjects of Khiva
and Bokhara; while other authorities objected, on general grounds, to
enlarging the circle within which the British Consular protection could
be claimed as of right. On the other hand the very strong represen
tations of the Government of India could not be ignored, while it had
to be borne in mind that the Convention was intended to supersede
" usage," and that if its terms did not cover the cases of the subjects
of Native States, the omission being deliberate, it would be difficult
hereafter in such cases to quote "usage" when either privileges or
penalties were in question ; we could scarcely claim to apply British laws
against persons to whom we deliberately refused British protection. On
this question, therefore, a further reference to India seemed necessary.
The second doubtful point was the proposed division into two classes,
in Persia as in Turkey, of British Indians. As has already been stated,
the proposal in the case of Turkey had been made with special reference
to the marriage question. Such persons were to be divided into two
classes, Class I., comprising all not Mahomedans, between whom and
Turkish women marriages were to be prohibited; Class II., comprising
Mahomedans, to whom such marriages might be permitted. There was
a further proposal that the issue of British subjects comprised within
Class II., if bom in Turkey, should be Turkish subjects. The basis of
the classification was thus the profession of the Mahomedan religion, and
was very suitable for the regulation of a social question like marriage,
but its applicability in other questions seemed doubtful. It was not