‘Jeddah Consulate.—Captain Beyts’ [‎122r] (4/12)

0
* Political, No. 70, dated 8th June 1871.
,1
f Letter from Foreign Office, dated 13th
December 1871.
Mr. Raby continued Consul at Jeddah until the
31st August 1871, but during this period of a little
more than six years he was only present at his post
for two years and seven months. During the
remaining three and a half years he was absent on
leave, granted by the Poreign Office, his duties
being, apparently, performed by Mr. Sourian, the
Dragoman of the Consulate.
On the 18th April 1871, a letter was written by
the Foreign Office to this Office, in anticipation of
Mr. Raby's transfer to another post, stating that
it appeared from that gentleman's reports that British
interests at Jeddah were limited to periodical visits
on the part of steamers of various private companies
af the time of the pilgrimage to Mecca, and to a
certain amount of trade carried on between Jeddah
and Indian ports in vessels bearing the British flag,
and owned by Native Indian subjects of Her
Majesty. Under these circumstances, while Lord
Granville thought it desirable that a British Agent
should be stationed at Jeddah, his Lordship did
not consider that Imperial interests at that port
required the maintenance of a salaried consular
officer, and accordingly proposed that the salary
which might be assigned to Mr. Baby's successor
should be entirely provided out of Indian funds.
This proposal was referred* to the Government
of India, who replied in a letter dated the 6th
January 1872, No. 10.
Meanwhile Mr. Sourian, who had been left in
charge of the Consulate by Mr. Baby, had been
compelled by his health to leave J eddah, making
over charge to a Mr. Johar, a British Indian subject
residing there, and Mr. Johar, leaving in his turn,
had transferred the duties to another British Indian
subject named Hafi»-ood-deen. Her Majesty's Con
sul General in Egypt, in reporting these movements
to Her Majesty's Ambassador at Constantinople,
represented that, " considering the importance of
" the British interests at that port," it was desirable
" that a duly qualified consular officer should be
£< appointed to it without delay." Sir H. Elliott
(24ith November 1871) expressed his concurrence
in this opinion, with especial reference to the
difficulties arising out of the quarantine regulations
consequent on the prevalence of cholera, and the
Eoreign Office took the opportunity of pressing
this Office for an early decision on Lord Granville's
proposal.
In referring the question to India, the Duke of
Argyll had made the following suggestion:—" I
" incline to tlie opinion that, with advertence to the
" increasing importance to British and Indian in-
" terests of the Bed Sea, consequent on the opening
" of the Suez Canal, and of the ports (namely, Mas-
" sowah. Mocha, Hodeida, Jeddah, and Yembo) on its
" Arabian and African coasts, it is expedient that
" a Consul and Agent, on a salary of Bs. 500
" monthly, be appointed for the Bed Sea, to be
« politically subordinate to the Besident at Aden."
Prom this wiggestion, the Government of India, in