File 619/1907 Pt 10 'Arms traffic:- Persian Gulf. Prize Money for captures in Persian Gulf.' [‎132r] (268/424)

^ as
Hy
em
it at
t910
iiing
ppa-
was
ipril
Ethe
mtly
Cox
) be
q in
;ent,
’sian
r-in-
the
i of
ated
)een
at it
.ded
mcb
the
ley
910
the
nee
am-
hat
md
te’s
of
the
to
[tie
if
nt.
ied
43
(2.) They considered it necessary to be very cautious in regard to compen
sation for the present, and were not prepared to say more than that
they would gladly give reasonable compensation to secure a really
permanent settlement. They believed that the trade would be
killed by the naval blockade, but the process was costly and liable
to cause friction. They would welcome a reasonable settlement
which would relieve them of the cost and trouble of a blockade.
As regards cession of territory, the Government of India reported
(after consultation with the Madras Government) that there were no
“ physical difficulties ” in ceding a considerable area round Pondi
cherry and “rounding off” the French possessions. But they
considered that no such cession should be made without an exchange
in respect of other parcels of French territory in India, and would
wish in any case to make further inquiries before expressing a final
opinion.
(3.) They agreed with the view expressed by the Resident in the Persian
Gulf that it would be necessary to purchase the consent of France
and of the Sultan to the regulation by us of imports and exports at
Muskat. They had no doubt that a practicable scheme could be
devised. Finally, they suggested that it would be of great con
venience if the French Government were to send an officer to India
to carry on all preliminary negotiations.
77. It should perhaps be added that both the Admiral and Colonel Cox
were fully agreed that, even if the
^ Views of Admiral a nd Resident, Pcrsmn proposed prohibition for one year were
carried into effect, it would still be
necessary to maintain the blockade at its present strength in order to keep
out arms and ammunition already stored at Muskat or elsewhere. The
Admiral deprecated any suggestion of territorial concession, being of opinion
that, provided Persia remained well-disposed, the situation could be dealt
. i • i cn j x rx with quite effectively without the as-
Admiral Slade to Government o± India, . , ^ T j! >» i i i
5th May 1910. sistance oi firance. 11, he proceeded,
740 10 “ we kill market by frightening off and
“ preventing customers from coming to
“ it, or by preventing them from taking deliveries of goods even if they
“ succeed in coming, then the trade will cease, whether it is bolstered up by
“ France or not.”
Colonel Cox’s view was that, as the blockade was succeeding so well,
no “ expensive palliative measures ”
should be proceeded with until it had
reached its point of greatest effect, and
that another attempt should then be
made to settle the whole Muskat question with France. He considered that
the refusal of the French to grant the right of search afforded good grounds
for withdrawing from the negotiations for one year’s prohibition, and
recommended that this should be done, and that further oveituies should be
dropped until the spring of 1911, when the “maximum effect _ of the
blockade would have been achieved. iVs regards the question of mdemm-
fyin o 1 arms dealers at Muskat by purchasing their stocks, Colonel Cox was of
opimon that such an undertaking might prove “ enormously expensive, and
should, if possible, be avoided. The contingency should, m any case only
be entertained in the event of the Treaty of 1844 (see paragraph 9 and
Appendix II.) being effectively modified. He pointed out that, so long as
contraband traffic only was suppressed, vendors deserved no compensation.
78 On the 7th June 1910 the Government of India asked for sanction to
continue the blockade till December 1910, when they proposed to review the
situation again.
Colonel Cox to Government of India,
27th April 1910.
728/10.
Political Department,
India Office The department of the British Government to which the Government of India reported between 1858 and 1947. The successor to the Court of Directors. ,
10th June 1910.
J. E. S.
[Appendices.