File 600/1905 Pt 1 'Aden Hinterland: Treaty with Dthala' [‎453r] (167/174)

7
"^iln-JdfpHnn ^Th^Tn 1° or isinally related to the Humar, under Turkish
1 " 1 ,,, , c usl011 within the British sphere would have given a more natural
boundary than that demarcated by the Commission, and it was with a view to such a
contingency that m paragraph 68 of the Amiri Report, of the 25th May, 1903,
it was suggested keeping open the Amir’s claims to Humar, as “it is to be foreseen that
any minor xeci ca ions of that (Haushabi) border which may be found necessary at the
moment of actual delimitation there, would be rendered impossible if the Amiri rights to
Humar are now definitely ceded to Turkey.”
I Ins suggestion did not at the time recommend itself to the consideration of Govern-
tnem, out should the Turkish Government create obstacles to the final rectification of
the boundaiy as delimited by the Commission, or renew their obstructive methods by
raising inadmissible claims along the Subaihi border, specially in the neighbourhood of
Ras luiba. His Majesty s Government may deem it expedient, in the final settlement of
the frontier, to demand a rectification of this portion of the Haushabi border and make
the line run along the natural feature of the xhmama—Jarban range.
8. Our negotiations with the Turkish Commissioners respecting the border between
Basesa and Kas ^iamis and the settlement made with them on the spot, were governed by
two considerations, viz., the express wish of Government that “ delimitation to the sea
should be completed this cold weather,” thus rendering any but minor references to
Constantinople impossible; and secondly, that the basis of the present demarcation, as
proposed by the Turkish and agreed to by our Government, was the status of the autumn
of 1901. Though this principle was departed from in the cases of Jalela, the recognition
of Yafa-as-Soufal as British, and the Irade of the 13th February, 1903, authorizing the
demarcation of a border from Lakamat-ash-Shub to the desert, it was reaffirmed by the
Resident in his letter of the 30th May, 1903. In the absence of any specific instructions
from Government on the subject, we consequently felt bound to adhere to the principle as
far as possible, and avoid any claims involving serious deviation from it.
9. The case of Shabwa waste a certain extent an exception. This shrine, with i:s
lands containing the only abundant supply of water south of J. Amama, has for several
years hack been looked upon as Turkish. The claims of the Haushabi Sultan, commu
nicated to the Commission in the Residency’s letter of the 23rd September, 1902,
including Shabwa, while stating that Daba and Hanba were Turkish.
The revival by the local authorities of the old claims to Ad-Dareja was most embarras
sing to the Turkish Commissioners, who could not, however, officially surrender them without
reference to Constantinople, while it seemed that the Sublime Porte would also be con
siderably embarrassed by claims that had led to fighting between British and Turkish,
troops. We consequently claimed Shabwa, and thus compelled the Turks to include it
in their reference, with the result, as anticipated, that the Turkish Government hurriedly
instructed their Commissioners not to press the claims to Ad-Dareja, &c. It then
became a question of delimiting the boundary between the lands of Shabwa and tne
Wajihi, i.e., from Ras Aseka to Maharib, and north of Aresma to Tawal and Wakadiya,
including on the British side the perennial streams in W. Mileli and the Karkahan
nullah.
10. The Haushabi Sultan having stated that Daba was Turkish, it became our duty
to demarcate on the basis of its just limits. Like Shabvva it is a shiine with wakf
lands situated in the Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. Ziyak. The Turkish claim, as set foith in oui diary entry of
the 21st December, 1903, extended down to the Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. Warazan, but, on making inquiries,
we found that a great portion of these lands really belonged to the Syeds of Dthubiyat,
in Amiri territorv. We sent for the latter, and demarcated on the basis of their limits,
<is detailed in their documents, drawing the boundary-line of Asaf Am Shan, where the
Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. Jihal (belonging to Daba) becomes the Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. Ziyak, thus again leaving in British
territory the perennial stream in the bed of the Wadi A seasonal or intermittent watercourse, or the valley in which it flows. below Jihal.
It seemed necessary to go into these details to explain the reason of the sharp
re-entry of the frontier-line between Wakadiya and Ras Namis, while the Haushabi
Sultan has shown a certain dissatisfaction with the settlement of the section of his
boundary between Basesa and Ras Namis In spite of his stu ements to tne
Residency An office of the East India Company and, later, of the British Raj, established in the provinces and regions considered part of, or under the influence of, British India. , recorded in its letter of the 23rd September 1902, to the Commission,
he evidently expected to get the crest of the Amama-Jarban lange as his boundaiy
and seemed to think that Government had done less foi him than foi the m
Dtha ii As a matter of fact, the demarcation of this portion of his border, though it
does not give a natural boundary (vide paragraph 5) is more satisfactory than could haye
been exnfeted The Intelligence Officer attached to the Field Force in July 1901,
together with the Political Officer, went into the question of the boundary above Kafut