'Memorandum by the Rev. G. P. Badger on the Pretensions of Persia in Beloochistan and Mekran, drawn up with especial reference to her Claim to Gwadur and Charbar' [‎4v] (8/20)

8
While the territories above named shall remain in the hands of the Sultan of
Muscat’s officers, he shall not allow the agents of any foreign Governments to
pass through those places, and shall protect them, by ships of war and otherwise,
against secret treachery and open foreign invasion.
The Sultan of Muscat has not the right of transferring Bunder Abbas, or any
of the afore-named territories, to any foreign power, even under the conditions
stipulated.
This Treaty was undoubtedly accepted for himself and his successors by the
late Sultan of Muscat, and its stipulations clearly define the territory which Persia
may now legitimately claim, either in virtue of prior possession or by right of
conquest. That territory (if I am not mistaken in identifying “ Eiseen ” mentioned
in the Treaty with the “ Jegeen ” of the maps) comprises, besides the two islands
of Kishm and Hormuz, the maritime provinces lying between Bunder Abbas and
Sudeij ; but the Persian boundary on the coast, as explained in a preceding
paragraph, extends between 60 and 150 miles to the eastward of the latter place,
the intermediate territory having been captured from the Belooch Ameer of the
Bolaidi about fifteen years ago, or eight years before the date of the last treaty
between Persia and Muscat.
There is not a tittle of evidence to prove that Persia has any right of
sovereignty on the coast of Mekran to the eastward of this boundary, and if she is
now advancing any claims in that direction, it is nothing more than what might have
been expected as a sequel to her recent triumph over Muscat, and her successful
encroachments in Beloochistan. As to Charbar and Gwadur, it deserves special
notice that those places are not even alluded to in the last treaty between Persia
and the late Sultan of Muscat. A clear proof that at that time Persia entertained
no pretensions to supremacy over them.
In conclusion, I quote the following remarks which I ventured to submit to the
Government of Bombay From c. 1668-1858, the East India Company’s administration in the city of Bombay [Mumbai] and western India. From 1858-1947, a subdivision of the British Raj. It was responsible for British relations with the Gulf and Red Sea regions. on this subject:—“ Viewed
ment^ombart^d^th 0 jZe' ’ n “““‘ion with the advance of the Persian army
1861. • towards the eastward of Kirman, the stipulation
contained in Article IX. of the Treaty under notice,
is suggestive of further meditated encroachment in that direction. That
Article distinctly provides for the passage of troops through Bunder Abbas to
Mekran, Beloochistan, and even Cutch [Gundava], that is, in a line towards the
Indus, which may eventually be found more practicable than any more northern
route. The Persians have already reduced the Ameer of the Bolaidi, whose
territories extend about 60 miles along the coast, and placed the province of Geh
under tribute. According to credible information collected at Muscat they have
also advanced from Bunpoor and occupied Serbaz, completely routing the
Beloochees. To the south, they are reported to be in force as far as Nusseerabad,
having subjugated all the country to the westward, and to be meditating an attack
on Kej, the capital of the Khan of Khelat’s Mekran territories ; while, in the north,
they have very lately retaken the district of Dizzuk from Azzad Khan, the firm ally
of the Dost, and are acting in concert with the Jam of Herat and Afzul Khan, who
are said to be marching in force on Candahar.
“ Whilst hesitating to attach any serious or immediate political consequence,
as regards British interests in the East, to these encroachments of Persia in Central
Asia, I nevertheless deem the subject of sufficient importance to evoke the
diligence of Her Majesty’s Government. And, as regards the proceedings of the
same power in the Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. , I respectfully submit that they supply a strong
motive for the adoption on our part of a vigorous and discreet policy, such as may
tend to conciliate the maritime Arab tribes in that quarter, and confirm them in
their attachment to the British Government.”
The annexed outline map, which has no claim to perfect accuracy, may
nevertheless be found useful in illustrating the political geography discussed in
the foregoing remarks.
(Signed) George Percy Badger.
London, 23d December 1863.