File 600/1905 Pt 5 'Aden Hinterland: Treaty with Sultan of Balahaf' [‎172v] (128/152)

■ y** ' ~n ~r
4'
The Sultanate*
At this stage of the interview the Resident asked Mohsin why he declines
to submit to Saleh bin Abdulla, and on what conditions he would he prepared
to accord such submission. Mohsin scorned the very idea. He stated that
Saleh bin Abdulla was a mere nonentity and was absolutely useless in
the administration of the country ; that his only business was to come to Aden
from time to time and to receive his stipend and such other presents as the
Resident was disposed to give; and that he (Mohsin) could never think of
submitting to such a man. He urged that he was the actual ruler during the
past fourteen years, and that he was the only Sultan who was recognised by
the tribesmen, and that therefore Government should accord their recognition
to his Sultanate. It was then explained to him that the Resident himself was
not aware of the views of Government on this particular point, and that it was
not certain that Government would recognise him, having regard to his past
conduct. Mohsin then earnestly declared that it was never his intention to
disobey Government, of whose mighty power he was well aware, that it was fear
that prevented him from coming, that he is now submissive, as he always
wished to he, to Government and would continue to be so and would even
“ give his own head ” for Government. Should, however, Government be not
disposed to recognise Mohsin, he wished that he should not be held responsible
for anything. It was then pointed out to him that he should not be at the
bottom of any trouble, as the great Government had a long arm and would
strike hard. To this he agreed, but he again repeated that he was the only
Chief recognised by the tribesmen, and that he was the only one who could
arrange the tribal affair to their satisfaction. Here the interview practically
ended, but with a view to ascertain how Mohsin would regard the situation in
the event of Government according the Sultanate to Ahmed bin Saleh, the
Resident incidentally asked Mohsin whether he was fond of his elder brother
Ahmed, and he replied that he was fond of him, but gave no indication from
which it could be inferred that he would either agree or absolutely refuse to
accept the Sultanate of Ahmed bin Saleh. Mohsin w r as thereupon further ques
tioned that if he was fond of his brother, as he professed to be, why he did not
come in and submit before this so as to secure his brother’s release earlier.
He replied that he w 7 as afraid that if he did come he w 7 ould also have been
imprisoned along with his brother.
After making one or two requests, the chief one being that as he had
come in and submitted his brother should be given some freedom to move about,
to which the Resident assented, Mohsin took his departure, promising to remain
in Aden till such time as the orders of Government were received.
Letter No. 8010, dated the 29th December 1904.
From—C. H. A. Hill, Esq., O.I.E., Acting Secretary to the Government of
Bombay, Political Department ;
To—Major-General H. M. Mason, Political Resident A senior ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul General) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Residency. , Aden.
I am directed to acknowledge the receipt of your confidential letter
No. 204, dated the 11th December 1904, relative to affairs at Baiahai.
2. In reply I am to request that you will submit, for the information of
Government, the record referred to in paragraph 3 of your letter, showing that
Mohsin w r as informed that his brother Ahmed bin Saleh w r ould be detained
until the $6,020 which Mohsin bad taken from the dhow A term adopted by British officials to refer to local sailing vessels in the western Indian Ocean. which was
wrecked near Balahaf had been paid, and to request, with reference to para
graph 2 of this Department letter No. 7338, dated the loth October 1902,
and paragraph 19 of your office letter No. 196, dated the 19th July 1902, and
letter No. 378, dated the 4th December 1902, that you will explain (1) why
you consider that the payment of $6,020 represented “restitution in full
of the stolen property”; (2) how any promise of the kind you refer to could
have been given to Mohsin in view of the orders of Government and Brigadier-
General Maitland’s reply thereto ; (3) why you consider that Government