'File 14/115 VII Annex (B 9) Abu Musa oxide: collected background material on the case' [‎110v] (231/1904)

12
No objection to the agreement with Wonckhaus was raised by the British protdg^
T, J. Malcolm, of Bushire, of whom the British Memorandum only says that the lessees
had " engagements " with him, while as a matter of fact he had entered the company
two years after the conclusion of the lease agreement and paid capital into it once,
being the only partner except Hassan Samaih who has paid in any. In the British
Memorandum it is made a matter of reproach to Hassan Samaih that, in reply to
Malcolm's letter of the 26th June, 1906, asking for a copy of the agreement, he, in the
first place, answered on the 13th July, 1906, that the agreement was drawn up in
German, aud that in a later letter, dated the 14th October, 1906, he again declined to
supply a^ copy on the ground that Mr. Wonckhaus had asked him not to say anything
about this business (Annexes 13, 14, of British Memorandum). No doubt Hassan
Samaih ought not to have made use of the excuse that the agreement was in German;
but his anxiety to keep the terms of the agreement secret as long as possible, and
especially not to co mmu nicate them to the firm of A. and T. J. Malcolm, is explained
by business considerations. For Malcolm was a competitor, since Ins firm of A. and
.T. J Malcolm is an agent for, and a shareholder in, the British firm of Strick and Co.,
in whose hands the Ormuz oxide trade is. Hassan Samaih had put his whole fortune
of about 100,000 rupees Indian silver coin also widely used in the Persian Gulf. into the Abu Musa oxide concern, which had so far been run
at a loss, and which he now hoped would at last improve in consequence of the agree
ment with Mr. Wonckhaus. He saw a great danger in the agreement getting to be
known too early. ^ Subsequent events have shown how well-founded his apprehension
of further difficulties was. Although Hassan Samaih did not send Malcolm the copy
of the agreement in the first instance, he nevertheless, in his letter of the 13th July,
1906, communicated to him all that was of importance in it, as is seen from Annex 13
of the British Memorandum ; in particular he did not, as alleged in the British
Memorandum, omit to answer the question whether other European firms could make
similar agreements, but said straight out: " We can therefore make no other contract."
In his reply of the 30th October, 1906 (11 Ramadan, 1324),* Malcolm says he will
see whether it would be possible to sell the red oxide at a higher price or to get better
terms, or whether, if it were found possible to obtain a higher price, the agreement
could be cancelled or not. He further expressly states : " If we are not sure of getting
a higher price, we shall not get the former agreement cancelled." In other words,
Malcolm would have liked to get a higher price and better terms, and if he found he
could get such he would have liked either to come to an arrangement with Mr. Wonck
haus as to other terms, or if he (Malcolm) was able to obtain them from another
party, to persuacie Mr. W ohckhaus to allow the agreement to be cancelled by amicable
arrangement. It follows from this, however, that he considered the agreement as
perfectly valid in itself. When Malcolm, later on, received a copy of the" agreement,
ho 'vjio jo mc-ru .'■» it h .-i-i , ..-ov-coj.ui* m it. — —iiiiiiiiniri
It appears from a letter addressed by Abdallatif to Hassan Samaih, on the
23rd June, 1905 (19 Rebi JI, 1323),f and a letter from the latter to Abdallatif of the
15th October, 1905 (i5^ ohaban, 1323), (Annex 9 of the first German Memorandum)
that at that time a considerable quantity of oxide was already being sold to Mr. Wonck
haus, and that it was proposed to supply oxide to Wonckhaus at a fixed price annually.
As the correspondence shows, Abdallatif agreed to this. After the conclusion of the
agreement of the 1st June, 1906, with Mr. Robert Wonckhaus for the delivery of oxide.
Hassan Samaih communicates the fact to Abdallatif on the 11th June (18 Rebi II, 1324)!!
and at the same time informs him of the substance of the agreement (Annex 11 of the
British Memorandum). In his reply of the 14th June, 1906 (21 Rebi 11. 1324)4
which has now become of importance, Abdallatif openly expresses his satisfaction at
the conclusion of the business, and the hope that better "times are coming at last
which will compensate for the sacrifices and disappointments of the past. The whole
letter has evidently been written in a mood "of relief, and furnishes indisputable
evidence that Abdallatif gave his consent to the conclusion of the agreement. It is
true tnat m tins letter he again show s the sceptical spirit of a person who is exnenenced
m affairs, ano wno therefore cannoX' xeel any satisfaction without at the same time
having fears of future difficulties ; he gives a warning against the conclusion of an
agreement which would be equivalent to a lease of the mines or might give rise to
difficulties which might conjure up the interference of more powerful persons. This
is the meaning which must be attached to the letter when considered impartially.
The German and the English translation (Annex 12 of the British Memorandum)
of this letter correspond almost word for word. In particular the English translation too
* Annex 34.
f Annex 32.
I Annex 35.