File 1508/1905 Pt 1 'Bahrain: situation; disurbances (1904-1905); Sheikh Ali's surrender; Question of Administration Reforms (Customs etc)' [‎105r] (214/531)

No. 331, dated Bushire, the 16th (received the 24th) July 1905.
From— Major P. Z. Cox, C.I.E., Officiating 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. in the Persian
Gulf,
To—S. M. Fraser, Esq., C.I.E., Secretary to the Government of India in the
Foreign Department,
I have the honour to forward copies of the letters marginally noted, addressed
Political Agent A mid-ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Agency. , Bahrein, to Resident, Nos. 204 to me by the Political Agent A mid-ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Agency. , Bahrein, on
s tes°iSfto% 2 otuicarAgenfBahrein, Nn. .006, receiving a copy of Foreign Department
dated 16th July 1905. letter No. 1873-E. B., dated 17th May
1905. A copy of my reply to Government to the latter communication had not
then reached him. My letter No. 781 to which he also refers, covered my written
message of 7th June for delivery to the Sheikh. A copy of it was forwarded to
Government with my No. 259 of nth June.
2. Now that the Government of India have at Bahrein a Political represent
ative of some standing and experience, I take for granted that they would wish,
especially at the present juncture when the affairs of Bahrein are sub judice, to be
placed in possession of his views first hand in all important matters, irrespective
of the question whether the Resident can entirely endorse them or not. It is on
this supposition that I submit his present communication for consideration.
3. After a careful scrutiny of his recommendations I am inclined to think
that the Political Agent’s zeal for reform has a tendency to carry him too fast
and too far, and that his present proposals are mainly of a nature which is only
compatible with a declared and effective British Protectorate.
In their letter No. 1873-E. B. to which Captain Prideaux’s present com
munication (No. 204) refers, the Government of India explained to me with some
emphasis that they had set their face against any such extreme measure as
being altogether opposed to the policy of His Majesty’s Government. They
went on to express the view that they might reasonably hope that such other
reforms as were necessary would be brought about by the gradually increasing
personal influence of the Political Agent A mid-ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Agency. .
The declaration of a Protectorate being out of the question, I fully concurred
with the Government of India that as soon as coercive measures were held to
have come to an end, our only course was to rely on the personal influence and
friendly advice of our Political Agent A mid-ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Agency. to further our policy in other respects.
When replying on this point in my letter No. 244, dated 14th June, I ventured to
indicate the nature which that influence must in my opinion possess in order to
have any chance of success.
4. Apart from such further reforms as this dominant influence may be able
to bring about in the future, I doubt if there is any middle course open to us
between the extreme ones of treating Bahrein (a) as a British Protectorate, and
(£) as an independent principality. I grant that if King Log does not give
satisfaction there is presumably nothing to prevent us from changing him for
King Stork, but it seems to me that we cannot at one minute insist that the
Ruler is an independent sovereign and expect him to assume responsibility as
such (as w r e did in connection with the Fracis-Times lawsuit arising out of
the “ Baluchistan ” seizure, vide the cor
respondence marginally noted), and at
another treat him like a petty Indian Raja King
and intervene in his internal administration
to the extent suggested by Captain Prideaux.
Enclosure, dated 16 th February 1809 , to India
Office, Despatch No. 7 -Secret, dated 1 ah March
1899 to Government of India and previous corre
spondence.
Lest I should appear at all inconsistent in making these observations, I
would reiterate here that the reforms advocated in my letter No. 123 ,dated 1 ith
M.arch 1905, were proposed essentially as component items of our punitive mea
sures against the Sheikh, at a time when I doubted whether Government would
consider those already taken as sufficient. Since then several months have elapsed
1
C404FD